Bread Trimming/Cutting : Location Patterns

[KhalistaniGunMan]

no one is saying that hindus are weak and all sikhs are strong and brave....however it all works on ratio!...bring me 100 hindu men and then bring me 100 sikh men...i can guarantee you will find a higher percentage amongst sikhs who are more aggressive, martial, hotheaded, courageous...

[Guest dataSingh]

no one is saying that hindus are weak and all sikhs are strong and brave....however it all works on ratio!...bring me 100 hindu men and then bring me 100 sikh men...i can guarantee you will find a higher percentage amongst sikhs who are more aggressive, martial, hotheaded, courageous...

yes , thats true !!

[West London Singh]

Not all hindus are weak , nor are all sikhs brave or even sardar-like , for that matter !

Stereotypes are not good

There was a time when people started calling sikhs sardars ( chiefs or leaders ) coz we had those personalities . Not all turbaned men these days have those qualities . They are just turbaned , not necessarily makes them sardar , which is actually a word of great honor !

Stereotypes are not good .

I didn't they were. I didn't make any stereotypes. Stop trying to flip the point in your favour. The original point of yours was that it was the policy of some people you refer to as "Britishers" to get Sikhs to trim their beards. You said this without pinning the blame even once on India. I pointed out to you that only did the British not want sikhs to trim their beards they had tough enforcement strategies in place to prevent this from happening. Compare this with the situation with Sikhs today in the Indian Army. The Indians have the complete opposite strategy. Forbidding and dismissing those that do not trim and become amritdhari. Despite all this....you choose to put thebblame on the "Britishers" ? :wow:

Now....I said the British thought a Sikh that cut or trimmed his hair would lapse into Hinduism. Lets be honest now, they were far-sighted and actually have a point. Nobody, except in your imagination, mentioned the word 'weak'. Only you know then, why you choose to devote the next few messages criticising the use of a word that wasn't even used in the first place.

I said the British believed the Hindus would be of no use in the battlefield. Rather than jumping to the defence of your beloved India perhaps you'd like to do something usefull and provide us with examples of when Hindus were indeed usefull in the battlefield. I, for one, am struggling for examples.

And I state once more.....We are communicating with each other in the English language, and in the English language there is no such word as "Britisher". It makes no gramattical sense. It would be like calling an American an Americaner. Or a Canadian a Canadianer.