D.卡尔顿 罗西
D. Carlton Rossi

National Security


           USS BUCK ammo transfer to HMCS HAIDA off Korean Peninsula

                                                   A New Paradigm

It was the longest naval blockade in modern history; although, it was also regarded as a siege. The Blockade of Wonsan lasted 821 days from February 16, 1951 to July 27, 1953. The blockade successfully denied the North Korean navy--which consisted of several small warships--access to its port on the south-east coast. Truman had initially called for a full, naval blockade of North Korea after the Korean People's Army crossed the 38th parallel. He was shocked to learn that " the U.S. Navy no longer had the warships with which to carry out his request." Furthermore, he was aware that the Soviet Union had about 85 submarines in the vicinity of the peninsula. Today, the United States is considering--as one of its options--a naval blockade of North Korea. Presumably, it would be intended to fully cut-off North Korea's access to the sea thus putting pressure on the Hermit Kingdom to dismantle its nuclear program. There is no question that the United States has the ability to undertake an extended naval blockade of North Korea; although, it will weaken its ability to respond elsewhere. However, it would be a strategic error to conduct a blockade without the support of China which may regard a blockade of its long-standing ally as an act of war.

The reader may justifiably point out the inconsistency of the argument by asking a question.Why would China participate in the blockade of its ally if it theoretically regarded a U.S. blockade as an act of war? The immediate answer to that question is that it might prevent an unimaginable nuclear confrontation on the Korean peninsula ending with the total annihilation of its ally and the beginning of WWIII.

To some extent the Korean situation reminds one of NATO's problem during the height of the Cold War with the Soviet Union. The Soviets had an overwhelming superiority in terms of the number of tanks at its disposal. It was apparent that the only way to stop those tanks in the event of an invasion was with tactical nuclear weapons. However, this might result in a nuclear retaliation by the Soviets.

On the Korean Peninsula the problem is not North Korean tanks. The problem is North Korean artillery perhaps coupled with chemical and biological agents. This artillery can pound Seoul causing massive casualites. The most effective, initial way to deal with this artillery might be a string of MOAB (mother of all bombs). This type of bomb was recently tested in Afganistan and proved its reputation.

However, if MOAB failed as well as jets attacking the artillery from behind their covering hills and other missile strikes then it appears the last resort would be a string of atomic bombs down the artillery line. One might have initially resisted using them because of the fallout danger to Seoul and the unwillingness to escalate to a nuclear solution. In the longer run, it would create a highly toxic, radioactive zone which, in effect, would be another kind of DMZ.

It hasn't been quantified, but a nuclear war would certainly not involve just a single bomb. It would probably consist of multiple bombs raining down on North Korea. It is anyone's guess as to how many bombs would be dropped on Pyongyang. Missile sites would also be prime targets. Half a dozen nuclear refinement sites could not be ignored to prevent the material falling into the wrong hands. Chemical facilities are targets. Airfields are a priority, too. The list goes on and on.

Anyone in his or her right mind might dismiss the preceding scenario as hysterically fantastical except for the fact that it was contemplated in an eerily similar way more than 65 years ago at the beginning of the Korean War. It must be remembered in what was known as "The Forgotten War" that while hostilities began on June 25, 1950 that it was shortly thereafter in July that President Truman sent two groups of B-29 bombers which carried atomic bombs to the U.K. and Guam."They were complete except for their fissile plutonium cores which remained in the United States". On December 06, 1950, the headquarters of the U.S. military in Tokyo considered three nuclear options. These scenarios were basically designed to contain communism of both Russia and China and to secure the safety of Japan.


General MacArthur was the main proponent of the use of atomic weapons  He called for the use of between 30 and 50 atomic weapons which would have represented approximately 10% of the U.S. stockpile. He wished to drop them on the neck of Manchuria as a means to begin a war with China. In addition, he asked the Pentagon to "grant him a field commander's discretion to employ nuclear weapons as necessary".

