Moderates, Fundamentalists, and Now Orthodox Sikhs
Gotta love Kim Bolan. For years, the Sikh-Canadian community’s favourite journalist has gotten tremendous mileage from the monikers “moderate” and “fundamentalists” that she has used to describe the BC’s Sikh population. Now, in her reporting of the Guru Nanak Sikh Temple’s election, she’s created a new segment of Sikhs: the “orthodox youth”.
Orthodox youth group sweep all executive positions at Surrey Sikh temple (Link)
I guess just saying “youth group” wouldn’t have been malicious enough. That would have brought up images of young underdog activists who chose to actually make a difference in overcoming tremendous odds in beating a slate of grey-bearded (or no-bearded) uncles who have monopolized our institutions.
Instead, she (and the Vancouver Sun) chose to stick a loaded word in front that insinuates a group that’s rigid, backwards and slightly Talibanistic. Yes, I know the word orthodox technically means “Adhering to the accepted or traditional and established faith” but the textbook definition of fundamentalist is someone who has ” a point of view characterized by a return to fundamental principles”, and that’s not how it was used over the past decade to describe observant Sikhs.
I guess Miss Bolan still has a job to do. If Sikhs actually got along and there was no controversy (real or incited), she’d have nothing to write about.
116 Responses to “Moderates, Fundamentalists, and Now Orthodox Sikhs”
Orthodox in the context of religion doesn't denote that at all. In the Jewish religion, Orthodox describes those who observe the Jewish version of rehat maryada with regards to dietary and clothing 'laws'.
Orthodox in the context of religion doesn’t denote that at all. In the Jewish religion, Orthodox describes those who observe the Jewish version of rehat maryada with regards to dietary and clothing ‘laws’.
Orthodox in the context of religion doesn’t denote that at all. In the Jewish religion, Orthodox describes those who observe the Jewish version of rehat maryada with regards to dietary and clothing ‘laws’.
Orthodox in the context of religion doesn’t denote that at all. In the Jewish religion, Orthodox describes those who observe the Jewish version of rehat maryada with regards to dietary and clothing ‘laws’.
Kim Bolan is a low life 3rd class anti Sikh writer. I offer my congratulations to the Sikh youth group for uprooting the old timers. LOL
Kim Bolan is a low life 3rd class anti Sikh writer. I offer my congratulations to the Sikh youth group for uprooting the old timers. LOL
Kim Bolan is a low life 3rd class anti Sikh writer. I offer my congratulations to the Sikh youth group for uprooting the old timers. LOL
Kim Bolan is a low life 3rd class anti Sikh writer. I offer my congratulations to the Sikh youth group for uprooting the old timers. LOL
Prem,
“Orthodox”, when used by Kim Bolan, is a loaded word. Words have power and Ms. Bolan chose to describe the youth slate as orthodox. She could just as easily have described them as the “youth slate”.
As Maple Leaf Singh has pointed out, even a word like “fundamentalist”
, which is a loaded word when applied to Sikhs, actually has a relatively benign definition. It is not the definition that is troublesome, it is the connotations the word carries.
It may well be that Ms. Bolan, in this article, chose to describe the group as orthodox with no ill-intent, and only meant to describe the largely amritdhari slate in a neutral fashion. However, I have difficulty giving her the benefit of the doubt, given her past writings; she lies in the bed she has made herself.
Prem,
"Orthodox", when used by Kim Bolan, is a loaded word. Words have power and Ms. Bolan chose to describe the youth slate as orthodox. She could just as easily have described them as the "youth slate".
As Maple Leaf Singh has pointed out, even a word like "fundamentalist"
, which is a loaded word when applied to Sikhs, actually has a relatively benign definition. It is not the definition that is troublesome, it is the connotations the word carries.
It may well be that Ms. Bolan, in this article, chose to describe the group as orthodox with no ill-intent, and only meant to describe the largely amritdhari slate in a neutral fashion. However, I have difficulty giving her the benefit of the doubt, given her past writings; she lies in the bed she has made herself.
Prem,
“Orthodox”, when used by Kim Bolan, is a loaded word. Words have power and Ms. Bolan chose to describe the youth slate as orthodox. She could just as easily have described them as the “youth slate”.
