Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 240
  1. #51
    I am in Jail

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Last Online
    09-01-2019 @ 06:40 PM
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,495
    Quote Originally Posted by TuskegeeBen View Post
    Who owns The Federal Reserve Bank ? And the Chinese have got them by the short hairs. Now,...Isn't that...an...hilarious phenomenon?
    Talking about De Nile...^. Least we forget to throw AU, NZ, and the pretentious UK, into the hilarity mix...

  2. #52
    Thailand Expat
    Dragonfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:38 AM
    Posts
    9,207
    O2 mobile 4G network in UK is completely shutdown, incidentally

    could we hope for her release in the 12 hours so that O2 could be back online?

  3. #53
    I am in Jail

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Last Online
    09-01-2019 @ 06:40 PM
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,495
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonfly View Post
    O2 mobile 4G network in UK is completely shutdown, incidentally

    could we hope for her release in the 12 hours so that O2 could be back online?
    DITTO!

  4. #54
    En route
    Cujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 10:58 PM
    Location
    Reality.
    Posts
    27,237
    Quote Originally Posted by TuskegeeBen View Post
    Who owns The Federal Reserve Bank ? And the Chinese have got them by the short hairs. Now,...Isn't that...an hilarious phenomenon?
    What drugs are you on?
    Or should it be 'on what drugs are you'? . (Any English teechas here)

  5. #55
    En route
    Cujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 10:58 PM
    Location
    Reality.
    Posts
    27,237
    Huawei: Chinese media accuses US of 'hooliganism' over Meng Wanzhou arrest
    State-run papers label Washington a ‘despicable rogue’ as Japan moves to ban telecoms company from government contracts

    Chinese media have lashed out at the US over the arrest of senior Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou, accusing the country of using “hooliganism” to suppress the Chinese telecom giant at the centre of what is turning into a major diplomatic incident.

    State-run China Daily said the arrest of Huawei’s chief financial officer appeared to be part of US efforts to contain the company, which is the world’s largest telecoms equipment provider, as well as its second-largest mobile phone maker.

    “One thing that is undoubtedly true and proven is the US is trying to do whatever it can to contain Huawei’s expansion in the world simply because the company is the point man for China’s competitive technology companies,” the editorial said.


    John Bolton says he knew in advance Huawei executive would be arrested
    Read more
    State-run tabloid Global Times said: “Obviously Washington is resorting to a despicable rogue’s approach as it cannot stop Huawei’s 5G advance in the market.”

    The rhetoric came as Japanese media reported that the country was effectively going to ban government purchases of telecommunications products from Huawei over fears of intelligence leaks and cyber attacks. The report follows a decision by the US this year to ban government purchases of Huawei gear.

    https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...wanzhou-arrest
    "In my professional assessment as an intelligence officer, Trump has a reflexive, defensive, monumentally narcissistic personality, for whom the facts and national interest are irrelevant, and the only thing that counts is whatever gives personal advantage and directs attention to himself."

  6. #56
    Days Work Done! Norton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Roiet
    Posts
    28,497
    The lady is not just some CEO shumck. She is close to the highest power in China and the CEO of it's biggest company. Her arrest is the equivalent of arresting Tim Cook.

    Chinese reaction should and will be strong.

  7. #57
    I am in Jail

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Last Online
    09-01-2019 @ 06:40 PM
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,495
    Quote Originally Posted by Norton View Post
    The lady is not just some CEO shumck. She is close to the highest power in China and the CEO of it's biggest company. Her arrest is the equivalent of arresting Tim Cook.

    Chinese reaction should and will be strong.
    Spot-on ^. Indeed, that lady is not just some ordinary CFO schmuck. The backroom boys are really beginning to lose it.

    May the heavens have mercy,...and redeem us,...from the aftermath results of their ^ foley. Sigh!
    Last edited by TuskegeeBen; 07-12-2018 at 04:03 PM.

  8. #58
    Thailand Expat
    Dragonfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:38 AM
    Posts
    9,207
    Quote Originally Posted by Norton View Post
    The lady is not just some CEO shumck. She is close to the highest power in China and the CEO of it's biggest company. Her arrest is the equivalent of arresting Tim Cook.

    Chinese reaction should and will be strong.
    it's just the NSA sending a message, saying we can do pretty much what we want in the real world, even your dearest leaders are not safe

    she will be released within the next 12 hours, along with the "fix" of the O2 mobile network

  9. #59
    Thailand Expat Humbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 06:33 PM
    Location
    Bangkok
    Posts
    12,025
    Quote Originally Posted by Norton View Post
    Chinese reaction should and will be strong.
    Kidnapping and extortion. What's next? Bone saws for companies that trade with Iran?

  10. #60
    I am in Jail

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Last Online
    09-01-2019 @ 06:40 PM
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,495
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonfly View Post
    it's just the NSA sending a message, saying we can do pretty much what we want in the real world, even your dearest leaders are not safe

    she will be released within the next 12 hours, along with the "fix" of the O2 mobile network
    You're probably spot-on about that ^. However, it's a pathetic soul that feels "the need" to perpetually prove itself, especially when the real world circumstance,...is clearly...a no-contest scenario.

  11. #61
    Member
    harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:39 AM
    Posts
    54,521
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    And no there is no UNSC resolution banning supplying telecoms equipment to Iran. Much as 'arry would like to suggest, with the usual lack of any evidence.
    Learn to read FFS. I never said there is. I said there was.

    She was involved in a company that breached sanctions in 2013.

    You could say that the charges might be "trumped up".

  12. #62
    Thailand Expat
    Dragonfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:38 AM
    Posts
    9,207
    sending messages is the only thing they can do which is regarded as effective diplomatically, short of declaring war

  13. #63
    I am in Jail

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Last Online
    09-01-2019 @ 06:40 PM
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,495
    Cancelled,...due to keeping compliance w/ the forum
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by TuskegeeBen; 07-12-2018 at 08:08 PM.

  14. #64
    Member
    harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:39 AM
    Posts
    54,521
    Oh fucking great.... A Tard fight!


  15. #65
    I am in Jail

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Last Online
    09-01-2019 @ 06:40 PM
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,495
    Quote Originally Posted by Cujo View Post
    What drugs are you on?
    Or should it be 'on what drugs are you'? . (Any English teechas here)
    I'm being nice, to even bother with a reply,..to your typically ignorant nonsense. Anyway, have you ever heard of a document called a U.S. Treasury Bond? Hmm?

  16. #66
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 11:01 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    16,071
    Quote Originally Posted by Cujo View Post
    Let's not forget that it's now the law that Huawei assist the Chinese gov. To spy.
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    She was involved in a company that breached sanctions in 2013


    Links please?

  17. #67
    Member
    harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:39 AM
    Posts
    54,521
    Quote Originally Posted by OhOh View Post
    Links please?

    I believe he is referring to the National Intelligence Law, article 7:

    Any organisation and citizen shall, in accordance with the law, support, provide assistance, and cooperate in national intelligence work, and guard the secrecy of any national intelligence work that they are aware of [emphasis added]. The state shall protect individuals and organisations that support, cooperate with, and collaborate in national intelligence work.
    I'm sure you can find it on one of your chinky government mouthpieces.

  18. #68
    Thailand Expat
    happynz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 11:36 PM
    Location
    on the corner of dusty and dustier
    Posts
    7,545
    Quote Originally Posted by TuskegeeBen View Post
    ,...and redeem us,...from the aftermath results of their ^ foley. Sigh!
    Who the hell is Foley?

  19. #69
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 11:01 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    16,071
    Huawei officials accept British intelligence demands

    "Embattled Chinese telecoms giant Huawei has agreed to British intelligence demands over its equipment and software as it seeks to be part of the country’s 5G network plans, the FT reported Friday.

    Huawei executives met senior officials from Britain’s National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), where they accepted a range of technical requirements to ease security fears, according to the FT’s sources.

    The NCSC said in a statement that it was “committed to the security of UK networks, and we have a regular dialogue with Huawei about the criteria expected of their products.

    “The NCSC has concerns around a range of technical issues and has set out improvements the company must make,” it said.

    The Chinese telecoms provider has come under scrutiny over the last few weeks, with one of its executives arrested in Canada last Friday on a US extradition request, raising fears of an escalation in the trade war between China and the US.

