dallysingh101

This hasn't been my experience in London, I think Bengalis are very different to Paks, and a lot of bongos don't like/trust stanis.

I can't get over the grandpa getting head... Man it's crazy, he looked like a typical baba or nana. I bet he's been doing that stuff since he was young in India.

That's disgusting. Treating kids like that; at a Gurdwara too. Whatever fudhooness parents have done shouldn't be put on the innocent kids head. They will just grow up to hate Sikhs (understandably too). What does Chatterey mean? Not where I am! Europeans love a bit of inter-racial! I think they like mixed-race here in terms of physical looks. Sexual exoticism is a common thing amongst Brits. If a white man gets a pretty Indian girl, he feels as if he has hit the jackpot as well as stuck a finger in the brown man's eye. What they don't like is people adhering to their non-European cultures - they do a lot to subtly coconutise people. They've got a vision for what they want us to be like.

I know one of the first things they did after the fall of of Lahore is to chop down all the trees around Hazoor Sahib which used to be a defensive measure. This is telling because Hazoor Sahib was in British occupied territory for a LONG time before they attacked Panjab, and they daren't do it, presumably in fear of reprisals. But after the fall of the Sikh kingdom they felt emboldened enough to do it.

Yeah blud, me too. It's mad innit bruv. And den dey beez like: "Blud why iz u dissin me for talking like dis man. It's just cos of my environment innit. Wot iz u? Like an English teacher or summin? And stop telling me to pull my pent up! You're long! You don't know about manz on street." Girls and boyz do dis innit.

I've got a few in my family and they look fully Indian (which I think secretly annoys some of their coconut parents.....lol). And I like it that way too, so they don't have any airs and graces over being half-white. Some of the mixed race kids are actually more darker than the full Panjabis in the family actually. I think it boils down to strong genes myself, Panjabi genes seem generally dominant over the white European ones - although you do get exceptions.

I hope you are right. And I hope your people acknowledge and act on mistakes and the feedback of other Sikhs instead of teh usual dismissing everything being said. And don't worry about me being left behind, I'm quite an adaptable cat. What you might want to be worrying about is living in lala land where no real change is taking place amongst your own lot but wishful thinking makes you think that it is.

Of course. I think in the past Sikh women lived much more physical lives than now, albeit helping in farms, carrying stuff about, long walks as no cars/public transport, grinding with chakki to make atta, ridking milk to make malai etc. The problem is (as you've alluded) comfort. How do get people to relinquish that! Sikh success is bringing in a whole new set of problems.

That's an easy way for you to gloss over genuine and real grievances spanning a long period of time rather than reflect on your own communities part in creating this situation.

I think we need to renormalise physical training for Sikh blokes with an emphasis on both physical fitness and prowess. According to Giani Gian Singh this was a norm for all Sikhs (not only those in the army) up until the end of the Sikh kingdom. But all this has to come with psychological development too. People need to get streetwise. And I think the sisters above have highlighted a really important issue with self-fixation. Like you get a lot of 'metrosexual' type young brothers these days who are fit and strong but mentally and behaviourally they are quite well....how do I say it....effeminate. I don't agree with those meek guys being stronger by the way, they are the ones who sit out all altercations out of fear or selfishness. But on the other hand the loud mothed, drinking pendu 'bwaah bwaah' type mentality is not only problematic in that such people usually end up only fighting with other apnay, it's also embarrassing and cringe worthy to behold.

What sullay do amongst themselves, in their own lands is no business or concern of mine. But when whites start jumping into the mix for their own greedy objectives they invite trouble in their own backyards in the form of retaliation. That's when it starts effecting us Sikhs. Whatever you might say, we haven't seen the levels of destruction and mass exodus from Arab land like we are now in living memory. So sullay internal fighting hasn't caused the kind of chaos we are seeing now. Look at Yazhdis, they have been there for a long, long time - but only after whitey jumps into the mix and plays king maker in the region have they ended up in the state they are in now. Same with Arab Christians, who've been living in the region for eons. How comes you are such an apologist for whites? Even some clued up goray are saying that the west's foreign policy is destructive and causing more and more problems; what makes you play down their actions and their consequences like you are? You seem to be justifying neo-imperialism with the argument that as sullay fight amongst themselves it is okay for goray to jump in and start playing their games too. That's a crazy argument.

British politicians are obsessed with bombing the Middle East, says Afghanistan veteran MP Clive Lewis says launching airstrikes in Syria is a 'knee- reaction' Politicians would think twice about sending troops to war if more had experienced its consequences first hand, an MP who served in Afghanistan has said. Clive Lewis, a recently elected Labour MP and former infantryman, criticised a Government push to bomb militant groups in Syria, arguing that a diplomatic solution would be more likely to succeed. “I’m tired of it. As someone who, to be quite frank, has had my fill on my short tour of Afghanistan of death and mayhem, I sometimes think if we had a few more MPs in there seeing the direct consequences of their lust for war, maybe they’d think twice about it,” he told parliament’s The House magazine. Mr Lewis argued that a guerrilla force like Isis would require the deployment of ground troops to effectively defeat and that airstrikes would be futile. He endorsed new leader Jeremy Corbyn’s approach to the situation in Syria and said the UK should be working with regional allies like Iran and Turkey to strangle the militant group and cut its supply lines. “Bombing hasn’t been thought through. If we’re talking about no fly zones and safe havens for refugees, how are we going to stop Isis from infiltrating no fly zones? That to my mind means boots on the ground,” he said. “Most military experts say you cannot comprehensively defeat Isis, an asymmetrical guerrilla force, from the air. It needs boots on the ground. So has this been thought through? “Let’s go for the diplomatic options first and exhaust them rather than this knee- reaction that we see in this House time after time, which is ‘we’ve got a problem in the Middle East, bomb it’,” he said. Iraq’s ambassador to Britain Faik Nerweyi made similar comments about the militant group last year, telling a meeting in Parliament that foreign military would have difficulty beating the because they were “integrated” into the local population and not “an army somewhere aloof”. The Government was defeated by Conservative rebels and Labour MPs in 2013 when it tried to gain parliamentary approval to launch airstrikes against Syria’s Assad regime in Syria. This month the Government said it would go back to MPs to ask them for permission to bomb Syria again – this time intervening to attack Isis, who are fighting the Assad regime. Asked specifically whether the Government wanted permission to launch attacks on Syria, Mr Fallon replied: “Yes, but to get parliamentary approval we’d have to be absolutely sure that we’d win the vote and establish a sufficient majority for it. “The circumstances have moved on. That was a motion about tackling Assad. The issue now is whether or not we’re prepared to deal with ISIL.” Mr Corbyn said last weekend that bombing Syria would not help refugees fleeting the region and could in fact create more. Mr Lewis was elected to the Norwich South constituency with an 8,000 majority, defeating an incumbent Liberal Democrat. The former army infantry reservist and television reporter sits on the Public Accounts Committee. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/british-politicians-are-obsessed-with-bombing-the-middle-east-says-afghanistan-veteran-mp-10512477.html

I don't know what to say, enough Sikh girls do this to give that impression. I've heard this before a few times from Paks.

The average freshy from the pend is uneducated and unskilled. So they wouldn't have much of a case. Right now, you can get hard working Polish people fully trained in their trade instead.

Some of these girls have quite conservative mentalities because western feminism hasn't penetrated their homelands (yet) , so that makes the chances of the marriages lasting better in my opinion.

Regime change is just another way of saying put a compliant chumcha on the throne. Maybe goray will learn now that their schemes don't always work? That's the problem, they had so much success making fudhoos out of everyone during the colonial period, they thought it would be as easy to do it again in modern times.....but things have changed and many people aren't the simple, manipulable lulloos they once were.

