Facebook is blocking Canadians’ posts on the assassination of a BC Sikh leader

https://pressprogress.ca/facebook-is-blocking-canadians-posts-about-the-assassination-of-a-bc-sikh-leader-their-posts-were-targeted-by-indias-government/

by toomanyrichies • 3 years ago

309 243 3 years ago

pressprogress.ca

eureka-belief2• 3 years ago

India’s government is apparently confidently enough in India’s global influence to be putting pressure on Canada and Facebook.

Just thinking out loud, if some parts of India started breaking away from India, that could start a chain reaction. India has incredibly diverse sets of citizens, each with their own set of cultural identities and historical grievances. Maintaining national unity has been a struggle since India become its own country. And it’s two enemies to the north would love to see India divided. Violent suppression of separatists is apparently a necessity evil for them.

JumpCrisscross6• 3 years ago

suppression of separatists

If true, this was a stupid move. They’ve martyred a separatist while bringing him and his cause international sympathy and attention. The assassins have carried out an action resembling an attack on a founding member of NATO and close ally of America’s. In North America. This is a line even the Soviets and Chinese respected. Not out of fear, but rational self interest.

If true, New Delhi’s best move is to find the perpetrators and make an example out of them. (My guess is a security element went rogue and the diplomats were too incompetent to keep it quiet.)

shrikant• 3 years ago

This is a line even the Soviets and Chinese respected.

Well, Russia is pretty fine with carrying out extra-judicial assassination attempts of undesirables on UK soil, so it's not clear this line is true any more.

lainga• 3 years ago

This is a line even the Soviets and Chinese respected

Partly because they were on the other side. It's different here (if true) because, as the BBC points out -

"Western powers would have to make a choice between backing Ottawa or New Delhi, a choice between supporting the principle of the rule of law or the hard necessity of realpolitik."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-66856568

zxienin• 3 years ago

The assassins have carried out an action resembling an attack on a founding member of NATO and close ally of America’s. In North America.

Even assuming it is sanctioned killing, how would that be an attack on Canada?

tredre3• 3 years ago

In North America. This is a line even the Soviets and Chinese respected

When it comes to assassination, maybe. But China conducts extra-judicial operations in Canada, and even deport citizens (send back to China), with little respect for Canada's sovereignty.

* Search for china+secret+police+canada and make your own mind. Obviously the CCP denies it and the Canadian government is mute. So you only have the mainstream media's word to go on.

__loam5• 3 years ago

This is a line even the Soviets

The Soviets regularly murdered dissidents from the Soviet Union in western countries. That's like half the reason the KGB existed. You can read about it in The Sword and the Shield by Christopher Andrew and Vasili Mitrokhin, a book directly referencing KGB archives.

OfSanguineFire• 3 years ago

If true, this was a stupid move. They’ve martyred a separatist while bringing him and his cause international sympathy and attention.

The heyday of the Khalistan movement was decades ago. It has petered out and lingers only at a minor, ineffectual level similar to how left-wing militants or Basque separatist violence still simmered for a while in Europe but achieved nothing. Plus, Western audiences are still poorly informed about ethnic and sectarian differences within India, there’s nothing here easy for them to grab on to. I wouldn’t expect this event to bring any new impetus to the Sikh separatist cause.

eynsham8• 3 years ago

necessity[sic] evil

The Khalistani movement is pretty weak, and as Pakistan shows, repression is counterproductive in that it is makes ethnic identity more salient not less. (At least in the Kashmiri case there is already a substantial terrorist movement that can’t be ignored; the Khalistan movement is a joke and certainly can be. Turnout in the last Assembly elections was ⩾70 per cent.) Even the Akali Dal was in alliance with the BJP. (See e.g. Jaffrelot's The Pakistan Paradox for an account of the radicalisation of Bengali, Muhajir, and Sindhi nationalists, inter alios.)

nik282000• 3 years ago

India has 25x the population of Canada, Facebook has no reason to side with Canada over any political dispute. More so after the stupidity of demanding that Facebook pay Bell for linking to 'Bell's' content.