    Beijing called the arrest of chief financial officer Meng Wanzhou a “despicable rogue’s approach” and part of a campaign to stymie China’s high-tech ambitions.

    Over the summer, Australia barred Huawei from providing 5G technology for wireless networks over espionage fears.
    New Zealand followed suit in November but said the issue was a technological one.
    Britain’s largest mobile provider has also joined the global ban.

    On Wednesday, BT announced it was removing Huawei’s telecommunications equipment from its 4G cellular network, following a warning from the head of the MI6 foreign intelligence service that singled out the Chinese company as a potential security risk.

    But Robert Hannigan, former head of the GCHQ intelligence agency that deals with cyber-security, on Friday warned of “hysteria” over Chinese technology.

    “My worry is there is sort of a hysteria growing… we need a calmer approach,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.
    British intelligence agencies have not “reported a backdoor or malicious intervention” by Huawei, and any official criticisms so far are of “incompetence rather than malice,” he added."

    Huawei officials accept British intelligence demands | Ebru TV Kenya

    Different title and slant but more details and dates of the specific NCSC requests/meetings from the Irish Times (reprint from the FT):


    Huawei caves in to UK’s security demands

    China’s tech giant agrees to address serious risks found in its equipment and software

    "Huawei has caved in to demands by UK security officials to address serious risks found in its equipment and software in an attempt to avoid being shut out from future 5G telecoms networks.

    At a meeting this week between Huawei executives and senior officials from GCHQ’s National Cyber Security Centre, the Chinese telecoms provider agreed to a series of technical demands which will change its practices in the UK, according to two people with knowledge of the discussions.

    Huawei has also agreed to write a formal letter to the NCSC outlining the company’s agreement to urgently address the issues, first raised in a critical report in July by an oversight board which monitors the testing of the company’s kit before approving it for use in UK networks.

    The move comes after the US government stepped up efforts to persuade western allies to shun the world’s biggest telecoms provider when upgrading services to new, fifth-generation technologies, amid fears over cyber espionage.
    Senior UK security officials have repeatedly stressed that their concerns are related to technical deficiencies and not the company’s Chinese origins.

    But the arrest on US sanctions-busting charges of Meng Wanzhou, the daughter of Ren Zhengfei, founder and chief executive of the Chinese telecoms group, last weekend has only raised the international pressure on the UK to take a tougher line.

    The commitment by Huawei to appease the UK’s concerns reflects the need for the Chinese group to tackle concerns where it can amid intense scrutiny of its business by western security organisations. It also represents a major coup for the government as it would require a significant shift in Huawei’s business practices.

    Western security chiefs have been unusually vocal in recent days to highlight concerns over Chinese technology groups. Alex Younger, head of MI6, the British intelligence service, said the UK faced a tough decision over whether to allow Huawei to supply technology for its 5G network.

    Huawei has been slow to react to the concerns raised in the July report that highlighted “shortcomings” in the Chinese telecoms equipment provider’s engineering processes that exposed British telecoms networks to risks. It also identified long-term challenges in mitigation and management of those risks.

    The issues raised include the use of out of date open source software developed by third parties that remained in the code used in some of Britain’s networks. Old software can be vulnerable to cyber attacks.

    A wider issue relates to the way that Huawei develops code and equipment, according to multiple people that have used the Chinese company’s kit. Huawei distributes the development of its equipment across multiple teams to speed up the process and reduce the chances of technology being stolen.

    That system has served Huawei well as it has grown but has become an issue for governments looking for clearer lines of accountability when auditing equipment.

    John Delaney, an analyst with IDC, said that Huawei appears to have responded to the pressure.

    “It [HUAWEI]is now the incumbent in the UK and it clearly wants to stay there,” he said. “It makes sense for them to at least pay lip service or to put in place tangible procedures to appease those concerns. They won’t want the contagion to spread to other countries.”

    Huawei said that the oversight board report “identified some areas for improvement in our engineering processes. We are grateful for this feedback and committed to addressing these issues. Cyber security remains Huawei’s top priority, and we will continue to actively improve our engineering processes and risk management systems”. The NCSC declined to comment. - Financial Times"


    https://www.irishtimes.com/business/...ands-1.3723549

    Another unfounded spying/backdoor/dodgy hardware story which appears to be easily recoverable.

