News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:'The old order is not coming back,' Carney says in provoc... by gruez on Tuesday January 20, 2026 @11:03PM (#46700958)
>It basically meant Trudeau could level allegations, not provide any evidence, and strut as if he as won.

Canada's case was well corroborated by US and UK intelligence. India's claims of Mr Nijjar of being a terrorist was not.

>But nothing in the evidence India presented, the people say, met the standard for criminal charges in Canada, let alone for extradition. To press their case, officials in New Delhi frequently sent clippings from Indian media, which was rife with lurid stories about Nijjar’s alleged involvement in violence, instead of providing what the process required: hard evidence, obtained without coercion, that would stand up in a Western courtroom. When that didn’t work, the people say, the Indians suggested that Canadian police find a way to concoct the necessary evidence.

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2025-india-sikh-separatis...

Re:'The old order is not coming back,' Carney says in provoc... by qart on Tuesday January 20, 2026 @11:54PM (#46701291)
> India's claims of Mr Nijjar of being a terrorist was not.

But I'm not talking about this claim. I'm talking about the fact that Trudeau accused the Indian government being responsible for his murder. The onus was always on the Canadian government to prove it.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-indian-government-n...

Re:'The old order is not coming back,' Carney says in provoc... by gruez on Wednesday January 21, 2026 @09:34AM (#46706268)
So bringing up an off topic comment about the Canadian government is fair game, but bring up a rebuttal from the Indian government is not?
Re:'The old order is not coming back,' Carney says in provoc... by qart on Wednesday January 21, 2026 @11:26AM (#46707874)
Calling out hypocrisy is fair game. What rebuttal? Why even talk about irrelevant "clippings"? On whom is the onus of providing evidence?