UK Woolwich Killing: The Long Feared Attack

[dalsingh1zero1]

Britain has serious issues in terms of identity in the modern globe. It's recent colonial experience has given it a taste of global power that it still (foolishly) dreams of holding on to.

Britain resents its European brothers and sisters but is sycophantic to America, at least the Republican America along 'Anglosphere' lines.

This country is heading for a crisis and the indigenous whites are clinging onto their 'stiff upper lip' ideals to the point of outright denial.

They need to wake up.

 

[spnadmin]

Well, if the US reverts to its pre-WW 1 philosophy of isolationism, that would certainly clear up a big part of the "Republican America along 'Anglosphere lines' problem. Both Republicans and Democrats on extreme party wings would join you in that.

 

[dalsingh1zero1]

Do you struggle with nuances admin?

I can't see how anyone with even a basic grasp of English could misconstrue my words as a call for isolationism. I'm just pushing for a less 'gung-ho' attitude towards war, especially by Britain who has enough problems as it is without jumping into other peoples and creating more for themselves. Go out by all means, just keep the soldiers, guns, tanks etc. at home.

Is that put simply enough for you to comprehend or do you want me to write it in colourful crayons on paper, maybe with cartoon pictures?

 

[spnadmin]

Somehow I managed to make my point without resorting to language like "Is that put simply enough for you to comprehend or do you want me to write it in colourful crayons on paper, maybe with cartoon pictures?"

You did not espouse isolationism. Isolationism is a growing sentiment in the US. The better term is "non-interventionism." I introduced it as an alternative course of action.

And of those who take a non-interventionist position, they would argue that ties to England or any other western or eastern nation should be based on economic interest of the United States alone. Both military expenditures and foreign aid have in their view beggared the US GNP. Just as you have pointed out that military misadventures have weakened the vitality of the British economy. China and Brazil pursue a similar direction.

From a global perspective there would be no US geopolitical orbit. No other nation would be drawn into it because it would simply not be operative. The chance of another "Republican Anglosphere" would vanish.

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Do you struggle with nuances admin?

I can't see how anyone with even a basic grasp of English could misconstrue my words as a call for isolationism. I'm just pushing for a less 'gung-ho' attitude towards war, especially by Britain who has enough problems as it is without jumping into other peoples and creating more for themselves. Go out by all means, just keep the soldiers, guns, tanks etc. at home.

Is that put simply enough for you to comprehend or do you want me to write it in colourful crayons on paper, maybe with cartoon pictures?

Dal Singh ji,

Guru Fateh.

Is it possible to have serious discussion by exchanging different ideas, how contrary they may be to our understanding of the world without flaunting our "stiff upper lip" by demeaning others' views?

Sikhi is a learning process as you may be very well aware of where even disagreements are also part and parcel of it.

Just a thought!

Tejwant Singh

 

[spnadmin]

Thanks Tejwant ji!

If I might add to focus back to the beginning of this thread. If the US were to adopt a non-interventionist policy, would the anger current US policies cause in the developing world and among immigrant groups, in this instance among Muslims, diminish? Out of the shadow of the US, would there be less reason to fear any "long feared attack"s, the topic of the threat starter?

 

[dalsingh1zero1]

Okay. I apologise. I felt my own points were being caricatured and demeaned. And I reacted to it.

The subject we are touching on is a deep one that touches on many subjects and when we talk about the 'Anglosphere' in its current guise we are really talking about white supremacism and neo-colonialism. Same old thing, in a slightly different shirt.

People are too frightened to draw direct parallels between what we see today and what European nations have been doing for some centuries. How can any conscious, intelligent Sikh support that? That brings us nicely to our own issues of our historical ambivalence towards being colonised where some of us on one hand celebrate the experience whilst simultaneously being proud of those Sikhs/Panjabi who died and fought against British imperialism. This is a sign of gross stupidity in my books.

Even outside of the economic arguments I made earlier against Britain's wishful attempts at modern day colonialism. There are strong ethical ones too that should resonate with any conscious Sikh.

So when we see desperate, violent acts that shock us, we need to put it in proper perspective (note that doesn't mean condoning it), and not lapping up the spin of biased media. When a society largely negates their own negative actions through silence and wilfull ignorance, you get exactly these types of wild attempts to break that silence.

Moving to another point. I also see direct parallels between currents events and Aurengzaabs policies in that they stretched his empire's resources to breaking point and alienated enough strongly willed people (amongst whom were some of our ancestors), which eventually led to the weakening and collapse of the Moghul empire.

Strategically talking Britain and walked into a guerilla war, where the enemy can pick and choose its targets and stretch Britain as it runs around trying to plug weak points - all with a rapidly emptying pot!

 

[Harry Haller]

DalSinghji,

The subject we are touching on is a deep one that touches on many subjects and when we talk about the 'Anglosphere' in its current guise we are really talking about white supremacism and neo-colonialism. Same old thing, in a slightly different shirt.

I don't think any particular race has any monopoly on supremacism or colonialism, although I admire your eloquence in your postings, I have to confess to sensing quite a coldness and detachment from the subject in question, that two undisciplined {censored}s who have been brainwashed into believing that they will soon be in heaven, in broad daylight, murdered a british off duty soldier.

People are too frightened to draw direct parallels between what we see today and what European nations have been doing for some centuries. How can any conscious, intelligent Sikh support that? That brings us nicely to our own issues of our historical ambivalence towards being colonised where some of us on one hand celebrate the experience whilst simultaneously being proud of those Sikhs/Panjabi who died and fought against British imperialism. This is a sign of gross stupidity in my books.

Well clearly not you , Sikhism deals with the truth, not the truth today, or yesterday, but the eternal truth. 100 Years ago the world was a very different place, no colonies could have every been established were it not for help on the inside, these people did not just walk over and conquer, they had help from the locals, people sold out, without that there would have been no British imperialism, I was born here, so I do not consider myself Indian, although I do not consider myself British either, I have few Punjabi traits, so I do not consider myself Punjabi either, I am just a Sikh, and in that spirit of just being a Sikh, I feel nothing but sympathy and empathy for the family of the dead soldier. You may ask whether I feel such for all those dying in Afghanistan, no, I do not, I do not know them, they are not personal to me, they do not live in the same country as me, if I felt anything for them, then by rights I should feel something for every rape, every murder, every act right across the globe, but I cannot, maybe I am wrong, but it is what is happening right on my doorstep that concerns me.

So when we see desperate, violent acts that shock us, we need to put it in proper perspective

I am not clinical enough to do that, if you can then maybe you are a better man than I.

Moving to another point. I also see direct parallels between currents events and Aurengzaabs policies in that they stretched his empire's resources to breaking point and alienated enough strongly willed people (amongst whom were some of our ancestors), which eventually led to the weakening and collapse of the Moghul empire.

Strategically talking Britain and walked into a guerilla war, where the enemy can pick and choose its targets and stretch Britain as it runs around trying to plug weak points - all with a rapidly emptying pot!

Most terrorists have some sort of command chain, the IRA had cells with commanders, authority, here what we have is a complete free for all, just do it..., there are no objectives, no plans, just the promise of heaven, as valid as some of your arguments are, at the end of the day we are talking about a British soldier beheaded on our streets, the streets that you and I live on, and I find that deeply unsettling, so unsettling, I cannot even get to the point where I am able to start pointing fingers towards history as to blame and fault.

This post is not intended to be critical of yours, in some ways I admire your cool thinking and level headed approach, I am too emotional to be like that, I just wanted to put my two pence in.

 

[dalsingh1zero1]

I don't think any particular race has any monopoly on supremacism or colonialism, although I admire your eloquence in your postings, I have to confess to sensing quite a coldness and detachment from the subject in question, that two undisciplined {censored}s who have been brainwashed into believing that they will soon be in heaven, in broad daylight, murdered a british off duty soldier.

To my mind that is such a simplistic conception of what happened, totally devoid of even an attempt off wider conceptualisation that I wonder if you've actually made any genuine effort to understand the situation in a broader context. And I'm not saying that to be offensive. I'm genuinely posing the question.

Well clearly not you , Sikhism deals with the truth, not the truth today, or yesterday, but the eternal truth.

Yes and sometimes this truth is difficult to deal with but should be faced nonetheless.