    Even the ex-head of GCHQ was exacerbated, "But Robert Hannigan, former head of the GCHQ intelligence agency that deals with cyber-security, on Friday warned of “hysteria” over Chinese technology."

    One wonders why the NCSC did not have the meeting or were not forthcoming with these "concerns" and published the companies acceptance prior to the announcement of Huawei being dumped from BT's tender list.

    In my experience it's common in software design to assign a number of programmers or teams to write modules of a complete programmes.
    Last edited by OhOh; 07-12-2018 at 09:12 PM.
    A tray full of GOLD is not worth a moment in time.

  20. #70
    I am in Jail

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Last Online
    09-01-2019 @ 06:40 PM
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,495
    Quote Originally Posted by happynz View Post
    Who the hell is Foley?
    Oops! "Folly" , instead. Thanks for noticing. Cheers, and Happy Holidays.

  21. #71
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 11:01 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    16,071
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    I believe he is referring to the National Intelligence Law, article 7:

    Any organisation and citizen shall, in accordance with the law, support, provide assistance, and cooperate in national intelligence work, and guard the secrecy of any national intelligence work that they are aware of [emphasis added]. The state shall protect individuals and organisations that support, cooperate with, and collaborate in national intelligence work.
    Not sure if this is what you are referring to, no link supplied, but this is what I have found ref your "believed" source:
    National Security Law of the People's Republic of China (2015) [Effective]

    Source:MOD Editor:Huang Panyue 2017-03-03


    Article 7 National security shall be maintained in accordance with the Constitution and laws and the principle of socialist rule of law by respecting and safeguarding human rights and protecting citizens' rights and freedom in accordance with the law.

    https://chinacopyrightandmedia.wordpress.com/2017/05/16/national-intelligence-law-of-the-peoples-republic-of-china-draft/

    Somewhat different from your, unlinked source.
    Last edited by OhOh; 08-12-2018 at 02:13 PM.

  22. #72
    Member
    harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    Today @ 01:39 AM
    Posts
    54,521
    Maybe there's a hint in the word "draft"?


  23. #73
    En route
    Cujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 10:58 PM
    Location
    Reality.
    Posts
    27,237
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    Maybe there's a hint in the word "draft"?

    You're right, he desperately wants it not to be true.

    Anyway.

    Huawei CFO committed fraud in breach of US sanctions, prosecutors sayMeng Wanzhou lied about links between telecoms giant and shell company, Vancouver court hears as bail arguments continue


    Leyland Cecco in Toronto
    Sat 8 Dec 2018 00.23 GMTFirst published on Fri 7 Dec 2018 22.13 GMT





    A senior Chinese telecoms executive committed fraud when she lied about links between Huawei and a shell company used to sell telecommunications equipment to Iran in breach of US sanctions, Canadian prosecutors have told a Vancouver court.
    Meng Wanzhou, Huawei’s chief financial officer, appeared in court on Friday as she sought bail in a case that has sparked a major international dispute between China and the US. After more than five hours of debate, the court has not yet decided if Meng will be granted bail as she fights an extradition order to the US. The closely-watched hearing will resume on Monday morning.


    Crown prosecutors allege Meng – the daughter of Huawei’s founder – engaged in “conspiracy to defraud multiple financial institutions” in 2013 when she attempted to convince bankers that Huawei and a former Hong Kong subsidiary SkyCom were wholly separate entities.
    “Ms Meng personally represented to those banks that Skycom and Huawei were separate, when in fact they were not separate,” said Crown attorney John Gibb-Carlsey. “Skycom was Huawei.”
    SkyCom employees used Huawei email addresses and bank records linked the two companies together, and SkyCom was used to engage in business deals with sanctioned countries, including with Iranian telecom companies, the court heard. The alleged sanctions breaches occurred between 2009 and 2014.


    In a packed Vancouver courtroom, Crown attorneys argued that Meng’s family’s vast financial resources – and the prospect of up to 30 years in an American prison – provided her with ample incentive to flee if granted bail.

