proactive

Interesting question. I think the whole question becomes a catch 22 situation. Anyone with even an iota of intelligence can see that there is some difference of opinion between those that people refer to a Brahmgyanis. But then we are also told that unless we ourselves are Brahmgyanis then we have no power to judge. Therefore the question becomes invalid! I think that a belief that we cannot judge who is a Brahmgyani or not is what has led to the mushrooming of fake sants and babas in Punjab. Thankfully there is a growing number of Sikhs in Punjab who have started to question the whole basis of these fake sants. Look that this belief another way, if we can't judge whether someone is a Brahmgyani or not then are we not committing a grevious sin by promoting ANYONE as a Brahmgyani because we have no power to judge. Nowadays we seem to promote anyone in Punjab who starts to wear a white chola as a Brahmgyani and this has led to some very unsavioury characters becoming Brahmgyanis in the eyes of ignorant people. Some of these fakes have recently been caught doing some very bad things in Punjab, a case in point is that so-called baba who raped a young girl. Going by some of the opinions of people here we cannot judge him even though any intelligent people would recognise that fake as a rapist and deserving of prison. My question which follows on from the thread is how about if some well established Brahmgyanis who might have been seen in photo opportunities with this fake and who may have previously praised him. Surely as Brahmgyanis they would know that this guy is a fake and in my view dutybound as Khalsa of Guru Gobind Singh to bring the sins of this fake to the notice of the common people as well as the authorities. Do Brahmgyanis need a type of 'trade union' as in the case of Sant Samaj? Why do established Brahmgyanis seek to become members of these 'trade unions' along with the fakes rather than unmasking them before the people. In the end it is their duty and given the belief that only a Brahmgyani can judge the avasta of another Brahmgyani then it it their DUTY to unmask these people since us common folk can't judge a Brahmgyani.

I think it depends on how well informed the family is about Gurmat. In some families people start to bow their head before the pictures and that is wrong. We have a few pictures of the Gurus and none of the family bow their heads. I guess it's just we get a sense of the Gurus' presence in the house.

Namstangji hates those who say Guru Granth Sahib is the only Guru but loves Kukas who say they are the 11th..12th.. whatever 'guru' No brahmgyanis do not lie. Fools call liars 'brahmgyanis'. Liars such as Kuka 'gurus', darshan das, ashutosh, radhaswami 'baba'

Guru Granth Sahib is Gurbani. Parts of Dasam Granth is Gurbani...but now people want to add Sarbloh Granth as Gurbani and then all sorts of works like Naseehat Nama..what next Mecca medina di gosti?

Don't waste your time. It's not Guru Nanak's Bani. If it was it would be in Guru Granth Sahib.

The handful of nutters excuse is wearing pretty thin! On the video for undercover mosque there comments being made were by so-called 'respected' Muslim leaders, those you see as multi-faith events and not the usual nut jobs like Abu Hamza. The venues being used and the organisations involved were ones that have been praised by the government. Only one religion can use it's scriptures to justify killing others, can you guess which one it is?

You are spot on. I've been to a few of his lectures and he's just embarrassing himself by trying to pass himself of as some kind of scholar. He was challenged by some martial arts school in east london a year ago but Niddar didn't accept it. The 'go and meet him yourself' replies come from Niddar's chelay and they like to keep up the pretence that he's some kind of unbeatable warrior, chances are any decent street style martial arts practioner could kick the crud out of him. I'd like to see Niddar try it on with a Krav Maga master.

And he has his sidekick 'Nirmala' Bahadar also pitches in with his own brand of shyt. I think he's gone from being a Nirmala to being a Nihang recently..what a joke!

Don't waste your time worrying about that guy. The shaan of a Shaheed of the Panth cannot be diminished by what lies a worm writes about the Shaheed.

Bijla Singh, Great responses to the Muslim's questions. The guy's arguments seem pretty infantile and easy refutable. 1. Guru Nanak Sahib a Satguru The concept of Satguru and Prophet are completely different. A prophet is a human being who bring the message of God usually through intermediateries like Angels or directly. In Islam Mohammed did not communicate directly with God but through the Angel Gabriel. Moses like direct communication with God as in the case of the burning bush and the handing down of the ten commandments. The manner of communication is also different. Before a supposed revelation Mohammed would suffer some kind of fit or epileptic attack. After the first interaction with, Mohammed tried commit suicide! Hardly the actions of a someone who had just heard about the message of God! But after a few days Waraqa died and the Divine Inspiration was also paused for a while and the Prophet became so sad as we have heard that he intended several times to throw himself from the tops of high mountains and every time he went up the top of a mountain in order to throw himself down, Gabriel would appear before him and say, "O Muhammad! You are indeed Allah's Apostle in truth" whereupon his heart would become quiet and he would calm down and would return home. And whenever the period of the coming of the inspiration used to become long, he would do as before, but when he used to reach the top of a mountain, Gabriel would appear before him and say to him what he had said before…. Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol 9, number 111. Compare this with Guru Nanak, Guruji has direct communication with God. 'Jaisi main avai Khasam Ki Bani'. No fits and frothing at the mouth just direct communication with God. Mohammed was also susceptible to the belief in witchcraft and magic. He believed once that he had been bewitched and affected by black magic which led him to believe that he had bedded his wives when he had not. Volume 7, Book 71, Number 660: Narrated Aisha: Magic was worked on Allah's Apostle so that he used to think that he had sexual relations with his wives while he actually had not (Sufyan said: That is the hardest kind of magic as it has such an effect). Mohammed went through a period of depression and was suicidal. How can this be the effect of having been in communication with Gabriel? How can a man be depressed and suicidal in between periods of supposed communication with God through Gabriel? 2. Therefore, to claim that no-one has heard of islam, or of the message of One God, throughout time, is false. If anyone does not believe this, then they must prove the Qu’ran wrong.” The Quran states "This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion." - [Quran 05:03] So the above comment by the Muslim chappie is incorrect. If Islam was perfected by Allah on a particular day, say for the sake of argument December 2nd 625 AD. Then anyone who had lived and died prior to 2nd December 625 AD would never have heard os Islam since it had not been in existence. One could argue that prior to 2nd December 625 AD Islam did exist but it was imperfect! Both ways the Muslim chappie is incorrect and as he has stated indirectly that if his comment is wrong then the Quran is wrong! If one the other hand he equates Islam with just a belief in one God then many people before Mohammed had a belief in one God but that is not the same as having known Islam. 3. Sikh Laws Sharia law, a system of law which the Muslim chappie seems to imply are PERFECT are the most imperfect and contradictory set of laws in esistence. Firstly a Muslim has to choose which Sharia school he has to follow. Initially there were many but nowadays there are four Sunni schools. If a system of law is God given then how is it that there are four schools of Sharia law some of which even disagree on the methods of prayer? This may be a small matter and most Muslims from one school of Sharia can still pray behind an Imam of other school but the whole matter of differences of opinion negates the whole concept of a God given law as espoused by this guy. Either it is God given and static and not subject to changing opinion as in Islam or it is God given but subject to reasoning by the adherents as in Sikhism. One cannot have both which is what Sharia is, it remains static but yet open to new opinions on new subjects many of which are contradictory. A point is fact is, Guru Gobind Singh forbade Tobacco. This judgement is static and will always remain so. No Sikh scholar has ever challenged this and expressed an opinion that tobacco is acceptable under certain circumstances. Under Sharia to so-called God given law various opinions have been expressed about tobacco. Initially some schools of Islamic law referred to it as 'disliked' mainly due to the smell. After the western research and tobacco smoking's like to lung cancer some rulings have now declared tobacci as 'forbidded'. How can this be? Surely if Sharia is God given then the scholars would have declared it as forbidden. Come to think of it since the Quran is such as miracle and 'full' of scientific facts surely there must be a verse saying that smoking is forbidden? Maybe one of the Muslims can bend the meaning of some words as they usually do with Quranic 'miracles' and come up with a verse forbidding smoking tobacco. Maybe even say that the verse says it 'causes harm to the lungs'! 4. Just War The concept of a Just War as in Dharam Yudh compared to an offensive war to spread Islam such as a Jehad are total opposites. A Dharam Yudh involves the fighting of tyranny of whatever extraction and the protection of the innocent of whatever religion. In Islam the killing of innocent civilians is par of the course in a Jehad. Since the aim of a Jehad is to strike terror in the enemy Jehad is a form of Terrorism. It involves the rape of captured enemy women and the enslavement of the enemy. Compare this with the Dharam Yudh of Sikhi where enemy women, children and non-combatants are protected and sent back to their own side. The Muslims who fought the Sikhs in the 18th century testify to the fact that the Sikh never harmed an enemy fleeing the field, never enslaved or raped any enemy women. Mohammed himself allowed enemy women to the raped by his followers. If that is not an indictment that he was a false prophet and full of ego and went far from God's plan then nothing is. Can you imagine Jesus, Krishna, Buddha, Guru Nanak or any of the other Gurus allowed women to be RAPED in their presence by their followers. This is exactly what Mohammed did. If the founder can be so brutal then can we be surprised if the followers live by his example? Evereywhere that Islam has gone it has brought misery death destruction. Look at any country where Muslims live and you will see that either they are already killing and maiming their non-Muslim fellow citizens or are ready to do so. A comparison of a Jehad and a Dharam Yudh can be epitomised by the Muslim who cuts of the head of a defenceless person such as a Daniel Pearl, a Eugene Armstrong or one of the dozens of other civilians to the cry of Allah Hu Akbar! Can one imagine a Sikh doing this whilst shouting Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh?

I'm surprised you guys don't know what AA is or stands for. I think they started off in america.. hence the name Automobile Association. They are pretty good and I remember when I first started driving our next door neighbours used to only have roadside cover which means that the AA only come out if ur car breaks down on a journey and not at home. Homestart was extra and they didn't have it. So when their car didn't start one morning their son towed it with his car the end of the road so that they could get the AA to look at it..LOL

AA means alcoholics anonymous. It's legal in this country for reforming drunks to break a window of a car in the town square with the owner's permission provided it is done between the hours of 8am -6pm. It's one of those archaic ancient laws we have in th UK. Oh I forgot the reforming drunk has to wear a large cloth cap and stand on one leg while he breaks the window.

Technically I don't think it's possible to lock yourself out of a new car especially those with central locking and IR control. Best method for old cars is the hanger which I'm gald to know the AA still use. I've been locked out of loads of old cars and always managed to unlock them myselves. For those who drive older cars it's a good idea to practice using the hanger method before you have to use it for real. 1. Undo a wire hanger, usually from the bottom of the hook where the two pieces of wire are rolled one over the other. Straighten it as best you can. You might want to break it in half so you have a more managable piece to operate with. Half the orginal size is good. Try the hook a bit so that it is only half the original loop. 2. Pull or loosen the plastic bit which runs along the bottom of the window. Loosen it mostly where the window pillar meets the bottom. 3. Push the hanger with the hook in between the glass and the metal door so it goes down inside the door. The door has a wire running at an angle through the door which is connected to the manual door release ( door opener) and the small pillar piece which is on the inside door mounting visible from outside the car, which is pushed down to close the door or pulled up to close it. 4. Start to slowly pull the hanger up and see if it catches on something. Repeat this procedure getting as close as possible to the door pillar until you catch on the wire. You will know you are in the right area when you notice the small pillar piece moving. When you do catch on the wire just pull the hanger up and you will notice the small pillar piece will be pulled up and the car door is open! The above is just for information purposes. Please don't go around trying to break into other peoples cars as it is illegal!

One thing which I have always found funny and which shows the mentality of fanatical Muslims is that they need someone to tell them how to live and what action is allowed and disallowed for them. They remind me of robots because you need a programmer to program everything into them otherwise they cannot complete every task that they will be set. The difference between a human being and a robot is the difference between a non-Muslim and a Muslim. A Muslim needs a ruling from some Imam to tell him how to ride a horse! Next they'll want a ruling on how to wipe their backsides..lol. Oh I forgot they already have a ruling on that!

It's good to see that some Sikhs are not so blinded by the 'all religions are the same BS' and call a spade a spade. I have been on some other forums where some Sikhs are so idiotic that when debating with Muslims they even put (pbuh) after every mention of Mohammed. Some evn had the nerve to write "don't criticise holy prophet mohammed"! When you have fools like that in Sikhi then who can we defend Sikhi when Muslims bring out their lying BS? Granted these muppets are a small minority and more and more Sikhs along with the rest of society are waking up to how dangerous Islam really is.

Kurtas You obviously have no clue about what you are talking about. What you are saying that Mann supporters should do in India is the same as most Indian desh-bigots say about any Sikh in the west who wants to comment on what the Indian govt is doing to Sikhs. So going by your own advice when can we hope to see you outside the Akal Takht calling Vedanti a liar, dishonest etc. Or are you as I suspect a hypocrite. Only good at giving such advice and never following it yourself.

Look at the bigger picture guys and vote for him. I have and hopefully he's be nominated. At the end of the day whether he wins or not with with Gurus Kirpa. He needs to play some good cricket against the Aussie in the ashes next month. Heres a few of his wickets http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cre9SICLCE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUfW6Z2o34g Here Monty and harmison destroying pakistan this summer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jMogTyK6q0 and the masterpiece Pak captain Inzimam falling over the wicket from a monty delivery

The main part of the crimewatch programme was devoted to honour killings. They reconstructed one particularly hideous case when the Muslim man strangled his ex-wife in front of her children. He's been on the run since 2000. Apart from the 'manjit' person who claimed she was set up for a forced marriage at 15 all the rest of the cases featured were Muslims. The 'manjit' person looked dodgy and looked like a Muslim rather than a Sikh. It's unbelievable that a Sikh family would try and get their daughter married off at 15! Did anyone else also notice that a lot of the photofit features now show a lot of Muslims. Out of 12 photofits about three were Muslims. Its shows how much crime Muslims are involved in nowadays. They are 9% of the prison population whereas they are only 3% of the general population. Maybe that Muslim spokesman should concentrate on his community rather that make unfounded accusations against Sikhs.

How about pointing out hypocrisy? Is that anti-Islam or discussing Islam?

Anti Islamic or just discussing Islam? Big difference

i can't say the women did anything that great. They just seemed to just be rebelling at one thing, women not being allowed to pray in the mosque. The ironic thing that wasn't mentioned in the programme was that these women are also supporters of Sharia law and under that very law women do not have the same rights in inheritance, testimony etc. As the narrator said they would not be able to carry out a campaign like this in a Muslim country.

Did anyone catch the Dispatches documentary 'Women only jihad' last night on Channel 4. There is a trailer for the programme here It has got to be one of the funniest programmes I've seen. It was about a bunch of young Muslim women who are trying to force mosques to allow women to worship in them! This must have come as a big surprise to many people that women are not allowed in a mosque. Where they are allowed, the usually have to sit right at the back or in a separate room and not in the main prayer room. These women belong to an organisation called Muslim Public Affairs Committe UK or MPACUK for short. I noticed two of them were on TV news a few weeks ago when the veil debate was going on. One of them rather than answer any questions from the presenter on the news kept on saying 'Jack Straw (MP) should NOT be allowed to talk on issues such as the veil' what a joke. He's a MP of course he as well as any other person has a right t give an opinion on the veil. Anyway on of the funniest scenes was when they went to a Mosque and tried to pray. They were physically stopped from entering the mosque. One of the mosque committee started to push the cameraman around. It looked like it was going to get rough and the women beat a hasty retreat. The mosque members then promised through the lancashire council of mosques to allow the women to pray 'in' the mosque the week after. When the women turned up they were shown to a house across the road from the mosque which was dilapitated and dirty! Another clip showed them turn up at a Mosque in Blackburn where they and the men with them were shoved around. One of the mosque members was swearing his head off telling the camera and women to F off. The programme tried to be positive about Islam in the UK but in my view failed miserably. They tried to how the 'progress' made by Muslim women because there is ONE Muslim women who has studied to become an Imam BUT she can't work as an Imam because part of the duties would involve leading men in prayer which is forbidden in Islam! Another thing the programme showed were Muslim women who had been battered by their husbands. The programme didn't delve any deeperand the words of the women who runs the homeless shelter for these women was telling. She said the women only left their husbands when the men started to beat their children. As Islam allows the beating of wives by husbands then these women saw nothing wrong in being battered wives but only took action when their children were being beaten. Having watched the documentary it just made me think how the rights given by Sikhi are taken for granted. Can you imagine if women weren't allowed in the Gurdwaras?

Naik is well known for talking out of his backside. He says there are 4 million more women in the UK then women. The figure is actually 1.6 million more women then men. There you have the level of Muslim intellect and honesty. The muppet has dozens of people who act as his researchers and he has a lot of resources at his disposal yet he cannot each check his facts about male-female populations. Further comparison of Naik's facts Germany has 1.75 million more female than males. NOT five million as claimed by Naik. In Russia he says that there are 9 million more females then men. On this one fact he is correct but if we analyse the figures further it totally demolishes his argument! Since his whole basis of using these figure is to justify the four marriages that Muslims are allowed by the Koran then we need to look at these figures differently. In the marriage age groups of say 19 - 45 in Russia men OUTNUMBER women by about 50,000. The excess of 9 million more women to men only starts showing up in the over 50's age group! There are over 8.5 million more women then men in the over 50's age group. This is because Russia lost a large number of men in the 2nd world war. So this fool thinks that women over 50 should either become second wives for men or become public property! His analysis of the effect of homosexuality is also incorrect. Just as normally it is assumed that 10% of the population is gay in most countries this is not just gay men but also lesbian women. Naik is a total murakh and it just shows the mentality of Muslims that this guy is the most intelligent Muslim that they could produce.

Sometimes learning from family members can be better that wasting money on lessons. I taught both my neices how to drive. I used to let them drive in a large disused car park for a few hours until they got used to braking, turning, changing gears etc. Then it was a few hours in quiet roads and finally normal driving. They only needed to take about 5-6 lessons from a driving instructor and that was because I couldn't be bothered to teach them 3 point turn, corner reverse etc. They all passed first time!

Don't get me started on the Palestinians! Muslims are hypocrites, Arabs are more hypocritic than other Muslims and Palestinians are more hypocritic than other Arabs! These people who have had the whole world bend over backwards to help solve their problems, they have been given billions of pounds in aid and have been offered their own state yet what do these hypocrites choose to do? Vote in a terror organisation as their government, send suicide bombers to kills people in Israell and when the Israelis build a wall to control the terrorists the palestinians start to rant about the 'apartheid wall' If only the world devoted half the time its wastes on these useless people on other issues like Punjab, Darfur, Kashmir these issues could be resolved.