100 Years ago the world was a very different place, no colonies could have every been established were it not for help on the inside, these people did not just walk over and conquer, they had help from the locals, people sold out, without that there would have been no British imperialism,

Yes, and I believe as Sikhs, a people who were at the very heart of the scenario you refer to above, we need to make extra effort to understand how and why this happened to us, in order to possibly try and inoculate ourselves from such a scenario in future and get dragged into God knows what mess.

I feel nothing but sympathy and empathy for the family of the dead soldier. You may ask whether I feel such for all those dying in Afghanistan, no, I do not, I do not know them, they are not personal to me, they do not live in the same country as me, if I felt anything for them, then by rights I should feel something for every rape, every murder, every act right across the globe, but I cannot, maybe I am wrong, but it is what is happening right on my doorstep that concerns me.

Earlier you referred to my own perspective as 'cold', but to me what you are saying above is about as cold as you can get. Essentially you seem to be saying that death and destruction on a large scale somewhere abroad doesn't concern me, but death that takes place in my locality does because it disturbs my equilibrium. In effect - out of sight, out of mind. It is the very definition of myopic.

I am not clinical enough to do that, if you can then maybe you are a better man than I.

It's not about trying to be a better man, its about having a unblinkered perspective of matters for the better of a wider group than solely ones we may identify with or belong to, by choice, birth or accident.

Most terrorists have some sort of command chain, the IRA had cells with commanders, authority, here what we have is a complete free for all, just do it..., there are no objectives, no plans, just the promise of heaven, as valid as some of your arguments are, at the end of the day we are talking about a British soldier beheaded on our streets, the streets that you and I live on, and I find that deeply unsettling, so unsettling, I cannot even get to the point where I am able to start pointing fingers towards history as to blame and fault.

Well, people need to start getting to grips with it, ignoring the root causes only increases the chances of repetitions. At the bottom of this lie causal factors. It is essential we get to grips with them. And when we do, we may well find that yes, some people are to blame for helping foster certain climates which help fuel extremism.

This post is not intended to be critical of yours, in some ways I admire your cool thinking and level headed approach, I am too emotional to be like that, I just wanted to put my two pence in.

I don't mind criticism as long as it's fair. I'm not unemotionally effected by events either despite the subtle suggestions in your post. By your own admissions you seem to be effected by the death of one soldier and pretty much unconcerned about the deaths of larger groups of people including many innocent women and children because the media here chooses not to highlight those consequences of the countries foreign policy here. That is pretty unemotional from where I am standing. But don't take this statement personally because you probably just perfectly reflect the majority perspective of people in this country. That doesn't make it right in my opinion though.

Those people dying abroad as a consequence of British foreign policy have as much right to sympathy and a voice as anyone else in my view. It's just such a shame that this important point has only been brought into focus and mainstream discussion after nasty, violent acts like we have witnessed. That itself is saying a lot about the power and nature of negation through silence. Maybe people need to honestly inquire of themselves - 'have I been a part of this negation, even if it was unintentional?'

I'd argue a conscious Sikh should do that.

 

[dalsingh1zero1]

Something worth reading in relation to the discussion above:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/26/iraqis-cant-turn-backs-on-deadly-legacy

 

[spnadmin]

to know

To my mind that is such a simplistic conception of what happened, totally devoid of even an attempt off wider conceptualisation that I wonder if you've actually made any genuine effort to understand the situation in a broader context. And I'm not saying that to be offensive. I'm genuinely posing the question.

I think here you have just stopped short of suggesting that respected member harry haller ji also requires a coloring book to comprehend the issues in an intellectually able way. You have not stopped short of stating he has not made an effort. Is that not a bit presumptuous? How do you know whether or not he has considered many different arguments, but chooses instead to focus on the immediate killing itself? And choses to share his personal reactions to it? You don't know.

Yes and sometimes this truth is difficult to deal with but should be faced nonetheless.

There are many other "difficult to deal with truths" in the Woolwich killing, as well as many other explanations for it. Aren't you presuming once again that themes you bring forward are the only difficult truths?

Yes, and I believe as Sikhs, a people who were at the very heart of the scenario you refer to above, we need to make extra effort to understand how and why this happened to us, in order to possibly try and inoculate ourselves from such a scenario in future and get dragged into God knows what mess.

That does not square. Sikhs who for centuries have been at the many hearts of many tragic scenarios don't "inoculate" themselves. Sikhs engage. Sikhs may not engage in consensus with other Sikhs, but Sikhs engage. Sikhs have understood historically that dissent is valuable to democracy.

Earlier you referred to my own perspective as 'cold', but to me what you are saying above is about as cold as you can get. Essentially you seem to be saying that death and destruction on a large scale somewhere abroad doesn't concern me, but death that takes place in my locality does because it disturbs my equilibrium. In effect - out of sight, out of mind. It is the very definition of myopic.

I can only repeat my earlier remark. You seem to presume a lot about the inner workings of one individual mind. Is harry haller ji suposed now to come back with "Oh no! You are wrong! I do care about death and destruction on a large scale somewhere around the word." As if death and destruction in his own locality were something to be defensive about?

It's not about trying to be a better man, its about having a unblinkered perspective of matters for the better of a wider group than solely ones we may identify with or belong to, by choice, birth or accident.

Will say that an unblinkered perspective of matters for the better of a wider group in no way trumps a simply unblinkered perspective. How does one individual decide that he or she speaks "for the better" of a "wider group?" Which wider group? What does the betterment look like? Numerous spokesmen for Islam, for Woolwich, for the UK Government, for Muslims in Woolwich, for the socially conscious and unconscious have taken opportunity to speak and continue to do so. I cannot imagine they decided they would speak for the worse. They surely believe they are speaking "for the betterment" as they define "betterment." How do you or any one else know you have your finger on the pulse of "the better?" Why can you not simply say you are speaking for yourself?


Well, people need to start getting to grips with it, ignoring the root causes only increases the chances of repetitions. At the bottom of this lie causal factors. It is essential we get to grips with them. And when we do, we may well find that yes, some people are to blame for helping foster certain climates which help fuel extremism.

Not a new thought, nor a recent discovery.

I don't mind criticism as long as it's fair. I'm not unemotionally effected by events either despite the subtle suggestions in your post. By your own admissions you seem to be effected by the death of one soldier and pretty much unconcerned about the deaths of larger groups of people including many innocent women and children because the media here chooses not to highlight those consequences of the countries foreign policy here. That is pretty unemotional from where I am standing. But don't take this statement personally because you probably just perfectly reflect the majority perspective of people in this country. That doesn't make it right in my opinion though.

Won't repeat myself.

Those people dying abroad as a consequence of British foreign policy have as much right to sympathy and a voice as anyone else in my view. It's just such a shame that this important point has only been brought into focus and mainstream discussion after nasty, violent acts like we have witnessed. That itself is saying a lot about the power and nature of negation through silence. Maybe people need to honestly inquire of themselves - 'have I been a part of this negation, even if it was unintentional?'

More than an overstatement. There have been numerous examples of sectors of public opinion asking the question "Where have we gone wrong?" in the wake of terrorist actions. 9/11 was no exception. Horrific as that was, many people "of conscience' saw fit to ask how everyone else was in denial and had contributed to the nasty, violent act by wearing blinkers.

I'd argue a conscious Sikh should do that.

A few days ago a lone soldier was hit by a car, sliced with a machete, and shot. The perpetrators then stood about making speeches and asking by-standers to record the event on their cell phones. One of the broad questions one could ask that transcends the local nature of the killing is how some people who have been punished in a way by political storms do this, yet others do not. How many Muslims live in the UK? What is the percentage of these 2?

Something tells me that the people of the UK will be able to handle this. Some will be blinkered; many will not. They will be able to balance both their disgust for the actions of 2 individuals, and the forthcoming debates. Something tells me that broad policy debates will ensue related to preventing terrorism, restrictions on free speech and the Internet, prevention strategies, the preparedness of intelligence forces, the size of a budget needed to curb and prevent, and the too-weak/too-forceful police response. They have so far managed that in spite of weekly bomb threats just 3 or 4 years back, subway terrorism, losses of sons and daughters in Afghanistan, and much more. Something tells me that many in the UK will continue to find the actions of the EDL unacceptable in a free society. Something tells me that the Muslim community will continue with the work of building community with non-Muslims. Something also tells me that all parties in the dialog will not be in total agreement at the end of the day. I suspect that Sikhs too will not always agree about the questions to ask nor agree on the "acceptable" answers. Disagreement will not make some Sikhs more ''conscious" than others.

 

[dalsingh1zero1]

Cop out by all means.

 

[Harry Haller]

Cop out by all means.

uhm sorry, the dogs want to go out, will reply when I get back

 

[dalsingh1zero1]

I guess this is a perennial discussion about the powerless and powerful. The actors may change but the game will remain the same.

Simply put, I think the abuse of power almost inevitably leads to some over reaction on part of some members the group on the receiving end.

Sure, we can focus on the desperate, violent consequence but lets not completely delude ourselves about the reality of such acts being a part of a much bigger picture, that might require just a little more thought to evaluate, than short term emotional responses allow.

I think I've made my points about as clearly as I can.

I for one am praying for restraint from the powerful and a little more humanity and ethics from those who have large {censored}nals, armies and weaponry available at their disposal.

Fundamentalism will never completely go away, but we can try to limit its growth.

 

[spnadmin]

dalsingh1zero1 ji

Are you talking about powerful nations like China, the US, Britain, France, Germany, Pakistan, India (forgive me if I left anyone out)? Or are you talking about SPN?

 

[spnadmin]

The powerful, the powerless and the abuse of power. I highly recommend this video taken in the midst of a peaceful protest against fraudulent election practices. Taken in Malaysia where powerful Muslims abuse powerless Muslims, along with Hindus, Sikhs and Asian ethnic minorities.

Caution: disturbing images.
Heart attack? Injuries show otherwise - YouTube

 

[dalsingh1zero1]

dalsingh1zero1 ji

Are you talking about powerful nations like China, the US, Britain, France, Germany, Pakistan, India (forgive me if I left anyone out)? Or are you talking about SPN?

?????

Yes I'm talking about powerful nations, governments - it's easy to abuse power.

I think it was Bhai Nand Lal who said words to the effect of 'I bow to the one with power who shows restraint' presumably a reference to dasmesh pita.

I think here you have just stopped short of suggesting that respected member harry haller ji also requires a coloring book to comprehend the issues in an intellectually able way. You have not stopped short of stating he has not made an effort. Is that not a bit presumptuous? How do you know whether or not he has considered many different arguments, but chooses instead to focus on the immediate killing itself? And choses to share his personal reactions to it? You don't know.

No, I don't know, but you know what admin. Harry seems pretty capable of answering for himself. So maybe back off a little?

You're not the only ones who feel strong emotions about this issue and I'm bringing what I believe to be important considerations to the debate - and NO - I don't believe my own perspective is the only one worth airing, but I'll argue my points vehemently none the less.

I don't presume to know people's inner minds but I do try and fathom points of views based on statements people make - which only seems natural to me. If there is any discord, I like to think that people will make the effort to clarify.

Anyway I don't think I could put my own point across more simply and clearly.

Ultimately this was more of a saddened, sigh about current events in this country and why I feel that governmental decisions have brought about the current, depressing situation. I'm not immune to what goes on. Maybe I just 'zoomed out' a lot more than harry in reaction to current events.

What we all share is sadness at current events, where we differ is our understanding of causal factors. I just see a direct link to what I believe to be foolish, haphazard foreign policy decisions.

 

[spnadmin]

Harry did not seem to mind. But I have to busy myself now with Rozana Spokesman and Sikh Spokesman uploads so won't be around anyway.

 

[Harry Haller]

To my mind that is such a simplistic conception of what happened, totally devoid of even an attempt off wider conceptualisation that I wonder if you've actually made any genuine effort to understand the situation in a broader context. And I'm not saying that to be offensive. I'm genuinely posing the question.

I do understand, and I also see your point of view, however, with respect, I think you are confusing a criminal act as an act of war. If every legitimite Islamic organisation in the UK has already denounced this as an anti Islamic action, I fail to see how you have any authority to suggest otherwise.

Yes, and I believe as Sikhs, a people who were at the very heart of the scenario you refer to above, we need to make extra effort to understand how and why this happened to us, in order to possibly try and inoculate ourselves from such a scenario in future and get dragged into God knows what mess.

I fail to see how we are involved, other than as innocent bystanders, but that could apply to many other cultures and religions, not just Sikhs.

