proactive

What LegalSingh is saying is that Taliban rule even with its discrimination was better than under the warlords prior to the Taliban taking over. It's a bit like saying Badal's rule is better than Beant's rule because there aren't as many fake encounters in Badal's rule than in Beant's rule. In a Muslim country for non-Muslims every ruler is a haram.zada, you hope the latest haram.zada is better than the haram.zada who's just been left office and is hanging from a tree!

Yes, it's great sewa and I liked that you told them that your approaching them was not aimed at converting them but to bring awareness of Sikhism to them.

Gurvah, You remind of the dummies I have met who's first answer to why there shouldn't be a Khalistan is that 'Pakistan will invade and annex it'. When's the last time a country has invaded another and annexed it? These people and you have one thing in common and that is a closed mind and an unwillingness to do research to find out whether your reasons against Khalistan have any merit. I suppose you are aware that international conventions exist which allow land locked countries THE RIGHT to access the sea through transit states by all means of transport. Do you also know that commercial airlines also have a similar right to overfly over different countries. But you already knew that because you've done all the research before coming on here haven't you? Most people who want freedom for their nation usually get emotional. Did I write that someone is going to give us Khalistan on a platter? if not then why did you write that? Khalistan will only come about when the majority of Sikhs in Punjab want it, I would have thought 99.9999% of people in the world don't have the necessary skills to administer a country. So what's your point? Here's the vicious circle that people like you do not understand India treats Punjab like a colony and strips its natural resources... Sikhs in Punjab demand Khalistan.. Govt murders an entire generation and turn the rest into drug addicts.. fools on internet claim 'how can you have Khalistan when the Punjab is a mess' If you don't even know about the atrocities or disregard them because of the above then you need to look at yourself and not point fingers at others.

If you're going to allow a bunch of fundamentalist Muslims to take over your country then you should expect that. Most places where Islam is in power without any moderating force such as secularism or democracy is a hell hole for non-Muslims and in the end becomes a hell hole for Muslims as well. You say that Afghanistan is hell for people living there but does that give them a right to discriminate against religious minorities. Why do they want to stop cremations? It seems like Islam is the one common denominator that is the reason that Muslim countries discriminate against their religious minorities. Maybe their country becoming a hellhole is karma against all the lands they made into hell holes during the 18th century and before. The Sikhs and Hindus in Afghanistan need to get out and either migrate to the west or to Punjab. There is no future for religious minorities in Islamic states.

Kudos to LegalSingh for countering what I can only class as the Uncle Toms on this forum. If you listen to the speeches of Sant Bhindranwale, he constantly gave example after example of why the Sikhs are slaves in India. This is prior to Bluestar, Woodrose, the genocide of Sikhs across India and the fake encounters of Sikh youth. Now what was the reason for him to do all this? It was because of the uncle toms among the Sikhs who would come up with a thousand and one excuses to explain away the discrimination the Sikhs suffered. Unfortunately for some people here, having a whole generation of Sikh youth murdered is not enough of a reason to want the future generations to be safe and secure in Khalistan. No is asking anyone to pick up an AK47 and go to India. All you need is to get rid of your slavish mentality and everything else will fall into place. Do you think that if the Sikhs of Punjab had the same josh as that which was displayed in London on Sunday that Badal would be in power today? The same slavish mentality on display here is what has kept the Punjab from having a decent leadership and for making progress to becoming Khalistan. The Sikhs of Punjab have at least got a excuse to have a slavish mentality. They have suffered a genocidal campaign from the India state. The young are brainwashed to think of themselves as Indians when they have nothing in common with people who live less than 300 miles away let along a 1000 miles away. The media constantly brands anyone who believes in Khalistan as a terrorism. YET I have come across many Sikhs from India online who though they have been through all the mass brainwashing, they still have come to the conclusion that Khalistan is a must for Sikhs. Compare those Sikhs who have refused to be brainwashed by both the educational system and the media with the Uncle Toms who have access to the most unbiased sources of what the Sikhs suffered and yet they come up with a thousand and one reasons for why Khalistan should not come about. But what excuse have the Neos and the fancy bananas on this forum have. Nations who have suffered 1/10th of what the Sikhs have suffered yet they still strive for independence. Nations that have not even suffered a massacre yet they still want to to be independence. Scotland gets from from the UK than they put in, yet a significant minority of the Scots want independence. Yet on here we have people who know full well that a generation of Sikhs was destroyed and the survivors are being turned into drug addicts. I could understand if after the massacres the Indian government had pumped money and investment into Punjab and turned Jalandhar into a Bangalore or Ludhiana into a NOIDA. But they didn't, not only did they murder our brothers, rape our sisters, they now want us to pay for the privilege! Punjab is saddled by debts going back to the movement days. No wonder the typical Indian consider the Sikhs as fools and only fit to be laughed at. If an Indian government official was to see what drivel some of the uncles Toms on here have written, he would think that the Sikhs don't care how we treat them, they will still remain fools and argue whether there should be a Khalistan or not. Do you think that if the situation heats up again the government wont use the same tactics as before given how many Uncle Toms still exist in our nation.

Then stop cutting and pasting other people's views from the SA thread. You seem to have no problem with viewing the Sikh organisations such as Akali Dal and SGPC, degenerating in the last few decades. Then why is it that you have a problem with the fact that the Nihangs have also degenerated in the last few decades. They are the only ones that went against the whole Panth by becoming Indira Gandhi's chumchay in 1984.

The Lahore Singh Sabha came out against Duleep Singh because of a number of reasons. 1. The only support for the restoration of a Sikh Maharaja would have been only from Sikhs and those Hindus and Muslims whose families had been connected to the Sikh rules. The Sikhs were 7% of the population. 2. The Hindu and Muslim population in the 1880's was not of the same frame of mind as the Hindu and Muslim population was in the 1830's. There had been reform movements such as Arya Samaj which was actively anti-Sikh in its beliefs. 3. In the 40 years since the annexation a significant amount of Punjabis had their careers as well as businesses tied up with British rule. 4. Duleep Singh was an unknown quantity. You can argue for and against what the Singh Sabha Lahore did, but it was at that time a small organisation. The Amritsar Singh Sabha had the greater following among Sikhs in the 1880's. It had the landed classes and the Maharajas supporting them. It was only after Giani Ditt Singh and Bhai Jawahar Singh joined the Lahore Singh Sabha that it overtook Amritsar Singh Sabha.

Your lies truly and astounding, yet to claim to be a Sikh. Have some sharam and bring your evidence. Your evidence disproved your own story! This story referred to below is about the time that the Nihangs had come to take over the Akal Takht, As the Akali leaders were in the bazaar, the Nihangs managed to get into the Akal Takht. You this account to state that the Nihangs had control of the Akal Takht from 1800s to 1920. A few hours in charge and then they received a beating. The story is Your other evidence is also sketchy Yes during the 1800s but not in 1920 So they tried to exterminate them in 1840s but still allowed them control of Akal Takht? The dastur-ul-amal written in 1850s doesn't even mention the Nihangs when considering the different duties of the complex attendents.

All that anyone showed as reference close to 1920 was from a book in 1908 which said that Amritsar WAS their headquarters. Do you know the difference between IS and WAS?

India has just released the Termin-bhaiya 1.0. The Chinese are quaking in their boots.

That Bibi attacked the Nihang leader because the Nihangs had come to dislodge the Akalis from the Akal Takht. I don't know whether she broke his legs but there were plenty of ex-soldiers among the Akalis who would have been quite capable of breaking legs if required. Your story is getting more and more ridiculous. You want us to believe that from being hunted down and having shoot on sight order in 1845 they Nihangs are in control of the Akal Takht in 1920! That ex-soldiers who had seen more violence and death and destruction that a Nihang could only imagine were so scared to confront the Nihangs that they sent a jatha of bibiyan to dislodge the Nihangs from the Akal Takht.

No doubt Bidhi Chand Dal did try to protect the complex but your beloved Jathedar, where was he in 1984. If other Nihangs took part in the movement then it was in defiance of the orders of Santa Singh. Be honest, do you really think that those Nihangs in Punjab will ever fight for the Panth? They are more of a liability and when the movement takes off again, they will revert to being the jholichuks and mukhbars of the government.

YOU HAVE NOT PROVIDED ANY PROOF FROM 1920! Are you so thick that you don't understand that a reference from 1846 does not mean the same thing was the case in 1920. Come on, if you can locate a reference from 1846, a time when there were a lot less books being written, surely you can get a reference from 1920 when there were dozens of newspapers and magazines being published.

Pakistan has thousands of robots, they are called the Pakistani Taliban.

Nihangs have been used by anti-Panthic forces against the Panth in the past and no doubt they will be used as such in future. They had an anti-panthic role in 1920 and their leader was Indira Gandhi's chumcha in 1984.

The thread is there for all to read. I asked for proof that-; 1. There was a Nihang Jathedar in charge of the Akal Takht in 1920. You claimed to have access to Akal Takht archives. So go on, show us the proof. The contemporary account is that the Pujaris disappeared from the Akal Takht and then when the Akalis took over, they convinced the Nihangs from the chaoni to come over and attack the Akalis. 2. That the Akalis used women to attack the Nihangs knowing that the Nihangs would not use force against women. Contemporary account has it that a single Bibi beat up the Nihang Jathedar and had to be restrained by the male Akalis 3. The Dasam Granth was thrown out of the window of the Akal Takht. No such thing listed in contemporary accounts.

Excellent post Mehtab Singh. The notion that massacres need to accompany the creation of new nations is not necessarily true. No massacres occurred when the Soviet union broke up or when the Slovaks parted with the Czechs. The Indian establishment is very adept at putting forward the belief that a break up would lead to massacres. It suits it's agenda to keep the people frightened of ever asking for freedom.

You seem to have a major issue with Jhabbar. Are you perhaps related to the congressi Jhabal family? As for the Virks, It was because of Virks among others that Gurjranwala was the centre of the Sikh empire. You might want to look up Bhag Singh Virk. So you cannot tolerate the breaking of the maryana inside Harmandir Sahib. So how do you feel about the fact that the party that the Jhabal helped infiltrate into the rural Punjab also attacked the Harmandir Sahib in 1984? If you are a relative of the jhabals then only God know what a fool you must be trying to make them look Panthic by attacking Kartar Singh Jhabbar.

Kphull is an id,iot just like that Bitta muppet. Just using your logic.

The growth of Islamic extremist movements in the Central Asian republics postdate the collapse of the Soviet Union. Islam didn't cause the collapse of the Soviet Union, it was the collapse of the Soviet Union that allowed Islamic extremism to expand into those areas. The Soviets were quite good at keep the lid on Islam, they did it for over 70 years. You are placing too much importance on a Taliban controlled Afghanistan. They will be loathe to pick a fight with China which will be the case if they support the Uygers. They've already seen what supporting a mad Arab in the 90s gave them. China for it's part is quite adept in playing one Islamic faction off against another. It will support Iran and use the Shias of Iran, now buttressed by the Iraqi Shia to threaten Afghanistan from the West. Before 9/11, Iran and Taliban Afghanistan nearly went to war, The West wouldn't mind the Chinese having a costly insurgency in their western provinces but then again the experience of blowback will probably keep them from fishing in troubled waters. The Taliban in control in Afghanistan will mainly be a danger to Pakistan. It will embolden their even madder cousins the Pakistani Taliban to commit more attacks on the government as well as on the Shias. All sorts of mad mullahs will emerge each more insane than the last. It will make for interesting watching.

I'm sure most of the people on here (apart from Dal Singh) are probably too young or weren't even born in 1984. I was 16 years old living in the UK then and I remember how Sikhs felt. There was a feeling that Khalistan is just around the corner but strangely enough there was very little support among the Sikh youth. I knew people my own age but many were just interested in the job situation and what college or university they were going to choose. The support was much more in the 30 and over age group. When I went to Punjab in 1988, I was under the impression that very few Sikhs supported Khalistan, this view was mainly because I tended to read the British press and watched the news on the BBC. In Punjab, I found that the Sikhs and even the Hindus in Punjab believed that Khalistan was inevitable. The support was big among the Sikhs and the Hindus just thought that anything they did would not have any effect on the final outcome. Fast forward 25 years and the situation is this. In the UK a majority of the Sikh youth in every age group seem to be in support of Khalistan. This was never the case in the late 80s. Even the young guys who come over from India in the last few years are very much in support of Khalistan. This I see as the effect of both the Sikh media (SC and Sangat Tv) as well as youtube and facebook. On facebook you see much more support from Sikhs in India. Not only in Punjab but Sikhs who live outside Punjab for whom you would think supporting Khalistan would be dangerous, also support Khalistan. The things which we never had in the 80s, was an effective media as well as a way to reach the Sikhs for Punjab is now available. I remember in the mid 80s Jagjeet Singh Chohan talking about setting up a satellite channel in order to broadcast programmes in support of Khalistan into India. That media now exists albeit in a different form. Youtube and Facebook have already shown how a movement can effectively counter the state propaganda and pass news and views without censorship on to a oppressed people. We have all seen how effective the Indian establishment has been in basically keeping the young Sikhs in Punjab ignorant of what happened in 1984. For all the millions that the govt had spent on buying the Badals and Tohras, the internet can negate all that if the Sikhs outside India are able to use social media to wake up the Sikh youth in India. This should be the next step that Khalistani organisations should be looking into. Sikh channel and Sangat Tv have been great at waking the Sikhs up in the West, but the Indian establishment will never allow them to directly broadcast into India.

The youth will only get 100% support from the Gurdwaras when they start to use their democratic right and start to set up committees such as the ones our Canadian brothers have set up. The youth always complain that when they have ideas about how to help they Panth, they get no support from the committees, this will never happen if the youth themselves are in charge of the Gurdwaras.

This all depends on how India breaks up. Whether it goes the Yugoslavia way, in which case different nations in each state will fight against each to get the maximum amount of territory, or it could the way of the USSR when the states declared themselves independent and there was no mass migration from one state to another. The likelihood is that the Indian establishment which is so corrupt and evil that it will make sure that when it goes down that it takes as many innocent lives with it as possible. The best outcome would be an orderly disintegration of India and minorities allowed to stay or leave without an coercion. This takes care of the question of who will look after the Gurdwaras and Mandirs.

I think we need to get away from assuming that when Khalistan is created then the rest of India will remain united. The likelihood is that any state that secedes from India will create a ripple effect which will see the creation of a number of other independent countries out of India. Th edges of the Indian state will secede, states like Assam, the north eastern states like Meghalaya, Tripura, Bengal etc. In the West will be Khalistan, Gujarat. In the South Maharashta, Tamil Nadu, Andhra etc. What will be left will be a rump India made up of UP, Delhi, Bihar, Madhya, Haryana and possibly Rajasthan. Sikhs will need passports to go and do a yatra to Delhi and Patna Sahib from the rump India. They will need another visa to go to visit Nander from a Maharashtra state etc. Same as Hindus from the rump India will need a Khalistan visa to visit Durgiana Temple and possibly Kurukshetra if the Sikh manage to include that into Khalistan.

I haven't written anything against Dasam Granth. You are just spreading misinformation. You've been countered on the SA forum four years ago. There are no reference about the Akal Takht having a Nihang Jathedar in 1920. You only provided reference to the Nihangs being at Akal Takht in the 1830s. How would you feel if someone said today that Sikhs are the rulers of Lahore in 2013 because the Sikhs were ruling there in 1845? I urge others to read the full thread on SA. It is an eye opener which shows how these sanatan fools are trying to rewrite Sikh history.