6 ms·

Lack of publicly revealed evidence does not mean a lack of evidence.

pseudo0 3y ago
Sure, there might be evidence that they are refusing to release, but Trudeau made the accusation publicly. By turning this into a public diplomatic spat, he now needs to show the proof.
b59831 3y ago
[dead]
belltaco 3y ago
Maybe they already lost the evidence because of routine deletion like it happened with the downing of Air India Flight 182 that killed 320 people and the alleged Canadian perpetuators were let go. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37601284 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37601284 The guy murdered was associated with one of the alleged perpetuators later on according to Canadian court records.
- whatever1 3y ago
  So Modi can send his goons in foreign soil to bring justice. I don’t understand this line of thought.
  - belltaco 3y ago
    I never said that or think so. Please don't accuse me of things I didn't say or think.
    - whatever1 3y ago
      You have several identical comments pointing to the same incident trying to build the case that implicates Canada in a terrorist attack. If not to justify the murder then what are you trying to achieve?
      - belltaco 3y ago
        [flagged]
      - belltaco 3y ago
        [flagged]
- maximilianburke 3y ago
  > Maybe they already lost the evidence because of routine deletion like it happened with the downing of Air India Flight 182 that killed 320 people and the alleged Canadian perpetuators were let go. The perpetrators weren't "let go"; they had a trial (the most expensive trial in Canadian history), and two of the three charged were found not guilty. Which is how things work in a liberal democracy. > The guy murdered was associated with one of the alleged perpetuators later on according to Canadian court records. Pretty sure that's not a crime in Canada. And if it is one, it doesn't meet the standard of "summary execution while sitting in ones car", which is definitely not a thing in Canada.
  - belltaco 3y ago
    > The perpetrators weren't "let go"; they had a trial (the most expensive trial in Canadian history), and two of the three charged were found not guilty. Which is how things work in a liberal democracy. Is the destruction of critical evidence also part of a liberal democracy? Not to mention failure to prevent critical witnesses from getting killed before being able to give testimony. > June 2, 2003: > Opposition MPs call for an inquiry into accusations that the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) blocked the RCMP investigation into the bombing. > According to RCMP documents, CSIS ordered the destruction of hours of wiretaps to conceal the fact that one of its agents, Surjan Singh Gill, had penetrated a circle of Sikh extremists planning the attack. He was ordered to pull out three days before Air India Flight 182 blew up. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/air-india-bombing-timeline-1.6520841 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/air-india-bo... > June 17, 2010: > Major releases his final report. Over more than 3,200 pages, he tears into the government and its "wholly deficient" agencies. He says failure to prevent the bombing was "inexcusable," the CSIS was "ineffective" and notes a "lax security culture" at airports. The RCMP "failed" to protect threatened witnesses, he adds. > Major says he cannot understand why CSIS deleted its wiretap tapes: "Inconceivable, incomprehensible, indefensible, incompetence," he writes > He also says successive governments had treated the victims' families "like adversaries, as if they had somehow brought this calamity on themselves." Politicians' failure to plug security holes was "inexcusable." > The inquiry concludes Talwinder Singh Parmar was the mastermind behind the deadly bombing. Maybe you know more than the retired Supreme Court of Canada Justice John C. Major.
- AverageDude 3y ago
  [flagged]
pratikss 3y ago
So far this mysterious evidence is not shared with ANYONE. Whether it is leader of opposition, five eyes allies whom he seeked support from, with the government he is asking to cooperate. In all likelyhood the evidence does not exist.
- dirtyid 3y ago
  It's not shared with public, which these things rarely are due to usual sources/methods excuse. US formally supports Canadian allegations against India, which means intelligence at least been vetted by FVEYs. Which isn't to give credenance to FVEY credibility, only it suggest there isn't LACK of evidence that gives US an out.
  - pseudo0 3y ago
    No, the US has not formally supported Trudeau's allegations. > Weeks before Trudeau's announcement, Canada had asked it's closest allies, including Washington, to publicly condemn the killing, according to a Western official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a diplomatically sensitive matter. But the requests were turned down, the official said. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/09/19/india-expels-canada-diplomat-sikh-assassination/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/09/19/india-expels... https://archive.ph/iblcf https://archive.ph/iblcf
    - dirtyid 3y ago
      US admin disputes the WP piece. >"Reports that Canada asked the U.S. to publicly condemn the murder and that we refused are false and we would strongly push back on the rumours that we were reluctant to speak publicly about this," the official said. US formally support Canada investigation, urged India to cooperate. That doesn't happen behind the scenes if US can wiggle out of allegations. Canada wouldn't have gone to G20 with allegations on sidelines unless they have sufficient FVEY intelligence. That's read between the line of formally supporting Canadian allegations but trying to find a position not throw everything into the shitter. Which they could have during Indian G20 to make this the dominating narrative. The most charitable interpretation right now is FVEY/US supports CA allegations, but still hoping this somehow IN/CA can manage crisis in way it would blow over.
morbidious 3y ago
Why the hell should the Indian government trust Canada's so-called evidence that they are not even willing to reveal? Anyone with two brain cells will call bs on something like this.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  The Indian government wouldn't rely on Canada's evidence to determine whether they carried out an assassination, in any case.
  - morbidious 3y ago
    Why not? If the evidence can be fact-checked on both sides, then its credibility can be established. All this depends on what kind of evidence Canada has (if at all they do).
    - powersnail 3y ago
      Surely India already knows whether they themselves have carried out the assassination?
      - morbidious 3y ago
        I have replied here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37607765 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37607765
        powersnail 3y ago
        If India is guilty, it knows that it is guilty. If India is innocent, it knows that it is innocent. In either case, India wouldn't need evidence from anybody else to determine its own innocence or guilt, because surely it knows whether it did what it is being accused of doing.
        kaycey2022 3y ago