JumpCrisscross6• 3 years ago

India has 25x the population of Canada, Facebook has no reason to side with Canada

To be super clear, if India actually assassinated a Canadian in Canada, this becomes relevant in America and Europe. (At best it means New Delhi has a rogue security element.)

This is not an editorial decision by Facebook. It’s the mindless implementation of complex policies.

cperciva• 3 years ago

Edited to remove misinformation.

Sorry, I was misled by news articles about the individual's status in Canada which were published prior to the announcement earlier today that he became a citizen in 2015.

bruceb• 3 years ago

Well Facebook earns more from Canada than India. So that is one reason.

tenpies• 3 years ago

Also importantly: Trudeau has yet to show evidence. This could easily be misinformation and disinformation.

Trudeau is notorious for lying, dividing people, and "interpreting differently" things, especially when all the attention is on his crumbling regime and mismanagement of virtually everything in Canada.

And it should raise everyone's flags that Trudeau, who has done everything possible to obstruct and derail the inquiry into Chinese election interference which likely put him in power - including saying that the information is classified - suddenly decides to share highly classified information from Canadian intelligence.

foobarian• 3 years ago

To top it all off isn't Trudeau Fidel Castro's son?

slashdev5• 3 years ago

I’m no fan of Trudeau, but way to shoot the messenger. And ramble incoherently about conspiracy theories.

Sanzig3• 3 years ago

The evidence is certainly classified and disclosure of details would probably result in unacceptable risk to Canadian and/or other Five Eyes intelligence assets. This is not a court of law, the Canadian government is not obliged to give up the identities of its sources.

Trudeau briefed the leaders of the opposition ahead of the announcement and they are all offering a united front on this. That's enough for me to infer that the intelligence on this must be rock solid.

seatac76• 3 years ago

That’s so not how things work . Facebook is a US company first of all if anything it is only liable to US laws. It has stated that it’ll respect local laws as needed, so if India wants to remove posts it should be geo restricted in India not globally at all, not that banning posts is right to begin with. But this is not right.

shrubble• 3 years ago

Facebook needs to just die at this point.

martin1975• 3 years ago

That's why I'm on Gab.

__loam5• 3 years ago

Yes, our favorite hive of right wing bullshit.

umeshunni• 3 years ago

So should terrorists

kypro• 3 years ago

It's not Facebook's fault, they're just following the law. The issue, if anything, is that in Canada you don't have the legal right to freely express yourself online and Facebook is legally allowed to censor your content. So obviously Facebook are going to have no problem with doing that if the Indian government are telling them to. The mistake of allowing private companies to have the right censor legal content (for whatever reason) is the mistake here.

Imo there's little difference in what Facebook is doing here with what they did when they removed Jan 6th posts. Hardeep Singh Nijjar was trying using his political influence to overthrow the Indian government by supporting extremist groups within India. Obviously unless you pass laws to protect freedom of speech Facebook isn't going to allow posts supporting this kind of behaviour on their platform – even if in this case a lot of people in the West agree with the extremists.

I'll also note that we don't even know if Hardeep Singh Nijjar was assassinated yet. This for the time being ranges from likely to a conspiracy theory depending on which governments and media sources you trust.

dblohm7• 3 years ago

Play stupid games (Canadian government bill C-18 [1]), win stupid prizes.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_News_Act

psnehanshu• 3 years ago

I heard that here https://youtu.be/1kJf4krMY4A?si=7vNSBNrU8f-rqJBp

kmeisthax2• 3 years ago

This isn't C-18, this is way worse.

The context is that there's a Canadian Sikh who has been calling for parts of India to secede from India. In response, India had him assassinated.

India has laws on the books that allow them to remove content globally for things that violate Indian law. They enforce this on social media companies by requiring them to have employees on the country's soil in order to take them hostage.

