LegalSingh

Calm down now Neosingh. Simmer down my friend. Nobody said anything about sham marriages for immigration purposes being 'acceptable' but you have, 3 times now on this thread, associated immigration sham marriages with 'incest' and 'peadophilia'. Its almost as if you believe people in a sham marriage actually sleep with each other. If, even after taking a few deep breaths you find yourself still as angry and irate as a Daily Mail reader then may I suggest, if you're from the UK, you ask your parents or grandparents for the truth of how so and so in your family came to this country in the 60's. After hearing the answers, and knowing how angry you are, I fully expect you to give yourself a damn good beating before throwing yourself out of the country in disgust at yourself. Seriously now bruvs, the thread is about the true evils of peadophilia and incest. You cheapen the seriousness of those crimes by likening them to insurance fraud and immigration fraud.

Having a 'sham marriage' with someone on paper for a few months just to get immigration clearance is hardly the same thing as actually having sexual relations with them neosingh. The vast majority of Sikhs that came into the UK in the 1960's came by doing very similar sorts of things. Sister's pretended to be wives......brothers pretended to be sons.....strangers pretended to be children etc.

^ Their faces should be used in the poster campaign against first-cousin marriages. The lesson of the danger of physical deformities from such marriages will only hit home when people see the actual evidence with their own eyes.

Census reports for which districts ? I would be inclined to think that the 'Punab' mentioned in that census is the area known as Haryana today, as the jatt clans of doaba became Sikhs alot earlier than the relatively recent singh sabha movement. For example a large chunk of the Sikh diaspora comes from just 2 different areas of doaba in Jalandhar district ; The manjki tract and the villages around Talwan. Both these areas have their Sikh roots since the 1700's. The first as a tract given as a jagir to various jatt Sikh clans by the moghul emporer in oder to keep the peace with them and the second as a cluster of jatt Sikh villages constantly, since the 1700's, at war with the extremely powerful pathans of Talwan. Thus the doaba jatt Sikhs have been Sikh since at least the 1700's so the 1920's of the singh sabha movement makes little sense as a point of reference given how being a Sikh meant power in doaba from the misl time onwards. Now, the term doaba is used a little to widely these days because the areas within are actually extremely different in terms of demographics and geography. We must therefore, seperate Jalandhar district from Hoshiarpur district for this discussion. Even Rudyard Kipling in his book 'Kim' makes his vegetable grower a 'Saini' from Hoshiarpur, because historically the main farmers of that district have always been Sainis rather than Jatt. As the Sainis enjoyed no power either under the Misls or the Sikh Raj I would guess that they could well be converts from the recent singh sabha movement My own guess is that happened during 3 phases in doaba : The first when Guru Arjan Dev ji came to doaba to get married. The second during Guru Hargobind ji's time when Sikhism took on a martial fighting tradition and thirdly during the misl times. And if I had to choose between the 3, I would guess that it mainly occurred during the 6th Guru's time when Sikhism changed to a more military aspect. Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji shows us that somewhere between the 1st and the 10th Guru, the Khatris started to abandon Sikhism en masse. I have no doubt that it happened during the 6th Guru's time when large numbers of jatts became Sikhs. ਖਤ੍ਰੀਆ ਤ ਧਰਮੁ ਛੋਡਿਆ ਮਲੇਛ ਭਾਖਿਆ ਗਹੀ ॥ The K'shatriyas (khatris) have abandoned their religion, and have adopted a foreign language (become Turks) Short answer, californiasardar, is no. All we know is that the muslim jatt clans formerly of doaba were re-located by the Pakistan government solely in what was then Lyalpur district and is now Faisalabad district. That is why even today the doaba Punjabi dialect is known as Faisalabadi Punjabi in Pakistan because the dialect of Faisalabad is today doabi. But for all the jatt Sikh clans the answer to our family history still lies with the mirasis in Pakistan. As I mentioned before different groups of Sikhs in Punjab before partition had different practices. Some went to Hardwar etc and kept records, but for the jatts there was always a relationship with the mirasis. Indeed the word 'miras' means heritage and thus the very definition of the word mirasi is 'keeper of the heritage'. By actual definition then the main function of the mirasi was to keep and narrate the family heritage.

There are many photographs in today's media in India of Jazzy B cavorting disgustingly with the disgusting Hard Kaur the other day. So I'm confused. Does he do the good Sikhi stuff just to make his name or does he do it just for a joke ? If a man doesn't suffer from mental problems how does he reconcile espousing the moral good of Sant Bhindrawale on Monday and then making lewd public poses with a skank that insults Guru Gobind Singh ji, on Thursday ? Seriously I'm intrigued. What happens between Monday and Thursday that makes a man do a complete 360 moral and ethical u-turn ? Monday: Thursday :

I'm probably off-point here but if we're genuinely referring to very 'high' studies in Sikhism, there are extremely good possibilities of Phd type research into Sikh related topics at the very internationally reputed University of London's School of African and Oriental Studies. The Dean there is a Sikh, although mona, called Gurpahal Singh whose area of expertise and interest is 'Sikh' related studies. As recent reports have highlighted we here in the UK have the highest rated centres of learning in the world per population. Study here has genuine international value. Thus we here should always grab the opportunity to research and advance Sikhism, especially when opportunities such as that mentioned above come our way.

Thats actually very true. Before partition, for rural jatt Sikhs it was the mirasis that kept the records of family history. Not written records mind.....the mirasi tradition was and is purely oral, passed on from generation to generation. After 1947, the only mirasis that stayed behind were the bhangra singers such as kuldip manak etc. The rest all left for Pakistan. Thus, as the muslim half of my clan has since re-settled in rural district Faislabad, thats probably where I'd have to go to get an in-depth history of my family. If I had to guess though....I'd say we only became Sikhs from Guru Hargobind ji's time onwards. Most Jatts only joined when the martial fighting tradition started. Btw....that Punjab govt website is total rubbish. Not only can I not find anything on it but it even has my village listed in the wrong Tehsil.

I've said the same thing here many many times. Our UK problem with muslims is tiny in comparison with the number of Sikhs in Canada marrying Christians, becoming Christians and raising their children as Christians, Tiny ! The difference is that we care whereas they don't. We take to the streets at a moments notice whereas they don't. In the same vein...having lived in Canada...the most visible difference is the way that in Canada the 'Sikh rights' 'Khalistan' game is almost solely the reserve of the old men. In the UK the opposite is true. It is the young 2nd, 3rd and 4th generation British born Sikhs who are always at the forefront of demonstrations etc. Things happen in Canada that would never be tolerated here. The only thing that unites us is Sikhi. Other than that we are world's apart in outlook and society norms.

How was Sadda Haq "interactive" ? I think you mean 'target' audience rather than 'targeted' audience. Targeted audience means after watching it in the theatre we will be targetted by death squads. Anyway if we're his target audience than he'd be preaching to the already converted. Thus even £10,000 would be money wasted. What we need is for him to make the type of movie that can be entered into international film festivals and are appreciated by the influential educated elite...i.e the people in powerful positions in things such as media etc. Studies have shown such people overwhelmingly appreciate movies such as those that come out of Iran which cost far less than the £200,000 Kuljinder Singh spent on Sadda Haq. The melodramatic bad over-acting and cheesy dialogue of Sadda Haq is about as opposite of the quality end as you can get. Judging by his first movie, Kuljinder Singh is wanting to run before he can walk. We all appreciate the good thing he did but he's clearly not up to the job of making a mega expensive large scale war movie type film of quality. Thats why I'm saying he'd do a far better job by concentrating on dialogue, acting and editing to tell the story on a low budget. If the Sikh public are crying out for a '300' type mega movie to tell the story then perhaps we should make efforts to bring the director Tarsem Singh back into the Sikh fold. As an established name he was given a mega budget by Hollywood studios to make the film 'Immortals' in the same vein as '300'. Clearly, in naming his film 'Immortals' he was reminded of his Sikh roots (the Akalis).

Umm. Sorry Kuljinder Singh but you don't "need" any of those things. You want them....but you don't need them. All you need is a very small amount of money to go with a superb first class dialogue centered script and a cast that can genuinely act. And of course, the make or break of all movies : good editing. When you try and show everything you end up showing nothing at all because it doesn't make cenematic sense. With decent dialogue and acting the whole film could be set in 2 or 3 rooms with a handful of actors, with events being heard to happen in the background. I know you're gonna make this movie so I implore you not to make the same mistakes as made in Sadda Haq. Don't try and tell too much.....No melodramatic over-acting.......no cheesy dialogue.....No bad background music. Get non-actors to act. Use real voices of real people. Real dialects. Real expressions. Real emotions. Do not make it like Sadda Haq.

Speak for yourself. I look down on all smokers. In fact not only we Sikhs, but society norms do too in this day and age. In fact, in terms of 'persecuting' them, mainstream feeling in society is to deny them access to the NHS etc.

This is terrible. :angry2: But what is the legal situation in America regarding kirpans ? Did AMC behave unethically or illegally ? Did they simply go against the their own ethics published in their corporate policy or did they break a right enshrined in law ? My natural reaction is to suggest Singh and Kaur start legal action against AMC, but I realise discrimination law in America is very different to the UK. In America it is a long and costly process, not unlike 3rd world countries. In Europe of course such action is completely free, as it is considered for the social good. Given the Chinese company's recent losses regarding disability discrimination I suggest Singh and Kaur and indeed all of us, remind the very Jewish orientated board of AMC of the very first anti-Jewish Law that Germany passed in 1933. That Law banned Jews from attending movie theatres......in other words gave cinemas the right to refuse entry to Jews simply for being a Jew. Trust me, there are many points of ours that AMC will either not understand or simply ignore....but this one will hit home hard.

Life is never that simple bruvs. The character you see as 'intolerance'in others can just as easily be found in ourselves.But of course it is human nature to see others as wrong and ourselves as always right. For example we 'look down' on smoking, but a Hindu sadhu in Amritsar might put forward the view that smoking hash is a fundamental part of his religion. But I'll be damned if I'm gonna let him do it openly in my holy city.

The rapist inviting the victim over for tea and a chat. "Come on in......I just want a chat" said the spider to the fly.

Knowing both Canada and the UK well I feel I am well placed to answer your query. The answer, basically, boils down to differences in types of 'Pakistanis' and differences in society norms per se. In no particular order, these are the reasons : 1) Pakistanis in Canada are overwhelmingly Punjabi. Pakistanis in England are overwhelmingly Mirpuri. The Mirpuris are known as 'junglees' in Pakistan itself as they are seen as backward and criminals. In normal circumstances, even Pakistani Punjabis don't like to associate themselves with them. 2) In Canada, a youth born to Pakistani parents and a youth born to Sikh parents find a common ground in that they rally around the Maple Leaf. Their 'Canadianess' unites them. That is not how things work in the old world. In the old world nationalism and patriotism is akin to facism. Thus neither muslim youth born in Britain nor Sikh youth born in Britain have anything to unite them under the British flag. Having been to nagar kirtans in Canada that is actually a fundamental difference between our two diasporas. Whilst the Canadian flag is given pride of place among Canadian Sikhs the British Sikhs never allow the British flag to have any place let alone pride of place. The only flag that matters is our national flag ; The Khanda. In fact, during nagar kirtans in many British cities the city officials have offical ceremonies where they lower the British flag from city hall and hoist the Khanda instead for the day as a mark of the khanda's supremecy. 3) Both the American adminstration and world authority at large recognise that the UK has probably more al-quaida sympathisers than anywhere else in the world. London is the acknowleged world centre of extreme islamic thought. It is a society where 2nd, 3rd and 4th generation British Pakistanis are far far more Islamic than their parents and grandparents. It is a society where the children of Pakistani immigrants force and coerce their mothers to cover themselves up with the veil. Similarly, 2nd,3rd and 4th generation British born Sikhs are far more likely to know more about Sikhism and display Sikh pride and be Khalistani than their Indian born parents and grandparents. This kind of dynamic is not present in Canada,

The Sikh Kingdom of Punjab wasn't the most prosperous part of India at the time because it quite simply wasn't part of India. Had absolutely nothing to do with it. The Punjab has spent far far more of its time as being the easternmost province of Persia (and was always Persia's richest and most prosperous province) but we don't today call ourselves Persians do we ? One characteristic of the Sikh Kingdom was that it never looked south towards India for anything. Not for inspiration....not for expansion....not for nothing. It always looked towards central Asia and that it is where it would have continued it's empire. As for it's power, one need not look much farther than the 'Great Game' for an illustration. As the 3 powers (Britain, France and Russia) played the great game it was the 4th power (the Sikh Kingdom of Punjab) that held the most powerful pieces in this game of chess. It was the Sikh Kingdom that the other 'powers' were tripping over themselves to impress and fawn over. Had the unfortunate events not occurred after Ranjit Singh's death there is no doubt that our power and empire would have grown as a result of alligning ourselves very closely with the French.

UK Sikhs are in a very unique and strange position. A position very different to the rest of the dispora. In the rest of the diaspora, for example Canada, Australia and America, Sikhism is racially attacked by the right wing but protected by liberals. In the UK its the total opposite. The extreme right wing absolutely love the Sikhs and constantly make public announcements expressing their love, whilst the liberals and left wing attack us. Its a very mental and messed up situation. :stupidme:

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.

If The Oxford English Dictionary were looking for a newer definition for the word 'irony' they could do worse than compare Sikhism and Hinduism. The ansestors of Sikhs left Hinduism partly because that faith was full to the brim with meaningless rituals, which the Sikhs abhored. Fast forward 300 years and we're at the stage where it is possible for a Sikh to leave Sikhism and embrace Hinduism because Sikhism seems to be full of riuals and, in contrast, Hinduism seems to have very few in comparison. Rituals rituals ritiuals. What is a non-Sikh supposed to make of it all ? He'll read about our history....how we started as an antidote to rituals....and he'll see how today we've got so many rituals we've got them coming out of our ears. We have become the world's kings of rituals.

Who in the world ever suggested life was good there ? No they wern't. Hindus had to. Not Sikhs. Again, you would be wise to talk to actual Afghan Sikhs and learn something, The story of the Sikhs being forced to wear yellow stars appeared first in an Indian newspaper and folloshly other news agencies took it as gospel. The Indian news media did that because they they associate Sikhs as being Hindus but the taliban itself did not do that. They actually had a healthy respect for Sikhs, partly because they were largely pashtun and so not only had a respect for the historiy between the 2 but also, under their pakhtoonwali code of conduct, had a duty to ensure the safety of their fellow monotheist neighbours. Now, although we here might have the impression that a city such as Kabul is pathan dominated the truth is that the pathans are a tiny minority there. That city is mostly full of the northern alliance supporters.....Uzbeks, Tajiks etc. The kind of people bitterly opposed to what you call the 'islamification' of the taliban. It is these people that have made life a misery for Kabul's Sikhs since the taliban fall. All I was suggesting to you then is the fact that the actual facts clearly counter the previous poster's contention that 'islamification' is to blame for the fate of the Sikhs.

Thats painting quite a misleading picture really. I mean I've talked to alot of Afghan Sikhs round these parts and they all say their problems started after the fall of the Taliban. You see the 'Islami' reign, under the taliban, was actually the only time in the last 30 years that Sikhs could get on with their lives in safety. After the fall of the taliban criminals took over the country and the life of a non-muslim became very cheap, and as businesmen in Afghanistan they became open targets. So, if anything the 'lesson; you speak of is actually the fact that 'islamication' was a good thing for Afghanistan's Sikhs and the de-islamification has proved to be a terrible thing.

Not that it matters, because it really doesn't, but Udham Singh was a Kamboj, not a jatt.

My own personal opinion is that the most fundamental difference is that one is a god-fearing religion and the other is a god-loving reliigion. Sikhs love god. Islam, and indeed all 3 of the semetic faiths, claim they also love god but I don't see how you can love something or someone that you fear, Their whole concept behind Islam, Christianity and Judaism is based on fear.....i.e love god or you will be skinned alive in the fires of hell for all eternity, furious vengence of god etc. So how can you genuinely love someone you fear ? For me, that is akin to a wife being in an abusive relationship. She doesn't leave him because she fears him and when questioned she says she stays with him because she loves him and he loves her. Sikhi, on the other hand, is all about love.

What a wonderful man, and I'm not just saying that coz I'm a Sikh. I'd say it too if he stuck up for a Hindu's religious principles too. Such men are rare. Deserves all the credit coming his way. Can't read Punjabi so don't know the full details but if someone could paste a photo of the man I would be most grateful. Would love to see the face of such a wonderful man.

I stated last week on a number of threads how many of you and also the Sikh canadian mp's had got it wrong in thinking FIFA make the rules. I stated it was IFAB that make the rules for football worldwide, not fifa. I also stated how, in a nod to the founding fathers of football, the IFAB board make-up is entirely British (English, Welsh and Scottish footballing bodies) and given the official English acknowldegment of the turban there was an absolute zero chance that IFAB would agree with Quebec's decision.