This last request was the final act of his insubordination which led to the firing of MacArthur by Truman. In other words, MacArthur had challenged Truman's authority and extent of power. However, keep in mind that Truman himself had not sought congressional approval for the war and its status remained as a "police action".

It is ironic today that the situation seems reversed with those who hope General James Mattis (Secretary of Defence) and General John F. Kelly (White House Chief of Staff) who were coincidentally both born in 1950 will provide some kind of check on the President's ability to wage nuclear war against North Korea. It is unclear if there is a willingness of Congress to constrain President Trump's ability to launch a nuclear war on instinct or even if constraint is desirable considering the potential dire threat posed by the North Korean regime. Would it be out of line to use 10% of the nuclear stockpile of the United States against an enemy which has nuclear weapons and threatened to use them against U.S. territory?


In order to answer the question of how many nuclear bombs might be dropped on North Korea one might point to the capability of one Ohio class Trident II submarine. It can carry 24 ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads. A complete salvo can be fired in less than a minute. Each Trident II can split into eight independent re-entry vehicles to attack 24 targets. The U.S. has fourteen of these submarines. They are just one part of a large and extensive nuclear arsenal.

The problem on the Korean Peninsula has been regarded as north-south oriented. The DPRK is more familiarly known as North Korea while the ROK is called South Korea.The Korean Peninsula was administered under the trusteeship of the Soviet Union in the north occupation zone and the United States in the south occupation zone after the Japanese surrendered South Korea. There was a brief but ill-fated attempt by the military governor to appoint the Japanese as temporary colonial administrators.The north-south zones were separated by the 38th parallel. Soviet forces withdrew in 1948 while American forces withdrew in 1949.


The Korean War began when Kim Il-sung led the Korean People's Army in a southerly direction across the demarcation line. They were assisted by both Soviet and Chinese forces. They were opposed by South Korean, U.S., Commonwealth and UN forces. An amphibious force led by MacArthur undertook an attack at Incheon and cut-off North Korean troops. The Allied forces then proceeded across the 38th parallel into North Korea up to the Yalu River on the southern border of China. At this point, massive numbers of Chinese troops pushed the Allied troops south over the 38th parallel. Seoul changed hands four times.

While all of these movements tend to reinforce the view of a north-south orientation over the Korean Peninsula it seems that the regional orientation is perceived to be west-east. For example, the capital city of North Korea is roughly on the 39th parallel. If one proceeds westward across Korea Bay one meets the city of Dalian on its peninsula. Further west one crosses the Yellow Sea, the Bohai Sea and then one comes to Tianjin on the mainland coast of China. A rather short distance from the port of Tianjin is the capital of Beijing.

To the east of North Korea is the Sea of Japan also known as the East Sea. It only takes a few minutes for a North Korean missile fired from the east coast of the country to reach Japan. Two missiles have flown recently over Japan while several have fallen into the Sea of Japan. North Korea has threatened to send an ICBM armed with a nuclear weapon over Japan and explode it over the Pacific Ocean in order to demonstrate its capability of striking the United States. It is clear that China's North Korean ally is terrifying one of China's largest trading partners or Japan and threatens its largest trading partner or the United States. While China has historically been North Korea's largest trading partner; yet, it falls way down the list of China's trading partners.

It is ironic that an important criterion for determining exactly when the United States would launch a nuclear attack on North Korea is which way the wind blows. The prevailing winds are southeasterly in summer and northwesterly in winter (ie. come from the north-west). If everything else is equal the United States would choose to launch in summer. In that event, northeast China would unfortunately be covered in fallout. However, the head of the CIA says that Korea is now on the cusp of war. Winter is coming.

During the winter months the winds come from the north-west and are quite strong. This means that South Korea would be the recipient of fallout. If the winds were westerly then Japan would receive fallout. If one merely considers self-interest then the United States would choose to launch if winds blew in other directions. This is another reason for China to join a blockade to prevent a nuclear war on the Peninsula.

However, more study needs to be done on the wind issue. Conceivably, hundreds of nuclear bombs could target sites in North Korea at different locations. How will this affect the wind patterns?