C-18 just says you can't post links on Facebook without news companies getting a cut of ad revenue. India wants all discussion of their assassination of a Canadian citizen to be censored, and they're currently getting that censorship.

ta86457• 3 years ago

In response, India had him assassinated.

Why do people keep saying this like it's a fact? Often it's the same people claiming that the murdered victim in Canada should be presumed innocent of the accusations levelled at him.

In both cases, we should approach the accusations with skepticism.

pcthrowaway• 3 years ago

They enforce this on social media companies by requiring them to have employees on the country's soil in order to take them hostage

Are you suggesting that India requires Facebook to employ people who reside in India in order to operate in India, and that they use those employees as hostages in order to coerce Facebook to succumb to their demands even when when those demands concern communication between non-Indian nationals residing outside of India?

If so, I'd love to hear more about this; do you have any resources?

Pxtl3• 3 years ago

For reference from those outside of Canada/India, when a region of Canada had a problem with a terrorist separatist group... well on the one hand we temporarily suspended civil liberties with the "war measures act".

But on the other hand we also ran a referendum and asked if the public really wanted to leave.

The separatists lost the referendum. Repeatedly.

Particularly relevant since PM Trudeau's father was involved in handling that situation.

yumraj5• 3 years ago

In response, India had him assassinated.

Where’s the evidence? Can you point to it.

jpambrun3• 3 years ago

Facebook is not playing a smart game either. The government is already and understandably furious at India for this encroachment to sovereignty (the murder of a Canadian in Canada by a foreign state), it was also already not happy at Facebook for their previous encroachment to sovereignty (the blocking of Canadian news), and now it has more reason to be mad at Facebook for this latest encroachment to sovereignty of applying Indian law on Canadian citizens. I imagine the pushback could be very strong.

RcouF1uZ4gsC• 3 years ago

Actually, Facebook is playing it smart.

Canada has less than 40 million total people. If Facebook completely exited Canada and banned all Canadians from Facebook, it wouldn’t be all that big of a deal.

India on the other hand has over a billion people.

If you have to choose to piss off a government, Canada is a much better choice than India.

boplicity2• 3 years ago

From the article's first paragraph:

"Canadian Sikh Facebook users posting about the assassination of a Sikh community leader are seeing posts disappear and accounts suspended in response to legal demands by the Indian government."

What does that have to do with C-18?

Nothing? Less then nothing?

darth_avocado• 3 years ago

Politics aside, this feels like a good policy question? How do laws apply in the context of a global platform like Facebook. Something may be in violation of a law in one country, but be totally acceptable in another. Should sovereign citizens on one country be subjected to laws of another? If Twitter files showed us anything, posts get taken down at the request of the government (including US and Canada).

JStanton617• 3 years ago

India (among other countries) have passed so called "hostage-taking laws" that require large social media companies to have in-country employees that can be strong-armed from ways small to large (threats of being convicted of treason and executed).

This is a specific policy to allow them to enforce their censorship laws in other countries.

Zak2• 3 years ago

Do they have options to enforce that other than blocking access to the service in question?

barkingcat• 3 years ago

There's a ton of precedence of American companies applying American laws universally across the world (regardless of whether it's applicable by jurisdiction) in IP cases, in trade issues, etc. many times it's easiest to just have 1 set of rules across the planet, so companies end up with following the lowest common denominator of legal actions and policies. (even if these policies are illegal in other jurisdictions. Many cases, American companies just go ahead with the illegal policies and then pay the fine in each country where it is found to be acting illegally. The fines are not even sufficient to be rounding errors of their operating budget in many cases so they just break laws at will just so that it's easier to match the policies around the world).

russdill• 3 years ago

In general, cross border enforcement of trade and IP law are governed by relevant treaties.

blululu3• 3 years ago

There are two differences: First, American law does not apply globally and makes no demands to apply globally. If companies do so it is a matter of convenience and not policy. While companies may petition the US government to apply pressure on allied countries to influence policy there is no presumption that American law will apply in a foreign country outside of what is circumscribed by treaties. Second there is the matter of positive vs negative laws. American law doesn’t prohibit much by way of publishing or collecting information in public spaces. Applying American laws globally results lack of a compliance in countries with stricter laws. The law in question actually prohibits something. What results is actually a greatest common denominator of law.

Waterluvian• 3 years ago

If you want access to that country's market, you are thrall to their potentially half-baked, wannabe democracy dictator-like decisions.

I think it's really that simple. Facebook can say "we will obey whatever your laws decide" to every country. Or it can say "deal with it. Block us." And I think it already happens that way for many countries.

gustavus• 3 years ago

For those wondering this isn't because of their boneheaded law the official justification is

Your page has been unpublished,” reads a notice sent to BC Sikhs that was reviewed by PressProgress. “This is because BC Sikhs goes against our Community Standards on dangerous individuals and organizations.

I for one am so glad that we agreed it was a good idea for social media to censor dangerous people and opinions, especially ones that might spread misinformation. It is a good precedent going forward that I do not think will have any unintended consequences.

slashdev5• 3 years ago

BC Sikhs goes against our Community Standards on dangerous individuals and organizations.

This is hilarious to anyone who knows any Sikhs. They’re some of the most peace loving people on planet earth.

edgyquant• 3 years ago

What a ridiculous generalization. Sikhs are capable of being dangerous just as any other group of people are.

antx3• 3 years ago

That's the problem with generalization:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Sikh_terrorism

adolph• 3 years ago

They’re some of the most peace loving people on planet earth.

I'd be open to see a statistical argument to support the above position.

  "peace loving" != "not dangerous"

As an example: The kirpan (Punjabi: ਕਿਰਪਾਨ) is a curved, single-edged blade that Khalsa Sikhs are required to wear as part of their religious uniform . . . Sikhs are expected to embody the qualities of a Sant Sipahi or "saint-soldier", showing no fear on the battlefield and treating defeated enemies humanely.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirpan

pseudo06• 3 years ago

Canada's single most deadly terrorist attack was the bombing of Air India Flight 182 by Sikh Khalistani separatists. 329 people were killed, including 268 Canadians.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_India_Flight_182

ipaddr• 3 years ago

They are known for being fierce warriors. They carry a ceremonial daggers.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_battles_involving_th...

Tibetan buddhist they are not

yumraj5• 3 years ago

Sikhs maybe, this is referring to “BC Sikhs” a group on Facebook which is, based on the post, obviously Khalistani sympathizer.

root_axis2• 3 years ago

We didn't "agree it was a good idea", this is just how the federated network we call the internet works. It's facebook's prerogative to determine what type of content appears on facebook's website.

Cameri• 3 years ago

Shouldn’t have pushed Bill C-18 then

UseStrict• 3 years ago

If you took 10 seconds to read, it's not at all C-18 related. It's entirely related to India being able to strong-arm Facebook to comply.

happytiger3• 3 years ago

You let them have total media control and censorship and then act surprised when they use it.

Canadians, time for change!

root_axis2• 3 years ago

What do you mean by "let them have total media control"?

happytiger3• 3 years ago

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/c11-is-now-law-and...

I do understand how this related only in a tertiary way. However, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission is a hot mess and Canada is headed towards total media control.

pharrington2• 3 years ago

You're saying Canadians let Facebook have total media control?

The blame lies on Mark Zuckerberg. This is a Mark Zuckerberg (or more generally, unfettered capitalism) problem.

kmeisthax2• 3 years ago

No, it's an India problem. Insamuch as Facebook or capitalism is even at fault, it's specifically because they're either willing to comply with, or have been duped into complying with, India's attempts at censorship.

The fact that BC Sikhs was eventually uncensored would indicate the latter, but India knows that they can try again, because...

