isingh1699

1- Aisha's age is documented to be 9

Many Islamic Scholars say this..

but it doesn't matter. You are not here to learn...and I won't educate you..since it serves my purpose. You can keep abusing Prophet Muhammad...what you don't realize is that there are other readers reading your and mine discussion..a curious, immature, young Muslim surfing

his current faith (which he might have considered changing had you put some intellectually simulating arguments against Islam in a respectable, seemingly honest manner instead of abusing--even if that abuse was factual

2- Do you think hundreds of millions of Muslim Arabs are somehow 'terrified' that if they leave Islam, they'll be killed?

3- Prophet Muhammad (SAW) was definitely the best human that ever lived

On this bro hahaha ... where do I start???

1. Is a laughable new excuse dreamt up by Muslim apologists who realise that a 54 year old Prophet Muhammad having sex with a 9year old child Aisha is morally unacceptable to all non-Muslims ... hence via al-taqiyya they deny authenticated Hadiths like Sahih al-Bukhari and seem to ignore "dolls" etc. Regards Muslims on this forum changing their faith I don't really consider that much of a statistical likelihood to be honest. But the more the true facts about Muhammad are more widely known and the quotes from the Quran that non-Muslims dislike are better recognised, the more that serves my purpose (as an opponent of Prophet Muhammad's personal ideology and lifestyle). Stating facts can never be considered abuse bro.

2. I genuinely believe that bro. I'm sure there are tens of millions of educated Muslims who simply don't believe that Allah(swt) was the author of the Quran and that they literally stay in Islam (outwardly) to avoid death and/or the rejection of their wider family and Muslim society.

3. See I just cannot get beyond the thinking that some consider Prophet Muhammad the best example humanity has to offer when the man sold human beings into slavery (amongst his other various well documented crimes against humanity). Even though officially he's stated to be a man I believe the closet status afforded to him (by himself) is a partner of Allah (in reality ... despite the denials). The verses relating to Hafsa and Aisha and the Coptic slavegirl and Surah 66 are pretty convenient for someone to author to benefit his sexual "appetite" (as you know what tasting honey was a euphemism for)! But to allege that Allah authored the Quran really is ludicrous (given it's content and messages)! LOL

1. You'll be wasting your time by calling Prophet a pedophile, or by insulting Islam vigorously as you and others often do here...I mean, insulting like that and dawah don't go hands in hands you know...

2. On a serious note : These is nothing that makes Muslims shy away from Sikhi...The problem is that Islam has built-in structures that make it very, very hard against outside ideologies/influences. For example, Islamic doctrine that Prophet Muhammad was last messenger and Qur'an is the last message of God etc....no other religious system has such built-in doctrines in such clear way. I mean, Qur'an literally mentions it...Bible, Gita, Guru Granth, Torah etc do not mention such doctrines in explicit terms as Islam does.

3. So when someone reach to a Muslim for 'dawah', Muslims generally don't give two heeds about what is being said...b/c remember, it is already established that Islam is the last, and only true faith and Allah himself says it in his book very explicitly (a thing missing in ALL religions)...

4. Salafism has alot to do with politics too. They don't even listen to the preaching of traditional Islam, forget about Sikhi...These movements arise from a culture that is highly tribal and politicized...and the actions of others make them more radical. I mean, look at today, just few hours ago..Army over-threw MuslimBrotherhood's government in Egypt...now, do you think that followers of Muslim Brotherhood will leave party OR they'll become even more radical?

1. Very true bro in respect of a personal face to face setting. But i figured that a proud Muslim coming on to a Sikh forum is hardly a candidate for enlightening about Sikhi, so why not go the direct route and cut out the Islamic dawah at source - as after all, nobody can defend the indefensible and established facts relating to the facts that Muhammad was indeed what is considered to be a pedophile and obviously Muhammad's ownership of slaves and his sale of human beings for financial gain is well documented in the Hadiths, as is the age of Aisha at which he (at 54 years old) consummated the marriage with her (when she was only a 9year old little girl).

2. I hear you and obviously these indoctrination methods have been perfected all the way since the time of Abu Bakr (Aisha's father for those that don't know) but surely educated Muslims themselves can see through the lies themselves? I mean when I read the Quran from cover to cover I was absolutely disgusted by the picture of Allah painted by Muhammad. So surely many Muslims see the character of Muhammad for exactly what he was but are just scared to leave the faith openly?

3. I agree with you, no matter what logical proofs are offered clearly disproving Islam the average indoctrinated believer will stick by Muhammad regardless of the fact that only Allah (swt) + the answers to be given to the most High should be important rather than any misguided loyalty to a man that sold women and children into slavery.

4. Opposing Salafism as I do, one thing is crystal clear, it represents the true ethos of Islam in the true spirit of how Muhammad treated kaffirs+opponents. All the other Muslim schools of thought are glorified apologists I strongly believe.

What the eff? O.o

What kind of policy is this? Punjab is already a fertile, agricultural area...agricultural yields must be sold in highly urbanized centers, and industrial zones of country. How Sikhs sell their products if they are not allowed to sell crops out side of state? What is the logic behind this law? Any idea?

It's not so much that the agricultural produce remains restricted to Punjab. It's the fact that the enemy bureaucrats for GOI artifically control the prices by purchasing the produce within the state at artificially low levels. The logic of our enemies is that they keep our people poor and supply the food at subsidised prices to innocent folks who they then program into believing Hinduism and/or voting for the Congress Party. The enemy bureaucrats are afraid of us. All our enemies who have attacked us have been afraid of us because Sikhi stands for equality, justice, fairness and goodwill to all and hence they try to oppress us (or use us) as that doesn't fit or didn't fit with the exploitative model upon which they run their control over nations/empires.

Hence, the urgent importance for us to grow our numbers beyond the 2% that Sikhs currently are among India's 1.25billion.

Problem isn't infrastructure, Sikh Punjab is mostly farming; sikhs have only increased from 15 % to 20% in urban areas since 47. Farming is becoming less viable due to government policies like not letting Sikhs sell crops out of state, which are some of main issues pertaining to independence of Sikh nation. Only reason land hasn't been further subdivided is because of murder of generation born during 70s by Indian gov. 10-20 years after that.

Yes bro East Punjab has historically had the best infrastructure in India but i think our Pakistani veer was meaning more in terms of facilitating higher urban densities. When we see how Ludhiana floods so badly so often it's clear our infrastructure is still poor overall, if considered against global standards rather than compared to Bihar etc.

Why we are still a minority in urban East Punjab astounds me. No wonder everyone in the cities of East Punjab talks in Hindi.

With subdivision and discriminatory GOI policies farming simply isn't viable and those with uneconomic landholdings need to ditch farming asap and work in the urban commercial sector so that Sikhs have more of a presence where the real money is. Rural Sikhs in Punjab can learn a trick or two from our Pakistani Veer's Arain caste in that respect. 100 years ago they were mainly all farmers in united Punjab. Now if I'm not mistaken the Arain caste in Pakistani Punjab dominates the number of lawyers in Lahore courts and has been very successful in making it in an urban commercial setting (despite their equally rural background) so perhaps our Pakistani veer will be kind enough to educate us on the secrets of the Arain caste's success?

1. E.Punjab has more population density than our side of Punjab..I guess it is b/c of the fact that Indian Punjab was divided further into three pieces. As you divide a land, population density becomes larger...

2. Indian Punjab's population density in 550 person per sq. kilometer...which isn't that much. With proper infrastructure...Indian Punjab can hold many more people..

3. Once human civilization finds a way to develop an ecosystem in deserts that can sustain human populations, many of our current problems will be solved.

4. Significant part of Arabia and North Africa is desert....Arabs must invest in heavily is research of advancing agriculture in deserts, using sea water for growing food in desert and so on..if this is successful...then Arabia can become one of the main population centers of the planet and current number of 300 million Arabs can go upto nearly 1 billion Arabs!

By 2030, Islamic World would be holding 2 billion+ Muslims Inshallah...making use of desert will immensely help us too in increasing our numbers globally after 2030...

1. Yes Pakistani Punjab is more than four times bigger than East Punjab and has closer to a 100million people now whereas East Punjab has around 30% of the population size of Pakistani Punjab.

