politics

Outgoing Japan envoy to China regrets not being able to free detained man

25 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

25 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

yeah... if a foreigner is detained in Japan, are they automatically released?? Why do the Japanese think the rules don't apply to them?

-26 ( +6 / -32 )

Aly RustomToday 07:55 am JST

yeah... if a foreigner is detained in Japan, are they automatically released?? Why do the Japanese think the rules don't apply to them?

Chinese espionage laws can result in the arrest of anyone with a smartphone.

12 ( +15 / -3 )

Chinese espionage laws can result in the arrest of anyone with a smartphone.

So what?

-24 ( +3 / -27 )

Aly RustomToday 08:24 am JST

Chinese espionage laws can result in the arrest of anyone with a smartphone.

So what?

You don't think people might end up being unjustly detained in a country with garbage laws and kangaroo courts?

12 ( +14 / -2 )

You don't think people might end up being unjustly detained in a country with garbage laws and kangaroo courts?

You don't think the same happens in Japan???

-24 ( +2 / -26 )

No worries, China has released the two Canadian spies(2 Michaels) at the end when things settled. So this Japanese man will go home at the end. Respect China's laws, take it seriously instead a typical childish westerner's despising manner. The espionage laws cannot be mocked. For justice, Chinese justice!

-17 ( +4 / -21 )

You don't think the same happens in Japan???

Are you arguing that in Japan possession of a smartphone is also enough to justify arrest for espionage? because there is no report for this happening.

In China it is clear that laws can be applied arbitrarily to exert political pressure without a rational justification, most countries can have specific cases that are problematic, but not may have the same situation where the problem is the systematic way the laws are abused.

14 ( +18 / -4 )

Are you arguing that in Japan possession of a smartphone is also enough to justify arrest for espionage?

No I am not. I am saying that Japan, like China, will not just allow foreigners who have been arrested for a crime to leave just because the foreigner got a consular visit, and it is stupid of the official to think that that would be sufficient to release the Japanese suspect from China.

-22 ( +2 / -24 )

In China it is clear that laws can be applied arbitrarily to exert political pressure without a rational justification, most countries can have specific cases that are problematic, but not may have the same situation where the problem is the systematic way the laws are abused.

Same as Japan. Look at the Ghosn case. He alongside Greg Kelly was arrested. Meanwhile Saikawa, who was accused of the exact same thing as Ghosn was only questioned VOLUNTARILY.

So yeah, Japan too does apply its laws arbitrarily

-22 ( +3 / -25 )

No I am not. I am saying that Japan, like China, will not just allow foreigners who have been arrested for a crime to leave just because the foreigner got a consular visit

The problem is not letting arrested people leave, but that they are arresting people by obvious misuse of laws for purely political purposes.

In a much more extreme example, if a government is condemning people to death for being of a certain race you can't just excuse this by saying other countries also have the death penalty.

Same as Japan

No at all the same, again one thing is to have single cases, another completely different to have this as the system, this is not the first nor will be the last time irrational laws are applied to foreigners to apply political pressure to other governments, this is a well known way for the CCP to do it, Ghosn case has been criticized even inside Japan and obviously no pressure to any government was exerted in his case.

11 ( +14 / -3 )

The problem is not letting arrested people leave, but that they are arresting people by obvious misuse of laws for purely political purposes.

I'm not arguing against that. BUT IF you are arrested in Japan, you will not be allowed to leave and so to assume that the Chinese would allow him to leave because he is japanese is foolish.

Ghosn case has been criticized even inside Japan and obviously no pressure to any government was exerted in his case.

There was pressure put on the French gov to investigate if there was any corruption for the Versailles party he threw and viola! the French gov issues an arrest warrant for him. So yeah, there was pressure by the Japanese gov.

-19 ( +2 / -21 )

Look the point I'm making is this: IF you are arrested in Japan for a crime you will not be released because of a consular visit and to think that China would cave in to Japanese demands is just foolish.

-17 ( +2 / -19 )

I'm not arguing against that. BUT IF you are arrested in Japan, you will not be allowed to leave and so to assume that the Chinese would allow him to leave because he is japanese is foolish.

No, the assumption is that the Chinese would allow him to leave because the arrest is obviously political in nature and badly justified, not because it was Japanese.

There was pressure put on the French gov to investigate if there was any corruption for the Versailles party he threw and viola! the French gov issues an arrest warrant for him.

So you think Ghosn was purposefully let to escape because the "demands" of the Japanese government were met? that makes no sense, the "pressure" is an obvious consequence from investigating the supposed fiscal problems of the company, not as some kind of condition from the Japanese government to release him, if anything the French investigation would make much more difficult to release Ghosn.

 IF you are arrested in Japan for a crime you will not be released because of a consular visit and to think that China would cave in to Japanese demands is just foolish.

And still your point fails to address the actual problem that is present, which is a transparent attempt to pressure the Japanese government using a systematic misuse of the law. Expecting the CCP to do the right thing is not realistic, but making the point they are acting incorrectly not.

13 ( +16 / -3 )

No, the assumption is that the Chinese would allow him to leave because the arrest is obviously political in nature and badly justified, not because it was Japanese.

Well, he has to go through the system- same as you or I would in Japan.

So you think Ghosn was purposefully let to escape because the "demands" of the Japanese government were met?

Please stop putting words in my mouth. I never said that. His escape was his own doing but there was pressure put on the French gov to smear him further that's all.

that makes no sense,

Exactly. Please do not put words in my mouth nor make assumptions about what I'm saying.

My point remains. When you get arrested in Japan, getting a consular visit will not get you out. And it won't in China either

-18 ( +2 / -20 )

And still your point fails to address the actual problem that is present, which is a transparent attempt to pressure the Japanese government using a systematic misuse of the law.

I wasn't trying to address that issue. That's not the point. Point is, when you get arrested you go through the system- even if the charges are political

-18 ( +1 / -19 )

Aly RustomToday 01:43 pm JST

And still your point fails to address the actual problem that is present, which is a transparent attempt to pressure the Japanese government using a systematic misuse of the law.

I wasn't trying to address that issue. That's not the point. Point is, when you get arrested you go through the system- even if the charges are political

The only point that matters is that the system in China is irreparably corrupt. People often disappear without even the ability to find out what happened to them in that "system".

14 ( +15 / -1 )

The only point that matters is that the system in China is irreparably corrupt.

As is Japan's.

People often disappear without even the ability to find out what happened to them in that "system".

No argument there. I personally refuse to transit in China so you're preaching to the choir.

-19 ( +3 / -22 )

elephant200Today 10:37 am JST

For justice, Chinese justice!

There is no justice in China. The laws are made by the neo-Emperor, solely for his and the CCP's benefit, and with zero input from the people.

That is not a justice system: it is a dictatorship.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

Well, he has to go through the system- same as you or I would in Japan.

And the problem is that in China the system is abused by design for political purposes, not the same as in Japan.

Please stop putting words in my mouth

This is not putting words in your mouth, is making evident what it would mean if your explanation was true, by making the meaning obvious it is also clear it makes no sense.

there was pressure put on the French gov to smear him further that's all.

And again, since according to you the purpose was to make France do it, then the Japanese government is perfectly fine with leaving Ghosn alone, right? obviously this is not correct.

Exactly. Please do not put words in my mouth nor make assumptions about what I'm saying.

Sorry but that is your argument, so saying it makes no sense is recognizing you can't defend this explanation.

My point remains. When you get arrested in Japan, getting a consular visit will not get you out. And it won't in China either

And your point is still completely unrelated to the problem here, which is an invalid arrest made for political purposes without a justified reason because the whole system is rigged for this purpose.

I wasn't trying to address that issue. 

You began the comparison with Japan trying to refute the fact the arrest was made invalidly for political purposes, if you recognize you are not addressing this point this means you are accepting it was correct after all and you were unable to refute it.

As is Japan's.

You failed to defend this point, neither how your example was supposedly an attempt to put political pressure in another country nor how arrests are made systematically for this purpose.

11 ( +14 / -3 )

And the problem is that in China the system is abused by design for political purposes, not the same as in Japan.

It’s very much is abused in Japan.

This is not putting words in your mouth, is making evident what it would mean if your explanation was true, by making the meaning obvious it is also clear it makes no sense.

You were putting words in my mouth and it seems that you just did not understand my explanation. Because I never spoke at all about his escape from Japan you mentioned that all by yourself

there was pressure put on the French gov to smear him further that's all.

And again, since according to you the purpose was to make France do it, then the Japanese government is perfectly fine with leaving Ghosn alone, right?

