UPDATED: Whither a Voice: Sikhs and Palestine
While emotions often run high on this issue, an email from a friend struck me enough to think about and create a forum for the issue.
As current estimates has over 850 Palestinian and 13 Israeli deaths, the tragedy in Gaza will be continued with Israeli strikes. Throughout the world, we have seen breath-taking numbers of individuals take to the streets (Professor Juan Cole of Informed Comment provides a cogent argument that street protests are overall useless and believes better lobbying for the future of the struggle) denouncing and calling for an end to the current strikes.
During the summer, on the eve of the Olympic Games, a fellow Langa(w)riter asked about the question of the shaheed (the witness) in the case of injustice and abuse.
While there will be varied Sikh perspectives on the issue of the current violence (often according to age, but not always) certain Sikh groups have taken an active stand.
The Canadian-based Sikh Activist Network worked to make sure a Sikh attendance would be seen at various protests. Certain facebook groups urging Sikhs to recognize the Palestine state have popped up. Another website shows a group of Sikhs that visited the Palestinian territories and Israeli state on a peace mission.
I wonder about other Sikhs’ participation on this particular issue (low, I would assume) and thoughts on institutional Sikh voices/individual Sikh voices responses and engagement with non-Sikh issues. How do we define those issues that call for a shaheed?
————————————————————-
No sooner had I asked these questions and posted this blog, when I received an email from a friend.
If interested, please sign on to this online note of solidarity called “Sikh Solidarity with Palestine” that is circulating through Facebook. I reproduce it verbatim below.
Sikh Solidarity with Palestine
January 12, 2009
Kal kaati raaje kaasaa-ee dharma pankh kar udriaa.
Koorh amaavas sach chandramaa deesai naahee kah charhiaa.This age is a knife, kings are butchers; justice hath taken wings and fled.
In this completely dark night of falsehood the truth is never seen to rise.– Guru Nanak Sahib, Sri Guru Granth Sahib, p. 145
After two weeks of relentless attacks and an ongoing siege, the results are sobering: over 880 people dead, 30% of whom are children, and more than 4000 injured; hospitals, schools, universities, local markets, streets, homes and communities crushed to rubble; a blockade on humanitarian relief including food and life-saving medical supplies; a ban on foreign journalists and media entering the area; and a sealed border rendering 1.5 million people imprisoned within the boundaries of a siege. Hundreds of thousands of lives are being destroyed as they are marked dispensable for one reason only: they are Palestinian. The death toll is rising, and Israel has hinted to no end in sight as it continues to expand its offensive by air, land, and sea. The above words of Guru Nanak Sahib, the first Guru and founder of the Sikh faith, ring painfully true today, 500 years after he wrote them.
According to Sikhi, all human lives are equal and should be cherished. Right now in Gaza, the lives of an entire people are being deemed worthless. We mourn the recent loss of over 880 Palestinian lives taken by the Israeli military. We also mourn the loss of the 9 Israeli lives taken by Hamas rockets.
We are Sikhs who stand against the brutality of Israeli occupation and the ongoing siege, blockade, and massacre of Gaza. Now more than ever, we call on our Sikh sisters and brothers to think about what our faith and our Sikh identity really means. Why did Guru Nanak Sahib seek to abolish the caste system in South Asia? Why did Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib sacrifice his life for the sake of others’ (non-Sikhs) right to freely practice their religion and live free of persecution? Why did Guru Gobind Singh, our tenth Guru, give birth to the Khalsa – an armed body of full-time revolutionaries – in 1699?
Because for Sikhs, fighting against all forms of tyranny and oppression is a spiritual obligation.
We are inspired by this Sikh tradition of fighting not only for our own rights and our own sovereignty as Sikhs, but for the freedom and rights of all people – sarbat da bhala. Historically, Sikhs have known all too well what state repression and violent hatred look like. Sikhs too, like Palestinians, have faced campaigns of ethnic cleansing by emperors and prime ministers, dictators and elected leaders. Without a doubt, we have struggled and we must continue to struggle for our right to exist and our right to be Sikhs. But we must bring to the forefront our responsibility to fight for the liberation and freedom of all people. When we end ardas with, “Nanak naam chardi kala, tere bane sarbat da bhala,” we must pay attention to the power and weight of these words, take them to heart, and put the concept of sarbat da bhala into practice.
What that means for us now, as Sikhs and as people of conscience, is to stand in solidarity with the people of Gaza, the Palestinians around the world fighting for their right to return home, and the thousands of Jewish and Israeli activists calling for an immediate end to the siege and an end to Israeli apartheid. Together, we must all demand peace and justice.
We encourage all Sikhs to learn more about what is going on in Gaza and about the history of Israeli occupation of Palestine. We encourage you to organize discussions about this issue amongst your sangat in and outside of the gurdwara, in your Sikh Student Associations, and in your families. Below are a few articles and resources that provide perspectives usually left out of the mainstream media:
http://electronicintifada.net
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/08/opinion/08khalidi.html
http://gazasiege.org
http://ajjp.org
http://stopthewall.orgMost importantly, we encourage you to take action. Get together with others in your community, Sikhs and non-Sikhs alike, and attend a local demonstration against the siege of Gaza. Make a donation to send medical supplies and other humanitarian relief to Gaza (http://www.freegaza.org; http://www.mecaforpeace.org). For those in the United States, call on the Obama administration to make his promise of “change” a reality by stopping the spending of U.S. tax dollars on bombs that kill Palestinians. For those in Canada, call on Harper to condemn Israel’s crimes against humanity and demand an immediate stop to the siege. Pressure both governments to urgently support the global movement for boycott, divestment, and sanctions against Israel—a strategy that helped to end apartheid in South Africa 15 years ago (http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/01/09-0).
Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh!
To sign on to this statement, send an email with your name and city to: sikhsolidarity@gmail.com.
203 Responses to “UPDATED: Whither a Voice: Sikhs and Palestine”
sizzle, it is an established fact that the ceasefire was actually broken by Israel, even CNN of all places reported this. I will happily provide the link if you insist that I do so.
sizzle, it is an established fact that the ceasefire was actually broken by Israel, even CNN of all places reported this. I will happily provide the link if you insist that I do so.
