Sikhs want an apology

[Lily]

Sikhs want an apology from the Canadian government because in 1914, a shipload of illegal Sikh immigrants were not permitted to remain in Canada. The hype over this incident is incredible with monuments to these "victims of racism" erected all over the place. It is also wrongly reported that when the ship returned to Calcutta it was fired upon by British troops.

What really happened was that when the ship docked, a train was ready to take the Sikhs back to their homes in the Punjab. Most of them were happy with this arrangement and went willingly. Others, who were political activists, were not. They wanted to remain in Calcutta and stir up trouble. They swarmed ashore and when a Punjabi policeman tried to arrest them, they shot him. A riot ensued. That's when the soldiers opened fire on them.

www.vancouverdesi.com/news/india/indo-canadians-say-parliament-should-apologize-over-komagata-maru-incident/444224/

[jacklawson]

This is yet another history rewrite by the victim industry..

[kelly]

So are the Sikhs gonna apologize for some of the crap they've done? Or, is that 'racist' to even suggest such a thing?

[The Tourist]

I don't understand the need or the desire for historical apologies. If there ever was one needed it would be from Japan for either Pearl Harbor or the human costs they inflicted on Chinese non-combatants. You see how that worked out.

When this ethnic apologist whining begins, I proffer the same ideology. I tell people that, "We stole Texas fair and square from Mexico, and we were standing in a chapel when we did it."

Yikes, you should see the Peoples' Republik of Madison start hand-wringing when I say that.

My favorite ironic exchange comes from the argument that we do not treat ethnic history with respect. Like peyote buttons for Indians, or canceling Halloween because it offends the Hmong, or the ridiculous attempt to issue a drivers license replete with a photo of a veiled Islamic woman. Heck, if she was obeying her faith she wouldn't ask to drive, at all.

Here's my rebuttal, if this slavish acceptance to ethnic traditions trumps law, then get out your Kevlar. If valid, then I intend to solve disputes with switchblades and kielbasa.

That's my heritage.

[Lily]

Historical apology first, and then reparation demands afterwards. It's all part of the extremely lucrative victim industry. Whoever is occupying the land now got it fair and square by superior firing power. It's really that simple. No need to apologise for being the winners. Further, what constitutes an "atrocity" in time of war is open to individual interpretation. I, for one, believe that anything goes as long as our side wins. How can you wipe out an enemy in a politically correct way?

[Lily]

Jan 13, 2013 2:59:41 GMT -5 kelly said:

So are the Sikhs gonna apologize for some of the crap they've done? Or, is that 'racist' to even suggest such a thing?

Sikhs still arrange marriages, and they will not marry outside their own race. I have no problem with that. In fact, I believe it makes perfect sense. However, if Europeans engaged in the same practice, they would be immediately labelled "racist." Funny how that works. ;D

There is no equality or fair play in Political Correctness. If you're European you're automatically branded a "racist," colonizer and bad person. If you're Christian that increases the black marks against you, and if you're "straight" as well, then you're a "homophobic" and downright evil. In the Unholy Bible of Political Correctness, non-white, non-Christian homosexuals are God's new chosen.

When it comes to black slavery we have no need to apologise either. It wasn't only whites who owned black slaves, blacks did as well. Whites were also slaves. Muslims traders dealt in both black and white slaves.
researchnews.osu.edu/archive/whtslav.htm
www.saveyourheritage.com/white_slavery.htm
americancivilwar.com/authors/black_slaveowners.htm

[The Tourist]

Jan 13, 2013 17:02:43 GMT -5 Lily said:

How can you wipe out an enemy in a politically correct way?

Hopefully as humanely as I can. And what I say now is sincere, and you have to take my word for it, as odd as it sounds coming from me.

Below is the carry gun I have in rotation this week--an SW 360PD in .357 Magnum. I also have a SIG Sauer 'Diamond Plate' .380 ACP, and an SW 642 in .38 SPL.

I will find my aggressor(s) petty, cowardly, lazy, shameless and without remorse. I intend to tuck my wife behind me and make sure none of them ever get up again.

Even as God puts down sin at the end of carnal time it is referred to as "the last strange act." I find good citizens get forced into the same predicament, and I am not asking for forgiveness.

I find it a dichotomy that our best have to face off against their worst. But I hope I live by one constant.

During this act, I intend to uphold my principles, not succumb to theirs. I shall not extract vengeance, or delight in their pain. I will extend to them only the highest standards of the engagement. I practice so that my actions inflict only the most humane attributes of defense.

Every time I look into one of those hollowpoints, the severity of conflict becomes very real.

[Christie Bremmer]

Why should we apologize for something our ancestors did? Doesn't make a lick of sense.

[The Tourist]

Jan 13, 2013 19:01:50 GMT -5 Christie Bremmer said:

Why should we apologize for something our ancestors did? Doesn't make a lick of sense.

Come to Madison, Wisconsin.

I once told a whiner, "I never owned a plantation and you never picked any cotton."

To the liberals here, the Emancipation Proclamation doesn't provide enough food stamps and the Vietnam War is still being fought.