Understand that Huawei is more than a consumer handset company. Think Cisco and Ericsson. They make the backbone telecoms and network gear as well. The US Govt does not want the US or it’s allies to use Huawei where they can gain control of sensitive public (utility) and government/military networks. Imagine what gaining control of a power grid could do. Second, ever wonder how a company like Huawei could get so much traction so fast in a very technical and scientific industry? Well the government does not have IP theft on the agenda for nothing. The Chinese have very ambitious plans to project power and Huawei is one tool in their arsenal gain intelligence and control of potential adversary networks.
This is my post of the day! Encourage people use imagination and wonder to think serious things!
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
You are so illiterate that you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post...not sure how you even came up with that comparison, but you seem unable to understand the concept that China has a SINGLE PARTY, the CCP, whereas the U.S. is a multiparty system.
It’s funny how many fandroids get very upset at the fact that they cannot buy Huawei devices here and scream that there is no proof about any allegations of espionage.
The simple fact that the CIA and the NSA issued the warning isn’t good enough for them. I get not trusting some parts of our govt, but when the part that spies on other countries warns the American people that there is a real risk, I think we should listen.
the simple fact that the warning was taken out of context and exploited for political purposes SHOULD upset you.
I already posted proof of Huawei spying in Poland, and in the infrastructure that Huawei provided for the African Union. More to the point, Western Intelligence agencies aren't going to provide details on whatever spying evidence that they find, so as not to indicate any National Technical Means, ie, how they obtained the data.
There is a Court that does handle such things in the U.S. overseen by a Judge, but even if Huawei was able to use that, they wouldn't be able to see the details of any findings that the Judge would see.
Indeed that is why US government is so mad at Snowden.
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
You are so illiterate that you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post...not sure how you even came up with that comparison, but you seem unable to understand the concept that China has a SINGLE PARTY, the CCP, whereas the U.S. is a multiparty system.
This could be a good title of political thesis.
I'm essentially following Phd's in National Security, from many Western Institutions. I got into that because of my interest in Naval Power in the Pacific, essentially from WWII history.
If you start following the twitter links, you can see divergence towards various niches.
This is my first link, to a lecturer at the U.S. Naval War College, China Maritime Studies Institute;
The point is, that these are the individuals that inform the Military Leaders and Politicians in the West, and spend their days analyzing China and other Western "adversaries".
Well, I'll take a pass on Chinese networking gear. Though, if they follow the standard set by the Five Eyes governments, even your home router can have non-standard things in them. 'Course, if you never reset the default password, it really doesn't matter...
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
You are so illiterate that you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post...not sure how you even came up with that comparison, but you seem unable to understand the concept that China has a SINGLE PARTY, the CCP, whereas the U.S. is a multiparty system.
Is there a difference? They both march in lockstep to whatever their leaders tell them to do and say.
Yeah, the difference is that there are in fact choices that U.S. voters have. In China, that is not the case.
"In the years leading up to the Huawei indictment, U.S. officials had been capturing information that would influence the investigation when telecom executives passed through U.S. airports, according to a number of sources familiar with the Huawei and ZTE investigations and the Meng indictment.
For example, Meng arrived in the United States via John F. Kennedy International Airport in early 2014. The indictment says investigators found “suggested talking points” on one of her electronic devices, stating among other things that Huawei’s relationship with Skycom was “normal business cooperation.”
Meng had been pulled into a secondary screening at the airport that time as well, and her electronic devices were taken, according to one person familiar with the stop. After a couple of hours, the devices were returned and she was freed to go, the person said."
LOL... we were talking about the similarities between the Republican party and the Communist Party -- but you're diverting the discussion to the U.S. political system. Nice try!
No, that isn't what "we" were talking about in the other posts on other threads, nor in your posts here. This is entirely your thinking, not mine.
While I certainly don't identify as a Republican, I can state that they are in fact elected, and on a number of occasions, have not given lockstep support to the sitting President.
DBAD, asshole.
Really? Then who was it that said: "you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post" That must have been the other TMAY
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
You are so illiterate that you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post...not sure how you even came up with that comparison, but you seem unable to understand the concept that China has a SINGLE PARTY, the CCP, whereas the U.S. is a multiparty system.
Is there a difference? They both march in lockstep to whatever their leaders tell them to do and say.
Yeah, the difference is that there are in fact choices that U.S. voters have. In China, that is not the case.
"In the years leading up to the Huawei indictment, U.S. officials had been capturing information that would influence the investigation when telecom executives passed through U.S. airports, according to a number of sources familiar with the Huawei and ZTE investigations and the Meng indictment.
For example, Meng arrived in the United States via John F. Kennedy International Airport in early 2014. The indictment says investigators found “suggested talking points” on one of her electronic devices, stating among other things that Huawei’s relationship with Skycom was “normal business cooperation.”
Meng had been pulled into a secondary screening at the airport that time as well, and her electronic devices were taken, according to one person familiar with the stop. After a couple of hours, the devices were returned and she was freed to go, the person said."
LOL... we were talking about the similarities between the Republican party and the Communist Party -- but you're diverting the discussion to the U.S. political system. Nice try!
No, that isn't what "we" were talking about in the other posts on other threads, nor in your posts here. This is entirely your thinking, not mine.
While I certainly don't identify as a Republican, I can state that they are in fact elected, and on a number of occasions, have not given lockstep support to the sitting President.
DBAD, asshole.
Do yourself and everyone else a favor and just block “George”. I identified him as a time-wasting troll a long time ago.
Sorry if you consider reality and facts "trolling". Sad.
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
You are so illiterate that you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post...not sure how you even came up with that comparison, but you seem unable to understand the concept that China has a SINGLE PARTY, the CCP, whereas the U.S. is a multiparty system.
Is there a difference? They both march in lockstep to whatever their leaders tell them to do and say.
Yeah, the difference is that there are in fact choices that U.S. voters have. In China, that is not the case.
"In the years leading up to the Huawei indictment, U.S. officials had been capturing information that would influence the investigation when telecom executives passed through U.S. airports, according to a number of sources familiar with the Huawei and ZTE investigations and the Meng indictment.
For example, Meng arrived in the United States via John F. Kennedy International Airport in early 2014. The indictment says investigators found “suggested talking points” on one of her electronic devices, stating among other things that Huawei’s relationship with Skycom was “normal business cooperation.”
Meng had been pulled into a secondary screening at the airport that time as well, and her electronic devices were taken, according to one person familiar with the stop. After a couple of hours, the devices were returned and she was freed to go, the person said."
The fact that Trump has to fall back on his fake case against Iran and hold the daughter of Huawei's founder as a political prisoner, kind of exposes the fact that his allegations of spying are just Protectionist, Nationalist bull.
The U.S. has no 5G Telecom system production; how could we be "protectionist"?
You and Avon B7 don't really understand what that term means, as if you would be inclined to.
You appear ill informed about Meng Wanzhou, as if I and others haven't posted enough on that subject.
Personally, I would like you and Avon B7 banned, but fortunately for you and him, I'm not the one making that decision.
You are just a common troll.
So, when you lose an argument you get huffy.... Got it.
By the way, even Trump is backing off of his false claims. You should take the hint.
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
You are so illiterate that you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post...not sure how you even came up with that comparison, but you seem unable to understand the concept that China has a SINGLE PARTY, the CCP, whereas the U.S. is a multiparty system.
Is there a difference? They both march in lockstep to whatever their leaders tell them to do and say.
Yeah, the difference is that there are in fact choices that U.S. voters have. In China, that is not the case.
"In the years leading up to the Huawei indictment, U.S. officials had been capturing information that would influence the investigation when telecom executives passed through U.S. airports, according to a number of sources familiar with the Huawei and ZTE investigations and the Meng indictment.
For example, Meng arrived in the United States via John F. Kennedy International Airport in early 2014. The indictment says investigators found “suggested talking points” on one of her electronic devices, stating among other things that Huawei’s relationship with Skycom was “normal business cooperation.”
Meng had been pulled into a secondary screening at the airport that time as well, and her electronic devices were taken, according to one person familiar with the stop. After a couple of hours, the devices were returned and she was freed to go, the person said."
LOL... we were talking about the similarities between the Republican party and the Communist Party -- but you're diverting the discussion to the U.S. political system. Nice try!
No, that isn't what "we" were talking about in the other posts on other threads, nor in your posts here. This is entirely your thinking, not mine.
While I certainly don't identify as a Republican, I can state that they are in fact elected, and on a number of occasions, have not given lockstep support to the sitting President.
DBAD, asshole.
Really? Then who was it that said: "you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post" That must have been the other TMAY
Again, comparing the single party in China, with the Republican Party, which is one of many in political system, is not a correct comparison.
Hence, why the DBAD, and yeah, you are in fact an asshole, but at least you can fall back on your illiteracy as an excuse.
