What's new

Khalistan Movement

I'm just questioning your founding theory. That if it were valid, then your nation wouldn't have split into two parts in 1971 because of your ideological differences
to question it you first need to understand it
and again fall of dacca was not due to ideological difference but due to minority dominance and ethnic nationalism
further i suggest you to seperately read "Ideologism" it might enlighten you about Ideologies and theories and how they are supposed to work
I might have been responding to someone else in this thread, when a topic different to Khalistan was breached. I suggest you take some time to read this entire thread
i dont have much curiosity to do so
i simply observe the forum , check my alerts and join threads in which i am mentioned or interested
i have not replied and nor do i ever reply to comments not intended for me
 
to question it you first need to understand it
and again fall of dacca was not due to ideological difference but due to minority dominance and ethnic nationalism
further i suggest you to seperately read "Ideologism" it might enlighten you about Ideologies and theories and how they are supposed to work

The ideological difference between East and West Pakistan was that religion can supersede ethnicity.

And we all know what happened in 1971 as a result of this.

i dont have much curiosity to do so
i simply observe the forum , check my alerts and join threads in which i am mentioned or interested
i have not replied and nor do i ever reply to comments not intended for m

You were accusing me of jumping from one topic to another without bothering to see that I was only responding to someone else who had changed the topic from Khalistan.

Accusations without proper investigation, can never sustain arguments.
 
http://www.dawn.com/news/1296424/sikhs-unburden-themselves-at-guru-nanaks-birthplace

SAHER BALOCH — UPDATED about 9 hours ago

While sermons at the 547th birth anniversary celebration of Guru Nanak at Gurdwara Janamsthan Nankana Sahib asked people to reflect and ensure kindness under any circumstances, creation of Khalistan, a separate homeland for Sikhs, remained the main topic of discussion among the Sikh representatives.

Thousands of Sikh pilgrims from the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Malaysia, Iran and Kenya seemed overwhelmed by the prospect of visiting Nankana — the birthplace of Sikhism’s founding father.

Inside the Gurdwara, most people from the older generation were busy listening to Sikh representatives. One after the other, the speakers, largely belonging to Pakistan’s Sikh Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee, spoke of injustices against the Sikhs, human rights violations and the increasing drug menace in India’s Punjab state.

Others went on an anti-India vitriol, but at the same time called upon the Pakistani authorities to set up more Gurdwaras for the 20,000-strong Sikh community living in this country. Banners near the pilgrims’ sleeping quarters reminded them about the riots and killings of Sikhs that rocked India in 1984.

Even before the celebrations began on Monday, there was talk at the Gurdwara for the inclusion of two issues in the religious sermons. One relates to the water dispute between the Indian states of Punjab and Haryana and the other to the cancellation of a meeting of Sikh religious representatives that was to be held in both Pakistan and India on Nov 10. It was cancelled after some delegates were arrested in Amritsar. They intended to discuss the Sikh freedom movement and the increasing trend of suicide among farmers in East Punjab and other Indian states.

“These problems faced by our community in India won’t go away until we do something about it. We need to separate if we want to remain relevant,” said a member of the Gurdwara committee, Gopal Singh Chawla.

As majority of pilgrims listening to him remained hesitant and didn’t seem as emotional when he raised slogans of a separate homeland for Sikhs in India, Chawla decided to announce his resignation from the post and left the podium amid blank stares.

Parminder Kaur, 76, a national of the United Kingdom, is visiting Pakistan for the second time to attend the birth anniversary of Guru Nanak at Gurdwara Janamsthan. Sitting at the back in the same veranda, she shakes her head from time to time. “What’s the point of using a religious platform for your own political aims?”

Armed with pictures of her ancestral home in Faisalabad Chak 106, she says that there is “no need to listen to those who don’t have to face the consequences of their speech. Vulnerable communities in both countries continue to face trouble because of well-timed speeches”.

With tensions rising between India and Pakistan, this year the number of pilgrims coming from India is fewer than last year, says Joga Singh, a representative of the Pakistan Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee in Britain .

“There’s been a considerable difference due to tensions. There are always other reasons. For instance, people still use passport of their place of birth while being a UK national. And their visas get rejected as a result of it. But the absence of direct flights from India and a general fear of being mistreated kept people away this time around,” he added.

Joga Singh himself has not been to India since leaving for Britain in 1981. In addition, his constant campaigning for a separate Sikh homeland ensured that he never gets an Indian visa. “This is how it is everywhere in the world. People like me have to look for places where we can speak our mind. The world is quite similar that way,” he added.

A mile away from the Gurdwara, at the sleeping quarters meant for Indian Sikhs coming from the UK, Canada and the US, Manmohan Singh Johal, said Pakistan was his home.

“I don’t care what is said at the event. I heard these people give the same speech every year. It depends on us what we want. I told my children back in the UK that I will visit Pakistan for Baba’s jayanti (birthday) this time. This makes it my first visit to Pakistan in about 40 years,” he added calmly.

Johal’s father, a resident of Faisalabad’s Chak 101, left Pakistan for Jalandhar, India, in 1947. Later he left India for the UK during the 1960s in search of a job and stayed there.

“There’s so much fear-mongering on both sides, especially the media, that one feels overwhelmed. For the first time in years, I took a round of Lahore’s inner city on a whim on Saturday. I cried later. There’s so much I missed all these years,” he said as hymns echoed from the main hall of the Gurdwara.

Published in Dawn, November 15th, 2016
 
pakistani's sure do love their conspiracy theories.....

Not all Indians stupid idiot. Those good looking people are only 3-6% of your population at the NW.

They are the least Indian among you. I'm tired of explaining this to you idiots.

The core genepool of Indians is the rotten Dravidian core of Central, Deccan and South India.

Rotten "dravidian" and south india ???

so why arent people like this are banned ??? hardcore racist comments
 
Rotten "dravidian" and south india ???

so why arent people like this are banned ??? hardcore racist comments

Indians are some of the most racist people the world has ever known. You treat Africans like $hit. You deserve no better.
 
there is nothing wrong if states wants to be seprate from indian union its just democracy do and i am sure world biggest democracy wont have any problem since they cant manage its people 70% population are below the poverty line.

nice job. In one sentence you have demonstrated how ignorance of what a democracy is, what poverty is and what Indian state of economy is. I think you are qualified to succeed Sartaj Aziz as advisor to your government.

I read that almost 20% of officers in Indian military are Sikhs. Since Sikhs constitute only 3% of India's population, this tells me that Sikhs are passionate about protecting India.

That makes the Khalistan movement a fringe clique of extremists and this thread simply a mischievous attempt by Pak cyber warriors. As usual bot failed.
 
nice job. In one sentence you have demonstrated how ignorance of what a democracy is, what poverty is and what Indian state of economy is. I think you are qualified to succeed Sartaj Aziz as advisor to your government.

I read that almost 20% of officers in Indian military are Sikhs. Since Sikhs constitute only 3% of India's population, this tells me that Sikhs are passionate about protecting India.

That makes the Khalistan movement a fringe clique of extremists and this thread simply a mischievous attempt by Pak cyber warriors. As usual bot failed.
isnt it amazing that everything which is morally correct hurt you guys. you have to accept it that no one in the world humiliate anyones holliest place and HINDU did, not by removing shoes to enter or saying bad words but killing kids women elderly people inside Golden temple. Now Hindus are only compensating Sikhs so they forget what happend there.
you are claiming and talking so much but never implement india is hindu state accept it even by force Sikhs are hindus category by constitution.
 
???????????????????????????
do read urself before posting sir

I do.

Ideological difference between your former East and West wings, was that religion could supersede ethnicity. 1971 only proved that difference beyond any doubt whatsoever.

If you read what I wrote carefully, you'll understand the import.

can not agree more but just realize where it started and where it is now

Again at the risk of sounding repetitive, I was only responding to someone else.
 
Ideological difference between your former East and West wings, was that religion could supersede ethnicity. 1971 only proved that difference beyond any doubt whatsoever
what i got from ur post is that the Bangalis and Pakistanis where different at ideology
while if u read the history they took the step because we denied them their rights
where can you deduce from it that the ideology was fluctuated?
what one should do is not go in absolute depth and first go to the reality and will realize that it was from the beginning was an administrative issue since 1951
plz not for you as you are a perfect intellectual go online search the topid Ideologism read it than the hstory of fall of dhakka
not for u for me
Again at the risk of sounding repetitive, I was only responding to someone else
should hve quoted me seperately
then again not our fault is it?
but just see the curves of the snake
 
what i got from ur post is that the Bangalis and Pakistanis where different at ideology
while if u read the history they took the step because we denied them their rights
where can you deduce from it that the ideology was fluctuated?
what one should do is not go in absolute depth and first go to the reality and will realize that it was from the beginning was an administrative issue since 1951
plz not for you as you are a perfect intellectual go online search the topid Ideologism read it than the hstory of fall of dhakka
not for u for me

One ideological difference between East and West Pakistan was that West Pakistan wanted to impose a uniform language namely Urdu, in both the wings. West Pakistan thought that one national language should override the native language of East Pakistan. Whereas East Pakistan didn't think it necessary to have Urdu imposed on them to incorporate themselves into one nation, but that they could retain their native tongue of Bengali and still be part of one nation.

Ring any bells?

should hve quoted me seperately
then again not our fault is it?
but just see the curves of the snake

I didn't quote you at all. Was quoting someone else, when you barged in on that. Please go thru the rest of the thread to bring clarity to your own self.
 
One ideological difference between East and West Pakistan was that West Pakistan wanted to impose a uniform language namely Urdu, in both the wings. West Pakistan thought that one national language should override the native language of East Pakistan. Whereas East Pakistan didn't think it necessary to have Urdu imposed on them to incorporate themselves into one nation, but that they could retain their native tongue of Bengali and still be part of one nation.

Ring any bells?
and ask yourself how does it negates Two-Nation theory?
in the constitution of 1962 Urdu and Bengali both were given National Language status
but still the point was validated after 1970 election
I didn't quote you at all. Was quoting someone else, when you barged in on that. Please go thru the rest of the thread to bring clarity to your own self.
you quoted me i replied
end of confusion
 
and ask yourself how does it negates Two-Nation theory?
in the constitution of 1962 Urdu and Bengali both were given National Language status
but still the point was

It was in 1948 that Urdu was imposed on East Pakistan, by your founding father, which led to agitation there. You cannot manipulate history according to your own needs.

you quoted me i replied
end of confusion

It was the other way round, end of story.
 
It was in 1948 that Urdu was imposed on East Pakistan, by your founding father, which led to agitation there. You cannot manipulate history according to your own needs
that is exactly what i am trying to say since the beginning of your objections
how does linguistic difference amounts to flaw in Two Nation theory?
It was the other way round, end of story
glad the story is ending
 
that is exactly what i am trying to say since the beginning of your objections
how does linguistic difference amounts to flaw in Two Nation theory?

glad the story is ending

Two nation theory espoused that Islam would be able to overcome all other differences between Muslims of the subcontinent, be it ethnic, cultural or linguistic, and Islam would solely be able to bind them all together under one nation, separate from the Hindus of the subcontinent. 1971 exposed this theory in a completely brutal manner.

If you can't see the flaws in the theory even in light of this, then you obviously don't want to, for even more obvious reasons, and the story has ended before it began.
 
Back
Top Bottom