- Companies like Facebook are big, monopolistic platforms, which mean they have too much content and not enough moderators, so they have a 'shoot first, ask questions later' mentality

- India holds some Facebook employees hostage. This is part of their law, you can't run a social media network there without domestic employees, and those employees effectively become agents of India with stiff penalties for noncompliance.

The fault Facebook and other capitalists have is not immediately NOPEing out of the Indian market. They left themselves open to being used as a censorship tool by powerful-enough governments.

n_t• 3 years ago

Since this will soon become heated and full of misinformation, here are some details-

1. PM Trudeau called emergency session over "credible" allegations but no actual evidence. The leader of opposition has also called out lack of evidence.

2. Canada expelled a key Indian diplomat but not nothing more - basically diplomatese - https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/18/americas/canada-hardeep-s...

3. India issued statement calling allegations as baseless and irresponsible - https://bit.ly/3EHtuwe

4. India too immediately booted out key Canadian diplomat. Diplomat was so angry he almost slammed car door on a journalist (https://x.com/ANI/status/1703997495318352108?s=20)

5. PM Trudeau seems to realize he has worsened relations with no credible evidence - https://www.reuters.com/world/canada-pm-not-trying-provoke-i...

As for background, India considers two countries as those which harbors terrorists active against India - Pakistan and Canada. Canada has harbored "Khalistani" terrorists (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_India_Flight_182) for long. Recently these "khalistani" (mind you, not Sikhs) have started threatening Indian diplomats (https://x.com/AdityaRajKaul/status/1676496624519122950?s=20) and attacked Indian properties and temples in Canada/UK. India recently started taking harder stance on push back on both Canada and UK for safety of it's nationals.

Sanzig3• 3 years ago

The leader of opposition has also called out lack of evidence.

That is not what he said at all: https://nitter.net/PierrePoilievre/status/170389391532824992...

papercrane• 3 years ago

He's since changed his position and is saying Trudeau should release more information publicly. For context Poilievre has refused to get security clearance, so it's unlikely he's seen the whatever evidence CSIS has.+

* https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/poilievre-trudeau-har...

+ there's a lot that's been written about his refusal. The short of it is that his position is that part of the process is he needs to promise not to reveal anything he sees and he has said that could interfere with his work as leader of the opposition.

mistrial92• 3 years ago

"khalistani" (mind you, not Sikhs)

thank you .. also I have seen ill-informed US people accosting young Sikhs with accusations and harassment on the street in daylight .. Sikhs identified by their formal dress

shkkmo7• 3 years ago

While I understand that "Khalistani" have significant doctrinal differences from "traditional Sikhs", it seems like claim the Khalistani are not Sikhs is like claiming that Mormons aren't Christians. It is a prejudice based exclusion of a group in contradiction of the groups own identity.

I think explaining the differences between groups is totally worth wile, but denying the label seem like prejudice to me.

I rather doubt that Sikhs have been accosted in the US based on being confused with Khalistanis, as few americans have ever heard of Khalistanis. The attacks I heard about all had to do with ignorant Americans not knowing the difference between Sikhs and Muslims.

shkkmo7• 3 years ago

I'm confused by several of your assertions.

You say Canada as "harbored" terrorists, but then link to an attack by Babbar Khalsa, which is designated as a terrorist by Canada. Do you have any basis for this assertion?