The west-east orientation in East Asia which seems to center on the Korean Peninsula was reinforced with Japan's invasion of China and Korea. The surrender of Japan to the United States did not take place though until two nuclear bombs were dropped on the country. However, the restoration of Japan was not undertaken for its own sake, but rather as a check to Chinese communism and revolution. In the same way, west Germany was restored to check Soviet Bolshevism and expansion in another west-east regional orientation.

If the United States with or without its allies were to undertake a full blockade of North Korea which might be termed "hard sanctions" then it would be bound to fail because there has been no indication so far that sanctions have done anything but strengthen the resolve of the North Korean regime to pursue its nuclear program. Secondly, the DPRK may need less than a year to develop these programs so that it is capable of launching an ICBM at the U.S. mainland.

This type of naval blockade also is restricted to a north-south orientation. It may be appropriate for the Peninsula, but it does not take into account the regional west-east orientation. For example, the DPRK has launched a missile eastward over Japan. It also does not deal with the PRC's reaction to the proximity of U.S. ships in the Korean Strait and in the Yellow Sea with regard to its territory. Finally, it means that if there were an easterly wind then fallout would cover Beijing.

The options open to the PRC are various. For example, the Chinese might try to run the blockade. However, the most obvious recourse is one of enclosure. You may wish to recall the strategic game called "wu ji" which involves enclosure. For example, a line of mines placed behind the naval blockade might enclose the blocker.

However, a joint, naval blockade undertaken by the Chinese and Americans might be capable of success. This kind of blockade would satisfy the demands of the west-east regional orientation. The Chinese navy would lay off the west coast of North Korea while the American navy would be situated off the east coast of North Korea. They would both operate independently and yet in concert simultaneously. These forces are balanced harmoniously at "arm's length". The primary goal is to prevent nuclear war. The secondary goal is to force the dismantling of North Korea's nuclear programs. The tertiary goal is "hard sanctions".

It is uncertain how Russia would react to a joint Chinese-American naval blockade since it continues to supply North Korea from its northeast region. It is most probable that Russia would try to advance its own west-east regional interest. This would centre around the Ukraine and strategic Black Sea area during a Korean conflict.

On the other hand, if there were a Chinese naval blockade on the west coast of North Korea along with a blockade on the east coast by the U.S. navy then it would be an entirely new development that might convince North Korea to dismantle its nuclear program. The balance of power would shift overnight. The Chinese presence along the coast could be interpreted in two ways; namely, to assist its ally or to enforce sanctions. Ultimately, though, it would help its ally denuclearize and prevent a nuclear peninsula and Far-East. A joint blockade may be the last chance to avert nuclear Armageddon.

If China is left out of the equation as far as a blockade goes then it may concentrate its efforts on Taiwan. If the reader recalls there was an operation launched against an island of Taiwan prior to the Korean War. It was called the Battle of Kinmen (金門戰役; Jīnmén Zhànyì). The battle was fought over Kinmen in the Taiwan Strait during the Chinese Civil War in 1949. Furthermore, according to CIA records, there was a possible invasion of Taiwan planned by the Chinese in the month of October 1950. However, when the U.S. and its allies crossed the 38th parallel though the Chinese priority changed to pushing back those who were perceived to be aggressors.

If a North Korean missile launch were to be judged as an act of war on U.S. or allied territory; or if the U.S. were to launch a pre-emptive or preventive nuclear attack on North Korea; or if the North Korean threat were no longer guaged to be existential but rather imminently substantial then casualties would be horrendous on both sides. The reaction and responses of Russia and China could be anticipated to a certain extent as they would not lie idle in their respective regions with China at least concentrating on Taiwan and Russia focused on the Ukraine. The outcome would potentially become a cataclysmic catastrophe. Simply stated, WWIII could be triggered.

D.卡尔顿 罗西

D. Carlton Rossi


Other variations, implications, and complications of a joint blockade will be discussed later in more detail through a question and answer format in Part B.