Earlier you referred to my own perspective as 'cold', but to me what you are saying above is about as cold as you can get. Essentially you seem to be saying that death and destruction on a large scale somewhere abroad doesn't concern me, but death that takes place in my locality does because it disturbs my equilibrium. In effect - out of sight, out of mind. It is the very definition of myopic.

I guess I am myopic then, yesterday one of my puppies nearly died, that concerned me more than anything for most of the day, more than this, more than two onsite jobs I was supposed to do, more than opening my shop, and more than filling up with petrol, (yes, I ran out), your attitude reminds a bit of those that set up direct debits with every international charity going, yet forget about the homeless man at the end of the street. I put my hands up, I am myopic and proud of it. I have no control over foreign policy, I cannot change the past, I can only deal with what I see, I can feed the man at the end of the street, thats just me, you have valid points, the world needs people like you to ask these questions and make these points, its just not me...

It's not about trying to be a better man, its about having a unblinkered perspective of matters for the better of a wider group than solely ones we may identify with or belong to, by choice, birth or accident

In fact, I think I will make him a sandwich, but back to your point, other than talking about it, what do you suggest we do?

Well, people need to start getting to grips with it, ignoring the root causes only increases the chances of repetitions. At the bottom of this lie causal factors. It is essential we get to grips with them. And when we do, we may well find that yes, some people are to blame for helping foster certain climates which help fuel extremism.

Thr group that carried out this act intend to introduce Sharia law into the UK, I am not sure they need any provocation or encouragement, personally, I believe there is nothing we can do to decrease the chance of repetitions, in any case, the words horse, gate and bolted come to mind.

I don't mind criticism as long as it's fair. I'm not unemotionally effected by events either despite the subtle suggestions in your post. By your own admissions you seem to be effected by the death of one soldier and pretty much unconcerned about the deaths of larger groups of people including many innocent women and children because the media here chooses not to highlight those consequences of the countries foreign policy here. That is pretty unemotional from where I am standing. But don't take this statement personally because you probably just perfectly reflect the majority perspective of people in this country. That doesn't make it right in my opinion though.

Ok, lets get down to brass tacks, I do not believe that foreign policy contributed to this criminal act, you do.I think this criminal act was prompted by a desire to turn the UK into an Islamic state

Those people dying abroad as a consequence of British foreign policy have as much right to sympathy and a voice as anyone else in my view. It's just such a shame that this important point has only been brought into focus and mainstream discussion after nasty, violent acts like we have witnessed. That itself is saying a lot about the power and nature of negation through silence. Maybe people need to honestly inquire of themselves - 'have I been a part of this negation, even if it was unintentional?'

I'd argue a conscious Sikh should do that

.

I think you insult every man, woman and child that has died as a result of British foreign policy by suggesting that these criminals speak for them.

In fact these criminals have taken the fun out of fundamentalism.

Can I please now go back to my drawing books, there is an elephant I really like the look of, I am going to call him Percy.

 

[dalsingh1zero1]

Go back to your colouring books. I think I need to do the same myself. At least you still have your sense of humour. lol

I don't think these people speak for the innocents that have been killed as a direct or indirect result of foreign policy decisions.

But the point that these people (the innocent victims) get generally ignored and are (in my opinion purposefully) kept out of our head-spaces is still pertinent. That injustice helps fuel what we saw earlier this week.

If we live in society that makes noise about its fairness and compassion, we shouldn't have to wait until decapitations take place on our streets to discuss those whose voices have been negated.

Plus just to clarify, when I said the statement you responded to with:

I fail to see how we are involved, other than as innocent bystanders, but that could apply to many other cultures and religions, not just Sikhs.

I'd zoomed out again and was implicitly referring to Sikh support for more dubious imperial projects of the past, a good example being the Opium wars in China (look it up if you need to). Just a side thought concerning avoiding scenarios like that again.


Anyway, let's end on something positive:

You are the One True Lord and Master of all the other beings, of so many worlds. ||3||

Nanak seeks the company of the lowest of the low class, the very lowest of the low. Why should he try to compete with the great?

In that place where the lowly are cared for-there, the Blessings of Your Glance of Grace rain down. ||4||3||