To: fanfan
Gill was not a 'people person'
I hadn't heard he was of Sikh origin, either. Is that being widely reported in Canada? I'm wondering whether its not getting much press in the US is because the fact isn't noteworthy, or because the MSM is being PC. Again.
3 posted on
09/16/2006 5:35:58 PM PDT by
mewzilla
(Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist. John Adams)
To: mewzilla
Very few facts are being widely reported.
As few facts as they think they can get away with, probably.
6 posted on
09/16/2006 5:39:23 PM PDT by
fanfan
(Trust everybody, but cut the cards yourself.)
To: mewzilla
No angle there at all. Sikhs are a bit irrelevant to the whole terrorism thing.
8 posted on
09/16/2006 5:40:11 PM PDT by
buwaya
To: mewzilla
And what does the fact that he's a Sikh have to do with anything?
16 posted on
09/16/2006 5:52:04 PM PDT by
lesser_satan
(EKTHELTHIOR!!!)
To: mewzilla; fanfan
I hadn't heard he was of Sikh origin, either. I read it in one Toronto paper, the Red Star, I believe.
However, aside from an older relative, his family weren't practicing Sikhs, i.e. no beards or turbans.
27 posted on
09/16/2006 7:21:06 PM PDT by
Allan
(*-O)):~{>)
To: mewzilla
I hadn't heard he was of Sikh origin, either. Is that being widely reported in Canada? I'm wondering whether its not getting much press in the US is because the fact isn't noteworthy, or because the MSM is being PC.
Given that Gill wrote on his website that he hated God, religion and religious people, it's pretty hard to call him a Sikh, let alone a member of any religion - except maybe Satanism (something that was also on his website, according to a MySpace-style test he took). That Gill was born into Sikhism is hardly relevant, since he pretty much renounced it.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson