China shouldn’t have access to communications network
By Letter to the Editor on December 16, 2020.
Many thanks to Rachael Harder for keeping us informed as to what is or is not happening in Canada.
I was particularly interested and dismayed that Canada is the only member of the intelligence alliance “Five Eyes” that has not banned or restricted Hauwei, the Chinese telecom giant company, from our 5G network. To allow this communist country to access our communications system is about the most dangerous thing a democracy with any common sense can do.
The Liberal government apparently voted against stopping the Chinese communists from accessing our communications networks. Thank goodness for people like Rachael Harder.
Hopefully people will contemplate that not one shot was fired by China, yet the virus that came from China killed a million a half people worldwide, and made millions more people ill, as well as almost destroying or seriously damaging most of the economies of the world.
Arlene Butler
Lethbridge
-1
O yes, thank goodness for people like Rachael Harder.
But I would be as much or more concerned about our own governments, and the US government, accessing our communication networks. Worrying about 5G from China sounds more like a trade war wrapped up in a conspiracy theory (which RH seems to be vulnerable to).
And where are our freedom-loving anti-maskers who worry more about having to wear a cloth on their face than the growing surveillance of our population?
i agree, fes. i remain stupefied by how little backlash there is among the masses to govt creep by creepy govt into one’s privacy, and by extension, freedom. indeed, freedom is compromised proportional to privacy being compromised. transparency must apply to govt in all of its facets, and to big corp, which tends to own “free world” govts, while people should be permitted unabridged privacy. how have we, at large, come to accept the reverse?
another minus, eh? you would then support fascism or totalitarianism…at least explain yourself, if you are able to articulate a thought.
Yes, biff. It is a pretty shallow idea of freedom is based on the freedom to do whatever you want, despite its impact on others. ‘The free development of each is the condition for the freedom of all.’
And when we accept creepy government offers for security over freedom, we deserve neither, as some sage said once.
I do fear for us when so many people accept massive digital surveillance (Five Eyes) with the belief that this somehow makes us safer. As you said, privacy is a foundation of security, as is equality of opportunity and outcome, and the meeting of basic needs for all. Things we used to understand before the radical transformation of the notion of society into economy over the past 35 years.