Not where I live, loads of them are married to Muslim men (and even faujis), or dating them.

Mate, a lot of Europeans love a bit of 'inter-racial', they don't need any mullah to trick them into interbreeding - they'll happily do it off their own back. At least in the England I know.

A moving letter about Jeremy Corbyn (the new Labour leader)from a man whose soldier son was killed in Iraq. I am a patriot – an immensely proud father of two sons. Both my boys served in the British army, and my eldest, Tom, made the ultimate sacrifice serving our country in Iraq. So I have a strong view on Jeremy Corbyn and patriotism. Corbyn has found himself at the blunt end of a lot of criticism in the media for his supposed lack of patriotism for not singing along with gusto to the national anthem during a memorial service to mark the Battle of Britain at St Paul’s Cathedral earlier this week. Battle of Britain veterans were quoted as saying the Labour leader’s “lack of respect” was astonishing. But I think those who criticise Corbyn should look more deeply at his record. Surely a true patriot is not just a person who follows the laid-out rituals, but one who defends the honour of his country at all levels with pride and vigour. A true patriot would not mislead or deceive his fellow countrymen or put them in harm’s way with no good reason. A patriot would wish to see his country held in high esteem on the world stage with other UN nations firmly in support. This is the man we know Jeremy Corbyn is, from all his words and deeds. Sadly, in sharp contrast we had a false patriot in a leaders such as Tony Blair who would gladly smile and sing his heart out to the national anthem for all to see, but who at the same time was misleading parliament on Iraq, misleading the people and worst of all misleading those brave troops who were to lay down their lives. So many died for the lie of a threat of weapons of mass destruction that never existed. He brought disgrace on Britain, taking us into an illegal war without UN backing. He brought suffering and death to many of our finest – including my son Tom – by sending them to an ill-planned war, ill-equipped. These are hardly the actions of a patriot. Corbyn has gone on record as saying that if Labour were to win a general election and form the government then he would apologise for the catastrophic war in Iraq. He stood firmly behind and supported military families who opposed the illegal war in Iraq in our quest to bring the troops – our sons and daughters, loved ones – home as soon as possible. More recently he has supported the call for Sir John Chilcot to bring a swift end to the farcical delays in the Iraq inquiry. Our country’s true honour would be upheld if those responsible for a war that has created so much havoc and unending destruction were brought to justice for what they did – Tony Blair included. Does the above display a distinct form of patriotism? Fighting for the honour – through honesty and decency – of our country? Let us not forget that if Corbyn had been prime minister back in 2003, Britain would not have entered into war with Iraq on a falsehood. He would have remained true to his people and his beliefs. Then 179 brave troops would not have died, and 3,500 would not have been severely wounded with life changing injuries. Hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi men, women and children would not have perished. Would Corbyn willingly exacerbate anti-western feeling around the world and make Britain a less safe place to live? Would he send our troops to risk death on a lie? I think not. Give the guy a break – he just wants a more equal society where people can live in peace. Surely this is a patriotic aim. Maybe it’s an unachievable utopia he strives for, but good luck to him. Reg Keys http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/17/jeremy-corbyn-patriot-war-tony-blair-iraq-labour

If this is true then we might as well give up. If tonday can walk in like that unchallenged and do that; I haven't even got the words for the Sikh 'men' that were present when it happened. This seems so outlandish that it must be bull? Or, we'll carry on like clowns and be saying the same thing in 10 years. This situation isn't going to change and could get much worse unless people start addressing it seriously. People have been highlighting this since the 80s. That makes it 30 years.

Mate, it isn't a coincidence that everyone and their cat within the quom seems to be move away from jats after interacting with them, be it by forming their own Gurdwaras or even leaving the faith altogether. Why is this? Is it that they smell really bad or something? No. At the root of this lies some seriously haughty,obnoxious, supercilious behaviour from that quarter; and then a denial that it takes place. It's a sad reality and it is more than high time to face this issue squarely head on. I don't care what excuses anyone has - it's straight unacceptable. Then certain people have the gall to complain about people moving away instead of reflecting on their own communities behaviour; or try and twist it into some issue of 'lack of faith' on part of those on the receiving end like the people should accept systematically demeaning behaviour - . If people persistently behave in an horrid way, any person with even a tiny shred of self-esteem will naturally move away. Face up to it. This crap has been going on long enough. There is no need for any protracted debate on the matter, that just naturally leads to obfuscation. That type of attitude and behaviour is just not on. End of. I've said my piece now. And I've given you some evidence like you asked. There is plenty more you can find if you're really interested. Reflect after you've watched those vids and read that dissertation. This isn't a personal attack on you btw, but seriously, this issue causing so much contention and fragmentation amongst us (not to mention that it has been going on for so long) that pu55y footing around it doesn't wash. That time has passed.

The root cause is straight forward. Ego and greed. Glad that you're going to read up about it. And for the record, I don't view things from any western (left or rightwing or anywhere inbetween) lens. No arguments about 'complexity' can ever justify a lack of humanity and compassion amongst Sikhs in this matter. Be careful not to (even subconsciously) let people off lightly because you belong to the same tribal construct as them. Good luck with your research!

I do do other things beside post on forums, so forgive me if I don't respond to you straight away. I think you are typical of the root causes of the problem, by this I mean by your denialist mentality. It's very common for people from your background to play down or deny what emanates from your quarter. Fortunately, more and more people are seeing things for what they are and rejecting the brainwashing of their families for a more honest, open and frankly humane and Sikhi orientated worldview over outdated, small minded, rural, pseudo-feudal worldviews in the 21st century. Our community faces the same struggle in this internal battle that we did with the grooming and sexual abuse issue. People were in straight denial about it and didn't want to acknowledge it for A LONG TIME. Like with the abuse issue, people who've faced discrimination aren't usually especially keen to highlight the issue or complain, especially when society (in Panjab) is actually dominated by people who are quiet happy with the status quo. Then there is also the matter of demeaning nature of the abuse whether in the form of verbal abuse or higher up the scale with the sexual abuse of females of so-called 'low-caste'. And we all know that our societies attitude towards the latter and the way it damages girls prospects for marriage. But, despite this some people do speak out and people do acknowledge and try and combat this. Here is some stuff for your perusal. Might make you a bit better informed about reality. Definitely read this: http://www.global.ucsb.edu/punjab/dissertations/NBehlDissertation.pdf Mate, you don't have to go very far to find examples. There is a lot more you can easily find if you can be bothered. I can only guess that you doing one (or more) of the below things that Natasha Behl identified as strategies used by people to obfuscate the caste issue? Behl, during her research, unfortunately found most Sikhs will react in one of 3 ways to continue talking about equality, but also continuing to discriminate in their daily practices: Distancing – they distance themselves from discriminatory actions by shifting responsibility onto others Narrowing – they obscure specific types of discrimination through the use of a narrow definition of equality, thus rendering specific discriminatory acts harmless. Shifting Blame - A majority of the respondents explain the structural position of Scheduled Caste Sikhs and Sikh women through a series of ontological narratives that minimize their own participation in discriminatory practices by shifting focus to Scheduled Caste Sikhs' and Sikh women's behavior, state policies, and degrees of religious observance. But it's cool. I believe in Waheguru and I believe in karma. And anyone supporting or trying to deny the disgraceful behaviour that takes place from certain sections of our community will have it coming back to them or their progeny in future. If people see the beauty of Sikhi despite the ugly actions of certain people claiming to represent Sikhi it doesn't make their actions excusable.

This thing is so ugly, I don't want to talk about it. For those of us who know what goes on: isn't weird how people are oblivious? Ranjeet01 use the internet if you're really interested.

Had never heard of that place before, just wiki'ed it. You learn a new thing everyday.