Wrong. No why would they? They want a different government to smear him to prove their point.

obviously this is not correct.

And obviously you did not understand what I was saying but whatever

Exactly. Please do not put words in my mouth nor make assumptions about what I'm saying.

Sorry but that is your argument, so saying it makes no sense is recognizing you can't defend this explanation.

It was not my argument and you saying that it is a new misunderstanding what I said does not make it so

-12 ( +2 / -14 )

And your point is still completely unrelated to the problem here, which is an invalid arrest made for political purposes without a justified reason because the whole system is rigged for this purpose.

First of all my point is the same and I don’t care if it’s addressing the main point or not. I am not going to comment on whether or not that individual was an actual spot or not because neither you nor I have all the details you just make the assumption that he is innocent. I don’t live on assumptions. I’m not gonna comment on why he was arrested only about the fact that when someone is arrested they have to go through the system now if you wanna argue about whether or not he’s actually innocent that’s a different arguments and I am not gonna have it with you. You can keep bringing it up but My point still remains. When you get arrested in a country most of the time you have to go through the legal system I hope you can finally understand that

-11 ( +2 / -13 )

You began the comparison with Japan trying to refute the fact the arrest was made invalidly for political purposes,

I never said the rest was not meant for political purposes I said when you get arrested in any country you have to go to the political process that is what I said I never commented on whether his arrest was political or not. I don’t care whether his arrest was political or not. I don’t care. And the reason I don’t care is because neither you nor I know for a fact that his arrest was political. You don’t know for a fact that he wasn’t spying on China

if you recognize you are not addressing this point this means you are accepting it was correct after all and you were unable to refute it.

Sorry but you trying to come up with your own conclusions to win the argument isn’t gonna work.

As is Japan's.

You failed to defend this point, neither how your example was supposedly an attempt to put political pressure in another country nor how arrests are made systematically for this purpose.

Sorry I defended my points very well. The fact that you want to be stubborn and not accept my point doesn’t mean I didn’t defend it. You’re choosing not to accept what I’m saying to you in my explanations to you because you want to win this political argument with me doesn’t make you right. Sorry

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

It’s very much is abused in Japan.

Not in the same way and degree, you were unable to prove so and your own example contradicts your position.

You were putting words in my mouth

Again no, I never wrote that you said this, I just argued that this is what it means, which was easy to prove since you could not argue against it.

and it seems that you just did not understand my explanation

What I did is to refute that explanation by exemplifying how it makes not sense.

Because I never spoke at all about his escape from Japan you mentioned that all by yourself

Yes, because that is the argument I am making that proves your argument do not make sense. According to your logic the escape would have been desirable from the Japanese position since the supposed political pressure already had the effect desired, this of course is false and proves the argument is not correct.

Wrong. No why would they? 

Because according to you the objective of the pressure was achieved, the problem is that you are in a circular logic, because according to you the purpose of the pressure is the same as the method, which is illogical.

And obviously you did not understand what I was saying but whatever

It was very easy to prove that what you were saying was illogical, that is not the same as not understanding it, the result is all according to your logic.

First of all my point is the same and I don’t care if it’s addressing the main point or not

What is not addressing is the point you were trying to refute, so if you recognize it is not even addressing it that means you are also recognizing you could not refute it.

you just make the assumption that he is innocent

No, I did not, the argument is that the system used to arrest him is invalid and the arrest obviously political in nature, if he had a proper process there would be no problem even if he was guilty at the end.

I’m not gonna comment on why he was arrested only about the fact that when someone is arrested they have to go through the system

And since this is the only reply you could give against the argument that the arrest was invalid then you are recognizing you could not refute that point. Precisely because you are using an irrelevant argument against a point nobody made is why you are conceding not being able to refute the real point made.

7 ( +10 / -3 )

I never said the rest was not meant for political purposes I said when you get arrested in any country you have to go to the political process 

That is the part where you concede defeat, because you did not made that point without quoting anything, you made it as a way to supposedly refute the fact the arrest was invalid thanks to the rigged system.

I don’t care whether his arrest was political or not. I don’t care.

Then the main point you began trying to refute remains valid and correct.

Sorry but you trying to come up with your own conclusions to win the argument isn’t gonna work.

The conclusions come from a valid logic argument that you have not been able to refute, just saying that logic "isn't gonna work" do not make it so. For that you would need to argue how this is the case.

