The Media blitz Since I first published a post ( 10 Dec 2018) on Canada's arrest of the Huawei CFO, Meng Wanzhou, I have been baffled, awestruck and frustrated by the refusal of Canadian media to question the legitimacy of her arrest and extradition. Since I began the process of my own modest online inquiries, I have noticed that the National Post , the newspaper founded by Conrad Black before he went to prison (he has since been pardoned by President Trump ), has published some of the most strident anti-China editorials. Although, Black sold the paper to one-time Liberal Izzy Asper, in recent years " the Post has retained a conservative editorial stance ." What does "freedom of the press" mean? Obviously every newspaper in the "free" world is owned by somebody. Does it matter who owns a newspaper or a media company? I don't know. I've never worked for a newspaper. I'm not particularly courageous or selfless, so I imagine that
Showing posts with the label Canada-China relations
Canadian Politicians Were Caught Like Deer in the Headlights, but Why Are Canadian Journalists Censuring any Discussion of the Merits of Meng's Case?
- Other Apps
"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum." Noam Chomsky HSBC, "the victim," doesn't want to prosecute After the G20 summit, President Trump let it be known that he is backtracking on the Huawei ban. Bloomberg and the Financial Times are reporting that HSBC is telling Beijing "It Is Not to Blame for Huawei CFO Arrest." Where does that leave us? Let's see: HSBC is, according to the Grand Jury indictment , supposed to be the victim of Meng Wanzhou's alleged bank fraud. The only evidence against Meng, according to the indictment, is a meeting she had with an HSBC executive and an accompanying Power Point presentation. If the "plaintiff" and the "victim" are backing away from the case, the original warrant