Insider assassinations in the third world
Today a suicide bomber in the Iraqi Parliament managed to kill eight people, and preliminary reports have it that the bomber was a security guard.
Whether or not the report of the bomber’s identity turns out to be true, the incident itself—which occurred within the highly-protected Green Zone—is another indication of how difficult security is in a failed nation with a history of enormous violence and no end of people with the motivation to sow chaos and fear. This was true in the days of Saddam, who “solved” the problem by killing everyone he suspected of being a threat, and those who were not, just for fun. And it’s true in today’s atmosphere, with attempts by so many to thwart the efforts by others to create a better nation in that long-beleaguered country.
The audience for today’s incident is twofold: the exhausted people of Iraq, and the far more easily exhausted people of the West. The word gets out through the MSM, which of course must report the incident and yet, in doing so, unwittingly and unwillingly becomes the instrument of the dissemination of terrorist propaganda.
Security in a failed and chaotic nation is incredibly difficult; who can be trusted? Despite the prevalence of rabid conspiracy theorists in our own country, the contrast couldn’t be greater between such nations and ourselves. The concept of a person charged with security at our own Congress being a counteragent, for example, is almost incomprehensible, although of course nothing is impossible.
Inside job assassinations such as this one are not just the province of Iraq, then or now. One exceedingly prominent example was that of Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, murdered by her Sikh bodyguards in 1984.
India isn’t the sort of country we think of as especially chaotic, but there is some recent Indian history that’s actually quite instructive on that score.
How many people are familiar with the reasons Indira Gandhi was assassinated, or the history of the Sikh insurgency in India? If not (and I certainly was one of those with only a vague familiarity with it prior to doing some research for this very post), you might want to do some reading.
In their campaign to secede from India and establish an independent nation, Sikh terrorists wreaked havoc in India, and the Indian government retaliated, hard. Very hard. And yet this sort of third-world-on-third-world violence caused (as is usually the case) hardly a ripple in the consciousness of most of us. However:
More than 250,000 Sikhs were killed by Indian security forces in Punjab between 1984 and 1992. It was also a period during which Sikh terrorists struck Indian targets seemingly at will.
That’s an awful lot of dead people, isn’t it? Indira Gandhi’s assassination was well-covered by the press, of course, but the larger context probably faded into the general background noise of third-world violence, a hum that’s been loud, constant, and generalized.
The immediate precipitating factor that was mentioned as motivation for the assassination was the Golden Temple assault in 1984, in which Indian forces killed approximately a thousand Sikhs holed up in the holiest of Sikh shrines. The government justification was that they were terrorists; the incident was regarded by Sikhs (or their propaganda) as the beginning of an Indian genocide against Sikhs in general.
But India’s Sikh problem, so out of control at the time, is now apparently under control (relatively speaking, at least). How did this happen? It appears that, starting around 1992, the Punjab government simply became tougher and more ruthless in crushing the movement. Human rights violations were common, but they worked, and the area has been relatively peaceful in the last decade.
It’s a sobering story. As I’ve written previously, in most third-world countries, the choice is between chaos and tyranny. Third-world countries unfortunately don’t have the luxury that we do of keeping their methods and hands relatively clean and worrying unduly about the finer points of human rights—although there are certainly variations of degree even in the Third World, and India was a paradise compared to a place like Saddam’s Iraq.
Oh, and another thing: Indira Gandhi’s successor, her son Rajiv, was in turn assassinated by the Tamil Tigers, those terrorists who brought us the suicide bomber vest as one of their contributions to humanity.
Well, we do have the case of Hasan Akbar, the 101st Airborne sargeant who “fragged” and opened fire on fellow soldiers back in 2003(?). Maybe the “infiltrators” haven’t reached high enough positions of “trust” yet. Or, maybe the Secret Service adheres to the Tom Clancy version of the Russian national motto: “Even paranoids have enemies”. They probably have watchers who watch the watchers of the watch watchers.
This is a product of cross-infiltration, Neo. Meaning, the more you share with a target enemy culture, the more that enemy can infiltrate yours. One of the reasons why it is hard for Westerners to infiltrate Arab societies is not only the language but the different culture itself. It makes infiltration and being infiltrated, much harder. Still possible, but it usually takes an organized network and a lot of time building contacts and covers.
Either people close to you become united in one purpose with you, or you’re going to have to have a war of extermination to see who gets to lead the survivors. The US, through total war, solved this problem of destiny and where the US should go, a few times over. Every time, unity became more and order was not only maintained but increased.
But there are people and factions that seek a perpetual war, a perpetual conflict over goals, in order to increase disunity and therefore disharmony. Arafat was one. The Left also applies for Iraq and Vietnam. Sometimes the forces trying to sustain the chaos, is internal, like Al Sadr. Sometimes the forces are external, like Iranian Qods and Democrat backstabbers.
The goal of any nation should be to forge a more perfect union, a unity that is stronger because it binds more people into a common cause, and that cause has to be on the path to human progress. One way or another.
The real challenge of bringing civilization to barbarians is that to keep some semblance of law and order among them, barbaric methods are often indispensable. There is no substitute to “circumcision of heart”; that is why more far-sighted colonizers began from sending missionaries. The only alternative to this is Jacksonian approach, which, unfortunately, may result in genocide.
And yet, the Wilsonian model has consistently failed when applied to the non western contexts. Are former British colonies better off now in terms of income, public health and social peace then when “Britain ruled the waves and waived the rules.”?
A second generation colonial political officer and scholar of the Ottoman Empire once said, “Odd thing about your average Musselman; he seems to prefer a foot on his neck and the occasional opportunity to snap at an ankle. Left to his own devices, he makes Bentham look like an optimist.
Great points, great comments. Refreshing to find reason and knowledge to counteract the endless kneejerk barrage. Anyway some years ago I had a Sikh friend who told me about Indian deprivations shortly after Independence in ’48. Not nearly so bad then, I guess. He was an interesting fellow and took matters of liberty seriously enough such that the only time I saw him without his turban, he was in a parade wearing an NRA hat.
Security is at the center of western political development too. It’s the top concern for both government and society. Our institutions have been strong enough that we’ve gotten a bit spoiled and forgotten that. Look back to the middle ages and you will find chaotic social conditions and nonexistent government institutions much like in many poor third world countries that don’t have security. After a time Europe saw the development of a complex and hierarchical feudal system. The central impetus behind feudal society was security not economics. (That’s one of the reasons I don’t find Marxist analysis particularly useful) We find all the ceremony and adherence to formal hierarchy to be quant at best or worse a strange abomination, but they were part of the socialization process. If you went through all formal rigor you were much more likely to take your place in society without being a disturbance. Call it a social vetting process to ensure that you were capable of fulfilling your roll and bound you to your place in society.
Of course that’s been changed, overthrown several times over. (Much for the better) The post enlightenment period has been a period of social convulsions followed by successive attempts to find institutions that better serve society’s needs, security first among them. I might point out that societies that progressively adapted did far better than societies that underwent violent revolution.
I wonder what this country would look like if she were invaded by, say, the Chinese. Our president thrown out of office, the administration thrown to street thugs, the military and law enforces thrown out and each and everyone of us; angry blacks, whites etc, Muslims, Jews, moonies, Mormons, Pat Robertson, David Duke, Farakhan, Manson, junkies, serial killers, rich and angry poor etc, democrats and republicans etc, business owners with no police, residents without security, foriegn army storming the streets breaking down residential doors , no infrustructure, no air-conditioning for Florida and Arizona, all prisoners cut loose from every prison, all banks closed, no patrols for the Mexican border, drug and weapons dealers the only people in business, would look like. Now I am trying to compare the image of that America to today’s Iraq. Surely we would ALL pull together, because we are first world civilized, cultured folks and would certianly help the Chinese set us back on our feet. And we would trip over one another trying to be the first to plant the flowers around their permenent military bases. I have to admit that if so much as my washing machine didn’t work for a full week I would be really pissed at someone. Maybe I would buy a weapon off the neighborhood weapons dealer and kill one of those Chinese soldiers marching down my street. I know I know, I am uncivilized and prone to violence. And no water for my morning coffee? I can’t even imagine what I would do. A true barbarian here.
You might well have mentioned Pinochet, and his ruthless but successful execution/ murder of some 4000 — and then implementation of Chicago Boys capitalism in Chile. Now the, by far, most successful S. Am. country.
Had Bush pushed for Chalabi as a new Shah/ Pinochet/ General X (of S. Korea), there would have been “order and gov’t ordered murders” — of the disorderly.
[shhhhh, shhhh, join me, Luke, and together we can bring ORDER to the galaxy…]
Great reminder of recent Indian history. The US should be offering guest worker military training to 500 000 Indian men to join the US trained “India corps”, to help police Iraq.
And “peacekeep” in Darfur.
And maybe to help the peacemakers in the West Bank.
The US and India should join together to create a new International Human Rights Enforcement Group, with US cash, tech, & training, and Indian men. Democracies only.
Aren’t there some 10 million excess/ unbalanced Indian men 18-36, due to selective abortion/ infanticide? There’s more in China, but many in India, too.
Firstly, let me say the reason none of us knew about the sikh killing is because there was a media blackout in Punjab for two months before the golden temple attack. The majority of the people in Punjab were pissed off because they were not reaping the benefits of their great economy. Everything was being redirected to other states.
Right now India is trying to deal with financial compensation for the widows of the “anti-sikh riots” (official name given by the government) or “The November Sikh Massacre” (name given by sikhs) that occurred right after Indira Gandhi was killed. It was an organized, government supported mass killing of sikhs that went on for three days. Because of this many people didn’t feel safe in their own country anymore.
Secondly, I don’t know how well off the people in Punjab are now. They have the highest abortion/infanticide rate in India. They have a very high substance abuse problem (even cough syrup is not sold without a prescription). There’s lots of suicides due to landowners owing money because Punjab is one of the most fertile and prosperous states it is the last to be dealt with. In general sikhs are considered a joke in the main stream media. Besides, the majority of the people there are no longer even sikhs because they are ridiculed and put down by indian society (underlying prejudice and complete destruction of self-esteem). AND even today men are going missing and families can’t find them.
So yeah, maybe there is stability to the outside eye but an average person would not live there if they had the chance.
Bonnie,
A more apt analogy for you would be if George Bush had become the actual Hitler you guys claim he is, arrests and tortures many of his own population and threatened peace and stability in the world. (I know this wouldnt be a difficult scenario for you to believe.)
Maybe you might welcome a French military invasion, (OK, admittedly, a French victory is a bit far fetched,), Especially if they tell you that they only want to restore America to its rightful place in the world community and then they will leave.
Would you as a liberal resist their occupation? Wouldnt you like them to see it through no matter how many of their own citizens decry the mounting death toll at the hands of right-wing ultra nationalists?
Wouldnt that be a more apt analogy here?
blackfive.netGreen Zone?
Harry: Yes, that would be the better analogy, but that hurts the narrative of folks like Bonnie, so they pretend it doesn’t exist.
(For some reason it puts “blackfive.net” in front of my link. Is there some setting I’m missing or is it a quirk in the code somewhere?)
christusrex.orgblackfive.netA true barbarian here.
Bonnie seems more like an effete socialite than a true barbarian.
The last time someone thought they were going up against the Chinese, it was Tianamen square.
Socialites are big on bluster, small on wisdom.
Link
To be a “rebel”, you first have to believe in something. What positive thing does Bonnie believe in, that is worth fighting and killing for?
Surely we would ALL pull together, because we are first world civilized, cultured folks and would certianly help the Chinese set us back on our feet. And we would trip over one another trying to be the first to plant the flowers around their permenent military bases. I have to admit that if so much as my washing machine didn’t work for a full week I would be really pissed at someone.
Barbarian cause you throw a temper tantrum over a broken appliance?
Most Americans believe in self-sufficiency, and would form armed militias using our stash of weapons, to enforce security because most Americans don’t expect the federal government to bail them out.
Here’s a story about what real barbarians do in a civilized nation.
Two Marines go up against 15 thugs
Barbarian and Civilized aren’t exactly Evil and Good. There are some shades. Too civilized, and bad things can happen. Too barbaric, and order breaks down. A civilization needs it barbarians, its warriors, its fighters that aren’t civilized, to protect itself from… let’s say the Islamic Jihad. You think an effete socialite or one of those HOllywood actors playing in 24 can slaughter our enemies? Naw, we need the real deal.
I’m not so sure it’s a better analogy: Americans are to Iraqis as French are to Americans?
It’s hard to come up with a perfect one, but the analogy would have to include the element of religion, language and culture.
So maybe Chinese is better.
Patrick Chester Says:
It’s the website, not you.
It is so easy to overlook principal differencies between civilization and barbarity if you judge them simply by amount of violence. True distinctions deal with different ways of keeping social order: shame vs. guilt culture, tribal vs. universalist ethics, law vs. custom, and so on. Medieval Europe was turbulent, but still civilized realm; the only true barbarians in it were Vikings, Corsicans and Sicilians. Even ancient Romans and Greeks were civilized peoples: they had Law and Pax Romana – in contrast to Hun, Vandals and other German tribes, that lived in never ending intertribal wars. Ancient Persian Empire also was civilized – it has law and State, not warring tribes.
So do not confuse civilization as such with Western Christian (or post-Christian) civilization. Third World is defined by tribalism, absence of functional state, and even impossibility of State.
I think the Iraqis do see us as we see the French. A bunch of sissies who won’t blow their enemies up, that is. We think the French aren’t aggressive and hardcore enough to do what needs to be done, and the Iraqis probably think the same of us.
Bonnie is not looking for close analogies she just likes playing the hypocrisy game.
Than she can forget about specific circumstances of any political situation and set up an easy but false equivalence. Wouldn’t you feel just like them if I set up a similar circumstance? Probably not Bonnie, I’m not one of them neither are you for that mater. Your assumption is that the two cases between any two countries are easily comparable without going into detail. Plus, there is the underlying mocking assumption that US institutions can be easily compared with any violent third world dictatorship.
Devils always in the details, Bonnie. You care to make a real argument, I’ll try a real answer.
Neo-andertal:
It’s not even an original false equivalence. I’ve seen variants of that pop up since 2003 or so.
Harry said:
“A more apt analogy for you would be if George Bush had become the actual Hitler you guys claim he is, arrests and tortures many of his own population and threatened peace and stability in the world.”
Err. ol’ Georgie boy is two steps(or more) ahead of you there Harry.
But we don’t bother with the red tape – we just deport our own citizens to countries where others can torture them.
“Threatened” peace and stability in the world?
The man has effectively ended any hopes for that for a good long time.
I’m surprised you haven’t noticed Harry…..
“we just deport our own citizens where others can torture them.”
Name them.
Hey, Dave, did you type that in the dark so the “Gestapo” wouldn’t find out?
The other interesting thing is to look at what ideas Bonnie has to have to create such an analogy and other statements.
Death because her washing machine is broken? Somehow that seems to fit with many of our gripes about liberals living a pampered life and not having the faintest clue as to what makes it work. Obviously that was hyperbole, yet for that to be even remotely amusing there has to be some element of truth to it. Obviously I also picked that because it is the most prominent – however the rest of the scenario is rife with the same type of ideas and a massive lack of knowledge about the regime in question.
Of course, she will never reflect on what she wrote enough to think about it – after all it is us “neo-cons” that are evil. Better to be reactionary and content in knowing you did “the right thing” by “caring”, never mind the actual consequences of your actions. Those may hurt your self esteem and anything that does that is to be avoided at *all* cost (after all, the important part is that you cared, unlike those evil neo-cons).
UB, “French to Americans” is not only “analogous”, it’s historical. American Revolution, anyone?
# Patrick Chester Says:
April 13th, 2007 at 8:44 pm
Neo-andertal:
It’s not even an original false equivalence. I’ve seen variants of that pop up since 2003 or so.
Exactly Patrick. “If America was invaded by Chinese (but not communists notice notice), wouldn’t you fight back for your freedom?”
Obviously the Iraqi “insurgents” are “freedom fighters” ahyup.
Err. ol’ Georgie boy is two steps(or more) ahead of you there Harry.
Bush is never any steps ahead of his opposition.
But we don’t bother with the red tape – we just deport our own citizens to countries where others can torture them.
You only have yourself to blame dave. If the ACLU and you folks supported Bush, he wouldn’t have to go outside this country to do what needs to be done.
“But we don’t bother with the red tape – we just deport our own citizens to countries where others can torture them.”
Send me a post card now and then.
Well, it’s April 20, after another day of horror and bloodbath in Iraq, and I think a pronouncement on the war is about due and no longer premature: The war is over, the neocons lost, and they dragged the rest of the American people with them.
The bad guys can strike at will, in the heart of the Green Zone or anywhere on the streets. The supply of suicide bombers appears unlimited, fueled by the presence of the hated occupiers.
The saddest part is that every one of those 3,000-plus lives — it’s just a vague, abstract number now; I no longer try to keep count — was spent in vain. Painful as it is to acknowledge, those lives were lost for the political beliefs and objectives of Bush and his advisers. The waging of this war was a mistake of catastrophic proportions — probably the worst mistake in US history, and certainly the worst military mistake since the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.
It never needed to happen; it never should have happened. The neocons who bayed for war — and cherrypicked information that supported their cause while ignoring or covering up information to the contrary — have those Americans’ blood on their hands.
There’s only one sensible course of action: Get the hell out of Dodge (declare victory if you must), and then deal with the consequences.
Because the consequences are likely to be extremely severe. The neocons have pulled this shitstorm down on top of all of us, and we’re going to be stuck with it for — how long? A generation; maybe more. Certainly nothing of true value will be accomplished while Bush is in the White House. He has no international allies (other than a few sycophants — Tony, are you there?) — and his support among Republicans has seemed to hit a stone floor among supporters (many of whom number contributors to this blog) who would support him no matter what.
(Just as a sideline, isn’t that a kind of psycopathy? If 36% support a manifestly failed president, how many of those supporters think it their patriotic duty to support the president no matter what? I think the number of people like that might be frighteningly hign.)
If you have replies, address them to the ether; I’m no longer interested in the irrelevant rantings of Ymarksar and his ilk.
I’ve just had a revelation. Two or three years ago, when I was participating in this blog because I was trying to understand the thinking of participants, however warped it may be, this blog was flooded by neocons trumpeting their ascendancy — a dissenting opinion was always answered within 15 minutes. Now, of course, they’ve all fled, so where my “inflammatory” posts were responded to by multiple readers within minutes, it now waits (for hours?) until the old faithfuls log on to support their position. It used to be rapid-fire because there were a lot of neocons basking in their ascendancy; now it’s just the tired old true believers, and they’re there when they’re there, not necessarily soon.
So, Neo, am I going to be accused of rapid-fire spamming at some point in the future when I post three messages in three weeks? It’s all relative, I guess.
Of course, if my opinions had not been dissenting, my multiple posts (which wouldn’t have prompted the attention of any ISP that ever existed anywhere) wouldn’t have been an issue in the first place.
Oh, well: You chided me for what I thought was an undeserved reason — which I thought and still think was only because I’m expressing an opinion contrary to the majority on here — but I’m still here. So thank you for your forbearance. Let’s agree to disagree.
Neo: Too bad you jumped the liberal ship for this bunch of clowns and losers. The appellation “neocon” is going to be a terrible anchor in years to come when W is proven by history to be the world’s worst president.
How do you define a neoconservative who’s been mugged by reality? You’d better come up with a definition soon if you don’t want to be associated forever with these bozos.
Thank God Bush has only two more years. His successor has a horrible legacy of damage to repair.
Wow, I just checked in after a couple of hours — how the mighty have fallen — or I guess that’s one way of putting it.
There’s not much point in talking to you guys anymore, since your neocon star has risen and fallen.
Byyyyyyy…. can you neocons feel the echo?
Sorry, teq, did you say something?
Just a wee correction: despite endless MSM repetitions, the bombing was NOT in the Green Zone. The Iraqi Parliament security brief had been turned over to the IA last July, and the Green Zone boundary redrawn to exclude it.
But it sounds so much direr to say “Green Zone bombing”, doesn’t it? I wonder who benefits from that … ???
The bombing of the Air India flights was a coordinated effort between three trading partners (USA, India, Canada) and their intelligence agencies (CIA, RAW, CSIS). The informants may have been purchased by these agencies, and dressed in the Sikh uniform. The dangers of the Sikh uniform and Sikh name is that intruders, or spies, can also adopt it and infiltrate the community. Now, when it is coming out 20 years later that “L Singh” bought the ticket for Air India Flight 182, and that other “Sikhs” were involved, it is very easy for us Canadians to assume that it was genuine Sikhs who were complicit in this act. It is not unlikely that some of the individuals who carried out the bombing wore a turban and kept unshorn hair, but the planning and funding was not done by any Sikh organization, nor by any individual Sikh. In fact, it was done by the Indian government. The Indian government attacked the Golden Temple in June 1984, and sponsored riots against Sikhs in November. These were all part of their attempts to destroy the movement by Sikhs for fair judicial process, human rights, and equality in Punjab. The Sikhs were becoming too powerful, too influential, and the public of the world was supporting them because like the Monks of Tibet – they were an oppressed people demanding their rights, and Indira Gandhi was a self-absorbed tyrant. In order to erase all traces of the Sikh movement against this oppression, the Indian government took the above actions. They do not care about “collateral damage” or the loss of life whether those were Canadian or Indian nationals. They knew that the Air India tragedy would target the families of 329 people, the media and politicians of many countries, and the citizens around the world against the Sikhs and their struggle. The Indian government knew that by putting the blame for a horrendous disaster on innocent Sikhs by