You should also understand why other countries resent being threatened on what to do with regards to their handling of 5G by the US. It is overreaching its power and this is seen as abuse. By extension you should also understand why Huawei is defending itself.
What you seem to be suggesting here is worrisome. You appear to see the deployment of 5G as some sort of global human ‘right’ to the extent that if the US impedes Hauwei’s deployment of 5G technology in the US that the US is ‘overreaching its power’. You seem to perceive that the US is accountable to other nations for what those nations want to do in the US.
Globalism is a nice idea that is completely impossible—people of the world will never ever be able to agree on how to live and do business with a single voice. If globalism continues to be pursued it will only work temporarily through silencing and oppressing the opposition. And eventually it will fall by rebellion. The US as an individual country is already showing it may be too big to accommodate the perspectives of its people (as the left tries to pull the country in a continually new direction), and a return to more individual state rights would probably be a more healthy thing for the country. Globalism is the opposite of what the world needs right now.
That would be true if Trump were limiting this to the U.S. -- but he's upping the stakes making a frantic effort to impose his will on every country in the world. And, many of them are now pushing back and calling bull to his bull.
But, even here in the U.S. he is depriving us of state of the art technology and a competitive environment based on what many consider to be bull. Huawei's case is contesting a law Trump had the Republicans ram through congress just prior to losing the House in the Midterms without meaningful debate and that deprived Huawei of the right to defend itself.
So, Huawei is taking it to court hoping that they get to counter Trump's politically motivated rhetoric with facts and truth.
Regardless of how the court rules, the American people deserve the truth rather than political rhetoric.
"While not the only area where Chinese investments in Europe concern the Pentagon, the 5G issue has risen to the forefront. Earlier this month, Acting Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan issued a statement: “Secure and resilient 5G telecommunications is vital to the security and prosperity of the United States, and DoD is working closely with our industrial and research partners to develop comprehensive and innovative solutions for both the Department and commercial industries. “The United States and our allies and partners must demand nothing less than robust, trusted, and secure next-generation communications systems,” Shanahan said."
Our military alliances depend on secure communications, and there is enough risk to veto Huawei.
That is certainly a truth that you are not providing.
Around a third of the world's communications hardware is Huawei gear. Secure communications must therefore already exist for the US military and political staff.
5G won't change that. If anything, things will become more secure over time as more focus is put on security.
It’s funny how many fandroids get very upset at the fact that they cannot buy Huawei devices here and scream that there is no proof about any allegations of espionage.
The simple fact that the CIA and the NSA issued the warning isn’t good enough for them. I get not trusting some parts of our govt, but when the part that spies on other countries warns the American people that there is a real risk, I think we should listen.
the simple fact that the warning was taken out of context and exploited for political purposes SHOULD upset you.
I already posted proof of Huawei spying in Poland, and in the infrastructure that Huawei provided for the African Union. More to the point, Western Intelligence agencies aren't going to provide details on whatever spying evidence that they find, so as not to indicate any National Technical Means, ie, how they obtained the data.
There is a Court that does handle such things in the U.S. overseen by a Judge, but even if Huawei was able to use that, they wouldn't be able to see the details of any findings that the Judge would see.
Proof?
I'm going to pick this out as you speak of other people posting misinformation.
This is an example of misinformation.
You said:
"I already posted proof...'
You didn't post proof. Proof doesn't exist yet in the first case and in the second, far less. You cited a LeMonde article on the AU case which cited anonymous sources and which Huawei and the Chinese government not only denied but basically called the claim preposterous.
I do not doubt that, to you, this constitutes 'proof' and I could pass on that (even if it isn't true) but if you want to make claims of misinformation you should be extra careful in what you write.
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
You are so illiterate that you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post...not sure how you even came up with that comparison, but you seem unable to understand the concept that China has a SINGLE PARTY, the CCP, whereas the U.S. is a multiparty system.
Is there a difference? They both march in lockstep to whatever their leaders tell them to do and say.
Yeah, the difference is that there are in fact choices that U.S. voters have. In China, that is not the case.
"In the years leading up to the Huawei indictment, U.S. officials had been capturing information that would influence the investigation when telecom executives passed through U.S. airports, according to a number of sources familiar with the Huawei and ZTE investigations and the Meng indictment.
For example, Meng arrived in the United States via John F. Kennedy International Airport in early 2014. The indictment says investigators found “suggested talking points” on one of her electronic devices, stating among other things that Huawei’s relationship with Skycom was “normal business cooperation.”
