# Operation Blue Star -Sikh Holocaust 1984



## A1Kaid

"Operation Blue Star  (36 June 1984) 

was an Indian military operation *ordered by Indira Gandhi*, the then Prime Minister of India,[4] to remove Sikh separatists who were amassing weapons in the *Golden Temple in Amritsar*.[5] The operation was launched in response to a deterioration of law and order in the Indian state of Punjab.

The operation was carried out by I*ndian army troops with tanks and armoured vehicles*.[6] Militarily successful, the operation aroused immense controversy, and the government's justification for the timing and style of the attack are still under debate.[7] Operation Bluestar was included in the Top 10 Political Disgraces by India Today magazine.[8]

Official reports put the number of deaths among the* Indian army at 83* and the number of *civilian deaths at 492*, though *independent estimates ran much higher*.[9]

The impact of the military assault, its aftermath and the increased tensions led to assaults on members of the Sikh community within India and *uproar amongst Sikhs worldwide*. In India, *many Sikhs resigned from armed and civil administrative office and returned their government awards*.[10] Revenge for the desecration of the Sikh shrine was pledged by some in the Sikh community,[10] and Indira Gandhi was assassinated by 2 of her Sikh bodyguards on 31 October 1984.[11]"

Source: Operation Blue Star - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Checked footnotes, they are reliable)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## LiberalPakistani

very very sad Sikhs have suffer'd alot but things arent any better for them til now these days i thank Allah for everyday that they gave us Pakistan i've personally met alot of Sikhs in New York thier views about thier Homeland arent good.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## A1Kaid

"1984 Indian State Terrorism Against Minorities"








US House of Representative Officials condemn India for it's state oppression against minorities.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## A1Kaid

Indian military officer addressing journalist, and deliberately misleading the public about Operation Blue Star. He blames both China and Pakistan completely disregarding Sikh aspirations and self-responsibility of India for this domestic event.

Amazing video

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zob

well the SIKHS have suffered enough i think...and do not deserve the people to shun responsibility & make PAKISTAN & CHINA the escape goats.....i mean seriously....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gubbi

Like the Chinese Ughuir problem, it was an *Indian internal security* matter!

Outsiders= comment and move on.

Btw this was almost 25 years ago, and the terrorist morons had it coming! 

IMVHO, any place of worship- be it temple, mosque or church- used to store/hide weapons, abused as a place of hiding by terrorists, or used for illegal purposes - loses its sanctity/sacredness and should be treated as any other building, history notwithstanding. Period.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zob

i am sorry GUBBI but these days nothing is AN INTERNAL PROBLEM.....and secondly....places of WORSHIP steer greif if attacked no matter what is stored inside it....so yes you can't tell OUTSIDERS to move on...because in a global environment nothing is an internal matter... and before you preach such things look at this forum NO PAKISTANI ever told an INDIAN to move on and not comment....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gubbi

Zob said:


> i am sorry GUBBI but these days nothing is AN INTERNAL PROBLEM.....and secondly....places of WORSHIP steer greif if attacked no matter what is stored inside it....so yes you can't tell OUTSIDERS to move on...because in a global environment nothing is an internal matter... and before you preach such things look at this forum NO PAKISTANI ever told an INDIAN to move on and not comment....



I do agree with you about the global environment. My comment was directed at some people who were defending about not criticizing China about its human rights record wrt Ughirs.

I understand that places of worship is a sensitive topic. However, I do firmly believe that when a fanatic group uses their place of worship to store weapons and escape the writ of the state for their illegal activities, then that place is desecrated! If the people also support such extremists in their abuse of such holy places then the law of the land should be exercised to flush such elements out. Thats just my personal opinion.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Khajur

We have a sikh prime minister for last six yrs who is incharge of the affairs in all senses including the nuke button.No body raised a finger and questioned his loyalty.I mean no body.

Indian military always been filled with sikh soldiers and generals who faught gallantly every battle of india.

Its actually a sikh police chief named *KPS Gill *took on the sikh militancy and crushed it for ever.

*Even after Blue star and riots of 1984 ,the fact remains neither indian public (read hindus) ever lost faith in sikh community nor majority the sikhs ever doubted the idea india and their role in it.*

---------- Post added at 03:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:09 PM ----------




Zob said:


> i am sorry GUBBI but these days nothing is AN INTERNAL PROBLEM.....and secondly....places of WORSHIP steer greif if attacked no matter what is stored inside it....so yes you can't tell OUTSIDERS to move on...because in a global environment nothing is an internal matter... and before you preach such things look at this forum NO PAKISTANI ever told an INDIAN to move on and not comment....



Pakistan had its Lal mashjid .
some time u have to take drastic step in the larger good of the state


----------



## Patriot

What was the reason behind this operation?I don't know much about this operation.If it was indeed done to kill Sikh terrorists (Punjab is not disputed territory and there are alot of Sikhs in mainstream in India) then i completely support this Operation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Peshwa

I agree with Gubbi here....

There are 2 parts to this story.....and both have to be dealt with in different light....There was a seperatist/terrorist movement led by Bindrawale....and they were using the sacred Golden temple as their fortress with civilian hostages....

In this case I think Indira Gandhi and the army were justified to go ahead and purge the terrorists.....by any means possible.....I agree there was some heavy handedness and religious sensitivity should have been taken into account...Important point to note is that the operation was taken up by Sikh commanders (Brar) and the Punjab police who comprise of a lot of Sikhs as well.....Nevertheless I support the army in their actions, as an enemy of the nation spans well beyond any religious realm!!!
And the same approach was used during the Askshadharm temple seige.....only difference was.....that during the latter, we had a trained Urban warfare group specializing in dealing with terrorists.....and we lacked this during Blue Star....

Now the aftermath of the Indira Gandhi killing.....that I feel is something that is a blot on Indian History....but I blame this on the leaders.....except for goons propped up by the Congress who committed the violence, and except for incidents by the same indivuduals in Delhi and Punjab, there was no Anti-Sikh sentiment in the country whatsoever!!!!

Indians will always be ashamed of this act......
But this is not just an "Indian or Hindu" phenomenon.....incidents and massacres vast greater have happened in other countries too.....eg. Massacres in East Bengal, Tianmen Square massacre,etc.....

So please let this not be about how non-secular us Indians are or Hindu mentality etc......I would rather discuss:
How this could have been avoided
Similarities to the Lal Masjid incidence, and how we can learn from Pakistan
What is the protocol about Religious sensitivity when enemies of a state or serperatist use religious buildings to hijack a country......
How would Pakistan have dealt with a similar situation where religious sensitivity of a minority group has to be taken into account?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## RPK

Peshwa said:


> I agree with Gubbi here....
> 
> There are 2 parts to this story.....and both have to be dealt with in different light....There was a seperatist/terrorist movement led by Bindrawale....and they were using the sacred Golden temple as their fortress with civilian hostages....
> 
> In this case I think Indira Gandhi and the army were justified to go ahead and purge the terrorists.....by any means possible.....I agree there was some heavy handedness and religious sensitivity should have been taken into account...Important point to note is that the operation was taken up by Sikh commanders (Brar) and the Punjab police who comprise of a lot of Sikhs as well.....Nevertheless I support the army in their actions, as an enemy of the nation spans well beyond any religious realm!!!
> And the same approach was used during the Askshadharm temple seige.....only difference was.....that during the latter, we had a trained Urban warfare group specializing in dealing with terrorists.....and we lacked this during Blue Star....
> 
> Now the aftermath of the Indira Gandhi killing.....that I feel is something that is a blot on Indian History....but I blame this on the leaders.....except for goons propped up by the Congress who committed the violence, and except for incidents by the same indivuduals in Delhi and Punjab, there was no Anti-Sikh sentiment in the country whatsoever!!!!
> 
> Indians will always be ashamed of this act......
> But this is not just an "Indian or Hindu" phenomenon.....incidents and massacres vast greater have happened in other countries too.....eg. Massacres in East Bengal, Tianmen Square massacre,etc.....
> 
> So please let this not be about how non-secular us Indians are or Hindu mentality etc......I would rather discuss:
> How this could have been avoided
> Similarities to the Lal Masjid incidence, and how we can learn from Pakistan
> What is the protocol about Religious sensitivity when enemies of a state or serperatist use religious buildings to hijack a country......
> How would Pakistan have dealt with a similar situation where religious sensitivity of a minority group has to be taken into account?



Hi Peshwa


You missed Air india Kanishka bombing

Air India Flight 182 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

---------- Post added at 09:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:19 PM ----------

still the case is alive

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## afriend

Zob said:


> i am sorry GUBBI but these days nothing is AN INTERNAL PROBLEM.....and secondly....places of WORSHIP steer greif if attacked no matter what is stored inside it....so yes you can't tell OUTSIDERS to move on...because in a global environment nothing is an internal matter... and before you preach such things look at this forum NO PAKISTANI ever told an INDIAN to move on and not comment....



I hope you follow what you say..!!!!

Friends this has been discussed in length in many threads..!! i don't think there any use in opening a new thread with the same arguments over and over again..!!! Please close this thread rather than let the different manifestations of the same arguments already discussed in this forum continue..!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Zob said:


> i am sorry GUBBI but these days nothing is AN INTERNAL PROBLEM.....and secondly....places of WORSHIP steer greif if attacked no matter what is stored inside it....so yes you can't tell OUTSIDERS to move on...because in a global environment nothing is an internal matter... and before you preach such things look at this forum NO PAKISTANI ever told an INDIAN to move on and not comment....



It is an internal matter for India, just like Baluchistan is an internal issue for Pakistan.

The Indian Sikh's could have sided with Pakistan in 1947, they could have sided with the Muslim League, instead we had trains full of massacred migrants (by militant Sikhs) showing up at our railway stations.

AFAIK, with their actions they chose to become a part of the Indian Union, and if they had concerns later, they should have been handled in a peaceful manner using the political process and avenues afforded them under the Indian constitution.

Studying the history of the operation is fine and open for comment (since it is a historical event).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Renegade

A1Kaid said:


> ZVzk6-BBKMA[/media] - Idiot Brar Trying To Cover Up Operation Bluestar By Lying
> 
> Indian military officer addressing journalist, and deliberately misleading the public about Operation Blue Star. He blames both China and Pakistan *completely disregarding Sikh aspirations and self-responsibility of India for this domestic event.*
> 
> Amazing video



I am sure that you are completely ignorant of the fact that *Lt.Gen.K.S.Brar *(who was in charge of Operation Bluestar) is a *SIKH* himself.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gabbar

> Its actually a sikh police chief named KPS Gill took on the sikh militancy and crushed it for ever.



He is a mass murderer. He even killed the families of "alleged" terrorists. He had created groups called "CATS" or police cats. They would kill any person who's name even came up in police file. I can provid many examples where police took medals for killing a hard come militent and 20 years later that hard comre militent surfeced in Canda or US and even India. Who were those people that got killed then? 

To understand the whole thing you have go back to 1947, that's where all it began. What Nehru and M.Gandhi promised, what happed when they created Punjab, What happened in 1978, why army attacked on the one of holliest day on Sikh calender (Martyr day of Sikhs 5th guru).

It's shame what IA and Indian leadership did that day. Lots of Gurudwaras are in Pakistan and even all of the wars, Pakistani army have never steppted inside Sikh gurudware with thier boots.

---------- Post added at 04:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:38 PM ----------




> I am sure that you are completely ignorant of the fact that Lt.Gen.K.S.Brar (who was in charge of Operation Bluestar) is a SIKH himself.


His uncle has warned him that if ever come infrom him he will shoot him personaly. He is living under very tight secuirty since 1984. Militents are still in hunt for him.


----------



## Patriot

Gabbar said:


> He is a mass murderer. He even killed the families of "alleged" terrorists. He had created groups called "CATS" or police cats. They would kill any person who's name even came up in police file. I can provid many examples where police took medals for killing a hard come militent and 20 years later that hard comre militent surfeced in Canda or US and even India. Who were those people that got killed then?
> 
> To understand the whole thing you have go back to 1947, that's where all it began. What Nehru and M.Gandhi promised, what happed when they created Punjab, What happened in 1978, why army attacked on the one of holliest day on Sikh calender (Martyr day of Sikhs 5th guru).
> 
> It's shame what IA and Indian leadership did that day. Lots of Gurudwaras are in Pakistan and even all of the wars, Pakistani army have never steppted inside Sikh gurudware with thier boots.
> 
> ---------- Post added at 04:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:38 PM ----------
> 
> 
> His uncle has warned him that if ever come infrom him he will shoot him personaly. He is living under very tight secuirty since 1984. Militents are still in hunt for him.


Why did Army attack on one of holliest day on Sikh calender?Could they not wait for a day?Also I dont know much about situation but how many terrorists were there..why they had to use this kind of force?


----------



## Gabbar

> It is an internal matter for India, just like Baluchistan is an internal issue for Pakistan.



Word internal is being used a lot lately since China rioting I see. But nothing is internal in globalization. It's globalvillage in this day of age. If Canadain christians start killing muslims from Pakistan even though they are born there, I pretty sure world would not sit silencly under the banner of "internal problem".



> The Indian Sikh's could have sided with Pakistan in 1947, they could have sided with the Muslim League, instead we had trains full of massacred migrants (by militant Sikhs) showing up at our railway stations.



There were many scenarios that could of happend, India could of stayed together, Sikhs could of had thier own state etc. As far as trains are concerned, claims are being on both sides that other guys started. Who do you believe? When I was a kid, our elders use to tell us who trians with bodies started arrive from the other side? Should I just believe blindly here or what?



> AFAIK, with their actions they chose to become a part of the Indian Union, and if they had concerns later, they should have been handled in a peaceful manner using the political process and avenues afforded them under the Indian constitution.



Sikhs were promised automomous state with in India. India would of been responsible for defence, foreign affairs etc. What nehru changed his mind and said "time has changed".

Studying the history of the operation is fine and open for comment (since it is a historical event).

---------- Post added at 04:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:49 PM ----------




> Why did Army attack on one of holliest day on Sikh calender?Could they not wait for a day?Also I dont know much about situation but how many terrorists were there..why they had to use this kind of force was used?



Don't for sure why would they pci that day. When hundereds of pilgrims would be arriving that day. Remember punjab is strated with spies at this moment, I am pretty sure they knew what day it was. There were hundereds of militents along with Brigadier General (rtd.) First they sent in a commando units which was mowed down by terrorits and amry sent in tanks after they panickd. They wanted to capture it before daylight. During daylight, amry would of been sitting ducks in the complex.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Gabbar said:


> Word internal is being used a lot lately since China rioting I see. But nothing is internal in globalization. It's globalvillage in this day of age. If Canadain christians start killing muslims from Pakistan even though they are born there, I pretty sure world would not sit silencly under the banner of "internal problem".


By internal I do not mean that the global community should not voice opinions about it, but it should also respect the sovereignty of the nation in which said problems are occurring.



> There were many scenarios that could of happend, India could of stayed together, Sikhs could of had thier own state etc. As far as trains are concerned, claims are being on both sides that other guys started. Who do you believe? When I was a kid, our elders use to tell us who trians with bodies started arrive from the other side? Should I just believe blindly here or what?



I did not mean to suggest that atrocities were one sided, just that the Sikhs obviously chose against the idea of Pakistan and partition, and therefore chose the Indian Union.


> Sikhs were promised automomous state with in India. India would of been responsible for defence, foreign affairs etc. What nehru changed his mind and said "time has changed".


Nehru backtracked on a lot of issues - I point out his backtracking on the plebiscite in Kashmir a lot for example. I think he was the least honorable of all the Independence figures from India and Pakistan.

But at the same time, I do not think that violence to achieve those rights was the right answer, though I also do not think that the extent of violence used by the state to suppress dissent was justified or acceptable.


----------



## afriend

Gabbar said:


> He is a mass murderer. He even killed the families of "alleged" terrorists. He had created groups called "CATS" or police cats. They would kill any person who's name even came up in police file. I can provid many examples where police took medals for killing a hard come militent and 20 years later that hard comre militent surfeced in Canda or US and even India. Who were those people that got killed then?
> 
> To understand the whole thing you have go back to 1947, that's where all it began. What Nehru and M.Gandhi promised, what happed when they created Punjab, What happened in 1978, why army attacked on the one of holliest day on Sikh calender (Martyr day of Sikhs 5th guru).
> 
> It's shame what IA and Indian leadership did that day. Lots of Gurudwaras are in Pakistan and even all of the wars, Pakistani army have never steppted inside Sikh gurudware with thier boots.
> 
> ---------- Post added at 04:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:38 PM ----------
> 
> 
> His uncle has warned him that if ever come infrom him he will shoot him personaly. He is living under very tight secuirty since 1984. Militents are still in hunt for him.



Hey you should also be aware of the lal masijid where mushraf rampaged the militants who was sheltered there..!!! The whole point is.. for godsake.. keep religion for yourselves.... People have been killing each others for some distorted belief they have about A religion.. one who cannot love a fellow human being.. is a militant no matter how religious he is..!! If you are a sikh muslim or a hindu.. FIRST LEARN TO LOVE PEOPLE MAN..!!!!

And i know sikhs did just that.. they hated the person responsible for destruction of golden temple and killed that peron... but i believe if some people still hold the grudge against any community for that.. i would say they are reall a... hls... 

The concept of India wont succeed without particiipation of all the diverse cultures that we have... and i respect Sikhs for the way they have integrated themselves. But i hate those people who still carry on those message of khalistan or terrorism abroad..!!!!.. India doesnt hate any particular religion.. i hope people get that picture.. and i am talking about the concept of india before 1947.. coz the present pakistan have too lost lot people of people because of the internal religious extrimists callled taliban..!!! The whole point is why the hell do we bring religion to everything we talk about..and the why then hell we got diveded in first place..!!!! And it all boils down to religion man..!!! We will never be a gr8 nation man.. if the soul existence of our country is religion..!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gabbar

> Hey you should also be aware of the lal masijid where mushraf rampaged the militants who was sheltered there..!!! The whole point is.. for godsake.. keep religion for yourselves.... People have been killing each others for some distorted belief they have about A religion.. one who cannot love a fellow human being.. is a militant no matter how religious he is..!! If you are a sikh muslim or a hindu.. FIRST LEARN TO LOVE PEOPLE MAN..!!!!



I can see your point afriend but tell me how would muslims feel if a christian army went into Mecca complex to clear alleged militents?



> And i know sikhs did just that.. they hated the person responsible for destruction of golden temple and killed that peron... but i believe if some people still hold the grudge against any community for that.. i would say they are reall a... hls...



They hold a grudge that 25000 got killed after the Gandhi death and no an single person is in the jail lfor that after 25 years.




> The concept of India wont succeed without particiipation of all the diverse cultures that we have... and i respect Sikhs for the way they have integrated themselves. But i hate those people who still carry on those message of khalistan or terrorism abroad..!!!!.. India doesnt hate any particular religion.. i hope people get that picture.. and i am talking about the concept of india before 1947.. coz the present pakistan have too lost lot people of people because of the internal religious extrimists callled taliban..!!! The whole point is why the hell do we bring religion to everything we talk about..and the why the hell we got diveded in first place..!!!!



India is the most religiolus state. When in comes to religion people get harder than stone. Religion comes to this argument because it was attack on a religious instalation and worshiped by millions of peole. It's natural to have anger when you destroy something very close to peole's hart and no one got punished for that.


----------



## afriend

Gabbar said:


> I can see your point afriend but tell me how would muslims feel if a christian army went into Mecca complex to clear alleged militents?



Then again you are just justifiying my point. If a person from our own reliigion kill a person inside our own religoius place.. you kill that person.. but if a person from other community kills a person of other religion then yes thats the reason to kill the entire community..!!!! 



> They hold a grude taht 25000 got killed after the Gandhi death and no an single person is in the jair lfor that after 25 years.


I believe the people who killed 25000 people doesn't belong to any particular religion but a particular so called secular party of todays times named congress.. many still vote for them..!!! and a sikh is their leader..!!!! Got the irony????



> India is the most religiolus state. When in comes to religion people get harder than stone. Religion comes to this argument because it was attack on a religious instalation and worshiped by millions of peole. It's natural to have anger when you destroy something very close to peole's hart and no one got punished for that.


I am not billitling the anger that people have seeing their religious place destroyed...!!! But what i am saying is that.. if you cant get the concept of humanity then what is the use of religion!! You said india was religious.. then why the hell is BJP is not able to build the Ram temple in ayodhya for which babri was destroyed.. the destruction of babri caught india by surprise and hence it was destroyed.. now let me see any RSS or VHP Aholes near the babri site trying to build a temple there.. they will be fried then and there brother..!!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Gabbar

> Then again you are just justifiying my point. If a person from our own reliigion kill a person inside our own religoius place.. you kill that person.. but if a person from other community kills a person of other religion then yes thats the reason to kill the entire community..!!!!



I appologize but I failed to see your point.



> believe the people who killed 25000 people doesn't belong to any particular religion but a particular so called secular party of todays times named congress.. many still vote for them..!!! and a sikh is their leader..!!!! Got the irony????



Not once and Not once I have blamed Hindus for this. It was a state sponsered act. I can see the irony but he is one who made an appology for the 1984, it took 25 years and Sikh to make an appology, see my point.



> I am not billitling the anger that people have seeing their religious place destroyed...!!! But what i am saying is that.. if you cant get the concept of humanity then what is the use of religion!! You said india was religious.. then why the hell is BJP is not able to build the Ram temple in ayodhya for which babri was destroyed.. the destruction of babri caught india by surprise and hence it was destroyed.. now let me see any RSS or VHP Aholes near the babri site trying to build a temple there.. they will be fried then and there brother..!!!!!



I said religious state not religious fanatics, even though they exist in India. It is Indian educated and moderen people who are keeping BJP, RSS and VHP at bay but they are gaining forces. And remeber there is different between worshipng your religions and worshinp and following the concept/message of your relgion. If you just worship religion it self and dont care about the message, you have missed the hole point of the religion.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## notsuperstitious

If I bring in machine guns into a religious place, I'm disrespecting it. Boots are just protective shield for feet, they don't disrespect religious places when they are there to kick out the guns.

The govt of india used excessive force to defeat the insurgency. But then its one of the handful cases in the world when insurgency was completely defeated.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## afriend

Gabbar said:


> I appologize but I failed to see your point.



The point is.. see the situation as it is and not through the prism of religion. And i appreciate that you can call a spade a spade. But your hate is towards the system or to the perpetrators of those who destroyed golden temple without any reference to any religion. And i respect the secularism in your hate . But yes it was an unfortunate incident in our country's existence.. you are willing to sacrifice your life for the country.. where in you are sacrificing the greatest love that you have and that is of your parents.. i wish people have such feelings regarding the religious structures too where in they can put the same in line for the sake of your country and its existence



> Not once and Not once I have blamed Hindus for this. It was a state sponsered act. I can see the irony but he is one who made an appology for the 1984, it took 25 years and Sikh to make an appology, see my point.



Hmm.. i see your point, then again you don't learn to walk without falling. But if someone still blame for the fall that you had while learning to walk then i think thats not justified. And thats just an argument and i still love it when people put their country before their religion. 



> I said religious state not religious fanatics, even though they exist in India. It is Indian educated and moderen people who are keeping BJP, RSS and VHP at bay but they are gaining forces. And remeber there is different between worshipng your religions and worshinp and following the concept/message of your relgion. If you just worship religion it self and dont care about the message, you have missed the hole point of the religion.


Yes thats what i am talking about.. the message..!! If we get that then there is no question of this issue coming up again and again..!!!! Expect for the point that justice needs to be delivered to the people massacred during the riots.. and not for the destruction of the religious place. And hey its not just the educated and the modern people who keeps these forces at bay.. but the poor people of this country which forms the majority and without whom any party can come into power.


----------



## IBM

Hi Everybody. I myself is Sikh. I was in Delhi in 1984. I used to live in 4 storey apparment. The hindu mob knew that we live there and they came to kill us. I was 6 yrs old at that time. We lived in 4th floor and all three floors were occupied by sindhi hindu family. They saved us from that mob. So all hindus are not at fault . The mob who came to kill us was from lower section of society who lives in delhi slums. There motive was to kill and rape sikh women and loot there stuff They have nothing to do with Indra Gandhi's death. Its just they were assured by some leaders who want cheap publicity, that they can do wat ever they want with sikhs for 3 days. sad event.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Jatt Boy

Real Punjab -



In UT Chandigarh, according to leading Punjabi newspaper Ajit, 38&#37; DSP rank, 48% inspector rank, only 1 Punjabi above DSP rank, IG, DIG, SP, Vigilance, ASP Centre all higher officials from Haryana, Delhi, UP.

Bhakra Dam allowed 170 lakh acre feet of water to Rajasthan without asking Akali Govt. UT Chandigarh got 292 lakh unit extra electricity from Punjab (again w.o permission) at just 1.40 crore INR, market price is 21 crore INR. Punjab is buying elec. from other states at 6.90 INR / unit. We face 8-12hrs cuts daily.

Rajasthan got 2Lakh, 32 thousand cusecs water 'daily', farmers in Punjab are commiting suicide.

GOI should look into this, its only matter of time, Chandigarh will go in Haryana's favour.

In India&#8217;s Punjab region, going abroad is a son&#8217;s only duty. Good people settled in Canada etc, Politicians are corrupt, at this pace Punjab will vanish from India's map in next 20yrs, surveys will keep showing it richest state in India, highest no. of mercedes sold here.


----------



## Peshwa

IBM said:


> Hi Everybody. I myself is Sikh. I was in Delhi in 1984. I used to live in 4 storey apparment. The hindu mob knew that we live there and they came to kill us. I was 6 yrs old at that time. We lived in 4th floor and all three floors were occupied by sindhi hindu family. They saved us from that mob. So all hindus are not at fault . The mob who came to kill us was from lower section of society who lives in delhi slums. There motive was to kill and rape sikh women and loot there stuff They have nothing to do with Indra Gandhi's death. Its just they were assured by some leaders who want cheap publicity, that they can do wat ever they want with sikhs for 3 days. sad event.



Sorry to hear this brother.....makes me sick to even think about the sliminess of our politicians.....

Thanks for sharing this story with us.....


----------



## paritosh

whatever happened that sad day was bad and a slap on the concept of secularism.Congress leaders have publicly apologized to the sikh community although it doesnt move $hit.My dad tells me stories as to how jagdish tytler and the other congress leaders paid the Bihari settlers in delhi to kill the sardars.What happened was for me even worse than whatever happened in partition....for we were killing our own people....and as Gabbar rightly puts it..it cannot be forgotten.
the picture of today's India is quite different.Sikhs and hindus are socially deeply entangled...any sikh would tell you about it.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## A1Kaid

*Operation Blue Star 1984 and the Sikhs A Documentary*







Documentary covers Indira Gandhu, Operation Blue Star, Media blackout Sikh freedom cause, invasion and desecration of Sikh Holy Temple, Hindu rioters killing Sikh families.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## notsuperstitious

IBM said:


> Hi Everybody. I myself is Sikh. I was in Delhi in 1984. I used to live in 4 storey apparment. The hindu mob knew that we live there and they came to kill us. I was 6 yrs old at that time. We lived in 4th floor and all three floors were occupied by sindhi hindu family. They saved us from that mob. So all hindus are not at fault . The mob who came to kill us was from lower section of society who lives in delhi slums. There motive was to kill and rape sikh women and loot there stuff They have nothing to do with Indra Gandhi's death. Its just they were assured by some leaders who want cheap publicity, that they can do wat ever they want with sikhs for 3 days. sad event.



True, I've heard similar stories. The event had nothing to do with religion, isn't Tytler a sikh converted to Christianity?

Luckily the dark days did not create a rift between sikhs and other groups. When we were kids in mumbai and had to take a taxi by ourselves, our mom had instructed us to look for a taxi driven by a Sardarji. That did not change even during the insurgency days and all non sikhs from india i know have a deep sense of love and gratitude towards sikhs. Bad thing is, no more sardarji driven taxis in mumbai anymore, good thing is, Sikhs have largely got out of that socio economic class and are the most affluent majot group in india today.


----------



## Khajur

Sikh militancy is a dead issue.
Khalistan is day dream of militant sikh residing in places like wesern europe and north America.There can have Khalistan in canada and they surely haveit by now as it homes most militant sikhs.


But khalistan isnt touching indian shores.U know why....the sikhs of india wont allow it as too small to park all their trucks.

*Anyway operation bluestar is one of the best moment of indian histroty and indian state showed brute resloves to deal with its internal problem.IG Gandhi made some mistakes,but she is a hell of tough lady.Any country would be proud of a leader like her.*

On the otherhand, riots of 84 are a blot on face of india and its very sad that we never punished who were the culprit of 84 riots .

---------- Post added at 07:06 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:03 AM ----------




Gabbar said:


> He is a mass murderer. He even killed the families of "alleged" terrorists. He had created groups called "CATS" or police cats. They would kill any person who's name even came up in police file. I can provid many examples where police took medals for killing a hard come militent and 20 years later that hard comre militent surfeced in Canda or US and even India. Who were those people that got killed then?
> 
> To understand the whole thing you have go back to 1947, that's where all it began. What Nehru and M.Gandhi promised, what happed when they created Punjab, What happened in 1978, why army attacked on the one of holliest day on Sikh calender (Martyr day of Sikhs 5th guru).
> 
> It's shame what IA and Indian leadership did that day. Lots of Gurudwaras are in Pakistan and even all of the wars, Pakistani army have never steppted inside Sikh gurudware with thier boots.
> 
> ---------- Post added at 04:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:38 PM ----------
> 
> 
> His uncle has warned him that if ever come infrom him he will shoot him personaly. He is living under very tight secuirty since 1984. Militents are still in hunt for him.



Gabbar, they should give *Bharat Ratna *to KPS Gill.


----------



## peace123

bhindrawala was not a terrorist he never killed a innocent person.
and someone wtf vajpayee said after the operation he exactly said:"yeh to bahoot pehle ho jana chahiye tha."
also badal was involved in the operation.
i've red about 5/6 books on operation bluestar from different writers and almost everyone says that badal&co were involved


----------



## glomex

peace123 said:


> bhindrawala was not a terrorist he never killed a innocent person.



Just like Osama Bin Laden...He never Killed a person....


But he motivated young men to pick up wepon....and spread hatred just like Osama Bin Laden...So if Osama Bin Laden is a terrorist...Bhindaranwala was a terrorist....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## peace123

glomex said:


> Just like Osama Bin Laden...He never Killed a person....
> 
> 
> But he motivated young men to pick up wepon....and spread hatred just like Osama Bin Laden...So if Osama Bin Laden is a terrorist...Bhindaranwala was a terrorist....



tell me how many innocent people were killed by the bindrawalas group
and list when they attacked any public place, do you even know how all the operation began? can u tel me why they send something like 3000/4000 military personal again 100 khalistanis? can u please tell me where were the police was when innocent people were being killed by congress ? can u tell plz me why the police killed so meny innocent guys (only young)before and after the operation? i've lived in punjab and i know wat they did for person like me and other they worked against dowry ecc.


----------



## glomex

peace123 said:


> tell me how many innocent people were killed by the bindrawalas group
> and list when they attacked any public place, do you even know how all the operation began? can u tel me why they send something like 3000/4000 military personal again 100 khalistanis? can u please tell me where were the police was when innocent people were being killed by congress ? can u tell plz me why the police killed so meny innocent guys (only young)before and after the operation? i've lived in punjab and i know wat they did for person like me and other they worked against dowry ecc.


During 1970s, the Indian Green Revolution brought increased economic prosperity for the Sikh community in Punjab. This propensity kindled an age old fear in the Sikh community - that of being absorbed into the Hindu fold and led to the rise of Sikh militants.
The insurgency intensified during 1980s when the movement turned violent and the name Khalistan resurfaced and sought independence from the Indian Union. Led by Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale who , though not in favor in the creation of Khalistan but also was not against it, began using militancy to stress the movement's demands. Soon things turned bloody with India alleging that neighboring Pakistan supported these militants, who, by 1983-4, had begun to enjoy widespread support among Sikhs.
In 1984, Operation Blue Star was conducted by the Indian government to stem out the movement. It involved an assault on the Golden Temple complex, which Sant Bhindranwale had fortifed in preparation of an army assault. Indira Gandhi, India's then prime minister, ordered the military to storm the temple, who eventually had to use tanks, helicopter gunships, artillery and chemical weapons.
After a seventy-four-hour firefight, the army successfully took control of the temple. In doing so, it damaged some portions of the Akal Takht, the Sikh Reference Library and some damaged to the Golden Temple itself. According to Indian government sources, eighty-three army personnel were killed and 249 injured. Militant casualties were 493 killed and eighty-six injured.
During same year, the assassination of Indira Gandhi by two Sikh bodyguards, believed to be driven by the Golden Temple affair, resulted in widespread anti-Sikh riots, especially in New Delhi. Following Operation Black Thunder in 1988, Punjab Police, first under Julio Ribeiro and then under KPS Gill, together with the Indian Army eventually succeeded in pushing the movement underground.
In 1985, Sikh terrorists bombed an Air India flight from Canada to India, killing all 329 people on board Air India Flight 182. It is the worst terrorist act in Canada's history.
The ending of Sikh militancy and the desire for a Khalistan catalyzed when the then-Prime Minister of Pakistan, Benazir Bhutto handed all intelligence material concerning Punjab militancy to the Indian government, as a goodwill gesture. The Indian government used that intelligence to put an end to those who were behind attacks in India and militancy.
The ending of overt Sikh militancy in 1993 led to a period of relative calm, punctuated by militant acts (i.e. the assassination of Punjab CM, Beant Singh in 1995) attributed to half a dozen or so operating Sikh militant organisations. These organisations include Babbar Khalsa International, Khalistan Commando Force, Khalistan Liberation Force and Khalistan Zindabad Force.




Khalistan movement was about dividing India...and any move to Divide a country should be crushed by brutal force....to establish writ of the State...and state has all the right to go to any extent to establish tat..

Example.....

Ltte In Sri Lanka ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## duhastmish

Harsh steps but it paid off in the end- i Think right now the peace and sovereignty in pujab. is also to a degree because of kps gill and his ways to handle terrorism. thats the only way to handle it. grab him by the throat.

We all know what bhindra wala was doing in side akal takha he made it a bloody borthal those day he use to pick up girls and get them there. he was living like a king there. with his own army.
Ofcourse what army did was a strong step but it was from the orders of politcians. 
And the politcial will was very strong for punjab. it was dark but it was sucessful in the end.

people did suffer - indra made some seriously wrong decision and she paid for them too.


If this is what it cost for peace. i think india need to relook at the - maoist and these terrorist. with same policy of operation blue star.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## peace123

ur facts r wrong!!!!! nonononon wait a moment!!!! that is wat the goverment said. at that moment bhindrawala was not trying to divide india he was only trying to provide some right to the sikhs:

Post-Independence : Broken Promises & Discrimination


In 1950, despite protests by Sikhs, the Indian constitution was adopted, which failes to even recognize the Sikhs as a separate religion or "quam," instead Sikhs were categorised as Hindus, and remained defined as such under Article 25 of the Constitution. The British recognised Sikh marriages under the Anand Karaj Act 1909, however this was replaced by the Hindu Marriage Act 1951. Sikh marriages are no longer recognised. To get a marriage license in "secular India", Sikhs have to sign a form entitled "The Hindu Marriage Act of 1951"

Panjab was a state utterly broken and totally ruined both economically and socially by the Partition with Pakistan. Instead of Government help, the Sikhs began facing economical, social and religious discrimination.


Farmers in Panjab paid higher prices for their agriculture inputs, but were offered lower prices for their produce in comparison with neighbouring states. The Central Government assumed sole control over prices and farmers were not allowed to cross state boundaries to get higher prices for their labours in the next state.

Electricity generated by the Hydroelectric Dam Bhakra on the Panjab borders was more costly and provided in smaller amounts in Panjab than in it's neighbouring states.

75&#37; of the water available to Panjab was being diverted to other states.

70% of the revenue raised by Panjabis, for development of Panjab was sent to other states.

The Central Government investment in Panjab was less than 1%, the lowest amongst all the states, however Panjab was the most highly taxed.

Restrictions on the recruitment and promotion of Sikhs in the armed forces were applied. This was a grave insult as Sikhs being 2% of India's population counted for the majority of sacrifices in the freedom struggle against the British.

After Independence Sikhs began facing racial slurs from leaders and the media. When Nehru was reminded about the promises he and Gandhi made to the Sikhs before Independence and all the broken promises since, he stated simple, "the circumstances have now changed."

"Kya main taqat dushman ke hath main de dun (How can I entrust powwer into the hands of the enemies)." (Jawaharlal Nehru, 1961)

"The Sikhs are lawless people and a menace to the law abiding Hindus... The Government should take strict measures against them." (Jawaharlal Nehru)

In a circular sent to all Deputy Commisioners in Panjab by the Home Minister Vallabhi Patel, there were instructions that Sikhs should be treated like a "criminal tribe." They were urged to be severe so that the Sikhs should wake up to the political realities and recognize "who are the masters and who are the slaves."

In 1956 all states in India were recognized on linguistic and cultural basis, however Panjab was the only state in India left out of this. In addition huge anti-Sikh propoganda compelled virtually all Panjabi speaking Hindus to deny Panjabi as their language and claim allegiance to Hindi, however, their knowledge of Hindi was non-existent.

Furthermore, Sikhs felt the wrath of Hindu nationalism nurtured by M.K. Gandhi. After his death fundamentalist cults and organisations such as RSS and Ayra Smaaj began anti-Sikh propaganda. Sikhs were humiliated throughout national media and literature. Ayra Smaaj and other fundamentalist Hindu organisations published literature, held events and conferences which degraded and insulted the Sikh Gurus. A great effort was made to disolve Sikhism into Hinduism.

In 1966 the Panjabi Suba Movement began, during peaceful agitations throughout the 50's and 60's over 250,000 Sikhs demonstrated peacefully and courted arrest to get their linguistic rights (this is 5times the number of Indians arrested by the British in the whole "Quit India Movement"). Darshan Singh Peruman was martyred whilst on hunger strike in prison. He demanded that Sikhs should be given more rights and more autonomy for Panjab. His martyrdom and noble sacrifice was ignored by the Government.

Two majority Panjabi speaking districts were left out of the 1961 census. The now already shrunken Panjab was further halved to form a Hindi speaking state Haryana in 1966. Furthermore, the small remmant of Panjab was still denied the status of a Panjabi speaking state. Some of the prosperous Panjabi speaking areas including the capital Chandigarh were left out and given to Haryana. This was a direct violation of the Indian Constitution and pre-independence promises. Panjab remains the only state in India to have a shared capital and no control over its natural resources, water and electricity.


----------



## glomex

peace123 said:


> ur facts r wrong!!!!! nonononon wait a moment!!!! that is wat the goverment said. at that moment bhindrawala was not trying to divide india he was only trying to provide some right to the sikhs:
> 
> Post-Independence : Broken Promises & Discrimination
> 
> 
> In 1950, despite protests by Sikhs, the Indian constitution was adopted, which failes to even recognize the Sikhs as a separate religion or "quam," instead Sikhs were categorised as Hindus, and remained defined as such under Article 25 of the Constitution. The British recognised Sikh marriages under the Anand Karaj Act 1909, however this was replaced by the Hindu Marriage Act 1951. Sikh marriages are no longer recognised. To get a marriage license in "secular India", Sikhs have to sign a form entitled "The Hindu Marriage Act of 1951"
> 
> Panjab was a state utterly broken and totally ruined both economically and socially by the Partition with Pakistan. Instead of Government help, the Sikhs began facing economical, social and religious discrimination.
> 
> 
> Farmers in Panjab paid higher prices for their agriculture inputs, but were offered lower prices for their produce in comparison with neighbouring states. The Central Government assumed sole control over prices and farmers were not allowed to cross state boundaries to get higher prices for their labours in the next state.
> 
> Electricity generated by the Hydroelectric Dam Bhakra on the Panjab borders was more costly and provided in smaller amounts in Panjab than in it's neighbouring states.
> 
> 75% of the water available to Panjab was being diverted to other states.
> 
> 70% of the revenue raised by Panjabis, for development of Panjab was sent to other states.
> 
> The Central Government investment in Panjab was less than 1%, the lowest amongst all the states, however Panjab was the most highly taxed.
> 
> Restrictions on the recruitment and promotion of Sikhs in the armed forces were applied. This was a grave insult as Sikhs being 2% of India's population counted for the majority of sacrifices in the freedom struggle against the British.
> 
> After Independence Sikhs began facing racial slurs from leaders and the media. When Nehru was reminded about the promises he and Gandhi made to the Sikhs before Independence and all the broken promises since, he stated simple, "the circumstances have now changed."
> 
> "Kya main taqat dushman ke hath main de dun (How can I entrust powwer into the hands of the enemies)." (Jawaharlal Nehru, 1961)
> 
> "The Sikhs are lawless people and a menace to the law abiding Hindus... The Government should take strict measures against them." (Jawaharlal Nehru)
> 
> In a circular sent to all Deputy Commisioners in Panjab by the Home Minister Vallabhi Patel, there were instructions that Sikhs should be treated like a "criminal tribe." They were urged to be severe so that the Sikhs should wake up to the political realities and recognize "who are the masters and who are the slaves."
> 
> In 1956 all states in India were recognized on linguistic and cultural basis, however Panjab was the only state in India left out of this. In addition huge anti-Sikh propoganda compelled virtually all Panjabi speaking Hindus to deny Panjabi as their language and claim allegiance to Hindi, however, their knowledge of Hindi was non-existent.
> 
> Furthermore, Sikhs felt the wrath of Hindu nationalism nurtured by M.K. Gandhi. After his death fundamentalist cults and organisations such as RSS and Ayra Smaaj began anti-Sikh propaganda. Sikhs were humiliated throughout national media and literature. Ayra Smaaj and other fundamentalist Hindu organisations published literature, held events and conferences which degraded and insulted the Sikh Gurus. A great effort was made to disolve Sikhism into Hinduism.
> 
> In 1966 the Panjabi Suba Movement began, during peaceful agitations throughout the 50's and 60's over 250,000 Sikhs demonstrated peacefully and courted arrest to get their linguistic rights (this is 5times the number of Indians arrested by the British in the whole "Quit India Movement"). Darshan Singh Peruman was martyred whilst on hunger strike in prison. He demanded that Sikhs should be given more rights and more autonomy for Panjab. His martyrdom and noble sacrifice was ignored by the Government.
> 
> Two majority Panjabi speaking districts were left out of the 1961 census. The now already shrunken Panjab was further halved to form a Hindi speaking state Haryana in 1966. Furthermore, the small remmant of Panjab was still denied the status of a Panjabi speaking state. Some of the prosperous Panjabi speaking areas including the capital Chandigarh were left out and given to Haryana. This was a direct violation of the Indian Constitution and pre-independence promises. Panjab remains the only state in India to have a shared capital and no control over its natural resources, water and electricity.




So what do you want.......


----------



## peace123

glomex said:


> So what do you want.......



i personaly don't want khalistan or something separate from india but i want respect for sikhs(& i know u r intelligent enough to understand i mean)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sob

Gabbar said:


> I can see your point afriend but tell me how would muslims feel if a christian army went into Mecca complex to clear alleged militents?



Sir unfortunately this happened in Mecca in 1979



> Hundreds of Islamic radicals led by Saudi preacher Juhayman al-Otaibi invaded the Masjid al-Haram in Mecca, Islam's holiest shrine, on Nov. 20, 1979. The intruders included men from all over the Muslim world, from Pakistanis to Egyptians to a handful of American converts. Tens of thousands of worshipers were trapped inside the holy compound. The battle for the shrine lasted two weeks, causing hundreds of deaths and ending only after the intervention of 3 GIGN commandos from France.


----------



## glomex

peace123 said:


> i personaly don't want khalistan or something separate from india but i want respect for sikhs(& i know u r intelligent enough to understand i mean)



Do you think Sikhs don't have what they deserve....let me tell you ...I personally know many sikhs who are respected and belong to good families...Go back to Punjab and you will see a sea change....


I don't know who is feeding you stupid information....may be for once you should stop watching YouTube and visit Punjab for real stories of Success..of Sikhs....


----------



## duhastmish

lol - i think sikh are the most prosper people right now in india. i mean guys this is question to all the indian memebers: 

Have you ever seen a sikh begger ??????

-----
more ove punjab is probably the only region in india where you have peace and easiest to make money - go to ludhiana punjab.
--- i dont buy this argument that sikh dont get respect rather - its funky and kind of cool to be called punjabi in india.


----------



## peace123

glomex said:


> So what do you want.......





duhastmish said:


> lol - i think sikh are the most prosper people right now in india. i mean guys this is question to all the indian memebers:
> 
> Have you ever seen a sikh begger ??????
> 
> -----
> more ove punjab is probably the only region in india where you have peace and easiest to make money - go to ludhiana punjab.
> --- i dont buy this argument that sikh dont get respect rather - its funky and kind of cool to be called punjabi in india.



money is not alway a priority, i mean respect means first of all a new 
law for sikhs shaadi and not apply the hindu law on sikhs


----------



## duhastmish

peace123 said:


> money is not alway a priority, i mean respect means first of all a new
> law for sikhs shaadi and not apply the hindu law on sikhs



dude i dont know what you talkign about either i seen a shocker or you dont know hte facts.
i have been to a Sikh marriage once a friend of mine its called anand karaj they do it early in the morning in side gurdwara 

its all in morning - the Sunday brunch so was big let down to get drunk in morning. lol


----------



## IBM

duhastmish said:


> lol - i think sikh are the most prosper people right now in india. i mean guys this is question to all the indian memebers:
> 
> Have you ever seen a sikh begger ??????
> 
> -----
> more ove punjab is probably the only region in india where you have peace and easiest to make money - go to ludhiana punjab.
> --- i dont buy this argument that sikh dont get respect rather - its funky and kind of cool to be called punjabi in india.




I agree with you. Sikhs or punjabi's r the most properous community in India and Sikhs r treated with respect now. Punjab despite of corrruption still has highest purchasing power. Example Punjab has highest no. of Mercedes sales in whole India. Hope i have not gone out of topic. Above all khalistan issue is gone, finished in India. but still live in Usa,canada,UK. I myself saw lot of sikh extreamist is treated as heroes in gurudwara in these countries.


----------



## notsuperstitious

IBM said:


> I agree with you. Sikhs or punjabi's r the most properous community in India and Sikhs r treated with respect now. Punjab despite of corrruption still has highest purchasing power. Example Punjab has highest no. of Mercedes sales in whole India. Hope i have not gone out of topic. Above all khalistan issue is gone, finished in India. but still live in Usa,canada,UK. I myself saw lot of sikh extreamist is treated as heroes in gurudwara in these countries.



Thanks IBM, you can see some more evidence in the statistics here. Sikhs are wwaaayyy ahead of others in all indicators.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/current-events-social-issues/20806-indian-minorities-backward.html

Yes militant sikhs are very active in some countries, but they dare not show their faces in public in india because they know the ground reality.


----------



## paritosh

Khajur said:


> *Anyway operation bluestar is one of the best moment of indian histroty and indian state showed brute resloves to deal with its internal problem.IG Gandhi made some mistakes,but she is a hell of tough lady.Any country would be proud of a leader like her.*
> 
> On the otherhand, riots of 84 are a blot on face of india and its very sad that we never punished who were the culprit of 84 riots .


this is a very wrong conclusion that you've made yourself to believe...maybe it's because you are still coming to grips with the politics of the sub-continent.
The congress under Mrs. gandhi was for the first time since independence fearing a defeat in the elections...In punjab they had not foot-hold....so she endorsed Bhidrawala...
as far as bhidrawala is concerned...you shouldn't jump to conclusions...majority of the Sikhs...even those you know and who love India...don't view him as a terrorist...from what i've heard he was a religious man.it was Mrs Gandhi's fault that she played with fire.

on a side note...i would like all the hindu memebers(I hate referring religiously but....)to realize that today the two reasons why we remain hindus to this day is because of
a)the Rajputs of rajasthan
b)the Sikh warriors of Punjab
whenever I see a sikh I remember that.




> Gabbar, they should give *Bharat Ratna *to KPS Gill.



yeah...I agree.
even if he was brutal...today's generation of Sikhs and hindus owe the peace in Punjab to him.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IBM

peace123 said:


> money is not alway a priority, i mean respect means first of all a new
> law for sikhs shaadi and not apply the hindu law on sikhs



I myself is Sikh. I don't see anything wrong that sikh marriages comes in hindu marriage act. I mean sikhism is very close to Hinduism infact Sikhish comes out of Hinduism and 9 Sikh gurus were Hindus. We share 97% similarity in culture and rituals. We Sikhs have freedom to do marriges in Gurudwara . So Hindus r not forcing us to do marriages according to hindu rituals(7 pheere)..... so we have freedom and respect in India.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## paritosh

peace123 said:


> bhindrawala was not a terrorist he never killed a innocent person.
> and someone wtf vajpayee said after the operation he exactly said:"yeh to bahoot pehle ho jana chahiye tha."
> also badal was involved in the operation.
> i've red about 5/6 books on operation bluestar from different writers and almost everyone says that badal&co were involved



@ peace...I have read bhindrawalas stories too...about how religiously tolerant he was...and how he saved a hindu female from paying dowry and stuff...all that makes me want to believe that he was indeed a saint...but why did he stock up arms in the golden temple?
weren't their MMG? and rocket launchers in the temple complex?

see...the sikhs have this misconception that the GoI attacked the golden temple to embarrass the sardars of india who wanted their own state...the GoI attacked the golden temple because the separatists were operating from there.

IMO...whatever happened was bad...the 1980s was a turning point in the history of the sikhs in India.Had they chosen to intensify the Khalistan movement...we'd have sikh kids not going to schools and colleges and becoming mujaheedin like warriors...
in today's India I see no disparity b/w sikhs and hindus...sikhs hold good positions in India and are among the richest in India.
things have turned out well for sikhs.
so I believe that this whole episode though is a dark chapter in the history of our nation...but it also has a flip-side...a side that shows how from the dark days of the 80s we have progressed to this day and age where we live in peace and calm.

@Peace123...In India wherever people start talking in regionalistic way..they are condemned...like in the case of Raj Thackrey standing up for the maratha youth....the south Indian politicians promising of a 'bloodbath' if anything happens to Prabhakaran...etc etc..
it's a nation which is weakened by it's diversity and strengthened by it's diversity...it's what you want to believe in.


----------



## sob

Mrs.Gandhi played with fire and it backfired on her and the nation spectacularly.

Bhinderwale was propped up by the Congress to take on the Akalis and the Tail ended up waging the dog.

I have travelled in Punjab during the dark days and can vouch for the terror inflicted by the terrorists during those days. After dark the streets would get empty. There were attempts by the Terrorists to give a communal colour, by attacking only non-Sikhs and letting the Sikhs go after attacking a bus. But due to the strong relations between the two communities their evil design was thwarted.

The response from the state was quite brutal but I have yet to see any of these bleeding hearts condemn the killings by the terrorists. Also the action on the Golden Temple was tragic but no country can allow it's territory to be used to attack it's citizens. 

I have Sikhs in my family and we all were shocked at the Operation Ble Star but we were totally disgusted by the actions of the terrorists and the way they defiled the temple.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## paritosh

IBM said:


> I myself is Sikh. I don't see anything wrong that sikh marriages comes in hindu marriage act. I mean sikhism is very close to Hinduism infact Sikhish comes out of Hinduism and 9 Sikh gurus were Hindus. We share 97% similarity in culture and rituals. We Sikhs have freedom to do marriges in Gurudwara . So Hindus r not forcing us to do marriages according to hindu rituals(7 pheere)..... so we have freedom and respect in India.



well I think that there should be a Sikh marriage act...
but I would tell you something interesting about India...we really aren't a secular state...when the constitution was being written and secualr examples all across the world being studied...it was decided that we'd have a uniform civil code for all the citizens and thereby remove most of the cultural discriminations..but a common consensus couldn't be reached on that...the muslims wanted a separate civil code for them....the constitution committee under Mr. Ambedkar wasn't ready to listen...so over the years the constitution agreed to an exception for the muslims....so in the weird secular nation we are,those who talk of separating one culture frm another are hailed as 'secularists' and those who talk of a common civil code are 'right-wing nationals'!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## polyglot

paritosh said:


> *so in the weird secular nation we are,those who talk of separating one culture frm another are hailed as 'secularists' and those who talk of a common civil code are 'right-wing nationals'!*




 

Has pm singh (as a sikh) ever voiced his opinion regarding how he feels about goons in his party like tytler or Sajjan Kumar? I would to hear that and have yet came across any accounts of the same.


----------



## third eye

sob said:


> *Mrs.Gandhi played with fire and it backfired on her and the nation spectacul*arly.
> 
> Bhinderwale was propped up by the Congress to take on the Akalis and the Tail ended up waging the dog.
> 
> I have travelled in Punjab during the dark days and can vouch for the terror inflicted by the terrorists during those days. After dark the streets would get empty. There were attempts by the Terrorists to give a communal colour, by attacking only non-Sikhs and letting the Sikhs go after attacking a bus. But due to the strong relations between the two communities their evil design was thwarted.
> 
> The response from the state was quite brutal but I have yet to see any of these bleeding hearts condemn the killings by the terrorists. Also the action on the Golden Temple was tragic but no country can allow it's territory to be used to attack it's citizens.
> 
> I have Sikhs in my family and we all were shocked at the Operation Ble Star but we were totally disgusted by the actions of the terrorists and the way they defiled the temple.



I agree with all whats written above except for the fact that it backfired.

States have to take hard decisions, the fact the Cong created B' wale does not imply he was above the law. he had it coming & got it. Yes the tail did wag the dog, but the dog had the final say with the tail.

To that end, at a tangent I would like to draw a parallel with what Mush did in Lal Masjid. However distasteful it may have been & whatever were the compulsions - it had to be done.


----------



## Gabbar

> Anyway operation bluestar is one of the best moment of indian histroty and indian state showed brute resloves to deal with its internal problem.IG Gandhi made some mistakes,but she is a hell of tough lady.Any country would be proud of a leader like her.



Either you are ignorent or ill informed. Killing your own citizens is a best moment in IA history? People who makes only 2&#37; of India's population but made 92% of sacrifices to free India from Briths rule and thier most holiest shrine was desicrates, was a proud moment? There were many different things that could of done, cut water, electricity and food to the complex but destroying the complex was a proud moment to you?




> Gabbar, they should give Bharat Ratna to KPS Gill.



Go tell that to the families of innocent peole he assacinated for medals.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gabbar

> I myself is Sikh. I don't see anything wrong that sikh marriages comes in hindu marriage act. I mean sikhism is very close to Hinduism infact Sikhish comes out of Hinduism and 9 Sikh gurus were Hindus. We share 97&#37; similarity in culture and rituals. We Sikhs have freedom to do marriges in Gurudwara . So Hindus r not forcing us to do marriages according to hindu rituals(7 pheere)..... so we have freedom and respect in India.



I would have to kindly disagree with you. Distinct Identity and recognition is must for any religion. Given that we share lots of cultural similarities with Hindus in Punjab but would you say same thing about Hindus in Tamil Nadu or Kerala? Before partition and even still we share lots of cultural similarities with Muslims in west Punjab, would you consider us Muslims than? Pakisan has Anad Karaj marriage act but our own country doesn't? 60+ years of indipendence and how hard is pass a law just for this issue? Christ was born to Jewish parents. No one will define Christianity as an offshoot of Judaism. Similarly, Guru Nanak Sahib, though born to Hindu parents, founded a distinct religion. It is ignorance (or conspiracy) to call Sikhism as an offshoot of Hinduism. Guru Nanak Sahib had proclaimed in unequivocal words that the Sikhs are "neither Hindus nor Muslims" (na ham Hindu na Musalman).

---------- Post added at 02:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:31 PM ----------




sob said:


> Sir unfortunately this happened in Mecca in 1979



They destroyed Mecca with tanks and bullets? Can you provide some links to this inccident?


----------



## Khajur

paritosh said:


> this is a very wrong conclusion that you've made yourself to believe...maybe it's because you are still coming to grips with the politics of the sub-continent.
> The congress under Mrs. gandhi was for the first time since independence fearing a defeat in the elections...In punjab they had not foot-hold....so she endorsed Bhidrawala...
> as far as bhidrawala is concerned...you shouldn't jump to conclusions...majority of the Sikhs...even those you know and who love India...don't view him as a terrorist...from what i've heard he was a religious man.it was Mrs Gandhi's fault that she played with fire.
> 
> on a side note...i would like all the hindu memebers(I hate referring religiously but....)to realize that today the two reasons why we remain hindus to this day is because of
> a)the Rajputs of rajasthan
> b)the Sikh warriors of Punjab
> whenever I see a sikh I remember that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah...I agree.
> even if he was brutal...today's generation of Sikhs and hindus owe the peace in Punjab to him.



I admire IG Gandhi because she knew exactly what would be the repercusion of sending indian troop in to holy shrine of golden temple .They had all sorts of behind the scene negotiations which ofcourse failed and Bhidrawala was on verge of declaring khalistani state. So Gandhi had to take very unpopular but tough measure at her personal perils.

I can never believe operation blue star was politically motivated or intended to demean sikh community in anyway.

This lady kept her sikh body guards inspite of clear intelligence reports that Sikhs were to out kill her to avenge Blue star ops.

we hardly see this kind courage any more among indian politicians and her tough desion making ability is sorely missied.

She made many blunders like imposing emergency,but her tough as nail attitude was admired by even critics like Henry kissinger.

You second quote:


" *on a side note...i would like all the hindu memebers(I hate referring religiously but....)to realize that today the two reasons why we remain hindus to this day is because of
a)the Rajputs of rajasthan
b)the Sikh warriors of Punjab
whenever I see a sikh I remember that.* "

what utter pure nonsensical bullshit statement...Come on paritosh i never expected such stupid statements which i heard for the second time.First one time i heard it from a Khalistani rabble rouser on youtube.

*Outside NCR and north west india,such statement would be viewed as idiotic to say the least*.

What u exactly u meant when u say Rajputs and sikhs saved hindism?? u mean saved from converting to islam by muslim invaders ?? 

Hinduism is thousands yr old and pracised by crores of ppl in all parts of india.

I'm from orissa and mosts of the ppl are hindus not becasue of any Rajputs or sikhs,but because of undiminishing faith *many centuries old Jagananth tradition*.So is case with most other states in middle india and down south where hindu religion survived due strong belief system of the native ppl and innumerous sacrifices in spite of hundreds of yrs of muslim onslaught.

*I've nothing but utter respect for sikh religion and sikh ppl in general,but Guru Nanak appeared and khalsa movement came into exitence only in 17th century*.

*By then most of muslims areas in suncontinet of today had coverted to Islam already*.

Its Maratha Warriors shivaji maharaj who faught Aurangzebs conversion drive far successfuly then any Rajput or khalsa sikh.But then again forceful conversion was seen in few pockets and many hindus converted to islam due to Sufi movement at that specific point of time.

Guru Govind singh who just ushered martial khalsa sikh was contempory of shivaji.

I know that sikh warroirs help save some hindus lives of north west india during the invasion of Nadir Shar of iran.And from there rose these stories of Sikhs saving hindus.

*But making any blanket statemet like giving credit to Rajputs or sikhs for existence of hinduism is historically inaccurate and sounds very stupid to say the least.*

Hindus of orissa or many other states of india are hindus now... not because of support from any Rajputs or sikhs...but because of their strong conviction in hindu religion itself. 


.


----------



## Peshwa

peace123 said:


> money is not alway a priority, i mean respect means first of all a new
> law for sikhs shaadi and not apply the hindu law on sikhs



That isnt possible brother....First off...Indian laws arent "Hindu Laws"....
Secondly....Do you know how many religions exist in India...we cannot just succumb to religious pressure.....
If we change laws for Sikhs, then we first need to lookout for Muslims since they're a larger minority....would you be ok with Shariat law for them, multiple marriages etc?

India cannot be blackmailed by religious groups, Hindu, muslim or Sikh....Religion should stay away from State policy.....
Religion is used like a tool in India and we need to stop this right away!!! This is why I praise Operation Blue Star

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Khajur

Gabbar said:


> Either you are ignorent or ill informed. Killing your own citizens is a best moment in IA history? People who makes only 2&#37; of India's population but made 92% of sacrifices to free India from Briths rule and thier most holiest shrine was desicrates, was a proud moment? There were many different things that could of done, cut water, electricity and food to the complex but destroying the complex was a proud moment to you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Go tell that to the families of innocent peole he assacinated for medals.



Hello, yes they were own citizens.But they were terrorists armed with loads with ammunitin and had become threat to the safety and integrity of india.It was the last measure after all peaceful negotiation failed to dislodge them the Golden temple.

And whats so surprising about it??

*Our army never hesitate to kill kashmiri militants,bodo and Ulfa militant of Assam and tribal naxalites/moists when they question writ of the nation, mercilessly in the self interest of this country.They are all indian citizens too.*

Those militants were never innocent and even sikhs soldiers who attacked as part of IA knew it verywell.

Its an very unfortunate incident,but those millitant had it coming ...forced upon themselves by taking this nation into an hostage.The state showed enough tougness as needed to deal with it and thats why praised its one of our best moments.

*And i'm sure all those great sikhs leaders who died fighting the british would concur with my views*.


----------



## peace123

Peshwa said:


> That isnt possible brother....First off...Indian laws arent "Hindu Laws"....
> Secondly....Do you know how many religions exist in India...we cannot just succumb to religious pressure.....
> If we change laws for Sikhs, then we first need to lookout for Muslims since they're a larger minority....would you be ok with Shariat law for them, multiple marriages etc?
> 
> India cannot be blackmailed by religious groups, Hindu, muslim or Sikh....Religion should stay away from State policy.....
> Religion is used like a tool in India and we need to stop this right away!!! This is why I praise Operation Blue Star



wait a moment, i'm not saying to change completely the indian constitution but just somethings one of them is a proper marriage act beacause sikhs r not hindus and hindus marriage act can't be applied on sikhs.
for ur general knowledge muslim people has there own marriage act.


----------



## Gabbar

@ khajur:

Bhindranwala never wanted Khalistan initialy, all he wanted was what promised to Sikhs in 1947. Khalistan was declared by Sikhs in 1986.

It was to heal IG's her bruised ego. During emergency, Sikhs shred her emergency rule to pieces in Punjab by long marches, since it was un-constitutinal.

Wasn't that kissinger who called her "old witch"?

Who faught moguls than all these year? 55 years of gurrila war by Sikhs. Rajputana rebelions. Read India's history from 1600s - 1850s. Sikhs rescued girl whenever Abdali was taking them to Kabul. 

Sivaji faught Aurangzeb but where? In Maharashtra? Give me the time line where Maratha's faught Jahangir?, who faught Abdali?, who faught Mir Mannu etc.



> Its Maratha Warriors shivaji maharaj who faught Aurangzebs conversion drive far successfuly then any Rajput or khalsa sikh.



When did shivahi captured Delhi? Who closed the Khyberpass? Do you have any idea how many times India was attacked, many attackes never reached Maharashtra due to fighting with Sikhs, Rajputs and/or looters had gotten what they needed. 



> *Guru Govind singh who just ushered martial khalsa sikh was contempory of shivaji.*



I would love to debate this one with you. PM on this one open a new thread, I want to know how you came to this conclusion.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gabbar

> That isnt possible brother....First off...Indian laws arent *"Hindu Laws"....*
> Secondly....Do you know how many religions exist in India...we cannot just succumb to religious pressure.....



Under constitution it's called Hindu marrige act.



> If we change laws for Sikhs, then we first need to lookout for Muslims since they're a larger minority....would you be ok with Shariat law for them, multiple marriages etc?



Would you consider consider Chritian or Muslim marriage act for Hindus? Dont confuse religious recognition with law of society. Sharia is sort of society law. Sikhs are forced to register as Hindus under Hindu marriage act.



> India cannot be blackmailed by religious groups, Hindu, muslim or Sikh....Religion should stay away from State policy.....



Agree....



> Religion is used like a tool in India and we need to stop this right away!!! This is why I praise Operation Blue Star



Couldn't disagree or disapointed in the last part of your statement. Killing elders, womens and kids is good thing for you.


----------



## Gabbar

> Hello, yes they were own citizens.But they were terrorists armed with loads with ammunitin and had become threat to the safety and integrity of india.It was the last measure after all peaceful negotiation failed to dislodge them the Golden temple.



Terrorists aren't born terrorists. What drove them to pickup arms. Did you know what Gandi said when asked by Tara Singh after 1947 that "what if Sikhs didn't get what they were promised?", he said "Sikhs will have the right to pick the arms". Thats the exact quote from him. Please provide some link where negotiations were takng place, I want to know how did miss this.

And whats so surprising about it??

Our army never hesitate to kill kashmiri militants,bodo and Ulfa militant of Assam and tribal naxalites/moists when they question writ of the nation, mercilessly in the self interest of this country.They are all indian citizens too.

Those militants were never innocent and even sikhs soldiers who attacked as part of IA knew it verywell.



> Its an very unfortunate incident,but those millitant had it coming ...forced upon themselves by taking this nation into an hostage.The state showed enough tougness as needed to deal with it and thats why praised its one of our best moments.



Yes, it is toughness. Kill your own citizens, instead of listening to there problems. As Khuswant Singh said to IG that "LAMHOH NE KHATA KEE THEE PER SADION THE SAZA PAYEE". 



> And i'm sure all those great sikhs leaders who died fighting the british would concur with my views.



Beleive they also wouldn't be pround what thier own government, people and army did to thier own citizens


----------



## Khajur

Gabbar said:


> @ khajur:
> 
> Bhindranwala never wanted Khalistan initialy, all he wanted was what promised to Sikhs in 1947. Khalistan was declared by Sikhs in 1986.
> 
> It was to heal IG's her bruised ego. During emergency, Sikhs shred her emergency rule to pieces in Punjab by long marches, since it was un-constitutinal.
> 
> Wasn't that kissinger who called her "old witch"?
> 
> Who faught moguls than all these year? 55 years of gurrila war by Sikhs. Rajputana rebelions. Read India's history from 1600s - 1850s. Sikhs rescued girl whenever Abdali was taking them to Kabul.
> 
> Sivaji faught Aurangzeb but where? In Maharashtra? Give me the time line where Maratha's faught Jahangir?, who faught Abdali?, who faught Mir Mannu etc.
> 
> 
> 
> When did shivahi captured Delhi? Who closed the Khyberpass? Do you have any idea how many times India was attacked, many attackes never reached Maharashtra due to fighting with Sikhs, Rajputs and/or looters had gotten what they needed.
> 
> 
> 
> I would love to debate this one with you. PM on this one open a new thread, I want to know how you came to this conclusion.




Gabber,

*"who faught Abdali?"*

Have U read about third Battle of panipat ??

Battle of Panipat (1761) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*The marathas under Shivaji weakened the moguls empire by taking on Aurangzeb.*

After Aurangzeb the moghuls empire disintegtrated.
Yes,Guru Gobind singh established the khalsa foce only in 1699 long after death Shivaji.

Its the weakening of moghuls healps the rise of sikh power but it existed only in north west india.

Other regions of india were under marathas and other muslim rulers of who came out of lost moghul empires.

Sikhs made no resistance to Abdali who faught the marathas in battle of panipat in 1761.I have given the llink.

They too couldnt stop Nadir shah from reaching delhi.

After the loss of Maratha at Panipat,its british who were sweeping rest of india from bengal and Madras.

Sikh empire by that time were reigning in punjab regions only outside majority of current indian land till they fall in 1800s.

*The pointis Sikhs had never any influence major indian parts expect for punjab in the history.Even their existance in the west didnt prevent the british from grabbing most of india or stop invaders like Abdali or nadir shah.*


----------



## Gabbar

*Marathas did fought him but only once I believe, he invaded nine times. *

Ahmad Shah Durrani​










*First of Nine Invasions of India*

Durrani's EmpireHe invaded India nine times between 1747 and 1769. He set out from Peshawar on his first Indian expedition in December 1747. By January 1748, Lahore and Sirhind had been captured. Eventually Mughal forces were sent from Delhi to resist his advance. Lacking artillery and vastly outnumbered, he was defeated at Manupur in March 1748 by Mu'in-ul-Mulk, the son of the Wazir Qamar-ud-Din who had been killed in a preliminary skirmish. Ahmad Shah retreated to Afghanistan and Mu'in-ul-Mulk was appointed governor of the Punjab. Before Mu'in-ul-Mulk could consolidate his position, Ahmad Shah, in December 1749, again crossed the Indus. Receiving no reinforcements from Delhi, Mu'in-ul-Mulk was forced to make terms with him. In accordance with instructions from Delhi, Ahmad Shah was promised the revenues of the Chahar Mahal (Gujrat, Aurangabad, Sialkot and Pasrur) which had been granted by the Mughal emperor Muhammad Shah to Nadir Shah in 1739. The nonpayment of the revenues of the Chahar Mahal was the reason for his third Indian expedition of 1751-52. Lahore was besieged for four months and the surrounding country devastated. Mu'in-ul-Mulk was defeated in March 1752, but was reinstated by Ahmad Shah to whom the emperor formally ceded the two subahs of Lahore and Multan . 

During this expedition Kashmir was annexed to the Durrani empire. By April 1752 Ahmad Shah was back in Afghanistan. Mu'in-ul-Mulk found the Punjab a troublesome charge and his death in November 1753 only served to intensify the anarchy. All power was for a time in the hands of his widow, Mughlani Begam, whose profligacy signalled many a rebellion. The Mughal Wazir Imad ul-Mulk took advantage of this anarchy to recover the Punjab for the empire and entrusted its administration to Adina Beg. Ahmad Shah immediately set out to recover his lost province. He reached Lahore towards the end of December 1756, and, after an unopposed march, entered Delhi on 28 January 1757. The city was plundered and the defenceless inhabitants massacred. A similar fate befell the inhabitants of Mathura, Vrindavan and Agra. Towards the end of March 1757, an outbreak of cholera amongst his troops forced Ahmad Shah to leave India. The territory of Sirhind was annexed to the Afghan empire. Najib ud-Daula, the Ruhila leader who had supported him, was left in charge of Delhi and his own son, Taimur, appointed viceroy of the Punjab. He had no sooner left India than the Sikhs, together with Adina Beg, rose in revolt against Taimur. Early in 1758 Adina Beg invited the Marathas to expel the Afghans from the Punjab. This was accomplished by the Marathas who actually crossed the Indus and held Peshawar for a few months. These events brought Ahmad Shah to India once again (1759-61). The Marathas rapidly evacuated the Punjab before the Afghan advance and retreated towards Delhi. They were routed with enormous losses at Panipat on 14 January 1761. 

*Vadda Ghallughara&#8212;the Great Killing*
After Panipat the main factor to reckon with was the growing power of the Sikhs who had constantly been assailing Ahmad Shah's lines of communication. It was against them that the Afghan invader's sixth expedition (1762) was specifically directed. News had reached him in Afghanistan of the defeat, after his withdrawal from the country, of his general, Nur ud-Din Bamezai, at the hands of the Sikhs who were fast spreading themselves out over the Punjab and had declared their leader, Jassa Singh Ahluvalia, king of Lahore (1761). To rid his Indian dominions of them once for all, he set out from Qandahar. Marching with alacrity, he overtook the Sikhs as they were withdrawing into the Malva after crossing the Sutlej. The moving caravan comprised a substantial portion of the total Sikh population and contained, besides active fighters, a large body of old men, women and children who were being escorted to the safety of the interior of the country. Surprised by Ahmad Shah, the Sikhs threw a cordon round those who needed protection, and prepared for the battle. Continuing their march in this form, they fought the invaders and their Indian allies desperately. Ahmad Shah succeeded, in the end, in breaking through the ring and glutted his spite by carrying out a fullscale butchery. Near the village of Kup, near Malerkotia, nearly 25,000 Sikhs were killed in a single day's battle (5 February 1762), known in Sikh history as Vadda Ghallughara, the Great Killing. But the Sikhs were by no means crushed. 

*Harimandar Quickly Restored*
Within four months of the Great Carnage, the Sikhs had inflicted a severe defeat on the Afghan governor of Sirhind. Four months later they were celebrating Divali in the Harimandar (God's Temple) Amritsar, which had been blown up with gunpowder by order of the Shah in April 1762, and were fighting with him again a pitched battle forcing him to withdraw from Amritsar under cover of darkness (17 October). Ahmad Shah left Lahore for Afghanistan on 12 December 1762. 

Ahmad Shah planned another crusade against the Sikhs and he invited this time his Baluch ally, Amir Nasir Khan , to join him in the adventure. He started from Afghanistan in October 1764 and reaching Lahore attacked Amritsar on 1 December 1764. A small batch of thirty Sikhs, in the words of Qazi Nur Muhammad, the author of the Jangnamah, who happened to be in the imperial train accompanying the Baluch division, "grappled with the ghazis, spilt their blood and sacrificed their own lives for their Guru." Ahmad Shah came down to Sirhind without encountering anywhere the main body of the Khalsa. This time he went no farther than Sirhind. As he was marching homewards through the Jalandhar Doab, Sikh sardars, including Jassa Singh Ahluvalia, Jassa Singh Ramgarhia, Charhat Singh Sukkarchakkia, Jhanda Singh Bhangi and Jai Singh Kanhaiya, kept a close trail constantly raiding the imperial caravan. Their depredations caused great annoyance to the Shah who lost much of his baggage to the Sikhs. The floods in the River Chenab took a further toll of his men and property, and he returned to Afghanistan mauled and considerably shaken. 

*Last Invasions and Death of Ahmad Shah*
The fear of his Indian empire falling to the Sikhs continued to obsess the Shah's mind and he led out yet another punitive campaign against them towards the close of 1766. This was his eighth invasion into India. The Sikhs had recourse to their old game of hideandseek. Vacating Lahore which they had wrested from Afghan nominees, Kabuli Mall and his nephew Amir Singh, they faced squarely the Afghan general, Jahan Khan at Amritsar, forcing him to retreat, with 6,000 of the Durrani soldiers killed. Ahmad Shah offered the governorship of Lahore to Sikh sardar, Lahina Singh Bhangi, but the latter declined the proposal. Jassa Singh Ahluvalia, with an army of 30,000 Sikhs, roamed about the neighbourhood of the Afghan camp plundering it to his heart's content. Never before had Ahmad Shah felt so helpless. The outcome of the unequal, but bitter, contest now lay clearly in favour of the Sikhs. The Shah had realized that his Indian dominions were at the mercy of the Sikhs and he bowed to the inevitable. His own soldiers were getting restive and the summer heat of the Punjab was becoming unbearable. He, at last, decided to return home, but took a different route this time to avoid molestation by the Sikhs. As soon as Ahmad Shah retired, Sikhs reoccupied their territories. 

The Shah led out his last expedition in the beginning of 1769. He crossed the Indus and the Jehlum and reached as far as the right bank of the Chenab and fixed his camp at Jukalian to the northwest of Gujrat. By this time the Sikhs had established themselves more firmly in the country. Moreover, dissensions broke out among the Shah's followers and he was compelled to return to Afghanistan. 

On Ahmad Shah's death in 1772 of the cancerous wound said to have been caused on his nose by a flying piece of brick when the Harimandar Sahib was destroyed with gunpowder, his empire roughly extended from the Oxus to the Indus and from Tibet to Khurasan. It embraced Kashmir, Peshawar, Multan, Sindh, Baluchistan, Khurasan, Herat, Qandahar, Kabul and Balkh.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## notsuperstitious

peace123 said:


> wait a moment, i'm not saying to change completely the indian constitution but just somethings one of them is a proper marriage act beacause sikhs r not hindus and hindus marriage act can't be applied on sikhs.
> for ur general knowledge muslim people has there own marriage act.



You are right. The muslim personal law is based on sharia - separate for Shias and Sunnis.

The Hindu law you mentioned, what is it based on? And what is the SiKh law supposed to be ased on? What are the differences?


----------



## notsuperstitious

> Marathas did fought him but only once I believe, he invaded nine times.



Gabbar, thats true, but the most powerful Mughal - Aurangzeb - a blood enemy of Sikhs, he spent 25 last years of his life in maratha territory fighting the marathas, he could not defeat them and withing 6 (IIRC) years of his death in maratha land, marathas were in Delhi. Just to put the right perspective and not to deny the role of Sikhs in resisting outside powers.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sob

Gabbar said:


> t
> They destroyed Mecca with tanks and bullets? Can you provide some links to this inccident?



Sir you will find more information on this at this site
Home | The Siege of Mecca

This also has a photogallery but I could not upload the photos. 
Check this out also
Grand Mosque Seizure - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


> With religious approval granted, Prince Sultan ordered frontal assaults on three of the main gates, preceded by an artillery barrage.


Also you will find pics of the US embassy being stormed in Islamabad after rumors that the US had bombed the Holy Mosque at Mecca.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## glomex

sob said:


> Sir you will find more information on this at this site
> Home | The Siege of Mecca
> 
> This also has a photogallery but I could not upload the photos.
> Check this out also
> Grand Mosque Seizure - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Also you will find pics of the US embassy being stormed in Islamabad after rumors that the US had bombed the Holy Mosque at Mecca.




Well that was a good piece of Information....


Gives a lot to think about .....


----------



## paritosh

Khajur said:


> I admire IG Gandhi because she knew exactly what would be the repercusion of sending indian troop in to holy shrine of golden temple .They had all sorts of behind the scene negotiations which ofcourse failed and Bhidrawala was on verge of declaring khalistani state. So Gandhi had to take very unpopular but tough measure at her personal perils.


true true...but what led things go out of hand so much?
I don't care how she rectified her mistake...it was her mistake...to seek political aims she caused a blunder...and the country has to run through a system of scrutinies and checks and buffers...no person should be strong enough to take "tough measures at their perils"!
it's not an anarchy.


> I can never believe operation blue star was politically motivated or intended to demean sikh community in anyway.


I agree bluestar wasn't....


> This lady kept her sikh body guards inspite of clear intelligence reports that Sikhs were to out kill her to avenge Blue star ops.


I don't find the Sikhs entirely guilty for that.


> what utter pure nonsensical bullshit statement...Come on paritosh i never expected such stupid statements which i heard for the second time.First one time i heard it from a Khalistani rabble rouser on youtube.


well even if it has been sensationalized by some sardar on you-tube a large part of it stays a historical fact.
I am not a sardar...but I'd ask you a very interesting question....did you study in a CBSE affiliated school?now I remember in the 10th std,we had in our history books...a substantial portion on Maharaja Ranjit Singh and the rise of the Sikh empire...did we get to study that?I did not...it was removed from the curriculum...it was a part of our history wasn't it?i know about the cholas and the vijaynagar empire and those of the deccan...I know of the mughals....I have studied of the Bengali nawabs and those of lucknow..from the same history books...but why not of the most successful non-mughal empire that panned three different countries?


> Hinduism is thousands yr old and pracised by crores of ppl in all parts of india.
> 
> I'm from orissa and mosts of the ppl are hindus not becasue of any Rajputs or sikhs,but because of undiminishing faith *many centuries old Jagananth tradition*.So is case with most other states in middle india and down south where hindu religion survived due strong belief system of the native ppl and innumerous sacrifices in spite of hundreds of yrs of muslim onslaught.


The Egyptians did not leave being the followers of the pharaoh because they gave up hope in their religion...they were conquered.
The Egyptians of today identify themselves as Arabs and not the people who built the pyramids...heck the arabs themselves before being defeated fought years and years fiercely against the muslims...
It is more about military conquests than keeping your faith.


> *By then most of muslims areas in suncontinet of today had coverted to Islam already*.
> 
> Its Maratha Warriors shivaji maharaj who faught Aurangzebs conversion drive far successfuly then any Rajput or khalsa sikh.But then again forceful conversion was seen in few pockets and many hindus converted to islam due to Sufi movement at that specific point of time.
> 
> Guru Govind singh who just ushered martial khalsa sikh was contempory of shivaji.
> 
> I know that sikh warroirs help save some hindus lives of north west india during the invasion of Nadir Shar of iran.And from there rose these stories of Sikhs saving hindus.


under Akhbar...all religions flourished.there was no reason for the Sikhs to draw swords..Sikhism started not as a military movement....but as a spiritual one.With Aurangazeb in power...when religious atrocities were being committed...the sikhs became a martial cult...I would not compare the marathas and the sikhs...the marathas were a force to reckon..they weakened the mughal empire in the deccan and central parts...while the sikhs weakened the mughals in areas of punjab and even rajashtan...the rajputs who had alied with the mughals now rebelled against Aurangazeb as they were fierce hindus...and feared a muslim mass conversion.
Khajur...have you ever been to Rajasthan?if you'd go there....you'd see the maximum number of forts and garrisons in one state in India.
The whole friggin state is made of forts...which basically shows how battle ready and prone the rajputs were...
but interestingly...the rajputs and the sikhs were many times at loggerheads.
the rajputs were really pissed when the sikhs adopted the rajput title of 'singh' as their own...!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ranveer

gabbar ssa jee,

just to add some weight to your point....

attached is my school leaving.. some members should seriously look at the religion column and decide on their own what a disgust it is...


----------



## RPK

ranveer said:


> gabbar ssa jee,
> 
> just to add some weight to your point....
> 
> attached is my school leaving.. some members should seriously look at the religion column and decide on their own what a disgust it is...




Buddy mask other information!
it is not good to share the personal information on forums


----------



## peace123

ranveer said:


> gabbar ssa jee,
> 
> just to add some weight to your point....
> 
> attached is my school leaving.. some members should seriously look at the religion column and decide on their own what a disgust it is...



HINDUS HAV GIVIN NOTHIN TO US SIKHS 

80% OF THE PEOPLE WHO GAVE THEIR LIVES FOR INDIAN INDEPENCE WERE SIKHS 

U HEAR ABOUT GHANDI ALL THE TIME ABOUT "PEACEFULL PROTEST" WHERE DID HE GET THAT FROM -THE SIKHS 

THIS IS WHERE A GORA SAID I SEE MANY CHRISTS BEIN CRUSIFIED EVERYDAY I.E. NANKANA SAHIB ETC 

AND WHAT DID WE GET IN RETURN 

-WE HAD TO FIGHT FOR OUR LANGUAGE 

-WE ARENT STILL RECOGNISED AS SEPARATE RELIGION TO HINDUISM(WHICH ISNT A RELGION ANYWAY)WHEREAS THE UK RECOGNISES US NOT ONLY AS A RELIGION BUT ALSO AS A COMPLETE NATION 

-OUR HOLLIEST OF HOLY SHRINE THE SRI HARIMANDER SAHIB WAS ATTAKED WITH THE SRI AKAL TAKHT DESTROYED 

-OVER 100 000 SIKHS MASSACERED AFTER THAT B**** INDIRA GHANDI WAS GUNNED DOWN BY TWO HEROIC SIKHS 

-STILL TODAY ARTOCITIES ARE COMMITED 

ANDWHAT DO U SAY: India does not owe THAT MUCH to the Sikhs!! 

INDIA NOT ONLY OWES ITS EXISTENCE BUT IT OWES AN APOLOGY AS WELL AS ALOT MORE


----------



## duhastmish

peace123 said:


> HINDUS HAV GIVIN NOTHIN TO US SIKHS
> 
> 80&#37; OF THE PEOPLE WHO GAVE THEIR LIVES FOR INDIAN INDEPENCE WERE SIKHS
> 
> U HEAR ABOUT GHANDI ALL THE TIME ABOUT "PEACEFULL PROTEST" WHERE DID HE GET THAT FROM -THE SIKHS
> 
> THIS IS WHERE A GORA SAID I SEE MANY CHRISTS BEIN CRUSIFIED EVERYDAY I.E. NANKANA SAHIB ETC
> 
> AND WHAT DID WE GET IN RETURN
> 
> -WE HAD TO FIGHT FOR OUR LANGUAGE
> 
> -WE ARENT STILL RECOGNISED AS SEPARATE RELIGION TO HINDUISM(WHICH ISNT A RELGION ANYWAY)WHEREAS THE UK RECOGNISES US NOT ONLY AS A RELIGION BUT ALSO AS A COMPLETE NATION
> 
> -OUR HOLLIEST OF HOLY SHRINE THE SRI HARIMANDER SAHIB WAS ATTAKED WITH THE SRI AKAL TAKHT DESTROYED
> 
> -OVER 100 000 SIKHS MASSACERED AFTER THAT B**** INDIRA GHANDI WAS GUNNED DOWN BY TWO HEROIC SIKHS
> 
> -STILL TODAY ARTOCITIES ARE COMMITED
> 
> ANDWHAT DO U SAY: India does not owe THAT MUCH to the Sikhs!!
> 
> INDIA NOT ONLY OWES ITS EXISTENCE BUT IT OWES AN APOLOGY AS WELL AS ALOT MORE


peace you can you friggin stfu ???? dude what are you on about why capslock ?????

now dont shout at memebrs here. if u feel so bad about being a sikh in india. why dont you come to delhi gimmi your number - iwill show you how punjabi can be spoken in delhi, how sikh are richest buggers her sikh are not minority and - and i think except for a handfull of politicians every body know and respect. 

our ajad , bhagat singh and their borhterhood. and dont tell me indians dont know what sikh have done for this country.

just see prime minister of india - IS A SIKH and eductaerd poppulation love him . even thought now a days he is not doing it strong heartedly but i still respect him and love him . 

now dont get me started over this. just stfu. and check out ground realities. come and visit india. or pujab .
i tell you - go to punjab and then go to any other state except for - delhi and haryan ( they have big sikh communiyt) 
every other state is suffering and is poor. undereducated .


what have you done for your sikh community otherthan leaving them in this rumble and hiding in italy ???

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## glomex

peace123 said:


> HINDUS HAV GIVIN NOTHIN TO US SIKHS
> 
> 80% OF THE PEOPLE WHO GAVE THEIR LIVES FOR INDIAN INDEPENCE WERE SIKHS
> 
> U HEAR ABOUT GHANDI ALL THE TIME ABOUT "PEACEFULL PROTEST" WHERE DID HE GET THAT FROM -THE SIKHS
> 
> THIS IS WHERE A GORA SAID I SEE MANY CHRISTS BEIN CRUSIFIED EVERYDAY I.E. NANKANA SAHIB ETC
> 
> AND WHAT DID WE GET IN RETURN
> 
> -WE HAD TO FIGHT FOR OUR LANGUAGE
> 
> -WE ARENT STILL RECOGNISED AS SEPARATE RELIGION TO HINDUISM(WHICH ISNT A RELGION ANYWAY)WHEREAS THE UK RECOGNISES US NOT ONLY AS A RELIGION BUT ALSO AS A COMPLETE NATION
> 
> -OUR HOLLIEST OF HOLY SHRINE THE SRI HARIMANDER SAHIB WAS ATTAKED WITH THE SRI AKAL TAKHT DESTROYED
> 
> -OVER 100 000 SIKHS MASSACERED AFTER THAT B**** INDIRA GHANDI WAS GUNNED DOWN BY TWO HEROIC SIKHS
> 
> -STILL TODAY ARTOCITIES ARE COMMITED
> 
> ANDWHAT DO U SAY: India does not owe THAT MUCH to the Sikhs!!
> 
> INDIA NOT ONLY OWES ITS EXISTENCE BUT IT OWES AN APOLOGY AS WELL AS ALOT MORE





Stop ranting .......it has not got anyone anything...and nothing is going to change in future...

If you want things to change ...stop wasting your time here and come back to India and do something to uplift your Religion/ community...

You are the one who ran away from India leaving your country and now you start throwing crap ..just like others..... Come back to yor home and fight peacefully for your rights...

Your Sikh leaders are sitting on top positions in Punjab.....push them to do something for you.....if you can't do that...just Shut up......

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## peace123

@ glomex & duhastmish
nobody can't do anything for sikhs in india beacause we r discriminated & there is 0 respect and 0 power for sikhs in india, u can our pm he is sikh but can u please tell me wat he did for sikhs. we have never been paid which we deserve. And these things i feel only after leaving punjab. i m till in india but the attitude of people in india towards us is notas expected. Beleive me, sikhs are seen as jokers??? (hindi films and media). Atleast by my generation. Do u know the trouble u will face in a college or uni. outside punjab if u r a turbaned sikh?? The time of "sardar ji" has gone. Now its "oye sardar" "surdi" or like this. They 
make fun of our language, our appearance etc. and they dont know what we have done for india or they just dont want to appreciate. They will not miss a 
single chance to comment on u as a sikh or "sadrar". The circulation of "surd jokes" or "sardar jokes" is a fashion, and more importantly they are such a sick 
jokes they clearly show the image we are gaining. they will question u abt ur relegious beleifs and call then illogical (like having hair, beard and all) but as soon as the name "pakistan" comes, u r all good. One thing is clear, we had been the most respected community in india. But now we are loosing respect. Specially the new generation who has not seen sikhs fighting with british, china and pakistan 
and with Mtv culture, i dont know if we will be able to pass our traditions to our children. One other thing I have realised that its all politics in history has united us with current india. But, in terms of culture traditions, tastes, mentality, physique, bodylanguage etc. we ARE far different from the othe people in india (u can arguethat it is tru for many communities in india) but till i personally feel a clear difference between punjab and rest of the india. My dream is to live in Punjab with all five rivers and with all hindu, muslim and sikh PUNJABIS.


----------



## King Julien

Gabbar said:


> Would you consider consider Chritian or Muslim marriage act for Hindus? Dont confuse religious recognition with law of society. Sharia is sort of society law. *Sikhs are forced to register as Hindus under Hindu marriage act.*



so gabbar, what is the current status on the matter... 
I mean what's the stand of your representative in the parliament, I couldn't find any updated news on the matter...

by forcefully you mean, you filed an petition in supreme court, and court said "sorry can't help"?


----------



## glomex

peace123 said:


> @ glomex & duhastmish
> nobody can't do anything for sikhs in india beacause we r discriminated & there is 0 respect and 0 power for sikhs in india, u can our pm he is sikh but can u please tell me wat he did for sikhs



Precisely thats what I am saying........people like you just rant...rant and rant......people like you never come down to India and work for your community....

People like you only blame others for all that has gone wrong.......but never want to sort things out.....

People like you only watch from the sidelines and run away at the very first opportunity to greener pastures.........


You are not In India and probably you have accepted Italian Citizenship and you like to flaunt your Dual citizenship every time you interact with your India counterparts....... 

How about coming back to India and fight for your rights.............


Everybody wants a tag of a favored minority here....but no one would like to contribute.....


You want respect....come here...prove that you deserve respect and you will get it......don't just sit here on front of your Computer screen typing crap and thinking you can make a difference.... because you can't.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## peace123

1&#176; i'm not italian and i don't want be italian beacause i'm proudly indian and then sikh
2&#176; i've been in india last month, in december 2008; diwali 2008 ecc...
3&#176; i *not typing crap*.


----------



## glomex

peace123 said:


> @ glomex & duhastmish
> nobody can't do anything for sikhs in india beacause we r discriminated & there is 0 respect and 0 power for sikhs in india, u can our pm he is sikh but can u please tell me wat he did for sikhs. we have never been paid which we deserve. And these things i feel only after leaving punjab. i m till in india but the attitude of people in india towards us is notas expected. Beleive me, sikhs are seen as jokers??? (hindi films and media). Atleast by my generation. Do u know the trouble u will face in a college or uni. outside punjab if u r a turbaned sikh?? The time of "sardar ji" has gone. Now its "oye sardar" "surdi" or like this. They
> make fun of our language, our appearance etc. and they dont know what we have done for india or they just dont want to appreciate. They will not miss a
> single chance to comment on u as a sikh or "sadrar". The circulation of "surd jokes" or "sardar jokes" is a fashion, and more importantly they are such a sick
> jokes they clearly show the image we are gaining. they will question u abt ur relegious beleifs and call then illogical (like having hair, beard and all) but as soon as the name "pakistan" comes, u r all good. One thing is clear, we had been the most respected community in india. But now we are loosing respect. Specially the new generation who has not seen sikhs fighting with british, china and pakistan
> and with Mtv culture, i dont know if we will be able to pass our traditions to our children. One other thing I have realised that its all politics in history has united us with current india. But, in terms of culture traditions, tastes, mentality, physique, bodylanguage etc. we ARE far different from the othe people in india (u can arguethat it is tru for many communities in india) but till i personally feel a clear difference between punjab and rest of the india. My dream is to live in Punjab with all five rivers and with all hindu, muslim and sikh PUNJABIS.





I don't know who feeds you this information....I am a Hindu married to a Sikh Lady........I have had Sikh friendssince my childhood...and I have never seen myt friends being disrespected by Hindus ......Though sometimes I have had friendly laugh with my Sikh friends by calling them Oye Sardar... and I still do that and I will do because I love my friends...and they love me too.....

I see more Hindus Visiting Bangla Sahab .Sheesh Ganj Gurudawara In delhi....more than Sikhs do.......... I have sen More Hindus At Golden Temple than Sikhs.......

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## peace123

glomex said:


> Everybody wants a tag of a favored minority here....but no one would like to contribute.....



so u mean sikhs haven't contributed


----------



## glomex

peace123 said:


> so u mean sikhs haven't contributed



That was a generic statement ...towards people wanting Minority status...


----------



## duhastmish

peace123 said:


> 1&#176; i'm not italian and i don't want be italian beacause i'm proudly indian and then sikh
> 2&#176; i've been in india last month, in december 2008; diwali 2008 ecc...
> 3&#176; i *not typing crap*.



Dude wha tarey ou talking about ?? what are you saying sikh are discrimnated in india. wtf is wrong with this country man, 

maharastrian say were discrimnated 
bihari say they are.
gadwali say they are.
asamese and east indian say they are. 
madrasi are taken for joke
i mean - guys you need to take a chill pill - friggin lets not make worst than it already is in india.
grow up you all. 

and i am muslim and i been to gurdwars too - so its not about who go there. sikh and every other bugger hindu muslim ,buddist need to friggin take a break here man. india is friggin becoming war zone between each other. region religion clan colour language what else size of your thing ???? now , i mean is there anythign else left to fight for ????

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## peace123

more hindus at golden temples than sikhs....

hahahahahahah
r u joking???


----------



## peace123

*Sikhs being discriminated all over India- S. Tarlochan Singh Ex- Chairman National Commission for Minorities & Member Rajya Sabha
SIRSA NEWS
28 April, 2009*
All pictures can be clicked to enlarge or right click to open link in new window. Pictures: Pankaj Dhingra
Sardar Tarlochan Singh Ex- Chairman, National Commission for Minorities and member Rajya Sabha from Haryana, who was in Sirsa on an electioneering mission for NDA candidate Dr. Sita Ram met the local press. While addressing the media persons he said without mincing words that Sikhs are being discriminated against rest of the Indians and even the other minorities in India. Quoting the recent action by Supreme Court of India in setting of SIT against Mr. Nareneder Modi, about his alleged role in Bet bakery genocide, he said that he would have welcome the move but, why the apex court could not take any suo motto action against the Genocide of the Sikhs in 1984, why any NGO or any Government recent or in the past could not put even a single culprit behind the bars in the last 25 years or so. He accused Congerss PM Dr. Manmohan Singh of papering only one minority i.e. Muslims at the cost of other 4 minorities recognized by constitution of India.


----------



## glomex

peace123 said:


> *Sikhs being discriminated all over India- S. Tarlochan Singh Ex- Chairman National Commission for Minorities & Member Rajya Sabha
> SIRSA NEWS
> 28 April, 2009*
> All pictures can be clicked to enlarge or right click to open link in new window. Pictures: Pankaj Dhingra
> Sardar Tarlochan Singh Ex- Chairman, National Commission for Minorities and member Rajya Sabha from Haryana, who was in Sirsa on an electioneering mission for NDA candidate Dr. Sita Ram met the local press. While addressing the media persons he said without mincing words that Sikhs are being discriminated against rest of the Indians and even the other minorities in India. Quoting the recent action by Supreme Court of India in setting of SIT against Mr. Nareneder Modi, about his alleged role in Bet bakery genocide, he said that he would have welcome the move but, why the apex court could not take any suo motto action against the Genocide of the Sikhs in 1984, why any NGO or any Government recent or in the past could not put even a single culprit behind the bars in the last 25 years or so. He accused Congerss PM Dr. Manmohan Singh of papering only one minority i.e. Muslims at the cost of other 4 minorities recognized by constitution of India.



Ok ..so now this boils down to Anti Sikh Riots in Delhi......


Tell me Sikhs have been on top positions in Punjab and Even IN central Government...what have they done to facilitate the trial of Anti Sikh Rioters...


----------



## peace123

glomex said:


> I don't know who feeds you this information....I am a Hindu married to a Sikh Lady........I have had Sikh friendssince my childhood...and I have never seen myt friends being disrespected by Hindus ......Though sometimes I have had friendly laugh with my Sikh friends by calling them Oye Sardar... and I still do that and I will do because I love my friends...and they love me too.....
> 
> I see more Hindus Visiting Bangla Sahab .Sheesh Ganj Gurudawara In delhi....more than Sikhs do.......... I have sen More Hindus At Golden Temple than Sikhs.......





glomex said:


> Ok ..so now this boils down to Anti Sikh Riots in Delhi......
> 
> 
> Tell me Sikhs have been on top positions in Punjab and Even IN central Government...what have they done to facilitate the trial of Anti Sikh Rioters...



a single(or small group) sikh in the central party can't do anything


----------



## afriend

duhastmish said:


> Dude wha tarey ou talking about ?? what are you saying sikh are discrimnated in india. wtf is wrong with this country man,
> 
> maharastrian say were discrimnated
> bihari say they are.
> gadwali say they are.
> asamese and east indian say they are.
> madrasi are taken for joke
> i mean - guys you need to take a chill pill - friggin lets not make worst than it already is in india.
> grow up you all.
> 
> and i am muslim and i been to gurdwars too - so its not about who go there. sikh and every other bugger hindu muslim ,buddist need to friggin take a break here man. india is friggin becoming war zone between each other. region religion clan colour language what else size of your thing ???? now , i mean is there anythign else left to fight for ????



If everyone is descriminated.. the question remains by who..??? We are a country of equal discrimination..!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## MFI

peace123 said:


> more hindus at golden temples than sikhs....
> 
> hahahahahahah
> r u joking???



It's true.I call my Sikh friends as 'oye Paaji' is suppose i'm discriminating
Me with my Sikh friends:


----------



## glomex

peace123 said:


> a single(or small group) sikh in the central party can't do anything



Apart from being in Central Government Sikhs are also sitting in Powerful positions in Punjab....why have they done nothing about it...

They play a lot of politics in Religious Organization SGPC.......


----------



## peace123

glomex said:


> Apart from being in Central Government Sikhs are also sitting in Powerful positions in Punjab....why have they done nothing about it...
> 
> They play a lot of politics in Religious Organization SGPC.......



wat can they do out of punjab and i never said that sikhs r dicriminated in punjab the problem is out of punjab where sikhs are like "manifesto da circo"


----------



## glomex

peace123 said:


> wat can they do out of punjab and i never said that sikhs r dicriminated in punjab the problem is out of punjab where sikhs are like "manifesto da circo"



That's a wonderful excuse.......we can't do anything because we are Expendable... our political leadership is incompetent... and they can't fight for us .....

By the way Is Punjab not a part of India....


----------



## zombie

Gabbar said:


> Sikhs are forced to register as Hindus under Hindu marriage act.



Gabbar dont have the time now to discuss all the points but there are a lot of misconceptions in this thread including from hindus. I didn't get married under the Hindu marriage act despite my wife and I being Hindus. So there is no way Sikhs are forced to marry under Hindu marriage act. 

Special Marriage Act (1954, India) -- Britannica Online Encyclopedia

I agree with you though that if there were a seperate Sikh marriage act also it would be nice especially for those who would like something like that even though I am sure that as one of the most modern religions Sikh marriage acts would most likely be as close as possible to a secular marriage act like Special marriage act than any religious marriage act.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## peace123

glomex said:


> That's a wonderful excuse.......we can't do anything because we are Expendable... our political leadership is incompetent... and they can't fight for us .....
> 
> By the way Is Punjab not a part of India....



i never said this
i just said that out of punjab for ex. haryana pun. gov. can't do anything

when i said that punjab is not a part of india???


----------



## peace123

zombie said:


> I agree with you though that if there were a seperate Sikh marriage act also it would be nice especially for those who would like something like that even though I am sure that as one of the most modern religions Sikh marriage acts would most likely be as close as possible to a secular marriage act like Special marriage act than any religious marriage act.



wtf i was saying since yesterday


----------



## glomex

peace123 said:


> i never said this
> i just said that out of punjab for ex. haryana pun. gov. can't do anything
> 
> when i said that punjab is not a part of india???



If you claim that Discrimination Against Sikhs is rampant in other states than I would like to highlight the state of Bihari Workers in Punjab being treated like slaves ...and Disrespected....and called names like *oye Bihari..*....

So Sikhs get a similar treatment outside their state....when they are called Oye Sardar... 

My Sikh friends here are Managers and are respected...bacause they worked hard and achieved some position......and I have examples of my Sikh friends not working hard and are non achievers so they are not respected.....


Now if you belong to second category ..then no one can help you........


----------



## peace123

glomex said:


> If you claim that Discrimination Against Sikhs is rampant in other states than I would like to highlight the state of Bihari Workers in Punjab being treated like slaves ...and Disrespected....and called names like *oye Bihari..*....
> 
> So Sikhs get a similar treatment outside their state....when they are called Oye Sardar...
> 
> My Sikh friends here are Managers and are respected...bacause they worked hard and achieved some position......and I have examples of my Sikh friends not working hard and are non achievers so they are not respected.....
> 
> 
> Now if you belong to second category ..then no one can help you........



i know that bihari r not well treated in punjab but it is also true that they choose to come to punjab and no body invite them, have you ever been to ludhiana? if yes, have you seen how many biharis(recpectfuly) are ther in ludhiana. and notice calling bihari a bihari(come from bihar) is nothing wrong while sardar is more discourteous. saying oye sardar is wrong(like oye hindu or oye muslim) but u can say oye punjabi that is nothing wrong

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## glomex

peace123 said:


> i know that bihari r not well treated in punjab but it is also true that they choose to come to punjab and no body invite them, have you ever been to ludhiana? if yes, have you seen how many biharis(recpectfuly) are ther in ludhiana. and notice calling bihari a bihari(come from bihar) is nothing wrong while sardar is more discourteous. saying oye sardar is wrong(like oye hindu or oye muslim) but u can say oye punjabi that is nothing wrong



Tiis reminds me of my friend (A sikh Friend) who got his hair cut reason....... Fashion..... was once walking on street in Minerva , Ludhiana.....with me.....some from behind called him...Bhaiya side ho ja.........he felt so dejected and said....When I had Turban I was respected and People use to call me A Sardar..and look When I cut my hair they called me a Bhaiya(A slang for UPite)..so he decided to grow his hair back and wear a turban to be called a *Sardar....*

I thought Sardars liked being called Sardars as it means *a Leader* litrally....

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## peace123

glomex said:


> Tiis reminds me of my friend (A sikh Friend) who got his hair cut reason....... Fashion..... was once walking on street in Minerva , Ludhiana.....with me.....some from behind called him...Bhaiya side ho ja.........he felt so dejected and said....When I had Turban I was respected and People use to call me A Sardar..and look When I cut my hair they called me a Bhaiya(A slang for UPite)..so he decided to grow his hair back and wear a turban to be called a *Sardar....*
> 
> I thought Sardars liked being Sardars as it means *a Leader* litrally....


oye sardar and sardar r bit different concepts.


----------



## glomex

peace123 said:


> oye sardar and sardar r bit different concepts.



Ok....If I call my friend ...Oye sardar....and he responds with love...why is it difficult for you to understand.....I would love to call you Oye sardar ...if you want....and we can share a laugh .....

There are stereotypes and one just has to live with it.....and i think Sardars are the ones who have adjusted to the stereotype in most comfortable manner.......Thats what I love most in my friends........ and I cherish them being my friend......

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jatt Boy

@ peace123 - stop yaar, I live in Punjab also. Middle class has no issues, and I have studied in CBSE school w/ Hindu brothers. Now you will say CBSE 'Gandhi' syllabus brainwashed me ?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Gabbar

sob said:


> Sir you will find more information on this at this site
> Home | The Siege of Mecca
> 
> This also has a photogallery but I could not upload the photos.
> Check this out also
> Grand Mosque Seizure - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Also you will find pics of the US embassy being stormed in Islamabad after rumors that the US had bombed the Holy Mosque at Mecca.



Thank you for the info but it still does not change the ground reality in India.


----------



## Gabbar

King Julien said:


> so gabbar, what is the current status on the matter...
> I mean what's the stand of your representative in the parliament, I couldn't find any updated news on the matter...
> 
> by forcefully you mean, you filed an petition in supreme court, and court said "sorry can't help"?



Look KJ, forced basically means against your will. right? Pakistan has Sikh marrige act. Why can't India has one? When ever you fill a marriage certificate, it goes under Hindu marriage act. It's the law and it's out of SC hands. Nothing agains Hinduism, it's about your own recognition here. Where I am from Hinds, Sikhs and Muslims lives side by side. We have gurdwara's, Shiv temple and Dargah in our village. When ever there is shivratri you will see orthodox Sikhs helping cook food, cleaning the premises and organizing events to help our Hindu brothers. It's not about Hindu Vs. Sikhs, it's about recognition, broken promises and when somebody tried to get them, they were killed by thier own government. 

*PS: (not at KJ) Please stop making rants here, please make rational and logical arguments.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gabbar

glomex said:


> Ok....If I call my friend ...Oye sardar....and he responds with love...why is it difficult for you to understand.....I would love to call you Oye sardar ...if you want....and we can share a laugh .....
> 
> There are stereotypes and one just has to live with it.....and i think Sardars are the ones who have adjusted to the stereotype in most comfortable manner.......Thats what I love most in my friends........ and I cherish them being my friend......



Glome I can see your point but do not try to call sarder a "oye sarder" especially in Punjab. Seriously might get in trouble for that or big lecture.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## A1Kaid

Patriot said:


> What was the reason behind this operation?I don't know much about this operation.If it was indeed done* to kill Sikh terrorists* (Punjab is not disputed territory and there are alot of Sikhs in mainstream in India) then i completely support this Operation.




One interest point is were the Sikh militants actually Sikh terrorist? Or were they Sikh freedom fighters? 
If they were Sikh terrorist one must prove they specifically targeted civilians. So how many civilians did these Sikh terrorist kill?


If they were Sikh freedom fighters then they would most likely resist against Indian Army forces and fight for freedom from oppression.


Any thoughts?


----------



## glomex

A1Kaid said:


> One interest point is were the Sikh militants actually Sikh terrorist? Or were they Sikh freedom fighters?
> If they were Sikh terrorist one must prove they specifically targeted civilians. So how many civilians did these Sikh terrorist kill?
> 
> 
> If they were Sikh freedom fighters then they would most likely resist against Indian Army forces and fight for freedom from oppression.
> 
> 
> Any thoughts?



What was LTTE?

freedome fighters...or terrorists....

I guess they were terrorists and a banned organization ..because they tried to devide a nation...for reasons may be similar to Khalistan movement followers....

any thoughts....


----------



## afriend

peace123 said:


> i know that bihari r not well treated in punjab but it is also true that they choose to come to punjab and no body invite them, have you ever been to ludhiana? if yes, have you seen how many biharis(recpectfuly) are ther in ludhiana. and notice calling bihari a bihari(come from bihar) is nothing wrong while sardar is more discourteous. saying oye sardar is wrong(like oye hindu or oye muslim) but u can say oye punjabi that is nothing wrong



WTF.. Is calling a sardar sardarji discourteous..!!! Man...!!! I have been doing this with my collegues..!!! Gabbar.. fateh..!!! please help me out here..!!!


----------



## Gabbar

> One interest point is were the Sikh militants actually Sikh terrorist? Or were they Sikh freedom fighters?



Depends who you ask. When insurgench started, first 3-4 years it had very good support amongs Sikhs but down the road when police started to use "CATS", some people started to loot and started to target Hindus in Punjab, it all went down hill from there.



> If they were Sikh terrorist one must prove they specifically targeted civilians. So how many civilians did these Sikh terrorist kill?



Number is in thousands but not all terrorist were Sikhs. Do some search on police CATS in punjab who were acting like terrorist do bring one group's popularity down in the area.



> If they were Sikh freedom fighters then they would most likely resist against Indian Army forces and fight for freedom from oppression.



Early days of the insurgeny it was against government and government instalaions. It was never agains Hindus, Congres did very good job in turning this between Hindus and Sikhs. 1984 rioting was supported by congress thugs. Many thousands were saved by thier hindus neiboughrs.


----------



## Gabbar

afriend said:


> WTF.. Is calling a sardar sardarji discourteous..!!! Man...!!! I have been doing this with my collegues..!!! Gabbar.. fateh..!!! please help me out here..!!!



I there is a mis-q here. Bihari is regionalism and sardar is more of a religion and identity thing. He is saying "oye sardar" is discourteous not sardarji. Infact sardarji is very respectfull thing.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Gabbar

glomex said:


> What was LTTE?
> 
> freedome fighters...or terrorists....
> 
> I guess they were terrorists and a banned organization ..because they tried to devide a nation...for reasons may be similar to Khalistan movement followers....
> 
> any thoughts....



Agian depends you ask. You go talk to passionate tamil in SL, London or Toronto. According to them LTTE "was" a freedom movement.


----------



## afriend

Gabbar said:


> Look KJ, forced basically means against your will. right? Pakistan has Sikh marrige act. Why can't India has one? When ever you fill a marriage certificate, it goes under Hindu marriage act. It's the law and it's out of SC hands. Nothing agains Hinduism, it's about your own recognition here. Where I am from Hinds, Sikhs and Muslims lives side by side. We have gurdwara's, Shiv temple and Dargah in our village. When ever there is shivratri you will see orthodox Sikhs helping cook food, cleaning the premises and organizing events to help our Hindu brothers. It's not about Hindu Vs. Sikhs, it's about recognition, broken promises and when somebody tried to get them, they were killed by thier own government.
> 
> *PS: (not at KJ) Please stop making rants here, please make rational and logical arguments.*



You are one wise man who knows that loving religion doesn't necessarily mean hating India. 

Many years down the lane i think .. "that i dont have an act but you do" kind of religous issues will be done away with. But in the first place why the fcuk do we have different acts, just have one act which allows a man to marry a women..!!! Rest let the community decide for itself.. if anything is done by force there is law to put a check on it. 

If we put the practices of different religions into law then we are gonna have crores of law for just one simple thing called marriage.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## afriend

Gabbar said:


> I there is a mis-q here. Bihari is regionalism and sardar is more of a religion and identity thing. He is saying "oye sardar" is discourteous not sardarji. Infact sardarji is very respectfull thing.



Well in fact i call them oye sardarji..!!!  Well since they havent complained i dont think i have a reason to worry right.!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gabbar

Having so many religions, languages, and cultures have kept India strong during troubled times. But it has also brought some conflict as well. Since India is a very diverse nation, you have to have a secular society. If one group takes over everything and try implement thier changes, other will feel second class and unsecure. Its just the reality. We can't have extrimism in any religion dictating the whole community. RSS, VHP, TALIBANS, AL-QAIDA, BABBAR KHALSA, KLA etc, these such kind of organizations and idiology is a threat to our national unity.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## afriend

Gabbar said:


> Having so many religions, languages, and cultures have kept India strong during troubled times. But it has also brought some conflict as well. Since India is a very diverse nation, you have to have a secular society. If one group takes over everything and try implement thier changes, other will feel second class and unsecure. Its just the reality. We can't have extrimism in any religion dictating the whole community. RSS, VHP, TALIBANS, AL-QAIDA, BABBAR KHALSA, KLA etc, these such kind of organizations and idiology is a threat to our national unity.



Well ur right lets JUST have a secular constitution based on the principles of humanity.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gabbar

afriend said:


> You are one wise man who knows that loving religion doesn't necessarily mean hating India.
> 
> Many years down the lane i think .. "that i dont have an act but you do" kind of religous issues will be done away with. But in the first place why the fcuk do we have different acts, just have one act which allows a man to marry a women..!!! Rest let the community decide for itself.. if anything is done by force there is law to put a check on it.
> 
> If we put the practices of different religions into law then we are gonna have crores of law for just one simple thing called marriage.



I love Sikhism and I love India. I dont think they contridict each other. Khalsa was created to protect India from foreign invaders. Finally Maharaja Ranjit Singh did closed khyber pass and since then that have not been attack on India through that area. It was shamefull, disappointed, hurtfull act in 1984.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IBM

My dear Indian brother. We Sikh and Hindu r one will remain one we r Indian first. This thread is attempt by our enemy to create difference between us stop this thread .


----------



## Gabbar

^^ It doesn't matter who created this thread. But we should not be affraid discuss our dark history and shortcomings. That will make us stronger and hopefully prevent things like these in future.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## IBM

Gabbar said:


> ^^ It doesn't matter who created this thread. But we should not be affraid discuss our dark history and shortcomings. That will make us stronger and hopefully prevent things like these in future.




believe me bro our friends r enjoying our fight...........


----------



## paritosh

well it doesn't matter who created this thread and for what purpose.It is good that we've so far had a productive discussion in this regard.
but I really think that we should do something about the sikh marriage act....


----------



## paritosh

peace123 said:


> @ glomex & duhastmish
> nobody can't do anything for sikhs in india beacause we r discriminated & there is 0 respect and 0 power for sikhs in india, u can our pm he is sikh but can u please tell me wat he did for sikhs.
> we have never been paid which we deserve. And these things i feel only after leaving punjab. i m till in india but the attitude of people in india towards us is notas expected. Beleive me, sikhs are seen as jokers??? (hindi films and media). Atleast by my generation. Do u know the trouble u will face in a college or uni. outside punjab if u r a turbaned sikh?? The time of "sardar ji" has gone. Now its "oye sardar" "surdi" or like this. They
> make fun of our language, our appearance etc. and they dont know what we have done for india or they just dont want to appreciate. They will not miss a
> single chance to comment on u as a sikh or "sadrar". The circulation of "surd jokes" or "sardar jokes" is a fashion, and more importantly they are such a sick
> jokes they clearly show the image we are gaining. they will question u abt ur relegious beleifs and call then illogical (like having hair, beard and all) but as soon as the name "pakistan" comes, u r all good. One thing is clear, we had been the most respected community in india. But now we are loosing respect. Specially the new generation who has not seen sikhs fighting with british, china and pakistan
> and with Mtv culture, i dont know if we will be able to pass our traditions to our children. One other thing I have realised that its all politics in history has united us with current india. But, in terms of culture traditions, tastes, mentality, physique, bodylanguage etc. we ARE far different from the othe people in india (u can arguethat it is tru for many communities in india) but till i personally feel a clear difference between punjab and rest of the india. My dream is to live in Punjab with all five rivers and with all hindu, muslim and sikh PUNJABIS.


brother you've had some bad experiences...but it's not like that at all.
I from my experience would like to tell you that all forms of regionalism and communalism are bad in a dynamic religious and cultural equilibrium that today's India is.One strike of the match and you'd have the country blazing.


----------



## A1Kaid

IBM said:


> My dear Indian brother.* We Sikh and Hindu r one will remain one we r Indian first.*



Well actually Sikhism is a monotheistic faith and Hinduism is a pagan faith or polytheistic faith.

Sikhs believe in a single supreme God not millions of God's Hindus believe in. Sikhs have different religious rituals than Hindus, and Sikhs do not worship animals like Hindus.

So these are considerable and distinct difference between Sikhism, Sikhism does have small influences from Hinduism. Though many would say Sikhism is a different religion from Hinduism.

So Sikhism and Hinduism are technically different religions.


----------



## A1Kaid

*Sant Jee talking about Sikhs are not Hindus*


----------



## A1Kaid

*Sikhs Are Not Hindu, RSS, Hindutva Baman Attacks On Sikhs*









Part 2


----------



## paritosh

@A1Kaid
do you support the LTTE?
i would add to the line by IBM...
"we sikhs,hindus,muslims and christians are one"
to hell with all the religious differences....as a nation we have unity in diversity.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## afriend

A1Kaid said:


> Well actually Sikhism is a monotheistic faith and Hinduism is a pagan faith or polytheistic faith.
> 
> Sikhs believe in a single supreme God not millions of God's Hindus believe in. Sikhs have different religious rituals than Hindus, and Sikhs do not worship animals like Hindus.
> 
> So these are considerable and distinct difference between Sikhism, Sikhism does have small influences from Hinduism. Though many would say Sikhism is a different religion from Hinduism.
> 
> So Sikhism and Hinduism are technically different religions.



Well what i think, Mr. IBM was trying to say is, irrespective of different faiths we believe in, down the lane we are just one(as in united).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## peace123

@ A1Kaid
thanks but we indian don't need ur help

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## vsdoc

I speak here as an Indian ..... not as a Hindu, or a Muslim, or a Christian, or a Sikh, or a Buddhist, or a Jain, or a Parsi. When we say we are a Secular nation, it means that in the eyes of the Govt. we are all One. Our Constitution gives us Indian citizens the right to Equality irrespective of our Religion. But with Rights come Responsibilities. There are no free lunches in this world. I personally feel it is wrong on our collective part to on the one hand say we are Secular, but on the other expect the Govt. and the Judiciary, backed by the entire Civil establishment, the provide for and give legal national backing to various Different Civil Acts (be they for Matrimony, or Property) based on Religion. Let us be candid enough as educated honest true Indians and admit that there is no place in our society for a different Hindu Act, or a Muslim Act, or a Sikh Act, or any other Act. It is frankly ABSURD that more than 60 years after Independence, more than 60 years of vindication to the World that Secularism works, we still cannot get this simple truth! Plain and simple and logical move would be to have a major revamp, abolish ALL these, and have a SINGLE COMMON INDIAN CIVIL ACT. Whether the present Govt., or any other Govt. in the future has the courage of conviction and the consensus of the Nation to actually bell this troublesome cat, is another issue altogether.

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## notsuperstitious

The marriage act issue is largely a non issue. The 'Hindu' marriage act is not based on any religious commandment in Hindu scriptures but on the culcural practices of people of dharmic religions. Hence it considers Sikhs / Buddhists/ Jains'FOR THE SAKE OF THAT ACT' as Hindus. Maybe the word Hindu is causing come insecurity among some Sikhs. Maybe the word 'Hindu' should be removed from the act but lets not create more acts when there's no necessity. Lets use a word that says 'people from the east of indus following local culture'.

Hey thats Hindu, the word 'Hindu' does not exist in our religion 

*Wahe Gurujika Khalsa- Wahe Guruji ki Fateh*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IBM

Dear all, all i can say "Sare jahan se acha Hindustan hamara Hum bulbule he iske yeah gulistan hamara. " we r Indian first. We r proud of our country..

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## vsdoc

That still leaves us with the special Muslim marriage act. Why the need for that? Why should the Indian Govt. legally allow an Indian man to marry more than one Indian woman? And why should those Indian women not get the same rights as other Indian women in the case of a divorce? These are questions of Civil Law and about one section of Indians not having the same rights as another (larger majority) section of Indians ..... hence Inequality based on Religion ..... hence going against the basic tenets of the Indian Constitution ..... why is that so difficult to understand and accept?

Cheers, Doc


----------



## peace123

fateh71 said:


> The marriage act issue is largely a non issue. The 'Hindu' marriage act is not based on any religious commandment in Hindu scriptures but on the culcural practices of people of dharmic religions. Hence it considers Sikhs / Buddhists/ Jains'FOR THE SAKE OF THAT ACT' as Hindus. Maybe the word Hindu is causing come insecurity among some Sikhs. Maybe the word 'Hindu' should be removed from the act but lets not create more acts when there's no necessity. Lets use a word that says 'people from the east of indus following local culture'.
> 
> Hey thats Hindu, the word 'Hindu' does not exist in our religion



practicaly talking marriage act is not so important but why the name of the act is hindu marraige act and why not simply marriage act don't u think that its a dicrimination against sikhs/ buddhists/ hains/ mazdeas eccc..


----------



## peace123

Jatt Boy said:


> @ peace123 - stop yaar, I live in Punjab also. Middle class has no issues, and I have studied in CBSE school w/ Hindu brothers. Now you will say CBSE 'Gandhi' syllabus brainwashed me ?



ehi
i'm not an extremist and i'm proudly indian

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## notsuperstitious

peace123 said:


> practicaly talking marriage act is not so important but why the name of the act is hindu marraige act and why not simply marriage act don't u think that its a dicrimination against sikhs/ buddhists/ hains/ mazdeas eccc..



Yes, there's no need to call it Hindu. But then, the term Hindu is not a term used in Sanatan Dharma. Hindu as a term was always used to include the Jains / Buddhists etc when the term was created.

Let me repeat, the law should not be called Hindu law as *its a secular law based on local culture and not on religious decrees of Hinduism*, no Hindu religious scholar has any role to play in it unlike the Muslim personal law for example.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Khajur

A1Kaid said:


> Well actually Sikhism is a monotheistic faith and Hinduism is a pagan faith or polytheistic faith.
> 
> Sikhs believe in a single supreme God not millions of God's Hindus believe in. Sikhs have different religious rituals than Hindus, and Sikhs do not worship animals like Hindus.
> 
> So these are considerable and distinct difference between Sikhism, Sikhism does have small influences from Hinduism. Though many would say Sikhism is a different religion from Hinduism.
> 
> So Sikhism and Hinduism are technically different religions.





*Here comes anther expert in hinduism from across the border*.

A1Kaid,

*There are no millions of God in hindusm, but millions "Devatas" *who are Hindu deities worshipped as symbols or representations of one supreme being( "param Bramha") .

These* Hindu deities are characters of hindu "Puranas"(*roughly translates as mythologies in english) where God born as those deities in human or animal form for the benifit of mankind and the the creation in different ages.

Most of the million Devata live swarg(heaven) are believed to carry different power of the supreme being and all work according to the wishes of that supreme being .

So when hindus worship them ,they dont pray form of a stone or the live animal,but as the one of the sysmbols of the supreme Brhama they represent as described in our Puranas/holy scriptures.


*From Lord Buddha to jain Mahavir , Guru Nanak of Sikhism,Santha Kabir are those great saints who objected to unnecessary rituals and caste division that permeated in to hindu dharma over thousands of yrs and tried reform it in the way they realised the presense of the supreme/param bharma and started new simple paths/cults to reach that supreme being bereft of most hindu rituals . And now their followers are known as buddhist, jains or sikhs*.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## notsuperstitious

Khajur said:


> *Here comes anther expert in hinduism from across the border*.
> 
> A1Kaid,
> 
> *There are no millions of God in hindusm, but millions "Devatas" *who are Hindu deities worshipped as symbols or representations of one supreme being( "param Bramha") .
> 
> These* Hindu deities are characters of hindu "Puranas"(*roughly translates as mythologies in english) where God born as those deities in human or animal form for the benifit of mankind and the the creation in different ages.
> 
> Most of the million Devata live swarg(heaven) are believed to carry different power of the supreme being and all work according to the wishes of that supreme being .
> 
> So when hindus worship them ,they dont pray form of a stone or the live animal,but as the one of the sysmbols of the supreme Brhama they represent as described in our Puranas/holy scriptures.
> 
> 
> *From Lord Buddha to jain Mahavir , Guru Nanak of Sikhism,Santha Kabir are those great saints who objected to unnecessary rituals and caste division that permeated in to hindu dharma over thousands of yrs and tried reform it in the they realised the presense of the supreme/param bharma and started new simple paths/cults to reach that supreme being bereft of most hindu rituals . And now their followers are known as buddhist, jains or sikhs*.



I thought of replying to that, but i did not want to go that route. To anyone who really wants to find out, they can, to those beating the drums of their religious supremacy (oxymoron), you can't teach people who claim to know everything can you? They lack the basic quality required for knowledge, humility!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## duhastmish

hmmmm - what are you people fighting for ? relgion ? i bet most of you buggers are not - ortodox religous. i mean not inclined toward faollowing for age old meaningless (in current age ) custom of religion. so why argue over it.

Religion change : and the one who accept this change will move forward. you know whats wrong with mullah ISLAM????

The mullah islam doesnt change according to time. they are stuck in age old cutom and ethics of religion. they are not understandign the symbolic meaning but are stuck in iconic meaning.
-----------
now same is happenign with hinduism or sikh extrimist. 

guys religion change - and sikh and buddist are two most accommodating religion.

*to me sikh : are born to give or devote themselve to this society. in india sikh are like elder brother to rest of country.

protective pioneering nationalist and demanding respect.( in all feild social , politcial , business or defence)*

as for sikh jokes : dude they are friggin funny and so are pathan jokes or gujju jokes. but its fun till the intention is not to hurt sentiment by pointing at religion or their custom.
---------------
i for one dont belive there is racism against sikh, not here atleast and it did get me in rage when that S.O.B varun abused sikh as religion. and i can assure that also did rage 99.999999&#37; hindu or muslim or buddist or jain or jews or parasi or christians etc.....

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## vsdoc

Many of my friends in school (I grew up in Jamshedpur) were sardars. In college too my best friend and roomie was a cut-surd, as well as other sardar batchmates and friends. Sardar jokes? So what? Have you seen how Parsi bawajis are portrayed in all our movies? Do you see us getting all uptight and taking offense?!!!!!! Yes, Golden Temple was not a particularly bright spot in our history - but cmon guys, is it not time to move on as a community and a country? On one side of the coin the pepetrators of the Delhi riots still run free, but on the other so do those who plotted the kanishka bombing. Indira Gandhi was gunned down, Gen. Vaidya in Pune. And there was someone here mentioning that the army units went into the temple with their boots on. Buddy you are misinformed. I remember clearly those days and how ladies across the country had cried the day after the storming when it was learned that the first 2 units of the NSG had crossed the main courtyard aginst well-entrenched HMG fire - BAREFEET - and most of those young soldiers in the initial attack were mowed down - coz for fear of not harming the main sanctum sanctorum, they could not retaliate with mortar/grenade/rockets which would have been the easy thing to do. There is no end to the vicious cycle of revenge. I dont know how many of you here are old enough to remember that decade of Akali terrorism - I was - and it was really bad. Punjab as a economic power and rice/wheat bowl of India was gutted, and everyday on TV and in the newspapers it was thebreaking news, the ONLY news. And it was like that for nearly a generation. Nobody liked how it ended, but nobody was sad when it did. 

I love sardars like my brothers, like I do my other Indian Hindu, Muslim, or Christian friends. I gre up in a home where we have foto frames of dieties of all religions on our prayer shelves along with our own. We celebrate all festivals with equal enthu, be it Holi/Diwali or gobbling delicious bityani and the milk sewai on Id, or going to midnight mass on Christmas (admittedly to see the gorgeous mini-skirted anglo girls!). We buy gold on Dhanteras for our ladies. I totally freak out on the kababs, kadhi gosht, and firni at the Mominpura food stalls after sundown during Ramzan. I go with my surdi friends for langars to the gurudwara and when in college we once had a long strike (it was covered famously on all National news channels as strikes in defense institutions become National news) all girl and guy cadets were rescued from the railway station platforms by city sardars and given shelter in the Hollywood gurudwara - for 3 days. I still fondly remember beloing rotis as part of the public service in the huge kitchen there. 

The point in all this random rambling here, especially for our Pakistani brothers, is that we Indians love being Indian and that means we love our diversity and our colorful customs and clothes and food and we are flexible and accomodative to each others beliefs and faiths and we love living together as brothers. Like all humans, we are not perfect, and we do screw up once in a while. We are not proud of it nor do any of us condone it - either openly or in private. We recognise secularity as what binds us together and makes us a growing force on the world stage, and we will always come together to defend it when forces - either external or internal - come to destroy this fabric that binds us together and is the very essence of being an Indian.

Jai Hind!

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## A1Kaid

Khajur said:


> *Here comes anther expert in hinduism from across the border*.
> 
> A1Kaid,
> 
> *There are no millions of God in hindusm, but millions "Devatas" *who are Hindu deities worshipped as symbols or representations of one supreme being( "param Bramha") .
> 
> These* Hindu deities are characters of hindu "Puranas"(*roughly translates as mythologies in english) where God born as those deities in human or animal form for the benifit of mankind and the the creation in different ages.
> 
> Most of the million Devata live swarg(heaven) are believed to carry different power of the supreme being and all work according to the wishes of that supreme being .
> 
> So when hindus worship them ,they dont pray form of a stone or the live animal,but as the one of the sysmbols of the supreme Brhama they represent as described in our Puranas/holy scriptures.
> 
> 
> *From Lord Buddha to jain Mahavir , Guru Nanak of Sikhism,Santha Kabir are those great saints who objected to unnecessary rituals and caste division that permeated in to hindu dharma over thousands of yrs and tried reform it in the way they realised the presense of the supreme/param bharma and started new simple paths/cults to reach that supreme being bereft of most hindu rituals . And now their followers are known as buddhist, jains or sikhs*.






> "*There are no millions of God in hindusm, but millions "Devatas" *who are Hindu deities worshipped as symbols or representations of one supreme being( "param Bramha")-Khajur



You contradicted yourself, a deity and God are in essence the same thing. I could have easily said Hinduism is a pagan or polytheist religion with millions of deities (and not God). And as you said "worshiped as symbols or representations of one supreme being", in essence idolatry and statue worshiping thanks for your admittance.





> "These* Hindu deities are characters of hindu "Puranas"(*roughly translates as mythologies in english) where God born as those deities in human or animal form for the benifit of mankind and the the creation in different ages.
> 
> Most of the million Devata live swarg(heaven) are believed to carry different power of the supreme being and all work according to the wishes of that supreme being ."-Khajaur



The ancients believed in polytheism as well but now much of the World has come to understanding if there is a God it is only one supreme God.



> So when hindus worship them ,they dont pray form of a stone or the live animal,but as the one of the sysmbols of the supreme Brhama they represent as described in our Puranas/holy scriptures."-Khajuar



Correct, but considering in Hinduism anyone can worship anything he/she chooses or believes the scriptures Puranas become less meaningful as one is guided merely on faith and self-opinion rather than divine guidance.


All the rest you spout is crap not worth responding to.

Now let's get back to topic, this is not about the origins of Hinduism. But what is clear is Sikhism and Hinduism are respectable their own faiths, even if you suggest Sikhism is derived from Hinduism.


Back on topic now.


----------



## A1Kaid

fateh71 said:


> I thought of replying to that, but i did not want to go that route. To anyone who really wants to find out, they can, to those beating the drums of their religious supremacy (oxymoron),* you can't teach people who claim to know everything can you? They lack the basic quality required for knowledge, humility!*





"* you can't teach people who claim to know everything can you? They lack the basic quality required for knowledge, humility!*"-Fateh71


You are in no position or hold any title that gives you the right to judge whether someone has humility or not. Understand...

Besides I have demonstrated knowledge here, past and present, therefore your allegation and opinion is baseless.


----------



## A1Kaid

*"Sikh Genocide 1984 Eye Witness"*


----------



## Khajur

A1Kaid said:


> You contradicted yourself, a deity and God are in essence the same thing. I could have easily said Hinduism is a pagan or polytheist religion with millions of deities (and not God). And as you said "worshiped as symbols or representations of one supreme being", in essence idolatry and statue worshiping thanks for your admittance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The ancients believed in polytheism as well but now much of the World has come to understanding if there is a God it is only one supreme God.
> 
> 
> 
> Correct, but considering in Hinduism anyone can worship anything he/she chooses or believes the scriptures Puranas become less meaningful as one is guided merely on faith and self-opinion rather than divine guidance.
> 
> 
> All the rest you spout is crap not worth responding to.
> 
> Now let's get back to topic, this is not about the origins of Hinduism. But what is clear is Sikhism and Hinduism are respectable their own faiths, even if you suggest Sikhism is derived from Hinduism.
> 
> 
> Back on topic now.



Before going to the topic...let me say u still didnt get it,did u??

