Huawei CFO arrested for violating US sanctions on Iran

[Wt_know]

1 minute ago, inlinesix said:

Someone will tell you off.

She did not plea guilty 

😂

in angmoh saying is .... 

in ah beng saying is "you didn't tell but you didn't ask ..." when buy used car from ah beng dealer ... lol

Edited September 26, 2021 by Wt_know

[Sturtles]

My opinion, she hid information, but if she is guilty, shouldn’t Canada deliver a guilty verdict?

Which is what mislead investigators meant.

This whole case is just to achieve political aims, without true consideration of the underlying actions.

[inlinesix]

2 minutes ago, Wt_know said:

in angmoh saying is .... 

in ah beng saying is "you didn't tell but you didn't ask ..." when buy used car from ah beng dealer ... lol

😂

He even quote CGTN news that Meng did not plea guilty le.

 

[inlinesix]

3 minutes ago, Sturtles said:

My opinion, she hid information, but if she is guilty, shouldn’t Canada deliver a guilty verdict?

Which is what mislead investigators meant.

This whole case is just to achieve political aims, without true consideration of the underlying actions.

Canada arrest her under US extradition request.

It is up to US to provide the required evidence for the extradition 

Edited September 26, 2021 by inlinesix

[Sturtles]

Just now, inlinesix said:

Canada arrest her under US extradition arrest.

There was clear case that she misled HSBC into believing Skycom is unrelated to HW.

Definitely believe HW sold restricted products to Iran while they are under sanction.

I just can't fathom, why if she is guilty, she is not convicted. 

Was it under a technicality so had to be released, or she is not considered to have committed an offence worthy of 3 years of house arrest?

The West does not have ISA, so infringement of such personal rights is baffling. 

[inlinesix]

Just now, Sturtles said:

Definitely believe HW sold restricted products to Iran while they are under sanction.

I just can't fathom, why if she is guilty, she is not convicted. 

Was it under a technicality so had to be released, or she is not considered to have committed an offence worthy of 3 years of house arrest?

The West does not have ISA, so infringement of such personal rights is baffling. 

The conditional release is based on plea bargain.

It will be interesting which side initiated this move.

[Sturtles]

6 minutes ago, inlinesix said:

The conditional release is based on plea bargain.

It will be interesting which side initiated this move.

Release with Admission of guilt makes sense, and maybe she traded some secrets for it.

However, she was released without admission of guilt, and only admit to misleading/hiding info that makes it difficult for investigators to do their work, which ultimately should also deliver a verdict if she was guilty in the primary crime, or not guilty to the primary crime which is the current case now

Eg. I detain you because I suspect you are a murderer, and question you where you were on Sunday night ( which was at a Geylang having a good time), and you lied you were with your friend.

In the end, the investigators found out you lied, but also not guilty of the primary charge - Murder. 

This is what I see with Meng's case.

[Falc]

22 hours ago, Beregond said:

To me meng and the 2 michaels are politicals victim. Do u want to see what the 2 michaels are being charge of??

Its ok if u dun agree with me on this. totally  fine with me

Its ok also if u feel USA  win this round against china. fine with me also

Its perfectly ok with me also if u feel the conclusion of this meng cases is an embarrassment for china not usa.

I totally respect your POV and not going to debate with u on that. 

enjoy your weekend and dun take thing too hard 😆

Ya, it is quite pointless when there is no agreement of the facts. You draw your conclusion based on how you see your own facts and this is no forum of fact finding. lol

[Falc]

15 hours ago, Sosaria said:

So will more people there now chiong Huawei stores to snatch up their phones?

Like the good fortune that fell on Erke when the sports brand donated a large sum of money for flood relief?

Or will PRCs still stubbornly queue up for iPhone 13?

 

Would a poll of MCFers provide an answer? 😛

[Beregond]

5 minutes ago, Falc said:

Ya, it is quite pointless when there is no agreement of the facts. You draw your conclusion based on how you see your own facts and this is no forum of fact finding. lol

I alway agree to disagree. 