No Sizzle, you can’t seem to differentiate between vile hate-filled rhetoric and F-16s dropping bombs on a caged urban population.
I mean “both are wrong. neither is right. but one [is so utterly inhumane and destructive], irrespective of the history that may have inspired it, is absolutely worse than the other.”
As Amneezy mentioned, it was the Israeli Government that abrogated the ceasefire by not allowing food and humanitarian aid into Gaza that was a condition of the ceasefire. The Israeli Government has pretty much even stated that the present round of violence had more to do with the carte blanche given to it by the outgoing Bush administration than HAMAS rockets.
No Sizzle, you can't seem to differentiate between vile hate-filled rhetoric and F-16s dropping bombs on a caged urban population.
I mean "both are wrong. neither is right. but one [is so utterly inhumane and destructive], irrespective of the history that may have inspired it, is absolutely worse than the other."
As Amneezy mentioned, it was the Israeli Government that abrogated the ceasefire by not allowing food and humanitarian aid into Gaza that was a condition of the ceasefire. The Israeli Government has pretty much even stated that the present round of violence had more to do with the carte blanche given to it by the outgoing Bush administration than HAMAS rockets.
No Sizzle, you can’t seem to differentiate between vile hate-filled rhetoric and F-16s dropping bombs on a caged urban population.
I mean “both are wrong. neither is right. but one [is so utterly inhumane and destructive], irrespective of the history that may have inspired it, is absolutely worse than the other.”
As Amneezy mentioned, it was the Israeli Government that abrogated the ceasefire by not allowing food and humanitarian aid into Gaza that was a condition of the ceasefire. The Israeli Government has pretty much even stated that the present round of violence had more to do with the carte blanche given to it by the outgoing Bush administration than HAMAS rockets.
and now you conflate tacit positions (or not so tacit on Hamas' part) and military action to make your emotional point.
but i'm glad that you at the very least acknowledged the existence of "vile, hate filled rhetoric." my point has come full circle. we are free to take sides in this conflict, and reasonable people can disagree. but we shouldn't support either side in the name of sikhi, nor parallel our history and philosophy here because no side is deserving of it, including the side who may be oppressed, but whose political power is fueled and emboldened by "vile, hate filled rhetoric" rooted in a sense of ethnic and religious superiority.
and now you conflate tacit positions (or not so tacit on Hamas’ part) and military action to make your emotional point.
but i’m glad that you at the very least acknowledged the existence of “vile, hate filled rhetoric.” my point has come full circle. we are free to take sides in this conflict, and reasonable people can disagree. but we shouldn’t support either side in the name of sikhi, nor parallel our history and philosophy here because no side is deserving of it, including the side who may be oppressed, but whose political power is fueled and emboldened by “vile, hate filled rhetoric” rooted in a sense of ethnic and religious superiority.
and now you conflate tacit positions (or not so tacit on Hamas’ part) and military action to make your emotional point.
but i’m glad that you at the very least acknowledged the existence of “vile, hate filled rhetoric.” my point has come full circle. we are free to take sides in this conflict, and reasonable people can disagree. but we shouldn’t support either side in the name of sikhi, nor parallel our history and philosophy here because no side is deserving of it, including the side who may be oppressed, but whose political power is fueled and emboldened by “vile, hate filled rhetoric” rooted in a sense of ethnic and religious superiority.
To Under stand the whole issue you must read how antisemetism has been practised before we discuss the currant crisis in GAZA.
Antisemitism ( also sometimes known as Judeophobia) is prejudice against or hostility toward Jews.
Christianity and antisemitism
5.1 New Testament and antisemitism
5.2 Early Christianity
5.3 Medieval and Renaissance Europe
5.4 19th and 20th century
5.5 Accusations of deicide
Islam and antisemitism
6.1 Jews in Islamic texts
6.2 Differences with Christianity
6.3 Status of Jews under Muslim rule
6.4 Pre-modern times
6.5 Nineteenth century
6.6 20th century
Then only can we pronounce who is right and wrong and not just based on a episode of violence in Jan 2009 which I agree is unfortunate as it targets children and woman folks.
To Under stand the whole issue you must read how antisemetism has been practised before we discuss the currant crisis in GAZA.
Antisemitism ( also sometimes known as Judeophobia) is prejudice against or hostility toward Jews.
Christianity and antisemitism
5.1 New Testament and antisemitism
5.2 Early Christianity
5.3 Medieval and Renaissance Europe
5.4 19th and 20th century
5.5 Accusations of deicide
Islam and antisemitism
6.1 Jews in Islamic texts
6.2 Differences with Christianity
6.3 Status of Jews under Muslim rule
6.4 Pre-modern times
6.5 Nineteenth century
6.6 20th century
Then only can we pronounce who is right and wrong and not just based on a episode of violence in Jan 2009 which I agree is unfortunate as it targets children and woman folks.
To Under stand the whole issue you must read how antisemetism has been practised before we discuss the currant crisis in GAZA.
Antisemitism ( also sometimes known as Judeophobia) is prejudice against or hostility toward Jews.
Christianity and antisemitism
5.1 New Testament and antisemitism
5.2 Early Christianity
5.3 Medieval and Renaissance Europe
5.4 19th and 20th century
5.5 Accusations of deicide
Islam and antisemitism
6.1 Jews in Islamic texts
6.2 Differences with Christianity
6.3 Status of Jews under Muslim rule
6.4 Pre-modern times
6.5 Nineteenth century
6.6 20th century
Then only can we pronounce who is right and wrong and not just based on a episode of violence in Jan 2009 which I agree is unfortunate as it targets children and woman folks.
Sizzle,
tacit opinions? Would you like me to cut-and-paste 'not so tacit' Israeli government officials' opinions on Palestinians? Many others have taken cues from politicians and also engage in the 'not so tacit' vile rhetoric of denying the existence of a people and term them the 'so-called Palestinians.'
If your sole aim was for me to admit that there is 'vile, hate-filled rhetoric', I might be empathetic towards you. However, even in trying to take a conciliatory tone, your extreme narcissism in trying to 'score points' is so repugnant that I hardly want to acknowledge your banal point.
Sounds like an apt description of Zionist claims to the entire Palestinian lands.
Sizzle,
tacit opinions? Would you like me to cut-and-paste 'not so tacit' Israeli government officials' opinions on Palestinians? Many others have taken cues from politicians and also engage in the 'not so tacit' vile rhetoric of denying the existence of a people and term them the 'so-called Palestinians.'
If your sole aim was for me to admit that there is 'vile, hate-filled rhetoric', I might be empathetic towards you. However, even in trying to take a conciliatory tone, your extreme narcissism in trying to 'score points' is so repugnant that I hardly want to acknowledge your banal point.
Sounds like an apt description of Zionist claims to the entire Palestinian lands.
Sizzle,
tacit opinions? Would you like me to cut-and-paste ‘not so tacit‘ Israeli government officials’ opinions on Palestinians? Many others have taken cues from politicians and also engage in the ‘not so tacit’ vile rhetoric of denying the existence of a people and term them the ‘so-called Palestinians.’
If your sole aim was for me to admit that there is ‘vile, hate-filled rhetoric’, I might be empathetic towards you. However, even in trying to take a conciliatory tone, your extreme narcissism in trying to ‘score points’ is so repugnant that I hardly want to acknowledge your banal point.
Sounds like an apt description of Zionist claims to the entire Palestinian lands.
this is reaching epic levels.
thought exercise! cut out the adjective "tacit" in my prior post and the statement still stands. you were comparing apples and oranges, a pretty silly argument that could just have easily been reversed, citing suicide bombers rather than F-16's and smart bombs. sorry to have so easily mooted half of your prior post and two of your sweet hotlinks.
quite frankly, i don't think you even understand my argument enough to acknowledge it. i wrote a post to specifically critique the paralleling of Sikh history, struggles and philosophy to that of the Palestinians, because that's precisely what's being done in the original post and by certain organizations. i tried, though i foolishly slipped a couple times, to not engage in the argument as to which side, the Palestinians or the Israelis, is ultimately "right," though my sympathies are probably fairly obvious. my sympathies, however, are besides the point. i tried, repeatedly, to turn the discussion back, which you label my attempted "conciliatory tone." but rather than discussing or even acknowledging (as you now admit) this "banal point" in any cogent or pointed manner, a banal point that was made for you about 17,000 times, you chose to use all of your above posts proving that Israelis are tyrants and that i am a shill for expressing anything other than extreme contempt for them and unequivocal support for the Palestinians. you also used the word "Zionists" a lot.
but let's take a time out. does that all make sense? if not, that's cool. i made the argument and criticisms to a general audience, to voice a previously unspoken opinion and to express extreme discomfort at some fellow Sikhs' use of our collective history and philosophy, recklessly and very sloppily applying it to an extremely polarizing and controversial conflict in order to drum up support to the side with which they otherwise sympathize. [look! i repeated the argument for you in case you started drifting and were tempted to post some more hotlinks to support an argument in which we're not even engaged!] it's not a matter of "scoring points" brah, it's a matter of making valid ones in the confines of the existing discussion. if his makes just too much sense for you, pardon my narcissism.
this is reaching epic levels.
thought exercise! cut out the adjective "tacit" in my prior post and the statement still stands. you were comparing apples and oranges, a pretty silly argument that could just have easily been reversed, citing suicide bombers rather than F-16's and smart bombs. sorry to have so easily mooted half of your prior post and two of your sweet hotlinks.
quite frankly, i don't think you even understand my argument enough to acknowledge it. i wrote a post to specifically critique the paralleling of Sikh history, struggles and philosophy to that of the Palestinians, because that's precisely what's being done in the original post and by certain organizations. i tried, though i foolishly slipped a couple times, to not engage in the argument as to which side, the Palestinians or the Israelis, is ultimately "right," though my sympathies are probably fairly obvious. my sympathies, however, are besides the point. i tried, repeatedly, to turn the discussion back, which you label my attempted "conciliatory tone." but rather than discussing or even acknowledging (as you now admit) this "banal point" in any cogent or pointed manner, a banal point that was made for you about 17,000 times, you chose to use all of your above posts proving that Israelis are tyrants and that i am a shill for expressing anything other than extreme contempt for them and unequivocal support for the Palestinians. you also used the word "Zionists" a lot.
but let's take a time out. does that all make sense? if not, that's cool. i made the argument and criticisms to a general audience, to voice a previously unspoken opinion and to express extreme discomfort at some fellow Sikhs' use of our collective history and philosophy, recklessly and very sloppily applying it to an extremely polarizing and controversial conflict in order to drum up support to the side with which they otherwise sympathize. [look! i repeated the argument for you in case you started drifting and were tempted to post some more hotlinks to support an argument in which we're not even engaged!] it's not a matter of "scoring points" brah, it's a matter of making valid ones in the confines of the existing discussion. if his makes just too much sense for you, pardon my narcissism.
this is reaching epic levels.
thought exercise! cut out the adjective “tacit” in my prior post and the statement still stands. you were comparing apples and oranges, a pretty silly argument that could just have easily been reversed, citing suicide bombers rather than F-16’s and smart bombs. sorry to have so easily mooted half of your prior post and two of your sweet hotlinks.
quite frankly, i don’t think you even understand my argument enough to acknowledge it. i wrote a post to specifically critique the paralleling of Sikh history, struggles and philosophy to that of the Palestinians, because that’s precisely what’s being done in the original post and by certain organizations. i tried, though i foolishly slipped a couple times, to not engage in the argument as to which side, the Palestinians or the Israelis, is ultimately “right,” though my sympathies are probably fairly obvious. my sympathies, however, are besides the point. i tried, repeatedly, to turn the discussion back, which you label my attempted “conciliatory tone.” but rather than discussing or even acknowledging (as you now admit) this “banal point” in any cogent or pointed manner, a banal point that was made for you about 17,000 times, you chose to use all of your above posts proving that Israelis are tyrants and that i am a shill for expressing anything other than extreme contempt for them and unequivocal support for the Palestinians. you also used the word “Zionists” a lot.
but let’s take a time out. does that all make sense? if not, that’s cool. i made the argument and criticisms to a general audience, to voice a previously unspoken opinion and to express extreme discomfort at some fellow Sikhs’ use of our collective history and philosophy, recklessly and very sloppily applying it to an extremely polarizing and controversial conflict in order to drum up support to the side with which they otherwise sympathize. [look! i repeated the argument for you in case you started drifting and were tempted to post some more hotlinks to support an argument in which we’re not even engaged!] it’s not a matter of “scoring points” brah, it’s a matter of making valid ones in the confines of the existing discussion. if his makes just too much sense for you, pardon my narcissism.
Anyone who supports the arab muslim palestinians in the name of Sikhi is whats called a ‘useful idiot’. (say the period out loud)(which is what I believe Sizzle is saying, except maybe the idiot part)
Anyone who supports the arab muslim palestinians out of their OWN belief and ideas about what sikh dharm espouses is entitled to their own interpretation. (though I respectfully disagree with them)
FYI, I don’t see anyone protesting the Egyptians who have closed their border to food and medicine for the arab muslim palestinians as well… why didn’t they simple turn on the aid tap from that particular crossing before all this started?
Anyone who supports the arab muslim palestinians in the name of Sikhi is whats called a 'useful idiot'. (say the period out loud)(which is what I believe Sizzle is saying, except maybe the idiot part)
Anyone who supports the arab muslim palestinians out of their OWN belief and ideas about what sikh dharm espouses is entitled to their own interpretation. (though I respectfully disagree with them)
FYI, I don't see anyone protesting the Egyptians who have closed their border to food and medicine for the arab muslim palestinians as well… why didn't they simple turn on the aid tap from that particular crossing before all this started?
Anyone who supports the arab muslim palestinians in the name of Sikhi is whats called a ‘useful idiot’. (say the period out loud)(which is what I believe Sizzle is saying, except maybe the idiot part)
Anyone who supports the arab muslim palestinians out of their OWN belief and ideas about what sikh dharm espouses is entitled to their own interpretation. (though I respectfully disagree with them)
FYI, I don’t see anyone protesting the Egyptians who have closed their border to food and medicine for the arab muslim palestinians as well… why didn’t they simple turn on the aid tap from that particular crossing before all this started?
I think we can sort out who's right and who's wrong later.
Right now, we need to simply do whatever we can to stop the killing.
Have any of you debating this issue thought deeply that these are real human beings – both Gazans and Israelis? Have you had your loved ones killed in senseless violence, inspired only by hatred and prejudice? These are real people, real, thinking, feeling human beings, just as we are. The only real difference is location. As human beings, there is no difference.
Consider this. My husband and son and some other family members were murdered in the Delhi Pogrom of 1984. Do you need to have a similar experience to show some compassion on all the suffering people in this stupid conflict?
I have my own opinion about the issue of Israel vs. Palestine, and I am willing to set that aside – for the time being – and simply act as a humanitarian to end this murderous nonsense.
I am sorry if I offend anyone, but I think this needs to be said.
I think we can sort out who’s right and who’s wrong later.
Right now, we need to simply do whatever we can to stop the killing.
Have any of you debating this issue thought deeply that these are real human beings – both Gazans and Israelis? Have you had your loved ones killed in senseless violence, inspired only by hatred and prejudice? These are real people, real, thinking, feeling human beings, just as we are. The only real difference is location. As human beings, there is no difference.
Consider this. My husband and son and some other family members were murdered in the Delhi Pogrom of 1984. Do you need to have a similar experience to show some compassion on all the suffering people in this stupid conflict?
I have my own opinion about the issue of Israel vs. Palestine, and I am willing to set that aside – for the time being – and simply act as a humanitarian to end this murderous nonsense.
I am sorry if I offend anyone, but I think this needs to be said.
I think we can sort out who’s right and who’s wrong later.
Right now, we need to simply do whatever we can to stop the killing.
Have any of you debating this issue thought deeply that these are real human beings – both Gazans and Israelis? Have you had your loved ones killed in senseless violence, inspired only by hatred and prejudice? These are real people, real, thinking, feeling human beings, just as we are. The only real difference is location. As human beings, there is no difference.
Consider this. My husband and son and some other family members were murdered in the Delhi Pogrom of 1984. Do you need to have a similar experience to show some compassion on all the suffering people in this stupid conflict?
I have my own opinion about the issue of Israel vs. Palestine, and I am willing to set that aside – for the time being – and simply act as a humanitarian to end this murderous nonsense.
I am sorry if I offend anyone, but I think this needs to be said.
And Kaptaan, old friend, you say
I have repeatedly denounced the Egyptians keeping the border closed in my blog, The Road To Khalistan. Every time I condemn Israel's blockade, I mention Egypt, as well. So now you have seen someone protesting this. Unfortunately, my heath precludes demonstrating in the streets; I do hope that, in this case, at least, the pen is mightier than the sword.
And Kaptaan, old friend, you say
I have repeatedly denounced the Egyptians keeping the border closed in my blog, The Road To Khalistan. Every time I condemn Israel's blockade, I mention Egypt, as well. So now you have seen someone protesting this. Unfortunately, my heath precludes demonstrating in the streets; I do hope that, in this case, at least, the pen is mightier than the sword.
And Kaptaan, old friend, you say
I have repeatedly denounced the Egyptians keeping the border closed in my blog, The Road To Khalistan. Every time I condemn Israel’s blockade, I mention Egypt, as well. So now you have seen someone protesting this. Unfortunately, my heath precludes demonstrating in the streets; I do hope that, in this case, at least, the pen is mightier than the sword.
another thought exercise: Can a handful of perverted suicide bombers individually create the amount of terror and destruction of F16s? Seems a very post 9/11 neo-con solution – that a handful of non-state idiots warrants a state-to-state response. Let’s bring it closer: Do 40 militants in the Akal Takht really warrant sending in the Indian Army? So as usual you moot nothing, except deciding what you have mooted or not mooted. You really must be a lawyer in how much you enjoy talking to yourself.
