Han Solo

 

Canadians will by now probably all know the name Han Dong. Foreigners may not care, or may need some background. I ask them to Google it. Or just think “Benedict Arnold,” or “Quisling”—accused, not proved.

Dong’s tearful speech in parliament yesterday has convinced some—notably Althea Raj—of his innocence. This is soft-headed, naive. He has reason to regret damage to his career and reputation, and to his family, whether he is guilty of the charges or not. Indeed, he has more reason if he is guilty.

One word he spoke makes me think he is guilty. He referred to these “absolutely untrue claims.” An innocent man doth not protest so much. I remember O.J. Simpson saying that he “absolutely” did not kill his wife.

Another reason to believe the charges true: if the charges are false, Global News and the Globe and Mail risk not only their credibility, but possible lawsuits. The whistleblower at CSIS risks his career and a prison term. 

What is the evidence that led them to make such a dangerous move? Given the nature of the claims, the evidence almost must be a wiretap. That would be compelling evidence; my guess is that they have this in hand.

And, if the matter was indeed brought up to the government long ago, they too could have heard this evidence. Yet they took no action. In other words, they were actively colluding with the Chinese government against Canadian interests. The government.

Whether Dong is innocent or guilty, it is now essential to hold a public inquiry. If he is innocent, this is necessary for him to clear his name: he has a right to his day in court. If he is guilty, the public must know the truth. There may be no specific criminal charge possible; the necessary punishment must be political, and for this the grand jury of the Canadian people must know the evidence. 

He and his cabinet are stalling in every way they can, but I cannot imagine Justin Trudeau still being Canadian prime minister a year from now.