Sh$t that White People do - end of year re-cap

[dallysingh101]

On 6/25/2019 at 11:53 AM, Guest jigsaw_puzzled_singh said:

Your message is very unclear so I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say but, from something you said previously over a week ago (not sure why you spent a week googling it and have come back to it) I'm guessing it's about how Sikhs in Afghanistan were treated pre and post taliban rule ?

Look...nobody in their right mind is going to defend the Taliban. That religion itself, even in it's moderate version, is one of the 3 Abrahamic religions and so absolutely chock-a-block full to the brim with utter garbage and hate. I'm not interested in the religion itself.....none of the 3 abrahamic faiths interest me in the slightest......I'm interested in the socio-political landscapes that events create. What is clear is that for all it's faults - and there were way too many - the period of Taliban rule in Afghanistan was a good period for the Sikhs in Afghanistan because, as business owners, the Sikhs needed a period of law and order and that's exactly what the taliban period provided. Things got really bad for the Sikhs in Afghanistan, and the situation became untenable, not during the Taliban period but just after the American invasion when the Taliban fell. That's when the warlords took over and law and order broke down. As business owners, the Sikhs became perennial victims of robbers, murderers and thieves that preyed on the Sikhs because they were non-muslim.  So please.....pretty please with sugar on top....what on earth are you arguing with me about dallysingh101?

Okay, on this point we seem to have come to the same conclusion. And I didn't spend a week googling it btw. I just remember the news reports of the time. Obviously when I saw apnay in it, it peaked my interest. 

I'm not defending the Taliban myself, but the truth that Mullah Omar (pre US+allies) invasion of the region post 9/11, protected Sikh merchants under his jurisdiction (for some reason) is one of those strange but true scenarios. It was probably because Sikhs had a monopoly on the cloth trade then and the place was dependent on them? Other people should also note how things changed so swiftly for them when external factors disturbed existing power balances.

You wrote this:

Quote

First of all, no Muslim has ever forced any Sikh woman to ever wear the face veil. Even during the dark days of the Taliban in Afghanistan remember, whilst the Taliban treated Hindus very unkindly, even forcing them to wear yellow stars, they didn't enforce any such rules on the Sikhs.

 And I simply pointed out that this was untrue. Sikh women WERE wearing burkhas when they left the house out there. That's what that news report I saw focused on, how they were the first to remove them after the invasion (in the Sikh quarters not when out and about). 

[dallysingh101]

This I don't get? 

Chasing someone through a train (yes, literally chasing, the black guy was trying to get away and moved to another carriage),  and not expecting trouble. 

I wonder if he was trying to show off in front of his son? 

Shame how it all ended. 

 

[dallysingh101]

^^^

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7183275/Lee-Pomeroys-family-leave-court-CCTV-played-fatal-attack.html

[Ranjeet01]

Here is a message from a white guy:

In the west, being a minority gives you special status that allows you to more easily gain university places, jobs and chat <banned word filter activated> about others without recourse.

Minorities are privileged in the west.

In the east, they truly oppress their minorities.

Whine less, you have it good

[MisterrSingh]

23 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

This I don't get? 

Chasing someone through a train (yes, literally chasing, the black guy was trying to get away and moved to another carriage),  and not expecting trouble. 

I wonder if he was trying to show off in front of his son? 

Shame how it all ended. 

I saw the CCTV footage on the news prior to it ending due to the killing itself, and I have to say the victim seemed to be unnecessarily confrontational in terms of being in the personal space of the attacker. Why he followed him into the next carriage I don't understand. I don't think he had any experience of knowing when to step the hell back and maintain a distance so there's a chance of seeing someone winding up to launch an attack. A slightly overweight IT consultant with some height + not wanting to lose face in front of his young son = a life lost. He misjudged it and overestimated himself. It doesn't excuse the savagery of the killer, but ego and pride contributed to a desperately sad situation.

[dallysingh101]

1 hour ago, Ranjeet01 said:

Here is a message from a white guy:

In the west, being a minority gives you special status that allows you to more easily gain university places, jobs and chat <banned word filter activated> about others without recourse.

Minorities are privileged in the west.

In the east, they truly oppress their minorities.

Whine less, you have it good

Yeah, white privilege doesn't exist. And those 'effniks' from working class backgrounds getting into uni has nothing to do with them studying harder or having better cognitive skills that enable them to pass exams that the average working class white guy wouldn't even bother with..... 

[dallysingh101]

22 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

I saw the CCTV footage on the news prior to it ending due to the killing itself, and I have to say the victim seemed to be unnecessarily confrontational in terms of being in the personal space of the attacker. Why he followed him into the next carriage I don't understand. I don't think he had any experience of knowing when to step the hell back and maintain a distance so there's a chance of seeing someone winding up to launch an attack. A slightly overweight IT consultant with some height + not wanting to lose face in front of his young son = a life lost. He misjudged it and overestimated himself. It doesn't excuse the savagery of the killer, but ego and pride contributed to a desperately sad situation.

This was the most unnecessary happening. The victim said his piece (fair enough) about the guy allegedly blocking the carriage, they exchanged insults, the other guy walked away into another carriage (the white guy should have let him be at that point), but no, he followed him in a undeniably intimidating fashion (judging from what is seen in in the video). This guy acted in a way that most people would construe as wanting some physical altercation. 