The One U.S. Submarine That Could Completely Destroy North Korea

April 27, 2017





How the East was Won

The reader may recall that in 2003, at a time between the arrest of Sun and his trial, the author set up fifty websites on Webspawner. They were set-up so that if one were compromised then the others would survive. SUN Dawu could not speak for himself as he was held incommunicado and his website shut down; however, many others--including the author--came to his defence. The author tried to hire the leading, international, human rights lawyer from New York to plead Sun's case. The author's audience at that time were Chinese. Sun was portrayed by the author as he saw him; namely, a Confucian entrepreneur of integrity. Images of Sun, as well as his name, were censored by Chinese authorities so the author provided them on his sites. In retrospect, it is clear that Sun was among the leaders of the civil rights movement in China which began in 2003.

Over the years though the author cultivated a western audience by concentrating on Dawu Group's Private Family Enterprise System established in 2004 with its elections every two years, the model village to become a city established at the Xushui County, Hebei location and the prosperity of an enterprise oriented to people rather than profits. There have been subsequently other private family enterprise systems set-up in China, but Dawu Group's was the first. In 2015 and 2016, for example, Sun attended two conferences held in Beijing which attracted both Chinese and international interest. It is clear that the Dawu Group's system is oriented to the peasant base as well as the peasant migrating workers; although, other systems may have different orientations.

Generally speaking, though, Canadian governments have ignored peasant issues in China, the efficacy and efficiency of Chinese entrepreneurship and the model of rule of law and constitutionalism as established by the Dawu Group in 2004 which has resulted in six democratic elections. In theory, there is an understanding of how private enterprise creates jobs--perhaps 80% of new jobs in China, but in practice there is a continuing reliance on top down models that begin with the Canada-China Business Council (CCBC) and elitist Canadian executives of major corporations. The result is that private entrepreurship in Canada is struggling to survive.

There has been only lip service paid by the Canadian government and unwarranted comments made by the CCBC in the dire cases of John Chang and his wife who are Canadian entrepreneurs arrested for an alleged commercial violation and then charged criminally when they professed their innocence rather than confess. The former conservative Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and the current Liberal government made the case of the billionaire and CCP member Xiao Jianhua a priority since they wish to diversify and intensify trade with China as a supplement to free-trade under NAFTA. However, they marginalized the case of John Chang through indifference. The author whole-heartedly supports the Chang family because it reminds him of the case of SUN Dawu which involved private, family entrepreneurs involved in farming who produced a first-class product, but who were oppressed by a corrupt system.

It was apparent in China that as power was concentrated in the body of one Party and the hands of one, core leader that opposition was not tolerated. The purge may have begun earlier with the Falun Gong, but it now extends to any source of opposition which included religious minorities, press, constitutionalists, lawyers, peasants and civil rights activists among others. The reality of modern China is that lawyers and the military must pledge sole allegiance to the Party. Imagine this situation happening in a Canada where lawyers do not pledge to uphold the constitution and rule of law and the military does not pledge to defend Canada, but both groups pledge to be loyal to a particular Party.

Currently, the concerns of the author centre on Canada and how a Chinese totalitarian system may impact our country. The Chinese government says to us that western support of human rights in China involves interference. It pledges that if we do not press this issue then it will not interfere in our internal affairs. However, keep in mind that Chinese interference in Canadian affairs is rarely direct but rather indirect and less obvious. For example, the Chinese Ambassador to Canada says to Canadians not to politicize the case of John Chang who is a Canadian citizen--since it is an internal matter. The author respectfully replies that that depends on the definition of politicization. To the author the morphing of a civil case falling under GATT commercial rules at the time of "exploratory" China-Canada free-trade talks to a criminal case of smuggling which may result in a life sentence is a classic example of politicization.

In terms of the political situation in Canada with regard to foreign policy the author is disenchanted. Both the Conservative and Liberal Parties supported BO Xilai and his Mafia henchman until they were arrested. The repercussions are still being felt in Chongqing with the dismissal of SUN Zhengcai who was recently the Communist Party secretary of Chongqing and is under investigation over suspected “grave violations of discipline". "Sun also came under political pressure this year after party inspectors accused him and other Chongqing officials of not doing enough to root out the “toxic residue” of Mr. Bo’s influence".

