BRIT 'EMPIRE' DEAD, ATTITUDE STILL ALIVE - Englishman Apologizes (2)

[Dr. Jai Maharaj]

Forwarded article from the Hindu Vivek Kendra

> VISIT SANS APOLOGY
>
> By Christopher Balchin, New York City
>
> The Hindu
> October 15, 1997
>
> Sir, - I was horrified as an Englishman and human
> being, when I learned that Queen Elizabeth was
> visiting Amritsar, site of the infamous massacre
> by British troops of 379 unarmed civilians and
> wounding of 1200 others in 1919, without uttering
> even one word of apology (She has since visited the
> city).
>
> Sir David Gore-Booth Britain's envoy in New Delhi,
> said on October 7: "The Queen is not going to
> apologise, but she is going to lay a wreath. Those
> of you who recognise the subtle distinction will see
> it as a very special gesture."
>
> These cold, patronising, unclear words show that
> while the British empire is mercifully dead, the
> attitude that led to the death is very much alive.
> I have learned from the American educator and poet
> Eli Siegel, founder of the philosophy Aesthetic
> Realism, that the greatest enemy of man, the cause
> of all cruelty and of war is contempt, the
> "disposition in every person to think he will be for
> himself by making less of the outside world."
>
> My own desire to feel superior, to have contempt, is
> the reason why while I attended the Oxford University,
> I shamefully agreed with the accepted view in England
> of the British empire that we had brought needed
> civilisation to lesser peoples and were in fact doing
> them a kindness. The truth is the British empire was
> based on contempt, on the ugly, wrong, completely
> unscientific idea that other people, looking different
> and speaking different languages, did not exist to be
> known as having meaning, hopes and fears as real as
> that of any Englishman, but were inferior, brings who
> existed instead to be used for Britain's own power,
> glory and wealth; and this centuries-old government
> policy caused horrors, including in Amritsar.
>
> I think it was barbaric and I grateful to be learning
> now as a history teacher at the Norman Thoman High
> School in New York city about the rich history and
> culture of the people of India and to know that my
> purpose is to see meaning and use them to have more
> respect for the world. I want to apologise, as a
> representative Englishman to the people of Amritsar
> for what my country did to them.
>
> For the way of seeing that led to the British empire
> to end for there to be goodwill between people and
> between nations, this kind, urgent question by Eli
> Siegel needs to be asked and honestly answered: "What
> does a person deserve by being a person?" Thinking
> about this question, British representatives could
> never go to India, let alone Amritsar, without
> beginning their visit with a sincere expression of
> regret.
>
End of forwarded article from the Hindu Vivek Kendra

Excerpt

"Australia
"British settlement began in 1788, with the landing
party of transported convicts. Australia remained a
penal colony. during the first half of the 19th century,
during which time the continent was explored and
separate colonies were established in the various
states. Aboriginal populations were were displaced and
decimated' in some areas (e.g., Tasmania), they were
totally exterminated...."

End of Excerpt from THE UNIVERSAL ALMANAC; Andrews and
McMeel; ISBN: 0-8362-7977-8.

The union jack -- pet symbol of the past British
barbarians -- still stains one corner of the flag
of Hawaii, one of the 50 states of the UnitesD States.
The Hawaii legislature must see to it that the union jack
is removed from the flag, it must never be displayed
anywhere.

Yes, the union jack -- off it must go.

Jai Maharaj
http://www.flex.com/~jai
Om Shanti

[chatterjee avik prasun]

456275,456279-456283,456289-456290,456293-456295,456297,456299,456302-456304,456307,456313-456314,456318-456320,456324,456326,456328,456331,456335,456337-456339,456343-456349,456351-456352,456354-456356,456367-456370,456372,456379,456381,456390,456392-456394,456401-456403,456405-456407,456409,456411,456415,456417-456418,456422-456425,456428,456430,456432-456439,456441-456442,456446,456449-456452,456454,456458-456459,456461-456462,456464-456465,456467-456468,456475-456476,456478-456482,456484,456489-456493,
456495-456496,456499-456501,456504,456506,456508,456510,456513,456515,456521,456523,456525,456529,456533-456542,456549-456554,456557,456560-456564,456566-456568,456570-456571,456575,456577-456579,456581,456583-456585,456592,456595,456598,456607-456608,456614,456618,456636,456642,456651-456652,456664-456669,456674,456676,456687,456693,456697,456699-456700,456702-456704,456708-456713,456716,456719,456722-456723,456726-456732,456736-456737,456744,456751,456755,456758,456779,456810,456813-4568
: Brijnandan Singh Dehiya wrote:

: > India Today had reported a couple months back that in 1922, 3 years _after_
: > the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, British troops gunned down 1200+ people in
: > Gujarat, who had gathered to protest the Raj and its policies.

: That's true. I read that as well.

:
: > While everyone knows about Jallianwala Bagh, the Gujarat incident is never
: > reported for some reason.

: Perhaps it is not publicised as much. Who knows?

: It was a horrific massacre, nevertheless.

: And considering all we gave to the British, I have every right to live
: in this country.

Who is "we" ??? Royal plural ?

-avik.

: Nihar.

[Dr. Jai Maharaj]

In article <Pine.GSO.3.96.971017...@taurus.oac.uci.edu>,
Nathan Batra <nba...@taurus.oac.uci.edu> wrote:
>On 17 Oct 1997, NoSpamlchow wrote:
>
>> guarantee freedom and fair speech. If a nation like Chechnya and other
>> Caucasus Mountain states wanted independence, Russia would never permit
>> The historic boundaries of Russia is to the north of the Caspian Sea and
>> to the north of the Black Sea (Ukraine), not within the Caucasus
>> Mountains.
>
>
>I believe in self-determination, so yes, if Chechnyans voted to become an
>independent nation, it is their God-given right to make their own fate.
>Inalienable, too. but it
>is the same with the Confederacy. i don't see why being a separate
>"ethnicity" would ever make a diff in whether you have self-determination
>or not, but if it matters, the colonizers of southern states were mostly
>Scotch-Irish, the northerners English-German-Dutch.
>scotch-irish to rest
>of w. europeans probably the biggest difference in culture than any two
>w.euro places, verdad??
> and Moscow's attitude doesn't single out Russia as
>evil, Spain does same to Basque, India and Pakistan to Kashmir, India
>potentially to Sikhs in Punjab (if the majority there wants a separate
>sovereign), United Kingdom to Scotland (new leg forbidden from voting for
>independence!-o that
>ever-so-progressive Tony), Mexico to Chiapas. When you call russia evil,
>does this mean anyone who has same racial features as people in the
>government (at any given time) is evil? Tolstoy, Gorbachev,
>Tchaikovsky, AND Vladimir Doe?
>
>also, what does "historic" boundaries mean?? is earlier date somehow more
>sacred than later date?? are boundaries preordained, or
>are they arbitrary lines we earthlings imagine for administrative
>efficiency, for uniting for a stronger defense, for
>preventing overflow of immigrants, and for
>appeasing our napoleon complex/penis envies (of men)/greed???
>
>Nathan Batra
>
>
>
>
>