Kaljug Singh

Fateh! Sangat ji, don't post unsubstantiated rumours no matter how angry they may make you, because at the end of the day they are just going to fuel more anger and hatred for no reason. Let us wait until there is firm evidence for these claims before we act. K.

Fateh, Veer ji! As far as I am concerned, if there are solid reasons to believe that a terrorist has information that may lead to saving innocent people from certain death, that he would not willingly give the information up, and that time is of the essence, I have no problem at all with strong forms of coercion like waterboarding being used to extract the intelligence. I think it's pretty naive to believe that the US and western nations do not already use such methods, and if we can find a successful way to extract intelligence with a minimum of physical discomfort, then so be it. The people I named are the scum of the earth. They are murderers of INNOCENT PEOPLE and they deliberately and indiscriminately target men, women and children for the sole reason that they do not share their religious convictions. They murder because they believe Allah has told them they will be rewarded for the murder of infidels. To compare them to the shaheeds of 1984 is ridiculous and offensive. Islamic terrorists do not need any other reason to murder innocent people other than the ones they see in the Quran and the Hadith. Everything else is just used as an excuse to garner sympathy and to distract people from the their true religiously motivated reasons for killing. I also find it despicable that the author talks mentions the supposed crimes of the US and says nothing about the complete disregard for human rights in every single islamic country in the world. It always makes me laugh when apologists for these terrorists who hail from Islamic countries - and the terrorists themselves! - start arguing about human rights when pretty much every islamic country refused to sign the charter of human rights and instead penned their own version called the cairo declaration which is biased in favour of muslim males. And I notice that the author can't help but take a swipe at Israel. To call the support of the US for the nation of Israel as being tantamount to torture is vile in the extreme. He may get away with this in liberal circles or in the company of Muslims who blame the Jews for everything from the Jewish Holocaust to the assassination of John F, Kennedy, but I'll be damned if I let him get away with it here. Regards, K.

Green is the colour of Islam. A true Sikh only drives orange cars. Or black. Or blue. Or white. BUT NOT RED!!! K.

Yes. It's Anti-Sikh. And Bad. And also Wrong. A true Sikh drives a 1 litre Nissan Micra that has been registered in 1988 or before and has no modifications except a little rust. K.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/131542 by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahuif (sLinkData != "") //("Edit "); (IsraelNN.com) Palestinian Authority Muslims went on a rampage Sunday and desecrated 70 Christian graves two weeks after the pope praised efforts for a new PA state and tried to appease Muslim anger over previous disputes between the two religions. The vandals smashed gravestones and knocked metal and stone crosses off graves in the village of Jiffna, near Ramallah, home to approximately 900 Christians and 700 Muslims. Greek Orthodox Church official George Abdo told Reuters the head and hand of a statue of Madonna also was severed. The Palestine News Network, which claims to be comprised of independent journalists, did not report the incident but instead told its readers about a Muslim-Christian meeting in Shechem to discuss bias during Pope [benedict] XVI's visit. It said that the focus of the talks was the status of Jerusalem and efforts "to keep the optimal model of peaceful coexistence and tolerance between religions, particularly between Muslims and Christians." Sunday’s anti-Christian attack follows years of harassment from Muslims that has escalated a lengthy exodus of Christians from Judea, Samaria and Gaza. The areas enjoyed strong economies from 1967, when Israel took over administration of the areas following the Six-Day War, until 2000, when PA terrorists launched the Oslo War, also known as the Second Intifada. However, the PA and foreign news agencies have blamed Israel for harsh economic conditions that have chased away Christians. Reuters told its readers that “[Arab] officials say many Christians have emigrated in recent decades. Most cite economic hardships under Israeli occupation, though some also voice fears of less tolerant forms of Islam growing among Palestinians.” The news agency also quoted Issa Kassissieh, an advisor to PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, as saying that the attack was "an isolated act against Christian symbols” and that "Palestinian Christians and Muslims have always lived in harmony in the Holy Land.” However, the area has a history of attacks. Two months ago, a fire caused damage to a Coptic Christian church near Ramallah in what may have been arson. PA terrorists in Kalkilya three years ago set fire to the Young Men's Christian Association (YMCA) headquarters. The previous year, a Muslim mob armed with clubs beat Christians in a Christian Arab village near Ramallah, looting their houses and burning cars and houses. The attack followed a Muslim family's murder by poison of their Muslim relative after she became pregnant following an alleged affair with her Christian employer. Anti-Christian acts in Gaza have escalated since Hamas seized control of the region two years ago. Christian book stores and churches frequently have been bombed. Muslim threats have served to politicize the remaining 50,000 Christians, who maintain better relations with Muslims when joining forces to blame Israel for their problems. PA Christians often accuse Israel of barring them from entering Jerusalem to visit holy sites, although it was Israel that opened the sites to Christians in 1967. Jordan prohibited Christians, as well as Jews, from visiting holy places during its occupation of eastern Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria from 1949 to 1967. Journalist Larry Derfner, in a recent article in the Jerusalem Post, quoted veteran Jerusalem peace activist Hanna Siniora that the shrinking of the Christian community in Judea, Samaria and Gaza started long before the Oslo War and even before 1967. Siniora told him, “The emigration began over a century ago, under the Ottoman Empire, and the main reasons have always been lack of economic opportunity and political instability.”

Fateh! I doubt that Mr Larsen is likely to bump into your post here. 1 in 7 released Guantanamo detainees return to Islamic terrorism: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/us/polit...&ei=5087%0A I couldn't care less if the CIA tortured people like Said Ali al-Shihri, a leader of Al Qaeda’s Yemeni branch who bombed the US Embassy in Sana, Yemen, last year, and Abdullah Ghulam Rasoul, an Afghan Taliban commander. I suppose you would prefer that Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr (who has terrorist ties and has preached hate against Americans), be compensated by the US as well for his alleged "torture" by the CIA. After all, the infidels are supposed to pay jizya for the upkeep of the Believers, right? It seems like a typical Muslim strategy to wage jihad on the infidels and then, when they are inevitably captured as a result of their stupidity, to complain about being mistreated and ask for financial compensation and a British/American passport. K.

Fateh! OK, I'm going to check through each of the sources mentioned. I'll come back and edit this when time permits until I have done all of them. Source 21. It points to an encyclopaedia of Naples. Presumably the author of the article wants us to read the bit about Abu Tabela (Avitabile). Well, this source says the following about Maharaja Ranjit Singh: "One of the stories they tell about Singh is that despite his many conquests, he did not allow wanton destruction of life or property, and that throughout his life he never passed a sentence of death. " Regarding Avitabile, he says: "Avitabile quickly earned the reputation of being a bloodthirsty and ruthless enforcer of Sikh authority. Every morning, they say, Avitabile would have a few Muslims thrown to their deaths from a minaret just as a warning to the locals. He meted out absolutely gruesome "justice" as governor of Peshawar, something that no doubt helped to drive the population away from the city; the population of Peshawar was reduced by half in the years of Sikh rule. " It's clear this is hearsay. The author mentions no historical sources to support this. Even if Avitabile was a sadist, he was a Christian not a Sikh, and to blame his excesses on Ranjit Singh is pretty silly. Source 22. Is from pakistanpaedia, another wiki that claims that the population of Peshawar was halved, but provides no sources. So basically the proof of this assertion is that some other guy said it first. Source 23 and 24. Both point to the same news article by the same author, who is a Pakistani politician, who makes the claim that this mosque was destroyed and replaced with the Goraknath temple, but he doesn't give any reference to historical texts to prove this. Pretty much hearsay again. Besides, why would Sikhs build a Hindu temple? Source 25. An article blogged by a Pakistani author who says that this mosque was the only one that survived the depredations of the Sikhs. He cites no historical source, so again its hearsay. This author even points out that the legendary cruelty of Avitabile is unconfirmed, especially the legend of his using the minarets as gallows. Source 26. A Sikh History article on Hari Singh Nalwa. It says he never destroyed any mosques. :-) Source 27. A paragraph on the Muhabat Khan mosque by an anonymous author who says the same thing about Avitabile using the minarets as gallows. No historical source cited. But the author put this sentence in quote marks, so it must be true - right? Um, no. There is no mention of the minarets being destroyed by the Sikhs and being rebuilt by the British. Source 28. A paragraph about Avitabile from the Sikh Encyclopedia which mentions the same rumours about Avitabile's rule of Peshawar being described as one of "gallows and gibbets". There are sources here, yay! Alas, none mention where this description originated and whether there was any truth to the rumours. Source 29. From a page on the Engineering University of Peshawar. It is the same as one of the earlier source. There is no mention of Avitabile. Repetitious and irrelevant. Source 30. Exactly the same as source 27. Repetition. Maybe saying it twice will make it true? Source 31. This is an article written by a travel journalist. It mentions the same claims regarding the minarets, but it does not claim to be based on anything but the journalists knowledge of Peshawar, and of course therefore there is no historical text referenced to verify this rumour. Source 32. Exactly the same as source 26. Repetition. Source 33. A paragraph from a tourism guide. The actual line here that the author of this article is probably referring to is this one: "A guide told us that during the Sikh-period, the minarets were used a lot as gallows." So an old illiterate peasants words constitutes historical prrof, I guess. The authors in his next sentence after citing these sources claims that "the desecration of Peshawar's mosques by their [the Sikh's] appointed administrator is well documented," which might be true, but this article certainly proves no such thing. Sources 34 and 35 and 36 (which is the same as 35). These I have discussed above. The Sikhs may have destroyed the Shalimar gardens for firewood (I suppose the author would prefer the Sikhs to perish in the cold?), but these sources do not offer any evidence to support the claim. The Columbia Encyclopaedia claims that Bala Hisar fort was still being used as military headquarters in the 21st century so the claim that it was destroyed by the Sikhs is likely false. What is definite is that the authors cited source certainly doesn't substantiate his claim. If this guy had handed in this essay at university to be marked, it would have been thrown back in his face. Regards, K.

Fateh! Well, regarding this quote: In regards to Sikh rule in Peshawar, the British noted: " Of the monuments of the Muslim period, too very few have survived our own times, not because the Muslim kings were not endowed with architectural tastes and talents or that they did not construct any attractive edifices, but because everything of architectural value that existed here was destroyed by the Sikhs, especially during Avitabile's reign as the Governor of Peshawar. The only buildings of any antiquity and historical interest are the Gor Khatri, also called Serai Jahanabad, and the Mosque of Mahabat Khan. Even these did not escape the tyrant's hand, while the mosque was desecrated and its lofty minars were used as gallows, the Serai was converted into the residence of the governor, and the mosque of Jahan Ara Begum built inside was replaced by a temple, which still stands there.[34] " Look at the source in footnote 35. The above paragraph has just been lifted from the very biased review of the book the reviewer is discussing. It says nothing about the British saying that, it is the author of the review, Syed Mohammad Tahir, who is saying it. If you read the rest of his review and you can see the bias in favour of the Moghuls. I wouldn't be surprised if the rest of the sources are misrepresented as well. Regards K.

Toronto Muslim files complaint after Infidel says hello to his wife. It's a news article and funny. http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=1618828 Hallway culture clash In a Toronto apartment building, a feud has broken out over a neighbourly 'hello.' What hath multiculturalism wrought? Matthew Coutts, National Post Published: Friday, May 22, 2009 In trying to adapt to a patchwork of often conflicting cultures, has civility become the casualty of accommodation? When the landlady of my Toronto apartment building said an outraged neighbour had filed a complaint about me over an apparently inappropriate hallway interaction with his wife, my mind raced through the countless conversations I've had with fellow tenants, none of which seemed a possible source of offence. It turns out, it wasn't a salacious transaction that had caused the complaint, but rather a neighbourly and -- to me -- entirely forgettable greeting, little more than a brief "good morning" as I passed my neighbours on the way to work. Still, it was enough of an affront for the man -- once a doctor somewhere in the Middle East, my landlady clarified -- to feel I had broken a cultural taboo. The incident started an awkward feud which has involved warnings not to repeat my indiscretion and one face-to-face shouting match, which included allusions to my impending death. I expect the battle will wage on, as we appear to be stuck at an impasse. His Muslim upbringing has ingrained in him a sense of entitlement to demand I not speak directly to his wife; and my prairie upbringing has ingrained in me a duty to strive for polite cohesion with my neighbours. My landlady, who has handled the complaint with tittering trepidation, hasn't helped dispel the friction. She has told me to adhere to the demands because the man "could be dangerous," directing me to literally turn my back to the couple as they pass, never make eye contact and never hold the elevator for them, no matter what. Life among neighbours has become increasingly complicated by multiculturalism, in this case making even the most affable salutation or good Samaritan gesture a practice in walking on eggshells. But in trying to adapt to a patchwork of often conflicting cultures, has civility become the casualty of accommodation? I grew up in Manitoba, where it was an affront to your neighbour not to be cordial. If you didn't greet them by name you could be talked about in hushed voices and risked being labelled standoffish. Community amongst neighbours was not something to consider, it was a way of life. Call it prairie law. Since moving to Toronto, I have lived in condos where asking your neighbour for the proverbial cup of sugar is greeted by skeptical, confused faces and closed doors. But the majority have been open to the time-passing chats that break down barriers. My midtown apartment building is home mostly to young professionals and is the definition of nondescript. I frequently hold doors for people carrying packages and say "you're welcome" if they show gratitude. I have run errands for unfamiliar neighbours because I was heading out into the rain anyway and there was no point in us both getting wet. I chat like a fool while waiting in the laundry room. Of course, denying me the right to greet a woman in our shared hallway fails to measure up to reported conflicts that have caused a culture clash, such as Canada's reaction to a recent Afghan law allowing some husbands to withhold food until their wives agree to sex, or the case of a Toronto-area father and son accused of killing a daughter who refused to wear a hijab at school. I discussed my situation with the head of a prominent Muslim women's rights organization, who was understandably more concerned with the living conditions of the woman in question. She described the segregation of sexes as one of the worst examples of fundamentalist Islamic misinterpretation and dismissed the idea that my greeting could be construed as an offence. Keep smiling, keep saying hello, she advised. The successful cohesion of cultures requires concessions from both sides. Offence or not, I have continued to greet those I share a building with, although the couple next door continue living in reclusion. The alternative to this is to live amongst strangers in an icy standoff, fearful that the slightest attempt at community might be viewed as an affront. The alternative is to abandon prairie law, turn your back and close your eyes. And that sounds terrible.

Toronto Muslim files complaint after Infidel says hello to his wife. It's a new article and funny. http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=1618828 Hallway culture clash In a Toronto apartment building, a feud has broken out over a neighbourly 'hello.' What hath multiculturalism wrought? Matthew Coutts, National Post Published: Friday, May 22, 2009 In trying to adapt to a patchwork of often conflicting cultures, has civility become the casualty of accommodation? When the landlady of my Toronto apartment building said an outraged neighbour had filed a complaint about me over an apparently inappropriate hallway interaction with his wife, my mind raced through the countless conversations I've had with fellow tenants, none of which seemed a possible source of offence. It turns out, it wasn't a salacious transaction that had caused the complaint, but rather a neighbourly and -- to me -- entirely forgettable greeting, little more than a brief "good morning" as I passed my neighbours on the way to work. Still, it was enough of an affront for the man -- once a doctor somewhere in the Middle East, my landlady clarified -- to feel I had broken a cultural taboo. The incident started an awkward feud which has involved warnings not to repeat my indiscretion and one face-to-face shouting match, which included allusions to my impending death. I expect the battle will wage on, as we appear to be stuck at an impasse. His Muslim upbringing has ingrained in him a sense of entitlement to demand I not speak directly to his wife; and my prairie upbringing has ingrained in me a duty to strive for polite cohesion with my neighbours. My landlady, who has handled the complaint with tittering trepidation, hasn't helped dispel the friction. She has told me to adhere to the demands because the man "could be dangerous," directing me to literally turn my back to the couple as they pass, never make eye contact and never hold the elevator for them, no matter what. Life among neighbours has become increasingly complicated by multiculturalism, in this case making even the most affable salutation or good Samaritan gesture a practice in walking on eggshells. But in trying to adapt to a patchwork of often conflicting cultures, has civility become the casualty of accommodation? I grew up in Manitoba, where it was an affront to your neighbour not to be cordial. If you didn't greet them by name you could be talked about in hushed voices and risked being labelled standoffish. Community amongst neighbours was not something to consider, it was a way of life. Call it prairie law. Since moving to Toronto, I have lived in condos where asking your neighbour for the proverbial cup of sugar is greeted by skeptical, confused faces and closed doors. But the majority have been open to the time-passing chats that break down barriers. My midtown apartment building is home mostly to young professionals and is the definition of nondescript. I frequently hold doors for people carrying packages and say "you're welcome" if they show gratitude. I have run errands for unfamiliar neighbours because I was heading out into the rain anyway and there was no point in us both getting wet. I chat like a fool while waiting in the laundry room. Of course, denying me the right to greet a woman in our shared hallway fails to measure up to reported conflicts that have caused a culture clash, such as Canada's reaction to a recent Afghan law allowing some husbands to withhold food until their wives agree to sex, or the case of a Toronto-area father and son accused of killing a daughter who refused to wear a hijab at school. I discussed my situation with the head of a prominent Muslim women's rights organization, who was understandably more concerned with the living conditions of the woman in question. She described the segregation of sexes as one of the worst examples of fundamentalist Islamic misinterpretation and dismissed the idea that my greeting could be construed as an offence. Keep smiling, keep saying hello, she advised. The successful cohesion of cultures requires concessions from both sides. Offence or not, I have continued to greet those I share a building with, although the couple next door continue living in reclusion. The alternative to this is to live amongst strangers in an icy standoff, fearful that the slightest attempt at community might be viewed as an affront. The alternative is to abandon prairie law, turn your back and close your eyes. And that sounds terrible.

LOL Those are great sites, by the way. Very expensive courses though. Cheaper to join the armed forces - and they let you practice your skills on real people as well! :lol: K.

Fateh! The actions of these Namdharis might seem a little odd to us, but they are uncontrollable expressions of the mast they feel when they listen to Gurbani from Sri Guru Granth Sahib (and compositions of their own gurus) that is sung in the correct raag with traditional instruments (i.e., the way that shabad bani is supposed to be sung and the way it was sung in the times of the Gurus up to Guru Gobind Singh Ji). Mainstream Sikhi frowns down upon these physical displays in Gurughar because it distracts others from their worship, but I sometimes wonder if more of us would be able to feel the same mast more easily if kirtan was done in this traditional way. Anyway, I hope the old man was able to locate his kangha afterwards without too much trouble. Regards, K.

Fateh! Greying of hair is hereditary like male pattern baldness, so all your friend can do is retard its progress. Washing his beard daily in a strong tea made of rosemary and/or sage may help. This may also make his beard grow in a little quicker. He can also try the desi treatment for the condition which is to massage amla oil into the hair roots. Have him take a good multivitamin with minerals like copper (for melanin) in them, and tell him to eat more protein in his diet. Anxiety can also cause premature greying, so tell him not to sweat the little things unless he wants to look like Bhai Gandalf Singh by the time he's 25. K.

Fateh! Confusingh, I accept your apology, but there is no need for it. Just try to listen to what your Gursikh brothers like SunSingh are saying, in particular meditate on the bani they are quoting you, don't just respond instantly with a refutation because the panktis are not in accord with your beliefs. If you do the latter, you will completely miss the point of what they are trying to tell you. At the end of the day, you gain nothing debating points from Sri Guru Granth Sahib as it not a mere holy book like the Bible - it is our Living Guru. Every akhar and every pankti is a direct communication from Akal Purakh to your soul, they are not words you can quote and interpret for everybody else because everybody has a different avastha, and the same pankti will reveal a whole new level of meaning to you when your avastha changes as a result of the bhagti and simran that you do. Sikhi teaches that everyone is equal; in other words, you do not have to be born a certain caste to gain enlightenment. But that doesn't mean that everyone is the same. I probably understand more mathematics than you because that's what I do, but I will never be at the level of a great natural mathematician like Srinivasa Ramanujan. In a similar way, some people have done more naam abhyaas in this life and former lives, and are at a totally different level to us. However, we will eventually reach the same level of God-realisation as them, but it might not happen in this lifetime. Now, your experience (through which you, me and everybody else interpret the message of the Guru Granth) may teach you that Sants in human form do not exist and that all people who have that title attached to their names may be fakes and conmen, but my experience teaches me otherwise. I believe that, if you continue to do sangat of Gursikhs, you will meet a real one one day. The same can be said of siddhis. I don't claim any powers, but the reason that you find Gursikhs arguing with you about the panktis in bani regarding their existence, is because they have either experienced them themselves or know some other Gursikh who has. As I said earlier, they come naturally (much like large muscles come naturally from lifting heavy objects) but they only give you hankaar if you start making use of them. You can lift weights to be stronger than the next person but be humble at the same time, or you can develop ego as a result of the large muscles that come about as a side-effect of strength training and misuse your size to intimidate others. Do you understand? You may want to do some research on the concept of jivanmukhti in Sikhi. We are told to obtain this while we have the blessing and advantage of being in human form. There is a katha somewhere on this site in which Sant Jagjit Singh Harkhowale discusses this issue (I believe you can find them on this site). Regards, K.

Fateh! Are we "conversating" again? :D So now you are saying Sants don't exist again? Singh, make up your mind and let me know when you have come to a decision. And I thought you only follow Sri Guru Granth Sahib, but now you are using the AKJ as some sort of authority? And, pray tell, what other jatha does not believe in the existence of Sants? Does your last sentence mean that you are both a liar and a figment of my imagination? See the references that SunSingh and other Gursikhs have given you regarding Sants and Brahmgyanis, and listen to what they are saying as they are being patient and kind and going out of their way to educate you. Regards, K.

Derkha derkha! K.

Well mate, if you do not want people to respond to your ideas, it's probably not a good idea to post them on a discussion forum. As to who is lying and who is not, your posts are all here for everyone to read so they can make their own minds up. I never questioned whether they exist, but those who are put forward nowadays as Sants don't do anything in a selfless manner, they only do so for personal gain, this is not Sikhi. Well, it's good to know that you now agree that Sants do exist since plenty of people here have shown you the relevant shabads. As to quoting gurbani, Singh, I could show you a line from Sri Guru Granth Sahib that says the sky is blue and you will turn around and say, well blue here actually means green, and by sky Guru ji actually meant apples, and of course "is" is "were" as the apples Guru Ji is actually talking about are Delicious Red apples that have now become ripe - and this is why oranges are forbidden in Sikhism. Regards, K.

Fateh! They ARE spreading Islam, their intentions ARE Islamic. These modern day Muslims are doing the same thing that their ancestors have done since the creation of Islam, the same thing has been happening since the 7th century and yet people want to believe that it is some kind of anomaly and that Islam as a religious and political entity is actually peaceful and tolerant. I know that Sikhi has a reputation of acceptance (not just tolerance), but you do not have to tolerate intolerance and you do not have to respect someone's beliefs because they are under the impression that they are revealed by some spiritual entity. The sooner people stop being so politically correct and call a spade a spade, the sooner we will be able to deal with such issues. My advice is to read the history of Islamic conquests, learn about taquiyyah (the practice of deception for the furtherance of Islam), and just plain look around you and look at the chaos that Islam has created in every single country where Muslims are a majority. On the one hand, you have Muslims destroying everything in their path and enforcing Islamic law; on the other hand, you have the greasy smooth Islamic apologists like Tariq Ramadan telling you that these Muslims are actually misguided (but fail to explain the fact that these jihadis are using Islamic texts and precedent as reasons). Yet the same thing keeps happening - more countries fall apart under Islamic terrorism, others cave into Muslim demands through the political process, and as soon as the Muslim population becomes a majority, they apply Islam through force and initimidation. Educate yourself and know more about Sikhi AND Islam than any Muslim fanatic you encounter, plant a seed of doubt in his or head and watch them fall apart. Don't feel that you have to sit back and respectfully listen to their arguments, and don't feel that it is wrong to attack their religious principles and texts out of some misguided belief that it is somehow an unSikh thing to do. Also read the old rehat maryadas concerning Muslims, as they are still a good guide to relating with them. These are things our ancestors learned through painful experience so we would not have to. Regards, K.

Enemies of the Panth: Ourselves. K.

Gurbrakaal, Excellent post, Veer ji. I agree with everything that you have posted except this: I've seen a few very well educated people trapped by the double-speak and cult techniques of recruiters for Islam and other religious ideologies. Education, strong self-confidence and knowledge of Sikhi does not mean that one becomes immune to such brainwashing. The only real preventative is to keep sangat of Gursikhs, be involved in your community and your family so that you have a support system in place, and share your concerns with them when it is necessary. (This is in addition to regular bhagti.) I would also recommend some reading about cult recruitment techniques and brainwashing, if only to be able to recognise such behaviour and to get out of there if you detect them. Regards, K.

Fateh! There's no point reading American media as they have been castrated by the whining of Muslims in that country who complain about the portrayal of Muslims as terrorists (even when the terrorists are Muslim). See bbc news site for more information. The 4 men are Muslims. Note how CNN only reports their European names and makes no mention of their Islamic names, and note how they say nothing about the anti-Semitic angle. K. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8060684.stm Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play. </p> Four men were arrested late on Wednesday over alleged plots to attack targets in and near New York. The four planned to blow up synagogues and use Stinger missiles to bring down military planes, US prosecutors said. The men were seized after allegedly planting what they thought were bombs near two synagogues in the Bronx area. They earlier agreed to buy explosives from FBI agents posing as Islamic militants. New York has been on alert for a new terror attack since 9/11. The four are charged with conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction within the US and conspiracy to acquire and use anti-aircraft missiles, officials said. The charges carry jail terms of between 25 years and life imprisonment. The four, all Muslims, are to appear in a federal court later. They were named as James Cromitie (also known as Abdul Rahman), David Williams (aka Daoud and DL), Onta Williams (aka Hamza) and Laguerre Payen (aka Amin and Almondo). A senior FBI official in New York said three were US citizens and one was from Haiti. BBC defence and security correspondent Rob Watson says the case appears to be a classic sting operation against suspected home-grown militants rather than a plot with any links to known international terrorism. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the alleged plot showed "homeland security threats against New York City [were] sadly all too real". 'Sought weapons' The arrests were the result of a year-long investigation, officials said. The defendants wanted to engage in terrorist attacks," said Lev Dassin, acting US attorney for the Southern District of New York. "They selected targets and sought the weapons necessary to carry out their plans." According to prosecutors, the men planned to detonate cars packed with C-4 plastic explosives outside the Riverdale Temple and the Riverdale Jewish Center in the Bronx district of the city. They also intended to target military planes at the New York Air National Guard base at Stewart Airport, 60 miles (85 km) north of New York City. <A class=bodl href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8060684.stm#map" __eventIdglow885782234="97">See a map of alleged targets In their efforts to obtain weapons for the attack, the men dealt with an informant from the FBI, who provided the group "with an inactive missile and inert explosives." "They had bags that were set up that they believed to be bombs, carrying about 30 pounds of explosives which they believed to be explosives," FBI official Joseph Demarest told reporters. 'Afghan war anger' According to prosecutors, Mr Cromitie - whose parents are from Afghanistan - told an FBI informant in June 2008 that he was angry over the US-led war in Afghanistan. He "expressed an interest in 'doing something to America"'. From October 2008, the informant began meeting him regularly along with the four others at a house in which the FBI had concealed video and audio equipment. The group allegedly "expressed desire" to attack targets in New York and Mr Cromitie "asked the informant to supply surface-to-air guided missiles and explosives", prosecutors say. In April 2009, the group agreed on the synagogues they intended to attack and proceeded to conduct surveillance, including taking photographs of the warplanes at the military base, prosecutors say. Mr Cromitie allegedly pointed out Jews in the street, saying "if he had a gun, he would shoot each one in the head", according to the district attorney's statement. According to the statement, he told the informant that attacking the Jewish community centre would be a "piece of cake". He also said he would be interested in joining Jaish-e-Mohammed - a Pakistan-based group considered a terrorist organisation by Washington - "to do jihad".

Fateh! What the hell is up with the sikhiwiki.org article on this Darshan Dham cult? The first half describes the assassination of the cult's founder due to his beadbi, and the second seems to have been written either by one of his mindless cult followers or a fervent admirer. K.

Fateh! It's great that they took your issues on board, and I didn't expect anything less as Sindhis are genuinely good people, but why do they not just go to the gurdwara if they want to have darshan of Sri Guru Granth Sahib, where the issue of beadbi should hopefully not arise? That is what most Sindhis do. To be honest, it just seems like they are offering services like Akhand Paaths for financial reasons rather than anything else - more gods and religions being represented = more money for the priests. Regards, K.

Fateh! Whether you agree or disagree with the actions of the family, just learn something from it. Treat your daughters with as much love and respect as your sons, teach them Sikh values from a young age, and lead from example. And, for the love of God, don't use your home computer to learn how to make bombs if you are later planning to blow something up. Regards, K

Fateh! That was not his original point. I doubt that anyone here disagrees that knowledge is a good thing. I suggest that you read the thread from the beginning and tell us whether you also agree with his beliefs on the non-existence of siddhis, that sants do not exist, that Baba Deep Singh did not fight with his head in his hand after he was decapitated (because it is impossible according to science), that Nihang aarti maryada is anti-Sikh, and that we should support a radio station that does nindiya of mahapurush and dasam bani. K.