Question bout attack on Golden Temple

[ms514]

Sat Sri Akal:

By no means a comprehensive document of Sant Ji's speeches, but definitely a powerful glimpse:

http://www.lotusmedia.co.uk/sikhstudent/Do...%20Speeches.pdf

[Balwinder Singh]

There is one interview of an army person Mr. reddy or something like this which clearly indicates that attack was imminent.Sant ji knew this and he built the defence.I will try to find it and post it here.

[GurSa Singh]

This is on Tapoban phorum.

Author: uk singh

Date: 06-06-04 04:29

In June 1984 Indian army troops launched a full-scale military assault on the holiest of shrines in the Sikh religion, the Golden Temple. 150,000 army troops were deployed for the assault which involved special commando troops, helicopter gun ships, heavy artillery, tanks and even chemical gas - resulting in the deaths of over 2000 innocent pilgrims and the destruction of the Akal Takht.

From this legitimate description of events, one would hope that the Indian government had a justifiable reason to attack a place of worship with such ferocious methods. Unfortunately the White Paper report produced to justify the army attack on the Golden Temple and mass slaughter of innocent worshipers concluded that Indira Gandhi had no choice but to order the attack to capture 30 militants inside for whom they had arrest warrants. However this justification is proven to be baseless when we consider the facts below:

1/ Jarnail Singh Bhinderanwale, the army’s main target had been arrested and was in government custody months before the attack. How can the attack be warranted on the grounds that the government had to arrest Jarnail Singh Bhinderanwale when he was already in their custody month before, and was released by the Indian Government without any charges?

2/ Further more Jarnail Singh and the 29 other so called militants the government uses as an excuse for the attack did not remain in the Temple complex 24 hours a day, but freely traveled Punjab and the surrounding areas on a daily basis. If these people needed to be captured why did the army with all its weapons of destruction ent

er the Golden Temple killing worshippers caught in the cross fire, when they could have easily assassinated or arrested these people at any time outside the Temple complex?

3/ The SGCP management of the Golden Temple desperately asked the government on a number of occasions to produce a list of people they wanted to capture so that the management could take action and prevent any army intervention. However the Indian authorities refused and failed to do this despite it being an option to prevent an assault. Why?

4/ In April 1984 a few weeks before the attack, the Indian Government sent Professor Mehar-Chan Bharadwaj and another MP along with other government investigators into the Golden Temple. On return Professor Mehar-Chan Bharadwaj reported to the Indian Parliament that “there are no terrorists in the Golden Temple”, and warned against attacking the holy shrine. Why did the government blatantly ignore its own officials and disregard their own inquiry and attack the Golden Temple?

5/ Recently the Israeli army waited for over a month using diplomacy and negotiations to get over 200 fully armed Palestinian Militants peacefully out of the Church of Nativity. Why was no such diplomacy used by the Indian Government to secure a peaceful resolve to the stand off, considering thousands of innocent men, woman and children were caught inside the complex? The Indian army only followed a halfhearted attempt to negotiate a peaceful settlement for a few hours and begun the assault with scores of heavy artillery shells being blasted into the holy shrine. This raises serious concerns, when we consider how other Governments have dealt with such situations. The Indian Government was hell-bent on the attack and preferred a conflict rather than diplomacy.

6/ If the government was forced with its back against the wall to storm the holiest of Sikh shrines in order to capture 30 militants, why had it been preparing for the attack for over a year before? Retired Lt-General S.K Sinha a directly involved a

nd high-ranking army leader of the time reported in the Spokesman newspaper (Jun 1984, p28-29), “The army action was not a last resort as Prime Minister Indira Gandhi would have us believe. It had been in her mind for more than 18 months. The army had begun rehearsals of a commando attack near Chakrata Cantonment in the Doon Valley, where a complete replica of the Golden Temple complex had been built”. How can the violent military strike be defensible on the grounds that militants were present in the Temple, when all the facts even from high-ranking Indian Army officials show how an attack was being planned since 1982? At this moment in time Jarnail Singh Bhinderanwale or other so called militants were not even inside the complex.

