MisterrSingh
-
Posts
7,295 -
Joined
-
Days Won
225
Content Type
Profiles
Calendar
Forums
Everything posted by MisterrSingh
-
These frauds still view us as the peasantry; to be roused and herded into action whilst they retire to a safe vantage point, and observe the ensuing carnage. Whose blood is split (literally or figuratively)? Ours. These wealth-obsessed individuals who masquerade as our spiritual betters, sitting adjacent to Guru Granth Sahib Ji lecturing us on how to be the perfect Sikh. Disgusting. What's even more disgusting are the enablers of these satanic personalities: the enemy within our ranks, namely us.
-
Brother, you seem to be okay with us being used as pawns by the Pakistani top brass. I know beggars can't be choosers and we were punching way above our weight, but doesn't it seem a bit off to you that our so-called allies were arming or supporting us not due to some affinity for our aims or respect for us as individuals, but because they wanted to hurt the Indians by destabilising a vital part of the country? We were nothing but canon fodder to the Pakistanis. A buffer. I find it quite insulting that we were being manoeuvred by those godless Musleh; a side that featured Sant Jarnail Singh Ji was having its strings pulled by a faceless collective of untrustworthy, slimy Pakistanis as a way of sticking it to the Indians? I consider it an insult to Dasme Paatshah that we ever approached those pieces of 5hit. I can guarantee you they promised the Singhs that if things went pear-shaped they'd intercede and back us up, because there's no way a rag-tag band of admittedly awesome fighting Singhs could've taken on the entire Indian military. Logic dictates the Pakistanis egged us on to kick things off, and they promised us they'd be behind us to back us up. Instead, they sat back, realised there was no way we were going to escape from bring cornered in Harminder Sahib, and they observed the tamasha. Yeah, Bhutto may have been the one to sell out, but the assumption that the ISI was honour-bound to help us doesn't sound right to me. We were so desperate to give what-for to the Indians that we went into cahoots with the worst possible "allies." The enemy of my enemy is NOT my friend. Real politik 101. -
That's exactly the aspect of Sikhi I struggled with growing up as a child and even up until quite recently. The overwhelming belief that I could never measure up to those Sikhs of yesteryear, no matter what I did, due to their almost inhumanly perfect demeanours was overwhelming at times. It was incredibly disheartening, particularly for someone such as myself who was incredibly proud of our faith and its tenets. Of course, i would never advocate "lowering the bar" in order to make guys like me feel better about their deficiencies (that way lies the erosion of standards). There must be a higher benchmark that we must strive to reach, yet I'd prefer if it was based on factual history, instead of unrealistic fantasy designed to conjure a mythology on par with the more established faiths we were surrounded by in India.
-
Absolutely. The slightly naive belief that all puratan Sikhs functioned according to Satjugi behavioural tendencies in a world ravaged by Kaljug is quite amusing. The same people will point to historical Sikh defeats and social misfortunes as divine punishment for erring from those sacred ideals, as if we were spared from violence and death when our Guru Sahibs were at the forefront of Sikh life. It's a dangerous and, at worst, a deliberately misleading rewriting of Sikh history in order to edit the slightly questionable aspects of human behaviour, in order to present a watered-down version of reality. We've nothing to be ashamed of at all. There's no dishonour in showing humanistic tendencies in those apparently hallowed times; if anything, future generations of sophisticated and intelligent Sikhs will be more inclined to learn about and respect our history if it isn't a mythological white-wash more akin to the folklore of thousands of years ago as opposed to events that barely occurred 500 years in the past, which in the grand scheme of human history is not too long ago. For clarification, I'm referring to solely to the period post-Guru Sahibs. I'm not casting aspersions on our Guru Sahibs divinity in any way.
-
Some point to the manner in which Sirhind was razed to the ground. You don't believe empty houses and fields were destroyed whilst the people were allowed the opportunity to observe the destruction in safety? No, it's safe to say the civilian population was adversely affected during those acts of vengeance, hence Banda Singh's honest admission that he'd overstepped the limits of what was acceptable.
-
I understand your anger, but whose blood? Not innocents, I hope, of whatever denomination. The resentment and hate we harbour for our enemies will rise up in others for us. That's not the way.
-
As much as the action we took was justified, we were naive and ill-prepared. I'm not sure whether the act was one of symbolic defiance prior to the inevitability of attaining shaheedi, or a belief that somehow the Singhs would be victorious against all odds. I don't know. The tragedy lies in the subsequent pogroms against Sikhs, encouraged by the Indian state, to weaken, demoralise, and humiliate Sikhs. Did anyone really believe the Indian govt would turn against a certain section of its own population in such a hideously barbaric manner? I don't think anyone dreamt such a thing could happen. False encounters dressed up as anti-terrorist operations is an act of the lowest of the low; basically allowing the Indians to instigate acts of deadly violence to strike fear into the hearts of Sikhs in order to cower them into submission, whilst giving the impression to the wider world that all action being undertaken was justified. After all the sacrifices Sikhs made for that filthy, third-world, degenerate country and its fickle, sub-human population. Dirty Indian bastards. Finally, we were foolish to trust the Pakistanis. I've never received a straight answer from anyone on this forum regarding the Pakistani involvement in Sikh separatism, but whatever the extent of their involvement, they hung us out to dry. The fact that the Singhs on our side trusted those gandhe Musleh galls me beyond the belief. Did not one spiritually inclined individual on our side know the Pakistanis were playing us in their game with the Indians? We were pawns, and we fell for it. Poora bakwaas.
-
He was alpha as anything. A proper "Banda." Liberal Sikhs want to downplay or even write him out of Sikh history because of his aversion for Islam, and the way he went about giving those animals a bloody nose. He perhaps went too far, and like a genuine man, he was all too willing to accept his mistakes, and the following quote of his prior to his execution - in a conversation with a Mughal higher-up - proves he understood the nature of God more than most so-called men of God: "Whenever men become so corrupt and wicked as to relinquish the path of equity and abandon themselves to all kinds of excesses, then Providence never fails to raise up a scourge like me to chastise a race so depraved; but when the measure of punishment is full then he raises up men like you to bring him to punishment."
-
'beant Sin' Grandson Commits Suicide
MisterrSingh replied to StarStriker's topic in WHAT'S HAPPENING?
Let's not fall into the trap of, "Mentally ill child = punishment from God." A few of you are skirting on the edge of making this statement. -
As much as I'm enjoying Trump putting the cat amongst the pigeons, the cause he represents deserves someone a tad less divisive, because the issues he rallies against are dismissed by the other side on account of Trump being Trump. Like it or not, he's as much as part of the "system" as his opponents. But, for the time being, he's doing a decent job in scaring the crap out of the duplicitous establishment. Time will tell what type of impact he'll ultimately have. I don't think Congress will allow him to have free reign if he's elected, so expect the Democrats and even the Republicans to thwart him in the Senate on most issues.
-
The problem reaches beyond Left, Centre, or Right, and even more than a case of secular vs non-secularism. It's not black and white, and as Jonny ji mentioned above, the root lies in an issue of finance.
-
They don't want to single out Muslims. Apparently, they prefer throwing everyone under the bus instead of confronting one particular group.
-
Truth. ^^^ I suggest some of us should rediscover that Sikh masculinity that was synonymous with Sikh males for centuries until we became a group of whiny victims. History has been unfair to us, there's no doubt it, but if we continue to look to the past, we won't have much of a future to contemplate. As Sikhs we should never go looking for trouble, but when trouble finds us, we should not hesitate to tackle it head-on. As for this turban issue it'll be interesting to see how the British govt implements this ban on turbans. Hopefully, the crusty old uncles in our community, who can barely string two words together in English, keep their mouths shut, and allow the younger generation to come forward and explain why making enemies of a loyal immigrant population such as Sikhs will be to the detriment of Britain. Unlike Musleh, we won't be hacking British soldiers to death on British streets, or exploding bombs on British transport, but our silence and ambivalence will speak volumes when these isles turn to 5hit because of the cowardly appeasement of the Muslim minority.
-
As usual, Musleh ruining it for other brownies.
-
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/31/senior-eu-lawyer-backs-workplace-ban-on-muslim-headscarves
-
The opposite is occasionally true for males, when a male paedo abuses a boy, the victim grows up to be gay (and in some cases they too become abusers when they mature). But some don't. Yeah, it is complicated. It's like guys admiring the aesthetics of Arnie in his hey-day. It's from an almost detached, observational perspective, much like admiring a piece of art or a sculpture. A gay fella would get hot under the collar checking out biceps and pecs, but a straight guy wouldn't go there.
-
I read (or heard) something quite recently that female sexuality is a heck of a lot more fluid than male sexuality. You see it in some women who get divorced in middle age (not through choice but due to their husband hitting the road), and then suddenly realise they find women attractive. It's that kind of behaviour that adds to the belief that for some people their sexuality is a choice. I don't know where I stand on that issue, because I haven't chosen to be attracted to the opposite sex, so I'm not quite comfortable in jumping on that bandwagon.
-
Does anyone else find lesbianism a bit of a contradiction? I'm sure we've all seen the butch, masculine-looking females (not transgender) who claim they find other women attractive, but if you stop to think for a moment, if these women were attracted solely to the fairer sex for their feminine traits, then why "man" yourself up and assume masculine traits and features like a short hairstyle, etc? Why not just be with a guy if you like your women to resemble to men? What's going on there?
-
Bro, that's something between you and God, and you'll have to decide what needs to be done. Only your conscience can guide you to the best choice. Good luck.
-
Why would anyone - male or female - WANT to be a sant in this day and age? It's a tarnished title that induces cynicism and disbelief in all but the most gullible and sycophantic. Usually, it's a method of attracting a following in order to generate attention and ways of generating income. Be a sant if you want to. But as long as God knows about it, that's all that matters. If you want "santdom" for egotistical and material purposes, then you aren't a sant. You're an opportunist.
-
'beant Sin' Grandson Commits Suicide
MisterrSingh replied to StarStriker's topic in WHAT'S HAPPENING?
The family says it was an accident due to weapon maintenance, yet it emerged he was suffering from depression. Seems there's still stigma surrounding mental illness in Punjabi society. -
Please don't offer anyone advice in the future. You're laughably wrong on so many levels. As for the "Canadian Jatt," if your MIL has sons of her own of marriageable age, YOU need to extricate her from your home, and send her on her way. The only reason she's been capable of filling your wife's head with nonsense is because you've failed to get your wife on side before her mother got to her. If your wife was on-side and you guys had put up a united front, nobody; mother, father, sibling, etc, would ever be capable of turning her head. That's a failing on your part, as well as an unfortunate cultural trait that afflicts our womenfolk. All your problems should've been identified and solved quite a while ago. You've let matters escalate due to your timidity and carelessness. Take control of your home and your family. It is possible for you to do so in a calm and controlled manner without unleashing the inner pendu and resorting to violence. The question is: "Do you have the will to restore order?"
-
Who is this, bro?
-
Woman In India Caught Beating Up Elderly Woman In Her Own Family
MisterrSingh replied to genie's topic in WHAT'S HAPPENING?
Or maybe some people are just animalistic, cruel beasts who derive pleasure from inflicting pain on those who can't defend themselves, and instead of "understanding" their perversions, they need a taste of their own medicine? Usually, that's enough to put an end to these episodes. -
The sad fact is most Sikhs can be bought incredibly easy.