wht to say

[curious_man]

vwihgurU jI kw Kwlsw!

vwihgurU jI kI &iqh!!

this is the incident which happened last night with me....

i was watching this latest 1984 movie....(the one which starts with information about Normandy)...

and then my friend just popped in and said that he also wants to see.....

after watching he said useless video.... and then a discussion started.... but as my other friends came we stopped.... but the discussion was embedded in my heart and i wanna know from all u ppl.... u were the one who helped me get closer to sikhi.... i need answers for his questions or doubts..

actually he is a son of Col. XYZ (i m not gonna name him)......... and his father was there in punjab in 84 and post 84....

so first and foremost thing in his mind was that sant ji was a terrorist..... a normal person even though having a group of hundreds still dont have so mjuch artillery, arms and ammunation...how and why was the need of machine guns and other automatic guns required..... obviously he was backed by Pakistan...

i started giving him the answers that sikhs should be armed...etc... but then he said a knife is more than enough.... u r not going for a war..that u r heavily armed with machine guns all the time.... roaming in streets with guns in hands...wht is then the general thought of all the ppl..... obviously if u go to a bar and still drink milk there, everyone will still think u r

drinkin wine etc.... :|

i said ok whtever ..for u he was terrorist ok... but then y the army chose the day of martyrdom of guru ji..... he said so could we have been waiting ...wherever the terrorist is , whtever the time is ....the terrorist has to be killed..... he said for eg.. if osama has to launch a nuclear missile and US knows it ....and if it attacks osama and accidently its eid on that day... then u will say it was all planned....??

y were so many civilians died.... he accepts yes ok civilians died but they were sandwiched between the bullets of both army and terrorists.... well he had nothing much to say...

and for delhi riots ...he was sorry.....but he said if thse stupid ppl become crazy no one could handle.... u can see ureself in gujrat riots.. in bombay back in 92 were ethey able to stop the riots ...no!!.... so its common ..its general

next day someone would say that some indian troops in kashmir went to a mosque and killed some pakistani militants..accidentaly some bullets got fired on walls too...so the indian army wanted to crush islam .... how ridiculous....

dont just read whtever is on the net and accept it... read both views ....he further said religion make ppl more senti (he is not religious at all)... therefore there is no way to discuss ...u will say yes and i will say no...... but whtever happend ....army was there to kill terrorists....he said that his father in anti-terrorist division of army and he spent many yrs in punjab and after kargil

... he said my dad used to tell me how they captured some pakistani.... same there they take religion as their sheild ..some go to mosques ..some kill hindus and blah blah.,.. but ppl just see the outer covering which is temporary ...they dont see that ultimately army is for peacemaking..

and my other friends popped in

so the end.....

i was not able to sleep that night..... :wub:

[Singhstah]

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

ask him,even if sant ji was a terrorist,was he in all all the gurdwaras in panjab,i dont think so,but they were still attaked ,is he a supporter of the attak?

[curious_man]

vwihgurU jI kw Kwlsw!

vwihgurU jI kI &iqh!!

thats wht he is saying that sant ji was a terrorist... read my post carefully from "so first and foremost .....to... drinkin wine etc."

yes i said y other gurudwaras...y werent there terrorists in other gurudwaras too...

i dunno ...wht to say...he is a son of an armyman..

[ms514]

Sat Sri Akal:

"so first and foremost thing in his mind was that sant ji was a terrorist..... a normal person even though having a group of hundreds still dont have so mjuch artillery, arms and ammunation...how and why was the need of machine guns and other automatic guns required..... obviously he was backed by Pakistan..."

With all the intelligence agencies and whatever that India has, have they yet produced solid proof that any Pakistani support was given to Sant Ji? Nope.

"... but then he said a knife is more than enough.... u r not going for a war..that u r heavily armed with machine guns all the time.... roaming in streets with guns in hands...wht is then the general thought of all the ppl....."

When the Mughals were invading India, did a Brahmin ever say.."Hey, put down that gun. A knife is enough". Or how about when the British invaded? If India knows even one thing about Sikhs that is correct, it is that Sikhs are armed, for the protection of the defenseless, the weak, the poor AND themselves. It is our right, and a right that even the corrupt Brahmin Mohandaas Karamchand Gandhi recognized when saying that if the Sikhs were ever wronged, the Sikhs would be rightful in drawing their swords.

"..... he said so could we have been waiting ...wherever the terrorist is , whtever the time is ....the terrorist has to be killed..... he said for eg.. if osama has to launch a nuclear missile and US knows it ....and if it attacks osama and accidently its eid on that day... then u will say it was all planned....??"

Ok..Sant Ji himself surrendered for arrest as soon as he found out that he had an arrest warran

t in his name. He proceeded through trial and was acquitted. Why not issue another warrant considering he has already proven to be cooperative? Osama blatantly stated time and time again that he WILL kill Americans. Did Sant Ji ever say he WILL kill someone, launch a terrorist attack, etc? Did he ever declare Khalistan? The answers are no. So he provided no reason to send in the Army to attack. He did not harm any civilians, he did not terrorize the land nor did he committ any crimes (otherwise he would have been found guilty and been sent to prison). That leaves what reason for invasion?

"he accepts yes ok civilians died but they were sandwiched between the bullets of both army and terrorists.... "

So to get at 40 Sikhs, you kill 3000? Yeah, good logic. Rational governments will spend days upon days on negotiation to get innocent people out and yet eyewitnesses say that not even a warning was given before the fighting started. Yeah, they really valued those civilians...

"

and for delhi riots ...he was sorry.....but he said if thse stupid ppl become crazy no one could handle.... u can see ureself in gujrat riots.. in bombay back in 92 were ethey able to stop the riots ...no!!.... so its common ..its general"

Listen to the comments by Patwant Singh Ji in the BBC documentary Sikh (availble at Sikhnet for viewing). In it, he speaks of how the pattern of the mob was very precise. It targeted Sikh businesses, residences, taxi stands, Sikh places of worship and Sikhs. A riot's trademark is that the shops and residences that are looted/vandalized/destroyed are random. How did this mob know that these were Sikh residences/places of businesses? These records were obtained ahead of time at the local City Halls. This information was made known to the leaders of the separate mob wings. They pointed out each specific Sikh place and had that place destroyed only. This is not the pattern of a mob, but the pattern of a well organized civilian assau

lt against a specific target, the Sikh community. And if it was only a riot, why were the police instructed no to stop the riots? Why was the Army told to hold back (when the Army was deployed, the "riot" stopped almost immediately).

Don't expect to argue this person into believing your viewpoint. Take this as knowledge for yourself about what happened.