Leaderboard

whenever you get Congressis talking about 2002 massacre of Muslims, and in reply when someone asks about 84 massacre of Sikhs by the congress, they will never admit that the congress was wrong. They will try to give a vague reply instead of a direct answer and suggest Sikhs should "move on". That's almost as outrageous as asking a victim of rape and violence to simply "move on" without punishing the guilty.

I personally think paki01 is now showing his true colours...first it was about getting in with the crowd with emphasizing one similarity...being panjabi..balle balle shava shava etc...now the inshallah etc is kickin in slowly.......us siks are very hospitable and a little naive to outsiders/strangers etc and welcome with open arms but sikh should not let their guard drop....paki01 cleary chooses who to answer to and who to ignore... sorry to say singh/kaurs this maybe a small and stupid example but this is how grooming and uni girls get trapped is fundementalist islamic preachers who chew and spit our sikh girls bodies...from a secondary source i hear very regulary the muslim guys would befriend male and females sikh as just friends and then these same sikhs will introduce them to a sikh girl for a "date"....im sure SA could shed some more light...

I was in a BBQ party today with Indian friends (I won't call them Hindu as some of them feel insulted being called as Hindu as they now know the real meaning of word "Hindu"), I was the only Sikh. Anyways, coming to the main point, the Oxford case was one of the main discussion points, and all of them were piss** off/frightened/annoyed with the whole Oxford incident. Some of them came to me saying "SardarJee, we need you again, the way Sikh Gurus and Sikhs saved our religion/culture 300-400 years ago, help us again in this foreign land from this another form of Islamic terror". I felt proud. Some of those Indian (Hindu) friends were so frightened that they were planning to go back to India. My message to them was teach your daughters/children your own culture/religion/language at home, spend maximum time with them, don't leave them alone and let them go over for any evening/night-outs with strangers. Fill Gursikhi in blood of your children, go with them to Gurudwaras on weekends and do SEWA with them.

i bet this cop never thought that one day these ssp's will want to kill me, when he was killing sikhs at their behest. On the one hand i want to say this guy got what he deserves, but on the other, it is good news that a middle-ranking officer has made these claims. It will help in the case against india's human rights abuses. If badal can give 1 crore to the family of that killer spy sarbjit singh, he should make the same gesture towards these 83 victims families as well. But i bet he wont.

Newly blessed Amritdharis from Mathaana, Madhya Pradesh! DHANN HAI TU DHANN DHANN DHANN KHALSA!!!!!

Lactose intolerance may also be a cultural thing. India is less intolerant than E. Asia and Africa but more than Europe. This may be because of culture, and also due to fact that many had nomadic ancestors who did/still do drink milk. You heard of lactose intolerance in Punjab where people drink milk straight from the cow? I've even read a lot of papers saying raw milk is one of the best foods for you but when milked from a healthy cow. edit - Are you also going to refuse dehi, roti (chappared with butter), kheer, paneer, etc.?

Punjab, WORLD | July 1, 2013, 7:11 pm Punjab Police Officer Admits Killing 83 in Fake Encounters Inspector Alleges Life Threat from KP GillBy: Sikh24 Editors AMRITSAR SAHIB (July 1, 2013)–An Amritsar Sahib based Punjab Police officer named Surjit “Singh” has admitted to killing over 83 people in police custody. Surjit alleged that during the Sikh Freedom movement in Punjab, the Punjab Police under the guidance of KP Gill had killed many in false encounters. Surjit has alleged that many of those killed in these encounters were actually innocent youth of Punjab who had no links to so-called “militant organisations”. In an interview by Day & Night News, the former officer admitted to having carried out the killings even though he was personally against such heinous crimes. Surjit alleged that he was promised promotions by the Punjab police to carry out such operations however such promises are not being kept today. He has also alleged that his life too is in danger now and he has requested the CBI to carry out a full investigation in this case and also provide him with security. Punjab Police officer Surjit singh (on right) has alleged he was asked by KP Gill to carry out fake encounters. Surjit has been serving the Punjab Police since November 1989. During his tenure there, he was often given a list of names that were to be picked up and eliminated. He alleged that if proper investigations are carried out, many other Punjab Police officers would be found guilty of committing the same crime as him. Human Rights Activist S. Jaswant Singh Khalra had unearthed proof of 25,000 illegal cremations just in Amritsar Sahib area. S. Khalra was later also abducted and eliminated by the Punjab Police under the orders of KP Gill. http://www.sikh24.com/2013/07/punjab-police-officer-admits-killing-83-in-fake-encounters/#.UdIdjDvviSo Sikh24 Editors can be reached at @

"Killings of Sikhs in 1984 was need of the hour." Tweet by Mr. Azhar, Congress leader and Gen. Sec. of NSUI (Student wing of Congress party) North West Distt. Mumbai. Shameless creatures, do not deserve to be called human. They will definitely pay for their sins. सिख दंगों को जरूरी बता कर फंसे कांग्रेस नेता नई दिल्ली ।। इशरत जहां एनकाउंटर केस के बहाने नरेंद्र मोदी को घेरने की कोशिश में एक कांग्रेस नेता ने न केवल वरिष्ठ बीजेपी नेताओं को समाजविरोधी करार दिया बल्कि 84 में हुए सिखों के नरसंहार को भी वक्त की जरूरत बता दिया। हालांकि, बाद में उन्होंने इस बयान पर सफाई देते हुए माफी भी मांगी। इशरत एनकाउंटर केस को लेकर सोशल साइटों पर भी माहौल गरमाया हुआ है। इसके पक्ष और विरोध में तीखी बहस चल रही है। इसी बहस के दौरान ट्विटर पर अजहर नाम के एक शख्स ने मोदी, आडवाणी, राजनाथ और सुषमा स्वराज का नाम लेते हुए उन्हें समाजविरोधी तत्व बता दिया। इसके जवाब में उनसे पूछा गया कि आप 84 में होने वाले 4000 सिखों के नरसंहार पर क्या कहेंगे जिसे राजीव गांधी ने 'जब बड़ा पेड़ गिरता है...' वाले बयान से सही ठहराने की कोशिश की थी? इस पर आईएम अजहर ने पूरी बेशर्मी से कहा, 'सिखों को मारना उस वक्त की जरूरत थी।' गौर करने की बात है कि यह अजहर कोई आम शख्स नहीं बल्कि कांग्रेस के एक नेता हैं। उनके ट्विटर अकाउंट पर दिए गए परिचय के मुताबिक वह एनएसयूआई के नॉर्थ-वेस्ट डिस्ट्रिक्ट मुंबई इकाई के महासचिव हैं। बहस में कांग्रेस के यह नेता यहीं नहीं रुके। जब उनके इस बयान की प्रतिक्रिया में उन्हें लोगों ने घेरते हुए कहा कि 'आपने अपना असली सांप्रदायिक, आपराधिक और हिंसक रूप दिखा दिया' तो उन्होंने जवाब में दलील दी कि स्वर्ण मंदिर में बैठे सिख कोई स्वतंत्रता सेनानी नहीं थे। वे सत्ता के लिए अपने ही देशवासियों से लड़ रहे थे।' बाद में जब उन पर चारों तरफ से हमला होने लगा और उनके लिए अपना बचाव करना मुश्किल होने लगा तो उन्होंने यह कहते हुए अपना बयान वापस ले लिया कि 'मैं 84 के सिख नरसंहार को गलती से ऑपरेशन ब्लू स्टार समझ बैठा था। माफ करें।' बाद में उन्होंने वे विवादास्पद ट्वीट भी डिलीट कर दिए। लेकिन तब तक मामला काफी आगे बढ़ चुका था। http://navbharattimes.indiatimes.com/photomazaashow/20945510.cms http://navbharattimes.indiatimes.com/india/national-india/Congress-leader-apologises-after-defending-84-sikh-riots/articleshow/20945082.cms#gads

