Jump to content

Civil Killings


er_gurjot
 Share

Recommended Posts

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use