Sikhs mistaken for Muslims inside America yet again

Indus

Lifer
May 11, 2002
13,514
9,395
136
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Sikh-Temple-Vandalized-Buena-Park-361394011.html

Officials for a Sikh temple in Buena Park believe their building was targeted in a possible hate crime on Wednesday after vandals spray painted the area.

Jaspreet Singh showed NBC4 spray paint, also known as tagging, on an parking lot wall near the temple and nearby tractor trailer possibly connected to a gang.

On the trailer, an expletive could be seen in spray paint followed by the word "ISIS."

Singh fears the turbans and beards Sikhs wear are being confused for followers of Islam, a completely separate religion.

Singh said its the first attack on the temple in 30 years. He also believes the vandalism could be some type of backlash related to the San Bernardino mass shootings.

"In this kind of tragedy, I would suggest all Americans come closer and protect each other rather than splitting and hating each othe," he said.

:rolleyes:

So Mr. Trump, when is America going to be safe again for Sikhs? We have no choice.. we need to deport the ones committing these violent acts.
 
Dec 10, 2005
26,616
10,353
136
Trump hasn't said a word about Sikhs.
It is true that Trump has not, to my knowledge, said anything disparaging about Sikhs. However, very dumb people think turban = muslim. Trump and the Republican party have been quite successful in scaring up some good old fashion nativism, with the result that some people are going to take it into their own hands to terrorize their fellow Americans, just because they are the "wrong" (whether real or apparent) religion/ethnicity/etc...
 
Last edited:

BonzaiDuck

Lifer
Jun 30, 2004
16,054
1,682
126
Trump hasn't said a word about Sikhs.

Back at a time after 911, a Sikh gas-station attendant was shot dead by some cornpone shitass in Arizona. Ignorant assholes. The sordid, hateful underbelly of America and lower than crocodile piss.

And you can't tell by appearances. I was driving from So-Cal to Seattle to visit my cousin back in '02, stopping at an Oregon gas-station at 2AM. The attendant really looked like one swarthy, grungy grease-monkey.

I stood there talking with him about Cold War history for almost an hour.

And I once knew a truck driver who created oil paintings and collected albums of Beethoven and Richard Strauss.

You never can tell -- until some asshole opens his mouth or shoots someone.
 

DigDog

Lifer
Jun 3, 2011
14,084
2,563
126
Sikhs are actually pretty cool. A warrior religion dedicated to fighting injustice and helping the needy.
 

MongGrel

Lifer
Dec 3, 2013
38,466
3,067
121
Trump hasn't said a word about Sikhs.

WU0hx1B.jpg
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
37,489
29,972
136
This is why Republicans need to focus more on the word "terrorism" and less on one word "Islam" and "Muslim". You know the Republican base cant differentiate between the two. Remember the mask killing in the Sikh temple early this year? Was that terrorism?

Also attacks on Muslims in this country are spiking. Think the GOP rhetoric has something to do with it?
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,883
641
126
Also attacks on Muslims in this country are spiking. Think the GOP rhetoric has something to do with it?
And here you are attacking the GOP. Ever think that your words are spurring GOP members to attack? Why, you're inciting violence!
 

buckshot24

Diamond Member
Nov 3, 2009
9,916
85
91
It is true that Trump has not, to my knowledge, said anything disparaging about Sikhs. However, very dumb people think turban = muslim. Trump and the Republican party have been quite successful in scaring up some good old fashion nativism, with the result that some people are going to take it into their own hands to terrorize their fellow Americans, just because they are the "wrong" (whether real or apparent) religion/ethnicity/etc...
So it's still Trumps fault, amazing. You have no clue what motivated these people and who they are listening to. And I think you have reversed, Trump is tapping into something that already exists.
 

buckshot24

Diamond Member
Nov 3, 2009
9,916
85
91
This is why Republicans need to focus more on the word "terrorism" and less on one word "Islam" and "Muslim". You know the Republican base cant differentiate between the two. Remember the mask killing in the Sikh temple early this year? Was that terrorism?

Also attacks on Muslims in this country are spiking. Think the GOP rhetoric has something to do with it?
Please let us know how you know these people who did this were part of the Republican base.
 

BonzaiDuck

Lifer
Jun 30, 2004
16,054
1,682
126
Please let us know how you know these people who did this were part of the Republican base.

You remember "Training Day" with Denzel Washington? "It's not what you know, but what you can prove."

This side-dialog popped into the frenzied aftermath of the Giffords shooting in Tucson. Palin was trying to back-pedal and distance herself from certain web-posts, until it was determined that Loughner was clinically insane.

Which way do you think Robert Dear would vote, had he not chosen to make his statement with bullets?

Also, I remember the Giffords aftermath. A talk-radio conservative posed the argument that "Oswald was a communist; the Right doesn't do things like that." If that's an "argument," it's also a joke. It's a joke since one thing doesn't necessarily infer another. It's especially a joke if the first half of the statement is false. "Assigned to work in an counterintelligence project in the states . . . " A lot of folks haven't any idea what counterintelligence involves.
 

buckshot24

Diamond Member
Nov 3, 2009
9,916
85
91
You remember "Training Day" with Denzel Washington? "It's not what you know, but what you can prove."
No, I never saw that movie. But I like the quote. I would ask him, "how much of what you know is complete rubbish?"

This side-dialog popped into the frenzied aftermath of the Giffords shooting in Tucson. Palin was trying to back-pedal and distance herself from certain web-posts, until it was determined that Loughner was clinically insane.
You're not talking about the "target map" are you?
Which way do you think Robert Dear would vote, had he not chosen to make his statement with bullets?
I have no idea. He probably would have struck out.

imagesrobdeer.jpg


Oh, you mean the other guy. Does it matter?
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Trump hasn't said a word about Sikhs.

Idiots are confusing them with followers of Islam. Not that doing this in front of a Mosque is any better. Trump is really pushing the fear button on these idiots and riling them up.
 

buckshot24

Diamond Member
Nov 3, 2009
9,916
85
91
Idiots are confusing them with followers of Islam. Not that doing this in front of a Mosque is any better. Trump is really pushing the fear button on these idiots and riling them up.
Do you have ANY evidence that these guys were "riled up" by rhetoric let alone Trump's rhetoric?
 

BonzaiDuck

Lifer
Jun 30, 2004
16,054
1,682
126
Do you have ANY evidence that these guys were "riled up" by rhetoric let alone Trump's rhetoric?

Proving it is one thing; recognizing that the rhetoric briefly preceded the event, that's another.

I could simply observe the corporate affiliations, major donors and other underpinnings of the Bush administration before 2003. I could also observe that Halliburton was given a sole-source contract for the Iraq War.

Whether or not I could make all that a crime, or whether or not I could prove "a conspiracy," that's something else.

Consider the art and science of propaganda campaigns. If you're going to spread black propaganda -- complete falsehood -- you have to assure that nobody is going to find the truth of the matter. And if you want to prove something there, you need the confession of the propagandist.

So proving a causal connection between "rhetoric" and action requires more than the chronology. Suspecting a connection, that's yet something else.

If Sarah Palin had actually said "I'm going to post these web-pages with the cross-hairs and targets so maybe somebody will shoot a congresswoman," you still have to prove that someone in the audience also said they were going to act on either the suggestion or the "instruction."

And that's the little technicality we face in the SB shootings. Did they merely visit some web-pages and become "radicalized?" Or did some network of individuals "put them to work?"

Because that's going to determine something of a response to it. And if you knew the identities of the individuals in the network, they'd get the death-drone, wouldn't they?
 

buckshot24

Diamond Member
Nov 3, 2009
9,916
85
91
Proving it is one thing; recognizing that the rhetoric briefly preceded the event, that's another.
Pretty weak. The guy could have seen a yellow truck the day before. Correlation isn't causation. All this reminds me of JFK conspiracists.
 

BonzaiDuck

Lifer
Jun 30, 2004
16,054
1,682
126
Pretty weak. The guy could have seen a yellow truck the day before. Correlation isn't causation. All this reminds me of JFK conspiracists.

I've said that. I've said it over and over again. That doesn't mean that the correlations don't at least raise a suspicion, if the same types of event-sequences and correlations have occurred before.

You know, of course, that H. L. Hunt and one of his sons had put up the "Treason" posters in Dallas just before "The Big Event?" And that after it was over, those facts were starting to come to light, and the elder Hunt (and family) suddenly decided to vacation in Mexico for about six weeks?

They were even beneficiaries of the Big Event. But I don't think there's any substantive connection between the Event and Hunt, although the Russians did almost as soon as it happened.

For the literature, True -- it has become an "industry." Who pushes that observation? Everyone who publishes cherry-picked arguments fitting the original story. And you can prove that the publication history has been shot through like Swiss-Cheese with document forgeries and propaganda. Some of the propaganda comes from the suspicious side of the argument, and if there is an alternative explanation, when their explanation doesn't match the alternative, one must wonder whether it is deliberate, or accidental.

I'm not going to explore this further. I have other plans.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
I had trouble with the OP's link, so maybe I failed to see something but it strikes me as pretty damn 'thin' to claim vandalism on a Sikh temple because a nearby truck had **** ISIS spray painted on it.

Fern
 

BonzaiDuck

Lifer
Jun 30, 2004
16,054
1,682
126
I had trouble with the OP's link, so maybe I failed to see something but it strikes me as pretty damn 'thin' to claim vandalism on a Sikh temple because a nearby truck had **** ISIS spray painted on it.

Fern

I don't get it. What is "tagging?" If someone comes up, spills white paint all over your Alfa-Romeo -- that's not "vandalism?"

It's a lot more probable that it was directed at the Sikh's, than any chance that it wasn't.

I have a tenant (had a tenant) in a property I own. She's black. The neighbors, who I know, include two unruly young men -- big guys -- of German descent. They've had a history of being noisy going back to the days I was there. One night at 1AM, she and her boyfriend went to their door to complain about the noise. They threatened her escort with a torn off beer can. She called the police. Reports were filed.

Within a week, someone had keyed her new car -- not one scratch, but 30 or 40 on all the body-panels. When it went in for repair and she was given a loaner or rental, someone -- "they" -- keyed it with the same fury.

More police reports were filed. They couldn't apparently "prove" a connection of the people and the vandalism. If it happens again, I've threatened to file a civil suit. IT's my Mo-ney!! They cost me Money!!

And underlying it all -- the message was "How DARE you call the police on me, you N . . . N . . . . N-----!!" I can't prove it, but it's a high-probability interpretation.