Jump to content

Is Trudeau supporting an organization which has a history of links to terrorism?


blackbird

Recommended Posts

This article describes how the Khalistan movement has been a militant, violent organization In India. It has a history of violent confrontation with the India security service and many lives have been lost. Yet this photo shows Trudeau seems to support this organization.  How can this be possible in Canada which has designated some organizations as terrorists?

Why India fears the Khalistan movement and how Canada became embroiled in diplomatic spat over killing of Sikh separatist (theconversation.com)

 

Trudeau with kirpan.jpg

Edited by blackbird
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • blackbird changed the title to Is Trudeau supporting an organization which has a history of links to terrorism?
1 hour ago, blackbird said:

Trudeau seems to support this organization.

Utter bullshit, they've (Babar Khalsa?) been on a terrorist list in Canada for decades.
And your anti-Trudeau derangement seems to exceed your concern over a Canadian murdered on Canadian soil possibly by foreign agents.

Have you no shame at all?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, herbie said:

Utter bullshit, they've (Babar Khalsa?) been on a terrorist list in Canada for decades.
And your anti-Trudeau derangement seems to exceed your concern over a Canadian murdered on Canadian soil possibly by foreign agents.

Have you no shame at all?

quote

Trudeau’s party is believed to lend passive support to the Khalistanis who have been using Canada as a strong base for decades now.

The Canadian PM has repeatedly failed to take into account the sensitivities in India regarding support to Sikh terror groups in Canada.   unquote

In a first under Justin Trudeau, Canada lists Khalistani extremism as threat | World News - The Indian Express

Do you think this article is true?  Do you think Liberals support Kalistanis?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There’s a series of distinctions to be drawn here. I’ll just take two obvious ones. Firstly, advocating for an independent Sikh homeland should not be a crime in and of itself. We don’t arrest those who think Quebec should be a country, do we? Only those Sikhs who actively pursue violence should be persons of interest to the police. Secondly, no foreign country has the right to take the law into its hands here in Canada. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If India wanted the guy there's a process of extradition to use.

If you really think countries have the right to go into sovereign nations and murder people they don't like, you've lost as much moral standing as the USA has. They do it just because they can and no one can do anything about it.

Hell, even when someone comes in and cuts someone up to pieces inside the US there's just a minor protest as they'd do it too.

But grasping desperately at any straw that could possibly blacken Trudeau, we don't need your opinion. We have the National Post for that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Aristides said:

We don't arrest Alberta separatists either.

It's a completely different matter.

1) Alberta wouldn't be separating to create a "Land of the Pure" 2) They were separate to begin with and it's completely legal, based on our constitution, for them to separate. 

India already endured 1 partitioning and it cost roughly 10M lives. It's insanity to take the topic of separation lightly, especially when militants are leading the charge. 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

It's a completely different matter.

1) Alberta wouldn't be separating to create a "Land of the Pure" 2) They were separate to begin with and it's completely legal, based on our constitution, for them to separate. 

India already endured 1 partitioning and it cost roughly 10M lives. It's insanity to take the topic of separation lightly, especially when militants are leading the charge. 

Alberta was just a district of the Northwest Territories before it joined Confederation. Same as Alaska or Hawaii before they became states. 

The Sikh Empire was independent of the rest of India before it was conquered by the Brits in the 1840's

Sikhs did not get a choice when they were made part of present day India. One of the many failures in the British government's  rush to get out of India.

Edited by Aristides
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Aristides said:

Alberta was just a district of the Northwest Territories before it joined Confederation. Same as Alaska or Hawaii before they became states. 

That doesn't affect their ability to separate.

Quote

Sikhs did not get a choice when they were made part of present day India. One of the many failures in the British government's  rush to get out of India.

You're ignoring the elephant in the room. 

India has already endured 1 partitioning. Do you understand that? Do you understand how much violence and death it caused? I think you don't.

Quote

The townspeople were ushered out to a playground, where the previous day’s captives had been doused with oil and burned alive. Corpses lay strewn across the streets. “One dead body here, one dead body there. All people we know,” Kumari said. “There’s Khyaliram, there’s Baleddiram.”

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia-pacific/70-years-later-survivors-recall-the-horrors-of-india-pakistan-partition/2017/08/14/3b8c58e4-7de9-11e7-9026-4a0a64977c92_story.html

That article says up to 2M dead, I thought it was more. Regardless, that's a lot of dead people. It's like killing everyone in a stadium of 100,000 people twenty times.

No one should be talking about partitioning India without first talking extensively about how to do so without bloodshed.

Obviously the people who are already engaging in bloodshed aren't the ones to do it.

I used to have a link to a video of Jagmeet Singh sitting with other Khalistani separatists/terrorists, and one of the men in the photo reputedly said [paraphrasing] "that he was aware that it couldn't be done without bloodshed." It was from a National Post article, but the link to the video stopped working so I got rid of the link.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/as-jagmeet-singh-condemns-terrorism-second-video-shows-him-speaking-alongside-sikh-separatist

I'm almost 100% sure this is the article I referenced in my earlier post. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was Laurier who decided to split the territory into two separate provinces, Alberta and Saskatchewan in 1905.

India was a construct of the British, there were still several hundred princely states in India which they promised to respect when they became independent. A promise the went back on as soon as they were independent. There was also no such thing as Pakistan before the British made it part of India.

Edited by Aristides
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

They were separate to begin with and it's completely legal, based on our constitution, for them to separate. 

No it isn't - where in the constitution does it say that?  It absolutely is not,

It is generally recognized both in canada and internationally however that if a population wishes to seperate then (with caveates) they should be allowed to do so - but the very idea was a major constitutional crisis for canada when the first referendums came up in quebec.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

9mm bullets are way cheaper than extradition processes, and way more certain. 

Not when the price is our sovereignty - which you don't seem to give much value to .

I guess that whole rule of law thing is pretty cheap for you as well.  How many died over that back in the day?

I think we paid a high price for our freedoms.  You seem to feel that they aren't worth anything more than the cost of a bullet.  It's sad what our country has come to. No wonder Canadians were fine forcing people to get the jab - no one believes that the country or its rights are worth anything.

1 minute ago, August1991 said:

We Canadians are federalists.

We get along. 

 

Don't you live in Quebec?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Aristides said:

We don't arrest Alberta separatists either.

How many terrorist acts have Albertans committed to try to force separatism? How many airplanes did they take down?

It was Sikh terrorists who blew up the Air India jet over Scotland. Their mastermind is hailed as a hero by Sikhs in Canada. They even have posters of the guy on the wall in their temple.

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/why-a-journalists-question-to-jagmeet-singh-about-an-air-india-bombing-made-them-both-targets-of-criticism/wcm/7962f76d-01c7-40a4-918d-ea8f5cefb166/amp/

The article asks-

"Is it appropriate for Sikh temples in Canada to display posters hailing the alleged architect of the 1985 Air India bombing as a martyr?"

And Jagmeet Singh had no problem supporting this "hero". That is Canada's relationship with the Sikhs.

Edited by OftenWrong
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Aristides said:

No apologist for terrorism here but do you support political assassinations by foreign powers on Canadian soil? 

I am not on trial, and I did not ask you to apologize. However your comparison of Sikh terrorists with Alberta underscores your complete ignorance in the matter. 

;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Firstly, advocating for an independent Sikh homeland should not be a crime in and of itself.

 It is wrong when almost all the Sikh immigrants from India are doing it within Canada.  They are demanding it as a core belief of their religion.   This is organized interference in another country's sovereignty. This is not a part of being a good  Canadian citizen.  This makes Canada a part of the problem as India sees it.  Of course liberals see it as just a part of their democratic rights or freedoms, but freedom is not unlimited.  There are responsibilities on everyone to maintain peace, order, and that includes respecting the sovereignty of other countries and their internal governance.  Canada demands that other countries do not interfere with Canadian democracy, elections, and sovereignty.  Canada's government and all citizens must likewise respect other countries sovereignty including India.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, blackbird said:

 It is wrong when almost all the Sikh immigrants from India are doing it within Canada.  They are demanding it as a core belief of their religion.   This is organized interference in another country's sovereignty. This is not a part of being a good  Canadian citizen.  This makes Canada a part of the problem as India sees it.  Of course liberals see it as just a part of their democratic rights or freedoms, but freedom is not unlimited.  There are responsibilities on everyone to maintain peace, order, and that includes respecting the sovereignty of other countries and their internal governance.  Canada demands that other countries do not interfere with Canadian democracy, elections, and sovereignty.  Canada's government and all citizens must likewise respect other countries sovereignty including India.

 

No. It should not be an offence in Canada, India or Timbuktu to advocate for new countries. If a country can’t tolerate that then it’s not a real democracy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

"Opinion".  :rolleyes:

BTW just because I point out the problems with Sikh terrorism, and that Sikhs killed hundreds of Canadians on that flight, does not equate to liking Modi. Just because I don't say it, doesn't mean I approve. I simply don't feel compelled to virtue signal so as to show I'm with the group.

Screw ya's all, imo. ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

It's a completely different matter.

1) Alberta wouldn't be separating to create a "Land of the Pure"

Sure about that? Some crazy dudes out there.

An independent Punjab would be much richer than India as a whole. It’s the bread basket of the country.

 

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

2) They were separate to begin with and it's completely legal, based on our constitution, for them to separate. 
 

Modern India was carved out of British India, itself an entirely artificial and recent construct imposed by foreign invaders. It has c.120 languages and 1.4 billion people, kinda like Europe many times over. All that diversity doesn’t necessarily belong together. 

 

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

India already endured 1 partitioning and it cost roughly 10M lives. It's insanity to take the topic of separation lightly, especially when militants are leading the charge. 

It’s insanity to take it lightly anywhere but all countries come and go. They are artificial constructs created for the welfare and convenience of their inhabitants. Only tyrants and their ilk think there’s something eternal and inherently sacred about borders. 

Edited by SpankyMcFarland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The remnants of the aircraft fell into the sea approximately 190 kilometres (120 miles) off the coast of Ireland, killing all 329 people aboard, including 268 Canadian citizens, 27 British citizens, and 24 Indian citizens.[3] The bombing of Air India Flight 182 is the worst terrorist attack in Canadian history"

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

Oh well hey. Trudeau shrugs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,745
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    historyradio.org
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • User went up a rank
      Experienced
    • exPS went up a rank
      Contributor
    • DUI_Offender earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • exPS went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Fluffypants went up a rank
      Rising Star
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...