As Maple Leaf Singh has pointed out, even a word like “fundamentalist”
, which is a loaded word when applied to Sikhs, actually has a relatively benign definition. It is not the definition that is troublesome, it is the connotations the word carries.
It may well be that Ms. Bolan, in this article, chose to describe the group as orthodox with no ill-intent, and only meant to describe the largely amritdhari slate in a neutral fashion. However, I have difficulty giving her the benefit of the doubt, given her past writings; she lies in the bed she has made herself.
Prem,
“Orthodox”, when used by Kim Bolan, is a loaded word. Words have power and Ms. Bolan chose to describe the youth slate as orthodox. She could just as easily have described them as the “youth slate”.
As Maple Leaf Singh has pointed out, even a word like “fundamentalist”
, which is a loaded word when applied to Sikhs, actually has a relatively benign definition. It is not the definition that is troublesome, it is the connotations the word carries.
It may well be that Ms. Bolan, in this article, chose to describe the group as orthodox with no ill-intent, and only meant to describe the largely amritdhari slate in a neutral fashion. However, I have difficulty giving her the benefit of the doubt, given her past writings; she lies in the bed she has made herself.
she lies in the bed she has made herself.
What does that mean. This writer has gotten death threats against her and her children from some people part of the fundamentalist movement who do not understand the concept of freedom of speech in Canada.
It’s bad enough that the only journalist killed in Canada was father of MLA Dave Hayer who ran the Indo-Canadian times and believed to be killed by fundamentalist sikh’s. I could only image what this would due to the image of sikhs if somebody was to attack Mrs.Bolan because they don’t agree with what she writes.
she lies in the bed she has made herself.
What does that mean. This writer has gotten death threats against her and her children from some people part of the fundamentalist movement who do not understand the concept of freedom of speech in Canada.
It’s bad enough that the only journalist killed in Canada was father of MLA Dave Hayer who ran the Indo-Canadian times and believed to be killed by fundamentalist sikh’s. I could only image what this would due to the image of sikhs if somebody was to attack Mrs.Bolan because they don’t agree with what she writes.
she lies in the bed she has made herself.
What does that mean. This writer has gotten death threats against her and her children from some people part of the fundamentalist movement who do not understand the concept of freedom of speech in Canada.
It's bad enough that the only journalist killed in Canada was father of MLA Dave Hayer who ran the Indo-Canadian times and believed to be killed by fundamentalist sikh's. I could only image what this would due to the image of sikhs if somebody was to attack Mrs.Bolan because they don't agree with what she writes.
she lies in the bed she has made herself.
What does that mean. This writer has gotten death threats against her and her children from some people part of the fundamentalist movement who do not understand the concept of freedom of speech in Canada.
It’s bad enough that the only journalist killed in Canada was father of MLA Dave Hayer who ran the Indo-Canadian times and believed to be killed by fundamentalist sikh’s. I could only image what this would due to the image of sikhs if somebody was to attack Mrs.Bolan because they don’t agree with what she writes.
I guess Miss Bolan still has a job to do. If Sikhs actually got along and there was no controversy (real or incited), she’d have nothing to write about.
Well Miss Bolan has writen many articles about a group called the Hell Angels and other gangs like the United Nation and Independent Soldiers.
I love how people blame Miss Bolan for all the problems in the community. This is the same writer who has made it her life work to honor the memory's of the 329 people who died in Air India bombing which included many sikh's who died in the bombing.
The family members of the Air India victims are very grateful for Miss Bolan and the work she had done.
The sad thing is all the sikh's who died on June 23,1985 on that tragic fight seemed to be ignored by some in our community.
I guess Miss Bolan still has a job to do. If Sikhs actually got along and there was no controversy (real or incited), she’d have nothing to write about.
Well Miss Bolan has writen many articles about a group called the Hell Angels and other gangs like the United Nation and Independent Soldiers.
I love how people blame Miss Bolan for all the problems in the community. This is the same writer who has made it her life work to honor the memory’s of the 329 people who died in Air India bombing which included many sikh’s who died in the bombing.
The family members of the Air India victims are very grateful for Miss Bolan and the work she had done.
The sad thing is all the sikh’s who died on June 23,1985 on that tragic fight seemed to be ignored by some in our community.
I guess Miss Bolan still has a job to do. If Sikhs actually got along and there was no controversy (real or incited), she’d have nothing to write about.
Well Miss Bolan has writen many articles about a group called the Hell Angels and other gangs like the United Nation and Independent Soldiers.
I love how people blame Miss Bolan for all the problems in the community. This is the same writer who has made it her life work to honor the memory’s of the 329 people who died in Air India bombing which included many sikh’s who died in the bombing.
The family members of the Air India victims are very grateful for Miss Bolan and the work she had done.
The sad thing is all the sikh’s who died on June 23,1985 on that tragic fight seemed to be ignored by some in our community.
I guess Miss Bolan still has a job to do. If Sikhs actually got along and there was no controversy (real or incited), she’d have nothing to write about.
Well Miss Bolan has writen many articles about a group called the Hell Angels and other gangs like the United Nation and Independent Soldiers.
I love how people blame Miss Bolan for all the problems in the community. This is the same writer who has made it her life work to honor the memory’s of the 329 people who died in Air India bombing which included many sikh’s who died in the bombing.
The family members of the Air India victims are very grateful for Miss Bolan and the work she had done.
The sad thing is all the sikh’s who died on June 23,1985 on that tragic fight seemed to be ignored by some in our community.
It's been a couple of years now since Kim Bolan book Getting away with Murder and still no lawsuit against her for what she wrote in the book, I wonder why.
It’s been a couple of years now since Kim Bolan book Getting away with Murder and still no lawsuit against her for what she wrote in the book, I wonder why.
It’s been a couple of years now since Kim Bolan book Getting away with Murder and still no lawsuit against her for what she wrote in the book, I wonder why.
It’s been a couple of years now since Kim Bolan book Getting away with Murder and still no lawsuit against her for what she wrote in the book, I wonder why.
I find this rhetoric sinister in the light of the death threats that Ms Bolan reportedly receives.
I find this rhetoric sinister in the light of the death threats that Ms Bolan reportedly receives.
I find this rhetoric sinister in the light of the death threats that Ms Bolan reportedly receives.
I find this rhetoric sinister in the light of the death threats that Ms Bolan reportedly receives.
No doubt, some people would say that she ‘deserved’ it, that she ‘made her own bed’, and then in the next breath, complain about prejudice and media stereotyping of Sikhs on this issue.
I hope that anyone who disagrees with Kim Bolan on any issue does so by peaceful and rational means, through counter-argument and through writing, which is the way that a democracy works.
And I pray that she stays out of harms way if there really are people out there motivated enough to murder her or any members of her family. If that were to happen, it would be a bleak day for democracy and a triumph for fascism.
No doubt, some people would say that she 'deserved' it, that she 'made her own bed', and then in the next breath, complain about prejudice and media stereotyping of Sikhs on this issue.
I hope that anyone who disagrees with Kim Bolan on any issue does so by peaceful and rational means, through counter-argument and through writing, which is the way that a democracy works.
And I pray that she stays out of harms way if there really are people out there motivated enough to murder her or any members of her family. If that were to happen, it would be a bleak day for democracy and a triumph for fascism.
No doubt, some people would say that she ‘deserved’ it, that she ‘made her own bed’, and then in the next breath, complain about prejudice and media stereotyping of Sikhs on this issue.
I hope that anyone who disagrees with Kim Bolan on any issue does so by peaceful and rational means, through counter-argument and through writing, which is the way that a democracy works.
And I pray that she stays out of harms way if there really are people out there motivated enough to murder her or any members of her family. If that were to happen, it would be a bleak day for democracy and a triumph for fascism.
No doubt, some people would say that she ‘deserved’ it, that she ‘made her own bed’, and then in the next breath, complain about prejudice and media stereotyping of Sikhs on this issue.
I hope that anyone who disagrees with Kim Bolan on any issue does so by peaceful and rational means, through counter-argument and through writing, which is the way that a democracy works.
And I pray that she stays out of harms way if there really are people out there motivated enough to murder her or any members of her family. If that were to happen, it would be a bleak day for democracy and a triumph for fascism.
Having just commemerated Guru Tegh Bahadur's martyrdom, let's be very clear on what I believe is a fundamental concept in Sikhism:
I may not believe what you believe in. In fact, it may be the antithesis of my beliefs, but the sheer fact that you believe it, means, I as a Sikh, will fight to the death for your right to hold and express your views.
Guru Tegh Bahadur didn't die for a specific faith group. He sacrificed himself to stand up for freedom of conscience and expression. If Kim Bolan's opinions are the exact opposite of what I believe, that's fine. I can challenge and oppose her ideas in an appropriate manner. However, if someone wants to keep her from speaking, than as a Sikh I'm actually obligated to defend her right to speak her mind.
As much as Sikhs love their demonstrations (especially if they get to brandish unsheathed kirpans), in this case, the pen is infinitely mightier than the sword. If Kim Bolan writes something that we are offended with, fight back with letters, op-eds and petitions. Death threats are immature, completely counter-productive and just plain non-Sikh.
Having just commemerated Guru Tegh Bahadur’s martyrdom, let’s be very clear on what I believe is a fundamental concept in Sikhism:
I may not believe what you believe in. In fact, it may be the antithesis of my beliefs, but the sheer fact that you believe it, means, I as a Sikh, will fight to the death for your right to hold and express your views.
Guru Tegh Bahadur didn’t die for a specific faith group. He sacrificed himself to stand up for freedom of conscience and expression. If Kim Bolan’s opinions are the exact opposite of what I believe, that’s fine. I can challenge and oppose her ideas in an appropriate manner. However, if someone wants to keep her from speaking, than as a Sikh I’m actually obligated to defend her right to speak her mind.
As much as Sikhs love their demonstrations (especially if they get to brandish unsheathed kirpans), in this case, the pen is infinitely mightier than the sword. If Kim Bolan writes something that we are offended with, fight back with letters, op-eds and petitions. Death threats are immature, completely counter-productive and just plain non-Sikh.
Having just commemerated Guru Tegh Bahadur’s martyrdom, let’s be very clear on what I believe is a fundamental concept in Sikhism:
I may not believe what you believe in. In fact, it may be the antithesis of my beliefs, but the sheer fact that you believe it, means, I as a Sikh, will fight to the death for your right to hold and express your views.
Guru Tegh Bahadur didn’t die for a specific faith group. He sacrificed himself to stand up for freedom of conscience and expression. If Kim Bolan’s opinions are the exact opposite of what I believe, that’s fine. I can challenge and oppose her ideas in an appropriate manner. However, if someone wants to keep her from speaking, than as a Sikh I’m actually obligated to defend her right to speak her mind.
As much as Sikhs love their demonstrations (especially if they get to brandish unsheathed kirpans), in this case, the pen is infinitely mightier than the sword. If Kim Bolan writes something that we are offended with, fight back with letters, op-eds and petitions. Death threats are immature, completely counter-productive and just plain non-Sikh.
Having just commemerated Guru Tegh Bahadur’s martyrdom, let’s be very clear on what I believe is a fundamental concept in Sikhism:
I may not believe what you believe in. In fact, it may be the antithesis of my beliefs, but the sheer fact that you believe it, means, I as a Sikh, will fight to the death for your right to hold and express your views.
Guru Tegh Bahadur didn’t die for a specific faith group. He sacrificed himself to stand up for freedom of conscience and expression. If Kim Bolan’s opinions are the exact opposite of what I believe, that’s fine. I can challenge and oppose her ideas in an appropriate manner. However, if someone wants to keep her from speaking, than as a Sikh I’m actually obligated to defend her right to speak her mind.
As much as Sikhs love their demonstrations (especially if they get to brandish unsheathed kirpans), in this case, the pen is infinitely mightier than the sword. If Kim Bolan writes something that we are offended with, fight back with letters, op-eds and petitions. Death threats are immature, completely counter-productive and just plain non-Sikh.
I'm fairly certain P.Singh did not indicate that death threats are appropriate, but rather that Ms. Bolan should not be surprised from the criticism and opposition she faces from Sikh communities because of her loaded rhetoric/coverage of folks in Vancouver. Whether or not her rhetoric is loaded is an entirely different conversation (and the topic of this post), but I don't think anyone (in this forum) is advocating violence or threats.
I’m fairly certain P.Singh did not indicate that death threats are appropriate, but rather that Ms. Bolan should not be surprised from the criticism and opposition she faces from Sikh communities because of her loaded rhetoric/coverage of folks in Vancouver. Whether or not her rhetoric is loaded is an entirely different conversation (and the topic of this post), but I don’t think anyone (in this forum) is advocating violence or threats.
I’m fairly certain P.Singh did not indicate that death threats are appropriate, but rather that Ms. Bolan should not be surprised from the criticism and opposition she faces from Sikh communities because of her loaded rhetoric/coverage of folks in Vancouver. Whether or not her rhetoric is loaded is an entirely different conversation (and the topic of this post), but I don’t think anyone (in this forum) is advocating violence or threats.
I’m fairly certain P.Singh did not indicate that death threats are appropriate, but rather that Ms. Bolan should not be surprised from the criticism and opposition she faces from Sikh communities because of her loaded rhetoric/coverage of folks in Vancouver. Whether or not her rhetoric is loaded is an entirely different conversation (and the topic of this post), but I don’t think anyone (in this forum) is advocating violence or threats.
Suki,
The meaning should be fairly obvious if you read the paragraph preceding the fragment you highlighted. To spell it out for you – her biased writing in the past colors how many readers will interpret her articles today, even if her intent is neutral, so…. she is the author of her own misfortune, she lies in the bed she has made herself, she reaps what she has sown…. Associating my comment with death threats is ridiculous.
[quote comment="9078"]she lies in the bed she has made herself.
What does that mean. This writer has gotten death threats against her and her children from some people part of the fundamentalist movement who do not understand the concept of freedom of speech in Canada.
It's bad enough that the only journalist killed in Canada was father of MLA Dave Hayer who ran the Indo-Canadian times and believed to be killed by fundamentalist sikh's. I could only image what this would due to the image of sikhs if somebody was to attack Mrs.Bolan because they don't agree with what she writes.[/quote]
Suki,
The meaning should be fairly obvious if you read the paragraph preceding the fragment you highlighted. To spell it out for you – her biased writing in the past colors how many readers will interpret her articles today, even if her intent is neutral, so…. she is the author of her own misfortune, she lies in the bed she has made herself, she reaps what she has sown…. Associating my comment with death threats is ridiculous.
[quote comment=”9078″]she lies in the bed she has made herself.
What does that mean. This writer has gotten death threats against her and her children from some people part of the fundamentalist movement who do not understand the concept of freedom of speech in Canada.
It’s bad enough that the only journalist killed in Canada was father of MLA Dave Hayer who ran the Indo-Canadian times and believed to be killed by fundamentalist sikh’s. I could only image what this would due to the image of sikhs if somebody was to attack Mrs.Bolan because they don’t agree with what she writes.[/quote]
Suki,
The meaning should be fairly obvious if you read the paragraph preceding the fragment you highlighted. To spell it out for you – her biased writing in the past colors how many readers will interpret her articles today, even if her intent is neutral, so…. she is the author of her own misfortune, she lies in the bed she has made herself, she reaps what she has sown…. Associating my comment with death threats is ridiculous.
[quote comment=”9078″]she lies in the bed she has made herself.
What does that mean. This writer has gotten death threats against her and her children from some people part of the fundamentalist movement who do not understand the concept of freedom of speech in Canada.
It’s bad enough that the only journalist killed in Canada was father of MLA Dave Hayer who ran the Indo-Canadian times and believed to be killed by fundamentalist sikh’s. I could only image what this would due to the image of sikhs if somebody was to attack Mrs.Bolan because they don’t agree with what she writes.[/quote]
Suki,
The meaning should be fairly obvious if you read the paragraph preceding the fragment you highlighted. To spell it out for you – her biased writing in the past colors how many readers will interpret her articles today, even if her intent is neutral, so…. she is the author of her own misfortune, she lies in the bed she has made herself, she reaps what she has sown…. Associating my comment with death threats is ridiculous.
[quote comment=”9078″]she lies in the bed she has made herself.
What does that mean. This writer has gotten death threats against her and her children from some people part of the fundamentalist movement who do not understand the concept of freedom of speech in Canada.