As i said before, its millions of deities are different shape and names /Avatars based on "puranas "(hindu holy scriptures) of single supreme being or param Brahma.

Now presense of million deities in hindu religion dont doesnt translates to million gods ,*but as million Avatars of one single god*.A very simple logic to grasp for anyone but the rigid minds.


" *Correct, but considering in Hinduism anyone can worship anything he/she chooses or believes the scriptures Puranas become less meaningful as one is guided merely on faith and self-opinion rather than divine guidance.* "

Its purely matter of faith.
U have been told that that Quran is the divine guidance that prophet recieved from almighty god.So u follow it as ur source of divine guidance like every other muslim.

Simillarly hindus worship their different deities as many representations of almighty god based on the rituals and holy scripture of hindu religion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## notsuperstitious

A1Kaid said:


> "* you can't teach people who claim to know everything can you? They lack the basic quality required for knowledge, humility!*"-Fateh71
> 
> 
> You are in no position or hold any title that gives you the right to judge whether someone has humility or not. Understand...
> 
> Besides I have demonstrated knowledge here, past and present, therefore your allegation and opinion is baseless.



Ha ha, the arrogance of knowledge always does this to religious supremacists, they amass knowledge but never understand, as understanding required humility. Just look at your above reply to Khanjur, you just failed to understand one 'belief' and judging his 'belief' through the prism of your 'belief' and feeling all high and mighty. understand... you know as little or as much as anyone else when it comes to GOD, unless you've seen him or her or it.. understand... until then its a shooting competition of the blind... understand... and not just memorise.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## A1Kaid

Gabbar said:


> Terrorists aren't born terrorists. What drove them to pickup arms. Did you know what Gandi said when asked by Tara Singh after 1947 that "what if Sikhs didn't get what they were promised?", he said "*Sikhs will have the right to pick the arms".* Thats the exact quote from him. Please provide some link where negotiations were takng place, I want to know how did miss this.
> 
> And whats so surprising about it??
> 
> Our army never hesitate to kill kashmiri militants,bodo and Ulfa militant of Assam and tribal naxalites/moists when they question writ of the nation, mercilessly in the self interest of this country.They are all indian citizens too.
> 
> *Those militants were never innocent and even sikhs soldiers who attacked as part of IA knew it verywell.*
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it is toughness. Kill your own citizens, instead of listening to there problems. As Khuswant Singh said to IG that "LAMHOH NE KHATA KEE THEE PER SADION THE SAZA PAYEE".
> 
> 
> 
> *Beleive they also wouldn't be pround what thier own government, people and army did to thier own citizens*




You make several interesting points, but the question remains, Is Operation Blue Star in 1984 justified?

Meaning looking back now was it the right thing to do?


Also do you personally think the "Sikh militants" were terrorist or not?



> "Did you know what Gandi said when asked by Tara Singh after 1947 that "what if Sikhs didn't get what they were promised?", he said "*Sikhs will have the right to pick the arms".*-Gabbar



So does this mean the the Sikh claim is valid...? Both historically and legally?


----------



## bandit

A1Kaid said:


> You make several interesting points, but the question remains, Is Operation Blue Star in 1984 justified?
> 
> Meaning looking back now was it the right thing to do?
> 
> 
> Also do you personally think the "Sikh militants" were terrorist or not?
> 
> 
> 
> So does this mean the the Sikh claim is valid...? Both historically and legally?



Bluestar was justified in the sense that a nations government acted in the interest of the nation against forces that were threatening to disintegrate it. That civilians were killed or a religious place was desecrated was not the intent of the operation, it was a necessary step that had to be taken. The operation was not against a community as you try to make it out, the proof of it being that neither the sikhs as a community took up arms nither did the government suppress them. As of now just the scars remain but in the whole the purpose was achieved and as of whole the community remains loyal to their country. 
You can debate endlessly that the sikhs were/are repressed but your theories carry no weight as you are an outsider commenting on half baked facts. There are larger tangible proofs to negate your viewpoint like Punjab being the richest/Sikh PM/Large representation in the Forces/No terrorism.
And the Title of the thread is pretty dumb anyways, killing of terrorists is not a holocaust...its something like what happened with the jews.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## niaz

I was in London as Operation Blue Star unfolded. I can understand Delhi&#8217;s stand that there can&#8217;t be a state within a state. In some ways it resembles Lal Masjid operation some quarter a century later in Islamabad. 

As an outsider, IMO the problem lies not with the Operation Blue Star itself but its aftermath. Indra Gandhi was killed by a Sikh guard and any where from 10,000 to 50,000 (probably nearer 20,000) innocent Sikhs were looted and killed by an organized violence against the Sikhs as revenge, with law enforcing agencies calmly standing by doing nothing. I came across many inquiry reports, in one such report some 70 police officers were named as being directly involved, but not a single has been punished for it to my knowledge.

The process was repeated in Gujarat anti Muslim riots with the blessing of the butcher Narender Modi, who could ironically be the next Indian Prime Minister.

Having lived abroad for most of the last 40 years, I have very little prejudices/ religious bigotry left. However, each time I think of the anti Sikh riots in Delhi and anti Muslim riots in Gujarat, my blood boils. How can a country, despite being proud of her secular heritage, prove to be so bigoted when it comes to the crunch? But then what do you expect from the people who voted in the party; which murdered the only second Maha Atma or mega soul ever born in India; to run the country (BJP). 

I abhor Taliban in Pakistan but I also equally detest BJP which has murderers such as Narender Modi as their future leader. It is a pity that neither secular Congress nor bigoted BJP appear to be ashamed for patronizing such barbaric and dastardly acts by their activists.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## A1Kaid

bandit said:


> Bluestar was justified in the sense that a nations government acted in the interest of the nation against forces that were threatening to disintegrate it. That civilians were killed or a religious place was desecrated was not the intent of the operation, it was a necessary step that had to be taken. The operation was not against a community as you try to make it out, the proof of it being that neither the sikhs as a community took up arms nither did the government suppress them. As of now just the scars remain but in the whole the purpose was achieved and as of whole the community remains loyal to their country.
> You can debate endlessly that the sikhs were/are repressed but your theories carry no weight as you are an outsider commenting on half baked facts. There are larger tangible proofs to negate your viewpoint like Punjab being the richest/Sikh PM/Large representation in the Forces/No terrorism.
> And the Title of the thread is pretty dumb anyways, killing of terrorists is not a holocaust...its something like what happened with the jews.





"You can debate endlessly that the sikhs were/are repressed but your theories carry no weight as you are an outsider commenting on half baked facts. There are larger tangible proofs to negate your viewpoint like Punjab being the richest/Sikh PM/Large representation in the Forces/No terrorism."-bandit

Your emotions need to be kept under control or you won't last very long here, and you keep mentioning "your" and "your viewpoint", specifically point out what I said was commenting on "half-baked facts". Before you make further posts it is you who ought to do more reading because the BS allegations your pressing do not apply and are invalid.


----------



## Nemesis

A1Kaid said:


> "You can debate endlessly that the sikhs were/are repressed but your theories carry no weight as you are an outsider commenting on half baked facts. There are larger tangible proofs to negate your viewpoint like Punjab being the richest/Sikh PM/Large representation in the Forces/No terrorism."-bandit
> 
> Your emotions need to be kept under control or you won't last very long here, and you keep mentioning "your" and "your viewpoint", specifically point out what I said was commenting on "half-baked facts". Before you make further posts it is you who ought to do more reading because the BS allegations your pressing do not apply and are invalid.



What a cop out. Instead of commenting on his valid points, you go of on a tangent about emotions and such rubbish. Let moderators worry about his tone. 

He is right, as an outsider who has no knowledge of facts about India, except of what his hatred has taught him, you have no basis to make any assertion, making your points invalid.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Imran Khan

SAD incidents happen every were in world better we forget them and don't debate again and again time will never be back.learn from mistakes and don't separate hate every were its good for humanity.


----------



## Gabbar

> Bluestar was justified in the sense that a nations government acted in the interest of the nation against forces that were threatening to disintegrate it.



And who was responsible for creating that situation at the first place?



> That civilians were killed or a religious place was desecrated was not the intent of the operation, it was a necessary step that had to be taken.



Would of you said the same thing if it was your own family? Be honest with this one!!



> The operation was not against a community as you try to make it out, the proof of it being that neither the sikhs as a community took up arms nither did the government suppress them.



10-15 years of insugency after 1984 was not a proof? As far as government is concerned, did you know what happened in Delhi? You are from Delhi, you should know better than anybody else.



> As of now just the scars remain but in the whole the purpose was achieved and as of whole the community remains loyal to their country.
> You can debate endlessly that the sikhs were/are repressed but your theories carry no weight as you are an outsider commenting on half baked facts. There are larger tangible proofs to negate your viewpoint like Punjab being the richest/Sikh PM/Large representation in the Forces/No terrorism.
> And the *Title of the thread is pretty dumb anyways, killing of terrorists is not a holocaust...its something like what happened with the jews. *



Depends who you ask, you are entitled to your opinion but dont forget the thousands civilians dies along with alleged militents that were killed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## bandit

Gabbar said:


> And who was responsible for creating that situation at the first place?
> 
> 
> 
> Would of you said the same thing if it was your own family? Be honest with this one!!
> 
> 
> 
> 10-15 years of insugency after 1984 was not a proof? As far as government is concerned, did you know what happened in Delhi? You are from Delhi, you should know better than anybody else.
> 
> 
> 
> Depends who you ask, you are entitled to your opinion but dont forget the thousands civilians dies along with alleged militents that were killed.



See your anger is justified.
What I was replying to was a question about the validity of the operation. If some goons sitting in a religious place loaded with launchers and MG's are challenging the writ of the state it is necessary they be thrown out with force. 
The part about innocents being killed is very right....even if they are not my family I would still be sad for them for it was no mistake of theirs that they lost their lives.
The Insurgency was a temporary phase that died down once the few who were leading it were eliminated. It did not have the mass support because if it were, it would not have been possible to quell it even by brute force.
Lastly I do not forget the innocents who died, i felt let down when Tytler & co. were let off, they should've been made an example of, we do not want to give an impression of immunity to such heinous acts.


----------



## A1Kaid

niaz said:


> I was in London as Operation Blue Star unfolded. I can understand Delhi&#8217;s stand that there can&#8217;t be a state within a state. In some ways it resembles Lal Masjid operation some quarter a century later in Islamabad.
> 
> As an outsider, IMO the problem lies not with the Operation Blue Star itself but its aftermath. *Indra Gandhi was killed by a Sikh guard and any where from 10,000 to 50,000 (probably nearer 20,000) innocent Sikhs were looted and killed by an organized violence against the Sikhs as revenge, with law enforcing agencies calmly standing by doing nothing. I came across many inquiry reports, in one such report some 70 police officers were named as being directly involved, but not a single has been punished for it to my knowledge.
> *
> *The process was repeated in Gujarat anti Muslim riots *with the blessing of the butcher Narender Modi, who could ironically be the next Indian Prime Minister.





I just found this very revealing and truthful speech by a Sikh man, he discusses much of what you said above about police allowing Hindu rioters to kill Sikhs freely and Hindu Government facilitating the crimes...It's clear the Sikh militants or terrorist (whatever your opinion is) were not the only deliberate targets. Even unarmed Sikhs were the targets...


I recommend watching the video below.






Very truthful and passionate speech.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## bandit

A1Kaid said:


> Your emotions need to be kept under control or you won't last very long here, and you keep mentioning "your" and "your viewpoint", specifically point out what I said was commenting on "half-baked facts". Before you make further posts it is you who ought to do more reading because the BS allegations your pressing do not apply and are invalid.



What emotions did I display???

What allegations did I make???

The half baked facts were the ones you were putting up regarding Hindu gods...other members have tried to explain you the facts but since you don't seem to be willing to understand...i do not see any use explaining them again to you.

And it is you who seems to be getting emotional and threatening me...you do know what sort of emotion invokes threatening behavior don't you...its got something to do with fear.


----------



## A1Kaid

bandit said:


> What emotions did I display???
> 
> What allegations did I make???
> 
> And it is you who seems to be getting emotional and threatening me...you do know what sort of emotion invokes threatening behavior don't you...its got something to do with fear.




Calm down, I was not threatening you I was just making you aware the Forum does not tolerate the kind of disrespect you were showing...

Now you made some allegations and you should explain and prove them...



> "What allegations did I make???"-bandit



Your charges and allegations are below.

"but your theories carry no weight as you are an outsider commenting on half baked facts."-bandit

What theory carries no weight, maybe not on your delusional scale but truth is many Sikhs did die in the aftermath of the Operation and Operation BlueStar was devastating for the Sikhs, that is not a theory...

But be specific what "theories" are you referring to.

What theories, be specific post the wild conspiracy theories I have posted in regards to Operation Blue Star.

"The operation was not against a community as you try to make it out."-bandit

When did I try to "make it out" that way, using my own opinions.

"There are larger tangible proofs to negate your viewpoint like Punjab being the richest/Sikh PM/Large representation in the Forces/No terrorism."-bandit

Now you better prove your allegations. You keep using the words "you" and "your" so they are directed at me.


Now prove your allegations and be specific.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MZUBAIR

The operation was carried out by Indian army troops with tanks and armoured vehicles.Nodoubt the Militarily operation was successful. But I believe Khalis wounds are still fresh. Please correct me, I heard that there are number of Liberal movements in India.


----------



## bandit

A1Kaid said:


> "Your charges and allegations are below.
> 
> but your theories carry no weight as you are an outsider commenting on half baked facts."-bandit.



You are an outsider- True.

Your theories on Hindu gods were half baked facts which belie your claim of understanding and knowledge as previously pointed out.




A1Kaid said:


> "What theories, be specific post the wild conspiracy theories I have posted in regards to Operation Blue Star.



An Example

Well actually Sikhism is a monotheistic faith and Hinduism is a pagan faith or polytheistic faith.

Sikhs believe in a single supreme God not millions of God's Hindus believe in. Sikhs have different religious rituals than Hindus, and Sikhs do not worship animals like Hindus.

So these are considerable and distinct difference between Sikhism, Sikhism does have small influences from Hinduism. Though many would say Sikhism is a different religion from Hinduism.

So Sikhism and Hinduism are technically different religions. 





A1Kaid said:


> When did I try to "make it out" that way, using my own opinions.




All you've been trying to do is highlight the differences b/w Hinduism and Sikhism, your opinions were the ones that suggested that hindus mistreat sikhs...putting up youtube videos a while back showing crap weren't you.


----------



## vsdoc

I honestly feel that religion more than anything else has been the biggest cause of strife in the world. Not just in India ..... or Pakistan, but all over, across the ages. Man will find a way to kill man in the name of religion. And its just not different religions necessarily, or the majority mob hunting the minority. If that were the case then single state religion countries like Pakistan would have no strife and killing in the name of religion, coz there is really no "minority" to even speak about. So if Pakistani brothers feel the need to be sanctimonious and preach to Indians about killing in the name of religion, painting the canvas with a Hindu tyranny palette (be it against Muslims or Christians or Sikhs), then maybe it is time for them to introspect and take a deep look into the mirror and ask themselves why are Muslims killing Muslims in their own country, as well as in other Islamic countries too. Bottom line, please worship God in the way you want to, and be tolerant and respectful and open minded about the fact that others may choose to worship the same God in a different way. There is enough space on the planet for all beliefs. The trouble happens when we assume we are right, and others are not, and they either come around to our way looking at things, or we wipe them out. This raises suspicions, fears, insecurities, and a unhealthy isolation of us-and-them, with a collective persecution complex that further foments inward-looking narrow-mindedness and intolerance of anything different or foreign or from "outside." Please remember that on a global stage, from time immemorial, the most blood has been shed by the most intolerant religions.

Think about it.

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## duhastmish

vsdoc said:


> I honestly feel that religion more than anything else has been the biggest cause of strife in the world. Not just in India ..... or Pakistan, but all over, across the ages. Man will find a way to kill man in the name of religion. And its just not different religions necessarily, or the majority mob hunting the minority. If that were the case then single state religion countries like Pakistan would have no strife and killing in the name of religion, coz there is really no "minority" to even speak about. So if Pakistani brothers feel the need to be sanctimonious and preach to Indians about killing in the name of religion, painting the canvas with a Hindu tyranny palette (be it against Muslims or Christians or Sikhs), then maybe it is time for them to introspect and take a deep look into the mirror and ask themselves why are Muslims killing Muslims in their own country, as well as in other Islamic countries too. Bottom line, please worship God in the way you want to, and be tolerant and respectful and open minded about the fact that others may choose to worship the same God in a different way. There is enough space on the planet for all beliefs. The trouble happens when we assume we are right, and others are not, and they either come around to our way looking at things, or we wipe them out. This raises suspicions, fears, insecurities, and a unhealthy isolation of us-and-them, with a collective persecution complex that further foments inward-looking narrow-mindedness and intolerance of anything different or foreign or from "outside." Please remember that on a global stage, from time immemorial, the most blood has been shed by the most intolerant religions.
> 
> Think about it.
> 
> Cheers, Doc



Hi doc, i think you said it very well there.

just to add some more.

- religion is not the reason here, for demise of humanitarian love. its human interpretation of religion . religion was always meant for those human values and ethics. i think we as man kind are so mindless that we - go for iconic and physical aspect of religion not the meaning ( most times).

yes thats why - most of the religious countries or region are in deep trouble - be it south America, Russia,east europe, middle east, indian, or bible belt in united states ..... etc etc. It never holds true that people out of these region dont belive in god - but for sure they are not stuck to same age old - form of religion.

religion should change according to time - because human custom, science, ethics , society , life,communication, art and morals changes with time.

we are following our books , be it Koran , geeta , bible , Guru granth sahib, vedas etc. without putting the context of time and space. with respect to their symbolic meaning. people who do that - and are following this neo-religion of humanity. and are sucessful and happy and probably on the right path.

ofcourse going in right opposite direction is also meaningless. because to a person like me - being atheist means - you have no scale to judge morals , ethics, humanity and your values. relgiion is what tells you whats right and whats wrong. it works as a scale to you. so religion is very important for survival of a good human civilization.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## vsdoc

Yup I agree. Religion in terms of belief, faith, values, concept of right and wrong, good and evil, concept of life, death and after-life, the soul and its evolution, final judgment and the balance sheet, all these things in many ways are universal to all religions across the world. 

Yet we kill in the name of religion. Wars are fought in the name of religion. Countries divided in the name of religion. It all boils down to intolerance and fear in the end. And a marked lack of respect. The politics of religion is where all the problems start. And fanatic attitudes which see no middle ground.

But as a nation we have matured to a great extent. And the dangers from without have caused us to come together as one within, as Indians, and not as different religions. This was clearly seen in our collective National reaction post 26/11, both by Hindu and Muslim Indians. In many ways therefore, Kasab and his brothers in arms, did us a big favor, ripple effects of which were seen in the general elections and will be seen in the days to come.

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sob

vsdoc said:


> But as a nation we have matured to a great extent. And the dangers from without have caused us to come together as one within, as Indians, and not as different religions. This was clearly seen in our collective National reaction post 26/11, both by Hindu and Muslim Indians. In many ways therefore, Kasab and his brothers in arms, did us a big favor, ripple effects of which were seen in the general elections and will be seen in the days to come.
> 
> Cheers, Doc



Doc, Completely agree with you. We are seeing a maturing of our nation. Just to remind our friends, the reaction of the local community post 26/11

Mumbai?s Muslims take bold stand, brand 26/11 terrorists murderers - Columns - livemint.com



> There are nine bodiesall of them young menthat have been lying in a Mumbai hospital morgue since 29 November. They may be stranded there for a while, because no local Muslim charity is willing to bury them in its cemetery. This is good news.
> The nine are the Pakistani Muslim terrorists who went on an utterly senseless killing rampage in Mumbai on 26/11, gunning down at least 170 people, including 33 Muslims, scores of Hindus, as well as Christians and Jews. It was killing for killings sake. They didnt even bother to leave a note.
> *All nine are still in the morgue because the leadership of Indias Muslim community has called them by their real namemurderers, not martyrsand is refusing to allow them to be buried in the main Muslim cemetery of Mumbai, the 7.5-acre Bada Kabrastan graveyard, run by the Muslim Jama Masjid Trust.
> People who committed this heinous crime cannot be called Muslim, Hanif Nalkhande, a spokesman for the trust, told The Times of London. Eventually, one assumes, they will have to be buried, but the Mumbai Muslims remain defiant.
> Indian Muslims are proud of being both Indian and Muslim, and the Mumbai terrorism was a war against both India and Islam, explained M.J. Akbar, the Indian-Muslim editor of Covert, an Indian investigative journal.* Terrorism has no place in Islamic doctrine. The Quranic term for the killing of innocents is fasad. Terrorists are fasadis, not jihadis. In a beautiful verse, the Quran says that the killing of an innocent is akin to slaying the whole community. Since the...terrorists were neither Indian nor true Muslims, they had no right to an Islamic burial in an Indian Muslim cemetery.


----------



## jarnee

Khailstan is finally a reality in India & the world now, Sikhs are less then10% of Indian population, and control or own more then 30 % of the wealth. There is no Poor Sikh. There are huge numbers now migrated mainly to Canada, soon canada may have to change its flag to have bit of Orange in it  or replace the maple leave with "Ek-Onkar". Sikhs have done it with will and hard work. Today india has a Sikh PM. What Indira Gandhi did she got what she deserved. 
Riots in Delhi were unfortunate. Sikhs took a due revenge also by bleeding India with terrorism for 8 years and blowing up Air India plane. Congress also could not be as powerful as it earlier was. FYI - Khalistan's original maps had Pakistan's Punjab also as its part.


----------



## Gabbar

> Khailstan is finally a reality in India & the world now, Sikhs are less then10% of Indian population, and control or own more then 30 % of the wealth.



2.1% of the population to exact. Do you have any links to back-up 30% claim?



> There is no Poor Sikh. There are huge numbers now migrated mainly to Canada



Hunderds of farmers commited suicide las year due to loans.



> soon canada may have to change its flag to have bit of Orange in it  or replace the maple leave with "Ek-Onkar".


----------



## DarthVader

Gabbar said:


> 2.1% of the population to exact. Do you have any links to back-up 30% claim?



30% fig is surely from the air...but what do you think there representation regarding wealth holding? 




Gabbar said:


> Hunderds of farmers commited suicide las year due to loans.



So in other parts of country. I am not sure if Punjab has suffered more. On the other hand the general notion is that Punjab farmer is far better state in comparison to farmers in other part of India.
Farmer's suicide in India is complex topic and will need its own thread.

I can understand your anger, anguish regarding the 1984 and what happened after that. But I have 
to disagree if you mean that Sikhs have been discriminated today.


----------



## paritosh

@all the indian members slogging their a$$-off in trying to justify bluestar...
amigos...in a democracy like ours...one wrong move even if implied with good intentions...is labeled as "horribly bad"...and one of those "could have been avoided" types.
not many would support Godhra,babri,mumbai blasts '91,the khalistani air-india blasts,Samjhota...
the perpetrators of the above mentioned crimes also had good motives...but they killed many innocents...so while bluestar could have been avoided/was unavoidable....it was a big mistake...because the end-game went wrong.
"violence brings more violence and peace is through humility"...said Gandhi ji

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## vsdoc

I dont think there was anything wrong with Bluestar. 

In fact, it was a last resort forced upon the government by militant separatists defiling the sanctity of a holy place by setting up armed positions and war control centers within. A sovereign nation reserves the right to without mercy squash any danger to its integrity - foreign or domestic. Period. There is nothing for any Indian to be either ashamed about or to try and justify.

Yes, what happened in Delhi to the Sikhs was wrong, and as a nation we are and should be sorry for that. 

Cheers, Doc


----------



## Gabbar

> I dont think there was anything wrong with Bluestar.
> 
> In fact, it was a last resort forced upon the government by militant separatists defiling the sanctity of a holy place by setting up armed positions and war control centers within. A sovereign nation reserves the right to without mercy squash any danger to its integrity - foreign or domestic. Period. There is nothing for any Indian to be either ashamed about or to try and justify.
> 
> Yes, what happened in Delhi to the Sikhs was wrong, and as a nation we are and should be sorry for that.
> 
> Cheers, Doc



So do you think government couldn't cut of water, electricity, food and communication and negotiated? Did they have to attack on the holiest day on thei Sikh calander when thousands of devotees were there hence causing thousands of innocent deaths? Sir when Babri masjid was destroyed, where was the goverment and where was thier "national" integority?


----------



## afriend

Gabbar said:


> So do you think government couldn't cut of water, electricity, food and communication and negotiated? Did they have to attack on the holiest day on thei Sikh calander when thousands of devotees were there hence causing thousands of innocent deaths? Sir when Babri masjid was destroyed, where was the goverment and where was thier "national" integority?



As per my understanding,
1. Bhindernwala was headquartered in Golden temple way before the operation started. People easily forget his role in taking the war to golden temple. He was asked to surrender which obviously he didnt do, which mean that he didnt mind a war at the golden temple. And he was residing akal takth and nobody objects that. That is one of the most sacred places of sikhs is what i hear.
2. Cutting of water supply and food was not an option as i read, as golden temple was self suffient in water, and they had rations to last for over a month.
3. Indian government didn't have time at their hand, because had khalistan been declared, pakistan would have readily recogonised it and crossed over to punjab. And if the news spread that golden temple was at siege sikhs from villages would have taken up swords and rushed to golden temple in what would have been percieved as a Siege of golden temple, then it would have been difficult for the indian army to fire at their own innocent people.
So i think emotions apart, all should acknowledge what happend was unfortunate and condemn in strongest possible way the killings of sikhs in delhi. But understand the situation the country facing at that time.
And i got the reference for my arguments from the below article please read and post your thoughts. 
Operation Bluestar, 20 Years On

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gabbar

> 1. Bhindernwala was headquartered in Golden temple way before the operation started. People easily forget his role in taking the war to golden temple. He was asked to surrender which obviously he didnt do, which mean that he didnt mind a war at the golden temple. And he was residing akal takth and nobody objects that. That is one of the most sacred places of sikhs is what i hear.



I guess we can argue on his decision to to be at Harmandir Sahib but there was no other place in Punjab where he knew army would not attack and he was never going to surrender and even GOI knew that.



> 2. Cutting of water supply and food was not an option as i read, as golden temple was self suffient in water, and they had rations to last for over a month.



Back than they did not had good water filteration system and the water in the nector was not drinkable, you would gotton sick easily and ration usually they have to bring in lot frequenty than months and also needs lots of fuel to cook them as well.



> . Indian government didn't have time at their hand, because had khalistan been declared, pakistan would have readily recogonised it and crossed over to punjab. And if the news spread that golden temple was at siege sikhs from villages would have taken up swords and rushed to golden temple in what would have been percieved as a Siege of golden temple, then it would have been difficult for the indian army to fire at their own innocent people.



This is based on a one article that you posted link to and let me tell you that it's all BS that he has picked a date to declare Khalistan. After 1978 incident he personally said that he would congratulate and support congress government if just and just GOI punish who were responsible for that incient but as expected that did not happena and probably was final straw in his decision to declare khalistan.

*1984 Attack on Golden Temple*


----------



## afriend

Gabbar said:


> I guess we can argue on his decision to to be at Harmandir Sahib but there was no other place in Punjab where he knew army would not attack and he was never going to surrender and even GOI knew that.
> 
> 
> 
> Back than they did not had good water filteration system and the water in the nector was not drinkable, you would gotton sick easily and ration usually they have to bring in lot frequenty than months and also needs lots of fuel to cook them as well.
> 
> 
> 
> This is based on a one article that you posted link to and let me tell you that it's all BS that he has picked a date to declare Khalistan. After 1978 incident he personally said that he would congratulate and support congress government if just and just GOI punish who were responsible for that incient but as expected that did not happena and probably was final straw in his decision to declare khalistan.
> 
> *1984 Attack on Golden Temple*



Well i had already read the article you posted, and i had got one perception, before i read Mr. Brar's interview. And i really thought the first one written of emotions and second one based upon facts and logic. 

And more over i can never imagine indian army serving alchol and cigerates in the golden temple, and that busted and revealed that they are just writing BS.

And i suggest you read Brar interview in the rediff fully. 

He himselves wouldnt want to do that again, and what he did was his duty and i respect him for that. And as the situation suggested the entire punjab was on turmoil during that times.. So according to me it all sums up.


----------



## A1Kaid

Interesting excerpt...

"*Before* India's independence in 1947 Panditt Nehru and other Congress leaders *promised special constitutional rights to Sikhs* but soon *after* the independence *Nehru backed away from all those promises*. Not only that whereas India accepted various states based on differant languages and those languages recognised as the main language in those states. *But the moment Sikhs asked that Punjabi should be given similar status in Punjab, Jawaharlal Nehru dithered, simply because Punjabi was considered as the language of the Sikh community. As long as he was alive, he did not allow Punjabi to be recognised as the official language of Punjab.*"

Source: WSN-Opinion-Gandhi Family Traditions


The Sikhs were promised _special_ constitutional rights but after Independence PM Nehru and Congress Leader declined on his promises to the Sikh community in India...


Can someone please elaborate further what these special constitutional rights were?


----------



## A1Kaid

"Despite all these *discriminotry treatment Punjab continued to prosper and be the richest state in India*. To make matters worse Mrs Gandhi factionalised the Sikh polity. *So, why was Indira Gandhi so angry with the Sikhs*? 

As the saying goes, *Indira Gandhi wanted to teach the Sikhs a lesson*. Former Canadian High Commissioner to India in 1984 -William Warden testified before Justice Major at Air India inquiry that in *1975 Indira Gandhi imposed a state of emergency in India* and the Sikh Akali party of Punjab launched one of the largest and most effective demonstrations against what she was doing. Finally the emergency was lifted in 1977 and she lost the next elections. *When Indira Gandhi was re-elected as PM in 1980, she was particularly angry about the Sikh protests against her dictatorial rule during the two years of emergency rule and was determined to teach Sikhs a lesson.* In *Mr. Warden's words it was a 'pay back time'.* The western media covering Air India trial didn't give much coverage to Mr. Warden's comments. But the points raised by *Mr. Warden are confirmed by the comments by Indian army's Lt. General Sinha that Indian army had started preparing and practising for attack on Golden temple 16 months before the actual attack in 1984. *

The Indian army had *started preparations to teach the Sikhs a lesson at the express wish and will of Mrs. Indira Gandhi in keeping with the Gandhi Family Tradition*. Then through a media blitzkrieg, the world was told that Sikhs are terrorists and in the garb of that innocent men, women and children were killed.* All in the same Gandhi Family Tradition because Indira Gandhi wanted to teach Sikhs a lesson for opposing her emergency rule*."

Source: WSN-Opinion-Gandhi Family Traditions


I guess there is another side to this story, another casus belli to why Pm Indira Gandhi wanted to punish the Sikh community on the Sikh most holiest day when many pilgrims would be in attendance at the Golden Temple...

And that is it appears she believes the Sikhs opposed her two year emergency rule, as the article indicates...So Sikh militants simply challenging National Indian supremacy is not the only reason.

It seem *revenge* and *hatred* are the big reasons.


----------



## afriend

Well A1kaid, i guess whole of india was angry and protested against indira gandhi during that time. By your logic indira gandhi should be paying back whole of india . I think nationalism and fear of another bangladesh in india was the major reason rather than such stupidity.


----------



## A1Kaid

*History of Sikh Punjab*


*Punjab, Khalistan was independent from 1765 to 1849*. It was the last part of the subcontinent to be conquered by the British. *Sikhs are two-thirds of the population of Punjab and own 95 percent of the land there*. In the recent elections, the *Sikhs of Punjab overwhelmingly rejected Congress Party rule, which has brought about the murders of over 50,000 Sikhs in five years*. This was a clear demand for an independent Khalistan.

*When India was given its independence, the Sikhs were denied resumption of their independent status. The Sikhs were promised autonomy and they were given the Congress Party's solemn pledge that no law affecting Sikh rights would pass without the consent of the Sikh Nation. But as soon as the ink was dry, the Indian regime broke these promises. As a result, no Sikh has ever signed the Indian constitution, denying Sikh assent to Indian rule.*

Vice President Gore wrote that "civil conflict in any nation, and the inevitable hardship and bloodshed that it inflicts on that nation's civilian population, offends our sense of human dignity and our humanitarian ideals."* The Indian regime has murdered more than 200,000 Sikhs* in Khalistan since 1984, according to the Punjab Civil Service (PCS), the group which represents state magistrates across Punjab, Khalistan.

 
Source: Khalistan.net - Sovereign Nation


----------



## A1Kaid

afriend said:


> Well A1kaid, i guess whole of india was angry and protested against indira gandhi during that time. By your logic indira gandhi should be paying back whole of india . I think nationalism and fear of another bangladesh in india was the major reason rather than such stupidity.



This makes no sense, neither was the whole of India elected to become PM or implemented 2 years of emergency rule and lost an election because majority of Punjab did not support Indira Gandhi's election...

The article mentions when she was re-elected she wanted "pay-back" for losing the election because she believed the Sikhs were responsible for opposing her emergency rule in her previous rule as Prime Minister.

