The name says it all - Disinformation.

At least they warn you in their name that what you are about to read is complete disinformation.

Imagine that - a news media who’s purpose is to counter facts with disinformation.

Same arguments can be used to counter the anti-Chinese inflammatory comments being used to deny China-Canada trade.

The really interesting part of this is what was NOT said.

The Chinese EV’s coming over to Canada are arguably far superior to anything made by an American company, so they can not argue against these vehicles based on merit and quality, they have to use inflammatory anti-Chinese rhetoric to argue they should not be brought over.

When China bought controlling interest in Ford International (it was the money from this sale that kept Ford America solvent) er, and Tesla built his mega-plant in China, the detailed knowledge behind the patents on these EV’s went with them. In the case of Ford, the actual patent rights came with the sale. The Chinese improved on this knowledge. The irony is that now. when the Chinese vehicles come to Canada, the knowledge behind the patents also comes with them.

Probably the same as any Canadian politician who patched over to anther party. But at least Ma admitted he was playing a political angle, a political game, albeit a Conservative tactic.

Hmmmmm, maybe not so sure on that. Blue is the color of the PC party, Red is the Liberal color Of COURSE the world filter would be blue.

McCuaig-Johnston was a former assistant deputy minister, and as such had the political acumen to defend herself. She was definitely NOT a neutral unbiased independent witness. It is obvious she is vehemently anti-Chinese. She had a political agenda, and Ma had a duty to disrupt it. Ma was certainly not parroting lines from Beijing. In fact, I posit that given Ma’s background, that would be the very last thing he would consider doing - If he is older than 42, he was born in Hong Kong and emigrated to Canada when it was still under British rule. Ma’s question made it very clear he was talking about Shenzhen, and it was her that twisted, distorted, and obfuscated the dialogue to the Uighur, instead of answering questions about the topic being discussed - the manufacture of EV’s in Shenzhen China. The right wing is just sour grapes, still smarting from Ma’s patch-over from the PC to Liberal.

No,he is acting for the committee he s on. Given his birth background and subsequent emigration, I doubt if he has any loyalty to the Chinese government.

And then there is Cuba. Conundrum after conundrum. Oh for the good old days when you could tell the bad guys from the good without a playlist.

Wait, in the ‘good old days’, there was Vietnam.

The Conservatives are very upset that he switched parties, that is obvious. One would wonder what their reaction would be if he were still a conservative.

Politics is politics. To understand the questioning, it must be understood that this witness was NOT selected as an unbiased witness, but was selected specifically BECAUSE of her bias towards the issue, and towards China. She was an assistant deputy minister, which basically means an unelected politician specifically indoctrinated in the policies of the political party in power at the time. Her position was well understood long before she took the stand. There was no hope of getting any unbiased neutral ‘facts’ from her from the get-go.

Unfortunately, I see this tactic used by the PC members quite frequently, so I can accept that it is a tactic that party promotes in their members. It is, unfortunately, extremely common in the House of our neighbors to the south of us.

I sympathize with you. There does not seem to be a vehicle for good communication between the two mods for this community, and looking at the mod logs (in red, very bottom of right hand column) it does not appear that the mods do any dialogue with posters before banning them or deleting their posts. Theoretically, if one of the mods has a particular bias, there is no way to address that bias in their mod actions. Should their communication with you be in a DM, or should it be in a public forum?

His office freely admitted that he was using a tactic he learned while he was a member of the PC party. So was the ‘idiocy’ from the PC or the Liberal Party?

The thing is, he was a former PC that patched over to a Liberal, so what was the political torque applied to him, Liberal or PC?

That is why the importance of understanding his background, and connection to China. Being from per-Chinese Hong Kong, he would not necessarily be a propagandist for China. That part is difficult to follow.