It’s bad enough that the only journalist killed in Canada was father of MLA Dave Hayer who ran the Indo-Canadian times and believed to be killed by fundamentalist sikh’s. I could only image what this would due to the image of sikhs if somebody was to attack Mrs.Bolan because they don’t agree with what she writes.[/quote]
[quote comment=”9101″]
I find this rhetoric sinister in the light of the death threats that Ms Bolan reportedly receives.[/quote]
So, what are you proposing Prem? Bolan should be given a free pass when it comes to journalistic integrity, and we should all sit quitely for fear that any criticism against her will be taken the wrong way?
Is freedom of speech, including to criticize, now to be limited because Bolan alleges she has received death threats?
I find such pussy-footing to be far more sinister than any imaginary connection you’ve drawn between my statements and death threats. If you’re going to draw connections and label them sinister, then make sure you analyze the whole of what was written, and not just one selective fragment.
[quote comment="9101"]
I find this rhetoric sinister in the light of the death threats that Ms Bolan reportedly receives.[/quote]
So, what are you proposing Prem? Bolan should be given a free pass when it comes to journalistic integrity, and we should all sit quitely for fear that any criticism against her will be taken the wrong way?
Is freedom of speech, including to criticize, now to be limited because Bolan alleges she has received death threats?
I find such pussy-footing to be far more sinister than any imaginary connection you've drawn between my statements and death threats. If you're going to draw connections and label them sinister, then make sure you analyze the whole of what was written, and not just one selective fragment.
[quote comment=”9101″]
I find this rhetoric sinister in the light of the death threats that Ms Bolan reportedly receives.[/quote]
So, what are you proposing Prem? Bolan should be given a free pass when it comes to journalistic integrity, and we should all sit quitely for fear that any criticism against her will be taken the wrong way?
Is freedom of speech, including to criticize, now to be limited because Bolan alleges she has received death threats?
I find such pussy-footing to be far more sinister than any imaginary connection you’ve drawn between my statements and death threats. If you’re going to draw connections and label them sinister, then make sure you analyze the whole of what was written, and not just one selective fragment.
[quote comment=”9101″]
I find this rhetoric sinister in the light of the death threats that Ms Bolan reportedly receives.[/quote]
So, what are you proposing Prem? Bolan should be given a free pass when it comes to journalistic integrity, and we should all sit quitely for fear that any criticism against her will be taken the wrong way?
Is freedom of speech, including to criticize, now to be limited because Bolan alleges she has received death threats?
I find such pussy-footing to be far more sinister than any imaginary connection you’ve drawn between my statements and death threats. If you’re going to draw connections and label them sinister, then make sure you analyze the whole of what was written, and not just one selective fragment.
Camille,
You’re spot on – thank you.
Camille,
You're spot on – thank you.
Camille,
You’re spot on – thank you.
Camille,
You’re spot on – thank you.
I agree with P. Singh. Of course, all Sikhs are completely against threats or intimidation of a journalist. We respect the right of a journalist to do research on important news and report the news to the public. We respect the right of the journalist to freedom of expression, freedom of speech and freedom of the press. However, the previous actions of other individuals against Kim Bolan should be held separately and criticism should be held separately. Criticism is also a type of expression and we also strongly defend everyone's right to publically criticize Kim Bolan's articles which often are a horrible misinterpretation of the Sikh teachings and a disgusting misrepresentation of the Sikh community. Just because somebody loathes Kim Bolan's propagandist reporting style, does not mean they are a supporter of intimidation or threats. It also doesn't mean they are trying to quiet or nullify the quest for justice in the Air India case. In some ways Kim Bolan's reporting has in fact caused many people to become aware of real issues that deserve attention. These are not the topics that are being protested. If somebody's entire career was devoted to finding the truth about the 9/11 WTC attacks, but also made it a point to vilify and misrepresent all Muslims in the process, they would be wrong no matter how righteous their cause. This is the case with Kim Bolan. She stands behind the cause of finding justice and truth in the Air India case, which is important, but her real agenda could be something completely different – to create a general consensus in the Canadian population that Amritdhari Sikhs, especially those who advocate a free Khalistan, are extremely sinister elements of society and should be arrested or deported. Her articles strike fear in people about Sikhs as a whole based on her purposeful misrepresentation of Sikhs, which is irresponsible and highly unbecoming of a journalist.