    They also cited her refusal to visit the US, where her son attends school, as evidence of a sustained effort to evade a criminal investigation.
    Meng’s lawyer, David Martin, told the court: “Wealth can’t be a prohibition to bail. Even a person of enormous wealth can be released from custody in our great country.”
    Martin sought to portray her as a passionate businesswoman, committed to the success and image of a company founded by her father, Ren Zhengfei, where she has worked at for the past quarter of a century.
    Her health problems – high blood pressure and sleep apnea – were also cited as reasons to release her on bail.
    Martin said she would not breach any court orders. “She would not embarrass China itself,” he said, adding that her husband and daughter were in Vancouver.
    Her legal team also pointed out that while SkyCom was once a subsidiary, Huawei divested from the company and Meng vacated her seat on SkyCom’s board of directors. They also argued that Iranian sanctions were complex and SkyCom’s civilian telecommunications equipment sales likely weren’t in violation of any rules.
    Meng’s surprise arrest on Saturday as she travelled to Mexico is the latest salvo in a feud over trade and technology that has pitted the US against China, with Canada caught in the middle.
    Since Saturday, the telecom executive has been detained at the Alouette Correctional Centre for Women, a facility 50km outside Vancouver’s downtown core.


    The case, which has prompted fury in China, has put Canada in a difficult position: comply with a request from its neighbour and largest trading partner, or risk angering the country it has, for months, sought stronger ties with.
    Canadian wariness is not without cause: the last high-profile extradition request executed by Canada resulted in tit-for-tat action by the Chinese.
    In 2014, British Columbia resident Su Bin was arrested by Canadian officials, on accusations that he had stolen top-secret American fighter jet plans. He later pleaded guilty to the charges in a California court.
    Shortly after his arrest, two Canadians, Kevin and Julia Garret, who ran a coffee shop in Dandong, were arrested by Chinese officials. Kevin Garrett was charged with espionage and spent two years in prison.
    “China plays rough. We need to be on our guard and need to be aware that we’re going into a very difficult period with China,” said David Mulroney, Canada’s former ambassador to China.
    The Canadian Extradition Act requires that in order for a person to be extradited, the individual must be facing charges for an offence deemed criminal in both Canada and the country seeking the extradition request. Crown prosecutors argue Meng violated section 380 of Canada’s criminal code, which pertains to fraud.
    As China pressures Canada to release her, the detention has also created domestic political fissures with opposition parties expressing frustration over a lack of information from the federal government.
    In an interview with Fox News, the former prime minister Stephen Harper said Justin Trudeau should ban Huawei from Canada.
    “These are organizations, ultimately tightly tied to the Chinese security apparatus, and we think there are some real, serious issues there,” said Harper. “The United States is encouraging western allies to essentially push Huawei out of the emerging 5G network, and my personal view is that is something western countries should be doing in terms of our own long-term security issues.”
    https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...-breach-canada

  24. #74
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 11:01 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    16,071
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    Maybe there's a hint in the word "draft"?
    My apologies, wrong link, my post above now updated with the "effective" tag and correct link.

    Thesection ofinterest, doesn't appear to be any different from the draft.

    I don't suppose you have a link to your "official" source, or not of your, "quote"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cujo View Post
    You're right, he desperately wants it not to be true.
    Updated link, now the "effective" Chinese MOD site. Just to assist you to move from the ignorance group to the educated group. My pleasure.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cujo View Post
    Her legal team also pointed out that while SkyCom was once a subsidiary, Huawei divested from the company and Meng vacated her seat on SkyCom’s board of directors. They also argued that Iranian sanctions were complex and SkyCom’s civilian telecommunications equipment sales likely weren’t in violation of any rules.

    "At least 13 pages of the proposal to MCI, which involved expanding its subscriber billing system, were marked “Huawei confidential” and carried the company’s logo, according to documents seen by Reuters. In a statement to Reuters, Huawei called it a “bidding document” and said one of its “major local partners,” Skycom Tech Co Ltd, had submitted it to MCI.

    The statement went on to say, “Huawei’s business in Iran is in full compliance with all applicable laws and regulations including those of the U.N., U.S. and E.U. This commitment has been carried out and followed strictly by our company. Further, we also require our partners to follow the same commitment and strictly abide by the relevant laws and regulations.”In October, Reuters reported that another Iranian partner of Huawei last year tried to sell embargoed American antenna equipment to Iran’s second largest mobile operator, MTN Irancell, in a deal the buyer ultimately rejected. The U.S. antenna manufacturer, CommScope Inc, has an agreement with Huawei in which the Chinese firm can use its products in Huawei systems, according to a CommScope spokesman.

    He added that his company strives to comply fully with all U.S. laws and sanctions.
    Huawei has a similar partnership with HP. In a statement, the Palo Alto, Calif., company said, “HP has an extensive control system in place to ensure our partners and resellers comply with all legal and regulatory requirements involving system security, global trade and customer privacy and the company’s relationship with Huawei is no different.”


    The statement added, “HP’s distribution contract terms prohibit the sale of HP products into Iran and require compliance with U.S. and other applicable export laws.”
    As it's a Reuter's opinion piece one can always finds holes and unsubstantiated innuendo.

    The date of divestment might be useful. The date of her seat vacation also. But are mysteriously left unpublished.

    I presume you have never been involved in a tender proposal with a "partner" who includes deliverables supplied by your company, real or services, to the partner company?

    The legal obligation is between the "partner"/their client. All of the "partner's supplier have contracts with the "partner" company. Not the ultimate receiver of the real/services offer. Who has entered into a legal contract with the "partner" company.

    Huawei partnered with companies all over the world it seems. Huawei's partners include HP........., shall we assume the HP management.............., due to being a "partner" of Huawei, are equally to be arrested and charged?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cujo View Post
    Crown prosecutors argue Meng violated section 380 of Canada’s criminal code, which pertains to fraud.
    "SECTION WORDING
    380(1) Every one who, by deceit, falsehood or other fraudulent means, whether or not it is a false pretence within the meaning of this Act, defrauds the public or any person, whether ascertained or not, of any property, money or valuable security or any service, (a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to a term of imprisonment not exceeding fourteen years, where the subject-matter of the offence is a testamentary instrument or the value of the subject-matter of the offence exceeds five thousand dollars; or (b) is guilty (i) of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or (ii) of an offence punishable on summary conviction, where the value of the subject-matter of the offence does not exceed five thousand dollars. "

    Criminal Code of Canada - section 380(1) - Fraud

    One wonders if a "partner" is liable or "every one" who has dealings with the accused company? One also suspects there are plenty of Canadians/........... who would fall foul, if the decision to prosecute was taken by the Canadian law system.

    For example, are all the investors in companies who are made bankrupt due to ........ are they equally liable for committing the offence, the companies suppliers, the companies bankers, the companies supported politicians, political parties who received donations for election expenses.........? Not usually, IMHO.

    As you may now see, the link between the Chinese woman and the charge seems somewhat tenuous.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cujo View Post
    In an interview with Fox News, the former prime minister Stephen Harper said Justin Trudeau should ban Huawei from Canada.
    “These are organizations, ultimately tightly tied to the Chinese security apparatus, and we think there are some real, serious issues there,” said Harper. “The United States is encouraging western allies to essentially push Huawei out of the emerging 5G network, and my personal view is that is something western countries should be doing in terms of our own long-term security issues.
    I don't suppose you have a link to the "evidence", a politician with similar protection of "opinion" as most politicians, he has published publicly?

    Or shall we conclude that, the politician has no evidence and it is just his unsubstantiated and possibly only his "highly likely", personal view"? Due possibly to him being in the pocket of a competitor of Huawei or having his own dirty deeds made public by a foreign or local entity?

    Which in reality does appear to be the SOP of western countries these days in all foreign affairs.

    Last edited by OhOh; 08-12-2018 at 03:32 PM.

  25. #75
    En route
    Cujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 10:58 PM
    Location
    Reality.
    Posts
    27,237
    Trying hard aren't you.
    Have you been drinking your own piss?
    Because it seems you've been into Earls crayon box.
    First of all lets address the statement by her legal team.
    Just because they say it doesn't make it so.
    She's in this mess partly becayuse they already lied about the relationship between the companies, who's to say they're not lying now.
    What problem do you have with her facing the court if she broke the law?
    Which she obviously did. Whether or not sime random canadian or other could be prosecutted under section 308 (1) is neither here nor there is it.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •