>Bikramjit Singh<

The reason they have no interest in 1984 victims is that there is just no publicity in it. If tomorrow they announce they are going to help the 1984 widows and orphans they will get their photos and their names mentioned in only the Punjabi papers. But by being in Israel.. btw no such place as Palestine at the moment, is that they will get their names in the Israeli and International papers. For publicity conscious organisations this is what is important.

SevaSimranSacrifice I don't know what the intention of your convert friend is but if she is a devout follower of Islam then she would know that a Muslim should only be friends with non-Muslims if the intention is to create doubts in that person about their religion and talk up Islam. Here is a answer given by a well known Islamic site about friendships between Muslims and non-Muslims ---------------------------------- Question --I had some non-muslim friends with me. I chatted with them regularly but a Muslim friend of mine told me it is not permitted in Islam so I stopped chatting with them but i m still confused. So tell me whether its a sin to have a chat with non-muslims or it is permissible in Islam. Answer -- One is allowed to mix with non-muslims and chat with them on permissible topics, however they should not be made close friends. This of course is for those of your on gender. Chatting with the opposite gender is prohibited. Your intention when dealing and chatting with them, should be to invite them towards Islam. and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best Ml. Husain Kadodia STUDENT: Darul Ifta CHECKED & APPROVED: Mufti Ebrahim Desai

LostSoul I was yawning due to the boredom of having to read your pointless and ignorant contribution. From now on I will do what most of the posters say they do which is just ignore your posts. Btw find out what nindya means before throwing that word around just to cover up your lack of knowledge on this subject.

Mr/Ms LostSoul *yawn* Read my post before getting on your high horse. It was in response to something written by Jagjit Waheguru. Have you done any research on what was written or do you just go around making ignorant statements when you read something you don't like. I only wrote the things that Muslims themselves write that Mohammed did. So lots of 50 years old were marrying 9 years olds in the 7th century. That's new on me.

Don't let the mainstream media like BBC and other left wing agencies put a spin on the riots. The BBC have been concentrating on the 400 odd neo-nazi types who highjacked the demo while ignoring over 4500 ordinary Australians who came onto the beach to show Muslims that they want to enjoy and live the beach lifestyle that is under threat from Muslims. For the last five years the beach has been a place where Lebanese Muslims have been going around in gangs and swearing at Australian women on the beach calling them sl*ts. They also go around in gangs picking fights with individuals trying to sunbathe and surf.

I also thought the same until I read about his life written by Muslims themselves. If you pick up a book on Mohammed written by a non-Muslim you will be surprised at how the author will gloss over some of the questionable things that Mohammed did and try and present him as some sort of saint but the reality is otherwise. The amusing thing is that some Muslims try and justify and explain away these things saying that it was due to the times he lived in and then they contradict this by saying that he was a perfect example for every Muslim to follow! Some of the questionable things he did are-; 1. Marry a 6 year old girl when he was in his fifties and consummate the marriage when she was 9 2. Break his promises to his wives, especially when he had so many and each had a night that was allocated to her and he was found in one wife's bed by the wife whose night it was! He then had a 'revelation' from Allah telling him it's ok for him to break his promises to is wives! 3. Allow his followers to rape women captured in war. 4. Had 800 Jewish men beheaded and sold their wives and children into slavery. He took one of the Jewish men's wife as his concubine 5. Brought and sold slaves. Sometimes slaves were brought and sold in the mosques 6. Took part in raids on caravans effecting the economy of Mecca and forcing the Meccans to attack him 7. Banned Christian and Jews or any non-Muslims from being able to follow their own religion in Arabia These are just a few of the questionable things he did. Along with the above Muslims believe that Mohammed was also bewitched by black magic. Comparing Mohammed's life with any Gursikh's life let alone the Gurus shows how badly affected by ego Mohammed was. This is why in Bachittar Natak Mohammed is described as setting up his own sect and getting his followers to repeat his name and not do Nam Jap.