The strongest opposition to FIPA or the Foreign Investment Protection Agreement came from the NDP and the Green Party. However, FIPA was passed by the Conservative government of Harper with virtually no debate. The Liberal Party has used FIPA as the basis to conduct "exploratory" free-trade talks with the Chinese. The author does not understand how the current Liberal leader of a so-called liberal party is cozing up to a communist dictator of the CCP, state-owned monopolies of China and billionaries affiliated with the Party or sympathetic to the Party. The leader of the Liberal Party seems enamoured if that is the correct term with the Core Leader of China and with regard to the prospects of China-Canada free-trade which is progressing with a full speed ahead and damn the torpedoes approach.

Recently, the Conservative Party led by Scheer has adopted an opposition to free-trade platform based principally on security issues. They have also co-opted environmentalist issues of the Green Party and labour concerns of the NDP. The Chinese authorities reacted strongly to the Conservative platform, though, this shouldn't be inferred as an example of politicized interference or should it? However, in the Conservative platform there is no mention of the FIPA agreement as if they wish to satisfy Harper conservatives on the matter. However, FIPA is the root of the issue and needs to be readdressed. The Conservative Party cannot truly distinguish itself from the Liberal Party unless they disavow the China-Canada FIPA and distance themselves from Mulroney.

With respect to the Liberal government's foreign policy with regard to the United States it seems to be that they can't relate to a President who makes decisions on whim and who flouts rule of law and apparently flaunts obstruction of justice. Therefore, they try to connect with those who might influence the President. Perhaps few of them recognized that President Trump may be the first president who became a lame duck on the day of inauguration because he lost credibility and trust when he presented an alternate version of real rain at the time of his speech and the number of people in attendance.

The Liberal government instead prefers to deal with a dictatorial leader of China because he can get things done without opposition. They called on the pre-Harper, conservative, former Prime Minister Mulroney to help introduce them to influential Republicans in the United States. However, he is also used or is it vice-versa to advance the free-trade agenda with China?

Free-trade with China is not conducted to supplant trade with the United States, but rather to supplement it. For example, if Canada has had trouble with American special interest groups that want to protect their softwood lumber industry then turn to China which will solve this problem. Forget about how China promotes and protects its cement industry and steel industry rather than wood. Forget about how the company Sino-Forest which was dubbed "See No Forest" swindled Canadian investors on a mammoth scale. If you continue to pursue free-trade with China then you will see neither Canadian forest nor jobs.

The Liberal government has come to the conclusion that it is not productive to side with a low-level Communist. It must support the highest level Communist. Incidentally, that leader makes decisions on whim, flouts rule of law and launches an anti-corruption program which never seems to end or run out of prosecuting corruption cases--especially of political opponents.

At any rate, the author now concentrates on how Canada and Canadians may be affected deleteriously in three ways; namely, by FIPA, China-Canada Free-Trade and a potential extradition treaty. FIPA has taken away our sovereignty. China-Canada Free-Trade will take away our souls which to the materialist Chinese government do not exist. Finally, an extradition treaty will undermine the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Through a series of strategic acquisitions the Chinese government will weaken Canadian sovereignty and Canada's ability to guard itself. It has already impinged on and infringed upon Canadian sovereignty and protection in the fentanyl crisis, by the virtual dismantling of Northern Telecom and the hacking of the National Research Council to name just a few circumstances.

In conclusion, the author will briefly explain the title. Perhaps the reader thinks he has made an error and that it should read "How the West was Won" since we regard ourselves as of the West. You will recall that the eastern civilization moved west to the American frontier through literally a slash and burn policy of trees, overwhelming numbers, treaty violations, mining exploitation and war with Native Indians. Canadians preferred a more "benign" starvation and cultural assimilation to colonize indigenous peoples.

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) was established on July 1, 1921 or nearly 100 years ago. As such it may be the longest lived, continuous political party. It won over China through rebellions, revolutions, a famine and wars. It holds on to power through authoritariansim and ruthless treatment of opposition. In words, it says it is socialist, but in deeds it is a system of crony capitalism according to Minxing PEI which misappropriates public property and expands state-owned companies while in addition exhibiting unchecked political power as said by Yan SUN.

While direction is relative one must consider that North America is east to the Chinese if one considers the positon of the Pacific Ocean. The CCP now moves East to the shores of North America. It will use a form of asymmetrical warfare so subtle that Canadians and Americans will not even know who their enemy is. You will smile during the process of assimilation without even realizing what is happening. You will be overwhelmed by a ruthlessly corrupt, authoritarian regime and welcome it. You will bask in sunshine while your land, resources and water are appropriated and your innocence is expropriated.

D.卡尔顿 罗西


Former Political Star in China Is Under Party Investigation


JULY 24, 2017


"An overwhelming majority of Canadians oppose the sale of two domestic technology companies with military customers to Chinese investors and believe these takeovers should be a top priority for national security reviews...." Nearly four in five Canadians oppose the sale of Montreal's ITF. "ITF once participated in a university-level research project with a Canadian spy agency on the science behind making messages more resistant to hacking.which uses quantum cryptography to make advances in a field where experts try to produce coded messages that are difficult or impossible to crack."


China sets new record for quantum entanglement
en route to build new communication network

China has scored a victory against hackers and spooks as it surges ahead of other world powers in a new kind of space race.

Nick Whigham


In a bid to build an entirely new kind of internet — completely secure and impervious to hackers — China has pulled off a major feat in particle physics.

It appears to the author that some of the technology used by the Chinese to develop hack proof communication technology using quantum entanglement may have been developed at ITF Technologies. If this supposition is true then the Chinese have a leading edge in both the commercial and military application of this technology. It may mean that the recent agreement signed by the Liberal government for both Canadians and Chinese to refrain from hacking each other in the commercial area may be mute on the Canadian side if they will not have the capability to hack Chinese commercial sites. It also appears the Liberal government sacrificed Norsat International to get the agreement.
Norsat International's products and services are used extensively by telecommunications services providers, emergency services and homeland security agencies, military organizations, health care providers, news organizations and Fortune 1000 companies. Customers include NATO, the United States Department of Defense, Marine Corps, Army, Navy and Air Force; FOX News, CBS News; Boeing, Reuters, Motorola, TESSCO, General Dynamics and others.

In other words, the purchase of ITF and Norsat International seem to go hand in hand. The Chinese may want to forestall and prevent through patent law the above organizations from using quantum entanglement methods which they have developed. Furthermore, they may wish to build an internet firewall around the PRC to keep out foreign ideas of human rights, rule of law and constitutionalism.

Poll finds most Canadians oppose sale of high-tech firms to China



July 3, 2017


CSIS, Defence warned Ottawa on China laser technology deal


OTTAWA — The Globe and Mail

Jan. 23, 2017


China sets new record for quantum entanglement
en route to build new communication network

Nick Whigham



Canadians are very, very angry about the sale of ITF.  However, if you want a bit of cheer then console yourself that the Chinese have not perfected the "Illudium PU-36 Explosive Space Modulator" or planet-killing laser cannon created by Marvin the Martian over a period of 2000 years.


Marvin the Martian and Bugs Bunny
Warner Brothers Animation (C)
Educational Purposes only

Marvin the Martian in Space Modulator



Marvin the Martin's Laser Beam song

Marvin the Martian and Bugs Bunny
Warner Brothers Animation (C)
Educational Purposes only



Canada and China strike corporate hacking deal

Robert Fife And Steven Chase

OTTAWA — The Globe and Mail

June 26, 2017

"The two sides agreed that neither country’s government would conduct or knowingly support cyber-enabled theft of intellectual property, including trade secrets or other confidential business information, with the intent of providing competitive advantages to companies or commercial sectors,” an official communiqué drawn up between China and Canada says.

For years, according to U.S. officials, Chinese hackers have stolen valuable intellectual property and other business secrets from Western high-tech firms, drug makers, financial institutions and other companies.


