We don’t have a presidential plane, cuz we don’t have a president. Of course, neither do y’all.
Anyway, accusations that the Liberal Party of Canada are funded by drug money strike me as mild accusations, not wild accusations. In general, Canada is probably a leading center for money laundering, BC casinos have been investigated for that in recent years. There is a huge gang presence in all larger Canadian cities and no real appearance of concern about it from any level of government. Canadians are generally speaking unarmed outside of hunting season usage, and there are very few gun crimes except for those involving gang on gang violence. In that narrow segment the level of violence is considerable, not quite up to mexican levels, but otherwise there is probably little threat of guns being used for other forms of crime.
Personally I would imagine India did send in a team to end the agitation of the Khalistan advocate, as India’s stated policy is to disrupt any movement towards Sikh independence; whether true or false, the Indian government must have had strong belief that their target was effectively organizing support and possibly engaged in terrorist activity although it’s easy enough to say support itself is terrorist activity. As for Trudeau’s contention that India is interfering in “Canadian values,” I don’t know anybody who would fully agree that support for independence of Khalistan is a “Canadian value,” it’s probably not on anyone’s radar at all unless they are of the Sikh religion, and as to whether or not it’s lawful conduct, that would depend on exactly what activities were going on.
I would not expect any foreign government to turn a blind eye to support of domestic turmoil of any kind, and it was probably a lapse of due diligence by our intel services that led to the escalation of this situation to the point that India felt a need to take this on-paper illegal activity violating sovereignty. Allowing the Sikh leader to provoke the response is in a way also a violation of India’s sovereignty. Even if it’s a cause people could widely support such as South Sudan’s freedom from Sudan, nobody should expect a lack of response if movements were being organized from our country. I suppose India is bound to deny involvement, but it’s rather unlikely that anyone else felt any need to assassinate the person in question, unless it would be a Canadian of non-Sikh Indian background who felt strongly about it, and in which case, acting entirely alone or with some support from New Delhi?
America was tolerating NORAID operating on US soil raising money for the provos for years until 9-11 suddenly reminded Americans that terrorism isnt cool. And that was a group waging war on a supposed ally. Perhaps Britain should have send the Increment to cobertly slot NORAID leaders and provos that the US refused to deport and ignored all that gay rule of law shit?
If it really wanted to eliminate terrorists in Canada, it would use local gangs.
Imho, the killing of this terrorist is an internecine fight between factions of Khalistanis. There was another Khalistani terrorist liquidated last week in Canada. Also a gang killing. The role of Indian officials would be limited to encourage the factions to turn on each other.