JagsawSingh

maybe the first statement was not but that did not stop you from making derogatory remarks later ... given you have dependents you should be more patient and less patronising...unless you plan on treating your daughters and nieces the same way ?

I don't have any daughters and I, having true 100% belief in the pure 100% sexual equality that true Sikhism espouses, work hard for them to inherit a world in which the wicked mysoginist Islamic practices of the afghan Sikhs is welland truly consigned to the dustbin of history.

As for statements. You say I went on to make 'derogatory remarks' about women. Thats not true and anyone reading the other recent messages from people on this page might get the impression that I must have murdered and burned at the stake a handfull of women. All I did in fact say was this to Simran, in Punjabi :

• simmer down (understandable, as she was getting rather emotional)
• drink a cup of tea (understandbale as it does help people calm down)
• eat some biscuits (understandable, as they do go well with tea)
• put the tv on (understandable, as she was getting upset and it would help to get to get her mind off it)
• change her tampax pad
• sit down and relax (understandable, as it is a good way to unwind)
• don't talk too much (understandable, as some women do talk too much)

Now, was that really so bad ?

Everyone has already called you out on being disrespectful to "Simran345" as well as "Jvlondon", what exactly are you trying to prove? That you didn't slander them? Even if it's not slander you don't have to be rude to them. You live in your own bubble on and all you can see is the Pro-Jatt movement over all else.

People can "call me out" all they want. I'm not gonna be intimidated from speaking the truth. Simran just got all emotional over nothing when all I said was that she put a thumbs up 'like' next to a dodgy message....and its true, she did, and jkvlondon got back what she deserved when she, for no good reason, posted a message criticising me on a personal level.

As for this thing you call a "pro-jatt movement" on my behalf, well, for you to say that is testament to your own blind ignorance seeing how this discussion was in the form of a good educational format discussing the blatantly un-sikh, un-ethical and immoral inherent practices of the Afghan Sikhs in west London before Dallysingh101 started posting message after message about 'jatts', caling them backward bast***s. In between his blatant casteist messages of abuse I carried on not only articulating how the Afghan prctices must be stopped otherwise they will have a profoundly negative effect on the Sikhi our children will inherit, particularly with regards to seeing the function of Sikh women existing purely to satisfy that sexual lust of men, but I also articulated many times how I have, on this very forum, gone on personal vendettas against evil and corrupt jatt men of authority, for example gurdwara presidents and also how i am well known here for calling for the death and destruction of the morally corrupt jatt elite of Punjab politics. So this raises 2 questions:

1. Where exactly on this thread have I said anything whatsoever that could possibly be construed as being 'pro'jatt' ? and...
2. Why exactly do your eyes not see how the only person on this thread making vicious casteist remarks is dallysingh101?

Intimidation is a terrible thing and I try and teach my children about always being brave enough to speak up for and stand up for the truth despite the intimidation that will come their way when they do. In a sense then, we as the wider community have reached the stage where it is perfectly OK and acceptable to make as many abusive comments and remaks about jatts as you want. Thats OK. As demonstrated on this very thread people not only don't mind it they actually don't even notice it as its become so acceptable. In the same vein, when on this very forum I go into detailed criticisms of the Punjab leadership nobody accuses me of being casteist against jatts. When I delve into the detailed financial history of influential jatt sikh gurdwara presidents in order to expose them and bring them down nobody here accuses me of casteism against jatts. When I go on peronal vendettas against the parcharak jathas (all of whom from a jatt background) and point out how they are doing long term damage to sikhi nobody accuses me of being casteist against jatts. But if I say anything whatsoever against anyone from a non-jatt background I instantly become an "evil pro-jatt casteist"

As I said in the beginning, the truth will always prevail and I will not be intimidated into keeping my mouth shut. We have right now in west London, a 30,000 strong Afghan Sikh community that is sullying the good name of the dastar by having the following endemic practices :

• Endemic participation in criminal activities that now make the whole of west London see all Sikhs as immoral criminals
• Widespread and endemic practice of incest, in that they habitually, and in fact only, marry and have children with their own chache's sons and daghters, pooah's sons and daughters, thaya's sons and daughters etc.
• Habitual and ritual eating of Halal meat.
• A sick twisted practice of seeing Sikhism, and its rules for uncut hair etc, as only applicable for men. Strictly being of the view that a female has no business whatsoever practising Sikhism. As the Islamic Hadiths make it clear that a female wife MUST make and keep herself extremely 'sexy' in order to arouse and satisfy her husband's sexual desires, these Afghans have brought that sme principle to the UK, whereby their wives exist solely to maintain the home and to comform to the husband's sexual ideals of atttractiveness.

So, intimidate me all you want. I never stopped going after the Indians. I never stopped going after the jatt politicians. I never stopped going after the jatt parcharaks. I never stopped going after the jatt gurdwara pardhans and I most certainly won't stop going after these lot just because some of you will then try an shut me up by calling me a casteist. Some of you need to tak step back and imagine the kind of Sikhi that will exist in the UK if we allow the above practices to become acceptable and the norm. Intimidate me all you want. Their practices are evil and wrong and none of us should be afraid of saying so.

Yes a certain male, before he decides to,pick out people's names out of the blue and slander them without reason. I don't want to forgive him because he should learn what he creates, and will do it again to me and I won't let him. He doesn't even have the decency to apologise to me or penji Jkvlondon, so no ways no.

I'm getting sick of explaining this to you Simran but, as I said before.....The only thing I said about you personally is that you 'Liked' a message by gsinghysingh (message #65 on page 7). If you think that is 'slander' can I suggest you quietly make your way to message #65 on page 7 and observe the 'Like' by Simran345 next to the message. After that, I suggest you consult a dictionary and digest the fact that 'slander' is defined as a false statement. Therefore, the only way what I said about you could be called 'slander' was if it was me who deliberately and maliciously assumed the identity of a girl called Simran, and in the space of 5 minutes created a 'Simran' username for Sikhsangat.com and shamelessly used your name to put a 'like' next to a dodgy message. But....we both know that didn't happen did it now Simran ? So, seeing how you keep mentionng the word 'slander' in several messages since then, can you please kindly explain to me how a true statement can possibly be termed 'slander' ?

Hi Jagsaw, very nice to meet you, your absolutely correct maybe a lot has moved on. my comments were mostly a rant and probably ill informed. You spent a lot of time going over it and completing your essay on it. Now that you have excercised your mind. Ask your mum to find you a wife lad, the boys now a man!!!

Touche !!!

Well done gsinghysingh. An insult very cleverly disguised as a compliment. No mean feat. Well done.

Then don't friggin write my name and c r a p about me, coz you'll just get it back. Te tu apni vohti nal larla, Mere nal kio pange lenda.

And stop provoking me, stop your stupid behaviour. I'm just defending myself from your bakwas, of which YOU INSULTED ME.

REMEMBER. tu cha peela, te apne upar dol la.

Just flippin leave me alone. End it NOW.

Its finished (although I didn't insult you...I just said you liked a dodgy message and its true you did) but never mind about that, its finished. Just simmer down. But remember, naa mai cha peenda' (mai costa coffee peenda' hoonda') te naa mai mere' upar dol'ni. Tu buss cha te coffee di gul rainde'h te apne' tampax pad change karr'n da sorch. Get your emotional balance back.

I know what slander means and you are doing it to me, like now to you wont stop. No need to teach me 'professor'. Stop being so clever and showing your authority over me. You are the one that needs to do some research, not me. Me and you have nothing to discuss on this topic, I've made that clear. Why don't you just admit defeat where you are wrong.

I stand by what I say. I know what I like in GSinghysinghs post, and I've explained it clearly, which you don't understand.

Why quietly make my way, pange nal leh fer.

Who the hell you think you are?? Tu Mera supervisor a? I like what I wish to, I comment on whichever topic I wish to.

I don't need you to tell me what to do.

So what I liked a message, ferrrrr????

Why should I go by what you state? Again I've stated which bits of the post why I liked. Are you stupid that you don't understand?

Excuse me I didn't read 8pages. If you noticed I've been busy in other topics.

What exactly do I know Jagsaw ? I know you have a habit of arguing with people' and twisting things around and also I would go far as saying you are a bully, an Internet one that's for sure.

Look at the proof it's here, in front of you, look how you are going on and on to belittle me, yet I never wrote one comment.

I know you have issues, and are taking it out on me, I know you are don't like defeat, I know you like to argue with women, and belittle them as you've done with Jkvlondon too also before. I know you can't accept the truth of what I'm saying.

I know you give it the whole bla bla bla but if a woman gives you your own medicine back you don't like it.

i know I don't even bother reading any of your posts, coz they are full of c r a p. So no I didn't 8 pages like you got time to sit on here.

But now I found time to defend myself against you're bakwas.

You are right about one thing though, I need to consult a dictionary and look up the word 'ignore'. So I can ignore Jagsaw, and evi Paji Paji kardi rendi. Thank you ji for starting something that didn't need to be, only yourself to blame. I refuse to call you Paji now to, coz you have no respect at all. And pick on users including me to fulfill your ego.

But still I hope Waheguru blesses you with some respect.

I won't say it quietly , I will say it loudly, I IGNORE YOU, YOU ARE NOT WORTH WASTING ENERGY ON.

oh and thanku ji again for more bakwas you written, what you expect, ladoo?? When you wrote c r a p about me.

Thats the stupidest post I've ever read Simran. Really stupid. All the more stupid because I get home after picking the kids up from school only to find half a dozen messages directed towards me by an hystericaly emotional woman and the usual suspects, accusing me of slander.

Simmer down woman. Cha da cup peela'.....beshkot kaa'la....TV on karrla'....apna tampax pad change kar'la.....relax hoo ke'h ba'jah ram n'a. Baa'la nee boli da bandeh naal. Simmer down.

Ok Paji, but there was no need to mention me and write what he has.

And to those who have liked Jagsaw Singhs post about slandering me

What you mean 'slander' ? I suggest, Simran, you know what a word means before you decide to use it. The only thing I said about you personally is that you 'Liked' a message by gsinghysingh (message #65 on page 7). If you think that is 'slander' can I suggest you quietly make your way to message #65 on page 7 and observe the 'Like' by Simran345 next to the message. After that, I suggest you consult a dictionary and digest the fact that 'slander' defines a false statement. Therefore, the only way what I said about you could be 'slander' was if it was me who deliberately and maliciously assumed the identity of a girl called Simran, in the space of 5 minutes created a 'Simran' username for Sikhsangat.com and shamelessly used your name to put a 'like' next to a dodgy message. But....we booth know that didn't happen did it now Simran ?

I haven't even commented on this topic at all.

You 'liked' a message in which a man (gsinghysingh) not only made a false statement in which he implied that its just the odd one or two of these Afghan Sikhs who indulge in strange practices and that ALL...i.e EVERY SINGLE ONE of the Sikhs that are ruining Sikhism are from the one particular caste (Jatts).

Are you in the habit of 'Liking' posts without reading or understanding them ??

I don't give a damn........ and don't know what goes on in which caste

Really ? 8 pages long giving you detailed descriptions of 'what goes on' and yet you still don't know ?? This begs the question Simran.....What exactly do you know ??

As for you jkvlondon:

he spreading the 'love' again ? hale akkal nahin aiee ? ...maybe he hasn't had a good slap upside the head from his Mum in a while

Now that you know I haven't said anything false or malicious at all why don't you explain how and why you think you can willy niilly say things about people without having the most simple understanding of what you think you're either agreeing or disagreeing with ?

Or....as you have, in the past, alluded to the fact that you might perhaps be from one of those urban backgrounds that its simply a case of you taking the incest 1st cousin marriage issue personally as its something that runs in your family or........Is it perhaps a case of you being defensive in advance because my talk of morals and ethics hits a raw nerve with you seeing as you left home as a teenager to elope with your black boyfriend ?

Both of you females (Simran and jkvlondon) need to up your game intellectually and develop some self respect. Firstly, you need to understand the fact that in a discussion between those who think it OK to see women as nothing more than sex objects and those (me) bitterly and violently opposed to this way of thinking you should, if you had any self-respect, be firmly on the side of the latter. Secondly, if you think you might be up for arguing with me you better research what you say and be sure you're saying the right thing before posting insulting messages about me.

Jagoff:

You are a perfect example of the result of the brainwashing we have been speaking of.

Really ? You place so little value in the honour of the dastar that you have stated clearly in this very thread that : Its OK for dastar wearing Singhs to have sex with their sisters.....Its OK for dastar wearing Sikhs to see women as objects created purely for men to enjoy sexually....Its OK to commit crime and any sikh that doesn't think criminals are cool is a "soft Pu**y". On other threads, many a time, you have stated that it is wrong for Sikhs to be considered a race seperate from Indians. On this thread, you have repeatedly abused people...repeatedly used disgusting swear words. And yet you think I'm brainwashed for being consistent in stamping on all those that bring dishonour to the dastar ?

Your little friend here jacfsing is already well known for being a complete retard so he's a bit of a lost cause but people like buddasingh need to take a step back and analyse how an anti-Sikh, Pro-Indian, drinking, night-clubbing fake like yourself has managed to hoodwink him. Shame on him for that. But, as I said before, I, and my family, will NEVER stop stamping on the heads of all those who bring shame and disgrace on the turban no matter how hard you try and scare me away with abuse. A vicious foreign nation (India) illegally occupies my land. I will never, till my dying day, cease to break and abuse both them and the sellout Sikhs that support them. It is then, just a co-incidence that the 2 of you brothers in arms here right now (jacfsingh and Dallysingh101) are the ones that have been consistent over the years with your anti-Khalistan stance ?

I do recall, a couple of months ago, I received some abuse here for pointing out how the Afghan arora Sikhs in west London had made the entire west London population look at any male with a dastar and beard as a criminal....in much the same way that society has a stereotypical view of roma gypsies. Not a day goes by without the local papers having stories about multi-million dollar fraud this....multi-million dollar fraud that.....appearances in court....prison sentences.....business in Southall raided. Its got to the stage where the average Christian, Jew, Hindu or Muslim in west London associates the Sikh religion with rampant criminality.

They have a bridarai system. Its all in the family....quite literally as they practice first cousin marriage....and thus the way they operate is that they appreciiate that some in the family will undoubtedly get caught and be sent to prison but the greater 'good' of amassing great fortunes for the extrended family outweighs this risk.

To understand the dynamics of the 10 to 20,000 strong arora Afghan Sikh community of Southall, and how these 'refugees' have all amassed vast fortunes in the space of 10 years, all of them driving around in £80,000 cars, you have to first understand that they, as a closed community, both share their wealth and share share the risks that come with criminal enterprises.

Hunger strikes are extremely powerfull tools. Extremely powerfull.

Arguably, it was the hunger strike of the Irish nationalist Bobby Sands in 1981, and the subsequent deaths of the other Irish hunger strikers, that led to Britain conceding defeat in their fight against the concept of Irish nationalism because the British government's harsh reaction to those deaths was eventually seen as inhuman, much as the Indian government's and the Punjab government's would also be seen. The fact that we are not having the same effect....and in essence not having any positive effect whatsoever in comparison with historical facts about all hunger strikes can best be summed up thus: The first hunger striker died after 43 days and the last hanged on 'till the 73rd day.

We, the Sikhs, salute and stand alongside baba Surat Singh because his struggle is our struggle but....sometimes, we should take a step back and analyse why our struggle gets us nowhere and we are, arguably, in an even worse position today with regards to political rights than we were 30 years ago. Is our struggle merely to reassure and garner support amongst ourselves or is it to convince our oppressors that we are serious about what we do ? I ask this because headlines such as "Babu Surat Singh on his 365th day of hunger strike" means alot to me, as a Sikh already part of the cause but to the people we're trying to reach.........the Indians we're trying to teach about human rights and dignity....it just comes across as another example of what they percieve as the uneducated backwardness of Sikhs. They, who already have jokes about their stereotype image of us, look at those kind of headlines and wonder why they shoud take seriously a community that doesn't realise it is articulating a hunger strike day tally that is not only physically impossible but also 4 times greater than what has ever been achieved by a human being.

To get freedom.......to get our human rights........we need to step inside the shoes of our oppressors and understand what they're thinking. Some of them have been to Cambridge, some of them have been to Harvard. Even those that haven't know what the words 'Hunger Strike' mean. We, the western born educated sons and daughters of the Sikhs from Punjab need to understand that we are fighting a war with an enemy....we ARE at war, but this is not a war being faught with guns and rocket launchers. THIS, is a war of intellect. A war where reason will prevail. Reason, is with us. Barbarity is with them. '365 days of a hunger strike' is not an expression reasonable, educated......the wining side of an intellectual war....uses.

Ok. I wish I didn't have to do what I'm about to do but.....its gotta be done:

The first bit of the poster. Taking all the different sentences together it is clear each sentence is a hope for 2016. But, at the same time, there are aspects of it that are quite disturbing in that people might actually wish for such thiings in 2016. We start off with 'Handguns are in Museum'. Now, they say 'museum' rather than 'museums' or 'a museum' so they obviously have one particular museum in mind. We can only speculate if that particular museum is the naural history museum or the Sheffield Museum of Locomotive Engines but, regardless, the very fiirst sentence of the first bit at the top clearly demonstrates that it is indeed hopes for 2016 that are being listed because gettig rid of guns from the street is indeed a noble hope. This, of course, makes the second 'hope' very strange because that hope is that, in 2016, we get a world where 'Safe Water is Rare'.

The very next hope is a great one because it wishes for a world where 'Wars are (only) fought over twitter'.

But......in the next hope, it wishes for a world, in 2016, where 'canned air is sold'

And then we come to our very last hope.....a hope that 'pollution kills more people than accidents' ??

you seem to show some sort of bias against a certain group because your blind on the other group.

My god you really are incredibly dimwitted jacfsing2. On a thread about domestic violence dallysingh101 comes along and without reason posts a message in which he lays the blame on rural sikhs. Instead of seeing how disgusting and casteist he is for doing that (btw...he does that on every single thread he's ever been on here on sikhsangat) you choose to blame any sikh that points out how wrong he is for doing that.

Is that really how things are supposed to work ? Are urban sikhs supposed to insult rural sikhs at wll and if the rural sikhs ever dares say anything about it it will automatically be the rural sikhs fault ? Is that really how it works ? That the sun shines out of the urban sikhs ar$e and he can do no wrong but the rural sikh is always, by definition, a 'bad 'un' ?

I don't like Dallysingh101's view by any standard; however, on this instance he's being slightly more honest about the situation than you are,

Well now. At least we now know the 2015 winner of the forum's biggest fool. Its jacfsing2 by a landslide.

I mean lets just put this into perpective. You, jacfsing2, like the idea of dallysingh101 needlessly bringing his blatant anti-rural sikh prejudice into this thread by falsely blaming rural sikhs for domestic violence. You like that, or at least don't mind it that much. But you wish to cover your eyes and ears and refuse to acknowledge that :

• the newspapers in Punjab are full of stories of the urban lot habitually setting their wives on fire for extra dowry money
• The urban lot see women as such low quality human beings that they think Sikhi (i.e dastar and amrit) is only for men as they don't belive females have the mental and physical qualities to be a Sikh. i.e domestic torture.
• one urban group, the bhatras, don't let their daughters go to college and don't let any females out of the house without veiling and they enforce these rules with intimidation, fear and violence.

And yet you like the fact that one of the urban lot came onto this thread and decided he could pin the blame on all rural sikhs without any come back ?

Weren't you the same person who was speaking against Khatris just a few months ago?

I am the one, a few months ago, on a thread about the perverse Muslim culture of marrying their cousins, who pointed out how the khatris practice this same despcable tradition. If you're angry at me for pointing it out and not keeping it on th hush hush do you not think your anger might be misplaced and should perhaps be directed at the people who indulge in these disgusting incestous practices ?

As for this thread, you might recall that it was the usual subject: Dallysingh101 who came along and did what he does on every single thread he visits: Without rhyme or reason, he tried to insinute that it is the Sikhs who come from rural backgrounds who indulge in domestic violence while his urban lot are ever so civilsed they hardly ever do. And then you come along an get angry with me for not keeping the true facts on the hush hush and for pointing out how it is the urban lot in Punjab who habitually burn their wives and daughter in laws to death for extra dowry money, see women as not suitable both physically and mentally to be Sikhs, see women as not suitable to work hard outside the home, not suitable to fight, not suitable to attend university, not suitable to step outside the home without covering themselves like muslim women....i.e all the major ingredients needed for domestic violence and mental domestic torture. Thus, do you not think your anger is misplaced and should perhaps be directed towards the person that needlessly blamed the entire rural Sikh population for what is essentially an urban problem and the urban lot that indulge in such barbaric and mysoginistic practices ?

Thing is, you see our own pendus b1tch-slapping their wives too. Ok, not as much as in my parent generation but are we saying that this doesn't happen in our society, especially the more backwards parts?

Wow !!! Can there possibly be a more casteist person on sikhsangat than Dallysingh101?

Look back at his posts. It doesn't matter if the thread is about cars, Punjab, cakes or space travel.....the man will ALWAYS.....WITHOUT FAIL.... find a reason within it to put down Sikhs who come from a rural background. The man is totally shameless.

But....even more than shame is his ignorance.

For example, it would be really interesting too get inside his head and see how he can shamelessly attribute domestic violence at the feet of the rural Sikhs while completely ignoring these facts:

1. The newpapers every single day in Punjab are full of stories about rural women murdering their husbands (usually for extra-marital affairs) and urban husbands and families setting fire to their wife/daughter in law (usually for lack of dowry)
2. The urban Sikhs, as a rule, believe that Sikhism is only for men because women lack the intellect and other aspects needed to be a Sikh whilst this is a concept and state of affairs totaly alien among the rural Sikhs as they have a cultue whereby the women work and fight as much as the men, ie...the urban lot mentally enslave them (before regularly setting them on fire) whereas the rural lot emancipate them.
3. The one and only group of Sikhs in the UK that have the most oppressive attitude towards their women, and keep this oppressive order through intimidation, fear andd violence, are the bhatras.....and they, of course, are 100% from urban stock as they do not exist as a rule in rural areas. This urban group is the one that will not allow their daughters to study at university and will not allow their women to go out in public without a veil of some sorts.

So what exactly is it that goes through dallysingh101's mind where he can blank his mind from actual reality and continously, thread after thread, perpetuate his vitriolic prejudice against rural sikhs ?

Jagsaw jee, Hindus do phere around fire should we stop circles around Guru Sahib during Anand Karaj? Hindu Sadhus and rishis of ancient times kept Kesh so should we stop keeping kesh? Hindus call their spiritual teachers as Guru should we stop calling our Guru Sahibaan by this title?

This line of thinking is very detrimental to our Panth. Its also very illogical. If tommorow Hindus start eating Aloo Gobi (which they probably do) should we stop eating aloo gobi too now?

And when you say rituals are bad, we need to define what is a ritual to determine if all things ritual are against Sikhi. When we take Amrit from Panj Pyaras that is a ritual. The way amrit is prepared with each of the pyaras reciting one of the punj banis in turn while stiring the water-patasaa mixture with a Khanda can also be defined as ritual. When we matha tek in front of Guru ji that is a ritual. When we do ishnaan at the amrit sarovar of Sri Harmandhir Sahib that is also a ritual. These rituals are beneficial for our spiritual jeevan since it involves Guru Sahib or has been started by them. While following rituals of aanmat we recieve no spiritual benefit nor Kushi of Guru ji. So a distinction should be made between Sikh and non Sikh rituals and not discard all rituals in the name of Hindu phobia which is akin to throwing the baby along with the bath water.

Johnny, I'm going to ignore JKVlondon as she lacks intellectual substance but I'll start you with this thought:......Our Gurus took us out of the darkness.....Man, has taken us back into it.

Absolutely nothing to do with Hindus. Hindus can do what they want. Hindus have always had their traditions and they always will. Good luck to them. They're as good and bad as me. Nothing to do with me though.

Hindus, just like Sikhs, have some unbeleivably good people amomgst them. Truly wonderfull people. Truly so.

But....that ain't got sh$t to do with shi$t. Its to do with following rituals. If I were to follow my great great great great grandfather's Hindu ritual of choosing a first letter for the name of my son than what's to stop me from going to the Gurdwara and choosing a name for the brand of jacket to buy for my final accountancy exam interview ?

My Guru Ji is wonderfull. My interview at Freshfields is also quite wonderful and life changing. Should I first consult Guru Ji about the colour of the tie I should wear for an interview with a magic circle Law firm before I go ?

My life is no more an empty shell than the tie I put on. My life is simply to be able to have the understanding that Amrit will give me life. Its so simple. The fact that all those before who take amrit and yet still don't understand the true meaning of it is not my problem.

You see......once you become absorbed in rituals you forget about the actual substance. The actual substance of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji tells you everything you need to know about getting lost in rituals and thus, forgetting about actual substance so, I'll refer you back to what I said before:

"The greatest Sikh of the century (Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale) was named by his parents after a French army rank (after the French language became the lingua franca of the Khalsa Kingdom)

Our 10th master, Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji, named his children after Iranian first names."

i.e...a name is just a name. Nothing more.Nothing less. If a nation thinks a name of a child is mega important than that nation will never become an actual nation.

Now....as you see how we Sikhs are the ONE and ONLY major religion on planet earth without a homeland perhaps you can see it is justified because we have become absorbed in rituals rather than actual substance ??????

By nature, and by common sense, the word 'job' implies a wage.

With that 'wage' a worker either pays his or her rent and is able to lve or, if its decent enough, is able to get his or her foot on the property ladder.

So......whilst we've all heard talk about the Sikh Channell paying absolutely ZERO to ts staff I can't help wondering what kind of wonderfull 'job oppportunity' this really is when the advert mentions absolitely nothing about the amount of remuneration a candidate will or might get for the WORK he or she would do.

i.e....It is NOT a 'Job Opportunity'.

There is nothing Hindu about this ceremony Jagsaw. Which Hindu uses Bani to name their children? Does Manu write in Manu simriti to use Bani of the Gurus? No way.

The blessed perents who involve Guru Sahib in their Children's lives from the start recieve Kushi and kirpa of Guru Sahib. A Sikh tries to involve Guru Sahib in all events of his life. That is why we take Hukamnama in all our important decision making. This has been our tradition followed by all respected Sikhs since the start.

And lingua franca of the Sikh empire was farsi not french. That is also the language our foreign ministers and generals used to speak to the British and Afghans. Back then Farsi was considered the French of the east. A language of royalty.

Talk to Gujratis Johnny.

Its an ancient Hindu tradition to have a ceremony to pick a letter for the name of their newborn son.

Notice how I said 'son'. Thats because they, unlike we Sikhs, saw sons as more special than daughters. But...thats neither here nor there. Its about ritual. My great great great grrandfather came with a ritual and rituals to me as a Sikh mean nothng. I, as a Sikh, have no rituals for birth, no rtuals during lfe, no rituals for death.

The 'lingua franca' of War of the Khalsa Kingdom was officially French. The lingua franca of court was Farsi but the official language of War of the Sikhs was French.

And, just in case you're interested, the time of the French in Khalsa Punjab also coincided with the time that the Spanish language took its language shift from the 'g' to the 'r' and the French followed, through language fashion, hence two of the most popular Sikh names of the century 'Jarnail' and 'Karnail'.

Jagsaw's been on the sherry, I think. A Christmas tipple. ;)

Just kidding, I know he doesn't drink.

No sherry Mister Singh. Maybe a little too much pepsi though. Too much fizzy pop made me think everybody understands the phonetic alphabet. I was wrong. My bad :(

Basically though, I was saying how silly the poster was for advocating same surname marriage amongst Sikhs without understanding how most minor Jatt surnames (which only exist together in the same 10 mile radius of the same Tehsil of the same district) indicate that those with the same surname were part of the same family living in the same houshold less than 100 years ago. That, my friend, is insest. And that, my friend,is well and truly foxtrot uniform charlie kilo'd uniform papa !!!!

Baby names are a difficult but, at the end of the day, a very personal choice between you and your partner. Choose what you both feel comfortable with and NEVER EVER go with what we here say. Its you and your parner who have brought a beautiful child into this world. Its you both who should go with whatever you wish.

All we can do is tell you about is our decisions about our own children and Sikh history with regards to naming their children. From that you should take and discard what you will.

The greatest Sikh of the century (Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale) was named by his parents after a French army rank (after the French language became the lingua franca of the Khalsa Kingdom)

Our 10th master, Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji, named his children after Iranian first names.

Me, and my wife, did not go through any 'picking first letter' ceremony because it is exactly the same ceremony the Hindus have and we didn't want to cary on with Hindu leftover traditions my forefathers carried over with them with their conversion from Hinduism from Sikhism simply because that same Hindu tradition is now done in the name of our living master.

See?

Like I said. Take our experience but, at the end of the day, choose a name both you and your partner are happy with. Thats all that matters.

It's okay if you are married to the same surname. For example, in my family we are a Kalkat, and my dad's friend from his pind, is also Kalkat. Does this mean we are related to each other? The answer is no.

Charlie Bravo Tango; I'm sorry but I must tell you that you are foxtrot uniform charlie kilo'ing full of sierra hotel india tango.

There have been others here full of foxtrot uniform charlie kilo'ing sierra hotel india tango before, my friend, bravo uniform tango yankeee alpha the sierrsiat of them alpha.