infiltrating the community and paying off a few individuals to pose as “militants,” the Sikh community would be set back 100 years in their development and success around the world. With the black cloud of Air India hanging over the Sikhs of Canada, it has been extremely difficult for them to ask for Punjab to be restored to its pre-1947 state, with a state-level government and a capital city of its own. The Indian government was responsible for this tragedy. CSIS erased 190 or 250 wire taps for no other reason. Witnesses and news are coming about now, and haven’t for 20 years, for the same reason. CSIS has worked very hard to put this partnership under the rug and pin Malik and Bagri for this crime, but they were not successful and instead their incompetency has been uncovered. However, with time not only will it show that they were incompetent, but actually complicit in the murder of 329 people on this flight and 2 people at Narita Airpot in Japan. This was not the act of any Sikh organization, but the organized operation of Indian intelligence to destroy a political opposition. The bombing of the Air India flights was a coordinated effort between three trading partners (USA, India, Canada) and their intelligence agencies (CIA, RAW, CSIS). The informants may have been purchased by these agencies, and dressed in the Sikh uniform. The dangers of the Sikh uniform and Sikh name is that intruders, or spies, can also adopt it and infiltrate the community. Now, when it is coming out 20 years later that “L Singh” bought the ticket for Air India Flight 182, and that other “Sikhs” were involved, it is very easy for us Canadians to assume that it was genuine Sikhs who were complicit in this act. It is not unlikely that some of the individuals who carried out the bombing wore a turban and kept unshorn hair, but the planning and funding was not done by any Sikh organization, nor by any individual Sikh. In fact, it was done by the Indian government. The Indian government attacked the Golden Temple in June 1984, and sponsored riots against Sikhs in November. These were all part of their attempts to destroy the movement by Sikhs for fair judicial process, human rights, and equality in Punjab. The Sikhs were becoming too powerful, too influential, and the public of the world was supporting them because like the Monks of Tibet – they were an oppressed people demanding their rights, and Indira Gandhi was a self-absorbed tyrant. In order to erase all traces of the Sikh movement against this oppression, the Indian government took the above actions. They do not care about “collateral damage” or the loss of life whether those were Canadian or Indian nationals. They knew that the Air India tragedy would target the families of 329 people, the media and politicians of many countries, and the citizens around the world against the Sikhs and their struggle. The Indian government knew that by putting the blame for a horrendous disaster on innocent Sikhs by infiltrating the community and paying off a few individuals to pose as “militants,” the Sikh community would be set back 100 years in their development and success around the world. With the black cloud of Air India hanging over the Sikhs of Canada, it has been extremely difficult for them to ask for Punjab to be restored to its pre-1947 state, with a state-level government and a capital city of its own. The Indian government was responsible for this tragedy. CSIS erased 190 or 250 wire taps for no other reason. Witnesses and news are coming about now, and haven’t for 20 years, for the same reason. CSIS has worked very hard to put this partnership under the rug and pin Malik and Bagri for this crime, but they were not successful and instead their incompetency has been uncovered. However, with time not only will it show that they were incompetent, but actually complicit in the murder of 329 people on this flight and 2 people at Narita Airpot in Japan. This was not the act of any Sikh organization, but the organized operation of Indian intelligence to destroy a political opposition.
Nice post above. Pity that there is not a single grain of truth to any of it.
It’s quite typical propaganda of extremist diaspora Sikhs, willing to engage in elaborate fabrications and conspiracist nonsense just so that people who don’t know or understand the complex dynamics of Sikh history in India can be hoodwinked into joining their fold.
Unfortunately, most diaspora Sikhs are quite fanatic. They got booted out of India by their own co-religionists because most Sikhs in India got sick and tired of their nonsense. Of course, it is true that the Harimandir Sahib was desecrated by the Congress party. the Sikh fanatics had a lot of it coming. They perverted the largely peaceful Sikh community to support their nefarious agenda. A classic example of this is the Sikh terrorist leader Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, a “martyr” in they eyes of the crazy diaspora Sikhs. I suggest that you read
From Bhindranwale to Bin Laden: The Rise of Religious Violence
http://repositories.cdlib.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1024&context=gis
as well as
“Punjab, Knights of Falsehood”, by Kanwar Pal Singh Gill (the Sikh lawman who quelled the fanatic Sikh terrorist uprising in Punjab)
http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/publication/nightsoffalsehood/index.html