Meng had been pulled into a secondary screening at the airport that time as well, and her electronic devices were taken, according to one person familiar with the stop. After a couple of hours, the devices were returned and she was freed to go, the person said."
The fact that Trump has to fall back on his fake case against Iran and hold the daughter of Huawei's founder as a political prisoner, kind of exposes the fact that his allegations of spying are just Protectionist, Nationalist bull.
The U.S. has no 5G Telecom system production; how could we be "protectionist"?
You and Avon B7 don't really understand what that term means, as if you would be inclined to.
You appear ill informed about Meng Wanzhou, as if I and others haven't posted enough on that subject.
Personally, I would like you and Avon B7 banned, but fortunately for you and him, I'm not the one making that decision.
You are just a common troll.
So, when you lose an argument you get huffy.... Got it.
By the way, even Trump is backing off of his false claims. You should take the hint.
I repeat myself.
Even if Trump's claims are false, that doesn't equate to the equivalence of the CCP with the Republican Party, which is absolutely what you were stating. I would have banned you just for that, and I'm certainly not a Republican.
You should also understand why other countries resent being threatened on what to do with regards to their handling of 5G by the US. It is overreaching its power and this is seen as abuse. By extension you should also understand why Huawei is defending itself.
What you seem to be suggesting here is worrisome. You appear to see the deployment of 5G as some sort of global human ‘right’ to the extent that if the US impedes Hauwei’s deployment of 5G technology in the US that the US is ‘overreaching its power’. You seem to perceive that the US is accountable to other nations for what those nations want to do in the US.
Globalism is a nice idea that is completely impossible—people of the world will never ever be able to agree on how to live and do business with a single voice. If globalism continues to be pursued it will only work temporarily through silencing and oppressing the opposition. And eventually it will fall by rebellion. The US as an individual country is already showing it may be too big to accommodate the perspectives of its people (as the left tries to pull the country in a continually new direction), and a return to more individual state rights would probably be a more healthy thing for the country. Globalism is the opposite of what the world needs right now.
That would be true if Trump were limiting this to the U.S. -- but he's upping the stakes making a frantic effort to impose his will on every country in the world. And, many of them are now pushing back and calling bull to his bull.
But, even here in the U.S. he is depriving us of state of the art technology and a competitive environment based on what many consider to be bull. Huawei's case is contesting a law Trump had the Republicans ram through congress just prior to losing the House in the Midterms without meaningful debate and that deprived Huawei of the right to defend itself.
So, Huawei is taking it to court hoping that they get to counter Trump's politically motivated rhetoric with facts and truth.
Regardless of how the court rules, the American people deserve the truth rather than political rhetoric.
"While not the only area where Chinese investments in Europe concern the Pentagon, the 5G issue has risen to the forefront. Earlier this month, Acting Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan issued a statement: “Secure and resilient 5G telecommunications is vital to the security and prosperity of the United States, and DoD is working closely with our industrial and research partners to develop comprehensive and innovative solutions for both the Department and commercial industries. “The United States and our allies and partners must demand nothing less than robust, trusted, and secure next-generation communications systems,” Shanahan said."
Our military alliances depend on secure communications, and there is enough risk to veto Huawei.
That is certainly a truth that you are not providing.
Around a third of the world's communications hardware is Huawei gear. Secure communications must therefore already exist for the US military and political staff.
5G won't change that. If anything, things will become more secure over time as more focus is put on security.
The U.S. uses almost no Huawei or ZTE infrastructure at all, and there are obviously secure communications systems that are not available to the public.
"The All-IP Network (AIPN) is an evolution of the 3GPP system to fulfill the increasing demands of the cellular communications market. It is a common platform valid for all sorts of radio access technologies. AIPN focused primarily on the enhancements of packet switched technology but now it provides a continued evolution and optimization in terms of both performance and cost. The key benefits of AIPN architecture includes a variety of differentaccess systems‘ provision, lower costs, universal seamless access, and increased user-satisfaction and reduced system latency. But with the advantages of IP come some dangers: as data flow more freely and the internet is open not only to developers but also to all manner of criminals and viruses, developers and operators face new security challenges which should be solved properly.[8] Hence the 5G RAN (radio access network) technology should be a dynamic mesh network based on IP backhaul. In 5G networks there could be many types of base station including UDN (user densification network), massive MIMO (multiple-input multiple-output), traditional macro, and D2D. These various base stations will coordinate with each other horizontally more often than they do in 4G networks, and so will require a dynamic and adaptive wireless mesh network.[9]"
Wishing security happens is quite different that actually happening, and mesh networks are an invitation to insecurity.
