Is the US shooting itself in the foot by banning Huawei?

Equation said:

I'm not shifting anything. You asked me a question so I require you to define the terms "abuse" and "oppression," which you used in your question, and you have failed to do it. If you are confused, go read your own question again.

Click to expand...

Gatekeeper said:

This said it all
"Oppressed state" "checks and balances"
Thus guy genuinely believed all the crap they have fed him with!

Yeah, China is the "oppressed state" vision of Orwellian state.
The west have all "checks and balances" to protect its citizens. I wonder where all the "checks and balances" disappear to when it comes to the treatments of the indigenous people of the Americas and the land down under.
Or the "combatants" locked up in Cuba.
Diego Garcia, Bikini island?
I could go on. But let's not embarrassed him.

Click to expand...

Nutrient said:

Paragraph 531F of the Australian

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, states that "Carriers must give information to an authorised information officer".

In other words, Australian telecommunication carriers must cooperate with the spooks. This is very similar to article 7 of China's National Intelligence Law of 2017. You will find that nearly every country will have something like this.

You don't even know about your country! But your ignorance doesn't stop you from spreading fear and hate about another nation.

Click to expand...

weig2000 said:

As far as I know, before China enacted its National Intelligence Law, they had studied carefully many western countries' intelligence law. As you pointed above the Australian Telecommunication Act 1997 has similar article, so does the US's Cloud Act, as pointed out by Huawei Chairman Guo Ping in his keynote speech at the current MWC.

I noticed the US government's arguments against Huawei more recently have been focusing on China's National Intelligence Law, as well as UK NCSC's report on Huawei's software practice flaw. The latter is really about software engineering process, particularly the legacy codes.

Click to expand...

taxiya said:

Regarding the "Australia has less problem with cutting out Huawei than UK because Australia is more conservative (towards Huawei)". Let me just say this it is more of good long term relationship between Australian's operator (Telstra) and Ericsson which continued from 3G into 4G when Huawei was nothing (therefor concern was not an issue) in 3G outside of China. Ericsson continues to be strongly preferred in Australia because of the history.

Click to expand...

Biscuits said:

Seeing Canada blab about rule of law or due process is almost as sad as seeing North Korea blab about democracy.

So will China move on to capturing American spies now?

Pathetic regime to kidnap a civilian’s daughter because they can’t compete with his private family company.

What’s next, kidnap Chinese directions and force them to make a movie for Trump?

Click to expand...

CMP said:

You can't embarrass someone who's too shameless to carefully scrutinize his own civilization's contemporary wrongdoings (to this date).

Click to expand...

Jura said:

good you've edited your "skeletons"

Click to expand...

Gatekeeper said:

This just goes to show that their law abiding country with their democracies are no better than the "commies" that have no respect for "checks and balances" and "rule based" system! Gee

Click to expand...