Also, I see calling credible allegations "baseless and irresponsible" doesn't inspire confidence. It's pretty clear how bad the assassination looks for India and pretending otherwise instead of promising to assist with investigations just make India look more guilty.

timeon• 3 years ago

So first you present how this accusation is baseless. But why did you added how this guy was bad and dangerous? Even when he was - it is unnecessary to your original argument and looks bit suspicious.

andreygrehov3• 3 years ago

Which is why I love X - no censorship.

cududa• 3 years ago

Bad news. There’s more censorship since he took over. https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/economy/2023/5/2/twitter-fulfi...

andreygrehov3• 3 years ago

Social media censorship != governments' censorship requests

Free speech allows for a diversity of voices, some of which may express views not aligned with the government's perspective, whereas its absence leads to fewer government takedown requests.

reducesuffering2• 3 years ago

Did you miss it when they censored all mentions of Mastodon, banned people who said to follow their Mastodon instead, and throttled links to other websites?

freedomben3• 3 years ago

In your opinion, is censorship only censorship when done directly by a government?

andreygrehov3• 3 years ago

Yes and no. According to the Twitter Files, there was a prevailing amount of indirect censorship requests (majorly driven by democratic representatives - like it or not, this is a fact), meaning non-official government requests to shut a tweet down. This channel is now gone. Period. They no longer have the UI to do it. Prior to Elon's takeover, they had a dedicated tool to submit these kinds of requests. It's gone. Official (e.g., legal) government censorship is still present. It's not going anywhere. Since the non-official channel has been shut down, the official number of government requests has gone up, which is obvious. Overall, the amount of free speech on X has increased. Irrespective of whether you like Elon or not, this is the outcome of his leadership.

mabbo3• 3 years ago

To those saying "But Bill C-18" - it's not the Canadian government taking things down. It's the Indian government, taking down articles and posts that accuse them of assassinating a Canadian citizen on Canadian soil.

C-18 is a problem. We need to deal with it. That's not relevant to the issue at hand.

And to those saying "Well he was a terrorist..." we, in Canada, have something called the Rule of Law. You have to prove someone is guilty, in court, with real evidence. They serve time in prison for their crimes. They can be extradited to other countries to face court there.

If Bhai Hardeep Singh Nijjar was a terrorist, and there was sufficient evidence to convict him, the Indian government should have brought it to the Canadian Government. It's very simple really.

Murdering someone without trial because you don't like their political speech- why, I think there's a word for that.

screye3• 3 years ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_India_Flight_182

The Khalistani perpetrators of the worst terrorist act on Canadian soil, second only to 9/11 in deaths, walked free.

I can't comment on Canada's justice system broadly. But when it comes to holding terrorists accountable, Canada's track record is a joke.

ipnon2• 3 years ago

Mr. Nijjar was not involved; he was 8 years old when this happened.

gruez2• 3 years ago

The Khalistani perpetrators of the worst terrorist act on Canadian soil, second only to 9/11 in deaths, walked free.
I can't comment on Canada's justice system broadly. But when it comes to holding terrorists accountable, Canada's track record is a joke.

The wikipedia article says the Canadian government spent $130M prosecuting the accused, but was unable to secure a conviction. If these people can't be convicted, isn't the correct course of action "walked free"? I'm not sure what the alternative is here? Should we lock them up anyway? Is there any reason to doubt that their prosecution was botched?

Manuel_D• 3 years ago

As per your own link, many of the suspects are dead, on the run, in prison for decades (in the case of one suspect that provided testimony against the other perpetrators), or were found to have not had involvement in the plot. Saying the perpetrators "walked free" is a massive distortion at best.

lambdasquirrel• 3 years ago

And what of the murder of Sikhs that spurred that? Or the murder of muslims in India in general?

This issue is not something we want to be adjudicating. It is not a matter of black and white, good guys and bad guys. If India does not like the guy and wants him charged with terrorism, she needs to go through Canadian courts.

mabbo3• 3 years ago

Hardeep Singh Nijjar was 7 years old at the time of that attack.

Are you suggesting that he was involved?

Or are you suggesting that all Sikhs who believe in an independent nation for their people are guilty of that crime?

Should we also hold all Quebecois who believe in an independent Quebec guilty for the murder of Pierre Laporte?

eYsYs• 3 years ago

Murdering someone without trial because you don't like their political speech- why, I think there's a word for that.

Oh yeah? What's the word for accusing someone for murdering without an iota of proof?

rajup4• 3 years ago

Slander, defamation?

jpambrun3• 3 years ago

The prime minister put his credibility that of the government on the line. They obviously have evidence and are convinced of this being factual as the price to pay for being wrong will be very steep.

By the way, the word you are looking for would be the same for someone accusing of lying or deception without an iota of proof.

epgui2• 3 years ago

This is a distortion of the statement that was actually made / what is actually claimed.

jakderrida• 3 years ago

Oh yeah? What's the word for accusing someone for murdering without an iota of proof?

A murder accusation. What's your point?

chaostheory• 3 years ago

So Facebook still allows posts of news articles in Canada post C-18? I’m not very familiar with the subject hence the question

TheRealPomax• 3 years ago

It didn't say news article shares were getting removed, individual users' posts in which they talk about current events are being removed.

dirtyid5• 3 years ago

Western citizenship being inviolable golden passports for sheltering/weaponizing dissidents of foreign states is not going to be sustainable forever. The west providing sanctuary for enemies of other states is going to end when other states possess power/leverage to do something about it.

CoolGuySteve• 3 years ago

No, freedom of speech is the foundation of our society.

If other governments have a problem with that they can get fucked.

pedrosorio• 3 years ago

Replace Western with Russian and foreign with American and you have Snowden.

The asymmetry you imply does not exist.

nradov• 3 years ago

When will other states possess the power to do something about it? India doesn't have an expeditionary military, nor are they capable of building one in the next few decades. They can barely manage to defend their homeland and territorial waters.

What's more likely are additional restrictions on international trade and immigration. The great experiment with globalism appears to be winding down and powerful countries are decoupling their economies from each other.

meowtimemania• 3 years ago

Who are the enemies of foreign states that are being sheltered?

Method-X• 3 years ago

The word for it is "extrajudicial killing."

CydeWeys• 3 years ago

Or just assassination.

CrzyLngPwd2• 3 years ago

That's not a word.

zoklet-enjoyer• 3 years ago

Murder or assassination

dharmach• 3 years ago

>Murdering someone without trial because you don't like their political speech- why, I think there's a word for that.

Claiming without proof that Indian government carried out killing is called what?

ulchar2• 3 years ago

Look up Omar Khadr [1]. If the United States couldn't get an extradition for that kid, could India get one for Nijjar? I doubt it. Not saying as justification for the alleged actions of the Indian government, not in the slightest. I only suggest that Canada wouldn't necessarily co-operate eagerly.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_Khadr#

mabbo3• 3 years ago

Really, Khadr?

The guy was brainwashed as a child by his lunatic father and dragged to Afghanistan to resist American's invasion. There was some kind of firefight, he nearly died, and the Americans decided that since he survived he was guilty of all the crimes.

He was 15. A kid. A child soldier, by international law.

He was held for a decade in Guantanamo Bay, a US military facility, without any real trial.

The US already had him. They abused his rights and ignored international law. Why should Canada give him back to them?

givemeethekeys2• 3 years ago

Trudeau has has been having a terrible time with India. How fortuitous then, that a man, wanted as a terrorist in India who also happens to be Canadian citizen ends up dead, soon after these mishaps:

- https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-09-10/trudeau-i...

- https://www.fijitimes.com/modi-scolds-trudeau-over-sikh-prot...

With some luck, the people of Canada will completely forget what a tool Trudeau has been when it comes to foreign policy, rally behind him in the defense of the country against that big bad bully India and give him a majority in the next election.

eynsham8• 3 years ago

It's a bit naïve to think that the Canadian public will respond to this in the same way that the Indian nationalist press respond to 56 inches' chest-thumping. People can vote Poilievre and oppose extrajudicial assassinations by foreign intelligence agencies.

givemeethekeys2• 3 years ago

Here's what naive means: Lacking worldly experience and understanding, especially. Simple and guileless; artless. Unsuspecting or credulous.