It must also be stressed that while suppressing unbiased foreign Journalists or Human rights groups like Amnesty International from investigating Operation Blue Star the Government of India unleashed a river of false propaganda and lies that the militants inside had a formidable arsenal of weaponry. Without any independent proof of these assertions apart from the Governments desperate claims to justify the attack, such allegations cannot be taken seriously. However accurate evidence exists of the army itself planting weapons to make it appear that the Sikhs had heavy and modern weapons:

“Before the President of India visited the Golden Temple the army brought a truck loaded with weapons into the complex so that it would give the impression that the militants had so many foreign weapons” H.S Bhanwar (Diary De Panne p66).

7/ If the attack was to break the back of militancy in Punjab, why did the Indian army commence a full scale military attack with heavy artillery and tanks on a Sikh religious festival day, when thousands of pilgrims were attending the Temple from across the World to commemorate the martyrdom anniversary of the 5th Sikh Guru. If ones intent was to arrest only 30 militants, it was illogical to storm the Temple when it was packed out with innocent wors

hippers who were ultimately killed and wounded in the cross fire.

8/ Why did the Indian Government who calls itself the “Worlds largest democracy” implement a complete media blackout across the Punjab to coincide with the attack? All national and international reporters were thrown out of Punjab and prevented from reporting the truth about the attack. Only a hand full of Indian Government Journalists were allowed into the complex to produce propaganda and fabrications about the attack, and downplay the huge loss of life and destruction caused. Why would a Government with nothing to hide ban unbiased international reporters from reporting news concerning a major army operation? The truth is that the army attack was a massacre of civilian worshipers in cold blood, which the Indian Government did not want the World to know about. The cold-blooded genocide of men, woman and children in the Temple is expressed in the independent reports below:

A doctor drafted in by the army to conduct examinations, reported how “Sikhs had been shot at point blank range with their hands tied behind their backs with their turbans. It was a virtual massacre with a large number of woman, children and pilgrims being gunned down” The Guardian, 14th June 1984.

“On Sunday, Medical workers in Amritsar said Soldiers had threatened to shoot them if they gave food or water to dying Sikh pilgrims wounded in the assault lying in the hospital” Christian Science Monitor, 8th June 1984.

“On 4th June, when thousands of Sikhs had gathered at the Golden Temple, army tanks moved into the Temple complex, smashing into the sanctum and shooting everyone in sight. Many wounded were left to bleed to death and when they begged for water soldiers told them to drink the mixture of blood and urine on the floor.” (Amrit Wilson, New Statesman. 16th Nov 1984).

9/ Numerous credible eye witness accounts of the attack hold testimony that after the army had killed those they were supposedly after, they turned their attention on innoce

nt pilgrims, lining them up against the Temple walls and shooting them in cold blood. If the army action was to capture or kill militants in the Temple why did the army kill so many innocent people after they had secured the Temple Complex?

10/ The Sikh reference library was purposely ransacked and deliberately set on fire by the army. Army soldiers carried irreplaceable Sikh literature and items invaluable to the Sikh religion away in trucks. Archives of documents from every period of Sikh history and artifacts from the lives of the Guru’s were stolen or burnt by army troops. Recently the Indian Minster for Defense expressed how these items will be returned to the Sikh’s but why were they taken from the Golden Temple in the first place if the attack was not against the Sikh religion but against militants harboring inside. Twenty years on and these artifacts still have not been returned. Why has the Indian government stolen such items invaluable to the Sikh religion if the attack was only supposed to capture 30 militants, and why even to this day have they not been returned?

The above questions require answering and prove how Operation Blue Star was in fact an inevitable attack on the Sikh people. Jarnail Singh Bhinderanwale was used as an excuse to justify a wide scale clamp down on Sikhs and carry out human rights abuses across Punjab. This policy has left over 250,000 Sikhs murdered in the last 20 years. The world renown academic Joyce Pettigrew has detailed how the events unfolded pre and post Operation Blue Star. She described the assault as “not on a political figure or movement but to suppress a religion (Sikhs), to attack their heart, to strike a blow at their spirit and self confidence”.

[natsilahk]

SSB, of course what Rajiv said after his mothers assassination was wrong, and ridiculous.

Anyways lets get some FACTS straight.

Bhindranwale TOOK arms into the Golden Temple, he was NOT trying to protect it. Would the Golden Temple be attacked either way whether he was inside or not? perhaps, but I highly doubt it would be attacked with tanks and heavy artillery. Only the main gurdwara with the so-called "terrorists" taking place would have been attacked with tanks and so forth.