Sardar D S Gill. Nice to see you on this forum. I appreciate the good works IHRO are doing for the Human rights of Sikhs in India. Coming to the Jinnah offer, I don't think that this offer was made in a very serious manner. I read that during a dinner party in which both the Maharaja of Patiala and Jinnah was present a similar offer was made but when pressed Jinnah did not offer any realistic answers to the questions regarding his offer. His answer was that his writ would be law in Pakistan and the Sikhs needed no written agreements. Such an evasive answer from a trained lawyer such as Jinnah was enough to ring warning bells amongst the Sikh leadership. The subsequent events after Jinnah's death show that his words were as hollow as M K Gandhi's. One only needs to look at what Pakistan is today as opposed to the dreams of Jinnah. Jinnah also never made a public offer, the only documented offers were off the cuff remarks which were more aimed at getting the Sikhs to stop their opposition to Pakistan and for the whole of Punjab to become a part of Pakistan. The offers made around April 1947 came just a month after thousands of Sikhs were massacred in Rawalpindi area by the Muslims. How serious such an offer without any writted agreements could be taken is a good point. The main problem that the Sikh leadership had was their lack of unity. Many Sikhs weren't even with the Akalis and were flirting with Communism and the Congress. This lack of unity was what let the Sikhs down. The Sikhs although in a minority position everywhere in Punjab yet still had a number of Sikh states in Punjab which could have been the used to form the backbone of a Khalistan. If the Sikh leadersip had been serious about Khalistan and made it's creation their only policy, then the British, Congress and Muslim league would have had to agree to it's creation. The British would have agreed as long as they could avoid any violence and cut and run, Jinnah would have agreed because he was dying and only being kept alive by medical treatment. The Sikhs would also have had a better claim on the west Punjab districts which were eventually lost to Pakistan. As a third successor state to India, the British would have had to ensure that it was viable and using the 'other factors' provision in the partition document have ensured that property ownership as well as Gurdwara estates had an added weightage.

You might want to contact Rabinder Singh QC who works in Human Rights law. I think he works for the same chambers as Cherie Blair (tony's wife). rabindersingh@matrixlaw.co.uk http://www.matrixlaw.co.uk/WhoWeAre_Member...derSinghQC.aspx Try as many options as possible. You might also want to contact United Sikhs. One of their members in the UK is Mejinderpal Kaur who is also a lawyer. She has been very active in fighting the Turban Ban in France. Now that the wheels are in motion you should seek outside legal advice because the army does have a tendency to try and sweep things under the carpet. The contact details for United Sikhs in UK is Address: PO BOX 43799, London, W14 8SS, United Kingdom Tel: (0044) (0) 870 1993328 Fax: (0044) (0) 871433 5655 E-mail: unitedsikhs-eu@unitedsikhs.org

Namstang wrote Namstang, you really have no sense of history and are unable to be objective in any discussion regarding the SGPC. I have written a number of times for people such as you not to assume that just because the SGPC is corrupt at present it means that it was always so. SGPC when it was created was the most representative body of the Sikhs. It's birth was the direct consequence of the Sikhs wanting to take back control of the Gurdwaras from Mahants who were more Hindu than Sikh and who treated the Gurdwara lands as their personal possession. I would urge you to read history and maybe then you wouldn't be making such factually incorrect statements as british intelligence helping SGPC to 'get akali nihangs off their backs' It was the british govt urging the mahants to use all their means to deny the Sikhs control of their own Gurdwaras. The British were never afraid of the Nihangs, they feared the common Sikh peasants as well as the Sikhs in the army.

duplicate post

I think you should blame Bhai Gurdas for this because for some reason he 'erased' this great Gursikh Bhai Bala from history. Bhai Gurdas mentions even minor followers of Guru Nanak but not Bhai Bala. Could it be because there was no such person? This is strange because according to the Bhai Bala Janamsakhi, Bhai Bala plays a prominant role in Guru Nanak's life. 138031[/snapback] No thanks, i'll continue blaming likes of you. Do you have any idea how this particular argument can be used to argue ridiculous points... 'becasue it's not written here, it wasn't so'.... Bhai Gurdass Ji's prime objective was not that of a historian, neither is SGGS, nor is Dasam Granth. All three works don't focus on history per say. 138148[/snapback] You can believe what you want it makes no difference to me what you believe. I just posted some of the research that has been done on Bhai Bala and the majority of its points to there being no such person.

