Niddar Singh & Buddha Dal

[Matheen]

If some one destroys your property they are responsible for its repair.

It's a question of tradition, anakh and izzat. Government funds are unacceptable (something we seem to have forgotten in the West). The government would have made a huge deal about having rebuilt the Akaal Takht for the Sikhs, and made us feel obligated to them. Not to mention that Baba Santa Singh ji's design was very poor - three sides were white washed wall without any windows or doors. The present design is slightly different to what it was pre 1984, but more accurate than the govt. sponsored one and much better looking.

The mentality and personalities that used it as a fortress to serve their own purpose are absolutely blameless?

Name one person who used it for their own purpose, and what that purpose was. Why did the Indians attack the 30 or 40 other Gurudwarey as well? Don't forget that Sant Ji was arrested then released without charge - if all they wanted was him, they wouldn't have released him. The army made plans for the invasion way in advance, as told by former generals - Indira wanted to 'show these dogs their place'.

Nobody who was involved ever claimed Darbar sahib was a fortress, but they did have enough love for Guru Sahib to die protecting it against overwhelming odds.

Read A.R. Darshi's book, he is a Hindu but still managed to present the facts in an unbiased way. Better still, speak to Nihang Baba Nihal Singh Ji, Harian belan.

[THE WARRIOR]

If some one destroys your property they are responsible for its repair.

It's a question of tradition, anakh and izzat. Government funds are unacceptable (something we seem to have forgotten in the West). The government would have made a huge deal about having rebuilt the Akaal Takht for the Sikhs, and made us feel obligated to them. Not to mention that Baba Santa Singh ji's design was very poor - three sides were white washed wall without any windows or doors. The present design is slightly different to what it was pre 1984, but more accurate than the govt. sponsored one and much better looking.

The mentality and personalities that used it as a fortress to serve their own purpose are absolutely blameless?

Name one person who used it for their own purpose, and what that purpose was. Why did the Indians attack the 30 or 40 other Gurudwarey as well? Don't forget that Sant Ji was arrested then released without charge - if all they wanted was him, they wouldn't have released him. The army made plans for the invasion way in advance, as told by former generals - Indira wanted to 'show these dogs their place'.

Nobody who was involved ever claimed Darbar sahib was a fortress, but they did have enough love for Guru Sahib to die protecting it against overwhelming odds.

Read A.R. Darshi's book, he is a Hindu but still managed to present the facts in an unbiased way. Better still, speak to Nihang Baba Nihal Singh Ji, Harian belan.

Ank and ishat is forgotten in the west? There’s a fine line between the two and hankar. In the west we have a of an impartial vision of history it’s not perfect but it’s pretty close but it’s way ahead than the “delete” and “white wash” history that upnai and general Indian mentality is enslaved by.

Baba Santa Singh had the original drawings of the Thakat that’s what they used to correct the 20-30 percent that the army destroyed. The whole complex was not levelled as people would like us to believe.

In the political games of 80’s there was not a Good side and Bad side as people would like to project various personalities and groups being the righteous right and the government being the evil doers. Generally the Karkoos and the government were hated by the general populous of the Panjab equally because both were involved in Human Rights violations, both committed atrocities upon the people who were caught up in the show of muscle between the two sides and even between the different jathas towards their end.

I have spoken to Baba Nihal Singh and I am aware of his experiences and suffering, however he can tell you also that at times both sides had a very similar mentality. You may also want to speak to Amnesty International and others who clearly state that both sides inflicted inhuman suffering on their victims but here the Khalstani chelae will tell you are on the Indian government payroll also!

The pros answer and mentality today is one of total denial, the so called militants who attacked innocent people were government agents and so one and so forth. People need to get real.

Baba Santa Singh didn’t murder any one, didn’t shoot people for not making him roti, didn’t torture people, didn’t order any ones execution, didn’t rape bibia, these were just some of the atrocities committed by both sides the pros and against one camp or another.

India, Panjab and its people etc was/were the birthplace of Spirituality the hub of pondering and studying on the great divine, however no more nor in my opinion it will ever be again. Like the first homo-sapiens that left Africa and today we acknowledge that and give it kudos so has India also become that once upon a time land. There is no land no Panjab no golden state no haven home, Khalistan isn’t going to happen.

There is a universe of Difference between a Khalsa Raj Mentality and A Khalistani one.

[chhokaranwala]

interesting how some groups and jathas hold themselves utterly blameless for the tragic events of the 1980s and 1990s

how the same people justify the murder and killing of people who dont follow their version of Sikhi

[Tera]

Just to say I also downloaded that video a few years ago of the net (think i one i had was around 3hours) that showed the Sarbat Khalsa in which there was an amazing sea of kesri dastaars. It was in this video you could see the sangat taking apart the Akal Takht in order to rebuild.

I thought the fact that the Akal Takht was rebuilt by Sarkaar, pulled down by sangat and rebuilt was common knowledge - this is the first time I heard anyone dispute it.

I'll try and find the video at home... If I find it I will upload it somewhere for you to watch.

[Goli Da Vair Sada]

if the common people hated the kharkoo singhs why after the elections in 1989 wer all 13 seats taken by khalistanis? 10 of the 13 taken by candidates backed by simaranjit singh mann's united akali dal which was bascially formed by the all india sikh students federation. sounds like the people spoke in favour off the kharkoos to me. they formed the punjab gov for 6 months and openly talked about khalistan until presidents rule was imposed again. until 1991 when beanta was elected after a turnout of only 10 percent (most none sikhs) because the common people boycotted the elections. in the short few months that the Mann gov was formed he was denied his legal and constitutional right to enter parliament were he would have declared khalistan.

half a million sikhs wer said to of attended sarbat khalsa in 1986 to declare khalistan. nearly all sikh men. think about this. there are 20 million sikhs in punjab. half are men. half of those would be children or old men maybe unable to travel. even tho the government stopped many sikh attending sarbat khalsa still half a million sikhs attended. so dont chat rubbish about the common man not being with the kharkoos at that time.

[THE WARRIOR]

if the common people hated the kharkoo singhs why after the elections in 1989 wer all 13 seats taken by khalistanis? 10 of the 13 taken by candidates backed by simaranjit singh mann's united akali dal which was bascially formed by the all india sikh students federation. sounds like the people spoke in favour off the kharkoos to me. they formed the punjab gov for 6 months and openly talked about khalistan until presidents rule was imposed again. until 1991 when beanta was elected after a turnout of only 10 percent (most none sikhs) because the common people boycotted the elections. in the short few months that the Mann gov was formed he was denied his legal and constitutional right to enter parliament were he would have declared khalistan.

half a million sikhs wer said to of attended sarbat khalsa in 1986 to declare khalistan. nearly all sikh men. think about this. there are 20 million sikhs in punjab. half are men. half of those would be children or old men maybe unable to travel. even tho the government stopped many sikh attending sarbat khalsa still half a million sikhs attended. so dont chat rubbish about the common man not being with the kharkoos at that time.

So where are they now?

[Akal Purkh Ki Fauj]

Looks like "Warrior" is up to his old tricks again. Typical sanatic, I remember his baba used to the same trick at his ling bashing sessions where he would tell us all how he used to invade the other akharas and the kharkoos would try to attack him with their ak47's. I wonder how baba jis flawless system will deal with what the future holds - "drop the knife, drop the knife"

if the common people hated the kharkoo singhs why after the elections in 1989 wer all 13 seats taken by khalistanis? 10 of the 13 taken by candidates backed by simaranjit singh mann's united akali dal which was bascially formed by the all india sikh students federation. sounds like the people spoke in favour off the kharkoos to me. they formed the punjab gov for 6 months and openly talked about khalistan until presidents rule was imposed again. until 1991 when beanta was elected after a turnout of only 10 percent (most none sikhs) because the common people boycotted the elections. in the short few months that the Mann gov was formed he was denied his legal and constitutional right to enter parliament were he would have declared khalistan.

half a million sikhs wer said to of attended sarbat khalsa in 1986 to declare khalistan. nearly all sikh men. think about this. there are 20 million sikhs in punjab. half are men. half of those would be children or old men maybe unable to travel. even tho the government stopped many sikh attending sarbat khalsa still half a million sikhs attended. so dont chat rubbish about the common man not being with the kharkoos at that time.

So where are they now?

Its called rounding up and fake encountering then replacing with fake sanathan imitations. oh yeah I forgot about the burning of ancient texts in thakts sahibs library and then propergating the introduction of fake stories, texts and frescos : )

[THE WARRIOR]

Looks like "Warrior" is up to his old tricks again. Typical sanatic, I remember his baba used to the same trick at his ling bashing sessions where he would tell us all how he used to invade the other akharas and the kharkoos would try to attack him with their ak47's. I wonder how baba jis flawless system will deal with what the future holds - "drop the knife, drop the knife"

if the common people hated the kharkoo singhs why after the elections in 1989 wer all 13 seats taken by khalistanis? 10 of the 13 taken by candidates backed by simaranjit singh mann's united akali dal which was bascially formed by the all india sikh students federation. sounds like the people spoke in favour off the kharkoos to me. they formed the punjab gov for 6 months and openly talked about khalistan until presidents rule was imposed again. until 1991 when beanta was elected after a turnout of only 10 percent (most none sikhs) because the common people boycotted the elections. in the short few months that the Mann gov was formed he was denied his legal and constitutional right to enter parliament were he would have declared khalistan.

half a million sikhs wer said to of attended sarbat khalsa in 1986 to declare khalistan. nearly all sikh men. think about this. there are 20 million sikhs in punjab. half are men. half of those would be children or old men maybe unable to travel. even tho the government stopped many sikh attending sarbat khalsa still half a million sikhs attended. so dont chat rubbish about the common man not being with the kharkoos at that time.

So where are they now?

Its called rounding up and fake encountering then replacing with fake sanathan imitations. oh yeah I forgot about the burning of ancient texts in thakts sahibs library and then propergating the introduction of fake stories, texts and frescos : )

I believe in Dharma which is Sanathan in nature, is there something wrong with that?

The fact that you’re a neo-religious Sikh makes you a better person than me and automatically right? because you subscribe to your closed group mentality and opinion makes you right? Well if the righteous right and good suffer from tunnel vision and a discriminatory mentality I guess I’m pretty happy being wrong and bad!

Btw being so morally correct you shouldn’t be telling so many lies

[Akal Purkh Ki Fauj]

I believe in Dharma which is Sanathan in nature, is there something wrong with that?

If thats what floats you boat go for it! however do not try and pass off sikhi as hinduism. They are 2 very distinct and individual dharma's and not the "hindu Sikh sanatan" CONcocktion that your baba's are trying to pass off to the gullible zombies that congregate at your "shiv" (or is ranjit) akhara

[THE WARRIOR]

I believe in Dharma which is Sanathan in nature, is there something wrong with that?

If thats what floats you boat go for it! however do not try and pass off sikhi as hinduism. They are 2 very distinct and individual dharma's and not the "hindu Sikh sanatan" CONcocktion that your baba's are trying to pass off to the gullible zombies that congregate at your "shiv" (or is ranjit) akhara

Since you are the beacon of truth please state where and when I have at anytime or place stated any of those ideologies or beliefs?

you cant

Or has your hate mongering driven you to lie and distort so much that you convince yourself it’s the truth?