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
You are so illiterate that you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post...not sure how you even came up with that comparison, but you seem unable to understand the concept that China has a SINGLE PARTY, the CCP, whereas the U.S. is a multiparty system.
Is there a difference? They both march in lockstep to whatever their leaders tell them to do and say.
Yeah, the difference is that there are in fact choices that U.S. voters have. In China, that is not the case.
"In the years leading up to the Huawei indictment, U.S. officials had been capturing information that would influence the investigation when telecom executives passed through U.S. airports, according to a number of sources familiar with the Huawei and ZTE investigations and the Meng indictment.
For example, Meng arrived in the United States via John F. Kennedy International Airport in early 2014. The indictment says investigators found “suggested talking points” on one of her electronic devices, stating among other things that Huawei’s relationship with Skycom was “normal business cooperation.”
Meng had been pulled into a secondary screening at the airport that time as well, and her electronic devices were taken, according to one person familiar with the stop. After a couple of hours, the devices were returned and she was freed to go, the person said."
The fact that Trump has to fall back on his fake case against Iran and hold the daughter of Huawei's founder as a political prisoner, kind of exposes the fact that his allegations of spying are just Protectionist, Nationalist bull.
The U.S. has no 5G Telecom system production; how could we be "protectionist"?
You and Avon B7 don't really understand what that term means, as if you would be inclined to.
You appear ill informed about Meng Wanzhou, as if I and others haven't posted enough on that subject.
Personally, I would like you and Avon B7 banned, but fortunately for you and him, I'm not the one making that decision.
You are just a common troll.
In the absence of any evidence to backup US security risk claims, protectionism is what US actions will be called.
Google it yourself and see how many articles come back.
I will go into a little detail.
AT&T has a working relationship with Huawei. AT&T spent over a year tuning the Kirin 970 to its network infrastructure to begin carrying the Mate 10 Pro handset. A formal announcement was planned for CES 2018.
After all the technical and logistical effort to reach that point, it is hard to imagine AT&T went back on the deal at the last minute on its own accord. It is widely reported that the US government simply pressured AT&T to back out. AT&T wasn't the only carrier willing to carry Huawei gear.
To this day AT&T continues to work with Huawei but outside the US.
This is an example of protectionism.
The US not having any real influence in 5G is is really the whole issue (again, Google is your friend), I've provided links in other comments.
In the infrastructure realm, it is protectionism to prevent Huawei getting a foothold in the US market while the US frantically tries to catch-up. It is so 'out of the link' that it is already eyeing 6G and willing to depend on EU companies to handle the 5G era. Even if it means using lesser tech paying more and taking longer.
Pure protectionism and pretty much confirmed by some unfortunate tweets by Donald Trump that were also picked up by the press and surely some foreign governments.
Perhaps we can call it extreme protectionism seeing that the US is taking its efforts on a world tour and not limiting its actions to home soil.
It’s funny how many fandroids get very upset at the fact that they cannot buy Huawei devices here and scream that there is no proof about any allegations of espionage.
The simple fact that the CIA and the NSA issued the warning isn’t good enough for them. I get not trusting some parts of our govt, but when the part that spies on other countries warns the American people that there is a real risk, I think we should listen.
the simple fact that the warning was taken out of context and exploited for political purposes SHOULD upset you.
I already posted proof of Huawei spying in Poland, and in the infrastructure that Huawei provided for the African Union. More to the point, Western Intelligence agencies aren't going to provide details on whatever spying evidence that they find, so as not to indicate any National Technical Means, ie, how they obtained the data.
There is a Court that does handle such things in the U.S. overseen by a Judge, but even if Huawei was able to use that, they wouldn't be able to see the details of any findings that the Judge would see.
Proof?
I'm going to pick this out as you speak of other people posting misinformation.
This is an example of misinformation.
You said:
"I already posted proof...'
You didn't post proof. Proof doesn't exist yet in the first case and in the second, far less. You cited a LeMonde article on the AU case which cited anonymous sources and which Huawei and the Chinese government not only denied but basically called the claim preposterous.
I do not doubt that, to you, this constitutes 'proof' and I could pass on that (even if it isn't true) but if you want to make claims of misinformation you should be extra careful in what you write.
Proof, they arrested one Polish National and One Huawei Employee; Huawei later fired said employee.
You obviously want to wait for the case to work its way through the courts system, so I'll just add that all indications point to guilt.
So you are more that willing to accept whatever Chinese authorities and Huawei state, but less willing to even accept that maybe, they aren't being truthful
Huawei says it abides by all laws where it operates. Logically those same laws exist to be used in case of necessity by any company operating in the territory. From there on it it up to the courts to decide the outcome.
Huawei is NOT China. It is a private company.
I suggest we simply wait and see what comes of this.
Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake.
A company that so clearly committed fraud to hide its violation of Iran sanctions that the US government--and Canada--risked international blowback to prosecute those crimes is suddenly innocent because some AI troll account has stood on a soapbox and announced that "it says it obeys the laws!"
Huawei is a project of Communist Party members. It's hard to see how one could extract this massive, barely profitable state enterprise from the PRC. It sure couldn't operate on its own.
It's also well known that China is gunning at owning technology markets and will spare no expense to dump products at a loss until it owns the global means of production. that's been evident since the 90s.
"Everything you post here is total bullshit, but this really takes the cake."
You are so illiterate that you compared the CCP to the Republican Party in an earlier post...not sure how you even came up with that comparison, but you seem unable to understand the concept that China has a SINGLE PARTY, the CCP, whereas the U.S. is a multiparty system.
Is there a difference? They both march in lockstep to whatever their leaders tell them to do and say.
Yeah, the difference is that there are in fact choices that U.S. voters have. In China, that is not the case.
"In the years leading up to the Huawei indictment, U.S. officials had been capturing information that would influence the investigation when telecom executives passed through U.S. airports, according to a number of sources familiar with the Huawei and ZTE investigations and the Meng indictment.
For example, Meng arrived in the United States via John F. Kennedy International Airport in early 2014. The indictment says investigators found “suggested talking points” on one of her electronic devices, stating among other things that Huawei’s relationship with Skycom was “normal business cooperation.”
Meng had been pulled into a secondary screening at the airport that time as well, and her electronic devices were taken, according to one person familiar with the stop. After a couple of hours, the devices were returned and she was freed to go, the person said."
The fact that Trump has to fall back on his fake case against Iran and hold the daughter of Huawei's founder as a political prisoner, kind of exposes the fact that his allegations of spying are just Protectionist, Nationalist bull.
The U.S. has no 5G Telecom system production; how could we be "protectionist"?
You and Avon B7 don't really understand what that term means, as if you would be inclined to.
You appear ill informed about Meng Wanzhou, as if I and others haven't posted enough on that subject.
Personally, I would like you and Avon B7 banned, but fortunately for you and him, I'm not the one making that decision.
You are just a common troll.
In the absence of any evidence to backup US security risk claims protectionism is what US actions will be called.
Google it yourself and see how many articles come back.
I will go into a little detail.
AT&T has a working relationship with Huawei. AT&T spent over a year tuning the Kirin 970 to its network infrastructure to begin carrying the Mate 10 Pro handset. A formal announcement was planned for CES 2018.
After all the technical and logistical effort to reach that point it is hard to imagine AT&T went back on the deal on its own accord. It is widely reported that the US government simply pressured AT&T to back out. AT&T wasn't the only carrier willing to carry Huawei gear.
To this day AT&T continues to work with Huawei but outside the US.
This is an example of protectionism.
The US not having any real influence in 5G is is really the whole issue (again, Google is your friend, I've provided links in other comments.
In the infrastructure realm it is protectionism to prevent Huawei getting a foothold in the US market while the US frantically tries to catch-up. It is so out of the link that it is already eyeing 6G and willing to depend on EU companies to handle the 5G era. Even if it means using lesser tech paying more and taking longer.
Pure protectionism and pretty much confirmed by some unfortunate tweets by Donald Trump that were also picked up by the press and surely some foreign governments.
Perhaps we can call it extreme protectionism seeing that the US is taking its efforts on a world tour and not limiting its actions to home soil.
"Extreme Protectionism" in the face of increasing Chinese Authoritarianism, seems exactly as it should be.
You should also understand why other countries resent being threatened on what to do with regards to their handling of 5G by the US. It is overreaching its power and this is seen as abuse. By extension you should also understand why Huawei is defending itself.
What you seem to be suggesting here is worrisome. You appear to see the deployment of 5G as some sort of global human ‘right’ to the extent that if the US impedes Hauwei’s deployment of 5G technology in the US that the US is ‘overreaching its power’. You seem to perceive that the US is accountable to other nations for what those nations want to do in the US.
