Sikh To Death, a War nerd's tribute to Sikh warriors

[Pride]

See the thing is that the Punjab from '47-'66 was just about 50% Punjabi. It included regions of now Haryana and HP.

There were 37% Sikhs but if you are considering Punabi speaking people then it is true.

Punjabis wanted a state that correctly identified with this issue. Whats the harm in asking your state's boundaries to be correctly demarcated?

Here we are really struggling to know exact issues. My point is that few Sikh leaders want separate land or autonomy for Sikhs only state. I am intereseted to know what were actually the problems. There would be some 10-15 state division is going on currently everyone has their few valid points. Do you suggest the same for those states? I see most of them is for political benefit.

Tamils had a state out of Madras and so did many others, but why not a Punjab just for the speakers of the language? Add to this the fact that Nehru promised a greater autonomic region and you had a dissatisfied lot.

We can't compare Tamil an Punjab as Tamilians were not migrated from partitioned side, If you want to compare then Bengal could be better choice. If I discuss even the same then Madras state was quadrifurcated in 1953 so will you say that rest of the state and their linguistic people faced discrimination for some 6 years or Telangana who are trying to be separate from AP have discrimination for some 63 years. As everyone is talking about autonomy declared by Nehru then there were plenty of decisions Nehru took wrong. we being nationalistics can't beat the drum for the same.
Regarding autonomy, Please read
SikhSpectrum.com Monthly Punjab and Autonomy

While whole article is worth reading, I am mentioning few main lines. Where is this autonomy word is used or written:-

"The contemporary historians have done their best to obscure and confuse. The promise that they will not write a Constitution disagreeable to Sikhs is on the record. On July 7, 1946, the Statesman reported Nehru's statement, which he made at the Congress convention in Bombay, saying:

I see nothing wrong in an area and a set-up in the North wherein the Sikhs can also experience the glow of freedom.

What exactly did these words mean? Did this statement constitute a promise? We know how vehemently Nehru subsequently opposed the Sikh demand for a linguistic State, calling it separatist, anti-national and communal.

"

I dont have an e-book, man. The book's fairly recent. So i am not sure if an e-book exists.

No probs buddy, I will try to search the same but let me clear it one more time here. I am writing all this on such issue as I have discussion on this with Pro and anti type of people but when we discussed we found there were many misconceptions and not all then some wounds heal. Hence I am critic here only and not any sort of Anti.

 

[ps80]

Could you please explain the reasons for Punjabi Suba, if that was not for religion biased? My knowledge says only few Sikh leader wants autonomy for the state only to practise their faith. Even in '66 the decision for trifurcation of Punjab was done to increase % of Sikhs in existing Punjab.

Maharaja Ranjit Singh was great warrior, king and leader irrespective of religions and there were other Sikh warriors as well. We are not discussing about them. We are discussing here to understand what kind of mistakes happened from both side which we never repeat again future.



These border areas many times get exchanged and some times remain bone of contention. Belgaum is one of those disputed area even today between Karnataka and Maharashtra. So should this be taken again against Marathi pride??

The point is that border area exchange normally done on the basis of mutual understanding of state governments and then approval of Central government. Kerala and TN did, TN and AP did while MH and KA still have so no one sided injustice here.

Regarding "under existing constitution", Migration of Punjabi speaking people from other area is ill-logical anf wrong on Human ground basis.
According to this theory, Many Punjabi expeaking people who migrated from other side of Pakistan to settle in capital in '47 should be migrated again to Punjab in 1973 leaving all their home and business. Do you expect people do it after so many years??

1.This article has some brief info about the Punjabi Suba Movement and some of your questions:
SikhSpectrum.com Monthly. The Sikh separatist movement and the Indian state: A retrospect </font>

2. Migration of Punjabi speaking people issue is irrelevant to our discussion about the Punjabi Suba. Indians can migrate anywhere in India including Punjab. The concept of a separate Punjabi Suba was not at all against the non-Punjabi speaking people that were living in the then Punjab. They didn't have to leave Punjab because of that. Similarly, there was no need to migrate the Punjabi speaking people from the other Indian states. As I said before, anyone can live anywhere in India including Punjab irrespective of their religion and language.

 

[Pride]

1.This article has some brief info about the Punjabi Suba Movement and some of your questions:
SikhSpectrum.com Monthly. The Sikh separatist movement and the Indian state: A retrospect </font>

Thanks for sharing, I read the article which still clears my stand on two points as per the reference I mentioned above from same website.
1) Nehru never said about autonomy and his statements were taken only in this aspects.
2) This was again more religious issue and not linguistic. The only part where language played role when Hindus accepted Hindi over GuruMukhi.

Few more points for such issues mentioned in this article:-
1) Chandigarh was bone of contention between Haryana and Chandigarh which again looked as conspiracy against Punjab. While Mr Ahluwalia mentioned Madras for TN, Bombay for Maharashtra and Shimla for Himachal, He forgot to add that except Bombay, no other capital was on border of 2 states except Bombay. This was only victim card play by leaders nothing else, my POV.

2) Water division issue: This isssue always stay in world whether you bring 2 states or 2 nations. So again similar Congress agains Sikhs card here by Akali Dal.

2. Migration of Punjabi speaking people issue is irrelevant to our discussion about the Punjabi Suba. Indians can migrate anywhere in India including Punjab. The concept of a separate Punjabi Suba was not at all against the non-Punjabi speaking people that were living in the then Punjab. They didn't have to leave Punjab because of that. Similarly, there was no need to migrate the Punjabi speaking people from the other Indian states. As I said before, anyone can live anywhere in India including Punjab irrespective of their religion and language.

I am reiterating here 2 points of Anandpur resolution:-
1.The transfer of the federally administered city of Chandigarh to Punjab.
2.The transfer of Punjabi speaking and contiguous areas to Punjab.

Punjab was always complex state to handle with whether it was Partition or whether it was trifurcation of the same as in earlier case Muslim-Hindu-Sikh were so mingled in different part of states to break it in 2 way and later the same was with Hindu-Sikh population in the state. The demand of something separate based on religion or langauge can easily be seen against Hindus. This is the reason GoI has so much difficulty while they awarded separate Punjabi Suba to award sikh warriors of 1965 war. If you see from others POV then it was not that wrong happened to start a K movement.

 

[ps80]

Thanks for sharing, I read the article which still clears my stand on two points as per the reference I mentioned above from same website.
1) Nehru never said about autonomy and his statements were taken only in this aspects.
2) This was again more religious issue and not linguistic. The only part where language played role when Hindus accepted Hindi over GuruMukhi.

If you consider autonomy to be equivalent to a separate state/area for only Sikhs based on religion, I would say your PoV is wrong. This was never asked for, and was not promised.

You accepted, however partially, that language played a role. I would not argue on the issue of Punjabi Hindus accepting Hindi over their mother tounge Punjabi, however, that issue played a big role in this whole event. Did you read the paragraphs under "Imposition of Hindi in Punjab" in the article.

....was still a religious issue? care to explain?

Few more points for such issues mentioned in this article:-
1) Chandigarh was bone of contention between Haryana and Chandigarh which again looked as conspiracy against Punjab. While Mr Ahluwalia mentioned Madras for TN, Bombay for Maharashtra and Shimla for Himachal, He forgot to add that except Bombay, no other capital was on border of 2 states except Bombay. This was only victim card play by leaders nothing else, my POV.

I disagree with your PoV, but I wouldn't argue further on this. I see victim as a victim.

2) Water division issue: This isssue always stay in world whether you bring 2 states or 2 nations. So again similar Congress agains Sikhs card here by Akali Dal.

There are some legitimate rules (Riparian water rights) that are used mostly across the world, and in India too. Akali Dal proposed Congress to follow these rules. That's it. Who was playing religion card here?

I am reiterating here 2 points of Anandpur resolution:-
1.The transfer of the federally administered city of Chandigarh to Punjab.
2.The transfer of Punjabi speaking and contiguous areas to Punjab.

Punjab was always complex state to handle with whether it was Partition or whether it was trifurcation of the same as in earlier case Muslim-Hindu-Sikh were so mingled in different part of states to break it in 2 way and later the same was with Hindu-Sikh population in the state. The demand of something separate based on religion or langauge can easily be seen against Hindus. This is the reason GoI has so much difficulty while they awarded separate Punjabi Suba to award sikh warriors of 1965 war. If you see from others POV then it was not that wrong happened to start a K movement.

Again, I disagree with you here. The demand of the Punjabi Suba was not based on religion.

 

[Pride]

If you consider autonomy to be equivalent to a separate state/area for only Sikhs based on religion, I would say your PoV is wrong. This was never asked for, and was not promised.

Again same on my stance, No discussion of autonomy was discussion. I am still searching for your POV of asking for Punjabi Suba when religion was not involved in this or why trifurcation was done for Punjab??

You accepted, however partially, that language played a role. I would not argue on the issue of Punjabi Hindus accepting Hindi over their mother tounge Punjabi, however, that issue played a big role in this whole event. Did you read the paragraphs under "Imposition of Hindi in Punjab" in the article.

....was still a religious issue? care to explain?

There was never imposition of Hindi was planned. It was few politicians idea to have Hindi as National language which never happened even today. Punjab was not only state who has to follow the same. This was an issue which created havoc not only in Punjab but more impacted in South India. When all these issues happened government added 14 regional languages including Gurumukhi as National language. The support or rejection of few people on this issue does not matter for separate.

I disagree with your PoV, but I wouldn't argue further on this. I see victim as a victim.

No probs buddy, I respect your POV and stance.

There are some legitimate rules (Riparian water rights) that are used mostly across the world, and in India too. Akali Dal proposed Congress to follow these rules. That's it. Who was playing religion card here?

Quick cross question, The same is true with Krishna and Kaveri water issue between different states. What is your stand?? are you going to blame Congress/Central government for the same?

Again, I disagree with you here. The demand of the Punjabi Suba was not based on religion.

PS80, I will not discuss all these issues further because moreover we are reiterating same and same thing. The aim of discussion was to understand each other's POV. My stance is clear from the start of this topic. While I see there were some leader's who framed stories to normal public in Punjab saying that congress didn't do this didn't do that and finally which has been colored as religion base separate nation's demand. While I admit there were some issues which if could taken properly from both the parties, No such dark history take place but nonetheless we are happy now and now lead to happy and prosperous Nation. Jai Hind!!

 

[ps80]

Again same on my stance, No discussion of autonomy was discussion. I am still searching for your POV of asking for Punjabi Suba when religion was not involved in this or why trifurcation was done for Punjab?

After partition, majority of Muslim population migrated from Indian side of Punjab. When other states were being organized based on linguistic principles, in the Punjab region many Punjabi Hindus refused to disclose their mother tounge as Punjabi. Who was left then - Sikhs (majority was Sikhs, although I believe there were some Hindus and Muslims as well). If Sikhs ask for a legitimate demand which others refused to be part of (by accepting Hindi over Punjabi), you see Sikhs playing a religion card?

There was never imposition of Hindi was planned. It was few politicians idea to have Hindi as National language which never happened even today. Punjab was not only state who has to follow the same. This was an issue which created havoc not only in Punjab but more impacted in South India. When all these issues happened government added 14 regional languages including Gurumukhi as National language. The support or rejection of few people on this issue does not matter for separate.

If this is just your PoV, then I respectfully disagree. But if this is what you are claiming to be true, do provide some unbiased proof/evidence to support it.

Quick cross question, The same is true with Krishna and Kaveri water issue between different states. What is your stand?? are you going to blame Congress/Central government for the same?

I don't know much about Krishna-Kaveri issue. All I was saying that there are some reasonable rules or principles that are used worldwide to resolve water issues between states and countries. Isn't the Central Govt. the decision maker here, and if they discrimate among states, then they should be blamed.

PS80, I will not discuss all these issues further because moreover we are reiterating same and same thing. The aim of discussion was to understand each other's POV. My stance is clear from the start of this topic. While I see there were some leader's who framed stories to normal public in Punjab saying that congress didn't do this didn't do that and finally which has been colored as religion base separate nation's demand. While I admit there were some issues which if could taken properly from both the parties, No such dark history take place but nonetheless we are happy now and now lead to happy and prosperous Nation. Jai Hind!!

Yes and my PoV has also been very clear on this topic.

I would agree that both parties were responsible for the mess-up, but I would still hold the Central Govt. more responsible as they were the decision makers and some of their decisions were very discriminatory vis-a-vis Punjab. Politics is a dirty game!


Cheers!!

 

[Pride]

After partition, majority of Muslim population migrated from Indian side of Punjab. When other states were being organized based on linguistic principles, in the Punjab region many Punjabi Hindus refused to disclose their mother tounge as Punjabi. Who was left then - Sikhs (majority was Sikhs, although I believe there were some Hindus and Muslims as well). If Sikhs ask for a legitimate demand which others refused to be part of (by accepting Hindi over Punjabi), you see Sikhs playing a religion card?



If this is just your PoV, then I respectfully disagree. But if this is what you are claiming to be true, do provide some unbiased proof/evidence to support it.



I don't know much about Krishna-Kaveri issue. All I was saying that there are some reasonable rules or principles that are used worldwide to resolve water issues between states and countries. Isn't the Central Govt. the decision maker here, and if they discrimate among states, then they should be blamed.



Yes and my PoV has also been very clear on this topic.

I would agree that both parties were responsible for the mess-up, but I would still hold the Central Govt. more responsible as they were the decision makers and some of their decisions were very discriminatory vis-a-vis Punjab. Politics is a dirty game!


Cheers!!

As I already said, No further discussion from my side on this topic hence I respect your POV and ends here.. Cheers!!

 

[rubyjackass]

If you did not like this article, you did not get it right!

 

[Gabbar]

Regarding the boldest parts, this is really a sorry post coming from you, seems it's true what they say about sikhs living in Canada.

It has nothing to do where I live now, I would have same opinion if I was India at this moment. I love India and I have 4'x6' indian flag on my wall hanging at this moment.

1. This is the first time I have heard from someone that sikhs are not allowed or facing issues practising their religion. I'm not sure you're familiar with ground realities in India living in Canada and all, but sikhs are the most well off community in India with most key military and political positions in their hand. Also what's with 'we brought freedom to India' syndrome? You even claimed 90&#37; of sacrifices are made by Sikhs, where did you get that statistics? With all my respect to Sikhs, don't you think you're degrading the contribution of Bengalis and Marathis and mostly people from everywhere in India to independence? Do you even know how many of them died and what was their losses? Ask anyone in south and east India, he/she will tell you after independence for most of the years GoI spent all his resource for well-keeping of north and north west India leaving the south and east states to feel deserted, and here you're ranting about sikhs not getting their due. Stop being a supremacist, not suitable for a multi-ethnic nation.

I dont know how long you been here but I have discussed this before, why Sikhs are forced register thier marriges under Hindu marrige act? Why, in the Indian constitution, Sikhs are considered part of Hinduism? About the satistics, check how many people were sent "Kala Pani" and how many of them we Sikhs. How many people were hanged and how many were from Punjab.

2. About the second point, it's better to let a patriotic Sikh to reply you than me. Everyone knows how much they are respected in India, if they still feel grudge or want some kinda special status for them, what we in East and South should really do? Shoot the northies and blow up movie halls showing Hindi movies which typically portrays Bengalis and Tamils as comic relief! Gosh, and you all throw your tantrum to thakray clan when they beat up people from other states!

That particuar movie that you are talking about is beyond making fun of Sikhs, I dont know how to explain to you that how much that movie offended sikhs. "Babes" dancing on religious hims, a Sikh girl marrying a Muslim, a baptized sikh having sex with another women etc.


Sikhs&#8230;&#8230;Non-Sikhs&#8230;Total

Hanged &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;. : 93&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..28&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;121
Imprisoned for life (KALA PANI) 2147&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;499&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..2646
Killed at Jalianwala Bagh 799&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.501&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..1300
Killed at Budge Budge Ghat 67&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..46&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;113
Killed in Kooka Movement 91&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;. &#8212;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..91
Killed in Akali Movement 5 00&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8212;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;500
Grand Total 3697&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..1074&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..4771






LINKS:

Kala Paani account by Baba Visaakha Singh

http://www.nriinternet.com/INDIA/States/Punjab/2009/Dec/02/index.htm

 

[LaBong]

It has nothing to do where I live now, I would have same opinion if I was India at this moment. I love India and I have 4'x6' indian flag on my wall hanging at this moment.





That particuar movie that you are talking about is beyond making fun of Sikhs, I dont know how to explain to you that how much that movie offended sikhs. "Babes" dancing on religious hims, a Sikh girl marrying a Muslim, a baptized sikh having sex with another women etc.


Sikhs&#8230;&#8230;Non-Sikhs&#8230;Total

Hanged &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;. : 93&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..28&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;121
Imprisoned for life (KALA PANI) 2147&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;499&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..2646
Killed at Jalianwala Bagh 799&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.501&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..1300
Killed at Budge Budge Ghat 67&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..46&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;113
Killed in Kooka Movement 91&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;. &#8212;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..91
Killed in Akali Movement 5 00&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8212;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;500
Grand Total 3697&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..1074&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..4771






LINKS:

Kala Paani account by Baba Visaakha Singh

Punjab News, NRI News

Gabbar, first of all let me apologize for my juvenile emotional outburst. Had my people been killed in a similar manner I would have reacted in a same way. Hope some day Sikhs will get their justice due and those culprit will be sent to gallows. If only we could have undone what was done. Bloody politicians!

Here is a more comprehensive list of independence struggle activists:

Indian independence activists - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia