Baseless fear mongering by the CBC
I've never seen such a blatant attempt to plant fear and misinformation into the Canadian public than I saw tonight on the CBC.
I've never seen such a blatant abuse of journalistic power than Terry Milewski's piece on The National.
It doesn't take very much to slant a piece of journalism to suit the journalist's goals. When people give interviews, all you have to do is use them very selectively. Working as a journalist carries certain responsibilities, and the most basic tenet of journalism is to strive for fairness.
Terry Milewski's reporting on the Sikh community is anything but fair. It is malicious, it is divisive and it is a great shame that the CBC chooses to air his "reporting".
It doesn't take much to find a few nutjobs and air their opinions as the opinions of an entire community, and yet Milewski does this on an almost weekly basis, and the editors at the CBC seem to have no problem with it.
I've tried to come up with a rebuttal of Milewski's piece. Some of my rebuttal is based in clear fact and some of it is based on my observations of the Sikh community over the years.
- The most important starting point is that a violent movement for a Sikh state is virtually dead, in Punjab, in Canada and throughout the world. There still exists a number of Sikhs who wish to establish a Sikh state, but these people wish to do so through peaceful means.
- Tarek Fatah is someone who is deeply intolerant of anyone who doesn't buy into his rigid view of secularism. His view of secularism essentially calls for all religious people to cut their ties to their faith. He also seems to suggest that it is somehow beyond the pale to question the "unity" of India. How foolish. It's alright for Jewish Canadians to have nationalist sympathies with Israel and yet it isn't alright for other Canadians to have nationalist sympathies elsewhere as well? Are all national borders cut in stone? Are no nationalist movements worthy of sympathy? Does state-sponsored terrorism exist nowhere in this world? Most Sikh Canadians who are also Sikh nationalists are fully loyal to both Canada and to their aspirations for a Sikh state.
- This has been stated above, but Milewski makes a conscious decision to interview the most ignorant (and perhaps mentally imbalanced) people that he can find. He interviewed someone who said he spoke for a temple. That is a complete and utter lie. That person speaks for himself and nobody else.
- I can't state enough that there is very little appetite in any segment of the Sikh population that calls for any kind of violent behavior. I've never met a Sikh who wasn't horrified by the Air India tragedy. I've never met a Sikh who didn't realize that the Air India tragedy hurt the Sikh image immensely. Having said that, I have met Sikhs who aren't fully convinced that Sikhs were even behind the tragedy. Now I have my doubts about their theories, but unlike what Milewski kept trying to state as a fact, no Sikh was ever convicted of the Air India tragedy.
- Milewski's interviews of Dave Hayer and Ujjal Dosanjh were just laughable. Dave Hayer's dad distributed sweets outside of the main Sikh temple in Vancouver when Indira Gandhi was killed. Dave Hayer's dad called Jarnail Singh Bhindravale one of the greatest Sikhs ever. The point is that people change. Because someone expressed a view in 1984 doesn't mean that they still hold those views now, or even 10 years after 1984. What happened to Ujjal Dosanjh in 1985 was horrible and disgusting - but Dosanjh's inability (while perhaps somewhat understandable) to let go of a 20+ year old grudge clouds any objectivity that he might have.
- Milewski's attempt to isolate the Sikh community from any political power is as transparently obvious as it is malicious. Instead of perhaps offering some commentary that being integrated into Canadian society would be a good thing - Milewski's prescription is that isolating and shunning 100,000 Sikhs, 99% of whom do not favour any kind of violence for political ends, in India and especially in Canada, would be the best way forward.
- Milewski stated many many other falsehoods in his piece. For example, the WSO is a moderate Sikh group that expressly rejects any kind of violence. And yet he somehow portrayed them as some sort of violent extremist group. Milewski tried hard to portray as much as the Sikh population as possible as violent, raging, angry extremists. Why would he do this when it isn't so? Is it just because these sorts of lies get better ratings, or does Milewski have some other sort of deep seated dislike of Sikhs?
I've never seen such a blatant abuse of journalistic power than Terry Milewski's piece on The National.
It doesn't take very much to slant a piece of journalism to suit the journalist's goals. When people give interviews, all you have to do is use them very selectively. Working as a journalist carries certain responsibilities, and the most basic tenet of journalism is to strive for fairness.
Terry Milewski's reporting on the Sikh community is anything but fair. It is malicious, it is divisive and it is a great shame that the CBC chooses to air his "reporting".
It doesn't take much to find a few nutjobs and air their opinions as the opinions of an entire community, and yet Milewski does this on an almost weekly basis, and the editors at the CBC seem to have no problem with it.
I've tried to come up with a rebuttal of Milewski's piece. Some of my rebuttal is based in clear fact and some of it is based on my observations of the Sikh community over the years.
- The most important starting point is that a violent movement for a Sikh state is virtually dead, in Punjab, in Canada and throughout the world. There still exists a number of Sikhs who wish to establish a Sikh state, but these people wish to do so through peaceful means.
- Tarek Fatah is someone who is deeply intolerant of anyone who doesn't buy into his rigid view of secularism. His view of secularism essentially calls for all religious people to cut their ties to their faith. He also seems to suggest that it is somehow beyond the pale to question the "unity" of India. How foolish. It's alright for Jewish Canadians to have nationalist sympathies with Israel and yet it isn't alright for other Canadians to have nationalist sympathies elsewhere as well? Are all national borders cut in stone? Are no nationalist movements worthy of sympathy? Does state-sponsored terrorism exist nowhere in this world? Most Sikh Canadians who are also Sikh nationalists are fully loyal to both Canada and to their aspirations for a Sikh state.
- This has been stated above, but Milewski makes a conscious decision to interview the most ignorant (and perhaps mentally imbalanced) people that he can find. He interviewed someone who said he spoke for a temple. That is a complete and utter lie. That person speaks for himself and nobody else.
- I can't state enough that there is very little appetite in any segment of the Sikh population that calls for any kind of violent behavior. I've never met a Sikh who wasn't horrified by the Air India tragedy. I've never met a Sikh who didn't realize that the Air India tragedy hurt the Sikh image immensely. Having said that, I have met Sikhs who aren't fully convinced that Sikhs were even behind the tragedy. Now I have my doubts about their theories, but unlike what Milewski kept trying to state as a fact, no Sikh was ever convicted of the Air India tragedy.
- Milewski's interviews of Dave Hayer and Ujjal Dosanjh were just laughable. Dave Hayer's dad distributed sweets outside of the main Sikh temple in Vancouver when Indira Gandhi was killed. Dave Hayer's dad called Jarnail Singh Bhindravale one of the greatest Sikhs ever. The point is that people change. Because someone expressed a view in 1984 doesn't mean that they still hold those views now, or even 10 years after 1984. What happened to Ujjal Dosanjh in 1985 was horrible and disgusting - but Dosanjh's inability (while perhaps somewhat understandable) to let go of a 20+ year old grudge clouds any objectivity that he might have.
- Milewski's attempt to isolate the Sikh community from any political power is as transparently obvious as it is malicious. Instead of perhaps offering some commentary that being integrated into Canadian society would be a good thing - Milewski's prescription is that isolating and shunning 100,000 Sikhs, 99% of whom do not favour any kind of violence for political ends, in India and especially in Canada, would be the best way forward.
- Milewski stated many many other falsehoods in his piece. For example, the WSO is a moderate Sikh group that expressly rejects any kind of violence. And yet he somehow portrayed them as some sort of violent extremist group. Milewski tried hard to portray as much as the Sikh population as possible as violent, raging, angry extremists. Why would he do this when it isn't so? Is it just because these sorts of lies get better ratings, or does Milewski have some other sort of deep seated dislike of Sikhs?
posted by Japnaam Singh at
8:04 PM
0 Comments