Sorry I defended my points very well. 

Of course not, your only argument was that your own is not addressing the point you tried to refute, that is conceding you could not do it so you began discussing something unrelated.

You also failed to prove how the same problem happened in Japan, and ended up in a circular reasoning, pretending an arrest was made for some political purpose only to recognize the purpose was to arrest the person in the first place.

In the case of China, the purpose is to pressure Japan to do something that in no way involves the arrested person, so once this purpose is achieved then China would desist in the espionage accusations.

8 ( +11 / -3 )

It’s very much is abused in Japan.

Not in the same way and degree,

I never said it was in the same way and degree. Again you’re putting words in my mouth. I only said that the system in Japan is also abused as it is in China nothing about it being abused the same way

you were unable to prove so and your own example contradicts your position.

No I pretty much was able to prove my position. The fact that you don’t want to accept it doesn’t make it so. You’re projecting. You’re the one who’s unable to prove your position and so you accuse others of being unable to prove them because you can’t refute them

You were putting words in my mouth

Again no, I never wrote that you said this, I just argued that this is what it means,

It’s the same thing.

which was easy to prove since you could not argue against it. 

Again I did argue against it and the fact that you can’t accept it means you’re the one who’s unable to argue against my points

and it seems that you just did not understand my explanation

What I did is to refute that explanation by exemplifying how it makes not sense

Actually was your argument didn’t make any sense at all. And most of it was because you couldn’t even understand what I was trying to get through to you in the first place.. 

Because I never spoke at all about his escape from Japan you mentioned that all by yourself

Yes, because that is the argument I am making that proves your argument do not make sense.

Honestly it’s your whole argument from the very beginning that doesn’t make sense at all. And you try to hide that by telling other people that their arguments don’t make sense. I get that.

According to your logic the escape would have been desirable from the Japanese position since the supposed political pressure already had the effect desired, this of course is false and proves the argument is not correct.

No the political pressure on France was for them to prove the point that Carlos was a bad guy and they’re prosecuting him was justified. They didn’t want him to escape because they wanted a guilty verdict keeping him in jail and preventing the merger. No matter how many times I explained to you I thought you understand but I’ll still keep explaining it

Wrong. No why would they? 

Because according to you the objective of the pressure was achieved,

No it wasn’t in here again you don’t understand what I’m saying. Although you think that you do or you pretend that you do. The pressure on France was there to make sure that he was guilty in the eyes of public opinion. They wanted to keep him in Japan so that they could actually prosecute him

the problem is that you are in a circular logic, because according to you the purpose of the pressure is the same as the method, which is illogical.

Again here you go projecting. You are the one making circular arguments. My whole argument from the very beginning was not whether or not the Chinese rest was political or not. It was that the Japanese politician didn’t have a ride to expect the Chinese to just release the Japanese into his custody

And obviously you did not understand what I was saying but whatever

It was very easy to prove that what you were saying was illogical, that is not the same as not understanding it, the result is all according to your logic.

You can say that all day. You didn’t understand any of my points but you just pretend that you have Somehow managed to refute them when in fact you’ve not really addressed any of my points

First of all my point is the same and I don’t care if it’s addressing the main point or not

What is not addressing is the point you were trying to refute, so if you recognize it is not even addressing it that means you are also recognizing you could not refute it. 

Fact of the matter is I have refused all your arguments and I’ve made my points over and over again. The fact that you are the one making circular arguments and accusing me of doing so is the proof that you cannot argue against my points

you just make the assumption that he is innocent

No, I did not, the argument is that the system used to arrest him is invalid and the arrest obviously political in nature,

And again you don’t know that unless you are privy to some secret Chinese communist party Intel which I’m pretty sure you’re not.

if he had a proper process there would be no problem even if he was guilty at the end.

You don’t know that for a fact. You don’t know that he hasn’t had proper process. You don’t know that they’re not going through the proper legal channels. You just keep making these assumptions.

I’m not gonna comment on why he was arrested only about the fact that when someone is arrested they have to go through the system

And since this is the only reply you could give against the argument that the arrest was invalid then you are recognizing you could not refute that point. Precisely because you are using an irrelevant argument against a point nobody made is why you are conceding not being able to refute the real point made.

If this is really the best you’ve got, when you’ve gotten nothing at all to refute my points with. But I’m happy to play this game with you all night if I have to

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites