Jump to content

London attack: Four dead in Westminster terror incident


Premi5
 Share

Recommended Posts

59 minutes ago, Ranjeet01 said:

Lobbying is influencing and persuasion.

How that influence and persuasion works is another matter.

Like I said before Islam is a political ideology pretending to be a religion, it is a flawed political system that has to use certain tactics to keep things under control.

Our way is the better way like you have said. But as Dashmesh Pita told us to adept in the ways of rajniti.

If we were to fully realise our potential then we have to fully implement miri-piri. 

Problem in England is that we've created such a low image of ourselves in the political domain (post annexation) with English people, they don't even consider us worthy (and let's be frank, capable) of anything of any significance in the political domain. Time and time again we have rings run around us - and we still repeatedly follow old maxims and strategies that aren't working at all.

To lobby we need some bargaining chips. Muslims have it with oil rich nations and the capability to disrupt the economic system of the land here through terrorism. 

What the hell do we have to bargain with? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

One thing I've come to admire about Muslims in the West during the past decade or so is their resilience when it comes to defending their faith and doctrines in the face of incredible hostility - overt or otherwise - and attempts by whites for them to either disavow certain sections of their teachings, or even undergo a reformation of sorts. I have a broad sense of mistrust about all things Islam, and don't think much of their religious teachings, but fair's fair, i wish there was a similar strength of mind and loyalty for his or her faith amongst the average Western Sikh, who i feel would be all too willing to appease any potential non-Sikh dissenters by changing and distorting certain Sikh ways. For some of us, Sikhi is an adornment; an afterthought to be considered mood permitting, whereas i feel with Muslims Islam is THE priority, and everything else falls into place behind it.

Muslims don't, by and large, bend to the prevailing moods and opinions of the time, instead they try their best to shape their surroundings to their will, and that's a quality that should be respected - regardless of whether one agrees with their ways or not - if you've decided to follow a faith in its entirety. They're loathed to allow any outsiders to dictate how they need to conduct their religious business. We, on the other hand, are too malleable and agreeable, and those who have no business speaking for Sikhs seem to be sought time and time again for comment on issues they've no business discussing. 

I'm not a supporter of blind zealotry or religious violence, however being resolute and uncompromising and unapologetic for one's ways in order to placate a fickle, lost, and weak majority society simply is bad form in my opinion. 

There isn't a thing I could disagree with in all that. 

Going back to the post I made just previous to this - we (and let's be frank some of our ancestors) have created an image for the people here in England that only suggests malleability and compromise on our part. 

They must know that they came in and largely rewrote our faith during the colonial period. What weaker signal could we have sent them? How would this not mentally effect how they perceive us?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, dallysingh101 said:

Problem in England is that we've created such a low image of ourselves in the political domain (post annexation) with English people, they don't even consider us worthy (and let's be frank, capable) of anything of any significance in the political domain. Time and time again we have rings run around us - and we still repeatedly follow old maxims and strategies that aren't working at all.

To lobby we need some bargaining chips. Muslims have it with oil rich nations and the capability to disrupt the economic system of the land here through terrorism. 

What the hell do we have to bargain with? 

To be effective lobbyists we need to know what things are in our interest as it stands.

What do we need the government and institutions to do for us?

And I am not talking about things "kicking off".

I am just wondering whether the reason we are not as politically active is because most of our needs are met and most of the sangat are satisfied.

What we are left with is small things that we whinge about? Like the expression "1st world problems".

Maybe I am wrong, if anyone here could point out what interests of ours that need to be furthered.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's worrying as a Sikh is how woefully under-represented we are in Parliament, whereas Muslims are starting to make serious inroads into British politics at every level. It seems the only councillors we have are the ex-Communist, pro-India types - or their second generation offspring - who are as much unrepresentative of Sikh British interests and causes than any non-Sikh candidate. Heck, there's even white politicians who understand certain issues to do with us better than our own lot. Whether we need such representation or not is secondary, but we can't be crowded out of legislation formation by Muslims. It's social suicide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

What's worrying as a Sikh is how woefully under-represented we are in Parliament, whereas Muslims are starting to make serious inroads into British politics at every level. It seems the only councillors we have are the ex-Communist, pro-India types - or their second generation offspring - who are as much unrepresentative of Sikh British interests and causes than any non-Sikh candidate. Heck, there's even white politicians who understand certain issues to do with us better than our own lot. Whether we need such representation or not is secondary, but we can't be crowded out of legislation formation by Muslims. It's social suicide.

I grew up seeing a few turbaned Sikhs as mayors and councillors and whatnot. I'm wondering if it made any difference? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, dallysingh101 said:

I grew up seeing a few turbaned Sikhs as mayors and councillors and whatnot. I'm wondering if it made any difference? 

They were symbolic, hollow positions without any genuine influence. What I'm talking about is cabinet positions, or senior posts at the heart of government in the daily hubbub of Westminster, which is where Muslims are starting to infiltrate (without wishing to make it sound like a conspiracy, lol). Satpal Sandhu or whoever, sitting on the local council in Bedford has little to no bearing on nationally implemented legislation that will affect daily Sikh life in Britain, whereas Sadiq Khan, Naz Shah, etc, are actually getting on with it where it matters. A compliant, virtue signalling indigenous population is also a big help in these things, but that's another subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use