Twisted Islamo-Facist Pakistani Drama About Sikhs 1947

[Guest KopSingh]

come on guys calm down man, ppl have heard diffrnt stories from diffrent elders or articles etc. just dont doubt too many of the things

[Deep87]

Why weren't any muslim's touched in Maler Kotla? No doubt that there were bastards on our side that went against Gurmat tenets.

It may just be my observation, that when muslims pick a fight and end up getting whooped they start whining about how the fight wasn't fair even though they picked it. Am not talking about the common muslim but there leadership.

Both the Muslim and the Hindu leadership at the time had a blurry foresight of the future. Hence they fell to the oldest trick of the Brits, Divide and Conquer. Nor India or Pakistan can ever come close to being superpowers thus they will have no influence in world affairs and will always be treated as second class citizens. But if they would have rallied with the sikhs not to divide the tactical land mass we would be a force not to be messed with. If they hadn't fallen for the brits tricks we would all be living in harmony just like during the sikh raj. Just my observation. I stand to be corrected.

[gurdssingh]

Sri Nankana Sahib was 70% Muslim in 1947, the Sikhs were about 20%. There was a great massacre of Sikhs, here, as the Baloch Military took an active part in shooting Sikhs, women and children included.

You are most probably right, doing a google search it seems so. But thats distt. wise not the actual town/city. But still it seems majority muslim. I was just stating what my pops told me by speaking to the residents who were there prior 47, We all know the mass populace was not highly educated or had access to motor cars/bikes and so did not see the whole picture of the town in those days so they just told their story, of what they saw. If a young person in 1947 saw in his mohalla majority Sikhs as it would have been maybe he thought the whole town was like that.

[Guest KopSingh]

Why weren't any muslim's touched in Maler Kotla? No doubt that there were bastards on our side that went against Gurmat tenets.

they were untouched coz of the old promise i believe, coz muslims of malerkotla were the only ones who stood against the executions of the 2 lil sahibzadas of the king of kings

[proactive]

West London Singh

Rather than patronise people why not come up with the facts and figures. Amritsar city was never majority Muslim. Muslims were 47.8% in 1941 at a time when the census was heavily skewed against the Sikhs as the Sikhs and Hindus were in the throes of the non-cooperation movement and the Muslims having a Unionist government in charge were able to massage the census figures.

There is no doubt that Sikhs committed many atrocities in East Punjab just after the partition line was drawn. Maybe sitting in sofa pontificating about how Sikhs murdered Muslims gives you some kind of buzz but what is important is to consider why the atrocities happened. Half the Sikh population had just been ethnically cleansed from West Punjab. A great many historic shrines were now left in Pakistan, millions of acres of ther best land in Asia was in one stroke taken from the owners and passed to the tenants. There was no reason for Muslims to leave East Punjab. The Nehru and Gandhi fools would have wanted the East Punjab to remain 30% Muslim and the Sikhs and HIndus from West Punjab either sent back as refugees to Pakistan or resettled outside of Punjab.

The Jathas that went to work on the Muslims did so after the realisation came to Sikh leaders that the Pakistani would force all the non-Muslims out but still want to retain a fifth column of Muslims in East Punjab. If the Muslims had stayed then after 1947 the Sikhs would still have been a minority in places like Amritsar, Jalandhar and Ludhiana. Massacres were committed on both sides. The clearing of Amritsar after 1947 was a direct result of the violence committed by Muslims against the non-Muslims in March 1947.

The reason that Muslims MIGHT have had more dead than Sikhs who because apart from the Sikhs in Rawalpindi area who were subject to a general massacre, the Sikhs from Lyallpur and Montgomery were all former soldiers and their families who were allotted land in these districts after WW1. When they left the district it was organised into Jathas with jatha leaders, lookouts and scouts. The Muslims who left East Punjab did so in a general panic and their caravans were not wel organised. The Sikhs of Lahore, Gujranwala, Sialkot and Sheikhupura owned a majority of the land, hence they also had the wherewithal to organise their caravans well.

The facts of the massacre were that Pakistan was sold to the Muslim masses of West Punjab as a way in which they would be able to appropriate the land of the Sikhs and the factories of the Hindus. If the Sikhs and Hindus stayed in West Punjab then what was the reason to have a Pakistan when the Muslims would still be tenants of the Sikh landlords and still have to repay the money that they had borrowed off the Hindu moneylenders. The reason for the massacre of Muslims inm East Punjab was -;

1. To create space for the Sikhs and Hindus who were being forced out of West Punjab.

2. Revenge for the killings of Sikhs and Hindus in March 1947 and after.

3. As with no.1 to create an area where the Sikhs would be a majority and not face the same situation again

As for Malerkotla, I'll go out on a limb here. It was wasn't to do with the story of the Sahibzadas, it was two things. One the Jathas did not feel the need to attack the Muslims in the state as the Muslims of Malerkotla had not attacked Sikhs there. Muslims in other East Punjab areas had attacked Sikhs. A case in point was the 'Bet' area which was the lowlying land both sides of the Satluj river which had Muslim villages. Muslims in the bet area of Ludhiana had attacked Sikhs who were passing through the area. The other reason for not attacking Malerkotla was that the belief was that as nearly all the non-Muslims had left West Punjab then the Muslims of Malerkotla too would be evacuated by the military.

This is an interesting discussion but marred by people how think they know more but cannot back their statements with facts.

[genie]

Also I would like to point out the lack of disloyality the muslims of Malerkotla showed to the Sikhs in the 80s / 90s by joining the Indian punjab police and other paramilitary terrorist forces to kill separatists and harm their families. I believe the mass murderer of Sikh youths the dog Mohammad Izhar Alam also comes from Malerkotla. Why sant samaj sat in support of the beast alam shows they cant be trusted.

Sikhs are too kind for their own good then get stab in the back years later by people they helped. When will the kaum learn to look our for its own first and look after the long term geo-political interests of the Sikhs so that they flourish in countries they face being wiped out (afghanistan, pakistan) as first priority.

This is why Pakistan cant be trusted their sunni/wahaabi mullahs want to wipe all non-muslims and minority muslim sects out. Sikhs should start openly make contact with China as they do not have any interest in harming our faith rather more it would suit their interests to have Sikhs on their side against the Indian Union and dangers from islamo-fascist mullahs from pakistan.

[Guest KopSingh]

West London Singh

Rather than patronise people why not come up with the facts and figures. Amritsar city was never majority Muslim. Muslims were 47.8% in 1941 at a time when the census was heavily skewed against the Sikhs as the Sikhs and Hindus were in the throes of the non-cooperation movement and the Muslims having a Unionist government in charge were able to massage the census figures.

...

for goodness sake would it hurt u 2 do some research, here i have done it for ur lazy self -

http://www.sikhiwiki....php/Malerkotla

http://waqarkhan.com/malerkotla-info/

i thought this was general knowledge by sikhs, that thery were untouched cozo f the old promise. thats y if u cared 2 think thoroughly, that banda bahadur also didnt smash any of the malerkotla ppl up.

[Guest KopSingh]

Well i found an article here, which quotes a judge GD Kholsa (hindu i think), check this

http://www.apnaorg.com/articles/news-27/

in here it says more muslims died during partition than sikhs,also muslims in malerkotla were untouched coz of guru gobind singhs promise.

jus do sum research man, gods sakes, but at the same time, i needed 2 proof of wat knowledge ive attained over my short life, n there u have it.

[chatanga]

I believe the mass murderer of Sikh youths the dog Mohammad Izhar Alam also comes from Malerkotla. Why sant samaj sat in support of the beast alam shows they cant be trusted.

alam is from kashmir, but he tried to get elected from malerkotla. BTW Sant Samaj opposed his candidature from the very offset.

This is an interesting discussion but marred by people how think they know more but cannot back their statements with facts.

Thats west london singh for you.

Proactive that is a very informative post. You have brought a excellent point to the forum, about why the need for pakistan if the muslims were still economically subservient to the sikhs.

that guy iqbal, also used this as a platform to call for muslims to accept pakistan, that they would be free of the economic supremacy of the non-muslims.