Sure, there might be evidence that they are refusing to release, but Trudeau made the accusation publicly. By turning this into a public diplomatic spat, he now needs to show the proof.

b59831 3y ago

[dead]

belltaco 3y ago

Maybe they already lost the evidence because of routine deletion like it happened with the downing of Air India Flight 182 that killed 320 people and the alleged Canadian perpetuators were let go. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37601284 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37601284 The guy murdered was associated with one of the alleged perpetuators later on according to Canadian court records.

whatever1 3y ago
So Modi can send his goons in foreign soil to bring justice. I don’t understand this line of thought.
- belltaco 3y ago
  I never said that or think so. Please don't accuse me of things I didn't say or think.
  - whatever1 3y ago
    You have several identical comments pointing to the same incident trying to build the case that implicates Canada in a terrorist attack. If not to justify the murder then what are you trying to achieve?
    - belltaco 3y ago
      [flagged]
    - belltaco 3y ago
      [flagged]
maximilianburke 3y ago
> Maybe they already lost the evidence because of routine deletion like it happened with the downing of Air India Flight 182 that killed 320 people and the alleged Canadian perpetuators were let go. The perpetrators weren't "let go"; they had a trial (the most expensive trial in Canadian history), and two of the three charged were found not guilty. Which is how things work in a liberal democracy. > The guy murdered was associated with one of the alleged perpetuators later on according to Canadian court records. Pretty sure that's not a crime in Canada. And if it is one, it doesn't meet the standard of "summary execution while sitting in ones car", which is definitely not a thing in Canada.
- belltaco 3y ago
  > The perpetrators weren't "let go"; they had a trial (the most expensive trial in Canadian history), and two of the three charged were found not guilty. Which is how things work in a liberal democracy. Is the destruction of critical evidence also part of a liberal democracy? Not to mention failure to prevent critical witnesses from getting killed before being able to give testimony. > June 2, 2003: > Opposition MPs call for an inquiry into accusations that the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) blocked the RCMP investigation into the bombing. > According to RCMP documents, CSIS ordered the destruction of hours of wiretaps to conceal the fact that one of its agents, Surjan Singh Gill, had penetrated a circle of Sikh extremists planning the attack. He was ordered to pull out three days before Air India Flight 182 blew up. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/air-india-bombing-timeline-1.6520841 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/air-india-bo... > June 17, 2010: > Major releases his final report. Over more than 3,200 pages, he tears into the government and its "wholly deficient" agencies. He says failure to prevent the bombing was "inexcusable," the CSIS was "ineffective" and notes a "lax security culture" at airports. The RCMP "failed" to protect threatened witnesses, he adds. > Major says he cannot understand why CSIS deleted its wiretap tapes: "Inconceivable, incomprehensible, indefensible, incompetence," he writes > He also says successive governments had treated the victims' families "like adversaries, as if they had somehow brought this calamity on themselves." Politicians' failure to plug security holes was "inexcusable." > The inquiry concludes Talwinder Singh Parmar was the mastermind behind the deadly bombing. Maybe you know more than the retired Supreme Court of Canada Justice John C. Major.
AverageDude 3y ago
[flagged]

pratikss 3y ago

So far this mysterious evidence is not shared with ANYONE. Whether it is leader of opposition, five eyes allies whom he seeked support from, with the government he is asking to cooperate. In all likelyhood the evidence does not exist.

dirtyid 3y ago
It's not shared with public, which these things rarely are due to usual sources/methods excuse. US formally supports Canadian allegations against India, which means intelligence at least been vetted by FVEYs. Which isn't to give credenance to FVEY credibility, only it suggest there isn't LACK of evidence that gives US an out.
- pseudo0 3y ago
  No, the US has not formally supported Trudeau's allegations. > Weeks before Trudeau's announcement, Canada had asked it's closest allies, including Washington, to publicly condemn the killing, according to a Western official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a diplomatically sensitive matter. But the requests were turned down, the official said. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/09/19/india-expels-canada-diplomat-sikh-assassination/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/09/19/india-expels... https://archive.ph/iblcf https://archive.ph/iblcf
  - dirtyid 3y ago
    US admin disputes the WP piece. >"Reports that Canada asked the U.S. to publicly condemn the murder and that we refused are false and we would strongly push back on the rumours that we were reluctant to speak publicly about this," the official said. US formally support Canada investigation, urged India to cooperate. That doesn't happen behind the scenes if US can wiggle out of allegations. Canada wouldn't have gone to G20 with allegations on sidelines unless they have sufficient FVEY intelligence. That's read between the line of formally supporting Canadian allegations but trying to find a position not throw everything into the shitter. Which they could have during Indian G20 to make this the dominating narrative. The most charitable interpretation right now is FVEY/US supports CA allegations, but still hoping this somehow IN/CA can manage crisis in way it would blow over.

morbidious 3y ago

Why the hell should the Indian government trust Canada's so-called evidence that they are not even willing to reveal? Anyone with two brain cells will call bs on something like this.

dragonwriter 3y ago
The Indian government wouldn't rely on Canada's evidence to determine whether they carried out an assassination, in any case.
- morbidious 3y ago
  Why not? If the evidence can be fact-checked on both sides, then its credibility can be established. All this depends on what kind of evidence Canada has (if at all they do).
  - powersnail 3y ago
    Surely India already knows whether they themselves have carried out the assassination?
    - morbidious 3y ago
      I have replied here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37607765 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37607765
      - powersnail 3y ago
        If India is guilty, it knows that it is guilty. If India is innocent, it knows that it is innocent. In either case, India wouldn't need evidence from anybody else to determine its own innocence or guilt, because surely it knows whether it did what it is being accused of doing.
        kaycey2022 3y ago