But no matter what  there is 1 clear fact we must agree on.

Meng escape from USA clutches😆

Edited September 27, 2021 by Beregond

[Wt_know]

prc will sell kidney to buy a NEW phone ...

no need PhD to guess it's an iPhone and no one sell any organ to buy Huawei ...  

Edited September 27, 2021 by Wt_know

[Falc]

12 hours ago, Sturtles said:

My opinion, she hid information, but if she is guilty, shouldn’t Canada deliver a guilty verdict?

Which is what mislead investigators meant.

This whole case is just to achieve political aims, without true consideration of the underlying actions.

 

Don't be too quick to draw this conclusion. There is a political dimension, yes, but also wrongdoing under the law, US laws in this instance. She's charged under US law  not under Canadian law; the Canadian courts were deciding whether she could be sent to US to stand trial (she's not quilty before being tried) because she challenged that Canada could send her to US.

Democractic countries abide by due process of their law. People don't just mysteriously disappear and more mysteriously re-appear in some jail based on a guilty sentence. 

[Falc]

6 minutes ago, Beregond said:

I alway agree to disagree. 

But no matter what  there is 1 clear fact we must agree on.

Meng escape from USA clutches😆

Yes, she's given a second chance under the law.

But if she flouted the terms of her bargain and gone to the West or even SG (it seems SG has extradiction treaty with US but not China), she could still be arrested, extradicted and charged.

[Wt_know]

5 minutes ago, Falc said:

Yes, she's given a second chance under the law.

But if she flouted the terms of her bargain and gone to the West or even SG (it seems SG has extradiction treaty with US but not China), she could still be arrested, extradicted and charged.

just stay in PRC until 1 Dec 2022 ... to clear all future charges ...

Edited September 27, 2021 by Wt_know

[Beregond]

just read this news damn funny

canada and usa was trying very hard to deny that the release of the 2 michaels got anyhing to do with meng release. but china purposely refuse to wayang and release the 2 michaels immediately, and indirectly telling every 1 its part of the deal. lmao😆

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/world/canada-china-relations-normalisation-huawei-meng-foreign-minister-garneau-2203551

Canadian Ambassador to the United States Kirsten Hillman denied Washington had made the release of Kovrig and Spavor a condition for the resolution of the charges against Meng.

"Absolutely not. The DPA and the resolution of the charges against Ms Meng was a completely independent process, and it was proceeding as it did," Hillman told Canadian broadcaster CTV.

Garneau also said he did not think the timing of the men's return had anything to do with that of the federal election.

"I think it just worked out that way."

Edited September 27, 2021 by Beregond

[inlinesix]

9 minutes ago, Wt_know said:

just stay in PRC until 1 Dec 2022 ... to clear all future charges ...

That means she will be separated from her family for more than 1 year

[Falc]

13 minutes ago, Wt_know said:

just stay in PRC until 1 Dec 2022 ... to clear all future charges ...

The exact terms of her bargain made known already?

[Sturtles]

12 minutes ago, Falc said:

 

Don't be too quick to draw this conclusion. There is a political dimension, yes, but also wrongdoing under the law, US laws in this instance. She's charged under US law  not under Canadian law; the Canadian courts were deciding whether she could be sent to US to stand trial (she's not quilty before being tried) because she challenged that Canada could send her to US.

Democractic countries abide by due process of their law. People don't just mysteriously disappear and more mysteriously re-appear in some jail based on a guilty sentence. 

Your explanation is the clearest amongst those guilty/not-guilty verdict arguments.

To bring forth the case, or not to, rests on the political masters. 

It could not be that US has no sufficient evidence, while requesting house arrest of a foreign citizen not within its soil, for the past 3 years and needs another year to gather more standing to press charges.

Everything hereafter is just a show circus for internal media and political chip generation.