What person in their right mind would chase someone through train carriages like this, unless they wanted to have a confrontation?? Given this and what happened to Stephen Lawrence (and other less prominent race attacks and abuse in the UK), is it a wonder that the other guy felt threatened and defensive? It's not like race attacks don't/haven't happened here. I'd be alarmed as hell if someone started following me like that. I know most, if not every last one of you guys reading this here would probably too. 

If the victim wanted to save face, he did it when the black guy moved on. The mind boggles. Now one person is dead and another facing a long prison sentence. Totally avoidable. 

I'm wondering with all this Brexit vibe (taken in the totally wrong way by some racist white people, like it is the beginning of some white uprising), is going to make more fools feel like it is okay to publically intimidate ethnics - when they feel the odds are in their favour? I say this as someone who has family members who voted for Brexit because they felt the funds being sent to the EU where better spent here - rather than some racist resentment.  

[MisterrSingh]

11 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

I'm wondering with all this Brexit vibe (taken in the totally wrong way by some racist white people, like it is the beginning of some white uprising), is going to make more fools feel like it is okay to publically intimidate ethnics - when they feel the odds are in their favour? I say this as someone who has family members who voted for Brexit because they felt the funds being sent to the EU where better spent here - rather than some racist resentment.  

Until they reveal something to the contrary I'm assuming this wasn't a case of Brexit emboldening a previously closeted bigot, but rather a gullible middle class white professional who's bought the, "Everyone is the same underneath!" social propaganda. This is what happens when you allow your natural survival instincts to be dulled to the point where you not only enter a precarious social situation by relying on the fundamental decency of the opposing party to not misbehave BUT also the belief that everyone can be "reached" through civil discourse and reason. Before the guy was stabbed (when they were talking face to face in the second carriage), they both seemed to be having a conversation that wasn't animated or remotely threatening. The perpetrator suddenly flipped a switch.

Anyone who hasn't bought into the rainbows and unicorns outlook on life would know when to minimise a potential problem by creating as much distance between the potential threat and themselves. Those with street smarts and experience of the darker side of life develop a sense that alerts them to such situation; those who have never been in those situations and faced adversity are oblivious to such things and judge the world by their own standards, and that's a fatal mistake. The victim seemed to be trying to "reach" the other guy almost as if he was trying to heal or counsell the guy! That's madness, and ultimately it's a result of, as I mentioned, a dangerous philosophy that preys on the human desire to be seen as benevolent, forgiving, etc., which isn't something to be scoffed at, but goodness me, there's a time and a place for it. 

[dallysingh101]

52 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

Until they reveal something to the contrary I'm assuming this wasn't a case of Brexit emboldening a previously closeted bigot, but rather a gullible middle class white professional who's bought the, "Everyone is the same underneath!" social propaganda. This is what happens when you allow your natural survival instincts to be dulled to the point where you not only enter a precarious social situation by relying on the fundamental decency of the opposing party to not misbehave BUT also the belief that everyone can be "reached" through civil discourse and reason. Before the guy was stabbed (when they were talking face to face in the second carriage), they both seemed to be having a conversation that wasn't animated or remotely threatening. The perpetrator suddenly flipped a switch.

Anyone who hasn't bought into the rainbows and unicorns outlook on life would know when to minimise a potential problem by creating as much distance between the potential threat and themselves. Those with street smarts and experience of the darker side of life develop a sense that alerts them to such situation; those who have never been in those situations and faced adversity are oblivious to such things and judge the world by their own standards, and that's a fatal mistake. The victim seemed to be trying to "reach" the other guy almost as if he was trying to heal or counsell the guy! That's madness, and ultimately it's a result of, as I mentioned, a dangerous philosophy that preys on the human desire to be seen as benevolent, forgiving, etc., which isn't something to be scoffed at, but goodness me, there's a time and a place for it. 

You're right about the street smarts thing. But saying that,  I've had incidents where people have been making snide comments, or tried to act intimidatingly or have been in a carriage where some argy-bargy is taking place. Sometimes when you are say alone, and in packed train some people see this an an opportunity to act in a very obnoxious way. It does take that street savvy to gauge a situation and act accordingly. If someone has seriously determined  ill intent - there isn't much you can do to stop the situation escalating - especially if booze is involved. But otherwise, instincts can help to judge the situation and diffuse it. Misjudge this and anything can happen. Itis tricking though - say nothing and the offensive party might take it as a cue to go even further, say something and the situation could quickly escalate. You have to use your senses and intuition. 

Someone acting  like the gora did here is foolish, because you don't know what the other party may be going through as well. There might be a bereavement, or some serious  personal/family issue going on that has their mental state awry, and provoked  at the wrong time, this can come out explosively. 

Plus come on. In urban UK right now, the threat due to street level violence isn't something you can just ignore. A lot of people's survival instincts are activated right now. 

The deceased guy's son said that the father was the type to engage when he felt insulted and refuse to back down. I'm not justifying or condoning the perpetrators actions - but I think he probably felt a serious physical threat here, not that someone was trying to reach him like you are suggesting above. 

[MisterrSingh]