....that's right, you got it one, it's the good old pakistani muslims again, who seem to think they have a monopoly on grooming and paedophilia in the UK. The religion of peace once again leads the way in grooming vulnerable young women. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-23079649 Oxford grooming sex case: Brothers jailed for life Two pairs of brothers are among five men jailed for life for their part in a sadistic sex grooming ring which abused children from Oxford. Mohammed Karrar, 38, of Kames Close, Oxford, will serve at least 20 years after being convicted of 18 offences including child rape and trafficking. Bassam Karrar, 34, of Hundred Acres Close, Oxford, will serve at least 15 years. Akhtar and Anjum Doghar were also jailed for life. Akhtar Doghar, 32, and Anjum Dogar, 31, of Tawney Street in Oxford, will each serve a minimum term of 17 years. The men were convicted of several counts of of rape, child prostitution and trafficking. Plied with alcohol Kamar Jamil, 27, was jailed for life with a minimum term of 12 years. Jamil, formerly of Aldrich Road, Oxford, was found guilty of five counts of rape, two counts of conspiracy to rape and one count of arranging child prostitution. Assad Hussain, 32, of Ashurst Way, Oxford, and Zeeshan Ahmed, 28, of Palmer Road, were both jailed for seven years after they were found guilty of two counts of sexual activity with a child. At the men's trial the court was told how six girls were drugged and suffered sadistic abuse while aged between 11 and 15. The victims were plied with alcohol and drugs before being forced to perform sex acts. Some had also been beaten, burnt and threatened. Nine men had denied charges including rape, arranging child prostitution and trafficking between 2004 and 2012. Judge Peter Rook, sentencing at the Old Bailey, praised the courage of the six victims in coming forward, saying the men had blighted the victims' lives and robbed them of their adolescence. He said: "These six girls [the victims] have shown enormous courage in coming to the Old Bailey to give evidence, knowing they would be accused of lying, knowing they would have to relive their ordeals, knowing they have not been believed in the past." Judge Rook said he hoped the victims' courage will act as a deterrent to other men but also ensure the appropriate authorities will not fail in future to take action in the face of such activity. He told Jamil and the Dogar brothers, who were convicted of abusing girl one: "You took her soul. She felt as though it had been ripped out. You put her parents through years of sheer torture."

I wish during this disgusting act some bhoot should have came in dead girl body to teach this rapist lesson of his life time by cutting his willy off or something. This disgusting person needs to be internally raped by spirits so that he feel the agony internally before going to hell and get raped there too after death.

the failure of Sikhs to called the indian govt and army a terrorist entity is one reason why no justice is being served even in the face of overwhelming evidence of human rights abuses and genocide. The day the Sikh community starts to view the Indian Hindustani establishment as a terrorist establishment its indian army a terrorist army and its rule illegal of the will of the Sikh nation then no justice will be served and freedom will not be achieved. So Sikhs as Sant ji said in 1980s you can have the slave mentality for as long as you live and live under the corrupt terrorist mafia indian rule or be free men and fight for whats right. Credit to sant ji and other shaheeds who gave their lives and stood by their words and deeds, the indian terrorists attacked our holiest shrine and murdered our people in the most horrific manor. Lest we forgive or forget.

raamakalee mehalaa 5 shha(n)tha Raamkalee, Fifth Mehla, Chhant: ik oa(n)kaar sathigur prasaadh || One Universal Creator God. By The Grace Of The True Guru: saajanarraa maeraa saajanarraa nikatt khaloeiarraa maeraa saajanarraa || Friend, my Friend - standing so near to me is my Friend! jaaneearraa har jaaneearraa nain aloeiarraa har jaaneearraa || Beloved, the Lord my Beloved - with my eyes, I have seen the Lord, my Beloved! nain aloeiaa ghatt ghatt soeiaa ath a(n)mrith pria goorraa || With my eyes I have seen Him, sleeping upon the bed within each and every heart; my Beloved is the sweetest ambrosial nectar. naal hova(n)dhaa lehi n saka(n)dhaa suaao n jaanai moorraa || He is with all, but he cannot be found; the fool does not know His taste. maaeiaa madh maathaa hoshhee baathaa milan n jaaee bharam dhharraa || Intoxicated with the wine of Maya, the mortal babbles on about trivial affairs; giving in to the illusion, he cannot meet the Lord. kahu naanak gur bin naahee soojhai har saajan sabh kai nikatt kharraa ||1|| Says Nanak, without the Guru, he cannot understand the Lord, the Friend who is standing near everyone. ||1|| gobi(n)dhaa maerae gobi(n)dhaa praan adhhaaraa maerae gobi(n)dhaa || God, my God - the Support of the breath of life is my God. kirapaalaa maerae kirapaalaa dhaan dhaathaaraa maerae kirapaalaa || Merciful Lord, my Merciful Lord - the Giver of gifts is my Merciful Lord. dhaan dhaathaaraa apar apaaraa ghatt ghatt a(n)thar sohaniaa || The Giver of gifts is infinite and unlimited; deep within each and every heart, He is so beautiful! eik dhaasee dhhaaree sabal pasaaree jeea ja(n)th lai mohaniaa || He created Maya, His slave, so powerfully pervasive - she has enticed all beings and creatures. jis no raakhai so sach bhaakhai gur kaa sabadh beechaaraa || One whom the Lord saves, chants the True Name, and contemplates the Word of the Guru's Shabad. kahu naanak jo prabh ko bhaanaa this hee ko prabh piaaraa ||2|| Says Nanak, one who is pleasing to God - God is very dear to him. ||2|| maano prabh maano maerae prabh kaa maano || I take pride, I take pride in God; I take pride in my God. jaano prabh jaano suaamee sugharr sujaano || Wise, God is wise; my Lord and Master is all-wise, and all-knowing. sugharr sujaanaa sadh paradhhaanaa a(n)mrith har kaa naamaa || All-wise and all-knowing, and forever supreme; the Name of the Lord is Ambrosial Nectar. chaakh aghaanae saarigapaanae jin kai bhaag mathhaanaa || Those who have such pre-ordained destiny recorded upon their foreheads, taste it, and are satisfied with the Lord of the Universe. thin hee paaeiaa thinehi dhhiaaeiaa sagal thisai kaa maano || They meditate on Him, and find Him; they place all their pride in Him. kahu naanak thhir thakhath nivaasee sach thisai dheebaano ||3|| Says Nanak, He is seated on His eternal throne; True is His royal court. ||3|| ma(n)galaa har ma(n)galaa maerae prabh kai suneeai ma(n)galaa || The song of joy, the Lord's song of joy; listen to the song of joy of my God. sohilarraa prabh sohilarraa anehadh dhhuneeai sohilarraa || The wedding song, God's wedding song; the unstruck sound current of His wedding song resounds. anehadh vaajae sabadh agaajae nith nith jisehi vadhhaaee || The unstruck sound current vibrates, and the Word of the Shabad resounds; there is continuous, continual rejoicing. so prabh dhhiaaeeai sabh kishh paaeeai marai n aavai jaaee || Meditating on that God, everything is obtained; He does not die, or come or go. chookee piaasaa pooran aasaa guramukh mil niraguneeai || Thirst is quenched, and hopes are fulfilled; the Gurmukh meets with the absolute, unmanifest Lord. kahu naanak ghar prabh maerae kai nith nith ma(n)gal suneeai ||4||1|| Says Nanak, in the Home of my God, the songs of joy are continuously, continually heard. ||4||1||

Are you also going to refuse dehi, roti (chappared with butter), kheer, paneer, etc.? No way i love it !! :biggrin2:

It may be mentioned that the Akali Dal had promised in its manifesto for the 1997 Assembly elections to order judicial probe into militancy which might have investigated this aspect also. However, Badal later backtracked from this promise. Rather several of the police officials whose names used to be linked to fake encounter and state repression came to be the favorites of the Badal government. - See more at: http://www.punjabnewsline.com/news/confession-on-fake-encounters-by-police-official-fails-to-create-stir-in-punjab/82305#sthash.dMHpYTwP.dpuf

Are either of you right in the head? No disrespect seriously, asking you're asking the same people who do these encounters up until today to help those they 'encountered'. Lol,

I have plenty of relative in my own family who are like this, in my case it is usually always women relatives. If I tie gol dastar, they think it look uneducated, or an open beard doesn't look sophisticated enough. For such relatives I have seen doing parchar to them is the best reply. When they say something Manmat, in reply say something Gurmat and suggest they also follow Gurmat by covering their heads, take Amrit and do Paath if they want their jeevan to be saffal.

your parents, like most parents, probably prioritize academic and career achievement along with rishtay over all else. if you can show them examples of singhs who have excelled and show them that sikhi will not harm your education they may calm down a bit. also, if you make a lot of changes all at once that may be too much for them. maybe introduce only one or two changes at a time after Amrit to ease them into it. people have something invested in you remaining how you always were. when you change it upsets the status quo and the fight to keep their investment safe. maybe they want to remain asleep in maya and seeing a gursikh bothers them. maybe its something else. but i've noticed people try to hold others back from changing almost always for petty reasons. ask yourself what worldly benefit will they get if i don't change? then you can show them, in a really clear way, that they can still get SOME of these benefits from you. and just brush under the rug the fact that some of those ''benefits'' they will never get from you again.

Tell Them your gonna cut your hair/beard, start drinking,smoking, drug dealing, never gonna work, start stealing and taking drugs or do they want you to stay the same wear a dhamalla and keep you beard open, that should do it and make them think, as for your aunt take no notice of here she should worry about her own family (without being disrespectful), keep your faith and path strong, you are a son to be proud of !! :biggrin2:

WaheguruJiKaKhalsa!!WaheguruJiKiFateh!! there is no prblem in wear a type of pagh, its upto you dont use fixo tell ur massi to shave her head she isnt worthy of keeping her hair - kidding dont be bothered - parents will be parents . let them do there stuff- nagg let urself do ur stuff - sikhi

Keep your head up by doing more paath. Not only will this increase your jeevan and give you more strength, but Satguru will also take away the bad attitudes around you. Satguru says don't pay attention to what others are saying. Acknowledge the person, but disregard what they are saying and keep your full faith on what Satguru is saying. If you engage in a discussion with your Massi, she will play many mind games as all Punjabis have been practicing their whole lives. So don't say a word and keep saying han ji, han ji, han ji. If she ask are you going to cut it now after all of her convincing be like Satguru will help in this matter. In other words, you need to build the patience and humility to stand up to what you are facing. Sounds odd because many times we are told to fight for what we believe in. But in these type of situations Satguru tells us to be patient and be humble. It seems as you are facing an outer battle with your massi and dad as they are telling you to do something against Satguru, but really you are facing an inner battle within yourself. Becoming angry and upset with them shows that you are lacking to some degree patience and humility. Cool the inner heat of the body by doing more paath and what they say will not bother you. Satguru will do his kirpa on you

It's kaljug, what else can we expect? The wise are called fools and the fools are called wise. Keep doing what you are doing, stay strong in your faith and principles and don't compromise them for anyone. Who knows, maybe one day your family may be inspired by you to change their ways. You never know when Guru Ji will choose to bestow his grace on someone.

Whatever it is, he meant ill for sikh kaum and being public figure or representing organization at any level should be held responsible.

i don't know why parents have a problem when their kids follow sikhi... they didn't have the guts to stand up for their religion atleast they shouldn't stop others from doing it...i am in the same trouble too...i haven't even yet took amrit and they are already making a big deal out of it... well for u brother, all i can say is don't listen to them. u are doing a very good thing...good luck

UNITED NATIONS ASKED TO PROBE KILLINGS OF SIKHS IN PUNJAB 6 July 2013 Khalsa Human Rights, the human rights wing of the Sikh Federation (UK), has written to Professor Christof Heyn, the UN Special Rapporteur on extra judicial, summary or arbitrary executions following the confession last week by Sub-Inspector Surjit Singh of the atrocities committed by him and security forces in Punjab in the early 1990s. Surjit Singh who has gone into hiding since his confession has claimed to have killed 83 Sikhs in false encounters on the orders of Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Paramjit Singh Gill. He has stated that he did not know if the young men were guilty or innocent, and they were killed unlawfully: ‘The guilty were killed, and innocent [young men] were also brought to me to be killed. I didn’t know whether they were guilty or innocent, but I was told to kill them regardless.’ In a subsequent interview he also revealed that senior officials threatened that he would meet the same end as human rights defender Jaswant Singh Khalra, who was illegally detained and murdered by Punjab Police for investigating secret mass cremations. He stated that senior officials told him: ‘If you open your mouth, then like Jaswant Singh Khalra who was investigating the 25,000 missing bodies, and went missing himself—the same will happen to you.’ A Khalsa Human Rights spokesman said: ‘We understand human rights activist Kirpal Singh Randhawa has said that the Punjab and Haryana High Court would be approached to obtain a CBI investigation into the matter.’ ‘However, we do not think India can conduct an independent and impartial investigation into the atrocities that will result in the identification and prosecution of responsible police officers.’ ‘We have therefore written to the UN Special Rapporteur who has recently criticised India to ensure international pressure is exerted on India.’ Bhai Amrik Singh, the Chair of the Sikh Federation (UK) added: ‘From what Surijit Singh has described these are clear cases of extrajudicial and arbitrary executions that are illegal and without due regard to the law or legal procedure as defined by the United Nations.’ ‘Khalsa Human Rights are waiting for further information from lawyers and human rights activists about the 83 Sikh killed before submitting the Model Questionnaire developed by the Special Rapporteur as there is no need to exhaust domestic remedies in India before taking the matter to the United Nations.’ Jaspal Singh Co-ordinator, Khalsa Human Rights

Not only this particular case, but the phase of false/fake encounters (1978 to 1999), where in all illegal-abductions & detentions, custodial torture, enforced disappearances, arbitrary executions, secret & false stories of escapes from police custody, blatant use of laws of TADA & POTA, rapes, murder, kidnappings & extortions by the police/third agency/ alam-sena/KPS/Sumed/etc. should also be probed & taken to the ICJ (Int'l Court of Justice)

Here we go again! Shere Panjab over a generation ago highlighted the issues of grooming, paedophilia, under age sex, call it what you want it's rape against a child! Other issues are what were the Police, CPS & Social Services doing during this time when these problems were first highlighted of gangs of Pakistani Moslems targeting children for sex? Did you know for each child in care is worth £250,000 per year to a private company - what the hell where they spending the money on certainly not on 'child care'? I call for a full judge lead Independent judiciary enquiry. Anyone in positions of power who failed to take action, turned a blind eye to the victims, are to be arrested charged with neglect, failing to uphold the duties expected of them in the office they, stripped of their pensions and ultimately jailed. Enough is enough, every day I am hearing from the media about Police corruption and or perverting the course of justice for e.g. phone hacking, Hillsborough, those in positions (BBC -Jimmy Saville) turning a blind eye to countless allegations, don't forget Blair Peach, Stephen Lawrence, deaths in custody, rogue undercover police agents! The Chief Constable of Oxford Police should resign, aswell as the Chief Executive of Oxford Council, the head of the CPS and the head of social services, then tried in court, jailed for neglect and struck off so they never hold such important positions again. Contact your local MP today calling for a full judge lead independent judiciary enquiry now, I have. At this point in time it suits the authorities to side with the Islamist hence other minorities concerns go unnoticed. This site is monitored by the authorities this I have no doubt. It is also suspected that Anjem Choudary is a double agent (MI5 informant) which begs the question who are you Pakistani Punjabi? So Sikhs there is no need to denigrate Islam or Moslems. You are looking at jail time if proven in a court of law you have made defamatory racist remark, look what happened to the true Sikhs of Leicester who prevented the rape of a minor, who sides did the authorities take, where did the resources go? I suggest sing the praises of Sikhism. As Caryle stated, "No lie can live forever", which brings me to the next point. A day of reckoning is now upon the Police, time and time again it has been proven that the Police served themselves rather than the good people of Britain. There has been widespread corruption, lies, murder, etc etc and a failure to uphold the duties bestowed upon them (tackling grooming gangs).This has now been acknowledged by the British Government. Before a blind eye used to be turned but with the seriousness of the allegations and the public now armed with the Internet the rules of the game have changed. The Police themselves will go public and apologize for their past crimes and set in motion the prosecution of current & historical crimes committed by the police themselves. This will be unique in the sense high ranking police officials will find themselves in the dock. After this the CPS will be next in line as they on many occasions failed to prosecute, take for example ‘Officer E’ identified as the most likely suspect who killed Blair Peach on St. Georges day 1979. The CPS will come under fire in failing to bring paedophile rings to justice for over a generation. Watch this space!!! Long Live The Khalsa

http://www.hindustantimes.com/editorial-views-on/BarkhaDutt/It-s-a-dirty-business/Article1-1087835.aspx Its a Dirty Business In a country that gave (rightly so) even Ajmal Kasab the benefit of due process, the chilling CBI account, if true, of how a 19-year-old young woman was abducted, drugged and killed in a staged shootout that saw 70 bullets pumped into her and three others, should shame us all. Not because of the gigantic political ramifications of a case which books seven of Gujarat's top police officers and raises se rious questions about the culpability of intelligence officials in what the CBI argues is planted evidence, but because while the BJP and the Congress slug it out, the real revelation of the Ishrat Jahan controversy is India's wider culture of tolerance, even endorsement, of fake 'encounters'. While Ishrat's case has provoked a high-decibel media focus, this same week a sub-inspector (SI) in Punjab should have made headlines, but didn't. The SI from Tarn Taran - once a minefield of militant activity - suddenly announced that he had eliminated 83 people in encounters, several of which were planned set-ups done on the orders of his superiors. In police folklore though, till Surjit Singh broke his silence (the police argued that he'd had too much to drink when he made the statement), he was somewhat of a local hero. By his own admission, he was promoted on a fast track. Similarly, Maharashtra's police force spawned a whole generation of 'encounter specialists' who were eulogised and feted for decimating the Mumbai mafia. Hundreds of criminals are said to have been killed in these encounters between 1993 and 2003. The men lauded for the 'clean-up' became the subject of glamorous profiles in mainstream media and romanticised impersonations in Bollywood blockbusters, brandishing their guns happily in a display of flamboyant machismo. It has only been in recent years that controversies and serious allegations of human rights violations have ensnared these policemen, previously treated with unquestioning admiration. Public opinion, discounting exceptions, seems to lean towards looking the other way, when rules are bent. Drawing-room discussions add on a whole set of ifs and buts to what should be a straightforward moral principle - extra-judicial killings have no place in a civilised democracy. The argument offered by those who seek to rationalise the circumventing of a legal process is almost always that no tears need be shed for those who are terror suspects. The problem with this ex-post-facto justification is that intelligence inputs have often proven to be grievously wrong in court. The whole process of information gathering, by its very nature - and understandably so - cannot guarantee certitudes and yet must pursue even the hint of a lead. But if seemingly suspicious titbits become the basis for pre-meditated killings, the whole foundation of our judicial system - innocent until proven guilty - gets turned on its head. Even as we ask how and why Ishrat died and at whose behest, the 'encounter' is being validated by those who claim that suspected terror links were enough of a basis to eliminate her and the three men charged by the IB to be Lashkar-e-Taiba operatives. But once again these are allegations mired in controversy and plagued by the absence of certainty. On the one hand you have the Intelligence Bureau - whose own men are now on the mat - placing on record that no less than David Headley knew of Ishrat as a would-be suicide bomber. But you also have the IB's own argument contested fiercely by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) who sent a team to interrogate Headley in the US. After initially noting down Headley's reference in their case diaries, the NIA eventually dismissed the comments as "hearsay". The investigative agency made the argument that Headley never had direct contact with Ishrat and his comments were based on second-hand information passed onto him by a Lashkar commander who was also quoting another commander. In any case, Headley's inputs - reliable or not - have come only now. He was not an entity known to anyone in 2004 when the 'encounter' took place. Of course, a certain amount of opacity has to be wrapped around the intelligence community and how it operates. But enough IB officers I know would argue that inputs are never the same as conclusions. From Malegaon to Mecca Masjid, we have witnessed an alarmingly high number of false cases, foisted on innocent young men, initially charged with having terror links, but later acquitted respectably by the courts. In Hyderabad, 100 young Muslim men were taken into police custody for a blast they had nothing to do with. Even if one argues that mistakes made in intelligence gathering are not mala fide in intention, imagine if any of these young men had been bumped off in a staged killing that was later justified as being an encounter with a suspected terrorist. Tragically, even judicial clean chits don't wipe the slate clean. From Kashmir to Kanpur, more than one young man I've met who has battled a false case has struggled to get his life back on track. Sometimes a person is deemed suspicious on the basis of her ideology alone. In Jammu and Kashmir, for example, civilian deaths often fail to evoke the wider empathy they should because separatist leanings in the Valley have created a hardening of emotions among those who intensely disagree with the dominant politics in one part of the state. Yet above and beyond all politics is a universal principle. The loss of human life is always tragic. We are a country that applies the death sentence in the rarest of rare cases. That is the constitutional principle that has defined us for decades. The Constitution must not be abandoned - whether by the BJP or the Congress - to sanctify street executions masquerading as armed encounters. Barkha Dutt is Group Editor, NDTV

What has come out with this Policemans statements is that proof now in the India that the Police murdered Sikhs. I thinks its the first time that the pro India paper The Tribune has carried a story like this. Up until now the Indians including many Badal Akalis have said the Police were fighting terrorists. The whole Indian argument that they killed terrorists has fallen apart when their own start to accuse them. Saying this won't work and putting no alternative does not help much. The Singhs gave their lives they must be helped.

I don't think we can be very diplomatic when these Muslim paedophile gangs are being arrested every week. The Muslim community tried a publicity trick of getting 500 mosques to have their Imam do a talk on grooming last Friday. According to some websites a lot mosques just ignored the call. Their reason was that no devout Muslim would be involved in these gangs! When you have that level of denial then harsh words are indeed needed,

Ignore them with a smile

Even the best Muslim sources are openly admitting Hazrat Aisha was 6 when marriage began + Hazrat Muhammad was 51. And that sirf unki suhaag raath was when Hazrat Aisha was 9 and Hazrat Muhammad Sahib was 54 years old Aisha's Age of Consummation {C}{C} {C}From WikiIslam, the online resource on Islam{C}{C} {C}{C}Jump to: navigation, search {C}{C} The age difference between 9 year old Aisha and 54 year old Muhammad was 45 years This article discusses the DMS (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual) of mental disorders and cites sahih hadiths to prove that Prophet Muhammad was a pedophile according to clinical definitions. For all related sahih hadiths confirming Aisha's age at marriage and consummation, see: Qur'an, Hadith and Scholars:Aisha. For a comprehensive refutation of all the claims that Aisha was older than 9, see: Refutation of Modern Muslim Apologetics Against Aisha's Age. And for all other apologetic arguments, see: Responses to Apologetics: Muhammad and Aisha. Contents [hide] 1 Pedophilia1.1 Pedophilia according to DSM-IV-TR 2 Was Muhammad a Pedophile? 2.1 Only pre-pubescent girls were allowed to play with dolls 2.1.1 Sahih Bukhari2.1.1.1 Alternative Translations 2.1.2 Does the phrase 'little girls' mean pre-pubescent? 2.2 Aisha was pre-pubescent when Muhammad consummated the marriage 2.3 Consummating the marriage means sexual intercourse 2.3.1 Abu-Dawud Book 41, Number 49142.3.1.1 Proof One 2.3.1.2 Proof Two 2.3.1.3 Proof Three 2.3.1.4 Proof Four 2.4 Summary 3 Conclusion 4 See Also 5 External Links 6 References [edit] Pedophilia Many critics of Islam claim Muhammad's relationship with Aisha was a pedophilic relationship, therefore Muhammad was a pedophile. Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: "Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old." Sahih Muslim 8:3310 In psychiatry, the most commonly used diagnostic criteria for diagnosing psychiatric ailments are those from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of mental disorders. The latest issue is DSM-IV-TR. The DSM classification is a system that classifies and defines all accepted psychiatric ailments and symptoms, with their inclusion and exclusion criteria. The following are the inclusion and exclusion criteria for pedophilia (302.2): [edit] Pedophilia according to DSM-IV-TR A. Over a period of at least six months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger).B. The person has acted on these sexual urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies caused marked distress or interpersonal difficulty. C. The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A. Note: This does not include an individual in late adolescence involved in an ongoing sexual relationship with a 12- or 13-year-old. Diagnostic Critiera for Pedophilia Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Psychiatry Online "According to the DSM-IV definition, pedophilia involves sexual activity by an adult with a prepubescent child. Some individuals prefer females, usually 8- to 10-year-olds. Those attracted to males usually prefers slightly older children. Some prefer both sexes. While some are sexually attracted only to children, others also are sometimes attracted to adults.Pedophiliac activity may involve undressing and looking at the child or more direct physical sex acts. All these activities are psychologically harmful to the child, and some may be physically harmful. In addition, individuals with pedophilia often go to great lengths to obtain photos, films or pornographic publications that focus on sex with children. These individuals commonly explain their activities with excuses or rationalizations that the activities have "educational value" for the child, that the child feels "sexual pleasure" from the activities or that the child was "sexually provocative." However, child psychiatrists and other child development experts maintain that children are incapable of offering informed consent to sex with an adult. Furthermore, since pedophiliac acts harm the child, psychiatrists condemn publications or organizations that seek to promote or normalize sex between adults and children." Diagnostic Critiera for Pedophilia Medem Medical Library In the following article, it will be shown that Muhammad's relationship with Aisha did indeed meet all the criteria to make the diagnosis of pedophilia, and therefore Muhammad was undoubtedly a pedophile. [edit] Was Muhammad a Pedophile? Modern day Islamic apologists, and Islamophiles alike, will very often claim that Aisha had reached puberty by the time Muhammad married and had sexual intercourse with her. However, they never provide verifiable proof for this bold assertion. Instead, they rely on the pre-Islamic culture and traditional practices of 7th Century Arabia as evidence of their claim. This is of course completely false, as demonstrated by the hadith and the commentary of one of Islam's most famous scholars, Imam Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar Al-'Asqalani, Commander of the Faithful in Hadith, Qadi of Egypt, and author of the celebrated commentary on Sahih Bukhari, "Fateh al-Bari." To prove that Aisha was still pre-pubescent when Muhammad married and had sex with her, one has to understand Ibn Hajar's explanation of the permissibility of doll-playing for pre-pubescent girls in Islam. Applying this doll-playing exegesis to the ahadith of Aisha getting married or when she first had sex with Muhammad, one can effectively demonstrate that she was pre-pubescent on these occasions This evidence will be examined in the following three sections. [edit] Only pre-pubescent girls were allowed to play with dolls This is what the great hadith scholar, Shaykh al-Islam Imam Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar Al-'Asqalani, Commander of the Faithful in Hadith, Qadi of Egypt, had to say in regards to doll-playing and little girls: [edit] Sahih Bukhari Narrated 'Aisha: I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13) Sahih Bukhari 8:73:151 How do we know that it was Ibn Hajar who made the above (bolded) doll-playing exegesis? We know this by the reference to Fateh-al-Bari and also due to the fact that when we look at other translations of Bukhari 8:73:151, the same message is conveyed. [edit] Alternative Translations One On the authority of Aisha (RA), who said: I used to play with dolls in the presence of the Prophet (SAW). And I had girl-friends (playmates) who played along with me. They would hide (feeling shy) from him (SAW) whenever he entered. But, he (SAW) would send for them to join me and they would play with me. (Sahih Bukhari & Muslim) Little Girls Playing With Dolls The Islamic Ruling Concerning Tasweer, Abu Muhammad Abdur-Ra'uf Shakir The translator then provides some discussion on translations of various versions of this hadith before he follows up with Ibn Hajar and Fath-al-Bari: Al-Haafidh Ibn Hajar said in Fath al-Baaree (Fath al-Baaree, no. 6130, Kitaab: al-Adab, Baab: al-Inbisaat ilaa an-Naas): This Hadith has been used as a proof for the permissibility of possessing (suwar - of) dolls and toys for the purpose of the little girls playing with them. This has been especially exempted from the general prohibition of possession of images (suwar). Little Girls Playing With Dolls The Islamic Ruling Concerning Tasweer, Abu Muhammad Abdur-Ra'uf Shakir Two But if these images and dolls are toys for children, the Sunnah indicates that they are permissible. In al-Saheehayn it is narrated that ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) said: “I used to play with dolls in the presence of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and I had female friends who would play with me…” al-Bukhaari, 6130; Muslim, 2440. Ibn Hajar said: This hadeeth indicates that it is permissible to have images of girls (i.e., dolls) and toys for girls to play with. This is an exception from the general meaning of the prohibition on having images. This was stated by ‘Iyaad and was narrated from the majority. They permitted the sale of dolls to girls so as to teach them from a young age how to take care of their homes and children. Ibn Hibbaan stated that it is permissible for young girls to play with toys… He is asking about dolls and three-dimensional toys, and whether that affects his fast Islam Q&A, Fatwa No. 49844 Three Aaishah said, “I used to play with dolls in the presence of the Prophet (pbuh), and my girlfriends used to play along with me. Whenever, Allaah's Messenger (pbuh) would enter, they would hide from him. So he called them to play with me.”In the classical commentary on Saheeh al-Bukhaare entitled Fat-h al-Baaree, Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalaanee wrote the following: “This hadeeth is used as evidence for the permissibility of making dolls and toys with human and animal forms for the purpose of girls playing with them. This category has been specifically excluded from the general prohibition against making images. ‘Iyaad stated this to be categorically so and related that it was the position of the majority of scholars. He further related that they permitted the selling of toys for girls in order to train them from their youth in their household affairs and in dealing with their children…” Fatwa on the use of Images for children (p.1) BilalPhilips.com Note the great similarity in the commentary of Ibn Hajar in Fateh al-Bari to all four versions of the hadith. The words are different due to the different translators but the essential message is unchanged – only little girls (i.e. before puberty) are permitted to play with dolls. [edit] Does the phrase 'little girls' mean pre-pubescent? How do we know that these "little girls" are pre-pubescent? This is due to Islamic customs and laws specifically stating so. For example: Girls reach puberty and adulthood when they experience the above three signs. However, they have a fourth sign, that is, menstruation (hayd). Whenever a girl experiences it, she is a woman even if she is 12 years old. For Whom is Fasting Necessary? USC - Muslim Students Association, Compendium of Muslim Texts Islam And the Age of Puberty Islam clearly teaches that adulthood starts when a person have attained puberty. The Young Marriage of `Âishah® Madrassah In'aamiyya These Islamic websites provide us with the evidence, that in Islam when a girl reaches puberty, she ceases to be considered a girl and becomes a woman. Therefore, little girls must be pre-pubescent according to Islamic customs and laws. We also have commentaries by hadith scholars that reinforce this point: Al-Qaadee 'Iyaad has stated this position with definiteness, and transmitted it as the position of the Majority (Jumhoor) of the Scholars; and that they declared permissible the selling of toys/dolls (al-lu'ab) for little girls, to train them from childhood for the household responsibilities and child-rearing. Al-Khattaabee said: … it is understood that playing with dolls (al-banaat) is not like the amusement from other images (suwar) concerning which the threat (wa'eed) of punishment is mentioned. The only reason why permission in this was given to Aisha (RA) is because she had not, at that time, reached the age of puberty. Little Girls Playing With Dolls The Islamic Ruling Concerning Tasweer, Abu Muhammad Abdur-Ra'uf Shakir … Abu 'Ubaid, who said: We don't see there being any reason for that (permission to play with her dolls), except due to the fact that these toys are a source of amusement (lahw) for the children. So, if they were owned by adults, it would definitely have been detestable (makhrooh). Possession of Dolls By Little Girls The Islamic Ruling Concerning Tasweer, Abu Muhammad Abdur-Ra'uf Shakir [edit] Aisha was pre-pubescent when Muhammad consummated the marriage “My mother came to me while I was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down. My nurse took over and wiped my face with some water and started leading me. When I was at the door she stopped so I could catch my breath. I was brought in while Muhammad was sitting on a bed in our house. My mother made me sit on his lap. The other men and women got up and left. The Prophet consummated his marriage with me in my house when I was nine years old. Neither a camel nor a sheep was slaughtered on behalf of me.” Al-Tabari, Vol. 9, p. 131 This hadith suggests that Muhammad had sex with Aisha in her house on her wedding day. However, was this event really on her wedding day? This is proven by the Sahih Bukhari hadith below. Note the similarity in accounts, although the Bukhari 5:58:234 hadith is more expansive on the fact that the events took place on Aisha’s wedding day: Narrated Aisha: "The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Alright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. Sahih Bukhari 5:58:234 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old. Sahih Muslim 8:3311 Also note that Sahih Muslim says Aisha still had her dolls with her when she was taken to Muhammad’s house as a bride. Applying Ibn Hajar’s doll-playing exegesis from Part 1, it becomes clear that Aisha was pre-pubescent when she became a bride. Therefore, it is abundantly clear from the hadiths, that Aisha was pre-pubescent when Muhammad first had sex with her on her wedding day. [edit] Consummating the marriage means sexual intercourse Sunan Abu Dawud is the third most respected collection of ahadith, and the relevant narration used here is considered Sahih by some of the most authoritative ahadith scholars, including Shaykh Abdul Azeez al-Qaari' (Imam of Masjid Qubaa and professor of tafseer Quranic recitation at the Islamic University of Medina). "Aisha said, "The Apostle of Allah married me when I was seven years old." (The narrator Sulaiman said: "Or six years."). "He had intercourse with me when I was 9 years old." Abu-Dawud 2:2116 Here we see that Muhammad had sex with Aisha when she was 9 lunar years old. Is this age confirmed by any other (Sahih) ahadith? Yes it is: Narrated Hisham's father: Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed (sic – consummated) that marriage when she was nine years old. Sahih Bukhari 5:58:236 Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death). Sahih Bukhari 7:62:64 Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death)." what you know of the Quran (by heart)' Sahih Bukhari 7:62:65 Narrated 'Ursa: The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death). Sahih Bukhari 7:62:88 Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin: The Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) married me when I was seven or six. When we came to Medina, some women came. according to Bishr's version: Umm Ruman came to me when I was swinging. They took me, made me prepared and decorated me. I was then brought to the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him), and he took up cohabitation with me when I was nine. She halted me at the door, and I burst into laughter. Abu Dawud 41:4915 Apologists will insist that the term "consummate the marriage" means the completion of the 'nikah' ceremony, not sex. This is in spite of the Abu-Dawud hadith Vol. 2, No. 2116 translation that explicitly states 'intercourse' . Be that as it may, does 'consummate the marriage' mean sex? Here is proof that it does. In Sahih Bukhari, vol. 7, No. 64, the root word used is "dakhala". From the Hans-Wehr Arabic-English Dictionary: to enter, to pierce, to penetrate, to consummate the marriage, cohabit, sleep with a woman. Hans-Wehr Arabic-English Dictionary, P. 273 But how do we know that at the age of nine Aisha was still pre-pubescent? Here is the evidence from Sunan Abu-Dawud, Vol. 3, No. 4914 (This hadith is also repeated in Sunan Nasa’i): On the authority of Aisha (RA), that she said: The Messenger of Allah (SAW) returned from the battle of Tabook or Khaibar (the narrator of the hadith was in doubt about whether he was told "Tabook or Khaibar."). There was a curtain covering her 'sahwah' (chamber or small room in front of the house). The wind blew a side of the curtain and uncovered Aisha's dolls. He (SAW) said: What is this, O Aisha? She said: My dolls. The he (SAW) saw amongst them a horse with two wings from scraps of cloth. He (SAW) said: What is this which I see amongst them (amongst the dolls)? She said: A horse. He asked: What is upon it? She said: Two wings. He (SAW) asked (in astonishment): A horse with two wings? She said: Didn't you hear that Sulaiman (Solomon - AS) had horses with wings? She said: Then he (SAW) laughed until I saw his molar teeth.[1] Abu Daawood, An-Nasaa'iee as-Sunan al-Kubraa, Albani (ra) says the chain of narrators of an-Nasaa'ee is authentic (Saheeh). As for the chain of narrators of Abu Daawood, Albani (ra) has also declared it to be authentic (saheeh) Shaykh Muhammad Shams al-Haqq al-'Adheem Aabaadee, in his Sharh (explanation) of Sunan Abu-Dawud, says: This hadith and the one before it (Hadith #20) is used as an evidence of permissibility of possession of dolls and toys for the purpose of little girls playing with them. This (permission) is a special exception from the general prohibition of possession of images (suwar). This position has been stated with certainty by al-Qaadee 'Iyaad, and he has quoted it as the opinion of the Jumhoor (Majority of Scholars). He also said that the Jumhoor has allowed the sale of toys (dolls) for little girls, in order to train and prepare them from childhood for their household affairs and the raising of their children.According to the generally accepted tradition, Aisha was born about eight years before Hijrah. The battle of Khaibar took place in Muharram-Safar 7 AH. The siege of Tabuk took place in Rajab 9 AH. Therefore, to be generous, I will accept the Khaibar explanation and not the later, Tabuk explanation. It is generally accepted that Aisha was betrothed to Muhammad at the age of 6 in the year 3 BH. This is confirmed by reports that the marriage was consummated in Shawwal, which came seven months after the Prophet's hijra from Makkah to al-Medinah. Shaykh Muhammad Shams al-Haqq al-'Adheem Aabaadee So the Abu-Dawud hadith says that Aisha was still playing with dolls as late as 7 AH. That is 6 or 7 years after her marriage. Using the doll-playing exegesis of Ibn Hajar, Abu Ubaid, al-Qaadee 'Iyaad, and Shaykh Muhammad Shams al-Haqq, Aisha did not reach puberty until at least 6 to 7 years after her marriage when she would have been about 15 or 16 years old, but lets say 14 years old to be generous. [edit] Abu-Dawud Book 41, Number 4914Note that some apologists will try to say that this hadith is not sahih. They will use the following translation of the same hadith and highlight the phrase "the narrator is doubtful": Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin: When the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) arrived after the expedition to Tabuk or Khaybar (the narrator is doubtful), the draught raised an end of a curtain which was hung in front of her store-room, revealing some dolls which belonged to her. He asked: What is this? She replied: My dolls. Among them he saw a horse with wings made of rags, and asked: What is this I see among them? She replied: A horse. He asked: What is this that it has on it? She replied: Two wings. He asked: A horse with two wings? She replied: Have you not heard that Solomon had horses with wings? She said: Thereupon the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) laughed so heartily that I could see his molar teeth. Abu Dawud 41:4914 The evidence that this hadith is indeed sahih, and that the phrase "the narrator is doubtful" does not mean to imply that the hadith itself is doubtful, but the fact that the narrator was doubtful in regards to whether or not he was told it was Khaybar or Tabuk, is as follows: [edit] Proof One Various versions of the hadith include confirmation that it is sahih/authenticated/authentic, including one that refers to Sahih Abu-Dawud (a collection of Abu-Dawud hadiths that are deemed sahih): On the authority of Aisha (RA), that she said: The Messenger of Allah (SAW) returned from the battle of Tabook or Khaibar (the narrator of the hadith was in doubt about whether he was told "Tabook or Khaibar."). There was a curtain covering her 'sahwah' (chamber or small room in front of the house). The wind blew a side of the curtain and uncovered Aisha's dolls. He (SAW) said: What is this, O Aisha? She said: My dolls. The he (SAW) saw amongst them a horse with two wings from scraps of cloth. He (SAW) said: What is this which I see amongst them (amongst the dolls)? She said: A horse. He asked: What is upon it? She said: Two wings. He (SAW) asked (in astonishment): A horse with two wings? She said: Didn't you hear that Sulaiman (Solomon - AS) had horses with wings? She said: Then he (SAW) laughed until I saw his molar teeth.[1] Abu Daawood, An-Nasaa'iee as-Sunan al-Kubraa, Albani (ra) says the chain of narrators of an-Nasaa'ee is authentic (Saheeh). As for the chain of narrators of Abu Daawood, Albani (ra) has also declared it to be authentic (saheeh) Aboo Daawood and an-Nasaa’ee collected this hadeeth in another chain from Aaishah in which she said, “When Allaah’s Messenger (pbuh) arrived after the expedition to Tabuk or Khaybar, the wind raised an end of a curtain which hung in front of my closet, revealing some dolls which belonged to me. He asked me, ‘What is this?’ I replied: My dolls. He saw among them a horse made of wrapped cloth with wings, and asked, ‘What is this I am seeing among them?’ I replied: A horse. He asked, ‘A horse with wings?’ I replied: Have you not heard that Solomon had horses with wings? Allaah's Messenger (pbuh) laughed so heartily that I could see his molar teeth.” Sunan Abu Dawud, vol. 3, p. 1373, no.4914 and authenticated in Saheeh Sunan Abee Daawood, vol. 3, p. 932, no. 4123. This hadith is very clear that the meaning of playthings (lu‘ab) mentioned in the earlier narration does not refer to humans.[2] On the authority of Aa'ishah (radiyallahu anha), who said: 'The Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) returned from the battle of Tabook or it was Khaybar. There was a curtain over my room. The wind blew, lifting the curtain and exposing a part of my room in which, Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) saw some dolls with which Aa'ishah (radhi allahu anhu) used to play. He said: “What is this O Aa'ishah?” She replied 'my daughters (Arabs used to call dolls, daughters). He saw among them a horse with two wings made out of a piece of cloth. He said: “What is this?” She replied: 'A horse' He said: “and what are those on the horses?” She replied: 'Two wings' He said: “A horse with two wings?!” Aa'ishah said: 'The Prophet laughed until I could see his molar teeth.'[3] Authentic - Abu Dawood An Nisa'ee in Al-Ishrah Not only is the chain of narrators authentic according to Albani - but two other Islamic sources say 'authentic' or 'authenticated.' [edit] Proof Two The version taken from the pro-Islamic website, themuslimwoman.com, states that, “the narrator of the hadith was in doubt about whether he was told "Tabook or Khaibar”.[1] That is, not in doubt about the hadith. [edit] Proof Three Alternative translations do not carry the word ‘doubt’: Also on the authority of Aisha who said: “The Prophet (saw) returned from the battle of Tabuk, or it was Khaybar. There was a curtain over her room. The wind blew, lifting the curtain and exposing part of the room in which the Prophet (saw) saw some dolls with which Aisha used to play. He said, “What is this, O Aisha?” She said: “My daughters.” (Arabs used to call dolls for “daughters”) He saw among them a horse with two wings made of pieces of cloth. He said “And what is this in the middle?” She said, “A horse.” He said, “and what are those on the horse?” She said: “Two wings.” He said, ”A horse with two wings?!” Aisha said: “The Prophet (saw) laughed until I could see his molar teeth”[4] Abu Daawood, an-Nasaa’ee On the authority of Aa'ishah (radiyallahu anha), who said: 'The Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) returned from the battle of Tabook or it was Khaybar. There was a curtain over my room. The wind blew, lifting the curtain and exposing a part of my room in which, Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) saw some dolls with which Aa'ishah (radhi allahu anhu) used to play. He said: “What is this O Aa'ishah?” She replied 'my daughters (Arabs used to call dolls, daughters). He saw among them a horse with two wings made out of a piece of cloth. He said: “What is this?” She replied: 'A horse' He said: “and what are those on the horses?” She replied: 'Two wings' He said: “A horse with two wings?!” Aa'ishah said: 'The Prophet laughed until I could see his molar teeth.'[3] Authentic - Abo Dawood An Nisa'ee in Al-Ishrah [edit] Proof Four Authoritative Islamic scholars still use this hadith in their judgment of Islamic laws and customs. Shaykh Abdul Azeez al-Qaari' (Imaam of Masjid Qubaa and professor of tafsir and Quranic recitation at the Islamic University of Madeenah) had this to say about image-making in al-Usrah: “Regarding the hadeeth of Aaishah that she played with dolls in the presence of the Prophet (pbuh), and, in some versions of the hadeeth, that one of the dolls was in the shape of a winged horse, and that when the Prophet (pbuh) asked her about it, she replied, ‘Didn't you hear that [Prophet] Sulayman had a horse with wings?’ to which the Prophet (pbuh) responded by laughing; this hadeeth indicates the permissibility of children’s figurative toys, owning them and using them, whether they are clearly representative or not, and whether skillfully or crudely fashioned. There is no basis in the hadeeth for making a distinction. Those who say that Aaishah's dolls were not distinctly representative have made an arbitrary judgement not based on any evidence. What do they say about a winged horse?”[5] Shaykh Abdul Azeez al-Qaari' How can apologists claim that the Imam of Masjid Qubaa and professor of tafsir and Quranic recitation at the Islamic University of Medina uses a hadith that is not sahih in deciding the permissibility of doll-playing among Saudi Arabian children? For by doing so, even Shaykh Abdul Azeez al-Qaari' of Saudi Arabia seems to accept that this hadith is sahih. If using a weak hadith, a scholar must warn the reader of its weakness: “Generally, in Islamic law, only the authentic (sahih) and good (hasan) hadiths are used in deriving the rules. The weak (da`if) hadiths have no value for the purpose of Shari`ah. However, the scholars of hadith sometimes differ among themselves in the determination of whether some Hadiths are weak or not. The scholars have sometimes used weak hadiths for moral and spiritual (fada'il) matters. It is important that when one uses a weak hadith for any reason, one should explain it to the people that this is weak hadith and that it is being used for this particular reason." What is the Value of a Weak Hadith? Islam Online, Muzammil H. Siddiqi, President of Fiqh Council — North America, March 22, 2006 It is clear from this article that Shaykh Abdul Azeez al-Qaari' (Imaam of Masjid Qubaa and professor of tafseer and Quranic recitation at the Islamic University of Medina) did not say anything about Abu-Dawud 4914 being weak - thus it cannot be considered as such. Also note what the reference says at the end of the article: Sunan Abu Dawud, vol. 3, p. 1373, no.4914 and authenticated in Saheeh Sunan Abee Daawood, vol. 3, p. 932, no. 4123 [edit] Summary In the first section, it was shown that in Islam, doll-playing girls are pre-pubescent according to the doll-playing exegesis of Ibn Hajar and Islamic laws and customs. In the second section it was shown, using Ibn Hajar's doll-playing exegesis that Aisha remained a pre-pubescent child when she was married and had sexual intercourse with Muhammad. In the third section it was shown that Aisha remained pre-pubescent as late as 6 or 7 years after her marriage to Muhammad. [edit] Conclusion Does Muhammad meet all the criteria needed to be classed a Pedophile? Criteria A: Over a period of at least six months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger).Yes, Muhammad had sexual relations with a pre-pubescent child over a prolonged period - likely to have been at least 6 to 7 years. Criteria B: The person has acted on these sexual urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies caused marked distress or interpersonal difficulty.Yes, Muhammad had acted on his sexual urges - as demonstrated by Tabari IX:131 and various other Bukhari ahadith that state that consummation had taken place at the age of nine when it had been established that Aisha had not reached puberty until she was at least 14 years of age. Criteria C: The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A.Yes, Muhammad was 54 years old while Aisha was only 9 years old at the time of sexual intercourse. Therefore, even according to the most stringent clinical definition of pedophilia - the DSM-IV-TR - Muhammad would be found guilty as charged.

The Policeman has named KPS Gill as amongst those responsible for killing Sikhs. Although this policeman has killed he could bring down the 'big fish' if he is supported. Cop says he was forced to stage encounters Tells High Court he is willing to depose against his seniors; submits a list of ‘victims’ Saurabh Malik Tribune News Service Chandigarh, July 5 The past has come to haunt the Punjab Police. For years, the killing of innocent youths for medals and promotions during the days of militancy was a matter of conjectures and surmises. But a blast from the past has brought the matter under judicial scrutiny. Sub-Inspector (SI) Surjit Singh today moved the Punjab and Haryana High Court, claiming he was “compelled by his senior officers to kill youngsters in fake encounters.” He has, among others, named former police chief KPS Gill, in the list of officers involved. He has also given a list of “victims” and made it clear that he is willing to depose against his seniors. The petition for protection narrates a tale of neglect and unfulfilled promises made to policemen who “fought” militancy. “The men he had served with such devotion and faith are not worth his loyalty and devotion, but a bunch of selfish men out to commit any crime for small benefits and promotions,” his counsel asserted. Mincing no words, Surjit Singh said “unscrupulous senior officers of the Punjab Police killed innocent citizens in fake encounters by using their juniors for their own promotions and police medals…. The fight was much prolonged due to the atrocities of a group of sadist officers, who delighted themselves with torture and death.” Implicating his senior, Surjit Singh asserted that he “killed many innocent youngsters in fake encounters under the supervision of Paramjit Singh Gill, the then Senior Superintendent of Police, Amritsar.” Surjit Singh insisted that the encounters of known terrorists/ wanted persons were staged too “so that there was no need for collection of evidence to try them in a court of law”. Confessing his hand in the encounters, Surjit Singh said he showed courage by “participating in major encounters and was much appreciated for his fearless action in combat”. Giving reasons for his confession, his counsel RS Bains said: “The weight of the crime, which the petitioner has committed and which he has witnessed, always made him sad. “Remorse has set in to at least make an honest confession to those families whose children he had been instrumental in killing in the mistaken belief that he is doing his duty at the command of senior officers, who knew very well that they are committing crimes for private ends.They used the petitioner due to his immature age…” Also, while Surjit Singh’s juniors were promoted, he was not even regularised as Sub-Inspector. Bains said the High Court in September 2012 had directed the State of Punjab and the Director-General of Police to decide on a representation by Surjit Singh. “When he went to the Tarn Taran SSP, Ranjit Singh Hundal, he was not only denied a hearing but also beaten up threatened with elimination in a fake encounter.”

Media want to hush this up

The evidence this policeman would get most of the people in power jailed if it went to court both Congress and Akalis. Hence nothing is said in the media. There is a bit in the Times of India, http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-07-04/india/40370017_1_fake-encounters-cbi-probe-surjit-singh Ensaaf cover the incident http://www.ensaaf.org/multimedia/

News link from punjab spectrum http://www.punjabspectrum.com/2013/06/12832 Local News Channel Coverage http://www.news10.net/video/2507199376001/1/Sikh-couple-kicked-out-of-theater-due-to-religious-item Link to Petition http://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/50846/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=11324

Mods before you reject this, the reason i have wanted to stay gupt is because, rather than everyone dive on me, i want all the sangat to think about these lines from Sukhmani Sahib Ji. I myself am guilty of this and so are many others if they are honest, just lately i have noticed we are all and myself (with the exception of some, very few in fact) getting into arguments over nothing sometimes very silly points and trying to show how much more cleverer we are than each other or even better human beings. And then we have others who just come on and say we should not be on a particular side, but more tolerant etc, when they should try to diffuse the situation and say enough stop, but the truth is they are actually getting a kick from seeing others arguing. Hence trying to show they are good. I am not pointing at anyone in particular and i myself am the worst culprit !! But you know what lets love each other, forget our difference, because we are the children of the same father. Here are the lines i have taken, have we become like this ? aapas ka-o jo bhalaa kahaavai. One who calls himself good tiseh bhalaa-ee nikat na aavai. goodness shall not draw near him. Bhul chuk maf. Mods veerji if you refuse this, i understand.

Hello all! I have been quite upset by the prejudices people hold against other religions, so have been trying to write a book which can educate adults and children on the basics of major religions, showing the links between them. However, I am personally not a Sikh, so would be very grateful if you could look over this document and tell me what I should add/subtract/change please? Sorry to trouble you all, but if you do help, it would be most kind :')

Waheguru ji ka khalsa Waheguru ji ki fateh You can support them by like them on facebook...... https://www.facebook.com/pages/Babbar-Khalsa-Radio/365857486859975

Tervetuloa (no i'm not from Suomi). I just know you guys are very good at driving :biggrin2:

Credible source? Milk has been drank for years upon years, I don't think people had much trouble. The USA has all these health probelms because of crap diet. Junk food etc. However, homogonised milk may be worse than non-homogenised because the fat particles are made smaller, this might make it harder to absorb vitamins like A and E. I've been drinking 5-10 cups at least for the past 15 years of my life. I've never broken a bone.

if you make one mistake that guru ji told forbiddingly not to do such as: Cutting your hair , Doing Drugs , Cheating on your wife , Your paap is forever it cannot be forgiven and you will definitely go to hell. Where did you get this nonsense from, Guru ji is all forgiving merciful, this is wrong!!, It can be forgiven if you are truly sorry its called doing pesh in front of the SGGS JI and the panj pyare who will give you a penance to do, please stop frightening this vulnerable, new to sikhi young person, op please ignore this comment do not be afraid maharaj is very very loving, merciful more than any living being is or ever will be. Keep your determination and faith strong,pray and concentrate on Guru ji talk to him, he will call you when the time is right to take amrit and you will not be able to stop your self,trust me i know. But that does not mean you can keep making mistakes or doing wrong and you will be forgiven every time!

Lol, thanks for the info veer , worth reading and feel glad to come across it.

Lighter blue roans can look white from a distance i think

We don't HAVE to cremate. It's just a cultural leftover from Hinduism. We can cremate, bury, throw out to sea......anything. It doesn't really matter. The human body was just a temporary shell for our souls. Once we're gone...we're gone. It's over. Finished with. If we live in a country where cremation isn't allowed than so be it......we can just as easily bury. If we live in a country where burial isn't the norm than so be it.....we can just as easily cremate. We've enough, in fact way too many, rituals regarding living life as it is.....we don't need to be adding meaningless rituals to dead bodies too.

To be honest : Sikhs in Pakistan live a BETTER life than Sikhs in India. Islamic Fundamentalists are at war with everyone...no one is targeting Sikhs...tell me even if 50 Sikhs died in last 10 years of war? Over-whelming majority of victims of TTP terrorism are Muslims...Countries go through the cycles of civil unrest/war...Pakistan is no exception. Atleast Pakistani state did not murder 30,000+ Sikhs like Indian state did...nor did we attack Sikh holiest sites.... Now you understand why Sikhs choose to live in Pakistan? I don't understand why Indian Sikhs choose to live in India where their religion is not even recognized. Whats with all this negativity? If Pakistan is doing something right, then appreciate it..rather than this negativity....