Globalism is a nice idea that is completely impossible—people of the world will never ever be able to agree on how to live and do business with a single voice. If globalism continues to be pursued it will only work temporarily through silencing and oppressing the opposition. And eventually it will fall by rebellion. The US as an individual country is already showing it may be too big to accommodate the perspectives of its people (as the left tries to pull the country in a continually new direction), and a return to more individual state rights would probably be a more healthy thing for the country. Globalism is the opposite of what the world needs right now.
That would be true if Trump were limiting this to the U.S. -- but he's upping the stakes making a frantic effort to impose his will on every country in the world. And, many of them are now pushing back and calling bull to his bull.
But, even here in the U.S. he is depriving us of state of the art technology and a competitive environment based on what many consider to be bull. Huawei's case is contesting a law Trump had the Republicans ram through congress just prior to losing the House in the Midterms without meaningful debate and that deprived Huawei of the right to defend itself.
So, Huawei is taking it to court hoping that they get to counter Trump's politically motivated rhetoric with facts and truth.
Regardless of how the court rules, the American people deserve the truth rather than political rhetoric.
"While not the only area where Chinese investments in Europe concern the Pentagon, the 5G issue has risen to the forefront. Earlier this month, Acting Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan issued a statement: “Secure and resilient 5G telecommunications is vital to the security and prosperity of the United States, and DoD is working closely with our industrial and research partners to develop comprehensive and innovative solutions for both the Department and commercial industries. “The United States and our allies and partners must demand nothing less than robust, trusted, and secure next-generation communications systems,” Shanahan said."
Our military alliances depend on secure communications, and there is enough risk to veto Huawei.
That is certainly a truth that you are not providing.
Around a third of the world's communications hardware is Huawei gear. Secure communications must therefore already exist for the US military and political staff.
5G won't change that. If anything, things will become more secure over time as more focus is put on security.
The U.S. uses almost no Huawei or ZTE infrastructure at all, and there are obviously secure communications systems that are not available to the public.
"The All-IP Network (AIPN) is an evolution of the 3GPP system to fulfill the increasing demands of the cellular communications market. It is a common platform valid for all sorts of radio access technologies. AIPN focused primarily on the enhancements of packet switched technology but now it provides a continued evolution and optimization in terms of both performance and cost. The key benefits of AIPN architecture includes a variety of differentaccess systems‘ provision, lower costs, universal seamless access, and increased user-satisfaction and reduced system latency. But with the advantages of IP come some dangers: as data flow more freely and the internet is open not only to developers but also to all manner of criminals and viruses, developers and operators face new security challenges which should be solved properly.[8] Hence the 5G RAN (radio access network) technology should be a dynamic mesh network based on IP backhaul. In 5G networks there could be many types of base station including UDN (user densification network), massive MIMO (multiple-input multiple-output), traditional macro, and D2D. These various base stations will coordinate with each other horizontally more often than they do in 4G networks, and so will require a dynamic and adaptive wireless mesh network.[9]"
Wishing security happens is quite different that actually happening, and mesh networks are an invitation to insecurity.
First you continuously confuse Huawei with the Chinese government and now you are going on about 5G as a technology. No mention of Huawei in your pasting.
Could it be that the risks are universally applicable and independent of manufacturer in the matter you are raising and as such a question is for the bodies behind the architecture of 5G?
You know, exactly like the risks involved in 4G.
Of course, if governments and standards bodies saw 5G as such a risk on a technical level, then there was nothing stopping them from not auctioning 5G frequencies.
Huawei is a member of a group of companies behind 5G. Companies producing 5G equipment have to ensure interoperability and remain in compliance with standards. Huawei does more (probably) than any other manufacturer in terms of opening itself to scrutiny and striving for improvement.
It doesn't matter that the US has almost no Huawei infrastructure. Why do you think the US went on a world tour threatening allies?
If they have their own secure channels, where is the problem?
Comments
Indeed that is why US government is so mad at Snowden.
If you start following the twitter links, you can see divergence towards various niches.
This is my first link, to a lecturer at the U.S. Naval War College, China Maritime Studies Institute;
https://twitter.com/AndrewSErickson
Best to follow his followers and see where you end up, and then their followers. Lots of viewpoints.
Another example;
https://twitter.com/pekingology
The point is, that these are the individuals that inform the Military Leaders and Politicians in the West, and spend their days analyzing China and other Western "adversaries".
Hence, why the DBAD, and yeah, you are in fact an asshole, but at least you can fall back on your illiteracy as an excuse.
Not a thing. its useless drivel.
5G won't change that. If anything, things will become more secure over time as more focus is put on security.
I'm going to pick this out as you speak of other people posting misinformation.
This is an example of misinformation.
You said:
"I already posted proof...'
You didn't post proof. Proof doesn't exist yet in the first case and in the second, far less. You cited a LeMonde article on the AU case which cited anonymous sources and which Huawei and the Chinese government not only denied but basically called the claim preposterous.
I do not doubt that, to you, this constitutes 'proof' and I could pass on that (even if it isn't true) but if you want to make claims of misinformation you should be extra careful in what you write.
Even if Trump's claims are false, that doesn't equate to the equivalence of the CCP with the Republican Party, which is absolutely what you were stating. I would have banned you just for that, and I'm certainly not a Republican.
You are in over your head.
The U.S. uses almost no Huawei or ZTE infrastructure at all, and there are obviously secure communications systems that are not available to the public.
5G increases the potential access points;
https://ijcsmc.com/docs/papers/September2014/V3I9201499a27.pdf
"The All-IP Network (AIPN) is an evolution of the 3GPP system to fulfill the increasing demands of the cellular communications market. It is a common platform valid for all sorts of radio access technologies. AIPN focused primarily on the enhancements of packet switched technology but now it provides a continued evolution and optimization in terms of both performance and cost. The key benefits of AIPN architecture includes a variety of differentaccess systems‘ provision, lower costs, universal seamless access, and increased user-satisfaction and reduced system latency. But with the advantages of IP come some dangers: as data flow more freely and the internet is open not only to developers but also to all manner of criminals and viruses, developers and operators face new security challenges which should be solved properly.[8] Hence the 5G RAN (radio access network) technology should be a dynamic mesh network based on IP backhaul. In 5G networks there could be many types of base station including UDN (user densification network), massive MIMO (multiple-input multiple-output), traditional macro, and D2D. These various base stations will coordinate with each other horizontally more often than they do in 4G networks, and so will require a dynamic and adaptive wireless mesh network.[9]"
Wishing security happens is quite different that actually happening, and mesh networks are an invitation to insecurity.
Google it yourself and see how many articles come back.
I will go into a little detail.
AT&T has a working relationship with Huawei. AT&T spent over a year tuning the Kirin 970 to its network infrastructure to begin carrying the Mate 10 Pro handset. A formal announcement was planned for CES 2018.
After all the technical and logistical effort to reach that point, it is hard to imagine AT&T went back on the deal at the last minute on its own accord. It is widely reported that the US government simply pressured AT&T to back out. AT&T wasn't the only carrier willing to carry Huawei gear.
To this day AT&T continues to work with Huawei but outside the US.
This is an example of protectionism.
The US not having any real influence in 5G is is really the whole issue (again, Google is your friend), I've provided links in other comments.
In the infrastructure realm, it is protectionism to prevent Huawei getting a foothold in the US market while the US frantically tries to catch-up. It is so 'out of the link' that it is already eyeing 6G and willing to depend on EU companies to handle the 5G era. Even if it means using lesser tech paying more and taking longer.
Pure protectionism and pretty much confirmed by some unfortunate tweets by Donald Trump that were also picked up by the press and surely some foreign governments.
Perhaps we can call it extreme protectionism seeing that the US is taking its efforts on a world tour and not limiting its actions to home soil.
Proof, they arrested one Polish National and One Huawei Employee; Huawei later fired said employee.
You obviously want to wait for the case to work its way through the courts system, so I'll just add that all indications point to guilt.
So you are more that willing to accept whatever Chinese authorities and Huawei state, but less willing to even accept that maybe, they aren't being truthful
Thanks for making that point.
Could it be that the risks are universally applicable and independent of manufacturer in the matter you are raising and as such a question is for the bodies behind the architecture of 5G?
You know, exactly like the risks involved in 4G.
Of course, if governments and standards bodies saw 5G as such a risk on a technical level, then there was nothing stopping them from not auctioning 5G frequencies.
Huawei is a member of a group of companies behind 5G. Companies producing 5G equipment have to ensure interoperability and remain in compliance with standards. Huawei does more (probably) than any other manufacturer in terms of opening itself to scrutiny and striving for improvement.
It doesn't matter that the US has almost no Huawei infrastructure. Why do you think the US went on a world tour threatening allies?
If they have their own secure channels, where is the problem?
Reality is security isn't the problem at all.