Jump to content

Muzumdar

Members
  • Posts

    59
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Muzumdar's Achievements

Explorer

Explorer (4/8)

  • First Post Rare
  • Collaborator Rare
  • Superstar Rare
  • Conversation Starter Rare
  • Week One Done

Recent Badges

0

Reputation

  1. Which "leading politicians" are going to be on the London panel?
  2. The BBC website says that "hundreds of Sikhs were killed" in the "1984 riots." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7987201.stm Can we all email/call them to correct this please. We need "hundreds" changed to "thousands" and "riots" changed to "pogroms." Muzumdar
  3. Hello Matheen, long time no speak, how are you? I hope all is well. Yes, I too doubt the whole 'forced' argument. The women I heard on the phone-in voluntarily got involved with Muslims and voluntarily broke up with them. No question of 'force'. Of course Muslims will push their faith, that's the idea of a proselytising faith. Education, education, education!
  4. Thanks Captain C. I only heard bits and pieces of the debate but I must say, apart from that Singhni with the Dastaar who remained steadfast in her faith, Sikh women came out of that debate pathetically. Seriously, how dumb can these girls be? Sikh men didn't come out of it smelling of roses either. And that Nihal bloke needs to get a another job; he is quite possibly the worst radio presenter in living memory. Anyway, thanks again for your thoughts Captain.
  5. Well, did anyone hear the debate? If yes, what are your thoughts?
  6. Do you have no sense of manners or civility? You said: becuase: I disagreed with you on the point of not needing to find support for Rehit in the Guru Granth Sahib. I told you why. You were unable to respond, probably because your critical faculties are non-existent, so you decided to throw names and insults about. It is a typical response from a person who, being unable to cope with an intellectual conversation, resorts to desperate attacks. I think it is you who needs to do some reading.
  7. You cared enough to comment in the first place. Allow me to demonstrate the flaw in your argument with a historical argument. You say that the Gurus gave corporal authority to the Panj Pyare and the Akal Takht. 1919 Jallianwala Bagh, General Dyer guns down hunders of mainly Sikh peaceful protesters. What do the Panj Pyare at the Akal Takht do? Give Dyer a Saropa and honour him at Darbar Sahib. My point? That the Panj Pyare don't always get it right, which is why referring to Gurbani is always important.
  8. Qualify this statement. How are they foolish? You have no idea how much knowledge I may or may not have. If my argument is 'stupid', show me how. If you can't, then you will just look like an imbecile.
  9. Highly doubtful. It reads like a Damdami Taksal post 1990 Rehitnama. But this is part of the problem; he hasn't sourced it. For all you know he could have made it up himself. This is a ridiculous statement. Surely the Panj Pyare are guided by the Scripture because that is their Guru. Hence when deciding upon Rehit, they must consult the Guru at every instance. Their 'corporal authority' is dependent on their being able to back their assertions up. Which is why I asked for Gurbani to back the OP's 'Rehitnama'.
  10. waaheguroo You are free to believe this stuff, that's your choice. I have just one question: can either of the 4 points above be backed up definitively by Gurbani? If not, you're on a loser old chap.
  11. Interesting topic all around. Regarding college degrees: Vocational degrees (optometry, medicine, pharmacy, engineering, law, accountancy etc etc) which are based on a supply and demand market will not become worthless. Humanities degrees already are useless. Regarding apne's post: This may be slightly harsh, but a nuclear war is perhaps what is needed (to reduce the world's population drastically to free up resources etc etc). The question for people like the Sikhs is: how to stay the hell out of it. The most likely scenario is that some Muslim country (Iran) will either develop or use nuclear missiles (Pakistan already has them) on a Western nation or its ally (most likely Israel). This would result in most of the Arab world being gutted. (Another scenario is if China becomes a full on superpower and the Muhammedans attempt a bombing spree in Beijing. China will not hesitate to devastate the Arab world via nuclear means). So long as India stays out of it, the bulk of us will be safe. But then we must also remember that Pakistan is very close to our Punjab, and that it is likely that any Western-Islamic war will involve Pakistan. If they are hit, so will our Punjab be. Food for thought indeed...
  12. Any answer to my post Raju, or are you all bark and no bite?
  13. Raju bhai, before I begin to respond to your post, I have just one question: are you an Indian Christian? (You don't have to answer). I am guessing that what you are specifically referring to above can be gauged from below: The very premise this statement is based on is false. The notion of 'Indology' is flawed as it is etymologically based on the fictitious word 'India', which was dreamed up in the West. If we substitute the word 'indological' with subcontinental, the supposition that there are indeed 'victims' and 'oppressors' with defined national/cultural/ontological differences is very much a fact. Not only within the past 200 years, but ever since the arrival of the Aryans. Once you shed your Western lexicon and revert to reality, your house of wafer thin cards comes plummeting down. Again, the word 'Indian' is problematic. Let us be very specific. Women, most of them anyway, on the subcontinent are victims of misogyny, plain and simple. Let us be even more specific; of the main ideologies that dominate the subcontinent (Hinduism, Islam and Sikhism), two perpetuate and legitimise this misogyny (these are Islam and Hinduism), one (Sikhism) is clearly against it. While ground realities are different, on a theoretical level, the blanket term 'Indian' is useless. Are you denying that the cultures of the south and north are utterly different? This is simply untrue. The Tribune, for example, does no such thing. On the wider point, the Western intellectual framework is not a concrete mechanism, despite what you wish us to think. Within academia, the media and government there are a plethora of divergent voices that are given a platform. There is no one dogma that they all follow. You should put down Marx for a moment and use your own brain my friend, Guru Rakha, Muzumdar
  14. This is my last post on the matter Raju, but I will see you on the other thread you have started about 'the Western intellectual framework'. We will have to agree to disagree. There was no need to appoint anyone, the centre's power in India is supreme, it could have done what it wanted without having to appoint a puppet. Becasue he is a leftist, unlike Indira. This is true. When I said that Akbar was a Congress lover, I was referring to the Congress of old, the Nerhu Congress. Let us put this matter to bed now, although it has been very enjoyable sparring with you.
  15. MJ Akbar is so pro-India it's embarrassing. His book 'India, The Siege Within' is quite possibly one of the worst pieces of non-fiction I have ever read. He relies on cheap clichés and cheesy one-liners. His credibility as an impartial observer on anything is zero. Exactly. He would be the first one to espouse anti-Western conspiracy theories, just as his political masters - the Congress - would like him to. Mouthpieces of the government tend to find their way on to national airline carriers, you would know this if you had some perspective. You are insinuating that Dr Manmohan Singh was and is just a pawn in the West’s great game to control the Indian economy. I don’t think he is that thick, just a hunch.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use