Comments by "Music4567able" (@Music4567able) on "Why Meng Wanzhou is INNOCENT and WILL return to China (中文字幕）" video.

Ms. Meng should be released if Canadian judicial system is fair. I found that there is a new function to give "applause" to support Cyrus's channel. Just give an applause and keep it up!
397
@thanos7691 Your statement reveals some interesting facts. It means Chinese judiciary is as good as Canadian or Canadian judiciary is as poor as Chinese.
20
這部影片好棒！讓我為你掌聲鼓勵 (購買金額：HK$25.00) 👏👏
17
@everythingandmore5537 Where is your figures, "99.9% conviction rate" coming from? I would like to know if you are a "fake news maker" like the Epoch Times does.
10
@everythingandmore5537 Who tells you that the 2 Michaels could not present their case? They have lawyers to help them just like the suspects in other countries do. Ms. Meng didn't commit any crime within the jurisdiction of Canada. In contrast, the 2 Michaels are suspects who committed crimes against national security WITHIN CHINA JURISDICTION. If the 2 Michaels committed crimes against national security in the US, they may be sent to Guantanamo for detention without trial just like the treatment of the suspected terrorists arrested by the US.
8
@everythingandmore5537 It's quite funny that you defend for the infamous Guantanamo. Everyone knows that there is a concentration camp to keep suspects for years without trials. Also, some suspects are tortured by the officers there.
7
@seafood_hater Peter as a Canadian and he is confident with Canadian legal system. He trusts the court would give a fair verdict to Ms. Meng. Similarly, as Chinese I trust our court would give a fair judgment to the 2 Michaels. Therefore, he has the right to trust his country's legal system as what I do, fair enough.
6
@everythingandmore5537 First of all, don't know if the news you mentioned is true or not, I don't want to waste the time to verify. Even if it is a true event, it's still reasonable that some people have mental problems within a 1.4 billion population country. Many years ago, a veteran of the Iraqi War made a terrorist attack in Oklahoma and caused 169 people die in 1995. Therefore, I don't know what's the point why you mention a suicide bombing in Shanghai. Moreover, I don't know if it's something really happened at all. There are too many fake news spreading on the internet nowadays.
4
@VIAGRA465 From what I knew many years ago, Canada did not have "court of final appeal". I am not sure if the system changes or not. The Privy Council in Britain is the "court of final appeal of Canada". Although Canada is an independent country, its judiciary is not totally independent. If nothing has been changed.
4
@GETJUSTICE4U I took a course of the introduction of Canadian law many years ago. But I am not sure if the system has changed or not.
3
The 2 Michaels are suspects who committed espionage WITHIN CHINA JURISDICTION. Most countries in the world treat crimes like espionage and terrorism more seriously and detention before the trial is common. For instance, the suspected terrorists were in detention in Guatalamo by the US before the trial. In contrast, Ms. Meng didn't commit any crime within Canada jurisdiction. This is the sharpest contrast between the two cases.
2
@GregDBasham First of all, thanks for your updated information about the "court of final appeal in Canada". But you are so rude.
2
@billyhe2724 If I were you, I would not keep making lies to myself by saying that "I care China". Keep telling lies to yourself is something annoying. As your stance is quite clear, I don't think I need to further discuss with you. However, your skin color can never be changed. Those White Supremacists would still attack you on the street (I assume that you are living oversea) just because of your skin color, no matter you are so obsessed to the White. Good luck to be a Chinese overseas and bye bye 👋
1
@billyhe2724 How do you know the state offered lawyers that represent the 2 Michaels are not chosen by them? Have the 2 Michaels told you that? In contrast, those detainees in Guantanamo are detained without having a trial at the court. Don't know why you keep defending for a country that is not related to you but at the same time just keep a blind eye on that country, which captures another Chinese who did not commit any crime within neither Canada nor the US jurisdiction.
1
@billyhe2724 After reading all of your replies, it's quite clear that you are a defender of Canada and the US. Even they collaborate together to capture an innocent Chinese who did not commit any crime within their jurisdiction, you keep trying best to defend their vicious actions. At the same time, you did not care about the personal freedom of Ms. Meng but pay lots of attention to 2 espionage suspects from a foreign country. Your stance is quite clear. All readers notice that you don't have any love to your so-called mother nation, China. Just admit that. A lie can only cheat yourself but not others. After you admit that you don't love or even hate China, you would be relieved because you don't need to make excuses at the comment section hypocritically.
1
@billyhe2724 From your speech, it seems you know the 2 Michaels well and know that they "love" China. This kind of "love" is quite similar to the West "love" the Muslims in Xinjiang but they send troops to kill millions of Muslims countries civilians in the Middle East at the same time. This kind of "love" is quite interesting.
1
@billyhe2724 Ms. Meng just should not be deprived of her freedom to travel in Canada as she didn't commit any crime in Canada but the US jurisdiction either. Canada helps the US to capture an innocent person is obviously a flaw of its judiciary.
1
@billyhe2724 Don't think that Ms. Meng will not be detained in jail when she is sent to the US. Most other countries with extradition agreements to the US also realize such fact and they refuse to collaborate with the US as Canada did. It seems that you don't know how extradition agreements work in reality.
1
@billyhe2724 Which country will Ms. Meng is going to be sent to? Yes, the country that detains suspects against national security in Guantanamo. Again, I don't see you pay any sympathy to Ms. Meng and I don't see you really care about Chinese.
1
@billyhe2724 Of course the 2 Michaels are treated in a more humanistic manner when comparing to the US case in Guantanamo . The 2 Michaels have lawyers, they know when will be on trial and no evidence showing that they are physically abused. The detainees in Guantanamo are just detained for unknown time, without lawyers, not certain when will be on trial, and being physically abused. More ironically, we even don't know how the names of the detainees in Guantanamo. At least we know who the 2 Michaels are.
1
@billyhe2724 It's funny that you claim yourself as Chinese but I don't see you pay any sympathy to Ms. Meng, a Chinese woman who did not commit any crime in the jurisdiction of Canada but deprived from freedom of travel. Most readers here notice that you don't have any "love" to our country, China. Stop making hypocritical excuses by saying that you want China to have better reputation of the legal system. A lie can only cheat yourself, but not others.
1
@billyhe2724 Stop twisting the information and pretend that you don't know Ms. Meng didn't commit any crime within the jurisdiction of Canada but her freedom is deprived. The 2 Michaels are suspects who committed crimes against national security WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF CHINA. This is a more serious crime and that's why I use a similar case, the treatment to the suspects against national security of the US, to compare with the 2 Michaels in China.
1
@billyhe2724 Don't try to bypass my question. Do you dare to answer which country treat the suspects against national security issues in a more humanistic manner? The 2 Michaels in China or the detainees in Guantanamo?
1
@billyhe2724 You really want to bypass my doubt about the US practice in Guatalamo when comparing to the treatment of the 2 Michaels in China. I am still waiting for your answer. China or the US, who treats the suspects against national security in a more humanistic manner?
1
@billyhe2724 I just want to show you the moral standard of the so-called role model of democracy. That's why I mentioned the US. You seem to be offended when I point out the weaknesses of the US. Are you a shill of the US?
1
@billyhe2724 China's practice in the 2 Michaels case is far more humanistic than the so-called democratic US. The US tortured the suspected terrorists in Guatalamo and keeps them in the prison before trial.
1
@everythingandmore5537 In fact the vocational training center is part of the poverty alleviation program. If there are Han Chinese need help and training for better career opportunities, of course there are Han Chinese trainees in the vocational centers too. Only Western medias twist the fact and call the training centers as concentration camps.
1
@billyhe2724 Is it? The suspected terrorists were kept inside and tortured inside the Guatalamo is really a degradation of the US legal system.
1
@everythingandmore5537 You seem to raise another topic to shift people's attention from the "suicide bombing story" you have mentioned. Everyone here is curious about the source of the so-called "news". Would you tell us where is the source of the "news"?
1
@peterhanssens7260 All legal systems in the world are run by human. All humans have prejudice. Don't think that the Western legal system is really more impartial than the one in China. For instance, Trump used his power pardoned Bannon, his relatives and other allies before he stepped down. This is clearly a political interference. The difference is that I would not view our Chinese legal system is superior to the Canadian or the US legal system and imposes our will to the West. So don't try to tell me that you are more superior and think all systems should be endorsed by the West to become legitimate. Mutual respect is the key.
1