I think you should blame Bhai Gurdas for this because for some reason he 'erased' this great Gursikh Bhai Bala from history. Bhai Gurdas mentions even minor followers of Guru Nanak but not Bhai Bala. Could it be because there was no such person? This is strange because according to the Bhai Bala Janamsakhi, Bhai Bala plays a prominant role in Guru Nanak's life.

Bhai Bala is only mentioned in one Janamsakhi whereas Bhai Mardana is mentioned in all the Janamsakhis as well as in the Vars of Bhai Gurdas. The Bhai Bala janamsakhi was written by a sect called the Niranjanias. Bhai Handal was born in 1573 in Jandiala village. Bhai Handal was a disciple of Guru Amardas. Bhai He used to be a great sewak in the Guru's Langar and it is said that the Guru was impressed when he saw that Bhai Handal was sieving flour deep into the night for the langar. Guru Amardas appointed Bhai Handal to be his masand at the village of Jandiala. After Bhai Handal who devotedly served the Sikh cause his son called Bidhi Chand became his successor but he became infatuated with a muslim women, said to be of dubious character and much against the advice of local GurSikhs he married her. As this caused a great deal of consternation amongst the Sikhs instead of allowing himself to submit to the commands of the GurSikhs he became more egotistical and wrote a janamsakhi in which he belittled Guru Nanak by making Bhagat Kabir his Guru Nanak's Guru ( many encyclopedias in the west still sprout this nonsense which was taken by Trumpp a german missionary from the Bhai Bala janamsakhi ) and making his father Bhai Handal ever greater than Guru Nanak. In fact he went a step further by stating that Guru Nanak had married a muslim woman. This Bidhi Chand did in order to explain his own marriage to a muslim woman. Bidhi Chand wanted to increase his following even further so he set out to show in the janamsakhi that the Guruship which at this time was with Guru Ramdas had in fact decended from Bhagat Kabir to Guru Nanak and then to Bhai Handal and finally to him. In order to show this, the janamsakhi has a sakhi ( story ) where it is shown that in a previous life, Guru Nanak had been a oil seller in the court of Raja Janak and Bhai Handal had been a noble or royal personage. There is also a sakhi which relates to the birth of a Jat in the pargana of Batala who would be greater than Bhagat Kabir. Bidhi Chand clearly wrote this episode in order to show that Guru Nanak was prophesying the birth of his father Bhai Handal. It would not surprise me if Kavi Santokh Singh wrote about Bhai Bala, this is because Kaviji pretty much wrote whatever anyone told him as fact and did not use any form of analysis or critical evaluation of any story with regard to whether it was in line with Gurbani or not. Sardar Karam Singh's book 'Katik ki vaisakh' contains a very good analysis of whether Bhai Bala existed or not. He concludes he did not exist.

Sinister wrote Read the vaar below and then see how is looking ridiculous here

Pheena Please read the quote again. Osho claims to have been invited to the Harmandir Sahib. I'm not sure that story is even true because Osho like most dumbhis are not adverse to inventing stories in order to make themselves look good. If the incident actually occurred then I would assume that as a guest he would have known the reason why the hair are covered within a Gurdwara. Unless of course his whole purpose was to create an argument. The rest of the quotes does point to him being someone out to mock others especially his ignorant remarks about Guru Nanak being the only Guru. It does cause me some amusement when you seem to think that any quote can be taken as having two 'ways of looking at it' There isn't always two ways of looking at things. I would however like to read your other way of looking at it when Osho said only Guru Nanak was the Guru and the rest of the Gurus were not. I look forward to your reply.

Namstang All I wrote was a correction of your post where you without checking any facts said that Monica Bedi is a SIKH. Since you cannot handle any sort of criticism you then have the nerve to say that I am saying that we shouldn't help her because she is not a Sikh. Where have I written that? I say once again check you facts otherwise you will further confirm the general opinion on this forum that you are just an <banned word filter activated> and not interested in any discussion.

