Posted on 02/24/2014 2:50:14 AM PST by Cindy
SNIPPET: "The arrest of a woman accused of hiding more than 10,000 diamonds inside her body when she landed at Toronto’s Pearson International Airport comes amid warnings that Canada is one of the countries where illicit diamonds have been used for money laundering."
SNIPPET: "The woman had landed at Pearson on a Feb. 3 flight from Trinidad and Tobago, when she came to the attention of a Canada Border Services Agency officer, according to CBSA spokeswoman Vanessa Barrasa.
The RCMP said the woman was found to have carried 10,202 stones inside her.
The 1,500 carats (about 300 grams) of rough diamonds have an estimated value of $398,000, the RCMP said.
Helena Freida Bodner, a 66-year-old foreign national, was charged with four customs offences and two counts under the Export and Import of Rough Diamonds Act."
SNIPPET: "Trinidad is not a diamond-mining country. The nearest sources of the precious stones would be Venezuela, Brazil and Guyana."
SNIPPET: "A similar scheme is outlined in a report released last month by the Financial Action Task Force, a Paris-based intergovernmental body that sets standards and promotes anti-laundering reforms.
The report identified Canada as one of countries that have seen major criminal cases where diamonds were used as a currency in the narcotics trade, money laundering and terrorism financing."
(Excerpt) Read more at theglobeandmail.com ...
Then you and I are NEVER going to agree.
Tell me, If you're being mugged, and the mugger has gotten your wallet, do you think you should be obligated to tell him about your money belt too?
I'll admit I don't know international law, but it seems obvious to me that this woman was attempting to smuggle these diamonds into Canada. Why else would she try to conceal them? Oh, wait! I've got it! She didn't want them stolen. Yeah, that's it - she was trying to protect them. Yeah, that's it.
The point I (am apparently failing to) make is that this has nothing to do with what you can or cannot be permitted to own. It has everything to do with a person trying to enter into a country without paying the proper import duties on the merchandise she was carrying. Should she be permitted to get away with it? What about the effect that will have on business people who do pay the proper duties on their imported merchandise? Won't that put them at a disadvantage?
Governments do this all the time, and for good reason. If one doesn't like the duties and tariffs a government imposes on goods brought into their country, then one should not travel there.
Well, my guess was wrong. I do know they show up very bright on a normal x-ray.
No, we're not.
You raised a point. I explained why every state, including the U.S., had the right -- and the need -- to ascertain and control what was being brought into (or taken out of) the country.
You didn't like the answer. That's OK by me...but it's irrelevant to the facts.
Obvious to me too. My point is questioning the morality of governments who think they have the right to the fruits of your labor simple by crossing their borders. I know that it is a time honored way of governments to acquire the wealth of others, but I'm questioning the morality of it, not its history.
She didn't want them stolen
She didn't want them stolen by the government. Does the nature of the thief matter if your wealth is stolen/confiscated?
What about the effect that will have on business people who do pay the proper duties on their imported merchandise?
Quite likely, but she accepted a higher risk for a potentially higher reward. Doing away with import duties would level the playing field.
No you gave your opinion as to why. I don't agree with it.
With a couple of exceptions, thanks for the lively but polite debate. I’ve wasted enough time on this for now. have a great day.
Were they cut or uncut?
If uncut the diamonds may have been mined in an area not controlled by The Cartel, ergo they undercut the commercial market. Sudan, Angola, and other African countries are a big source of non-cartel aka illegal uncut diamonds.
My guess is they’re used in the drug trade due to high value per weight.
So this was a good call by the port authorities imo.
You didn’t answer the question.
How do you fund the military without taxes?
As far as my position on taxes and what a govt should do with taxes collected, don’t start pulling something out of your butt and claiming it’s what I believe because you don’t have the slightest clue what I believe.
When you pull something out of your butt and tell me it’s what I believe I’m more than happy to tell you to put it back where you found it.
Got it?
Don’t tell me what I believe.
I see that you’d rather be rude than discuss issues.
Does anyone honestly think that the TSA was put in place for bombs? No it was put in place to trap assets.
When you start telling me what I believe, I’ll get downright rude with you real quick.
Please show me WHERE I told you what you believe with a quote from me to validate your BS claim.
Go read your comments.
You’re using the standard left wing tactic of claiming you know what someone believes because they disagree with your position.
Just because I, we, support limited taxes and the right of the govt to levy tariffs doesn’t mean I, we, support the welfare state as you claim.
Play that left wing nonsense with me and I will call you out on it.
So in other words you can't back up your false claim, and you're just full of hot air and bluster to excuse your rude comments.
Sorry, my "opinion" expressed the fact of the matter -- which is a general tenet of international law. Every country has the right to secure its borders -- and know what's coming into (and going out of) their country.
That's what you don't agree with.
You can’t be serious. People try to smuggle drugs, animals, diamonds and other gems, and all sorts of illegal things. And you think governments have no business monitoring what people bring into their country? Think it over.
Yup. There should be no intrusion by our government as to why an undeclared semi-load of 20$, 50$ and/or 100$ bills, bales of bills, is being moved from the US across into Mexico. There is absolutely no inference of crime in such a prospect.
I understand and agree with the general notion of limiting government intrusion. But there is also a general public welfare need to be considered. Yes, the govey lays taxes and that crap as collateral to this, which I despise, but, for the general public welfare, we also need to be sure that such “transactions” are not furthering crime against the general population and destroying other’s right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
I don't necessarily disagree that the government needs some funding for some activities, but I'm looking at the dual taxation nature of having import duties and income/capital gains tax. Pay an import duty on the stuff, and then if you sell it (and she most likely intended to sell it since Liberace is dead and they closed his museum) pay a capital gains tax or pay an income tax on any profit. It strikes me as overly intrusive. It's kind of like the question I asked another freeper. If you're being mugged and the mugger already has your wallet are you morally obligated to tell him about the money in your money belt?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.