Would You Or Would You Not

[Bad Girl]

khalistan issue would do nothing but create problem for innocent ppl living in punjab.

[Bad Girl]

why would Dalits ask for their seperate homeland? Khalistan would be based on Sikh teachings and a fundamental teaching is EQUALITY. And what are you talking about "luxurious lives" all Khalistanis that i know work 6 days a week in standard average paying jobs and have an average 2-3 bedroom houses is that your version of luxury?

comparing to life here in punjab, they r living life which is far better and satisfactory.

[Khalsa_Girl_1]

GurFateh.

man..i would so live in the "Khalistan" state...

why not??

it would be wickeddddd!

peace...

GurFateh.

[curious_man]

i have no prblm in goin to khalistan.. providid i get a job there :e:

anywys...............

sab toh pehla parneet behn... i wud highly recommend ..plzz watch the vdo of the speech of Jaswant singh khalra given by das_nimana tht vdo opened my eyes too... and i have told u b4 also to watch the vdo's of shiromanikhalsadal.net ..... tht wud clear the doubt of khalistan!!

cuz u shld c and anticipate in both sides of debate!!...

anywys.. khalistan was never an isuue b4 84. jarnail singh bhindranwale ji never ever said tht sikh kaum needs a khalistan (u can c the vdo's of his speeches frm saintsoldiers.net) and trust me ... those whoever said tht bhindranwale ji agitated the khalistan issue.. after watching those vdo's ..they never replied me back!!

khalistan was declared by the sarbat khalsa in 1986 becoz of the 84 golden temple attack and much more becoz of november 84 riots(wht wud u say abt those riots..huh?... ).. !.. reminder: exact replica happend in gujarat riots.. ask those muslims.. they dont feel its their country!!

morever.. lemme tell u one thing.. khalistan will be made (and its not gonna happen..in front of my eyes)...but it will not be just a piece of land!! parneet behn.. khalistan will be made when the KHALSA is in majority of sikhs... but in todays kaljug..ppl engrossed in todays "libreralism" ... call those khalsa .."fanatics"... those khalsa tht live by the guru's rehat.. those khalsa tht stands for truth and justice... those khalsa r being called fanatics.... y???? becoz those khalsa clash our ego..clash our "lifestyle "!!

these so called khalsa were also called fanatics....terrorists even during the mughal rule... but behn due to those khalsa's shaheedi we today call ourselves "sikhs" ...but yeh we still do not fully comprehend their shaheedi!!

back to khalistan... its definitely not an easy solution... if u see the vdos ... all they want is fedaralism!!

these ppl (sikhs..punjabis) came to canada ..came to US..the western world... saw the politics of here... saw the laws of here... whtever it is ....it is better than in india!!....

behn ...eh veera haath jod ke keh rehya hai... ki plzz see both sides of coin.... when i was in india.. trust me i never knew y did golden temple was attacked... yah call me fool... but when i came here.. heard the speeches... i m not an iliiterate who got brainwashed... read sikhi... see the sacrifeces of so called "fanatics"... then reach to 84!!

aaaaah... me gettin senti again ... i'll write more if needs be...

srry for goin little offtopic... but this is necessary ..u gotta need to kno "y?"!! :D

vahegurooo ji ka khalsa ... vahegurooo ji ki fateh !!!

[manjot]

Let me just ask someone this. If SANT JARNAIL SINGH JI BHINDRANWALE had left Sri Harmandir Sahib, would Sri Harmandir Sahib still have been attacked in 1984? I'm not trying to diss Sant ji either, but did he really think he and the other gursikhs were as militarily sound as the Indian Army?

What did he expect would happen once the Indian Army showed up?

Bhul Chuk Maaf Karna if this is a stupid question.

Just really confused.

[mann_kaum_layee_qurbaan]

48 other gurdwaras were also attacked so that shoudl answer your question unless there were 48 bhindrawaals that we are unaware of.

also, talking about life of luxury, my parents work more than nay person in punjab probably. also my family has a house, many acres of farmland, properyy etc in punjab. I don't plan on donating it to idia any time soon. we go as often as possible. Anyways this is my personal stuff, you do your thing i'll do mine. i don't even understand whta your stand is. You say siksh will get massacred if khalistan is made, you say people in the west wouldn't move to khalistan, so what's your point?

like i said, does punjab need all 2 million western sikhs to come back to make khalistan? Also, maybe you need to see the khalistani sikhs who work cleaning toilets in airports in teh west before you go ranting about how luxurious our lives are. Yeah and i guess everyone in punjab is living the life like the people in chandigarh with their cars, hotel food, and big kothis...please if you want to generalize, be consistent.

peace.

[Guest HaRdKaUrWaRrIoRz]

this is a post by shinda singh on gursikhijeevan.com...it is sooo good and it nicely classifies ppl according to their take on issues like khalistan...mayb some ppl will realize after reading this what category they fall into and hopefully it will knock some sense into them...

topic:Uncle Tom's in Sikhi

Posted by: www.ShindaSingh.com (---.cpe.net.cable.roger)

Date: January 20, 2006 07:11PM

During the black revolution movement of the 1960's, Malcolm X divided the black masses into two distinct categories, and defined them using his famous analogies of the house negro, and field negro. He defined them as such:

“There were two kinds of slaves, the house Negro and the field Negro. The house Negroes - they lived in the house with master, they dressed pretty good, they ate good because they ate his food - what he left. They lived in the attic or the basement, but still they lived near the master; and they loved the master more than the master loved himself. They would give their life to save the master's house - quicker than the master would. If the master said, "We got a good house here," the house Negro would say, "Yeah, we got a good house here." Whenever the master said "we," he said "we." That's how you can tell a house Negro.

If the master's house caught on fire, the house Negro would fight harder to put the blaze out than the master would. If the master got sick, the house Negro would say, "What's the matter, boss, we sick?" We sick! He identified himself with his master, more than his master identified with himself. And if you came to the house Negro and said, "Let's run away, let's escape, let's separate," the house Negro would look at you and say, "Man, you crazy. What you mean, separate? Where is there a better house than this? Where can I wear better clothes than this? Where can I eat better food than this?" That was that house Negro. In those days he was called a "house nigger." And that's what we call them today, because we've still got some house niggers running around here.

This modern house Negro loves his master. He wants to live near him. He'll pay three times as much as the house is worth just to live near his master, and then brag about "I'm the only Negro out here." "I'm the only one on my job." "I'm the only one in this school." You're nothing but a house Negro. And if someone comes to you right now and says, "Let's separate," you say the same thing that the house Negro said on the plantation. "What you mean, separate? From America, this good white man? Where you going to get a better job than you get here?" I mean, this is what you say. "I ain't left nothing in Africa," that's what you say. Why, you left your mind in Africa.

On that same plantation, there was the field Negro. The field Negroes - those were the masses. There were always more Negroes in the field than there were Negroes in the house. The Negro in the field caught hell. He ate leftovers. In the house they ate high up on the hog. The Negro in the field didn't get anything but what was left of the insides of the hog.

The field Negro was beaten from morning to night; he lived in a shack, in a hut; he wore old, castoff clothes. He hated his master. I say he hated his master. He was intelligent. That house Negro loved his master, but that field Negro - remember, they were in the majority, and they hated the master. When the house caught on fire, he didn't try to put it out; that field Negro prayed for a wind, for a breeze. When the master got sick, the field Negro prayed that he'd die. If someone came to the field Negro and said, "Let's separate, let's run," he didn't say, "Where we going?" He'd say, "Any place is better than here."

Similarly in Sikhi we have our share of house negro's (Uncle Tom's) . Let’s face it, the majority of Sikhs left in Punjab and in India are Uncle Tom's. The biggest of the Uncle Toms, (there are hundreds of them), but the biggest one in my opinion has to be the renowned author Khushwant Singh.

I remember watching news clips, and interview's by Khushwant Singh after the assassination of Indira Gandhi, and he almost condoned the attacks, saying that the Sikhs had brought it upon themselves. Even though he was against the riots he seemed to think that the assassination of Indira Gandhi was not justified.

Now he's not the only one, their are many Sikhs who feel both sides where wrong in 84, and feel obligated to share the responsibility, just like the house negro would justify any out lash from the master as being justified.

So what are the characteristics of an Uncle Tom Sikh? Here are the few that I picked up:

Feel that the 84 attacks where justified and brought upon by the Sikhs.

That '84 is done with, time to move on with life.

Singhs of that era where fanatics, and where responsible for deaths of thousands of innocent.

Religion and Politics should never mix.

A really relaxed view on rehit. (Kakaars are optional type of relaxed)

Satkaar for Sri Guru Granth Sahib, pothis etc, is pretty low.

Are willing to sacrifice there pugh for a korsee.

Their general perception of Sikhi is something almost out of a care bear fantasy world, where violence is never necessary.

The view of Sikhi and promotion of Sikhi is far more left wing, just for the sake of appeasing one and all.

Taking Amrit is often left optional and not seen as a vital part of Sikhi.

Now I could go on, as many of you could, but suffice to say you get the point. Uncle Tom's have adopted the new trend of labeling themselves as moderates, although no such thing exists. Other notorious Uncle Tom's include but are not limited to Kalaa Afganaa, Manmohan Singh, Tara Singh Hayer, etc.

Now the biggest problem with Uncle Tom's in Sikhi is that they for one promote the wrong image to the world. They have good intentions, but the means by which they go about it I totally disagree with. They are virtuous individuals, with the wrong virtues. They waste no time in trying to distance themselves against field negro Sikhs, by labeling them as fanatics and are quick to stand against them, even if it means standing with the enemy. However beyond, that the biggest problem with Uncle Tom Sikhs, is that they justify, and promote the slave mentality within the Sikh masses, (something I'll come to talk about later on in the coming weeks), however its suffice to say that due to the promotion of this mentality they end up becoming our own worst enemies.

Now, knowing that Uncle Tom's are, our own worst enemies, we need to learn to deal with them. How we do that I have no clue. Up to now it seems as though we've left them alone and just worked at ignoring them, and only when they get rowdy do we slap them on the wrist and send them running, but this does not keep them from being a nuisance, but then again it seems like the only thing worth doing.

[Bad Girl]

somebody PMed me this

Hi Bad Girl

I want to say thanks for taking the time to try and talk sense to these Khalistani hypocrites who want to create trouble for innocent people but wouldnt want to live there. They are such stupid hypocrites and it is virtually impossible to talk sense into them. They are dragging Sikhs backwards with their fanaticism and backwardness.

hi prem thanks 4 supporting my ideas donno why those ppl act like 'parhe likhe moorakh'

I think they have identity crisis and try to solve it by going to extremes. Plus some fundamentalists like AKJ are active and they play on 1984 to start hatred for their own causes.

Even though these people exist, most Sikhs in England are perfectly good and moderate, I dont want you to get the wrong impression But these particular ones are so arrogant and ignorant. Imagine! Trying to make Khalistan and make trouble for Sikhs, and then saying that they would only go to Khalistan for a holiday! HAHAHAHA what cowards and hypocrites!

take care

ur right man, i just hate such ppl specially american n canadian sikhs r complete fanatics, didnt have much idea abt uk sikhs b4 im so glad they r morally educated

Canadians are definitely the worst. Many of the ones in Vancouver are direct descendants of the extremists that flourished from the 1980's and went to Canada as 'refugees' - it is the easiness of life that allows them to be so arrogant. Living in a western secular democracy where their rights are protected allows them to waste their time screaming about India, all with the luxury of not having to worry about the conseqiences of their actions on peoples lives in India - that is the textbook definition of a fanatic though, somebody who does not care for the lives of innocents. As long as Indian Sikhs can ignore and control their message, things should be OK, like you and Amrit say, Indian Sikhs recognise their schemes!

[curious_man]

meri post da kuch fayda nahi hua... i guess its just got ignored... still saying them "fanatics"... !!

[singh_sandhu]

KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALISTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN

ZINDAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD