JagsawSingh

Don't worry, you aren't the only delusional person out there who lacks 100% understanding of Bhai Randhir Singh Jee and AKJ, and has done nindia of him. What this so called "Sikh", if this person even exists, told you for the reason why people join the Jatha, is completely false and nonsense. You obviously have not met many Sikhs associated with AKJ to generalise to such a ridiculous extent. This shows your ignorance, actually your whole comment showed entire ignorance of AKJ and Bhai Randhir Singh Jee. If you want to understand AKJ, don't talk to children, talk to an elder like Bhai Jarnail Singh Jee, Bhai Tarsem Singh Jee etc in the UK or talk to Gurmat Bibek Sikh such as Bhai Kulbir Singh Jee in Canada (he will rip you into shreds in the most humble and compassionate way lol). They have a forum you can ask questions on, http://gurmatbibek.com/ Or why don't you read Bhai Randhir Singh Jee's books for starters. It's funny how Sikhs who hate AKJ insult Bhai Sahib whereas Sikhs associated with AKJ do not do the same with other saints who have different beliefs but instead respect them. Lastly, you must truly be kidding yourself if you think Bhai Sahib was a egotistical devious person, he was extremely humble and honest. I have nothing further to say, no need to waste my time further on this.

OK...seeing as you're one of the enlightened ones: Whats so different about Randhir Singh cutting Guru ji's limbs off because it didn't fit with his qualli style of music and these modern day 'missionaries' that want to cut some limbs off because it doesn't fit in with their thinking ?

I want you....an AKJ follower....to justift the cutting off of our Guru's limbs.

Lets here it.

and....

Bhai Sahib was given the formula to convert copper to gold and he disposed of it when he realized it was corrupting his mind.

What ?

Every child on planet earth that studies science at school learns the formula for turning copper into gold so just what kind of 'mind' was this that gets corrupted so easily and for such a silly reason ?

There is much evidence that raagmala is not gurbani. This is why panthic rehat maryada/akal takhat state its an individual choice and not to argue over this.. Something which has alluded your intellect.

Akj are not opposed to raag kirtan.. they simply believe that the primary objective of kirtan is spiritual enlightenment and uplifting the soul, not singing in strict musical measures.

Infact many akj kirtanis do kirtan in raag, as did bhai sahib randhir singh ji.

Ok so back to the topic.. dastar is mandatory for all sikhs.. bottom line.

I once had a conversation with an AKJ follower who tried to tell me how special Randhir Singh Grewal because he could turn copper into gold, and indeed that was one of the main reasons many came to follow him in the first place. The fact that the UK born AKJ follower said that to me though, revealed 2 things: Firstly, how uneducated the average Sikh in Punjab was in those days and secondly how badly educated many of the current generation of UK born Sikhs still are. You see, Randhir Singh was an educated man and he knew that those lacking education could be easily made to follow. So, I told my AKJ friend that if he was so easily impressed with such basic chemistry than he should get me a 2 penny coin, a glass cup and some zinc sulpate. Within a couple of minutes I said, I too will be able to turn copper into silver. And if has some strong heat available I could turn that silver into gold. Just like Randhir Singh. But there's 2 things to remember here: I'm not the type of person that wants to get uneducated people to follow me by performing science 'tricks' for them and in this day and age western born Sikhs should be educated enough to understand that a man that took away Raagmala from Gurbani because he personally didn't care for it too much is exactly the same as the modern day 'missionaries' who also want to cut some of Guru Ji's limbs off because they don't particularly care for them too much.

So, now that I've made that clear, let me repeat what I said before: The issue of Dastars and females should not be argued on the basis of support or non-support for AKJ or any other groups. It is pure and simple Sikhi that a Sikh amritdhari female MUST wear a dastar, otherwise she is NOT a Sikh.

The danger here is that people are obviously using their own personal dislikes and likes of particular jathas and groups and using those preferences as a basis from which to either support or rubbish th idea of Sikh women wearing dastars.

As I stated in my last message, I DETEST the Randhir Singh Grewal Jatha (who changed their name to the AKJ in the 1970's because people started to see the jatha as a very weird personality cult)....I DETEST all nihung groups and, as I have made clear here on this forum, I DETEST all parcharaks........And yet my wife wears a dastar. Not a keski...But a full dastar.

So, as you can see, me and my family follow nobody. The Sikhi we practice is one that is free from the sexist mysoginistic realities and influences that prevail in the sub-continent......free from the biased history books of Sikhs, all of whch were written by members of the urban groups that inherently have a certain view about women which even states they should not work outside the home. Once you clear your mind of all these negative influences you are left with nothing but the truth. The day any of you start to preach different rules for women is the day we lose the distinctive and unique sexual equality that exists in Sikhism and become just like the muslims and all the others. To say a Sikh female amritdhari does not have to wear a dastar just because she is a woman is exactly the same as telling a Sikh amritdhari man he doesn't have to wear a dastar. It is pure and utter folly and fakery.

Sikhi says the dastar means something profound. Are females such non-human animals that profound things can't apply to them ?

Sikhi says the bunga, tower, to be erected below the dastar means something profound. Are females such non-human animals that profound things can't apply to them ?

Sikhi says the top-knot at the top of the head has profound spiritual and health benefits ? Are females such non-human animals that the human circulatory and nervous system doesn't apply to them ?

Any Sikh woman that says she is Amritdhari and yet does not wear a dastar is, in my eyes, as shameless and fake as a male that professes to be amritdhari and yet wears a baseball to cover his ponytail. Both are equally ludicrous.

We absolutely detest randhir ingh grewal and his jatha (and remember the Randhir Singh Jatha only changed their name to AKJ quite recently, in the 1970's', as it started to resemble a personal dera of cult followship) and yet of course my wife wears a dastar. Our reasoning is simple: How on earth can a 'Sikh' be a 'Sikh' without a dastar ? It is basic common sense. It is absolutely ludicrous and damnright fakery for an amritdhari sikh woman to claim to be amritdhari and yet not have a dastar on her head. To accept her as amritdhari with a chunni on her head rather than a dastar is the same as saying I merely need to wear a thin piece of cloth across my head rather than a dastar.

As we have progressed.....we Sikhs born in the west especially, have been born free from the sexist and mysoginist culture that prevails in Punjab and also free from the reliance of reading books and gaining knowledge that was, in the past, the exclusive preserve of an elite group of urban community groups who essentially wrote Sikh history in a way that satisfies their community's view of things. That is no longer the case. I think when someone is born in an environment away from these influences one see true Sikhi and when one sees true Sikhi one can see that it would be making an absolute mockery of everything our religion stands for if we said a simple and pathetic piece of very thin cloth (chunni) is all a Sikh woman needs.

I'll tell you my take on this, brother

In Britain, the class system is still alive and kicking. By and large, the non-Asian victims of these brand of crimes are on the lowest rung of the social ladder; what use to be the white 'working classes' before they stopped working and became largely dependent on welfare (for reasons occasionally beyond their control such as government policies, I.E. loss of jobs and prosperity in areas that were hubs of industry before various social and economic upheavals) and became an almost feral underclass that the upwardly mobile (and selfish) middle class and ruling upper classes turn their noses up at.

The white man belonging to these middle classes and upper classes likes to pretend their brethren in these disadvantaged areas doesn't exist, and that all problems these people encounter are of their own doing. In effect, it's basically a mentality of, "You're on your own."

Once you get immigrant communities moving into these same areas, in this case Pakistanis, and observing these girls from broken homes have no protection from their families, and realising how strongly a sense of uncaring ambivalence pervades the authorities such as social services, etc, they take advantage of the situation, because they know the white man in-charge has largely given up on these people. They're easy pickings.

Generally, that's how things have reached this level of bad. As much as we should never absolve the Pakistanis for their depravity, the truth is the ruling and aspirational whites have hung out to dry a significant section of their own people for decades. When a society is fractured along those lines, you will inevitably encourage vultures such as these Pakistani sex gangs to isolate and feast on the stragglers who've been betrayed by their own.

And the whites have the audacity to lecture South Asians on their proclivity for the caste system! They should look closely at their own streets and realise how they've sold out entire generations of whites for their own greed and self-interest.

^ Thats pretty much everything Bob Dylan says in his epic 'Pawn in their Game'. The poor white remains....a kaboose in the rich white's game. He's taught in his schools. That history's with him. To never think straight. About the true shape that he's in. He's told not to complain. You're better than the blacks. You've been born with white skin.

Interesting facet about the great unwashed british working class though...who, essentially, are the true and most common face of white British people.Throughout history so many international ideas actually started off life as a way of changing things in England. i.e doing something for the benfit of the working class whites in England. Karl Marx of course wrote his communist manifesto in London for the conditions in England but it was other countries that had that revolution instead. Tom Paine etc actually wrote the blueprint for freedom from royal rule for the English but of course it was in the end the colonists in the colony of America who took Tom Paine's ideas and had a revolution instead. Meanwhile, things have stayed the same way in England, in terms of the class structure and the true sorry state of the majority of whites.

But.....I have another way of looking at this.....my own theory if you like. My theory is that the white British are by nature of extremely low stock compared to whites of other european countries. I think this because essentially, wherever in the world the white English have emigrated and made their home, their nature stays with them generations later. Lets take America for example. Only a very small percentage of white Americans have English blood, by far most of them are of German and Scandanavian blood as well as some Irish etc, although German ancestory is the one that easily dominates. In contrast, the English still exist in America and they are essentially the poor white trash of the south. The hillbillys...the trailer trash. Almost all of them are of English ancestory and so you do get the impression that the English have very low quality genes in comparison with other northern Europeans. Of course wherever the English go the class system follows and thats the same in America where the most of the Engish are the very poorest of American whites while the small minority of English upper class (the episcopoleans - Anglicans) such as George Bush etc are America's very richest.

Dear Jagsaw,

I take your opinion on board. However have you ever attended an SAS presentation, have you read Professor Jay's report on the Rotherham child grooming, looked at UN reports on how many girls are victims of child abuse worldwide, figures for the victims of the sex trade? in some countries it is estimated there are that many women abused it no longers functions as a normal society. One of the major aspects of the immigration crises across the world especially the middle east how gangs are making millions from child and women prositution. When Nepal suffered an earthquake a year or so ago child abusers were turning up in camps, hospitals laying claim to young girls as their relatives. When I die and WaheGuru asks me my Sewa - even with my failings as a human, I want to hold my head high and say I at least stopped/helped one girl from being a victim of child abuse for this I make no apology.

I take your sentiments into account brother. But, the fundmentals of my criticism of you, and all the messages before you, can be found in the very first page of this thread. What I said there went largely ignored and I think thats a shame. A shame but also quite frustrating for me personally and I think at this point we all need to take time out and analyse what Sikhi means to us on a personal level and in order to understand that we have to be conscious of how we reached this particular stage. I ask you all to do this because, at the end of the day, the ultimate truth is that the London, Toronto or Vancouver born mona Sikh that decides to grow his hair and become amritdhari is 1000% more knowledgable than all the multitude of parcharaks we have today who do 'sikhi' for a living. Those who have reached a better understanding of Sikhi know how to see both sides of the coin. In this particular thread it should be even easier to see 'both sides of the coin' because more often than not it is actually us who are on that other side of the coin. So, when 90% of the time it is 'evil muslims' who have absolutely no feeling for the hurt that will be caused in a Sikh girl's family...absolutely no regard for the pain....in their zealousness to help a Sikh girl disregard her family and become a Muslim shoud we, now that we are the tiny 10% of that equation, join them in their inhuman behaviour and also display that same disregard and feeling for that muslim girl's family ?

My answer is that we should neither discourage nor encourage. Whilst the other faiths are about the hatefull vengeance of a fearfull god ours is about the supreme love that dwells inside of us all....and that love is god. With love in her heart let her, if she really wants to, find her own way to Sikhi. None of us should be seeking to destroy that family unit in our zealousness to make her choose that option. If we do......then that is, by definition, no longer about love.

I'm beginning to think there's only one thing worse than grooming gangs.......and thats people on discussion forums who continously spoil intelligent discussions mid-point by continously....almost pathologicaly....out of insane habit, keep posting news articles from the Daily Mail about Pakistani grooming gangs. I mean just look at what Jeevan did to the discussion with his 'Daily Mail' paste in the message above this one. ^ The discussion just got killed, stone dead, with it.

Again, I think it reveals much about the intellectual lightweightness of much of the UK Sikhs. You never see American and Canadian Sikhs being infactuated with social problems affecting groups around them, and much of those problems are far more severe than the UK ones. They just positively get on with making their own lives happy and successful. But the UK Sikhs seem to be revelling in a sea of misery and dispair. It seems most of them are not happy unless they've got some complaining to do and nothing makes them more happy than being able to tell everyone about an article they read in the Daily Mail about Muslims. Being able to do this makes many of them so happy they can barely contain themselves. So much so that spoiling the discussion on just the one thread is usually not enough. They are so excited about others also reading the 'Daily Mail' article, they ensure they simultaneously post the same article on 3 or 4 other threads as well. Thats the usul modus operandi of that typical UK sikh so I wouldn't be surprised if Jeevan did the same thing when he posted the above article.

As a diaspora, I think the worldwide Sikh community as a whole in places like Australia, Italy, Canada and America etc need to analyse the social behaviour of UK sikhs and ensure that that their children do not fall into the same trap of becoming miserable, pessemistic complainers, only capable of seeing bad sides.

That makes no sense. Everyone values jewels. Its not like if the kohinoor had come from Russia or something, the british would throw it in the gutter. They are not keeping it in the crown jewels because it came from sikhs, but because its a pretty big jewel.

In no way is it a matter of honor for sikhs that the british have the kohinoor.it just warspoils from having conquered the sikhs. So i agree that the british have the right to it now. Because when they got it, warspoils was a legit way to gain posessions.

The mark of a small man with a small mind is when he makes an argument about the merits of why and how current owners own something without even attempting to undertand how and why the previous owners assumed ownership of it.

That brings us to ur other assertion about why we still live in the west. The truth is we were born here. And when we grew up we questioned, why am I, so different than the host country end up here? The obvious answer is our parents moved here for economic reasons.

No. We're here because we have been British subjects, with full rights to live here, continously, since the year 1849. If you were an Algerian living in London then yes, perhaps you can use the 'economic migrant' argument. But we have no need to justify our being here. Our mothers, grandmothers, great-grandmothers and great great grandmothers were all British Subjects with full rights of abode in the UK. We owe nobody any justifaction as to why we are here. Under the rights as British subjects, our grandparents move here is no different than someone moving from Norfolk to Coventry. So, the question is who is more respecting of great British truths and traditions ? We, who believe in them or the whites who, since the 1970's, have been slowly destroying the historic British traditions of ius soli, jus soli etc all in the name of racism. As I stated before, those who want to question why we are here need to study science, invent a time machine, go back in history and erase from history the moment their white forefathers made our brown forefathers legal British Subjects all those many years ago.

Like I said earlier pack up your bags and get out and go live in India. Nobody is forcing you to live among Whites or in a White country. Don't be a hypocrite.

They've been British Subjects with full rights to live here continously since the year 1849. You can disagree with them......just as I do....but you have no right to tell them to get away from a land that is every bit theirs as it is yours. This is NOT a 'white country'. If you feel passionate about it then I think the best thing you can do Quantavius is to study Science at a really advanced level, invent a time machine, go back in history, and erase from history the moment they were made British Subjects. Or, if the realities that have come about from the facts of history are that upsetting to you, you might want to consider killing yourself.

Before British took over India, India's share was 27% of the world's gdp which was the highest in the world even more than Europe combined. As the British began taking taking over, India's share of the world GDP also began a decline. By 1947 India's share of the world's GDP was a mere 3%. They looted India so thoroughly that in today's estimation it would amount to 600 trillion dollars! That is 400,000 dollars per Indian.

But why does it matter to you what Indias share of anything was ? You might as well claim South Africa's share too because 'before the British took over India' you, as a Punjabi Sikh, were not even part of India.....just as you wern't part of South Africa. You, were part of your own independant sovereign country which was a 100% seperate entity to India. Indeed, after the British 'took over India' it was another 150 years before they finally took our independant Punjab over and incorporated it into India. So yes, be angry about foreigners taking over your land and looting it but remember to be angry at the right people. The ones you need to be angry with are the little dark brown fellas to the south of us who not only took over and looted your land they're bloody well still doing at the precise moment you're sitting at the computer venting your anger at some random white people that left nearly 70 years ago.

And this estimation does not even include so called "gifts" like the Kohinoor that these Chors stole.

and how exactly do you think we Sikhs got our hands on the Koh-i-noor ? In contrast with how we got it the British actually got it in a relatively noble way (by winning a war). The way we got it was by low standard council estate moral stylee deceit. Shah Shuja, the King of Afghanistan, who owned the Koh-i-noor, was facing trouble at home from his brother, who wanted to overthrow him. The King then, came to the Sikh Kingdom of Punjab, who were the strongest regional power, in order to beg Ranjit Singh for help. Ranjit Singh said "OK"...."I'll help.....but only if you give me the famous Koh-i-noor". Shah Shuja gave the Sikh Kingdom the Koh-i-noor but Ranjit Singh did not actually help him. Instead, he put Shah Shuja in a house in Ludhiana (remember Ludhiana and the whole of Malwa were not part of tthe Khalsa Kingdom of Punjab). The King of Afghanistan was now confined to a house that wasn't even in the Sikh Kingdom so nobody could accuse the Sikhs off helping him and that was that. We got our hands on the Koh-i-noor in an immoral way. If you compare that to how the British got it...i.e by fighting 2 bloody and vicious wars in which thousands died you tell me who looks better from an ethical and moral point of view: The British or we Sikhs ?

Did bathrooms exist 500 years ago? I though everyone just found a spot behind a tree or a bush.

By 'bathroom' I think we're talking in the 'wash your face and body' sense rather than a place to do number 1s and number 2s. Indeed, in the much cleaner eastern sense, as opposed to the relatively unclean western sense, it was always considered inconcievable that anyone would want to crap and pee in the very place that he goes to get clean.

And, the persian 'khanna' literaly translates as a sort of compartment or small specific partitioned area rather than a 'room' as we would know it in the western sense.

I have never used that word in my life. Sound like some foreign non Punjabi word.

Its the Punjabi word for bathroom and has been so for the last 500 years at least.

Gulkhanna sounds more Persian than Arabic. The kh bit gives it away as well the Gul bit.

Not sure what you mean by 'Gulkhanna' Ranjeet but the Punjabi word for bathroom is 'Gusul-khanna'. The khanna bit of course, as you quite rightly point out, comes to Punjabi from the Persian, and this is perfectly natural as Persian and Punjabi are positively joined at the hip as Punjab was always part of Persia long before anyone came along and made it part of India. The interesting aspect there though is the fact that the Iranians have maintained their pre-islamic, classical persian word for bathroom, i.e dashtoohi, i.e, even though they embraced a form of Islam, they did not incoporate that particular Arabic word into their language. In contrast, Punjabi did, somewhere along the line, abandon its traditional word and instead, incorporate the Arabic word that came directly from the Koran. Like I said, food for thought.

Nice picture.

I can add another interesting and perhaps rather strange aspect to this:

We Punjabis have a word for 'bathroom' and that word is 'Gusalkhanna'. So, perhaps a Sikh will say he is 'going to the gusulkhanna to prepare himself to read nitnem.

But what does the word 'gusulkhanna' actually mean ?

Well, the 'khanna' aspect of the word is straightforward enough as it obviously means room, so the question is what does the word 'gusul' mean ?

Now this is where it gets interesting because the word itself was first uttered by the Muslim's prophet Muhammed and it comes to the Punjabi language directly from the Islamic Koran. Muhammed said every Muslim must perform a ritual called 'gusul' before he reads namaaz, and that ritual involves spraying his face with short bursts of water as well as throwing a few drops over each shoulder. So, our word for bathroom....that all of we Sikhs throughout the world use when speaking Punjabi, literally translates as 'the room we go to prepare ourselves to read the namaaz'.

Now there's food for thought.

Well surely this thread is different, coz they use lies n deciet to get converts, where as the thread starter here, says their muslim friend wants to become sikh off their own accord, quite a difference!

Thats not what I said though, was it StarStriker ?

I said, on Muslim discussion forums, there are often threads like this one in which a Muslim starts a thread in which he or she says, for example, there is a Sikh girl at college who is really showing an interest in embracing Islam but wants some more information etc. The other muslims on the foum then go on to recommend the best strategies etc and people like me are left wandering just what kind of insenstive uncaring monsters are these that don't have even an ounce of respect and feeling for the girl's family and loved ones and how such a thing would not only break their hearts but it would also tear a family apart.

We here, on this thread, are guilty of displaying those exact same uncaring, unprincipled qualities.

I'm calling you a low IQ buffoon, who appears to have mixed up all manner of things, who has a propensity for rambling and wasting people's time.

.....says the lying little $hit who claims to be a postgraduate and yet was under the impression that they're two separate words

On threads containing legal matters you come along and say "I work in the legal field"......On threads about psychology you come along and say "I've got a postgraduate in psychology" and yet really, when push comes to shove, you've never shown even an ounce of knowledge about any issue. The true and original 'man who knew nothing'. You are indeed, dalsingh101, the fakest faking little faker on sikhsangat. Much like a broken pencil:.....pointless.

I've worked in a number of fields.

And not everything people study or are interested in has to relate to some career objective. You do know people can study subjects just out of interest and self-development don't you?

I've never met anyone that did a postgraduate masters in psychology and thus had a qualification that would guarantee a job in that field, and choose instead to enter a totally different field (law) (a field, by the way, in which very very few graduates and postgraduates find a job) where you would not only have to embark on yet another period of totally different postgraduate studies but you would also have to go back to graduate studies again and do a conversion course.

In other words, dallysingh101, I'm calling you a liar and a fake.

I studied it at post graduate level, and there was some insightful stuff there.

No. There was no "insightfull stuff" there.

And, I'm pretty sure you've said before you work in the legal field which makes your claims of postgraduate studies in psychology all the more bizzare.

You sound like someone who would struggle with his GCSEs.

.......says the man that claims to have done postgraduate studies and yet, strangely, thinks the two are 2 totally distinct words that need a space in between. Lets just be thankfull the actual word 'postgraduate' wasn't tested during your 'postgraduate' studies

Often, on Muslim forums, a discussion like this appears, in which members debate how they can get a Sikh girl to turn her back on her family and embrace Islam. I often think, what kind of un-caring monsters are these that have no thought or care about the loved ones of that girl, how they will feel and how much hurt will be caused.

This thread, is a complete mirror image of that.

But someone like myself who has studied psychology

i studied psychology as well.

Having studied homeopathy

This is fast becoming the funniest thread ever. Anyone thats ever studied an 'ology' or 'pathy' at school as a 14 year old is suddenly the world expert on the matter.

How do I know ? Well,I studied anthropology at gcse level at school. I understand human behaviour. I can see the thing that links the 3 above. They have this need to mention their 'ology'. This is a condition.

A SONNET FOR BADAL:

And so,

Sadly,

It appears the monster will not die.

He merely had a bit of a cold.

A bit of the sniffles.

Sniffly sniffly poo.

Our goodbyes and fare thee wells must wait.

For sadly,

the monster just won't die.

Oh why don't you die you despicable little man ?

Please die.

And when you die,

please take that little faeces of a son with you.

Oh both of you,

please hurry up and die.

And that strumpet of a daughter in law, Harsmrat,

Take her with you too.

Oh the three of you evil little $hits.

Please hurry up and die..

You cannot treat the Bible and the Koran as though they hold equivalent positions in their respective religions.

Although Christians believe that the Bible is ultimately divine in origin, they acknowledge that it has also been delivered through fallible human vessels who perhaps distorted or miscommunicated the divine message.This allows Christians a much greater liberty to interpret and pick and choose at their own discretion.

.

And I'm fine with that. Remember, I'm the one that says its none of our goddamn business what is or isn't in anyone's scriptures. Maybe one day, when I or you have found perfection in everything we do and know we might be justified in spending time finding fault in others but, as it stands, I think our time would be better used in spiritually uplifting ourselves.

Islam is the most destructive force in the world today for a reason.

Is it though, Balkar ? Or is that what the 'big men' in power, who are stealing the wealth of the world and destroying the wealth of the earth want us to believe in order to distract us from what's really happening in the world ?

Every day, they are putting pesticides in our foods, children throughout the world are dying of cancer, natural resources are being depleted, they're putting more black youngsters in jails than in college, their racism means our children with their degrees have a tiny chance of getting a job compared to white children etc etc......and yet neither you nor I know a single person personally whose life has been either ended or made intolerable because of 'Islam'.

Its a game they're playing with our minds. Getting us to irrattionaly hate. I mean of course radical Islam is abhorent and must be stopped buts its something that must be tackled sensibly and rationally. To do that, things must be put into perspective. In order to do that, one must realise that there are those that want to plant seeds of hate in your head (media and men in power) in order to distract you from the real issues.

.

All that is true of islam and I can give you the verses from hadiths and quranic ayats to back it up so what your views of fascism of Islam? Is it not a fascist ideology?

Why would you even want to do that or even think about doing that ? Is it not a sign of mental illness ?

After all, I and others could follow your example of propogating needless hate aginst other religions and also quote verses of the Christian Bible in order to convince others that Christians are facists. I could, if I had the same inclination quote Exodus 21:20 which says "If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property."

I could quote Leviticus 25:44-46 which says " Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life"

I could quote Deuteronomy 20:10-15 which says "When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. When the LORD your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the LORD your God gives you from your enemies. This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby"

I could quote Leviticus 20:10 which says "If a man suspects his wife of adultery, he can force her to undertake a "trial by fire" where she drinks a magic potion that makes her barren if she is guilty. This is similar to the "trial by water" in the Code of Hammurabi where suspected adulteresses are thrown into a river to see if they float" (Note that there is no such test for men suspected of adultery, only women.)

I could quote Deuteronomy 22:13-21 which says "If a man takes a wife and, after lying with her, dislikes her and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, "I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity," then the girl's father and mother shall bring proof that she was a virgin to the town elders at the gate. The girl's father will say to the elders, "I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her. Now he has slandered her and said, 'I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.' But here is the proof of my daughter's virginity." Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, and the elders shall take the man and punish him. They shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver a and give them to the girl's father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives. If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl's virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father's house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father's house"

I could quote verses from the bible that say rape is not a real crime, especially if the girl's screams are not sufficiently loud enough and essentially, 'if you break it-you buy it', such as Deuteronomy 22:23-27 which says "If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death—the girl because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man's wife"

Or....seeing how it is Sunday today, lets see what the Christian scriptures say we must do to those who worked today instead of resting, such as Walmart-Asda staff today. Exodus 31 verse 15 tells us exactly what to do:

"For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day must be put to death"

I could go on with this superkaur but you see where I'm going don't you ?

The point is that you and I are not Christians or Muslims. What is or isn't in their scriptures is none of our business. Its up to them to find truth and enlightenment. Pointing out faults in their faith does our own spiritualy no good. We only need to be concerned with uplifting ourselves. Therefore, you need to spend less time hating others and more time finding love in yourself.