You have tried to take on multiple points. I addressed one of your banal points – namely, “neither side is perfect.”
No one is asking for your ‘unequivocal’ support for the Palestinians (I don’t unequivocally support anyone). Just realize that your attempt to ‘equalize’ the two sides is a gross injustice.
I do use the word Zionist a lot, because I am not making an anti-semitic argument, despite even some Jews that try to conflate Jewish identity and policies of the Israeli state. I even qualified my critique of Zionism, as especially those of the Likud extremist variety. However my critique of Zionism still stands – I oppose the political movement called Zionism that seeks to establish an exclusively Jewish homeland in the Palestinian lands.
Look Sizzle if you stuck to your point that you have a discomfort of some Sikhs’ usage of history to weigh in on the issue that is fine. However, when you started (‘foolishly’, to use your word) taking sides that is when I objected and responded in kind.
I guess we figured a way out of this impasse. Well ’til the next post requires your narcissistic comments! More then!
another thought exercise: Can a handful of perverted suicide bombers individually create the amount of terror and destruction of F16s? Seems a very post 9/11 neo-con solution – that a handful of non-state idiots warrants a state-to-state response. Let's bring it closer: Do 40 militants in the Akal Takht really warrant sending in the Indian Army? So as usual you moot nothing, except deciding what you have mooted or not mooted. You really must be a lawyer in how much you enjoy talking to yourself.
You have tried to take on multiple points. I addressed one of your banal points – namely, "neither side is perfect."
No one is asking for your 'unequivocal' support for the Palestinians (I don't unequivocally support anyone). Just realize that your attempt to 'equalize' the two sides is a gross injustice.
I do use the word Zionist a lot, because I am not making an anti-semitic argument, despite even some Jews that try to conflate Jewish identity and policies of the Israeli state. I even qualified my critique of Zionism, as especially those of the Likud extremist variety. However my critique of Zionism still stands – I oppose the political movement called Zionism that seeks to establish an exclusively Jewish homeland in the Palestinian lands.
Look Sizzle if you stuck to your point that you have a discomfort of some Sikhs' usage of history to weigh in on the issue that is fine. However, when you started ('foolishly', to use your word) taking sides that is when I objected and responded in kind.
I guess we figured a way out of this impasse. Well 'til the next post requires your narcissistic comments! More then!
another thought exercise: Can a handful of perverted suicide bombers individually create the amount of terror and destruction of F16s? Seems a very post 9/11 neo-con solution – that a handful of non-state idiots warrants a state-to-state response. Let’s bring it closer: Do 40 militants in the Akal Takht really warrant sending in the Indian Army? So as usual you moot nothing, except deciding what you have mooted or not mooted. You really must be a lawyer in how much you enjoy talking to yourself.
You have tried to take on multiple points. I addressed one of your banal points – namely, “neither side is perfect.”
No one is asking for your ‘unequivocal’ support for the Palestinians (I don’t unequivocally support anyone). Just realize that your attempt to ‘equalize’ the two sides is a gross injustice.
I do use the word Zionist a lot, because I am not making an anti-semitic argument, despite even some Jews that try to conflate Jewish identity and policies of the Israeli state. I even qualified my critique of Zionism, as especially those of the Likud extremist variety. However my critique of Zionism still stands – I oppose the political movement called Zionism that seeks to establish an exclusively Jewish homeland in the Palestinian lands.
Look Sizzle if you stuck to your point that you have a discomfort of some Sikhs’ usage of history to weigh in on the issue that is fine. However, when you started (‘foolishly’, to use your word) taking sides that is when I objected and responded in kind.
I guess we figured a way out of this impasse. Well ’til the next post requires your narcissistic comments! More then!
Hardeep –
It is telling that in your last post, you use the strategy I've been objecting to all along – paralleling and analogizing Sikh history (or philosophy) to that of the Palestinians. I just tried your little thought experiment – beyond the most basic superficial analysis, it doesn't at all work. ALMOST EVERY political, social, military, and historical element precipitating Operation Blue Star and the current Gaza conflict is vastly different. indeed, beyond Sikh's general objection to tyrants or oppression, there is little that is analogous to either party in the Gaza conflict.
I'll stop there. Pointing out all of the flaws and misrepresentations in your last post is tiring. So, in preparation for next time, when we might start fresh, some suggestions: first, brush up on your reading comprehension skills – you glossed over and ignored about 90% of what I stated and instead focused on a few points that weren't central to the discussion but permitted you to make condemnations. second, avoid trying to revise history when the "history" (our actual comments) is laid out in this very thread. you didn't "respond in kind" after i started taking sides, you got all hot and bothered when i cited an article to supplement my original argument, an article to which you disagreed on grounds that were tangential to my argument. i only "foolishly" took sides when i responded to you on those grounds rather than staying focused on the original points. and last, but not least, it'd be great if you could actually offer substantive arguments (besides the "reject Zionists, support Palestinians," which wasn't central) rather than frequent and prevalent ad hominem attacks, name calling, and inaccurate characterizations. it is pretty funny when someone lobs "lawyer" in a pejorative and accusatory manner, implying that deconstructing an argument is deserving . unfortunately, it doesn't really add to your position and gives us another great example of the pot calling the kettle black.
later, brah.
Hardeep –
It is telling that in your last post, you use the strategy I’ve been objecting to all along – paralleling and analogizing Sikh history (or philosophy) to that of the Palestinians. I just tried your little thought experiment – beyond the most basic superficial analysis, it doesn’t at all work. ALMOST EVERY political, social, military, and historical element precipitating Operation Blue Star and the current Gaza conflict is vastly different. indeed, beyond Sikh’s general objection to tyrants or oppression, there is little that is analogous to either party in the Gaza conflict.
I’ll stop there. Pointing out all of the flaws and misrepresentations in your last post is tiring. So, in preparation for next time, when we might start fresh, some suggestions: first, brush up on your reading comprehension skills – you glossed over and ignored about 90% of what I stated and instead focused on a few points that weren’t central to the discussion but permitted you to make condemnations. second, avoid trying to revise history when the “history” (our actual comments) is laid out in this very thread. you didn’t “respond in kind” after i started taking sides, you got all hot and bothered when i cited an article to supplement my original argument, an article to which you disagreed on grounds that were tangential to my argument. i only “foolishly” took sides when i responded to you on those grounds rather than staying focused on the original points. and last, but not least, it’d be great if you could actually offer substantive arguments (besides the “reject Zionists, support Palestinians,” which wasn’t central) rather than frequent and prevalent ad hominem attacks, name calling, and inaccurate characterizations. it is pretty funny when someone lobs “lawyer” in a pejorative and accusatory manner, implying that deconstructing an argument is deserving . unfortunately, it doesn’t really add to your position and gives us another great example of the pot calling the kettle black.
later, brah.
Hardeep –
It is telling that in your last post, you use the strategy I’ve been objecting to all along – paralleling and analogizing Sikh history (or philosophy) to that of the Palestinians. I just tried your little thought experiment – beyond the most basic superficial analysis, it doesn’t at all work. ALMOST EVERY political, social, military, and historical element precipitating Operation Blue Star and the current Gaza conflict is vastly different. indeed, beyond Sikh’s general objection to tyrants or oppression, there is little that is analogous to either party in the Gaza conflict.
I’ll stop there. Pointing out all of the flaws and misrepresentations in your last post is tiring. So, in preparation for next time, when we might start fresh, some suggestions: first, brush up on your reading comprehension skills – you glossed over and ignored about 90% of what I stated and instead focused on a few points that weren’t central to the discussion but permitted you to make condemnations. second, avoid trying to revise history when the “history” (our actual comments) is laid out in this very thread. you didn’t “respond in kind” after i started taking sides, you got all hot and bothered when i cited an article to supplement my original argument, an article to which you disagreed on grounds that were tangential to my argument. i only “foolishly” took sides when i responded to you on those grounds rather than staying focused on the original points. and last, but not least, it’d be great if you could actually offer substantive arguments (besides the “reject Zionists, support Palestinians,” which wasn’t central) rather than frequent and prevalent ad hominem attacks, name calling, and inaccurate characterizations. it is pretty funny when someone lobs “lawyer” in a pejorative and accusatory manner, implying that deconstructing an argument is deserving . unfortunately, it doesn’t really add to your position and gives us another great example of the pot calling the kettle black.
later, brah.
right, I forgot you had staked your monopoly on that
right, I forgot you had staked your monopoly on that
right, I forgot you had staked your monopoly on that
Mai,
Thanks for your response. I appreciate that you are attempting an even hand in this. From strictly a humanitarian level, I can understand and respect that you oppose the death of any civilians – arab muslim or jewish.
However, that having been said, I don't know that most people in Gaza can be called civilians when they have repeatedly elected and support a terrorist organization like Hamas, which has the genocide of Jews in its charter as a stated objective. There may be a small percentage of people in Gaza who voted against electing Hamas, which has made plain that they aren't interested in governing. The parents of children who allow Hamas fighters to launch attacks from their homes, or who shelter them or keep their children in schools from which they know Hamas fighters are launching attacks are putting their own children's lives at risk.
Hardeep and others think that Israel should simply absorb rocket attack after attack and live in a perpetual state of alertness when they know that its not just a handful of fighters, but almost literally the entire adult population of Gaza which supports these kinds of attacks. Why shouldn't Israel launch the type of operation which it has and more to eliminate esentially a hostile aggressive and violent group of people bent on Israel's destruction even if it means their or their own children's death.
The Gazans themselves want war and have brought about the current RESPONSE from Israel.
Mai,
Thanks for your response. I appreciate that you are attempting an even hand in this. From strictly a humanitarian level, I can understand and respect that you oppose the death of any civilians – arab muslim or jewish.
However, that having been said, I don’t know that most people in Gaza can be called civilians when they have repeatedly elected and support a terrorist organization like Hamas, which has the genocide of Jews in its charter as a stated objective. There may be a small percentage of people in Gaza who voted against electing Hamas, which has made plain that they aren’t interested in governing. The parents of children who allow Hamas fighters to launch attacks from their homes, or who shelter them or keep their children in schools from which they know Hamas fighters are launching attacks are putting their own children’s lives at risk.
Hardeep and others think that Israel should simply absorb rocket attack after attack and live in a perpetual state of alertness when they know that its not just a handful of fighters, but almost literally the entire adult population of Gaza which supports these kinds of attacks. Why shouldn’t Israel launch the type of operation which it has and more to eliminate esentially a hostile aggressive and violent group of people bent on Israel’s destruction even if it means their or their own children’s death.
The Gazans themselves want war and have brought about the current RESPONSE from Israel.
Mai,
Thanks for your response. I appreciate that you are attempting an even hand in this. From strictly a humanitarian level, I can understand and respect that you oppose the death of any civilians – arab muslim or jewish.
However, that having been said, I don’t know that most people in Gaza can be called civilians when they have repeatedly elected and support a terrorist organization like Hamas, which has the genocide of Jews in its charter as a stated objective. There may be a small percentage of people in Gaza who voted against electing Hamas, which has made plain that they aren’t interested in governing. The parents of children who allow Hamas fighters to launch attacks from their homes, or who shelter them or keep their children in schools from which they know Hamas fighters are launching attacks are putting their own children’s lives at risk.
Hardeep and others think that Israel should simply absorb rocket attack after attack and live in a perpetual state of alertness when they know that its not just a handful of fighters, but almost literally the entire adult population of Gaza which supports these kinds of attacks. Why shouldn’t Israel launch the type of operation which it has and more to eliminate esentially a hostile aggressive and violent group of people bent on Israel’s destruction even if it means their or their own children’s death.
The Gazans themselves want war and have brought about the current RESPONSE from Israel.
Jews in Islamic texts
Leon Poliakov, Walter Laqueur, and Jane Gerber, suggest that passages in the Qur'an contain attacks on Jews for their refusal to recognize Muhammad as a prophet of God.
Does this explain the currant crisis ?
Jews in Islamic texts
Leon Poliakov, Walter Laqueur, and Jane Gerber, suggest that passages in the Qur’an contain attacks on Jews for their refusal to recognize Muhammad as a prophet of God.
Does this explain the currant crisis ?
Jews in Islamic texts
Leon Poliakov, Walter Laqueur, and Jane Gerber, suggest that passages in the Qur’an contain attacks on Jews for their refusal to recognize Muhammad as a prophet of God.
Does this explain the currant crisis ?
Its called Zionism and its no different than the stereotypical right wing brush that some of you are painting the Palestinians as terrorists with.
How come no one has mentioned that on May 27, 1948 that the zionists tried to poison Gazan wells with typhoid and other biological agents?
Also, the Egyptions are not increasing settlements on Palesintian lands ILLEGALLY at a rate of 5% a year.
Granted that their may be some extremists on the side of Palestine wanting to wipe Israel off the map, but the reality is that Israel was FOUNDED on Zionist Ideology that wants to do the very same to the Palestinians. In fact they ARE doing it!
Here is a suggestion…
Why don't you compare a maps from 1948-1968-2009 then tell me who is wiping who off the map….
If you still don't get it, then go buy an atlas and find Palestine…
once you realize that Palestine isn't on the map then ask yourself again…
who HAS wiped who off the map!…
And if you STILL don't get it…
ask yourself why the Zionists don't protest at the Palestinian Consulate….
and you dont understand by now…
well.. your a lost cause.
Its called Zionism and its no different than the stereotypical right wing brush that some of you are painting the Palestinians as terrorists with.
How come no one has mentioned that on May 27, 1948 that the zionists tried to poison Gazan wells with typhoid and other biological agents?
Also, the Egyptions are not increasing settlements on Palesintian lands ILLEGALLY at a rate of 5% a year.
Granted that their may be some extremists on the side of Palestine wanting to wipe Israel off the map, but the reality is that Israel was FOUNDED on Zionist Ideology that wants to do the very same to the Palestinians. In fact they ARE doing it!
Here is a suggestion…
Why don’t you compare a maps from 1948-1968-2009 then tell me who is wiping who off the map….
If you still don’t get it, then go buy an atlas and find Palestine…
once you realize that Palestine isn’t on the map then ask yourself again…
who HAS wiped who off the map!…
And if you STILL don’t get it…
ask yourself why the Zionists don’t protest at the Palestinian Consulate….
and you dont understand by now…
well.. your a lost cause.
Its called Zionism and its no different than the stereotypical right wing brush that some of you are painting the Palestinians as terrorists with.
How come no one has mentioned that on May 27, 1948 that the zionists tried to poison Gazan wells with typhoid and other biological agents?
Also, the Egyptions are not increasing settlements on Palesintian lands ILLEGALLY at a rate of 5% a year.
Granted that their may be some extremists on the side of Palestine wanting to wipe Israel off the map, but the reality is that Israel was FOUNDED on Zionist Ideology that wants to do the very same to the Palestinians. In fact they ARE doing it!
Here is a suggestion…
Why don’t you compare a maps from 1948-1968-2009 then tell me who is wiping who off the map….
If you still don’t get it, then go buy an atlas and find Palestine…
once you realize that Palestine isn’t on the map then ask yourself again…
who HAS wiped who off the map!…
And if you STILL don’t get it…
ask yourself why the Zionists don’t protest at the Palestinian Consulate….
and you dont understand by now…
well.. your a lost cause.
So Kaptaan is an advocate of the "Final Solution" in Gaza
How very Sikh-like….
So Kaptaan is an advocate of the "Final Solution" in Gaza
How very Sikh-like….
So Kaptaan is an advocate of the “Final Solution” in Gaza
How very Sikh-like….
You are making and idiotic comment Hardeep, I oppose supporting the Gazans for the very reason they advocate genocide against Jews.
The Israelis are NOT committing or advocating for the elimination of all Gazans. They attempting to debilitate Hamas.
You are making and idiotic comment Hardeep, I oppose supporting the Gazans for the very reason they advocate genocide against Jews.
The Israelis are NOT committing or advocating for the elimination of all Gazans. They attempting to debilitate Hamas.
You are making and idiotic comment Hardeep, I oppose supporting the Gazans for the very reason they advocate genocide against Jews.
The Israelis are NOT committing or advocating for the elimination of all Gazans. They attempting to debilitate Hamas.
Just so you don’t start parsing my words, I support Israel in its attempt to stop the rocket attacks and aggression emanating from Gaza through military action. I do not advocate for the elimination of all Gazans.
Just so you don't start parsing my words, I support Israel in its attempt to stop the rocket attacks and aggression emanating from Gaza through military action. I do not advocate for the elimination of all Gazans.
Just so you don’t start parsing my words, I support Israel in its attempt to stop the rocket attacks and aggression emanating from Gaza through military action. I do not advocate for the elimination of all Gazans.
I agree with Kaaptan.
Jews are trying to save them selves from a potential threat of annihilation from their middle east neigbours for reasons best known ot middle east people.
Palestinans in contrast are fighting to get a piece of land which they call as their own but actually has changed hands several times in history .
History OF PALESTINE
Paleolithic and Neolithic periods (1 mya–5000 BCE)
Chalcolithic period (4500–3000 BCE) and Bronze Age (3000–1200 BCE)
Iron Age (1200–330 BCE)
Hebrew Bible period
Persian rule (538 BCE)
Classical antiquity
Hellenistic rule (333 BCE)
Hasmonean dynasty (140 BCE)
Roman rule (63 BCE)
Byzantine (Eastern Roman Empire) rule (330–640 CE)
Islamic period (630-1918 CE)
Arab Caliphate rule (638–1099 CE)
Umayyad rule (661–750 CE)
Abbasid rule (750–969 CE)
Fatimid rule (969–1099 CE)
Crusader rule (1099–1187 CE)
Mamluk rule (1270–1516 CE)
Ottoman rule (1516–1831 CE)
Egyptian rule (1831-1841)
Ottoman rule (1841-1917)
The 20th century
British Mandate (1920–1948)
UN partition
Current status
SEEMS TO BE A INTERESTING PIECE OF LAND WITH LOT OF HISTORY AND CLAIMANTS
SO THE QUESTION IS WHO IS THE ACTUAL OWNER OF PALESTINE ?
I agree with Kaaptan.
Jews are trying to save them selves from a potential threat of annihilation from their middle east neigbours for reasons best known ot middle east people.
Palestinans in contrast are fighting to get a piece of land which they call as their own but actually has changed hands several times in history .
History OF PALESTINE
Paleolithic and Neolithic periods (1 mya–5000 BCE)
Chalcolithic period (4500–3000 BCE) and Bronze Age (3000–1200 BCE)
Iron Age (1200–330 BCE)
Hebrew Bible period
Persian rule (538 BCE)
Classical antiquity
Hellenistic rule (333 BCE)
Hasmonean dynasty (140 BCE)
Roman rule (63 BCE)
Byzantine (Eastern Roman Empire) rule (330–640 CE)
Islamic period (630-1918 CE)
Arab Caliphate rule (638–1099 CE)
Umayyad rule (661–750 CE)
Abbasid rule (750–969 CE)
Fatimid rule (969–1099 CE)
Crusader rule (1099–1187 CE)
Mamluk rule (1270–1516 CE)
Ottoman rule (1516–1831 CE)
Egyptian rule (1831-1841)
Ottoman rule (1841-1917)
The 20th century
British Mandate (1920–1948)
UN partition
Current status
SEEMS TO BE A INTERESTING PIECE OF LAND WITH LOT OF HISTORY AND CLAIMANTS
SO THE QUESTION IS WHO IS THE ACTUAL OWNER OF PALESTINE ?
I agree with Kaaptan.
Jews are trying to save them selves from a potential threat of annihilation from their middle east neigbours for reasons best known ot middle east people.
Palestinans in contrast are fighting to get a piece of land which they call as their own but actually has changed hands several times in history .
History OF PALESTINE
Paleolithic and Neolithic periods (1 mya–5000 BCE)
Chalcolithic period (4500–3000 BCE) and Bronze Age (3000–1200 BCE)
Iron Age (1200–330 BCE)
Hebrew Bible period
Persian rule (538 BCE)
Classical antiquity
Hellenistic rule (333 BCE)
Hasmonean dynasty (140 BCE)
Roman rule (63 BCE)
Byzantine (Eastern Roman Empire) rule (330–640 CE)
Islamic period (630-1918 CE)
Arab Caliphate rule (638–1099 CE)
Umayyad rule (661–750 CE)
Abbasid rule (750–969 CE)
Fatimid rule (969–1099 CE)
Crusader rule (1099–1187 CE)
Mamluk rule (1270–1516 CE)
Ottoman rule (1516–1831 CE)
Egyptian rule (1831-1841)
Ottoman rule (1841-1917)
The 20th century
British Mandate (1920–1948)
UN partition
Current status
SEEMS TO BE A INTERESTING PIECE OF LAND WITH LOT OF HISTORY AND CLAIMANTS
SO THE QUESTION IS WHO IS THE ACTUAL OWNER OF PALESTINE ?
While we still disagree, I appreciate your clarification Kaptaan. From your previous comment it did seem as if you were advocating 'collective punishment' as you no longer see the bulk of the Gazan population as even 'civilians.'
Still that being said, the HAMAS charter does not state what you allege it does, nor do I believe you have any proficient knowledge in Arabic or understanding Hadiths to make such a claim.
As has been previously cited, Israel did not merely respond to HAMAS, but also abrogated terms of the ceasefire, namely the ending of the blockade, and wanted to take advantage of the carte blanche opportunity given to it by the outgoing Bush Administration. The Israeli government has yet to ascertain how the incoming Obama administration will react to the continued splashing of the bloody bodies of dead Palestinian children all over the press.
Harinder,
Easy, the inhabitants of the land. Change in political control (and is there any relevance to listing the Bronze Age?) does not necessarily change the inhabitants of the lands, especially in pre-modern societies).
While we still disagree, I appreciate your clarification Kaptaan. From your previous comment it did seem as if you were advocating ‘collective punishment’ as you no longer see the bulk of the Gazan population as even ‘civilians.’
Still that being said, the HAMAS charter does not state what you allege it does, nor do I believe you have any proficient knowledge in Arabic or understanding Hadiths to make such a claim.
As has been previously cited, Israel did not merely respond to HAMAS, but also abrogated terms of the ceasefire, namely the ending of the blockade, and wanted to take advantage of the carte blanche opportunity given to it by the outgoing Bush Administration. The Israeli government has yet to ascertain how the incoming Obama administration will react to the continued splashing of the bloody bodies of dead Palestinian children all over the press.
Harinder,
Easy, the inhabitants of the land. Change in political control (and is there any relevance to listing the Bronze Age?) does not necessarily change the inhabitants of the lands, especially in pre-modern societies).
While we still disagree, I appreciate your clarification Kaptaan. From your previous comment it did seem as if you were advocating ‘collective punishment’ as you no longer see the bulk of the Gazan population as even ‘civilians.’
Still that being said, the HAMAS charter does not state what you allege it does, nor do I believe you have any proficient knowledge in Arabic or understanding Hadiths to make such a claim.
As has been previously cited, Israel did not merely respond to HAMAS, but also abrogated terms of the ceasefire, namely the ending of the blockade, and wanted to take advantage of the carte blanche opportunity given to it by the outgoing Bush Administration. The Israeli government has yet to ascertain how the incoming Obama administration will react to the continued splashing of the bloody bodies of dead Palestinian children all over the press.
Harinder,
Easy, the inhabitants of the land. Change in political control (and is there any relevance to listing the Bronze Age?) does not necessarily change the inhabitants of the lands, especially in pre-modern societies).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMGuYjt6CP8