250,000 sikhs died in the last 20 years? Give me a break, dont try to feed yourself ridiculous numbers to get the cause of your arguement more ground. This original death toll number was stated as an approximiate number for the Sikh Deaths following partition time and all the way up to recent. The number of Sikhs that died in the Golden Temple that day were in the hundreds or thousands, and the delhi riots were in the thousands, and the remaining sikhs scattered throughout India were in the thousands. Total Sikh deaths relating to 1984 have been best estimated in the ten thousands.

The actual Khalistan movement picked up alot after the delhi riots were found out, and the government made several key mistakes such as :

1) Not stopping the riots by using armed forces. Even the General of the Army states that all the riots nation-wide would have been stopped within 10 minutes if he would have been allowed to step in.

2) The Army was sent to close-off Punjab AFTER the delhi riots because Congress was afraid of a "Sikh backlash"

3) Punjab was shut off from all communication and no human rights viewers were allowed in.

Now, some bad points about Bhindranwale which

many of you will not want to hear :

Bhindranwale was NOT a genius or a political stragetist at all, but he was pure at heart and his message was amazing. Bhindranwale took refuge in the Golden Temple because his message to the Sikhs would maximize if he was spreading it at the heart of Sikhi.

If he went to some other gurdwara with only a few people attend, you think anyone would listen to him? Its just common sense, you go to the place where most people attend, and you spread your message. The problem with Bhindranwale was, was that he was unable to unite the Sikhs. He gathered most of the poor-Sikhs and the wealthier ones didnt really follow him.

The coldest move Indira Gandhi made was to invade the Golden Temple on the martyr day of Guru Arjan. When she knew Sikhs from all over the world would be inside the Temple, and she also knew Bhindranwale was going to shift his position. He had roamed Punjab, but always came back inside the Golden Temple. She could have easily waited, easily talked her way out of it similar to what Rajiv Gandhi did.

Please, when you read about The Khalistan Movement do not simply absorb everything that is Pro-Khalistani or anti-Khalistani as correct. I strongly suggest you do your own research on this topic. Theres lots of bogus facts roaming around.

Do I think 1984 was one big conspiracy to kill all Sikhs?

No. BUT, I do believe Gandhi abused her power and used the situation as an advantage to put the Sikhs further down.

Now many people will argue that Bhindranwale was set up by Indira Gandhi so she could kill of Sikhi. This arguement is stupid, at one time Bhindranwale did assosciate himself with Gandhi but things changed and they parted ways. At one point the United States did help Bin Laden, but it was not a set-up to invade Afghanistan many years later and take over the Taliban.

Bhindranwale was a good man, and a good leader, but he just wasnt enough. His message came too much from the heart and at times he failed to use his brain in a

way that would achieve more success.

1984 was one of the worst years in Indian History, but I still go by what Bhindranwale originally spoke about. That if Khalistan is given to us on a plate, then I will take it. But if it is not, then we must just concentrate on bringing the Sikh status up in India.

Some claim that even after 20 years, no justice has been done? Although no justice has been done to the perptrators of the riots, I do believe justice has been given in the favor of Sikhi. More Sikhs have decided to keep rehit simply because of the event, and many Sikhs have become enlightened by it. I for one, know that if it wasnt for 1984, I would have never researched Sikhi and learned about it. I would have been another "mona" walking around with a blazing Khanda doing Bhangra to Daroo songs.

If I offended anyone, I'm deeply sorry.

[ms514]

Sat Sri Akal:

"Bhindranwale TOOK arms into the Golden Temple, he was NOT trying to protect it."

And he was supposed to defend the Harimandir Sahib how...by throwing daal and rotis from langar at the invading army ( )? What was his purpose for getting those weapons into Harimandir Sahib if not to protect it? Care to elaborate? If a Jatha of Nihangs (who are armed to the teeth) was to enter the Harimandir Sahib, would that be justification to launch an attack on Harimandir Sahib?

"Total Sikh deaths relating to 1984 have been best estimated in the ten thousands. "

Please quote your source (and if you quote some government document, don't be surprised if you are met with a wee bit of disbelief). The 1984 November riots alone produced 10,000 deaths nationwide, with 3000 in Delhi.

"at one time Bhindranwale did assosciate himself with Gandhi"

Proof please.

"Bhindranwale was a good man, and a good leader, but he just wasnt enough. His message came too much from the heart and at times he failed to use his brain in a way that would achieve more success."

People convey stories of Santji being a Brahm-Gyani, and you are saying he did not use his brain. I am really intrigued as to what you were expecting out of Sant Ji. Do tell.

This is not a post meant to tick anyone off here, but some of the comments made are just plain odd.

[Balwinder Singh]

natsilahk ji,

Just answer my few little questions:

1.Why did Indian army attack 40 other gurudwara if their aim was only to get sant ji?Indra gandhi herself told the parliament that she is behind bhindranwalee and his men who are in the Golden temple, then why did they attack other gurudwaras?

2.Why did they ransack the sikh library and continously denied it for 16 years.Just tell me why did they deny it?

3.Why did they launch operation woodrose which clearly mentions that "keep an eye on amrtidhari sikhs because they r commited to arson,murder and robbery"?

4.Why didn't they use any peaceful method to get bhindranwalee?

5. why didn't they issue warrants against bhindranwalee if their aim was to get him?

6.Why did they kill 10 sikhs in amritsar bazzar (oldest was 80 yrs old and youngest was 16)?(this is only one incident)

7.Why did they try to get false testimonies from sikh ladies?

8.Why there was media blackout if they were doing a right thing?

9. Why did they kill sikhs on point blank distance?

10. why did they use alchol and tabacoo in the golden temple for ONE COMPLETE MONTH? there was a board outside temple that "tabacoo and alchol are prohibited in the complex" for one month but they never cared.

There are many many questions which i need to ask.BUT PLEASE ANSWER ME THESE FIRST OF ALL. PLEASE ANSWER MY EVERY QUESTION IN DETAIL AS U HAVE DONE A 'RESAERCH' INTO IT.

KHALISTAN ZINDABAD!!!!

[AK-47]

Sant Ji did go to smaller gurdwara sahibs, and suprise suprise they would be jam packed when he was there!!!

Unity is a fleeting concept, i dnt think at any stage in history has any one people or nation been completely unified, so that concept kinda goes out the window. The people that really matter in punjab are the poor, the land owners and the ones who suffer day in day out due to govt policy, the rich have less problems so will ineveitably be less inclined to push for any change since they are already at the top of the ladder.

ps lol at dhal and roti!!! even if they had im sure it would have burnt the eyes out of the indian soldiers!!! lol

[natsilahk]

Sat Sri Akal:

"Bhindranwale TOOK arms into the Golden Temple, he was NOT trying to protect it."

And he was supposed to defend the Harimandir Sahib how...by throwing daal and rotis from langar at the invading army ( )? What was his purpose for getting those weapons into Harimandir Sahib if not to protect it? Care to elaborate? If a Jatha of Nihangs (who are armed to the teeth) was to enter the Harimandir Sahib, would that be justification to launch an attack on Harimandir Sahib?

"Total Sikh deaths relating to 1984 have been best estimated in the ten thousands. "

Please quote your source (and if you quote some government document, don't be surprised if you are met with a wee bit of disbelief). The 1984 November riots alone produced 10,000 deaths nationwide, with 3000 in Delhi.

"at one time Bhindranwale did assosciate himself with Gandhi"

Proof please.

"Bhindranwale was a good man, and a good leader, but he just wasnt enough. His message came too much from the heart and at times he failed to use his brain in a way that would achieve more success."

People convey stories of Santji being a Brahm-Gyani, and you are saying he did not use his brain. I am really intrigued as to what you were expecting ou

t of Sant Ji. Do tell.

This is not a post meant to tick anyone off here, but some of the comments made are just plain odd.

Um, if he was inside the golden temple to protect it, then why didnt he surrender when the Indian Army was outside with tanks and heavy artillery?

Or did he really think that his life was worth more then the golden temple so he must stay in inside and answer with fire.

Its as simple as this, He was inside the Temple to accomplish one mission which was to further convey his message to the Sikhs.

Also, the Jatha of Nihangs are not considered "immediate terroristic threats" to the Indian Govt so they would not invade. My point being that if you KNOW that your on the Indian Gov't hitlist, and still take refuge in the Temple and term it as "Protecting the Temple" your a fool.

I NEVER said it was a bad move on his part, just not the smartest possible move. And all you believers who think he was there to protect it need to look at the situation more.

Next, you question the statement of the deaths....I said "tens of thousands"...which is any number from 10,000 - 99,000.

10,000 seems like a norm number for the sikihs killed all over india due to riots. And plenty were destroyed in the gurdwaras.

Next, you do k now that Gandhi had hired Bhindranwale, or Bhindranwale worked for her and was "made" through this way.

I just dont think Bhindranwale made the best possible decisions to gain success. Its as simple as this, if Bhindranwale truly did make the correct decisions, the Sikhs would have won. He could not unite enough of the Sikhs to make a strong enough movement. Before the riots, his "approval rating" lol was far below 50%. It was after the riots that most Sikhs began to protest for separation more and his "approval rating" would have increased.

If he was inside to protect the golden temple, why didnt he surrender or gave his life up? I'

m sure the Indian Army wouldnt bring TANKS and other HEAVY ARTILLERY inside and start bombing if he had given up.

I am not saying I support India in any form. Bhindranwale attempted to do what would spread his message the most, and people think he was trying to protect the Golden Temple.

[SSB]

natsilahk the army did not give any warnings before attacking you should read peoples own story while they were in the gurdwara and also why did they attack on such a occasion theyt knoew it was guru arjun dev ji's shaheedi din

[natsilahk]

natsilahk ji,

Just answer my few little questions:

1.Why did Indian army attack 40 other gurudwara if their aim was only to get sant ji?Indra gandhi herself told the parliament that she is behind bhindranwalee and his men who are in the Golden temple, then why did they attack other gurudwaras?

2.Why did they ransack the sikh library and continously denied it for 16 years.Just tell me why did they deny it?

3.Why did they launch operation woodrose which clearly mentions that "keep an eye on amrtidhari sikhs because they r commited to arson,murder and robbery"?

4.Why didn't they use any peaceful method to get bhindranwalee?

5. why didn't they issue warrants against bhindranwalee if their aim was to get him?

6.Why did they kill 10 sikhs in amritsar bazzar (oldest was 80 yrs old and youngest was 16)?(this is only one incident)

7.Why did they try to get false testimonies from sikh ladies?

8.Why there was media blackout if they were doing a right thing?

9. Why did they kill sikhs on point blank distance?

10. why did they use alchol and tabacoo in the golden temple for ONE COMPLETE MONTH? there was a board outside temple that "tabacoo and alchol are prohibited in the complex" for one month but they never cared.

There are many many questions which i need to ask.BUT PLEASE ANSWER ME THESE FIRST OF ALL. PLEASE ANSWER MY EVERY QUESTION IN DETAIL AS U HAVE DON

E A 'RESAERCH' INTO IT.

KHALISTAN ZINDABAD!!!!

Ok lets see here,

1. I never said I supported India, and your bringing up the attack of other gurdwaras which I consider stupid on Gandhi's part. This is the reason why I was/am in support of Khalistan. The attacking of other gurdwaras and the riots continuing even in Congress views was India's bad part in 1984, and the reason I dislike India.

2.Your bringing up an irrelevant point, I never said I support India. I simply said both parts of the side made critical mistakes which led to a heavy artillery attack on Darbar Sahib, yet I support Bhindranwale more.

3. Another reason why my nickname is Khalistan backwards. I'm in support of Khalistan, I just recognize the mistakes Bhindranwale made so if a movement was to occur again the same mistakes would not be made. He was a good man, someone you can learn of, but not perfect and not enough of what we needed at that time.

4. I believe they did try "peaceful methods" but he never gave in, he even told his followers that they should either be prepared to die along his side, or seek their own escape out of the complex. If he were to give in during those "peaceful methods" he would have never accomplished anything. His message would not be sent, and he would just faded away in prison.

The rest of your questions are reasons why I stated India took advantage of the situation and reasons why I dont support India.

Now for the people who say "WHY INDIA BLACKED OUT THE MEDIA FROM SEEING THE ATTACK IF IT WAS A GOOD THING"

You do know that MANY of the armed Sikhs inside the golden temple wore MASKS. Why did they mask themsevles if they were doing it for a good cause? You cant have the media all in your face when your attempting to go to war. If they get too close, its so easy to grab a hostage. (Iraqi War)

Keeping the Media out for years after the at

tack, is ridiculous, a huge fault of India.

It's as simple as this, Bhindranwale could have made certain decisions and adjustments to save the attack on the Golden Temple, and Gandhi could have also done other methods that Rajiv Gandhi later used.

Both decisions were some-what flawed, I would say Indira's is more, hence why the nick is Khalistan spelled backwards.

I just dont buy this trash that "oh they were planning it anyway, and Bhindranwale was there to protect it"