Civil Killings

[er_gurjot]

gurufateh..

sangat ji today i happened to c d movie" blood diamonds" .... bout rebellion in sierria leone.. it was bout terrorism.. d child terrorists.....

watchin dat.. 1 thing came into ma mind.. which was common in all terror outfits b it Al Qaida, or nyone...

WHY DO THEY KILL INNOSCENT CIVIL PEOPLE?????

take it bombay blasts or khalistan movement or wateva...

WAT DO TERRORISTS BENIFIT BY KILLIN CIVILIANS....if dey got power den attack army base.. why markets, busses and trains?????

kindly bother to explain me this

regards

Gurjot singh dhaliwal

[KKV]

Gurufateh!

hmm. not too sure - maybe to peev the governments up? killing innocent naturally destroys public life - public have a go at the government - not sure

i personally believe that ALMOST every government plays part to such happenings as "terrorist attacks"

Gurufateh!

[raj_karega_khalsa]

The Bombay blasts which I think you are talking about- the ones the governmetn tried to pin on Babbar Khalsa- were proven to be done by a Muslim group.

And during the Khalistan Movement, The Jujhaaroo Singhs did not kill any innocent people on purpose. In fact, many of the Jathebandees had strict rules about punishing individuals for their crimes; it had to be 100% proven that the individual being accused was guilty, only then was he sent to Dharamraaj.

But the killing of innocents during the Khalistan Movement definately did take place, but the government was responsible for these killings. This has been admitted by the heads of the police. i.e. Ribeiro.

[er_gurjot]

fateh ji

i m sorry for pointing out to ny specific org. but i jus talked bout d general strategy of these terrorists

[er_gurjot]

fateh ji

i m sorry for pointing out to ny specific org. but i jus talked bout d general strategy of these terrorists

an if u say a muslim grp or ny other group.. den wat u feel is dey benifit from dis

[Mehtab Singh]

Islamic terrorism cannot be compared to the Sikh struggle in any way.

• Sri Darbar Sahib was attacked by the Indian army. No army ever attacked the Kaaba in Mecca. The Singhs took up arms to avenge the desecration of Sri Darbar Sahib. What did the Islamic terrorists pick up arms for?
  
• Sikhs were tortured by their own government. They became kharkoos to protect the honor of their religion and community. Islamic terrorists became terrorists because they were brainwashed into believing that every non-Muslim is an enemy.
  
• How many anti-government forces were there in Iraq during Saddam's regime? Or in Afghanistan during Taliban regime? Those tyrants never let such movements last long, but the Singhs managed to keep their struggle alive for a long time.
  
• Singhs never made statements that they would wipe out non-Sikhs from Punjab, but the Al Qaeda makes such statements every now and then.
  

[pun9ab1]

Terrorism is not that different from Gangsters or any gang. gangs have drugs, and other situations as there motive. while Terrorists use there rilgion, people, and other situations as there motvie.

We might find what islam does Terorism, but to them it is fighting for freedom. Whatever you may call it, you cannot judge what it right and what is wrong, US military in Iraq isn't prefect and neither is any other force fighting terrorism, so therefore you cannot take sides you must examine the issue closely before making an opnion.

[buddasingh]

Terrorism is not that different from Gangsters or any gang. gangs have drugs, and other situations as there motive. while Terrorists use there rilgion, people, and other situations as there motvie.

We might find what islam does Terorism, but to them it is fighting for freedom. Whatever you may call it, you cannot judge what it right and what is wrong, US military in Iraq isn't prefect and neither is any other force fighting terrorism, so therefore you cannot take sides you must examine the issue closely before making an opnion.

Is the point of your post to suggest that pro-Khalistani sikhs are terrorists?

[Jhajaroo]

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

Bin laden is seen as a freedom fighter for some, and a terrorist for others.

Bush is seen as a freedom fighter for some, and a terrorist for others.

It just depends what end your on. (where you live = what media you're getting) Because the media these days is a tool used to control the people. For example = fear, etc. The media controls the people, and who controls the media? The ruling class or the upper class who distort the media to suit them.