111–120 of 157 posts
The US State Department also warns about this: > "Reconsider travel to Mainland China due to the arbitrary enforcement of local laws, including in relation to exit bans, and the risk of wrongful detentions." https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/...
https://old.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/15kh611/travel_adv...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As long as you or any relation/acquaintance/company/nation you belong to do not offend China, you're cool. Case in point: the two Michaels from Canada detained 'suddenly' after a Huawei executive was detained in Canada in relation to a US govt case: https://globalnews.ca/news/8224094/canada-china-two-michaels... Though a third Canadian had his conviction retried to a worse sentence - death.
The US detaining people in foreign countries for breaking us “law” makes me think that China isn’t the country I should be afraid of. Sanctions are already a morally dubious set of actions that mainly harm the poor.
But for these subjects, you just see comments like "aren't you afraid of losing your freedoms!!" Which reads so American that it may have blue/red/white colours.
The number of US related detainees, both legally or illegally. For undubious or dubious reasons, and all around the world is soooooo high, I just chuckle when I see US people riding in their high horse.
I'm from a third party country, so I just sit and read with fresh popcorn.
This 'article' is a joke, just baseless fearmongering.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But british hacking groups would never ever be arrested for doing the same thing. Politics exists and it drives these decisions, there's nothing more hideous than someone who exercises power to destroy lives and pretends its merely procedure.
> But british hacking groups would never ever be arrested for doing the same thing. Sure they would. What makes you think otherwise?
Russian state-sponsored hackers oppose American interests. British, the opposite.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The arrest by Canada (not the USA) was justified on Canada's part because of their extradition treaty with us and the USA had a warrant for her arrest. Due process in Canada decided that the Americans didn't have a case for extradition, which was also their right. One can argue that America should have seen the flaws in the extradition case that Canadian due process did, but the case never went to trial in the USA so…
I'm sure the Chinese have a bunch of legalese bullshit for why they locked up those innocent Canadians, but we can look through it and see the real score. Right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People get arrested for lots of things, sometimes it is taking pictures that they shouldn't take, but had no idea that they couldn't take those pictures. In China, you can get arrested for taking pictures of pretty much anywhere, subject to whims of course (they can't put all tourists in prison or they would have no tourist industry). In America, you can take pictures of anything you want as long as you are allowed t…
On the other hand, making an unconscious wrong move when interacting with a cop in America can legally get you killed on spot. My whole point is that it is entirely subjectivist and boils down to whatever people are used to. If you want everything to be the way you are used to - maybe traveling just isn't your thing and that's ok.
China is worse now than it was in 2007 when I moved there. They had a huge backslide in liberalization after the Olympics, which got worse with Xi (who, as you know, is now president for life). Now it’s like 1999 again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think my freedom is at risk when I go there honestly. There are probably people in some fields or businesses that do have some risk. But I think the fears are overblown.
As long as you or any relation/acquaintance/company/nation you belong to do not offend China, you're cool. Case in point: the two Michaels from Canada detained 'suddenly' after a Huawei executive was detained in Canada in relation to a US govt case: https://globalnews.ca/news/8224094/canada-china-two-michaels... Though a third Canadian had his conviction retried to a worse sentence - death.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is something that I would expect visiting literally any country. To an extent, yes. However, context is key as the fairness and/or arbitrariness of those laws and how they are enforced vary wildly between countries. Merely avoiding breaking the law is a lot more difficult in an outright fascist dictatorship surveillance state like China than even the most surveillance happy western nations. So, while you shoul…
The matter of "fairness and/or arbitrariness" is entirely subjectivist. Visiting a foreign culture is always a dance across a minefield if you are careless and don't bother researching how to be a proper guest. For example, experienced tourists from my country visiting the US recommend thoroughly researching the rules and protocol of interacting with the police, including properly managing your body language and bein…
it's closer to the first one: fascist police
that's unfortunately absolutely something all people in the US have to worry about
the threat of them organizing and doing so as a result of you displeasing the government, however, is far more remote in the US than in China
in essence, China presents just another, higher and more abstracted level of unchecked arbitrary exercise of power, and thus you logically must concern yourself with those higher level threats as well as the lower level ones
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did that person try to sell drugs in China? Pretty well known that's a death penalty.
They tried to smuggle Chinese sourced drugs to Australia - but that's not the issue. They were charged, went to trial, sentenced to 15 years and appealed. When the appeal failed the original court upped the sentence to a death sentence. This appeared be a violation of a Chinese "no additional sentence for appeal" rule and a petty example of hostage diplomacy wrt the Canadian Government. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
They were being nice, and the second time they said, fine :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They tried to smuggle Chinese sourced drugs to Australia - but that's not the issue. They were charged, went to trial, sentenced to 15 years and appealed. When the appeal failed the original court upped the sentence to a death sentence. This appeared be a violation of a Chinese "no additional sentence for appeal" rule and a petty example of hostage diplomacy wrt the Canadian Government. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
He should have got the death penalty the first time around according to Chinese law. They were being nice, and the second time they said, fine :)
However, he wasn't sentenced to death the first time.
Do you have any comment on the apparent violation of the "no additional sentence for appeal" rule ?