I assure you that the Canadian public is fully capable of responding to this in a far more favorable way than almost any press, including the "Indian nationalist" press.

As an example, they keep voting Trudeau back into office.

EMCymatics• 3 years ago

Yeah, free speech doesnt exist on the internet.

inSenCite• 3 years ago

Trudeau obviously grasping at the chance of winning over some Sikh votes. Whether the allegations are credible or not is irrelevant to him, and likely will not be found out until after elections anyway.

On the other hand, Facebook is much more likely to err on the side of India given the much larger population and associated $ potential and THE BILL.

Canada is not exactly an espionage expert relative to places like India so I find it highly unlikely that we (Canada) will be able to figure this out in the short term without external help.

vharuck• 3 years ago

The Canadian government worked with US intelligence on this matter:

https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/canada-worked-closely...

fzil3• 3 years ago

Sikhs make up <2% of Canada. Even less when you account for that fact that not all of them are of age to vote. Do you really think a PM of Canada would throw away relationship with a potentially large trading partner for a few thousand votes?

dbsights• 3 years ago

Are you Canadian? Even asking the question feels ridiculous: yes, absolutely.

He shredded the Charter to fabricate a wedge (interior vaccine passports, firing civil servants) to win a few votes in the last election. This is absolutely in character.. good governance means nothing to Trudeau compared to being re-elected.

VancouverMan3• 3 years ago

There could be more to it than just acquiring future votes for the Liberal Party.

Keep in mind that Jagmeet Singh is the leader of the NDP, the other main leftist party in Canada, and he represents the Burnaby South riding.

Due to how Canada's elections work, the Liberals drawing even a relatively small number of voters away from the NDP in key ridings could have a significant negative impact on the NDP's and Singh's level of success during the next election.

In 2021, Singh beat the Liberal candidate by only about 4,000 votes, for example. That was only 10% of the vote, and the overall turnout was merely 51% in that riding.

rg1114• 3 years ago

This <2% population are not uniformly distributed.

And identity politics can and do win you seats in local councils, senates, congresses, and so on.

This is the very common mistake by identity politics deniers. They always say that <minority group> population is x% where x << 100. But what they forget, willingly or unwillingly, is that population is not uniformly distributed over the country and are concentrated in some parts, and a party, by appeasing the <minority> can and do win seats in democratic elections.

I have seen this first hand in multiple places.

Edit: I just learned that Trudeau's party is in power because of the support of a Shikh party. His party was 10 seats short of majority needed to form government. A Shikh party provided the support which put him in power.

mthoms4• 3 years ago

Trudeau reported what CSIS - in conjunction with it's allies - has concluded.

Yizahi• 3 years ago

Ukrainians posting about war crimes and uploading photos of war - "oh, we don't want to see such sensitive content, it is unsettling, better block it, delete it and ban users with hundreds of thousands subs, just not to see it".

A. Few. Moments. Later... "why is Facebook blocking my posts?!"

shmde• 3 years ago

He was as much as a "leader" as Osama Bin Laden was a "leader" for Al-Qaeda. The group the "terrorist" belonged to committed the world's deadliest act of aviation terrorism until the September 11 attacks in 2001. They were responsible for assasinating Indias Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Feels weird reading the western world feeling sympathetic for a group which commits acts of terrorism.

tamimio2• 3 years ago

After all the fiasco about Facebook, kind of shocking how and why people are still using it.. the worst kind of social media.

flerovium2• 3 years ago

The real story is India forcing its censorship regime on Canada by threatening employees in India.

Facebook should leave India or be forced by Canada and Europe not to cooperate with Indian demands.

Otherwise, the EU is letting India censor its own citizens.

deanCommie• 3 years ago

A couple weeks ago everyone here claimed Facebook were the good guys for Standing Up To The Canadian Government.

Uh huh.

Facebook is blocking Canadians’ posts on the assassination of a BC Sikh leader

Related Stories