                     Security Agreement on Intellectual Property

This agreement is meaningless for the following reasons.

1. China has already stolen trade secrets in a flurry of activity since China-Canada free-trade talks were announced last fall. 

They have already got what they wanted. This agreement is like closing the barn door after the horses have left.

The author will cite three examples from personal experience of Chinese methods to secure sensitive data from Canadian sources.

a) Chinese nationals were rummaging the scrap metal bins of Alberta pipeline companies. The purpose was to secure samples of non-corrosive steel pipe. This behaviour was reported to the Canadian embassy in Beijing. However, within a day, it was clear to the author that there had been a leak at the embassy so that the source was now aware of the report.

b) The author met a Chinese individual at the University of Waterloo. He held a masters degree in library studies. He was researching processes that could be reverse engineered. He reported to a Washington firm.

c) Contiguous to the Graduate School in the Chaoyang District of Beijing was the Lido Fandian or four star hotel. At the time there was a popular Starbucks where foreigners congregated. The staff was brazen enough to install listening devices in the false ceiling as the author sat enjoying his coffee. There were also listening devices planted in the bushes along the walkway near the hotel.

2. Canada does not steal trade secrets from China

Why would Canada steal trade secrets from the Chinese? It would only be acquiring trade secrets that had already been stolen from Canada or other foreign countries? Therefore, what concession did Canada have to make to secure this agreement. The Chinese give nothing for free. They are expert negotiators.

3. The source of hacks is mostly anonymous

The WannaCry virus spread quickly throughout the world within a matter of hours. It is conjectured that its source was China because of the language used. Indeed, China is where most bit mining is done. How does Canada know that this virus or others like it are not state-sponsored or approved? There is no Made in China stamp on any virus program.

4. Wishful thinking

A senior government official, who took part in Friday’s talks, said the agreement should nevertheless be seen as a potentially important step toward addressing the broader problem of Chinese espionage.

“This is something that three or four years ago [Beijing] would not even have entertained in the conversation,” according to the official, who is not authorized to speak on the record for the government.

No wonder the senior government official is unnamed. If anyone thinks that Chinese espionage will be curtailed then they need a reality check.

This kind of thinking is similar to those who believe that a Canadian program to train Chinese lawyers will help promote rule of law in China. It isn't happening. Human rights lawyers and their lawyers and their lawyers are arrested and sentenced. As of March 22, 2012 lawyers must pledge allegiance to the CCP.

"In its ongoing efforts to tie the Chinese legal profession as tight as possible to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), China’s Ministry of Justice (MOJ), the government agency that oversees the legal profession, announced its new initiative on Wednesday: every new lawyer in China must pledge allegiance to the CCP."


5.  Buy Sensitive Firms without full Security Review

Why should China hack Canada's most sophisticated firms when it is allowed willy-nilly to buy firms without a full security review on the excuse of protectionism? 

"The Hytera-Norsat approval comes just three months after Bains gave the go-ahead to Hong Kong-based O-Net Communications to buy out Montreal's ITF Technologies. ITF makes fibre-laser technology for communications and industry which can be used in direct-energy weapons."

6.. Compensation

The theft of intellectual property, including trade secrets or other confidential business information comes at a cost to Canadian businesses and enterprises. Canadian don't want empty promises about how the Chinese won't steal intellectual property in the future. We want compensation for what they have already stolen. For example, the demise of Northern Telecom as Canada's leading hi-tech company began with the theft of trade secrets. We want more, more, and more. We want billions and billions, and billions of dollars in compensation for all theft of intellectual property over the decades.

D.卡尔顿 罗西


                                                  Take me to your leader!


Marvin the Martian and Bugs Bunny
Warner Brothers Animation (C)
Educational Purposes only


June 29, 2017    

Did the Liberal government with its platform of hugs for thugs really trade-away Norsat for a limited hacking agreement in secret exploratory free-trade talks before the summer doldrums?

The Village Twit

D. Carlton Rossi   2017  (C)

Arctic Sovereignty