I agree with P. Singh. Of course, all Sikhs are completely against threats or intimidation of a journalist. We respect the right of a journalist to do research on important news and report the news to the public. We respect the right of the journalist to freedom of expression, freedom of speech and freedom of the press. However, the previous actions of other individuals against Kim Bolan should be held separately and criticism should be held separately. Criticism is also a type of expression and we also strongly defend everyone’s right to publically criticize Kim Bolan’s articles which often are a horrible misinterpretation of the Sikh teachings and a disgusting misrepresentation of the Sikh community. Just because somebody loathes Kim Bolan’s propagandist reporting style, does not mean they are a supporter of intimidation or threats. It also doesn’t mean they are trying to quiet or nullify the quest for justice in the Air India case. In some ways Kim Bolan’s reporting has in fact caused many people to become aware of real issues that deserve attention. These are not the topics that are being protested. If somebody’s entire career was devoted to finding the truth about the 9/11 WTC attacks, but also made it a point to vilify and misrepresent all Muslims in the process, they would be wrong no matter how righteous their cause. This is the case with Kim Bolan. She stands behind the cause of finding justice and truth in the Air India case, which is important, but her real agenda could be something completely different – to create a general consensus in the Canadian population that Amritdhari Sikhs, especially those who advocate a free Khalistan, are extremely sinister elements of society and should be arrested or deported. Her articles strike fear in people about Sikhs as a whole based on her purposeful misrepresentation of Sikhs, which is irresponsible and highly unbecoming of a journalist.
I agree with P. Singh. Of course, all Sikhs are completely against threats or intimidation of a journalist. We respect the right of a journalist to do research on important news and report the news to the public. We respect the right of the journalist to freedom of expression, freedom of speech and freedom of the press. However, the previous actions of other individuals against Kim Bolan should be held separately and criticism should be held separately. Criticism is also a type of expression and we also strongly defend everyone’s right to publically criticize Kim Bolan’s articles which often are a horrible misinterpretation of the Sikh teachings and a disgusting misrepresentation of the Sikh community. Just because somebody loathes Kim Bolan’s propagandist reporting style, does not mean they are a supporter of intimidation or threats. It also doesn’t mean they are trying to quiet or nullify the quest for justice in the Air India case. In some ways Kim Bolan’s reporting has in fact caused many people to become aware of real issues that deserve attention. These are not the topics that are being protested. If somebody’s entire career was devoted to finding the truth about the 9/11 WTC attacks, but also made it a point to vilify and misrepresent all Muslims in the process, they would be wrong no matter how righteous their cause. This is the case with Kim Bolan. She stands behind the cause of finding justice and truth in the Air India case, which is important, but her real agenda could be something completely different – to create a general consensus in the Canadian population that Amritdhari Sikhs, especially those who advocate a free Khalistan, are extremely sinister elements of society and should be arrested or deported. Her articles strike fear in people about Sikhs as a whole based on her purposeful misrepresentation of Sikhs, which is irresponsible and highly unbecoming of a journalist.
I agree with P. Singh. Of course, all Sikhs are completely against threats or intimidation of a journalist. We respect the right of a journalist to do research on important news and report the news to the public. We respect the right of the journalist to freedom of expression, freedom of speech and freedom of the press. However, the previous actions of other individuals against Kim Bolan should be held separately and criticism should be held separately. Criticism is also a type of expression and we also strongly defend everyone’s right to publically criticize Kim Bolan’s articles which often are a horrible misinterpretation of the Sikh teachings and a disgusting misrepresentation of the Sikh community. Just because somebody loathes Kim Bolan’s propagandist reporting style, does not mean they are a supporter of intimidation or threats. It also doesn’t mean they are trying to quiet or nullify the quest for justice in the Air India case. In some ways Kim Bolan’s reporting has in fact caused many people to become aware of real issues that deserve attention. These are not the topics that are being protested. If somebody’s entire career was devoted to finding the truth about the 9/11 WTC attacks, but also made it a point to vilify and misrepresent all Muslims in the process, they would be wrong no matter how righteous their cause. This is the case with Kim Bolan. She stands behind the cause of finding justice and truth in the Air India case, which is important, but her real agenda could be something completely different – to create a general consensus in the Canadian population that Amritdhari Sikhs, especially those who advocate a free Khalistan, are extremely sinister elements of society and should be arrested or deported. Her articles strike fear in people about Sikhs as a whole based on her purposeful misrepresentation of Sikhs, which is irresponsible and highly unbecoming of a journalist.