" I think nationalism and fear of another bangladesh in india was the major reason rather than such stupidity"-afriend

But according to history PM Nehru and Indian Congress leaders had promised the Sikh community special constitutional rights or autonomy. So what is this? Hypocrisy? Being disingenuous and perhaps unlawful of Indian Congress Leaders and state?


----------



## afriend

A1Kaid said:


> This makes no sense, neither was the whole of India elected to become PM or implemented 2 years of emergency rule and lost an election because majority of Punjab did not support Indira Gandhi's election...
> 
> The article mentions when she was re-elected she wanted "pay-back" for losing the election because she believed the Sikhs were responsible for opposing her emergency rule in her previous rule as Prime Minister.
> 
> " I think nationalism and fear of another bangladesh in india was the major reason rather than such stupidity"-afriend
> 
> But according to history PM Nehru and Indian Congress leaders had promised the Sikh community special constitutional rights or autonomy. So what is this? Hypocrisy? Being disingenuous and perhaps unlawful of Indian Congress Leaders and state?



Yes perhaps.So? My argument remains the same. 

The benfiits or the strength they foresaw in the concept of united india might have prompted nehru and other congress national leaders on going back on their personal promise. Which have been proved right. 

The state have become stronger and we have been well integrated.

And Bhinderwala started killing Hindus and other religious followers and his fight started when the sikh followers began to modernise and feared that sikhism would become irrelevant in future if it remained with india and has nothing to do with Nehru's stupid promise, and also there where some economic reasons which was exploited at that time. But these fears where proved wrong by the later generations of young sikhs.


----------



## bandit

paritosh said:


> @all the indian members slogging their a$$-off in trying to justify bluestar...
> amigos...in a democracy like ours...one wrong move even if implied with good intentions...is labeled as "horribly bad"...and one of those "could have been avoided" types.
> not many would support Godhra,babri,mumbai blasts '91,the khalistani air-india blasts,Samjhota...
> the perpetrators of the above mentioned crimes also had good motives...but they killed many innocents...so while bluestar could have been avoided/was unavoidable....it was a big mistake...because the end-game went wrong.
> "violence brings more violence and peace is through humility"...said Gandhi ji



Bro, you are trying to justify your stand by comapring an anti-terror operation with terrorist acts???....you think godhra, mumbai, air-india terrorists had good motives, I don't think so and i can't figure out the lie of logic by which you arrived at the conclusion. We can have differences over bluestar...that's perfectly fine...but the examples you gave are stretching it a bit too much.


----------



## Gabbar

> Bro, you are trying to justify your stand by comapring an anti-terror operation with terrorist acts???....



According to people who has opposite views to your opinion, will say that Operation Blue star (O-BS) was a terror activity by GOI. Are they wrong? Depends on who you ask.



> you think godhra, mumbai, air-india terrorists had good motives, I don't think so and i can't figure out the lie of logic by which you arrived at the conclusion. We can have differences over bluestar...that's perfectly fine...but the examples you gave are stretching it a bit too much.



Pritosh is not saying that they had good motives, he is saying that those people who did that thought that they had good motives. Same goes for people who did O-BS because they thaought they had good motives.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gabbar

> Well i had already read the article you posted, and i had got one perception, before i read Mr. Brar's interview. And i really thought the first one written of emotions and second one based upon facts and logic.
> 
> And more over i can never imagine indian army serving alchol and cigerates in the golden temple, and that busted and revealed that they are just writing BS.
> 
> And i suggest you read Brar interview in the rediff fully.
> 
> He himselves wouldnt want to do that again, and what he did was his duty and i respect him for that. And as the situation suggested the entire punjab was on turmoil during that times.. So according to me it all sums up.




You believe in someone's inverview who was there right. Well then you would not have problem someone else's interview who was also there?



> *FROM THE ARTICLE: The Darshani Deodhi (anteroom) was full of drunken soldiers who were smoking cigarettes. When these soldiers saw me, they started hurling derogatory verbal abuses at me, "who is this Sala?" Almost all the soldiers were abusive. They couldn't utter any words without using derogatory terms.
> 
> HEAD GRANTHI TO THEN PRESIDENT:
> I summarized the events. Further I told him that the soldiers were moving around with naked heads, with boots, and continuously drinking and smoking within the premises. Their behavior was inappropriate and derogatory. Whenever they see a Sikh, they kill him without asking any question.
> *



After the Attack - Interview with the Head Granthi of the Golden Temple​


----------



## afriend

Gabbar said:


> You believe in someone's inverview who was there right. Well then you would not have problem someone else's interview who was also there?
> 
> After the Attack - Interview with the Head Granthi of the Golden Temple​



I can understand the difference between the opinions coming from the ideolgy of blind faith and commitment to duty and nationalism. They differ brother.

And more over i cant find any other evidence on the net other than those published from sikh websites.

However one thing we all can agree upon is on whatever happened at golden temple was unfortunate. Was it necessary or not?? is a question which can be debated for ever..!!!!


----------



## Gabbar

> I can understand the difference between the opinions coming from the ideolgy of blind faith and commitment to duty and nationalism. They differ brother.



So can I but you are willing to believe a one person who was other but not the other? You are willing to take a one person's story, just because he was in the army? If it was his duty to carry out his mission, I am fine with it, but it also a duty to Khalsa to return his favour.



> And more over i cant find any other evidence on the net other than those published from sikh websites.



There was total media blackout in Punjab, did you really expect a neutral news agency to go down there talk to a head granthi? All of them were kicked out of punjab, expect doordarshan.



> However one thing we all can agree upon is on whatever happened at golden temple was unfortunate. Was it necessary or not?? is a question which can be debated for ever..!!!!



Agree........

PS: Sikhnet is a very neutal site, they do not promote violence and khalistani agenda by any shape or forum. There are othe sites, who does this and on purpose I avoided those sites so we can have neutral and mature discusion.

TY.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## bandit

Gabbar said:


> According to people who has opposite views to your opinion, will say that Operation Blue star (O-BS) was a terror activity by GOI. Are they wrong? Depends on who you ask.
> 
> 
> 
> Pritosh is not saying that they had good motives, he is saying that those people who did that thought that they had good motives. Same goes for people who did O-BS because they thaought they had good motives.



If you start making your own definitions as they suit you you can classify anything as such, but one criteria is attack on unarmed civilians...were Bhindranwala & co: unarmed...did they not fire back and kill soldiers as well, that was an armed group of people with a hostile intent and if the temple complex was desecrated by anyone it was them, the army operation was not intended against the temple itself but heavy casualties made it necessary.

As far as motives go what wrong motives do you think the GoI had, Indira Gandhi knew it was a political suicide to step inside the Temple yet she did it to prevent a division of punjab...whereas Bhindranwale was propogating his ideology and seccesionist agenda from the temple, he could have left when he knew the operation was coming.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gabbar

> If you start making your own definitions as they suit you you can classify anything as such, but one criteria is attack on unarmed civilians...were Bhindranwala & co: unarmed...did they not fire back and kill soldiers as well, that was an armed group of people with a hostile intent and if the temple complex was desecrated by anyone it was them, the army operation was not intended against the temple itself but heavy casualties made it necessary.



They are not definitions, they are very simple questions. Just think about it for a second. Attack against the Bhindranwale is not the issue here. Who drove him to take those actions, why attack on the holiest day on the Sikh calender when Punjab is flooded with spies and moles, GOI didn't know that? You can even go further to 1947 when Nehru betrayed Sikhs. It was combination of number of things that collectivly were simering under the surface for years and 1978 incident just brought that to surface.



> As far as motives go what wrong motives do you think the GoI had, Indira Gandhi knew it was a political suicide to step inside the Temple yet she did it to prevent a division of punjab...whereas Bhindranwale was propogating his ideology and seccesionist agenda from the temple, he could have left when he knew the operation was coming.



And who provoked or forced his hand or gave him a reason, whatever you want to call it? Please read and do diligence on the background before 1984 incident. It could of been easily prevented.


----------



## zombie

Bhindranwala could have hid anywhere else and his group could have fought against the IA. By hiding inside the golden temple and indulging in violence he showed that he had no respect for Guru Granth Sahib. If anyone desecreted the golden temple it was him.

Would people have been happy if Taliban hid inside the Golden temple and fought against IA? Just the fact that Bhindranwala called himself a Sikh shouldnt make one a holy warrior and the other a terrorist.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gabbar

> Bhindranwala could have hid anywhere else and his group could have fought against the IA. By hiding inside the golden temple and indulging in violence he showed that he had no respect for Guru Granth Sahib. If anyone desecreted the golden temple it was him.



Look I never said it was a good move on his part but it was the only place where they thought where IA would never attack. And remeber he was a religious leader not a political leader, so had all the authority to go to there. He was head of Damdami Taksal, which is one of five temporal seats. He was simple preacher who turned extreme or militent, again whatever you want to call him, by the things that were taking place in Punjab against Sikhs.



> Would people have been happy if Taliban hid inside the Golden temple and fought against IA? Just the fact that Bhindranwala called himself a Sikh shouldnt make one a holy warrior and the other a terrorist.



First of no one is restricted to go the Golden temple, even taliban can visit there. Only if they are visiting not attacking. If taliban would of been there, Sikhs would of freed them selves, Sikhs wouldn't need IA to rescue there worship places. We freed it from Abdai and Mugols, believe me Sikhs would of dealt with Taliban too.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## afriend

Only issue that is bugging my mind, was that after the operation was over was our soldiers disrespecting the shrine. I don't have any issues of IA trying to free Golden temple from these terrorists. If they showed disrespect then that is an issue. I had read the link Gabbar gave me, only problem that i had trouble with, to identify was the Alcohol and cigerates part, even though i don't want to believe it and feels like an unimaginable incident. Coz going for an operation i dont know how people would carry alcohol that too towards a sacred shrine???? May be this was deeds of some select few.. may be regiments from madras who didn't know the importance or the sacredness of the shrine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## bandit

Gabbar said:


> They are not definitions, they are very simple questions. Just think about it for a second. Attack against the Bhindranwale is not the issue here. Who drove him to take those actions, why attack on the holiest day on the Sikh calender when Punjab is flooded with spies and moles, GOI didn't know that? You can even go further to 1947 when Nehru betrayed Sikhs. It was combination of number of things that collectivly were simering under the surface for years and 1978 incident just brought that to surface.
> 
> 
> 
> And who provoked or forced his hand or gave him a reason, whatever you want to call it? Please read and do diligence on the background before 1984 incident. It could of been easily prevented.




I think we are arguing on different lines here...I only support the intent of the action against the Bhindranwale gang in the Golden Temple.

The issue about sikhs being betrayed after partition was resolved by sikhs themselves, they had become part of the mainstream as they grew prosperous, and also by the fact that they had stood fimly with India after bearing the worst of the partition riots as well as forgetting the differences in 1965.
The 1978 incident did have a political color to it and Indira Gandhi can be held responsible for that, through supporting Bhindranwale initially. The sikhs were right in holding the grudges for issues like punjabi language and punjabi suba which should have been done earlier.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## paritosh

bandit said:


> If you start making your own definitions as they suit you you can classify anything as such


everything has an explanation...the maoists can't wait for the govt's policies to bear fruit...they want "the people" to seize power of their lands and the resources that they hold....the SIMI people want India to be an Islamic state with sharia so that no one is discriminated and there is peace for all and Allah's word reigns supreme...the khalistani want the economically endowed Punjab to be the world's only Sikh state...Raj thackrey wants reservation for mumbaikars in the rail jobs of only Maharashtra...the kar sewaks wanted the Babri masjid to go down as it was built on the most pious hindu grounds...where the glorious ram mandir once stood...how could have narendra Modi acted against his hindu brothers 'after' they have been aroused with so much vigor...in _"their own country"_...
I can go on...these people/orgs/cults..have mass appeal...they have their reasons to be there in the first place.In a nation of >1 billion...massive differences would exist...democracy seems to catalyze these differences...we can't be ruthless in breaking the backs of these 'separatists'...not unless provoked to...but in a multi-party-multi-caste-multi-cultural-multi-refional-multi-socioeconomic system that we have in place...some one would definitely raise these buried issues from the past...massive inquiries would be set-up...but in reality only those who survive seeing these horrendous incidents closely would remember....
if you don't want to step-into their shoes it's alright...but if you'd...they are not really wrong believing whadeva they believe...the world might be flat for them..but _it is only democratic to think differently_...I in no way am referring to operation blue-star...yes it became necessary...but as all the non-congressiya 'senators' agree...."it could have been avoided!"
Indira Gandhi played a gamble in an area which was already tense...to gain political motives...but this realization that my non-sikh parents gave me this explanation that it wasn't the sikhs fault is gold enough for me to see this country through the secular haze Gandhi/nehru/ambedkar and co. wanted the bharat rashtra to be painted into...as for the others...
thy brought the rage of the empire unto thee...settle dispute through dialogue...people would listen and something would be done if you manage to live for 80 odd years...but people would like you...
take up arms and try to hasten things up...you are the 'antakwaadi' the state is out to hunt.


> but one criteria is attack on unarmed civilians...were Bhindranwala & co: unarmed...did they not fire back and kill soldiers as well, that was an armed group of people with a hostile intent and if the temple complex was desecrated by anyone it was them, the army operation was not intended against the temple itself but heavy casualties made it necessary.


Bhindrawale was armed...and they were armed to the teeth...but they did not have tanks...nor could have matched the numbers...bhindrawale died an untimely death...and so did Mrs. Gandhi....end of story.


> As far as motives go what wrong motives do you think the GoI had, Indira Gandhi knew it was a political suicide to step inside the Temple yet she did it to prevent a division of punjab...whereas Bhindranwale was propogating his ideology and seccesionist agenda from the temple, he could have left when he knew the operation was coming.


let me list the wrong motives....
1.cong trying to butt-in the punjab political scenario by announcing bhindrawale as the spiritual guru...
2.bhindrawale has other plans...Indira gandhi is waiting and watching..
3.revival ofthe khalistani movement....the pakistani connection...
4.absolute disregard for the dialogue and holding of talks...resulted in the window period closing....and hence happened the operation blue-star.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## vsdoc

Gabbar said:


> So do you think government couldn't cut of water, electricity, food and communication and negotiated? Did they have to attack on the holiest day on thei Sikh calander when thousands of devotees were there hence causing thousands of innocent deaths? Sir when Babri masjid was destroyed, where was the goverment and where was thier "national" integority?



A military operation is never planned on the basis of these considerations. I have a fairly good idea of the way a military mind works. Once the order is in place, the ONLY consideration is victory at minimum cost to self. Ethics, politics, religion, history, emotions, etc. are not factors a military mind labors under. They have enough on their plate just staying alive, rather than getting into intellectual socio-politico-cultural debates.

Bhindrawale did not develop those fortifications within the temple overnight. And it was not done without the knowledge of other non-militant Sikhs visiting or living within the temple complex. The choice of religious sanctuary was made by Bhindrawale. Saying he had no other option does not really matter in the context of things. He was a hunted man and a declared enemy of the state, and for such men there can be no refuge on sovereign soil, irrespective of their religion. 

I repeat - Bluestar was not something any Indian need be ashamed or apologetic about - ever. Delhi 1984 on the other hand was.

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## toxic_pus

bandit said:


> The sikhs were right in holding the grudges for issues like punjabi language and punjabi suba which should have been done earlier.


I am not exactly an admirer of Nehru, but it appears to me that Nehru was right, at least in principle, on the issue of Punjabi language and Suba.

From, *Amritsar: Mrs Gandhis Last Battle*, by Mark Tully and Satish Jacob. (I am typing from a paper back, so expect a few typos)

In 1953 Pandit Nehru set up the States Reorganisation Commission in order to *consider demands from many parts of India that state boundaries should be redrawn on a linguistic basis.* Some linguistic groups received satisfaction, but not the Akalis. *The commission rejected the Sikh claim for a Punjabi-speaking state, on the grounds that Punjabi was not sufficiently distinct from Hindi, and that furthermore the movement lacked the general support of the people inhabiting the area*.

Punjabi Hindus claimed that the demand was communal. The three main languages of the undivided Punjab had been Urdu, Hindi and various forms of Punjabi. Of the three, Punjabi was by far the most widely spoken by all communities, including Hindus. But *the Akalis argued that the states language be Punjabi written in the Gurmukhi script. This was the script devised by the second Guru for the Sikh scriptures. It was not widely taught or used outside Sikh religious institutions. Hindus were therefore able to maintain that the demand for the Gurmukhi script was a religious demand.* Because of the Punjabi Suba Movement and the link between language and communalism, in the 1961 census many Punjabi speaking Hindus declared Hindi as their mother tongue. Bhindranwale used to refer to them scornfully as people prepared to deny their mothers. The Prime Minister, Nehru, remained resolutely opposed to the creation to a Punjabi Suba or state until the end of his life. He too was convinced that the Akalis demand was communal. *He told Parliament: There is no doubt that I [Punjabi Suba] has grown up not as a linguistic issue but as communal issue.* Whether the demand was communal or not, *there is no doubt that the Akalis political ambition was to have a state they would always rule.* But they had forgotten that by no means all Sikhs are Akalis, and that they could not hope to rule a Sikh majority state without the support of some Hindus. (pg 39  40)​
The idea was to mark the state boundaries on the basis of language and not religion. Akalis demand to have a state on the basis of the most widely spoken language in that region  Punjabi  was no doubt a valid demand. But their demand, that the official script should be the one, which was exclusively devised to write Sikh scriptures, and which was not common outside the Sikh community, did have religious flavor in it. In that sense, I dont think Nehru can be blamed for interpreting the demands as communal.

In any case, that didnt prevent the creation of Punjab and constitutional recognition of _Gurmukhi_.

Nehru remained adamantly opposed to the Punjabi Suba until his death in 1964 but *in 1966 his daughter Indira Gandhi agreed to the formation of a Punjabi-speaking state.* Fateh Singh helped her by stating unequivocally that his demand was for a linguistic not a Sikh state. Mrs Gandhi was undoubtedly influenced by the gallant role of Sikh troops and mainly Sikh rural population of the border areas of Punjab in the war with Pakistan in 1965

Shrewd politician that she was, Mrs Gandhi also undoubtedly saw the Akalis as potential allies in the fight she was having with the congress party bosses her father had left behind

Under the Punjab settlement *the Hindi speaking plains became the new state of Haryana* with its border running up to Delhi. *The foothills of the Himalayas became the new state of Himachal Pradesh*, and *the rest remained Punjab*. *Punjab had a narrow Sikh majority of 56%, but language not religion was the basis for the division.* (pg 42  43)​
So eventually, the Sikhs did get their state. It is because of this, I do not agree with the argument that they were right in holding the grudges for issues like punjabi language and punjabi suba. Mind you, language movement had effected, perhaps even more, the southern and eastern parts of India. Although, it had resulted into riots, it still didnt spiral into what Punjab ultimately spiraled into.


----------



## bandit

toxic_pus said:


> So eventually, the Sikhs did get their state. It is because of this, I do not agree with the argument that they were right in holding the grudges for issues like punjabi language and punjabi suba. Mind you, language movement had effected, perhaps even more, the southern and eastern parts of India. Although, it had resulted into riots, it still didnt spiral into what Punjab ultimately spiraled into.



The sikhs got their state alright, but the point you missed was that they got it after a lot of time and agitation to get something they were promised as far back as 1946 by Nehru himself. Whether language should be the basis of states is a separate issue, but the fact that they were promised that before partition, and because it was a big reason for sikhs to support part of punjab into India, they should have been granted their state earlier. 
What punjab descended into (terrorism), was not because of the language movement or the state demand, they got it in 1966, it was an insurgency that grew out of the unfortunate events of 1984 and thereafter, and keeping in mind that hindus were equally responsible for inflicting suffering on sikhs. So the argument about grudges still stands.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## bandit

paritosh said:


> everything has an explanation...the maoists can't wait for the govt's policies to bear fruit...they want "the people" to seize power of their lands and the resources that they hold....the SIMI people want India to be an Islamic state with sharia so that no one is discriminated and there is peace for all and Allah's word reigns supreme...the khalistani want the economically endowed Punjab to be the world's only Sikh state...Raj thackrey wants reservation for mumbaikars in the rail jobs of only Maharashtra...the kar sewaks wanted the Babri masjid to go down as it was built on the most pious hindu grounds...where the glorious ram mandir once stood...how could have narendra Modi acted against his hindu brothers 'after' they have been aroused with so much vigor...in _"their own country"_...
> I can go on...these people/orgs/cults..have mass appeal...they have their reasons to be there in the first place.In a nation of >1 billion...massive differences would exist...democracy seems to catalyze these differences...we can't be ruthless in breaking the backs of these 'separatists'...not unless provoked to...but in a multi-party-multi-caste-multi-cultural-multi-refional-multi-socioeconomic system that we have in place...some one would definitely raise these buried issues from the past...massive inquiries would be set-up...but in reality only those who survive seeing these horrendous incidents closely would remember....
> if you don't want to step-into their shoes it's alright...but if you'd...they are not really wrong believing whadeva they believe...the world might be flat for them..but _it is only democratic to think differently_...I in no way am referring to operation blue-star...yes it became necessary...but as all the non-congressiya 'senators' agree...."it could have been avoided!"
> Indira Gandhi played a gamble in an area which was already tense...to gain political motives...but this realization that my non-sikh parents gave me this explanation that it wasn't the sikhs fault is gold enough for me to see this country through the secular haze Gandhi/nehru/ambedkar and co. wanted the bharat rashtra to be painted into...as for the others...
> thy brought the rage of the empire unto thee...settle dispute through dialogue...people would listen and something would be done if you manage to live for 80 odd years...but people would like you...
> take up arms and try to hasten things up...you are the 'antakwaadi' the state is out to hunt..



You can agree to any ideology if you are taught enough of it...and you have a right to speak and protest...for me the decision to act against bhindranwale was justified because he took up arms against the state...the democratic process of talks and negotiations may be long drawn...but it is the right way...picking up arms is the tipping point for the state to act and act it did. Nation comes first.


> Bhindrawale was armed...and they were armed to the teeth...but they did not have tanks...nor could have matched the numbers...bhindrawale died an untimely death...and so did Mrs. Gandhi....end of story.



They blew up a couple of APC's before the tanks were sent in, Brar was still reluctant to send in the tanks, but had to take the step as losses mounted.



> let me list the wrong motives....
> 1.cong trying to butt-in the punjab political scenario by announcing bhindrawale as the spiritual guru...
> 2.bhindrawale has other plans...Indira gandhi is waiting and watching..
> 3.revival ofthe khalistani movement....the pakistani connection...
> 4.absolute disregard for the dialogue and holding of talks...resulted in the window period closing....and hence happened the operation blue-star.




These were the mistakes of Gandhi before bluestar...what happened in June 1984 was the retaliation of the state against terrorism.


----------



## paritosh

see...it is the duty of the state to openly favor talks at ANY point.
we can not afford to be as ruthless as the perpetrators of violence if they ask for it...*as far as dealing with our internal issues is concerned.* 

we do accept the Kashmiri militants when they lay down arms even after years of killing...we give them govt. jobs...it is to win hearts...that is what the duty of the state has to be...to prevent even one single innocent for dying.
judges are told that one innocent man going to the gallows is worse than a thousand guilt-ridden culprits running free....the same goes for the state.
we took our decision long back...when our great leaders wanted us to be democratic and secular...operation blue-star was not supposed to kill even a single innocent....KPS Gill...I appreciate what he did...but it is the duty of the state to try him if there arises even a single case against him..no man is above the state...not bhindrawala not Mrs. Gandhi.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Khajur

I think we had enough discussions about Operation Blue Star and its tragic aftermath . Now its time to close the matter here.

*I dont like seeing indians bickering among themselves on a pakistani defence forum.*


----------



## paritosh

> *I dont like seeing indians bickering among themselves on a pakistani defence forum.*



nobody is bickering..valid points meet valid counter-points...otherwise this thread is futile.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gabbar

Khajur said:


> I think we had enough discussions about Operation Blue Star and its tragic aftermath . Now its time to close the matter here.
> 
> *I dont like seeing indians bickering among themselves on a pakistani defence forum.*



*Please refer to post #117.*


----------



## Khajur

paritosh said:


> nobody is bickering..valid points meet valid counter-points...otherwise this thread is futile.



With over 13 pages and 193 comments this thread has outlived its natural life span.

And when the same arguments goes round and round it look more like bickering at first sight which i dont like specifically on this site.


----------



## Khajur

Gabbar said:


> *Please refer to post #117.*



Yes,but may be somewhere more appropriate,as I said just dont do it *here*.period.


----------



## A1Kaid

*Punjab - Who Killed the Sikhs?*







"In Punjab State Sikh militants fought for an Independent state of Khalistan. We go to the country proud to call itself the world's largest democracy to investigate claims that over 2000 Sikhs have been abducted, tortured and killed in the name of anti-terrorism.

Produced by SBS/Dateline
Distributed by Journeyman Pictures"



*A Documentary presented by "Journeyman", this is a great informative and balanced Documentary. A Must Watch.*



*Counter-terrorism* does not give you the right to *systematically kill, kidnap, beat, and harass Sikh people in Punjab (their homeland)*. *Indian Police went around like blood thirsty militias and without any good evidence beat, killed, and tortured many Sikh families*. Not to mention Indian Army persecuted many innocent Sikhs on one of their *most holiest days at their Holy sites*. Counter-terrorism does not give you the right to do this, some Indian Army personnel did *fire indiscriminately*.

*Indian Police and Hindu mobs also looted Sikh-Punjab province *of it's tremendous wealth after the Sikhs- one of the hardest working people in India worked many generation to acquire the wealth and prosperity.


In the video at 2:30-2:40 a Sikh man says "*most of the police officers are illiterate and don't know anything about the law*." That is true.


----------



## bandit

Khajur said:


> With over 13 pages and 193 comments this thread has outlived its natural life span.
> 
> And when the same arguments goes round and round it look more like bickering at first sight which i dont like specifically on this site.



There is no bickering...nobody is calling the other names...in fact this has turned out to be very productive thread with members patiently listening each other out and going to lengths to explain their stand.
The thread did start out with a bit of flamebait as usual like above but look at the posts...theres hardly any hard feeling there...I guess this is an example of how a sensitive topic can be handled with a bit of patience to make it a productive discussion. We still stand united.

My two pence...


----------



## chindit

> Counter-terrorism does not give you the right to systematically kill, kidnap, beat, and harass Sikh people in Punjab (their homeland). Indian Police went around like blood thirsty militias and without any good evidence beat, killed, and tortured many Sikh families. Not to mention Indian Army persecuted many innocent Sikhs on one of their most holiest days at their Holy sites. Counter-terrorism does not give you the right to do this, some Indian Army personnel did fire indiscriminately.



And now a surd (Sikh) rules our country of 1 billion people (mostly non sikhs) and an army of a million - go figure


----------



## vsdoc

bandit said:


> There is no bickering...nobody is calling the other names...in fact this has turned out to be very productive thread with members patiently listening each other out and going to lengths to explain their stand.
> The thread did start out with a bit of flamebait as usual like above but look at the posts...theres hardly any hard feeling there...I guess this is an example of how a sensitive topic can be handled with a bit of patience to make it a productive discussion. We still stand united.
> 
> My two pence...



Let me add my own two pence to yours bro ..... my sentiments exactly. The Indians here, even though with divergent views, and some of them quite closely connected by faith, have come out with shining colors and given an excellent account of ourselves, in spite of attempts to foment negative passions at regular intervals. In a way it is a microsm of whats happening in real life, and as an Indian, it gives me immense confidence for the future of my country and pride in my countrymen. I do not see it as bickering. I do not see anyone taking a hard stance nor the discussion degenerating into tu tu main main. I say its in fact quite a cathartic exercise for all of us ..... and we need to thank a Pakistani brother for starting it, and making significant contributions at regular intervals.

Hindu, Sikhs, Christians, Jains, Buddhists, Muslims, Parsis ..... but first of all, above all ..... proud and true Indians.

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## A1Kaid

vsdoc said:


> Let me add my own two pence to yours bro ..... my sentiments exactly. The Indians here, even though with divergent views, and some of them quite closely connected by faith, have come out with shining colors and given an excellent account of ourselves, in spite of attempts to foment negative passions at regular intervals. In a way it is a microsm of whats happening in real life, and as an Indian, it gives me immense confidence for the future of my country and pride in my countrymen. I do not see it as bickering. I do not see anyone taking a hard stance nor the discussion degenerating into tu tu main main. I say its in fact quite a cathartic exercise for all of us ..... and we need to thank a Pakistani brother for starting it, and making significant contributions at regular intervals.
> 
> Hindu, Sikhs, Christians, Jains, Buddhists, Muslims, Parsis ..... but first of all, above all ..... proud and true Indians.
> 
> Cheers, Doc



Thanks for painting a rosy picture, next time please stay on topic this is not about how proud you feel about your country or you delivering a 'sales pitch' about Indian patriotism...Now no more of your off-topic posts, thanks.



We are discussing a very serious event in Sikh-Hindu history.


Now back on topic.




> "we can not afford to be as ruthless as the perpetrators of violence if they ask for it...as far as dealing with our internal issues is concerned."-paritosh



"Perpetrators of violence" well that's a two way street, both Indian police/army and apparently Sikh militants were fighting one another.

Though it is clear that the real and most vicious "perpetrator of violence" was the Hindu dominant Indian state through the Indian Army who assaulted the Sikh Holy Temple and the Indian Police who looted and allowed angry Hindu mobs to ravage the Sikh population, rape, kill, and kidnap Sikh families.


Do you think it was appropriate for the Indian state and PM. Indira Gandhi to launch this offensive during the Sikh Holiest day when many Sikh pilgrims would be in attendance? 


Launching a military offensive at such a time is CALLING for MORE causalities...


----------



## paritosh

A1Kaid said:


> Thanks for painting a rosy picture, next time please stay on topic this is not about how proud you feel about your country or you delivering a 'sales pitch' about Indian patriotism...Now no more of your off-topic posts, thanks.


A1kaid...if him just going off-topic was the problem...you could have said that in just one line.It is not prudent being rude without provocation.


> "Perpetrators of violence" well that's a two way street, both Indian police/army and apparently Sikh militants were fighting one another.
> 
> Though it is clear that the real and most vicious "perpetrator of violence" was the *Hindu dominant Indian state *through the Indian Army who assaulted the Sikh Holy Temple and the Indian Police who looted and allowed angry Hindu mobs to ravage the Sikh population, rape, kill, and kidnap Sikh families.


The Indian govt. did not attack the golden temple because it was a Sikh place of worship...the Indian govt. was not against the Sikhs...it was against the separatists housed in the golden temple complex.
let me re-phrase it....
We were against the separatists not because they were Sikhs but because they wanted to liberate the Punjab region from India.
that is why you'd see that in the entire length of this thread...Indians have somewhat defended the golden temple episode but all have unequivocally condemned the riots of '84 as they had a communal basis.Your usage of phrases like "Hindu dominated GoI" shows that you either don't understand what the op bluestar was about....or deliberately want to fuel a communal showdown of sorts on this thread.


> Do you think it was appropriate for the Indian state and PM. Indira Gandhi to launch this offensive during the Sikh Holiest day when many Sikh pilgrims would be in attendance?
> 
> 
> Launching a military offensive at such a time is CALLING for MORE causalities...


yes the criticism of the timing of operation is of common knowledge in India.
but I'd like you to read Kuldeep Singh Brar's version of the events too...
_"Before the operation started, General Brar walked around the Golden Temple in civilian clothes, and saw the militants and the barricades. His former superior, retired Major General Shabeg Singh, who led the militants, saw him taking rounds, and knew that he was up to something.[7] According to General Brar, the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC), which is supposed to have the managerial control of the temple, had lost the control of situation.

Since the afternoon, the army kept asking the militants to surrender, using the public address system. The militants were asked to send the pilgrims out of the temple premises to the safety, before they start fighting the army. However, nothing happened till 7 PM.[7] General Brar then asked the police, if they could send emissaries inside to help get the civilians out, but the police said that anyone sent inside would be killed by the militants. They believed that the militants were keeping the pilgrims inside to stop the army from entering the temple. Finally, around a hundred sick and old people were let out. These people informed the army that the others were not being allowed to come out.[7]

When asked about why the army entered the temple premises just after Guru Arjan's martyrdom day (when the number of devotees is much higher), General Brar said that it was just a coincidence.[8] The operation had to be completed in a short time, before dawn. Otherwise, exaggerated messages of army besieging the temple would have attracted mobs to the temple premises. The army could not have fired upon these civilians. More importantly, Pakistan would have come in the picture, declaring its support for Khalistan.[7]

General Brar talked to his men (many of whom were Sikhs) personally on the morning on 5 June 1984, and told them what they planned to do and why they were doing it.[9] He explained to them that it was not a mission against any religion, but against some militants who had defiled the sacred temple. He told his men that they may opt out of the operation, if they wished to. General Brar later said that none of his men, including Sikhs, walked away. In fact, in the unit commanded by Lieutenant Colonel Mohammad Israr (whose ten guards later led the first unit into the temple premises), the Sikh Officer Second Lieutenant Jasbir Singh Raina, raised his hand, and said that he wished to be the first one to enter the Golden Temple to wipe out the militants who had defiled the holiest Sikh shrine.[9]

On the night of 5 June 1984, General Brar's troops stormed the temple premises. General Brar had six infantry battalions and a detachment of commandos under his command. Four of the six senior commanders of his forces were Sikhs.[10] General Brar repeatedly asked his soldiers not to fire in the direction of the Harmindar Sahib, even if the militants fired from that side. He later stated that there was no damage to Harmindar Sahib, except a couple of bullet holes that could have been the militants' fire or odd stray fire from the soldiers.[7]

To prevent any damage to the Akal Takht, General Brar's soldiers initially tried to lob stun grenades that momentarily stun people without causing any collateral damage. However, Akal Takht was completely sealed, and there was no way to lob the stun grenades inside.[7] When his soldiers tried crawling towards the Akal Takht, several of them were killed by the militants' fire. General Brar later said in an interview that Bhindranwale and his immediate accomplices had shifted to the first floor of the Akal Takht, and this was against the tenets of Sikhism, since no one is allowed to stay above the Guru Granth Sahib.[7]

According to General Brar, tanks with huge halogen lights were brought in "to illuminate the Akal Takht, so that the soldiers could see where they were going and to momentarily blind the militants in the glare of the lights".[7]

General Brar's troops were finally successful in removing the militants from the Akal Takht, and both Shabeg Singh and Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale were killed during the operation."_

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EyelessInGaza

A1Kaid said:


> .......
> 
> Though it is clear that the real and most vicious "perpetrator of violence" was the Hindu dominant Indian state through the Indian Army who assaulted the Sikh Holy Temple and the Indian Police who looted and allowed angry Hindu mobs to ravage the Sikh population, rape, kill, and kidnap Sikh families.



Operation Blue Star was a response to burgeoning religious fundamentalism, perpetrated by a man who wanted to create a state within a state.

If every single Temple, Mosque, Church or Gurdwara in India were to be carpet bombed to flush out those who want to rule in terror, I would be first in line to support it.

Countries need institutional courage to take such a step; I'm glad we had it back then.

Blue Star was not a shame; the carnage inflicted upon Sikhs in the aftermath of Mrs G's assassination was a national disgrace.

How and why India survived that period is another story, but it speaks to the fundamental ability of our society to cope, and the integration of Sikhs in the overall tapestry of Indian culture.



A1Kaid said:


> Do you think it was appropriate for the Indian state and PM. Indira Gandhi to launch this offensive during the Sikh Holiest day when many Sikh pilgrims would be in attendance?
> 
> Launching a military offensive at such a time is CALLING for MORE causalities...



Perhaps the timing was inappropriate; I do not know, you may be right. Possibly they could have avoided civilian casualties.

But they would have to do it some time, and the army casualties would have been about the same, IMO. I knew a couple of guys who were there; they were going barefoot, with explicit orders not to fire back, into narrow corridors against machine guns that had been sited/ positioned by a retired Indian major general.


----------



## zombie

Enough of this nonsense. You can continue to troll. Your "high quality" you-tube videos posted as information for discussion shows your agenda to anyone. You are just too pathetic to not even be subtle.
Hindu India bashing minorities
Sikh holocaust
Indian state terrorism against minorities
Idiot Brar trying to cover up operation
When you have already made your point to chew on whats your point of "discussion" as a pakistani? 

AS for discussion - definitely most Indians by now know the role that Pakistan(with some good help from anti-Indira US establishment at that time) had to play in this episode which created problems for their own community and others. Indians-forget just Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Christians, even Muslims, have learnt by now not to get fooled by some Pakistanis crocodile tears and goading. Unknowingly you'll managed to unite Indians and make them wary of Pakistan even more. So there was some good outcome from this after all..


----------



## toxic_pus

A1Kaid said:


> Though it is clear that the real and most vicious "perpetrator of violence" was the Hindu dominant Indian state through the Indian Army who assaulted the Sikh Holy Temple and the Indian Police who looted and allowed angry Hindu mobs to ravage the Sikh population, rape, kill, and kidnap Sikh families.



The truth, my dear friend, is slightly different. [All quotes below are from _Amritsar: Mrs Gandhi's Last Battle_, by Mark Tully and Satish Jacob]
&#8220;Just before the powers [_Perspective: President&#8217;s rule was declared in Punjab. When it failed, police was give special powers_] were announced a prominent Sikh, H.S.Manchanda, was shot in broad daylight when his car stopped at traffic lights in the middle of Delhi. Manchanda was the President of the pro-Congress(Indira) Delhi Sikh Temple Mangagement Committee, and an outspoken critic of the Akali Dal Morcha. On the day the new powers were given to the police Hindus were &#8216;taught a lesson&#8217; by the killing of the prominent member of the right-wing Bharatiya Janata Pary, the successor to the Jan Sangh. The next day supporters of Mrs Gandhi were given a &#8216;sharp&#8217; warning by the killing of V.N.Tiwari, a professor of Punjabi who was a Congress (Indira) Member of Parliament. He was shot in his house in Chandigarh. On 22nd April an air-force officer was hacked to death in his home. This was the first time that a serving officer of the defence forces had been killed.

On 30th April one of the prime targets on Bhindranwale&#8217;s hit-list, the former Deputy Superintendent of Police Bachan Singh, was shot dead in Amritsar&#8230;&#8230;After killing the retired police officer the terrorists shot his wife and daughter who were riding in a rickshaw behind him&#8230;&#8230;Then came another terrorist attack which showed that whole of India that no special powers could help the government or the police &#8211; Bhindranwale was above law.

On 12th May Romesh Chander, the son and successor of the editor of the Punjab Kesari group of newspapers, Lala Jagat Narain, was shot dead driving through the streets of the industrial city of Jullundur&#8230;&#8230;On the eve of his death Romesh Chander had written in a prophetic vein, &#8216;No one knows whose trun will come next. All Punjab has become a slaughter house.&#8217;&#8230;&#8230;*During March and April at least eighty other people were killed and 107 injured in terrorist attacks by Bhindranwale&#8217;s men*&#8230;&#8230;By now the terror had spread throughout the countryside. This was largely because of the young men who had taken seriously the Sant&#8217;s injunction to buy arms and motorcycles and attack the enemies of the Sikhs. On 26th April, for instance, young Sikh motorcyclists shot a Hindu commission agent in the village Bhikiwind in Amritsar District and a Hindu Shopkeeper in the village of Smadh Bhai in Faridkot district. Satish Jacob visited the village of Bhikiwind and found the doors of most of the Hindu shops locked. The owners and their families had fled to the neighbouring state of Haryana. *Bhindranwale&#8217;s plans to alter the population of Punjab in favour of the Sikhs were bearing fruit.*

*By April 1984 it began to look as though he might succeed in clearing the Hindus out of Punjab. Not only were the small time traders, money-lenders and shopkeepers in the villages fleeing, confidence among Hindu businessmen in the cities was collapsing too.*

&#8230;many Hindu industrialists were planning to move their factories to the neighbouring state of Haryana&#8230;*Fear even drove many Hindus to adopt Sikh dress. A retired school teacher in Amritsar told Satish Jacob that he now wore a turban when he went out for a walk.*&#8221; (pg 122 &#8211; 131)

&#8220;*According to the government&#8217;s figures, Bhindranwale&#8217;s terrotists had already killed 165 Hindus and Nirankaris in the twenty-two months since the launching of the Akali Morcha. They had also killed 39 Sikhs because they had opposed Bhindranwale. The total number of deaths in violent incidents, including so-called &#8216;encounters&#8217; between the plice and Sikhs, riots, and the accident at the level crossing in which 34 supporters of the Morcha were killed, was 410. The injured numbered 1,180*&#8221; (pg 147)​


> Do you think it was appropriate for the Indian state and PM. Indira Gandhi to launch this offensive during the Sikh Holiest day when many Sikh pilgrims would be in attendance?


During the run-up to Operation Blue Star, Punjab had descended into complete mayhem. Bhindranwale and his goons were carrying out a regime of systematic terror and murder to cleanse Punjab of Hindus. In spite of that, storming The Golden Temple was not a priority to Mrs Gandhi. Instead, she attempted a last ditch negotiation with the Akali Morcha. Bhindranwale was the _de facto_ leader of the Morcha.

&#8220;Mrs Gandhi had been insisting that Punjab could only have Chandigarh if the Akalis were prepared to surrender the two tahsils of Fazilka and Abohar to Haryana in exchange [_Perspective: Akalis&#8217; demand were that Chandigarh should be part of Punjab, which till date is part of Haryana. This was among several other demands, arising from Anadpur Sahid Resolution._]. These were the terms of her original settlement, which had never been implemented. She now agreed that only the town of Abohar need be surrendered but maintained that this award should be made by a commission so that the Hindus of Haryana would not see it as a surrender. She promised that the findings of the commission would be guaranteed in advance. This was not good enough for the Akali leaders. They needed an announcement of the settlement by the government, not a commission if they were to convince their followers that the Morcha had been a success and could be called off.

This last round of negotiations was conducted on Mrs Gandhi&#8217;s side by her External Affairs Minister, Narasimha Rao, with the team of three administrators who were the members of the Punjab Think Tank&#8230;&#8221; (pg 137)​Mrs Gandhi was even willing to tone down her conditions and even went to the extent of guaranteeing that the commission would be cooked up in favour of the Sikhs. But Akalis needed a face saver, more than anything. Bhindranwale had different plans altogether.

&#8220;The government had stipulated that he(_Bhindranwale_) must agree before they would announce it&#8230;&#8230;Bhindranwale would not accept that the settlement met the Morcha&#8217;s demand&#8230;&#8230;and so the whole settlement collapsed&#8221; (pg 138)​Bhindranwale&#8217;s demand was that the entire Ananpur Sahib Resolution be implemented in toto. This would mean creating a country within a country and was naturally not acceptable to the GoI. Only after this last negotiation broke down, did Mrs Gandhi finally on 2nd June gave the go ahead. On that day in a speech addressed to the nation, via All India Radio, Mrs Gandhi made a final appeal to Akali leaders to &#8220;call off their threatened agitation and accept the framework of the peaceful settlement&#8221;, which was offered to them. The die was already cast by then. On 30th May, Major-General Brar was already ordered to move his Division. However, on 3rd May, Curfew was lifted in order to allow Sikhs to celebrate the martyrdom of Guru Arjun, and taking advantage of this, near about 200 militants slipped out from The Golden Temple. When the news of this escape reached the HQ, curfew was again reimposed in the evening and the District Commissioner, who was sympathetic to Bhindranwale, was transferred. It was then that Army opened fire, for the first time in the whole quagmire. Prior to the Army, the CRPF and local police had fired at The Golden Temple on 1st June, in order to draw fire from the Bhindrenwale&#8217;s men, so that he would reveal his strategic positions. It was, however a failure and his men showed extreme restraint. On 3rd June, Punjab was cut off from the rest of world and on the night of 5th June, the Operation Blue Star kick started.

The date, 5th June was a pure coincidence. The news of escape of 200 hardcore, trained militants, and the fear of uprising in the countryside, led to the very hurried attack on the Temple.

&#8220;The government&#8217;s explanation for starting the operation on a day so sacred to the Sikhs with all the risks of involving innocent pilgrims in the battle was that Bhindranwale was about to start a well-organised campaign to murder Hindus in villages throughout the Punjab. *A senior official of the Home Ministry told Satish Jacob that intelligence officers had intercepted messages from Bhindranwale and Shahbeg Singh instructing their followers to start killing &#8216;en masse&#8217; on 5th June. He also said Bhindranwale had plans to kill all Punjabi MPs and Members of the State Assembly. *Although the government has never provided any hard evidence to back up its allegation that Bhindranwale was planning a massacre of Hindus, it is true to say that the pace of the killings was accelerating alarmingly. *Twenty-three people were killed in the twenty-four hours before Mrs Gnadhi made her broadcast.*&#8221; (pg 148)

&#8220;*The army did have good reason to fear the Sikhs in the countryside*. The night after the Golden Temple was surrounded [_by the army_] a crowd of angry Sikhs from villages near Amritsar stormed into the Sultanwind area of the city and burned down the shops and small factories of Hindus. The strict curfew imposed but the army had proved ineffective. As tension built up throughout Punjub, army helicopters also spotted groups of angry Sikhs gathering in many different places. Troops were able to disperse them but not without loss of life.&#8221; (pg 151)​



> Launching a military offensive at such a time is CALLING for MORE causalities...


Evacuating the pilgrims from the hostels, within the Temple complex was also out of question.
&#8220;The tragedy could only have been avoided if the hostels had been evacuated before the attack on the Golden Temple complex started; but that was easier said than done. To evacuate the hostels first would have meant separating the two complexes. But both Bhindranwale&#8217;s men and his old rivals the Babbar Khalsa had taken up positions overlooking the hostels and indeed inside the hostels themselves. Bhindranwale had also sent his interpreter Harminder Singh Sandhu to Longowal&#8217;s office to prevent him surrendering. So any attempt to separate the two complexes would almost certainly have led to a battle in the hostels. Then battle could easily have spread to the Temple too, forcing the army to enter Bhindranwale&#8217;s stronghold before it was ready to do so.

A more serious problem was that of time. Separating the two complexes would have delayed the main battle and Lieutenant-General Sunderji who was in overall command felt he could not rake the risk. From the moment that the army laid siege to the Golden Temple on 3rd June he was obsessed with speed because he was afraid of that uprising in the countryside. Lieutenant-General Sunderji explained his fears tot the press after the operation.
&#8220;*We knew that they had plans to utilize the innocent people, the religious-minded innocent people in the countryside. That plan was to incite these people to come to the Golden Temple in thousands and to literally swamp the surroundings as well as the inside, thereby preventing most effectively any action we could have taken to flush the terrorists out. This was confirmed information. We even intercepted messages going out to the countryside. So any extended cordon or siege would have ended up with this type of mass movement.*&#8221;&#8221;​ (pg 151)​The hostel complex was however evacuated in the middle of the attack on Temple. Also, laying siege of the temple, medieval style, was out of question, because of the fear of uprising in the countryside. Army had to act swiftly.

Mr A1Kaid, please stop hate mongering through half-baked theories and misinformation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## vsdoc

zombie said:


> AS for discussion - definitely most Indians by now know the role that Pakistan(with some good help from anti-Indira US establishment at that time) had to play in this episode which created problems for their own community and others. Indians-forget just Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Christians, even Muslims, have learnt by now not to get fooled by some Pakistanis crocodile tears and goading. Unknowingly you'll managed to unite Indians and make them wary of Pakistan even more. So there was some good outcome from this after all..



I had exactly the same opinion on the efforts of another Pakistani and his brothers on 26/11.

A1Kaid, I am as proud of my country as you are of yours. The difference is that I do not need to put down Pakistan or Pakistanis or try and foment bad blood within Pakistanis on this forum to feel proud and good to be an Indian.

I hope you can appreciate this difference, and if my post is taken as off topic, it was in response to yours.

Back to the topic now.

Cheers, Doc


----------



## A1Kaid

vsdoc said:


> I had exactly the same opinion on the efforts of another Pakistani and his brothers on 26/11.
> 
> A1Kaid, I am as proud of my country as you are of yours. The difference is that* I do not need to put down Pakistan or Pakistanis or try and foment bad blood within Pakistanis on this forum to feel proud and good to be an Indian.
> *
> I hope you can appreciate this difference, and if my post is taken as off topic, it was in response to yours.
> 
> Back to the topic now.
> 
> Cheers, Doc



I think you are misconstruing the information.


"* I do not need to put down Pakistan or Pakistanis or try and foment bad blood within Pakistanis on this forum to feel proud and good to be an Indian.
*"

Well me neither, this is a topic about a historical event, Operation Blue Star. A horrible event for every Sikh in India who suffered by the Indian state. You talk about fomenting bad blood, but it was not me who shelled the Sikh Holy Temple or cause Operation Blue Star.

I am simply discussing this event, presenting information just as Indian members are presenting information, I am posting news reports, and footage so we can get to the depths of Operation Blue Star, because until now only the National Indian government side has been shown and reported (well mostly)...


But I see you Indian members are making personal insults, it truly shows how immature many of the members are.


You talk about appreciating this difference, there is little to appreciate especially with how members from your country behave on this forum.

Now I suggest we all go back on topic and we all had a fair chance to say our views.


----------



## vsdoc

A1Kaid, I think we both understand each other 

Btw, slightly OT once again but have been meaning to ask you for some time now ..... who is the gentleman in your avtar?

Cheers, Doc


----------



## Kasrkin

*Keep it clean from both sides. There is no need to comment on who is being a good boy and who isn&#8217;t. That&#8217;s for me to judge. Concentrate on the discussion; keep the flaming and emotion down on both sides.*


----------



## SSG VIPER

sob said:


> Sir you will find more information on this at this site
> Home | The Siege of Mecca
> 
> This also has a photogallery but I could not upload the photos.
> Check this out also
> Grand Mosque Seizure - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> Also you will find pics of the US embassy being stormed in Islamabad after rumors that the US had bombed the Holy Mosque at Mecca.


are u retarded tht never happened no weapons were used idiot nor did they use any.Theose guys were gassed to death by pakistani commandoes no bullets were fired retard


----------



## UchihaCG

> was an Indian military operation ordered by Indira Gandhi, the then Prime Minister of India


"Sikh SEPERATISTS" Am I right?
If All 2 million Hindus in Pakistan want to split a part of Pakistan and call it Hindustan and they were hiding in a temple. Won't your government do anything? Just asking...



> very very sad Sikhs have suffer'd alot but things arent any better for them til now these days i thank Allah for everyday that they gave us Pakistan i've personally met alot of Sikhs in New York thier views about thier Homeland arent good.


Yes it's very sad, i agree.






*INDIAN ARMY!*


----------



## deckingraj

HI All

Though i am a little late to contribute in this thread but me being a sikh thought i should also share my opinion on operation blue star...I wont get into length so a few points...

@paritosh



> The Indian govt. did not attack the golden temple because it was a Sikh place of worship...the Indian govt. was not against the Sikhs...it was against the separatists housed in the golden temple complex.
> let me re-phrase it....
> We were against the separatists not because they were Sikhs but because they wanted to liberate the Punjab region from India.




Yes very true...However there are lot of things that need to be considered...The whole episode is a black spot on our history. 
- Indira Gandhi failed to understand the pulse of Punjab and the same mistake was repeated by her son(Rajiv Gandhi)..
- Bhindrawala was Indira Gandhi's creation to have a tap on Akali Dal which was proving to be headache for congress in Punjab...Because they were after the promises that were made to sikhs during partition and were getting lot of public support

We all know that terrorist were hiding inside the holy shrine but did we question how did that happened??? What were the reasons which lead to it??? We need to keep in mind that as well...

Ayways what happened was unfortunate and i am glad things are looking better now...






> that is why you'd see that in the entire length of this thread...Indians have somewhat defended the golden temple episode but all have unequivocally condemned the riots of '84 as they had a communal basis.Your usage of phrases like "Hindu dominated GoI" shows that you either don't understand what the op bluestar was about....or deliberately want to fuel a communal showdown of sorts on this thread.




Paritosh i vehemently oppose the Golden Temple attack but not for obvious reasons and 84 riots for obvious reasons...Here are some points

- Do you know that most of the sikhs did not support bhindrawala when he was alive?? It was the attack on Golden Temple that resulted him in becoming a martyr...
- Do you know how many innocent people died in the cross fire between millitants and army??? How can one be so naive to attack the shrine on a holy day when you are expecting pilgrims in thousands???
- The attack was not just against militants...The deeper message was to break the phyche of Sikhs who supported Khalistan.. So far so good but the way it was done was pathetic and by the time people realized its impact Punjab was trembling under the daemon of Terrorism 
- Golden temple followed by 84 riots was more than enough to alienate Sikhs to such a level that even if they wouldn't have they ended up supporting Khalistan movement...if not joining it then atleast supporting it...
- Thank god good sense prevailed and punjabi's realized people who are using them(Terrorist) have nothing to do with the cause...


I hope you have pretty much the same views but if not we can discuss....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PakSher

India did commit a lot of atrocities against the Sikh Minority and continue to have Sikhs in jail to this date with no trials. If they cut the water, food and power to Golden Temple, they would not have to desecrate the golden temple. Even if Pakistan had 3 wars with India and Sikhs fought against Pakistan, we still did not attack and Mandirs or Sikh Holy Places in Pakistan. This just shows the nature of a Nation.


----------



## gogbot

Why does Pakistan Continue to separate The population of the Sub-continent based on Religion or creed

You have done so with your own country now stay out of ours.

Sikh support is firmly towards, India , because they are Indian.










And lets not forget India's most Powerful Singh 
Manmohan Singh







Clearly your Idea that sikhs will go against India is as absurd as Blacks going against America.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Novice09

PakSher said:


> India did commit a lot of atrocities against the Sikh Minority and continue to have Sikhs in jail to this date with no trials. If they cut the water, food and power to Golden Temple, they would not have to desecrate the golden temple. Even if Pakistan had 3 wars with India and Sikhs fought against Pakistan, we still did not attack and Mandirs or Sikh Holy Places in Pakistan. This just shows the nature of a Nation.



Really good one!  Than why you are killing your own Pakistani brothers in Waziristan and SWAT ???  

In 1984, Indian Govt. does not acted against Punjabis. They acted against the separatists during operation blue star. 

Yes, I condemn the riots of 1984.


----------



## Novice09

gogbot said:


> Why does Pakistan Continue to separate The population of the Sub-continent based on Religion or creed
> 
> You have done so with your own country now stay out of ours.
> 
> Sikh support is firmly towards, India , because they are Indian.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And lets not forget India's most Powerful Singh
> Manmohan Singh
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly your Idea that sikhs will go against India is as absurd as Blacks going against America.



Nice answer bro......

Do Pakistan have any non-muslim as their PM or President ????

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Novice09

PakSher said:


> India did commit a lot of atrocities against the Sikh Minority and continue to have Sikhs in jail to this date with no trials. If they cut the water, food and power to Golden Temple, they would not have to desecrate the golden temple. Even if Pakistan had 3 wars with India and Sikhs fought against Pakistan, we still did not attack and Mandirs or Sikh Holy Places in Pakistan. This just shows the nature of a Nation.





> *First Sikh officer in Pakistan Army*
> 
> By Zulqernain Tahir
> 
> LAHORE, Dec 19 2005: Harcharan Singh, 19, of the Nankana Sahib, is the first Pakistani Sikh in the country&#8217;s 58-year history who has been commissioned in the Pakistan Army as an officer.
> 
> The minorities in Pakistan are allowed to sit in all examinations, including the one conducted by Inter Services Selection Board (ISSB), but neither a Hindu nor a Sikh could get selected for the army service since the country&#8217;s inception. However, many Christians served in the army.
> 
> Harcharan was skeptical this year while appearing in the ISSB&#8217;s preliminary tests, thinking that such examinations were not meant for them (Sikhs) as he could not get through the initial phase last year.



Now the aforementioned news shows that either Pakistan is biased towards Hindus and Sikhs to induct them into their armed forces or they are socially backward.


----------



## deckingraj

> Do Pakistan have any non-muslim as their PM or President ????



Pakistan is an islamic state...Is india a hindu state??? Answer is no and thus you cannot expect both the countries to be same from their secular stand point... Also Obama is US president does that mean there is no racism in US??? 



> Now the aforementioned news shows that either Pakistan is biased towards Hindus and Sikhs to induct them into their armed forces or they are socially backward.



See the explanation above....I fail to understand that while comparing Pakistan and India why do indians forget that we are a democracy from 62 years with one tiny blot of emergency during Indira Gandhi rule..whereas Pakistans unfortunately has hardly seen true colors of democracy...So you just cannot compare...though good luck to them and hopefully the current government will fulfill its tenure with the next civilian one to follow 


what india needs to do is to ensure that fanatics(Hindu,Sikh,Muslims etc) do not get a chance to do any more things like 84 or Gujarat riots..

One thought to do some self introspection - When was the last time you heard about any communal riots of the level of 84 or Gujarat against non-muslims in Pakistan??? There should be no shame in accepting our mistakes in the past...However if someone is using those examples to prove that india is not united against any adversaries then they are living in fools paradise...let them why to bother????

One more advice to my friends this topic is about Operation Blue star which has nothing to do with whose prime minister is of what religion...So please add if you have something useful or else ignore...


----------



## Insane

All i can see that the thread started dint succeed in his attempt or did he 

Lot of Indian guys from all religions debated but mostly peacefully  

I am also glad that Most of the Pakistani members stayed away and did not add fuel to the ignition.  

There is good and bad in all of us, Same goes for nations Because nations consist of people. There are times when evil overcomes our good side and we do mistakes and heinous ones at that. Black spots and dark days in societies and nations occur when evil sweeps through to a huge number of people at the same time ( Even through the origin are a few). But its not like Evil can capture the good for ever. people come out of it and peace is largely maintained. Those days even though remembered with great sadness, and sometimes anger by people, the majority still continue in the good way and keep the negative aspects over running the sane side. No need of proof for this one. The very survival of human kind through thousands of years is proof enough.

Conflicts based on regions, nations, religion and even ideas and thoughts will occur but wont be able to abolish the good. Its the very fate of evil to be beaten ultimately by good. 

In every major occurrence of events like the one the thread is addressing, innocent people suffer and get killed.. That is really sad and unfortunate but that is how it is. When event like riots, wars happen we lose our loved ones but life moves on. That's how it must be. Bringing more unrest because of events of the past is not the way forward but still a minority will take that path as being an immortal evil cant truly be irradiated. ( By evil i do not mean the people who are evil.. but i mean the inherent component of the basis of every soul which takes over the conscience from time to time)

OK.. that was seriously off topic. Peace.


----------



## vectorhawk

LiberalPakistani said:


> very very sad Sikhs have suffer'd alot but things arent any better for them til now these days i thank Allah for everyday that they gave us Pakistan i've personally met alot of Sikhs in New York thier views about thier Homeland arent good.



I do not understand the logic behind your statements. Can you please elaborate?

Sikhs have suffered, true... Things are not better? and Thank Allah for Pakistan? and sikhs in New York not having good views about their homeland???


----------



## vectorhawk

fateh71 said:


> True, I've heard similar stories. The event had nothing to do with religion, isn't Tytler a sikh converted to Christianity?
> 
> Luckily the dark days did not create a rift between sikhs and other groups. When we were kids in mumbai and had to take a taxi by ourselves, our mom had instructed us to look for a taxi driven by a Sardarji. That did not change even during the insurgency days and all non sikhs from india i know have a deep sense of love and gratitude towards sikhs. Bad thing is, no more sardarji driven taxis in mumbai anymore, good thing is, Sikhs have largely got out of that socio economic class and are the most affluent majot group in india today.



Ohh, So true Fateh... Very Rightly Said...


----------



## vectorhawk

peace123 said:


> ur facts r wrong!!!!! nonononon wait a moment!!!! that is wat the goverment said. at that moment bhindrawala was not trying to divide india he was only trying to provide some right to the sikhs:
> 
> Post-Independence : Broken Promises & Discrimination
> 
> 
> In 1950, despite protests by Sikhs, the Indian constitution was adopted, which failes to even recognize the Sikhs as a separate religion or "quam," instead Sikhs were categorised as Hindus, and remained defined as such under Article 25 of the Constitution. The British recognised Sikh marriages under the Anand Karaj Act 1909, however this was replaced by the Hindu Marriage Act 1951. Sikh marriages are no longer recognised. To get a marriage license in "secular India", Sikhs have to sign a form entitled "The Hindu Marriage Act of 1951"
> 
> Panjab was a state utterly broken and totally ruined both economically and socially by the Partition with Pakistan. Instead of Government help, the Sikhs began facing economical, social and religious discrimination.
> 
> 
> Farmers in Panjab paid higher prices for their agriculture inputs, but were offered lower prices for their produce in comparison with neighbouring states. The Central Government assumed sole control over prices and farmers were not allowed to cross state boundaries to get higher prices for their labours in the next state.
> 
> Electricity generated by the Hydroelectric Dam Bhakra on the Panjab borders was more costly and provided in smaller amounts in Panjab than in it's neighbouring states.
> 
> 75% of the water available to Panjab was being diverted to other states.
> 
> 70% of the revenue raised by Panjabis, for development of Panjab was sent to other states.
> 
> The Central Government investment in Panjab was less than 1%, the lowest amongst all the states, however Panjab was the most highly taxed.
> 
> Restrictions on the recruitment and promotion of Sikhs in the armed forces were applied. This was a grave insult as Sikhs being 2% of India's population counted for the majority of sacrifices in the freedom struggle against the British.
> 
> After Independence Sikhs began facing racial slurs from leaders and the media. When Nehru was reminded about the promises he and Gandhi made to the Sikhs before Independence and all the broken promises since, he stated simple, "the circumstances have now changed."
> 
> "Kya main taqat dushman ke hath main de dun (How can I entrust powwer into the hands of the enemies)." (Jawaharlal Nehru, 1961)
> 
> "The Sikhs are lawless people and a menace to the law abiding Hindus... The Government should take strict measures against them." (Jawaharlal Nehru)
> 
> In a circular sent to all Deputy Commisioners in Panjab by the Home Minister Vallabhi Patel, there were instructions that Sikhs should be treated like a "criminal tribe." They were urged to be severe so that the Sikhs should wake up to the political realities and recognize "who are the masters and who are the slaves."
> 
> In 1956 all states in India were recognized on linguistic and cultural basis, however Panjab was the only state in India left out of this. In addition huge anti-Sikh propoganda compelled virtually all Panjabi speaking Hindus to deny Panjabi as their language and claim allegiance to Hindi, however, their knowledge of Hindi was non-existent.
> 
> Furthermore, Sikhs felt the wrath of Hindu nationalism nurtured by M.K. Gandhi. After his death fundamentalist cults and organisations such as RSS and Ayra Smaaj began anti-Sikh propaganda. Sikhs were humiliated throughout national media and literature. Ayra Smaaj and other fundamentalist Hindu organisations published literature, held events and conferences which degraded and insulted the Sikh Gurus. A great effort was made to disolve Sikhism into Hinduism.
> 
> In 1966 the Panjabi Suba Movement began, during peaceful agitations throughout the 50's and 60's over 250,000 Sikhs demonstrated peacefully and courted arrest to get their linguistic rights (this is 5times the number of Indians arrested by the British in the whole "Quit India Movement"). Darshan Singh Peruman was martyred whilst on hunger strike in prison. He demanded that Sikhs should be given more rights and more autonomy for Panjab. His martyrdom and noble sacrifice was ignored by the Government.
> 
> Two majority Panjabi speaking districts were left out of the 1961 census. The now already shrunken Panjab was further halved to form a Hindi speaking state Haryana in 1966. Furthermore, the small remmant of Panjab was still denied the status of a Panjabi speaking state. Some of the prosperous Panjabi speaking areas including the capital Chandigarh were left out and given to Haryana. This was a direct violation of the Indian Constitution and pre-independence promises. Panjab remains the only state in India to have a shared capital and no control over its natural resources, water and electricity.



I cannot believe anything of what you have stated above... It simply is not true... Please substantiate your claims, if you have anything to support the above...


----------



## vectorhawk

paritosh said:


> this is a very wrong conclusion that you've made yourself to believe...maybe it's because you are still coming to grips with the politics of the sub-continent.
> The congress under Mrs. gandhi was for the first time since independence fearing a defeat in the elections...In punjab they had not foot-hold....so she endorsed Bhidrawala...
> as far as bhidrawala is concerned...you shouldn't jump to conclusions...majority of the Sikhs...even those you know and who love India...don't view him as a terrorist...from what i've heard he was a religious man.it was Mrs Gandhi's fault that she played with fire.
> 
> on a side note...i would like all the hindu memebers(I hate referring religiously but....)to realize that today the two reasons why we remain hindus to this day is because of
> a)the Rajputs of rajasthan
> b)the Sikh warriors of Punjab
> whenever I see a sikh I remember that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah...I agree.
> even if he was brutal...today's generation of Sikhs and hindus owe the peace in Punjab to him.



That is so true... The history of the Singhs has been written in blood, all along...


----------



## vectorhawk

Khajur said:


> I admire IG Gandhi because she knew exactly what would be the repercusion of sending indian troop in to holy shrine of golden temple .They had all sorts of behind the scene negotiations which ofcourse failed and Bhidrawala was on verge of declaring khalistani state. So Gandhi had to take very unpopular but tough measure at her personal perils.
> 
> I can never believe operation blue star was politically motivated or intended to demean sikh community in anyway.
> 
> This lady kept her sikh body guards inspite of clear intelligence reports that Sikhs were to out kill her to avenge Blue star ops.
> 
> we hardly see this kind courage any more among indian politicians and her tough desion making ability is sorely missied.
> 
> She made many blunders like imposing emergency,but her tough as nail attitude was admired by even critics like Henry kissinger.
> 
> You second quote:
> 
> 
> " *on a side note...i would like all the hindu memebers(I hate referring religiously but....)to realize that today the two reasons why we remain hindus to this day is because of
> a)the Rajputs of rajasthan
> b)the Sikh warriors of Punjab
> whenever I see a sikh I remember that.* "
> 
> what utter pure nonsensical bullshit statement...Come on paritosh i never expected such stupid statements which i heard for the second time.First one time i heard it from a Khalistani rabble rouser on youtube.
> 
> *Outside NCR and north west india,such statement would be viewed as idiotic to say the least*.
> 
> What u exactly u meant when u say Rajputs and sikhs saved hindism?? u mean saved from converting to islam by muslim invaders ??
> 
> Hinduism is thousands yr old and pracised by crores of ppl in all parts of india.
> 
> I'm from orissa and mosts of the ppl are hindus not becasue of any Rajputs or sikhs,but because of undiminishing faith *many centuries old Jagananth tradition*.So is case with most other states in middle india and down south where hindu religion survived due strong belief system of the native ppl and innumerous sacrifices in spite of hundreds of yrs of muslim onslaught.
> 
> *I've nothing but utter respect for sikh religion and sikh ppl in general,but Guru Nanak appeared and khalsa movement came into exitence only in 17th century*.
> 
> *By then most of muslims areas in suncontinet of today had coverted to Islam already*.
> 
> Its Maratha Warriors shivaji maharaj who faught Aurangzebs conversion drive far successfuly then any Rajput or khalsa sikh.But then again forceful conversion was seen in few pockets and many hindus converted to islam due to Sufi movement at that specific point of time.
> 
> Guru Govind singh who just ushered martial khalsa sikh was contempory of shivaji.
> 
> I know that sikh warroirs help save some hindus lives of north west india during the invasion of Nadir Shar of iran.And from there rose these stories of Sikhs saving hindus.
> 
> *But making any blanket statemet like giving credit to Rajputs or sikhs for existence of hinduism is historically inaccurate and sounds very stupid to say the least.*
> 
> Hindus of orissa or many other states of india are hindus now... not because of support from any Rajputs or sikhs...but because of their strong conviction in hindu religion itself.
> 
> 
> .



Khajur, my brother, please read history in detail... and from both perspectives, the ones of defending Singhs and the Invading Muslim hordes... No offence to your POV seriously, just that you need to know more about the past...


----------



## vectorhawk

Gabbar said:


> @ khajur:
> 
> Bhindranwala never wanted Khalistan initialy, all he wanted was what promised to Sikhs in 1947. Khalistan was declared by Sikhs in 1986.
> 
> It was to heal IG's her bruised ego. During emergency, Sikhs shred her emergency rule to pieces in Punjab by long marches, since it was un-constitutinal.
> 
> Wasn't that kissinger who called her "old witch"?
> 
> Who faught moguls than all these year? 55 years of gurrila war by Sikhs. Rajputana rebelions. Read India's history from 1600s - 1850s. Sikhs rescued girl whenever Abdali was taking them to Kabul.
> 
> Sivaji faught Aurangzeb but where? In Maharashtra? Give me the time line where Maratha's faught Jahangir?, who faught Abdali?, who faught Mir Mannu etc.
> 
> 
> 
> When did shivahi captured Delhi? Who closed the Khyberpass? Do you have any idea how many times India was attacked, many attackes never reached Maharashtra due to fighting with Sikhs, Rajputs and/or looters had gotten what they needed.
> 
> 
> 
> I would love to debate this one with you. PM on this one open a new thread, I want to know how you came to this conclusion.



I second your words, brother...


----------



## ranveer

Do you know what Indian Constitution says about Sikh Religion?

PART III

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

Right to Freedom of Religion

25. Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion.-

(1) Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion.

(2) Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law-

(a) regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice;

(b) providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus.

Explanation I.- The wearing and carrying of kirpans shall be deemed to be included in the profession of the Sikh religion.

Explanation II.- In sub-clause (b) of clause (2), the reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious institutions shall be construed accordingly. 

What it means is that Sikhs are not recognised as a Seperate Religion but a branch of Hindu wider religion and they can wear Kirpans.

A sikh has to marry and register under Hindu Marraige Act while there was Anand Marraige Act for Sikhs during the time of British for Sikhs. There is seperate Acts for Muslims, Chritians. Some would say that Indian has so many religions but that is not logic. Make the rules same for everyone and let it be called Indian Marraige Act or Hindustan Marraige Act or let all religions be independent and recognize them.

In my school leaving certificate it says my religion as Hindu-Sikh and that is the thing which is not acceptable. It is the place of discontent. Where is religious freedom.

Bhindranwale fought for religious freedom and most of you dont know because our source of information is TV, news paper, radio and all these are state controlled in one way or the other. Its just like CBI works in conjugtion with political masters or unjust use of authority.

My respect for Bhindranwala grew as i grew with age and found about what happened. Just for the simple reason that he could have fled the war or run away as many would do but instead he stood and fought. This might not be logic but he stood true to the Gurus Word.

I do not appreciate violence or killing of any human but do we actually know our history. Dont you know that our history is taught to us buy regulated Government organisations in both Pakistan and India. Search for yourself and you will find many things.

Sikh Gurus always propogated Religious Freedom and fought the wars against unjust and wrong.

gagan damama bajio pario nisane ghao.
khet jo mandio surama ab jujhan ko dau;
sura so pahichaniai jo lare din ke het,
purja purja kati marai kabahu na chhade khetu.

The hero, entering the field,
Fights on without quailing.
Know that man to be a true hero
Who fights in defence of the defenceless;
Hacked limb by limb, he still flees not the field.

~ SGGS, Kabir jee, 1005

Guru Gobind Singh jee, seeks the divine boon to ever do noble deeds and be able to lay down his life for the sake righteousness:

deh siva baru mohi ihai subh karman te kabahun na taron,
na daro ari so jab jai laron nischai kari apuni jit karon
ar sikhaho apane hi mana ko ih lalach hau gun tau ucharo,
jab av ki audh nidan banai ati hi ran mai tab jujh maron.

Lord, Grant me this boon:
Never may I turn back from righteousness;
May I never turn back in fear when facing the foe;
May I ever instruct my mind to chant Thy praises;
And when the end arrives,
May I fall fighting on the field of battle.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

*Sikhs Hold Demo Against 1984 Carnage​*






> MUMBAI: Ahead of US President Barack Obama's India visit, hundreds of Sikhs held a protest rally in front of the United Nations, asking him to raise the issue of the 1984 anti-Sikh riots before the Indian parliament.
> 
> "He (Obama) must raise this issue in his speech to the India parliament," said Gurpatwant Pannun, lawyer for Sikhs for Justice (SFJ), a US based group that organised the rally in New York on Monday.
> 
> "We also want the UN to intervene to bring the perpetrators to justice," he said. In September, Bakhshish Singh Sandhu, coordinator of Sikhs For Justice had met Obama briefly to describe the events of 1984 and asked him to take up the matter in New Delhi, the group said.
> 
> Pannun noted that despite several attempts made by the Sikhs to bring the matter to the attention of the Obama administration, the president had not included any discussion of the anti-Sikh riots in his agenda.
> 
> "Obama cannot trade dollars with blood; we want him to pay tribute to the Sikhs who died," he said.
> 
> SFJ also announced that widows of Nov 1984 anti-Sikh riots will also hold a protest rally on Nov 8 when President Obama will be addressing the Indian parliament.
> 
> "The purpose of the protest is to remind the president that Sikhs and other religious minorities of India have been victims of violence and as president of United States, he has moral and legal obligation to address the violation of human rights," it said.
> 
> SFJ has also initiated a case against Road Transport and Highways Minister Kamal Nath in New York for his alleged role in the killings.





Sikhs hold demo against 1984 carnage - GEO.tv

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## KS

Jagdish Tytler and Sajjan Kumar must be hanged for their heinous crimes against the Sikhs ASAP.

But unfortunately the Congress continues to shelter these murderers.


----------



## REHAN NIAZI FALCON

what i derive is ,we must not interfer in internal affairs of india like that of operation blue star. it was india,s prob how to manage ...
same is for india not to interfer in our internal issues like balochistan , sindh or before that for pushtoonistan by airing racism .. nor should pakistan get involve in any such act ..
on kashmir issue both countries should respect each other and leave to kashmiri people what ever they decide ......plz don,t say kashmir is internal prob .... other than kashmir in any other prob we should suport peace .. even in kashmir we should offer peaceful help to kashmiries as now.. no need of militancy ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## REHAN NIAZI FALCON

what is by gone is by gone leave bitter past and look for better future with out hate for each other ............

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Windjammer



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Windjammer



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Trichy

^^^^Like this kind of people, GoI ordered to remove their Indian Citizenship...


----------



## PakSher

Another example of Indian terrorism against its citizens.


----------



## Subramanian

paritosh said:


> @ peace...I have read bhindrawalas stories too...about how religiously tolerant he was...and how he saved a hindu female from paying dowry and stuff...all that makes me want to believe that he was indeed a saint...but why did he stock up arms in the golden temple?
> weren't their MMG? and rocket launchers in the temple complex?
> 
> see...the sikhs have this misconception that the GoI attacked the golden temple to embarrass the sardars of india who wanted their own state...the GoI attacked the golden temple because the separatists were operating from there.
> 
> IMO...whatever happened was bad...the 1980s was a turning point in the history of the sikhs in India.Had they chosen to intensify the Khalistan movement...we'd have sikh kids not going to schools and colleges and becoming mujaheedin like warriors...
> in today's India I see no disparity b/w sikhs and hindus...sikhs hold good positions in India and are among the richest in India.
> things have turned out well for sikhs.
> so I believe that this whole episode though is a dark chapter in the history of our nation...but it also has a flip-side...a side that shows how from the dark days of the 80s we have progressed to this day and age where we live in peace and calm.
> 
> @Peace123...In India wherever people start talking in regionalistic way..they are condemned...like in the case of Raj Thackrey standing up for the maratha youth....*the south Indian politicians promising of a 'bloodbath' if anything happens to Prabhakaran...etc etc..*it's a nation which is weakened by it's diversity and strengthened by it's diversity...it's what you want to believe in.



They are all pussies bro.The ballsiest of them all were Kamaraj and MG Ramachandran and they would not have destablised law and order for any damn reason.


----------



## somebozo

Had we crushed lal masjid and mullahs back in the 1980's we wouldn't have terrorism problem today. instead we used American funding to arm them till teeth!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Subramanian

somebozo said:


> Had we crushed lal masjid and mullahs back in the 1980's we wouldn't have terrorism problem today. instead we used American funding to arm them till teeth!



But you would have had russia in the neighbourhood.


----------



## sensenreason

Zob said:


> i am sorry GUBBI but these days nothing is AN INTERNAL PROBLEM.....and secondly....places of WORSHIP steer greif if attacked no matter what is stored inside it....so yes you can't tell OUTSIDERS to move on...because in a global environment nothing is an internal matter... and before you preach such things look at this forum NO PAKISTANI ever told an INDIAN to move on and not comment....



So I guess by that token the Lal Masjid operation was oppression by the Pakistani Govt/Army on the Pakistani majority community..right?


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

sensenreason said:


> So I guess by that token the Lal Masjid operation was oppression by the Pakistani Govt/Army on the Pakistani majority community..right?





totally irrelevant; good work trying to forge a connection. Subsequent to lal masjid, few if any major protests and/or unrest took place. The State and civilians were not going around burning Islamists or their homes.

the scale of violence in LM pales in comparison to what happened during the Sikh genocide of 84


----------



## PakSher

The survivors of the Sikhs killed should be compensated and a national apology should be declared for the Sikhs.


----------



## Avatar

PakSher said:


> The survivors of the Sikhs killed should be compensated and a national apology should be declared for the Sikhs.



While you're at it, why not also demand a separate state and a few billion $$$ for starting up.


----------



## PakSher

Avatar said:


> While you're at it, why not also demand a separate state and a few billion $$$ for starting up.



That would definately help, but if the Indian Nation is not ashamed of killing Sikhs, then India would be contradicting its democratic values. Remember the "Biggest Democracy Stunt" that India has been playing for a while, did you forget to at least pretend like a democracy?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ps80

This thread is in the wrong section....has nothing to do with the Pakistani military history.


----------



## Gabbar

Avatar said:


> While you're at it, why not also demand a separate state and a few billion $$$ for starting up.



Why are we afraid to accept our short comings? Indian government made a blunder and rest of the country paid the price for it. Did your brother or father was burnt alive? Did your house was looted? Did you felt like Jew in Nazi Germany? If you answer is NO to these questions, you will not understand what those people went through. It is very easy for people like us to sit behind computer and be jugemental but one should really go and talk to those people so you can really understand what really happen.


----------



## LaBong

Gabbar said:


> Why are we afraid to accept our short comings? Indian government made a blunder and rest of the country paid the price for it. Did your brother or father was burnt alive? Did your house was looted? Did you felt like Jew in Nazi Germany? If you answer is NO to these questions, you will not understand what those people went through. It is very easy for people like us to sit behind computer and be jugemental but one should really go and talk to those people so you can really understand what really happen.



The question is who should apologize? Indian state represents all the people in India. Why I and people from my place should apologize when neither we feel animosity towards Sikhs nor anyone's been killed in our state. 

Why all of us need to apologize for something which had been done by political thugs of Delhi!


----------



## The HBS Guy

Abir said:


> The question is who should apologize? Indian state represents all the people in India. Why I and people from my place should apologize when neither we feel animosity towards Sikhs nor anyone's been killed in our state.
> 
> Why all of us need to apologize for something which had been done by political thugs of Delhi!



*Because we are all ONE NATION!*

I personally, apologize to all my Sikh brothers for whatever wrong was done to them by the Indian state.

It gives me great hope to see that Sikhs are now beginning to move on forgetting all the bitter memories. I hope we can all work together to script a success story for the country together.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LaBong

KingKong31 said:


> *Because we are all ONE NATION!*
> 
> I personally, apologize to all my Sikh brothers for whatever wrong was done to them by the Indian state.
> 
> It gives me great hope to see that Sikhs are now beginning to move on forgetting all the bitter memories. I hope we can all work together to script a success story for the country together.



No what I'm trying to say is that, why should I take responsibility on behalf of someone who doesn't represent me. Indian Army represents me, not Congress or BJP . I can share the pain of slain Sikhs but won't take responsibility of killing them.


----------



## Bang Galore

PakSher said:


> The survivors of the Sikhs killed should be compensated and a national apology should be declared for the Sikhs.





Gabbar said:


> Why are we afraid to accept our short comings? Indian government made a blunder and rest of the country paid the price for it. Did your brother or father was burnt alive? Did your house was looted? Did you felt like Jew in Nazi Germany? If you answer is NO to these questions, you will not understand what those people went through. It is very easy for people like us to sit behind computer and be jugemental but one should really go and talk to those people so you can really understand what really happen.







Abir said:


> The question is who should apologize? Indian state represents all the people in India. Why I and people from my place should apologize when neither we feel animosity towards Sikhs nor anyone's been killed in our state.
> 
> Why all of us need to apologize for something which had been done by political thugs of Delhi!





KingKong31 said:


> *Because we are all ONE NATION!*
> 
> I personally, apologize to all my Sikh brothers for whatever wrong was done to them by the Indian state.
> 
> It gives me great hope to see that Sikhs are now beginning to move on forgetting all the bitter memories. I hope we can all work together to script a success story for the country together.




*Already done guys.*


> Toronto, June 28 (ANI): Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh on Monday apologized 'on behalf of the Government of India' for the 1984 anti-Sikh riots, saying that it should have never happened.


Manmohan Singh apologizes 'on behalf of government" for 1984 anti-Sikh disturbances - Oneindia News
India Uncut: Manmohan Singh's apology for 1984

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## KS

Gabbar said:


> Why are we afraid to accept our short comings? Indian government made a blunder and rest of the country paid the price for it. Did your brother or father was burnt alive? Did your house was looted? Did you felt like Jew in Nazi Germany? If you answer is NO to these questions, you will not understand what those people went through. It is very easy for people like us to sit behind computer and be jugemental but one should really go and talk to those people so you can really understand what really happen.



Firstly both the sides had themselves to blame though the share becomes larger on the part of Congress and specifically IG.

Because it was IG who specifically cultivated Bhindranwale as a political counter-weight against the Akalis though it backfired big time on her.

Also the indian Army must have chosen some other day for the assault - Its still beyond my ken,why the martyrdom day of Guru Arjan was chosen as the day of assault.

Thirdly Sikhs,specifically a portion of them,should also be blamed for allowing the terrorists to use the Holy Temple as a sanctuary and store Heavy weaponry inside the sanctum sanctorum.

*But past is past and the best apology the congress (not Indian Gov) can make is to prosecute and punish Tytler and Sajjan kumar.*



Abir said:


> The question is who should apologize? Indian state represents all the people in India. Why I and people from my place should apologize when neither we feel animosity towards Sikhs nor anyone's been killed in our state.
> 
> Why all of us need to apologize for something which had been done by political thugs of Delhi!



Actually you are correct and wrong at the same time - Technically it is the Congress that has to apologise for the gruesome riots they carried out and others need not.

But if my apology will help heal the wounds of the Sikhs,I have no qualms in it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WHF

PakSher said:


> That would definately help, but if the Indian Nation is not ashamed of killing Sikhs, then India would be contradicting its democratic values. Remember the "Biggest Democracy Stunt" that India has been playing for a while, did you forget to at least pretend like a democracy?



I bow my head in shame and apologise for what all has happened to the sikh brothers in india.

But it is quite disgusting when a pakistani speaks of sikh *holocaust*.Since when are the children of mughals so sympathetic to sikhs??Last time i read history muslims boiled sikh gurus in hot water to dearth.
Well it was not mordern days then what has happened in modern times??
There was never any operation blue star/green star/pink star etc in pakistan..Then why is condition of the sikh community in pakistan so pathetic??
Why do hundreds of sikhs from Tdays pakistan from their ancestral homes come over to india for refugee??
Why is the sikh % in pakistan ever dropping in pakistan since 47??why do they have to pay jizya in crores?? 
There are still many questions in my mind but i would request any nobel pakistani (the gr8 champion and friend of minorities in india) to answer these question step by step..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LaBong

> Actually you are correct and wrong at the same time - Technically it is the Congress that has to apologise for the gruesome riots they carried out and others need not.
> 
> *But if my apology will help heal the wounds of the Sikhs,I have no qualms in it. *



Therein lies the problem, it shouldn't, rather we also should demand apology from whoever carried the riot for killing our countrymen.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Spring Onion

Abir said:


> The question is who should apologize? Indian state represents all the people in India. Why I and people from my place should apologize when neither we feel animosity towards Sikhs nor anyone's been killed in our state.
> 
> Why all of us need to apologize for something which had been done by political thugs of Delhi!



The hardliner Hindus in India who had burnt many Sikhs on streets/roads of India should come forward and apologize to Sikhs.


The government of India may have some reasons to justify the operation but those hardline groups who have killed and maimed Sikhs have NO reason neither any justification for the killings hence the onus for apologizing is on them.


----------



## Masterchief

Official apologies have been made,the question is when jagdish 'bastard' tytler would be hanged for what he did


----------



## Spring Onion

gaurav yadav said:


> Official apologies have been made,the question is when jagdish 'bastard' tytler would be hanged for what he did


*
A Sikh President apologizing over massacre of Sikhs is not a good idea.*


----------



## Spring Onion

KingKong31 said:


> I personally, apologize to all my Sikh brothers for* whatever wrong was done to them by the Indian state.*
> 
> .



*Do you believe the Indian State done something wrong to Indian Sikhs??
*


----------



## karan.1970

Jana said:


> *
> A Sikh President apologizing over massacre of Sikhs is not a good idea.*



What about a Muslim president apologizing over massacre of Muslims? aka Bangladesh.. Was that a good idea or is this restriction only applicable to Hindus and Sikhs?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Avatar

Double Post


----------



## Avatar

Jana said:


> *
> A Sikh President apologizing over massacre of Sikhs is not a good idea.*



This itself proves how deluded you have become in your life long quest for defaming India. 

Besides, is it not the biggest form of respect that a Sikh is now the Prime Minister ? What do you want us to do ? Elect a RSS Prime Minister and then make him issue an apology ?

PS: The President is Prathiba Patil, and she has no time to spare (to make apologies) with her busy schedule of sight seeing around India with her family at govt's expense.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## para-site

Avatar said:


> This itself proves how deluded you have become in your life long quest for defaming India.
> 
> Besides, is it not the biggest form of respect that a Sikh is now the Prime Minister ? What do you want us to do ? Elect a RSS Prime Minister and then make him issue an apology ?
> *
> PS: The President is Prathiba Patil, and she has no time to spare (to make apologies) with her busy schedule of sight seeing around India with her family at govt's expense.*




Not correct.....Our president Pratibha devi singh patil may not be that charismatic compared to Sir Dr. APJ Abdul kalam but this statement of yours is not good taste......Please dont respond the attentions seekers here with such statements......thank u.....

PS: In my opinion it may not be a very good idea to discuss our internal problems with foreigners......

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mughaljee

very sad moment.


----------



## Bang Galore

Karthic Sri said:


> Actually you are correct and wrong at the same time - Technically it is the Congress that has to apologise for the gruesome riots they carried out and others need not.





Abir said:


> Therein lies the problem, it shouldn't, rather we also should demand apology from whoever carried the riot for killing our countrymen.




It is the responsibility of the Indian state(irrespective of the party in power) to protect its citizens & in as much as it failed in that, an apology from the state should be considered a legitimate request. 



Jana said:


> *
> A Sikh President apologizing over massacre of Sikhs is not a good idea.*



*Prime Minister actually!* Indian prime Ministers regardless of their personal religion represent the country & an apology from Manmohan Singh ( which btw had to have been cleared by the cabinet) is as good as from anyone else. His words as Prime Minister are the words of the Indian state & should be treated as such.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Subramanian

Manmohan singh is a Congressman,A congressman apologizing for a Congress mistake.RSS would have never slaughtered hindus/sikhs/jains/buddhists in india.


----------



## LaBong

Subramanian said:


> Manmohan singh is a Congressman,A congressman apologizing for a Congress mistake.RSS would have never slaughtered hindus/sikhs/jains/buddhists in india.



And it's okay to slaughter non hindus/sikhs/jains/buddhists, is it? Seems Taliban really is getting a grip on India.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Spring Onion

Bang Galore said:


> *Prime Minister actually!* Indian prime Ministers regardless of their personal religion represent the country & an apology from Manmohan Singh ( which btw had to have been cleared by the cabinet) is as good as from anyone else. His words as Prime Minister are the words of the Indian state & should be treated as such.



My bad typed in hurry. 

I am talking about the sentiments. A Sikh PM apologizing over massacre of Sikhs is a bad symbolism.

we were watching live telecast of events while in our educational institute When US attacked Iraq and US army pulled down statue of Sadam Hussain and put US flag at top our head of the department asked the class; What do you see? do you see anything wrong with it?

There were many replies some said it was good as Iraqi people hate Sadam some said it was bad US should not have pulled down the statue.

Again our professor asked what exactly is wrong there?


I just said "Sir putting US flag on top is a bad symbolism. they pulled down statue thats ok as he was an individual but putting US flag is a sign which Iraqis will take in bad taste as an invasion."



I hope you got what i am saying. 

A Sikh PM who's own family was stuck in Hindu mob wanting to set them on fire, his apology no matter how much from Indian Govt is a bad symbolism.


On the other hand i will repeat that its Hindu hardline groups that should apologize to Sikhs for brutally killing thousands of Sikhs.

The Govt of India might have reasons for operation like "action against traitors or rebels" BUT hardline Hindus have NO reason to justify the killing of innocent Sikhs.


----------



## KS

Bang Galore said:


> It is the responsibility of the Indian state(*irrespective of the party in power*) to protect its citizens & in as much as it failed in that, an apology from the state should be considered a legitimate request.



As much as I would like to appreciate your intent,the bolded part is what I dis-agree upon.

Will it be ok if the Central Government headed by NDA apologises for the heinous crime perperated by the Congress ?? I dont think so.
*
An official apology is legitimate as long as it comes when Congress is in power.*

*PS: *Please all ignore Jana sis comments..She still doesnt know the difference between Hindu Mobs and Congress mobs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Spring Onion

Avatar said:


> Besides, is it not the biggest form of respect that a Sikh is now the Prime Minister ?



A political move for interests of a political party does not justify killing of thousands of Sikhs. Electing a PM, President or MP from minority has nothing to do with respect or disrespect. Its a political arena and it works just like that around the world.




> What do you want us to do ? Elect a RSS Prime Minister and then make him issue an apology ?



Nothing wrong in that. That would be symbolically more appealing.




> PS: The President is Prathiba Patil, and she has no time to spare (to make apologies) with her busy schedule of sight seeing around India with her family at govt's expense.



 i cant say anything about that. But since slot of President is just ceremonial there so she can be excluded from any blame.


----------



## Spring Onion

Karthic Sri said:


> As much as I would like to appreciate your intent,the bolded part is what I dis-agree upon.
> 
> Will it be ok if the Central Government headed by NDA apologises for the heinous crime perperated by the Congress ?? I dont think so.
> *
> An official apology is legitimate as long as it comes when Congress is in power.*
> 
> *PS: *Please all ignore Jana sis comments..She still doesnt know the difference between Hindu Mobs and Congress mobs.


lolzz you calling me sis. nice of you.


Secondly Karthic can you please prove that, that mob that had brutally slaughter Sikhs was composed of non-Hindus.

And howcome one political party condone the faith of a mob?

Can you provide me data that thousands of Congress supporter and member Indians are NOT Hindus?

Above all you are just putting blame on a party and shying away from the realities.


BTW Who killed Gandhi????????


----------



## LaBong

Jana said:


> lolzz you calling me sis. nice of you.
> 
> 
> Secondly Karthic can you please prove that, that mob that had brutally slaughter Sikhs was composed of non-Hindus.
> 
> And howcome one political party condone the faith of a mob?
> 
> Can you provide me data that thousands of Congress supporter and member Indians are NOT Hindus?
> 
> Above all you are just putting blame on a party and shying away from the realities.
> 
> 
> BTW Who killed Gandhi????????



Congress doesn't represent hardliner Hindus and as 85% of population in India are Hindus so it's nothing but normal that any activity which has been carried out in India will be led by predominantly Hindus, be it killing Sikhs or electing a Sikh to Prime Minister. Hinduism or any wrong interpretation of the same wasn't the motivation behind 84's riot.


----------



## Avatar

Jana said:


> lolzz you calling me sis. nice of you.
> 
> 
> Secondly Karthic can you please prove that, that mob that had brutally slaughter Sikhs was composed of non-Hindus.
> 
> And howcome one political party condone the faith of a mob?
> 
> Can you provide me data that thousands of Congress supporter and member Indians are NOT Hindus?
> 
> Above all you are just putting blame on a party and shying away from the realities.
> 
> 
> *BTW Who killed Gandhi????????*



I am sure this is not the first time you are asking the question, and I also think you're not dumb enough to not know the answer. These are just one of your minuscule attempts to derail the thread.

Note to fellow Indian Members: Dont feed the troll.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Subramanian

Jana said:


> lolzz you calling me sis. nice of you.
> 
> 
> Secondly Karthic can you please prove that, that mob that had brutally slaughter Sikhs was composed of non-Hindus.
> 
> And howcome one political party condone the faith of a mob?
> 
> Can you provide me data that thousands of Congress supporter and member Indians are NOT Hindus?
> 
> Above all you are just putting blame on a party and shying away from the realities.
> 
> 
> BTW Who killed Gandhi????????




The party gets the blame because they are the ones who did it.They even accepted it on the sly.BJP/RSS/Jana Sangh would never ever harm innocent sikhs,they are our brothers.


----------



## KS

Jana said:


> lolzz you calling me sis. nice of you.
> 
> 
> Secondly Karthic can you please prove that,* that mob that had brutally slaughter Sikhs was composed of non-Hindus.*
> 
> And howcome one political party condone the faith of a mob?
> 
> Can you provide me data that thousands of Congress supporter and member Indians are NOT Hindus?
> 
> Above all you are just putting blame on a party and shying away from the realities.
> 
> 
> BTW Who killed Gandhi????????




And can you prove that there was no non-hindu in that ?? You cant.

BTW Jagdish Tytler,the main accused is a converted christian.

I dont know what you are trying to prove...India being 85&#37; Hindu at that time its common sense that Hindus will be the majority at that time as Abir said.

But that does not become a Hindu vs Sikh problem.Sikh bodyguards killed IG and so congress mobs wanted revenge in a heinous way.

here.I have provided two links to say how your favourite whipping boy,the RSS saved Sikhs from the Congress mobs during the riots.


This is what Khuswant Singh has to say about the RSS:



> "RSS has played an honorable role in maintaining Hindu-Sikh unity before and after the murder of Indira Gandhi in Delhi and in other places"
> "It was the Congress (I) leaders who instigated mobs in 1984 and got more than 3000 people killed. I must give due credit to RSS and the BJP for showing courage and protecting helpless Sikhs during those difficult days. No less a person than Atal Bihari Vajpayee himself intervened at a couple of places to help poor taxi drivers
> 
> _ - Kushwant Singh: &#8220;Congress (I) is the Most Communal Party&#8221;, Publik Asia, 16-11-1989. quoted in Elst Koenraad, Who is a Hindu?, chapter 8.1_



Another link:

1984 Sikh riots - Topix

*I have tried my best..now its upto you to remove your blinkers and see the truth.*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mayankmatador

Sikhs are part of india and always be... punjab is one of the most prosperous state per capita income of chandigarh is Rs 1,00,000 plus.

now jst few illiterate rogue elements wanted separate khalistan.yaar forget it, and move on...


----------



## ps80

^^ Majority of Sikhs never wanted a separate state, although there were some genuine demands that were promised (to be fulfilled) to them by our first PM. The term _Khalistan_ was the created by politicians, mainly Congress, to defame the Sikh community and to divert attention from their genuine demands for states (decentralization of powers). 

Why are we focused on Bhindrawale....look at the other historical events prior to the Bhindrawale period.


----------



## U-571

inna lilahe wainna ilaihe rajiun

my regards to the martyers..., may there sacrifices bear fruit one day

amen

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gabbar

Abir said:


> The question is who should apologize? Indian state represents all the people in India. Why I and people from my place should apologize when neither we feel animosity towards Sikhs nor anyone's been killed in our state.
> 
> Why all of us need to apologize for something which had been done by political thugs of Delhi!



You are missing the point. Its not about people or thier repreentative reading something from a letter and saying we are sorry. That is just a formality. Real appology is to punish to people who comited that genocide. As far as ordinary people are concerned, least they can do is demand justice, is that too much to ask from you ELECTED government? Everyone is so concerned about reading something infront of a mictophone. 26 Years not a single convict. Convicts will die of old age and roads will be named after them and people who lost love ones will never get justice.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## LaBong

Gabbar said:


> You are missing the point. Its not about people or thier repreentative reading something from a letter and saying we are sorry. That is just a formality. Real appology is to punish to people who comited that genocide. As far as ordinary people are concerned, least they can do is demand justice, is that too much to ask from you ELECTED government? Everyone is so concerned about reading something infront of a mictophone. 26 Years not a single convict. Convicts will die of old age and roads will be named after them and people who lost love ones will never get justice.



I always have wondered, how Tytler couldn't be booked till today. I think recently he had been denied bail, don't know the recent updates.

I agree with you, if real culprits roams free, it's indeed a fail for all of us!


----------



## Rafi

My brother is married to a Sikh girl, there is some horrible stories of the pogrom after mrs gandhi was assasinated.


----------



## Avatar

Indian members stop wasting time over this petty thread. Blue Star is past and we are all over it. I dont understand how Pakistan's are so concerned when Sikhs themselves are over it. This is an attempt to break India's sovereignty, and such a thread has no right to exist. I would have no qualms in debating over this if a genuine Indian Sikh wished to discuss it. This forum is increasingly losing it's balance and Mod's are doing nothing about it. Indian members are banned the instant they talk about Balochistan, but Pakistani members can go on about anything starting from Khalistan to how Diwali is the worst festival in the world.


----------



## Rafi

It is a Pakistani site after all


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

most disturbing imagery


----------



## Water Car Engineer

Omg, you are allowed post such images, and dont act like these shameful things haven't happened in Pakistan.


----------



## U-571

Varghese said:


> Omg, you are allowed post such images, and dont act like these shameful things haven't happened in Pakistan.



so state sponcered butchering of pakistanis has never happened..


----------



## Kambojaric

what on earth are you guys doing???  This thread is sickening, seriously


----------



## Water Car Engineer

U-571 said:


> so state sponcered butchering of pakistanis has never happened..



Bro, are you serious? Please dont act like it never happened in your nation. Every nation has its shameful past.

1971 Bangladesh atrocities - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Much worse then anything Indians did to each other sense Independence, sorry.



> Yahya Khan to the journalist Robert Payne on 22 February 1971: "Kill three million of them, and the rest will eat out of our hands."



quote from the president of Pakistan at the time.


----------



## kashith

guys this is worse than trolling ...please stop!!! it is sickening , kuch to sharam karo yaar...jo khuda ko pyare ho gaye hai unki aise to photo mat lagao....


----------



## Water Car Engineer

*SinghIsKing*

You need to stop it....Seriously.


----------



## jayron

Gosh!! be sensitive , responsible and Don't get banned..


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

man, WTF. . .


----------



## U-571

guys please stop, its getting very sick man


----------