2. Yes, theoretically if the population density of East Punjab was the same as city like Macau then East Punjab could hold 1 billion people as one 50,000 sq/km metropolis. Then again if all buildings were tall like the Burj Khalifa or underground cities were built even more fanciful population projections can be made (without taking them too seriously). But fundamentally Sikhi is not a Punjabi phenomenon to be trapped within a couple of districts of East Punjab. It is a global faith with modern values which most of humankind agree with (if only they knew). So it's not about how we build our population in a tiny pocket of the original area covered by Khalsa Raj. It's about how the Sikh Panth has greater numbers from all different backgrounds in order to bring peace, brotherhood and spiritual happiness to the World. In that respect, my question to fellow Sikhs was how do we do that but my question to you as a proud Muslim is how can Sikhs reach out to fellow monotheists so that they join the Sikh Panth? Or are the Madrassa indoctrination programs so intense that we'd be wasting our time doing any parchaar (dawah) to Muslims? Bhai Mardana Ji the first Sikh bravely became Sikh despite the threat to his own life but with 500 million Muslims on our doorstep what is it about Sikhi that fundamentally makes many Muslims shy away from Sikhi even though it is a monotheistic faith based on logical truth especially when compared to Prophet Muhammad's claims? Or is this fear of leaving Islam purely + squarely controlled by Prophet Muhammad's decreed punishment (death) for brave ex-Muslim apostates?

3. Agreed

4. The prospect of Wahhabist numbers increasing in tandem with the Arab population is not appealing to non-Muslims ... so please can you advise how can monotheists like Sikhs remove jahilya-like ideologies which are popular with Salafist Arabs today and replace those discriminatory ideologies whch condone Slavery and Pedophilia with the slogan of Sarbath Da Bhalla (May God bless all humanity). That way even if there were 2 billion Arabs by 2050 a significant minority them would be Sikh, with others as Atheist, Muslims, Buddhists etc in a utopian world where most Arabs no longer associate themselves with the ideology of one Qureshi Slaveowner from Mecca around 14 centuries ago.

1. What do you mean by 25% of Sikhs?
2. Any source of your claim? I am interested to read. Is there any source of how many sikhs were there in the world in 1947 etc?
3. Yeah...Sikhs converting to Christianity is a big problem for Sikh community....
4. Strengthening the family-values and producing babies....

1. Yes Uggi wale Veer a horrific 25% of Sikhs in Pakistan were killed in 1947. The other 75% were ethnically cleansed out of Pakistan. It should be added that Sikhs will never condone the suffering of innocent Muslims from Uggi pind in Jalandhar district or any other village being treated badly in the mayhem of 1947 when the Muslims League wanted to again eradicate the Sikh Qaum.

However, those that actively demanded and voted for Pakistan (which left Sikhs as the main losers - as some often refer to us as) should rightly have been free to go to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan founded by a pork-eating, wine-swilling scoundrel like that Muslim Rajput called Jinnah and his sidekick the Punjabi Muslim Brahmin Iqbal.

2. Multiple sources. As you know academic research generally ranges from between 750,000 to 1.5million innocent deaths as a result of the Muslim demand for Pakistan and Partition and the Muslim League's employment of terrorist jihad tactics in order to achieve that objective and an ethnically cleansed state only for the supposed "master race" (=Ummah as described in the Quran). Around a million and half Sikhs lived in Pakistan in 1947. Given that it's widely acknowledged that at least 25-35% of the victims of partition were Sikh despite our percentage of the Punjabi population being more like 13% then it's clear the Sikh Panth suffered the horrific Genocide of around 25% of our people in Pakistan. Of course the 1947 Pakistani Genocide of Sikhs was not anywhere near as bad as earlier holocausts in which 50% and more of the Sikh Panth was killed off by Muslims. But victims of genocide are all equal and any honest Sikh will always condemn the suffering of innocent Muslims from Uggi or elsewhere in Punjab in 1947. Sadly when the Muslim League fanatics attacked Sikhs with a view to ethnically cleansing us out of Mahja, Malwa and Doaba as had been effectively achieved on the other side of the partition-designated border line they miscalculated and underestimated Sikhs. Even though Punjabi Muslims were more numerous than Sikhs in many areas like Amritsar, in a one on one situation (or a fair battle) Sikhs never retreat, Sikhs never surrender and Sikhs never come out as losers (should weaponry on both sides be equal).

3. True. American Christian missionaries bribing poor Sikhs to convert for financial gain is despicable. Luckily local Punjabi Muslims who stayed behind after 1947 - notably in the example of Malerkotla where Muslims are a majority - have enough knowledge of Sikhi to know that no significant numbers of normal Sikhs (who are not under severe financial pressure) will ever convert out of Sikhi given the ideology of Muhammad that Islam represents. All Abrahamic cults are dangerous but i agree with you in East Punjab, Sikhs should be most wary of American missionaries and to a lesser Wahhabist infiltrators.

4. Whilst you are correct on that, in isolation that will achieve nothing for Sikhs. Sikhs already have the lowest population growth rates in India because Sikhs are the richest community out of Hindu's, Sikhs, Muslims and Christians. Also East Punjab has a very high population density meaning there is an upper limit to population growth there. The Sikh community will only grow primarily from decent people whose parents are non-Sikh, who have faith in one God and want to see a society of justice, peace and brotherhood joining it. Fundamentally, there's nothing disqualifying you as our Punjabi veer from following in the esteemed footsteps of Bhai Mardana Ji but even if you don't all of the Sangat here will wish you a blessed Ramadan very soon.

You know what I strongly and openly oppose but it's never personal against you as we all realise how difficult it must be for a person (who personally might oppose slavery or pedophilia) to become an apostate from Islam.

so how many muslims converted to Sikhism? I have a feeling my ancestors were definitely muslims lol

Well that's something to be very proud that your ancestors were Muslims as of course Bhai Mardana Ji was the very first Sikh in our Panth. In Guru Nanak Dev Ji's Sangat 50% of the original Gursikhs were born to Muslim parents. The more Sikhi was considered a threat by the Islamic Empire of the Mughals more and more difficulty was placed in the way of Muslims wishing to join the Sikh Panth. Not least the punishment for apostasy in Islam. As Prophet Muhammad decreed that whoever dared to reject Muhammad's personal ideology should be put to death.

And thousands upon thousands of brave ex-Muslims that became Sikh were killed for leaving Islam. By the time of Guru Arjan Dev Ji Maharaj's shaheedi the Islamic Empire of the Mughals was openly killing down Sikhs and apostates from Islam were often among the first Sikhs to be brutally killed and subsequently generation by generation the Sikh Panth began to be comprised more of converts from Hinduism then Islam.

Sources say that sadly only 1 in 8 of the converts from Maharajah Ranjit Singh's time until 1947 were Muslim, while seven in eight were of Hindu ancestry. In that period between Maharajah Ranjit Singh's leadership of Punjab and 1947 the Muslim Jatts, Muslim Rajputs, Muslim Gujjars, Muslim Arain/Kambohs and Muslim Khatri's remained quite loyal to Islam and generally Muslims who became Sikh were from non-Saka tribal ancestries. Sadly since 1947 there have been even fewer converts to Sikhi from Islam the most famous of whom are probably Bhai Gurmohinder Singh Ji, Kuldip Manak and in the 1980's Shaheed Lakshman Singh Babbar.

Given that there are more than 500million Muslims in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh the SGPC should spend a bit of money translating Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji into Shahmukhi Punjabi script, Urdu, and Bengali at the very least. Once Muslims realise that Sikhi is all about 100% devotion to Allah and none other (just not slaveowners like Muhammad) a small minority of certain open-minded people born to Muslim parents will naturally come towards Sikhi - particularly women as Sikhi offers 100% gender equality whereas Islam discriminates and oppresses women. We can't stick to the old routine of not criticising the personal life and failings of slaveowners such as Prophet Muhammad online for fear of offending Muslims if the consequence is that innocent people with true faith in one God are left trapped within Islam. We need to encourage them towards Sikhi as the more people helping the Panth achieve the objective of a just and peaceful society the closer it will come to reality. If people are racistly told that they must remain in the religions they are born into all we can expect is more genocides, more bombs killing innocent victims, more grooming targetting innocent children + more terrorism against the innocent.

No discussion about the Khalsa raj and coalitions is complete without mentioning the French.

Great point Legal Singh Veerji.

Of course Sardar Baghel Singh was an Amritdhari whose life you are obviously familar with + in whom 100% of the Panth has so much pride in, given that he had no other affiliation other than the Khalsa Panth + resolute faith in one God alone.

Dear Mr P.Singh

I'm pleased to say that you have got the job! You can join Mr Harper's press secretary as his intern on Monday.

Legal Veerji you still haven't been able to refute how the 5% of Punjabi's that were Sikh in 1800 can outnumber the 8% of Punjabi's that became Sikh after 1800.

Given that, according to you, the overwhelming majority of Jatt tribesmen became Sikh prior to 1800 then by 1947 the Jatt tribe should have comprised around a 20% minority of Sikhs due to the influx of non-Jatt converts in the Singh Sabha movement's heyday.

In reality nowadays Sikhs of Jatt tribal ancestry account for around 46% of Sikhs in Punjab.

This figure is according to Jatt Mahasabha's demand for Backward Caste status on the OBC list (in whose interest it would be to inflate that figure) and the only explanation for that current figure is conversion of Hindu Jatts to Sikhi thanks to the impact of the Singh Sabha movement as it began to gain momentum around 125 years ago.

125 years ago was 5 generations back in the case of most families and not the 1920's you mistakenly referred to.

But yes the Singh Sabha Lehar and the Akali movement to liberate our Gurdwara's in the 1920's were effectively one and the same which is what may have confused your perception of the subject.

I can't believe how, on the basis of your own family's history, you are denying the indisputable facts presented by Proactive Veerji + Jonny101 Veerji.

But I do think u will make a good lawyer.

Even if your client is guilty of murder I'm sure you as an attorney can convince yourself that he was elsewhere at the time of the murder.

But I think the jury of Sikh history knows that Sikhi was never popular in Punjab - our current "dominance" is only as a result of the 1947 Genocide of 25% of Sikhs in Pakistan by Punjabi Muslims and the ethnic cleansing of Sikhs from Pakistan, as well as the 1966 East Punjab boundary changes.

Even after the Singh Sabha movement's extensive efforts we still only amounted to 13% of Punjabi's in 1947 and we were a minority in all districts of Punjab.

Your individual family history is different but remember your Dhaliwal clan are just one clan from the Jatt tribe, just like clan McDonald is a single Scottish clan.

If my memory serves me correct many of the Dhaliwal Jatts from the Manjki tract opposed the Khalsa Raj and sided with the British in 1849.

Of course the true Sikh Amritdhari's who as Khalsa rejected their Jatt tribal affiliations + looked only to the Khalsa Panth for brotherhood fought against the British.

It's great that Sikhs are finally a majority nowadays in Malwa and Majha (compared to the Hindu's that comprise the majority in the Doaba districts) but inward migration into Punjab, conversion of Sikhs into Derawadi slaves and into Abrahamic cults may leave us as a minority in East Punjab in the next decade.

But maybe that will serve as a wake up call for us to put aside our differences and work more unitedly to try continue the Singh Sabha tradition.

Differences of opinion on this subject aside I do salute your ancestors for liberating themselves from the falsehoods of Hinduism + Islam at the time in history they did and embracing the Sikh ideals of equality, justice, brotherhood, charity and service to humanity.

Perhaps we should turn this discussion into the direction of how do we increase Sikh numbers amongst the Punjabi Qaum nowadays?

The Punjabi Muslims now speaking Urdu, Hindu Punjabi's choosing to converse in Hindi and with our community still majority rural ...

I think we need your everyone's ideas on how we can grow our numbers in this setting given the problems of drugs, abortions and tribal mindsets that affect us.

Achieving freedom seems to be a fantasy at this point when we haven't built the foundations of a 100% united and de-tribalised Qaum and drugs continue to flood in with ISI + RAW supervision as well as the new agents of KP Gill aborting our Qaum's future before they are born.

Do you think these criminals don't know that any sexuality immorality is forbidden in Islam?

But the whole of the non-Muslim world thinks that a 54 year old Prophet having sex with 9year old child Aisha is utterly sexually immoral and wrong as child abuse.

Heck! even consensual out-of-wedlock sex is a grave crime in Islam..and every Muslim knows this.

But the Quran permits Muslim men to freely have sex with slaves + those that their right hands possess (any vulnerable woman they can dominate) that they are not wed to!

Actually I think its the other way 'round. The misconception comes about from the census of '81 itself. There are things about it that just simply do not add up under closer scrutinization. The next census even acknowledeged the flaws of the earlietr census by changing the way it recorded the word 'jatt' for in the 1881 census various other 'castes' , for example the rais and other mahaton 'castes' were included under the bracket jatt.

True that a certain numbers of other agricultural tribes such as Mahtons (Bhai Bhala Singh), Arain/Kambohs (Bhai Sukha Singh), Saini's (Bhai Jamala Singh) and even some agriculturalists who were Rajput's (Shaheed Bachiter Singh), Khatri's (Sardar Hari Singh Nalwa), Ahluwalia's (Sardar Jassa Singh) and Labana's (Bhai Makhan Shah) were wrongly included within the population figures for the Jatt tribe which artificially skewed the figures in 1881. (Brackets are examples of Guru ke Sikh and Khalsa's who rejected their old tribal identities and gave the whole Panth immense collective pride in their bravery)

Secondly, the 1881 tries to tell us 2 things : Firstly, the fact that 66% of al Sikhs were jatt

This was a wrongly inflated percentage figure, we all agree.

and secondly the fact that half if not more of all jatts in Punjab were Hindu.

There were way more Muslim Jatts than Sikh ones + yes there were more Hindu Jatts than Sikh ones in 1881

If we are to believe this is true and that the other half of the Punjabi jatts only became Sikhs during the 1920's then surely the 1931 census should show the proportion of Sikhs being jatt jumping to 90-95% ?

Your assumption is totally wrong bro. Like Proactive Veerji explained, if non-Jatt tribes increased by 310% whilst Hindu Jatts leaned ever more towards Sikhi (but at a slower rate of increase in Jatt numbers compared to non-Jatt tribes) then quite clearly Jatt numbers will fall to the 50% or so they were in 1931.

I suspect the answer lies in the rather nonchalent way that the uneducated country bumpkin types have reacted to written words, reports, census' etc. Having spoken about this with my father, he informed me that even relatively recently when he was a child he and other sikhs regularly called themselves 'hindu' sometimes.

I think that may be specific to your family bro. Since the Singh Sabha movement of Jonny Veerji's ancestors time most in our Panth have totally rejected the Arabic term Hindu most strongly.

They were not enlightended, educated or on terms with worldly affairs to know better. The term was almost universally used in Punjab as meaning 'Indian' and 'not-muslim'.

True that definition has historically been the case but since Maharaja Ranjit Singh every man in Punjab knew whether he was a Sikh or a Hindu. Sikhs believe in one God only. Hindu's did not.

As you can see then, there are many misconceptions. One is how, contrary to the census, practically every jatt from Punjab narrates his family history as being Sikh since the 1700's.

If all (or most) Jatts were already Sikhs in the 1700's and all Sikhs were collectively no more than 5% of Punjabi's in 1800 ... but all Sikhs were 13% of Punjabi's overall in 1947 ... then assuming 50% of Sikhs were Jatt in 1800 ... then the Jatt percentage would, if not boosted significantly by new converts, all things being equal, fall to around 20% of Sikhs. Instead about half of Sikhs in 1931 were still from Jatt tribal ancestry.

And nowadays Jatt tribal ancestry is still just below half of the Sikh population so it is impossible that the overall 8% numeric increase in Sikh numbers between 1800-1947 (from 5% in 1800 to 13% of the Punjabi population in 1947 = 160% percentage growth in Sikh numbers in the approximately 150 year period) was exclusively non-Jatt. It was about 7 of the 8% numeric figure increase from Hindu's and 1 of the 8% numeric figure increase from Muslims with roughly around 3% of the 8% numeric figure increase (roughly 37.5% of 1800-1947 converts) being Jatts. Capisce?

If the census is correct then half of all jatt Sikhs should have a Hindu grandfather for the singh sabha movement is recent.

Again you're assuming all conversion occurred in 1931.

50years between 1881 to 1931 was itself enough for 3 generations in cases.

The census is flawed.

True but the logic that all (or most) Jatts were Sikh in the 1700's is absurd. A majority of non-Muslim Jatts were Hindu in 1881. Hindu Jatts outnumbered Sikh Jatts back then. And even today Jatt Sikhs represent only 16% of the tribe, Hindu Jatts around 29% and Muslim Jatts are the clear majority of Jatts with around 55% of the Jatt population. If only non-Hindu population figures for the Jatt tribe are examined then there at least three times more Muslim Jatts than Sikhs from the same tribe. In fact the Muslim percentage of Jatts is significantly lowered by many clans which overlap with Jatts/Rajputs reporting as Rajputs in Pakistan. Essentially Jatts+Rajputs are a majority among Punjabi Muslims.

What's sad about the figures overall, is that despite the message of 1699, Sikhs were reluctant under British divide and rule policies to surrender their old tribal identities as specifically ordered by Guru Gobind Singh Ji with the birth of the Khalsa Panth.

Can we even call ourselves Sikhs if some still hold on to old tribal identities in 2013?

There is always a linguistic disparity over sources, as long as the essential ideal is preserved either is acceptable via academia. :pluggedin:

True bro, pronouncing the two terms probably has the same effect. Funny how these Rohilla Muslims are concentrated in Barelvi ilaqa :biggrin2:

What do you mean by "common denominator is Islam?" ..Stop being an 49 IQ imbecile all of you guys....

Sikhs look like complete losers....or probably Sikhs ARE complete losers and hence you act like it?

In the case of Christian murderers Jesus didn't give them a full length tutorial in rape or murder. Obviously we all know the man didn't have a virgin birth or resurrection though.

In the case of Hindutva murderers, there isn't really any cow or monkey god that says kill all non-hindu's + attack places of worship because half-elephant Ganesh says this or that.

In the case of Atheism there is no Atheist Holy Book which instructs atheists to kill innocents.

Sadly in the case of these Muslim pedophiles (groomers) you know full well they are following pedophilia in the footsteps of a 54year old Arab who had sex with a 9year old.

In that respect these Pakistani's seem to have less of an age gap between them and their non-Muslim victims. Furthermore, they have only followed part of the Sunnah + Hadiths.

As you know the Holy Quran is explicit in saying that Muslim men can freely have sex with their slavegirls + who their right hands possess (which translates as grooming victims nowadays).

You have to be honest with your conscience Pakistani bro.

Remember you are answerable to none other than Allah (swt).

When Allah(swt) questions u if it was reasonable to believe in a Nabi that at the age of 54 had sex with 9year old child Aisha ... will you be able to honestly say that u genuinely believed "HE" was the final messenger of Allah(swt) despite clear evidence to the contrary?

When Allah(swt) questions u whether it's believable that the Quran is the exact word of Allah(swt) will your conscience answer yes? Is Allah capable of condoning slavemasters?

Despite such damning evidence proving that the Quran was clearly not written by Allah(swt) as presented by Tandoori Singh, are u still adamant that Allah(swt) is the author?

Sincerely, if u don't see the link between these groomers and Islam+Muhammad then we all pray that Allah(swt) guides u the right way because it's sad to see this type of brainwashing done on a fundamentally decent fellow Punjabi. It's truly sad u don't see it.

You are not in the business of comparing homosexuality to other sins yet you group it with the most sinful of acts like murder, rape etc. My friend you are already comparing it to other sins.

It's very worrying if a person doesn't know what is worse out of two consenting adults doing this OR murder, rape, pedophilia + slavery :stupidme:

they must be all Mirpuris.

Mirpuri criminals are mainly Jatt, Rajput, Gujjar + Arain as these are four largest castes with a Hindu background + so they try even harder to convert non-Muslims.

Jats of Azad Kashmir

Should the esteemed author have written Rohilla instead of Ruhlia perhaps? They are mostly from the Afridi and Yousafzai castes. But a great article + really good site.

I think Sikh ithihaas is so full of inspiring stories of bravery in adversity that it can strengthen even the weakest of the weak.

It's a Christian, Muslim and Hindu lie that God punishes innocents by sitting in an office and deciding to unleash a flood on a particular area, for example.

This is a really great post which i could do well to learn from :biggrin2:

http://www.pingalwara.net/donations.html

What the hell? Is there any way we can help? This is no joke, we need to help Bibi Ji. Perhaps someone could ask Pinglewara to get involved? I know they're a hospital, but Bibi Ji is mentally ill.

I think bro if we donate to Khalsa Aid and Pingalwara and other reputable transparent charities and bring this matter to there attention they will take care of it. Pingalwara do take care of the mentally ill, better than Punjab government places, so they're well qualified and very honestly run.