Well, she has received death threats, these are not allegations. They are facts.
Your question is a little bizarre, in as much as no suggestion was made that ‘freedom of speech’ should be limited because of the death threats that Kim Bolan receives. I said that I found the rhetoric of her being ‘a low life’ who has ‘made her own bed’ to be sinister because they echo so much of the rhetoric of threat and violence that underlies discussion of Kim Bolan by some Sikhs. Your freedom to say what you want has not been impeded — it still operates under less onerous conditions than Ms Bolan experiences, for example.
Thank you Maple Leaf. I believe that to be not just the ‘Sikh’ ideal, but a universal ideal too. As long as individuals receive threats to their lives for what they say, what they are saying becomes obscured. To put it plainly, not only are threats of violence, bullying and intimidatory rhetoric morally evil and cowardly, they are also moronic in as much as they never extinguish the flame of free speech. Someone else will always take up the mantle being carried by the targets of murderous intent.
Sikhs can claim the moral highground if they stand firm on these principles.
Well, she has received death threats, these are not allegations. They are facts.
Your question is a little bizarre, in as much as no suggestion was made that ‘freedom of speech’ should be limited because of the death threats that Kim Bolan receives. I said that I found the rhetoric of her being ‘a low life’ who has ‘made her own bed’ to be sinister because they echo so much of the rhetoric of threat and violence that underlies discussion of Kim Bolan by some Sikhs. Your freedom to say what you want has not been impeded — it still operates under less onerous conditions than Ms Bolan experiences, for example.
Thank you Maple Leaf. I believe that to be not just the ‘Sikh’ ideal, but a universal ideal too. As long as individuals receive threats to their lives for what they say, what they are saying becomes obscured. To put it plainly, not only are threats of violence, bullying and intimidatory rhetoric morally evil and cowardly, they are also moronic in as much as they never extinguish the flame of free speech. Someone else will always take up the mantle being carried by the targets of murderous intent.
Sikhs can claim the moral highground if they stand firm on these principles.
Well, she has received death threats, these are not allegations. They are facts.
Your question is a little bizarre, in as much as no suggestion was made that 'freedom of speech' should be limited because of the death threats that Kim Bolan receives. I said that I found the rhetoric of her being 'a low life' who has 'made her own bed' to be sinister because they echo so much of the rhetoric of threat and violence that underlies discussion of Kim Bolan by some Sikhs. Your freedom to say what you want has not been impeded — it still operates under less onerous conditions than Ms Bolan experiences, for example.
Thank you Maple Leaf. I believe that to be not just the 'Sikh' ideal, but a universal ideal too. As long as individuals receive threats to their lives for what they say, what they are saying becomes obscured. To put it plainly, not only are threats of violence, bullying and intimidatory rhetoric morally evil and cowardly, they are also moronic in as much as they never extinguish the flame of free speech. Someone else will always take up the mantle being carried by the targets of murderous intent.
Sikhs can claim the moral highground if they stand firm on these principles.
Well, she has received death threats, these are not allegations. They are facts.
Your question is a little bizarre, in as much as no suggestion was made that ‘freedom of speech’ should be limited because of the death threats that Kim Bolan receives. I said that I found the rhetoric of her being ‘a low life’ who has ‘made her own bed’ to be sinister because they echo so much of the rhetoric of threat and violence that underlies discussion of Kim Bolan by some Sikhs. Your freedom to say what you want has not been impeded — it still operates under less onerous conditions than Ms Bolan experiences, for example.
Thank you Maple Leaf. I believe that to be not just the ‘Sikh’ ideal, but a universal ideal too. As long as individuals receive threats to their lives for what they say, what they are saying becomes obscured. To put it plainly, not only are threats of violence, bullying and intimidatory rhetoric morally evil and cowardly, they are also moronic in as much as they never extinguish the flame of free speech. Someone else will always take up the mantle being carried by the targets of murderous intent.
Sikhs can claim the moral highground if they stand firm on these principles.