Get your facts straight. Monica Bedi is a HINDU. Look at her uncle's name Purshottam LAL Bedi. Her father's name is Prem KUMAR Bedi. Unless of course she is an Udasi! Might have to consult the sanatan websites to double check.

Yes, Pheenaji there are some who would go against Osho blindly but then there are also many who would follow Osho blindly even when he abuses our Gurus. The only things that come across from your quotes is that they show how Osho was so arrogant that he thought he could emulate Guruji. The whole theory behind covering your head in the presence of Guru Granth Sahib is that you are in the physical presence of the Guru. You cover your head as a sign of respect. The Sakhi about Mecca is that the Muslims say that the Kaaba is God's house. So Guruji was saying that God is everywhere and not just in one place. When Sikhs uncover their hair at bathing they are not in the physical presence of the Guru Granth Sahib. So Pheenaji, I assume that you are not Keshdhari, so will you be going into the presence of the Guru Granth Sahib without covering your head the next time you go to the Gurdwara. I doubt it, it's makes good reading but in the end you know Osho's story is just bukwas otherwise I would ask the the Osho chelas here to try and go inside a Gurdwara without covering your head. Let me know how you get on :TH: It just goes to show what state Sikhi is in that a wife has to approach a person like Osho to advise her how to stop her husband from reciting Gurbani. That Gurbani which can release the soul from 84 lakh joon, the wife wants to be enjoy a few hours of sleep and the recitation of Gurbani is disturbing her sleep!! Just read and realise what the wife says to Osho THINGS ARE GETTING OUT OF CONTROL!! Is the husband drinking sharab and coming home and beating up his wife..er NO Is the husband cheating on his wife with other women.. er NO Is the husband gambling all his pay and leaving the family to starve...er NO HE'S RECITING JAPJI SAHIB AND HIS RECITATION IS DISTURBING HER SLEEP.. The funny thing is that if Osho told her to recite loudly his books all day she would probably do that without a thought for anyone else but having to listen to Gurbani at Amrit vela disturbs her! And the funniest thing is that some people on here read such gibberish stories of Osho and think that they are getting some unique spiritual insight or realising some sublime truth!!

Is it just me or is TT Singh looking quite LISSA in some of the pics. He needs to build himself up, do some body building or eat a lot of poranthay. Plus in some of the pics he looks quite short and in others he's towers over some tall guys. This will confuse the police no end

The meanest baddest Singh this side of Amritsar!! Btw Bros can we not put too many pics of TT Singh, we don't want to make it easy for the cops to arrest the leader of the group who went to the booze party.

The other two pictures are on following site (rather a long URL) http://iccoventry.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news...-name_page.html I was watching the news and just saw the most wanted singh in the world. Looks like he has contacts. 137253[/snapback] I'm really proud of apna Sardar Tip Top Singh Ji. It's great to see Sikh youth taking an interest in world affairs and bringing peace between world leaders. I heard Tip Top Singh is chief advisor to Bush and Blair. He actually advised them not to invade Iraq and told them to deal with their own extremists and fanatics such as the Leamington Sharabi Budday Al Qaida and their WMDs such as Jack Daniels and Smirnoff. Unfortunately Bush and Blair thought Saddam was more dangerous even though Tip Top Singh told them that the LSBAQ could launch a WMD attack on Britain within 30 minutes which was a full 10 minutes more than the 40 minutes the Iraq dossier said that Saddam would take for an attack on Britain. Events in Leamington Spa have taken a similar turn. Due to Tip Top Singh's attack and the subsequent attempt at regime change even more fanatical sharabis have tried to take over. We have Mushh Futt Al Sharabi leading the new Al Sharabi in Leamington. I love the pic of Tip Top Siyan between Musharraf and Manmohan Singh. He's a tireless sewadar and I nominate Tip Top Singh Ji as YOUTH OF THE MONTH!!

Namstang I would first try and find out who the people were who did the shooting, i would not as you have done blame Kharkoos just because the people doing the shooting wore Bana. This is exactly what you did regarding the two Gursikhs accused of the air india bombing. I think you said a relative or a friend of your family was killed in that bombing and on your forum you were quick to accept that it was these two Gursikhs who did the bombing and were even calling for them to be hung. This is the difference between you and most of the people on this forum, they would like to see the evidence of guilt before declaring people as guilty. Regarding your explanation that because it was police officers that were killed then it had to be Kharkoos. You need to understand the tactics used by the GOI at that time. There were tens of millions of rupees in special slush funds solely to pay for black cats and informers. The police would pick some innocent youth up, kill him and then claim that he was a major figure in the Khalistan movement and claims the lakhs as reward. Corruption and black operations were being conducted everywhere. These cats openly drove around in cars without registration plates and blacked out windows and no one apart from the Kharkoos ever faced them. Even the police were scared of the most notorious cats. One cat even shot and killed a Police DSP because he had a dispute with him regarding money owed. The police were capable of everything, just read the human rights reports, nobody was safe and anyone with a grudge would use the police or the cats to get even with someone else.

JagoBhai There is no need for conspiracy theories here. Any country would suspect a character like Osho. The FBI used to keep tabs on most unconventional figures whether they were communist, fascist, self styled 'gurus', free love preachers and hippies. FBI poisoing Osho are just conspiracy theories Personally I think your view the Osho could have been Guru Gobind Singh returned shows just what type of people fall under the spell of Osho.

Namstang I seriously doubt that you know anything about what happened in Punjab during the Kharkoo days. You say Kharkoos killed your relatives but you don't know their names just that they wore bana!!! Have you even been to Punjab? especially during the Kharkoo period? I doubt it. I never knew that the police cats had a uniform Stop making ridiculous statements that you can't back up with evidence. Kalay Kachay wale were cops who used to carry out robberies, rapes and killings in villages which supported the Kharkoos. They were not police cats, police cats were people who tried to pass themselves off as Kharkoos aand dressed in bana and then killed innocent people to blacken the name of the Kharkoos. If you really want an apology that is relevant then ask KPS Gill to apologise for his cats having killed your relatives and stop wasting your time and everyone elses' asking us to apologise for what the cats did. So Niranjana told you in a phone call long time ago that I threatened him Man you must have a lot of time on your hands to be calling people on the forum, you post here endlessly and on top of that you have the time to follow that up by phoning people from the forum as well. It's funny who throw around accusations at me but can never back them up. You said sometime ago that I was the creator of whyichosesikhi website. I asked you then to provide evidence and if you could not then to apologise but all you know is how to post accusations without proof. In your previous post you said that I had THREATENED BOTH Niranjana and his wfie, now you say Niranjana was threatened and he was afraid that his wife would become a victim of my 'fanaticism' .. please get your story straight before you start to throwing accusations.

Isn't that always the case. If a Sikh can't stand the Nindya of the Guru then he is a fanatic but if he follows the 'long haired lover from liverpool..or is it rajneeshpuram' and thinks that by my man Osho saying in Amritsar that he is the Sikhs' 11th Guru and that only Guru Nanak was a Guru and the other nine weren't then he's being shown some sublime truth then that Sikh is a true Sikh. Just disputing my man Osho seems to earn one the distinction of being called a fanatic and being equated with Aurangzeb. FYI Mr. Premkranti, buddhism died out in India because there was no one with the guts to fight for what they believed in. Same Buddhism died out in Indonesia and Malaysia. It only exists in some countries because the rulers were prepared to fight for their religion. Btw isn't a buddhist defined by non-violence? So what about the bloody history of China, Japan, Burma and Thailand? Were these people buddhists who were violently invading other countries? Never seen a fanatic buddhist?? You should get out more often, what about those Japanese soldiers who invaded China and raped millions of women in China in the 1930's. Oh and then there's the small matter of the anti-tamil riots by the buddhist sinhalese in 1983. Similar to the way the Sikhs were massacred in Delhi in 1984. I suppose you also think there is no such thing as a fanatic Hindu as well??