Us Should Return Stolen Land To Indian Tribes, Says United Nations

[dalsingh101]

<p>

Do these "martyrs" forget the blood their Islamic forebears have spilled in the name of Islam empire building? Do they not remember the Ottomon Empire, and closer to home, the Mughal Empire who were the epitomy of spreading a faith by the sword?Hundreds and thousands of rapes, murders, forced conversions, deaths, mutilations, executions, God knows what else. Oh but I suppose all those lost lives were fair game because the final objective was for the glory of Allah?</p>

<div>

I feel a few comments on some of your own are warranted for discussion. I disagree with the highlighted point above, I don't think that the Mughal empire was uniformly characterised by the above. I see it as something that shifted and changed shape regularly, for instance Akhbar was amongst the most tolerant and efficient leaders India had. What happened within the Mughal aristocracy was a constant jostling between strict interpretations of the faith and more liberal ones. Unfortunately for Sikhs the hardcore usually won in these internal contests, which had consequences for us. But not all potential Mughal leaders were fundo sullay, some were quite liberal. But the liberal guys usually ended up getting their arses kicked during wars of succession by their more staunch relatives. Imagine if the Moghul, who had fled through Guru Arjan's territory and sought his blessings, had actually won the war of succession for example (note how getting the blessing gave an excuse to the winning party i.e. Jahanghir to subsequently execute the Guru as per his own memoirs).

Then we had maha fundo Aurengzaab, who went bezerk with that whole conversion with the sword mess. Point is that the Mughal empire wasn't a uniform staunch Islamic one, sometimes the outgoing emperor actually favoured the liberal for his successor but these guys would lose in the battles that invariably took place when the emperors throne became vacant. I think Akhbar favoured someone other than Jahanghir. Aurengzaab killed off his brothers and imprisoned his father for the throne. But it could have theoretically have been different and it is factually incorrect to characterise all of the Moghuls (especially if we include the potential emperors who never made it) as the marauding type. I can't remember his name but one contemporary Mughal of Aurengzaabs time even had classical Hindu texts translated into Persian to demonstrate their affinity with Islam for example.

Of course none of this means we let our guard down to the crap we are facing now.

Yet, the Western endeavours of the likes of the U.S. and Britain in recent years are a drop in the ocean compared to the thousands of years of misery and bloodshed Islamic empires have inflicted on the world in the name of their God.

Come on man, slavery and things like the inquisition, what what happened in Latin America was just as brutal.

Now the shoe is on the other foot and they talk about injustice, mass murders, and the shedding of innocent blood. Ironic. The relatively recent issue of Palestine and Israel also is applicable. BTW, I'm sympathetic to the Palestinian cause as I believe the actions of the Israelis are hugely unjust but nobody seems to have the will to act on behalf of the Palestinian people. But just look at how Muslims around the world rally for the Palestinian cause, and how they use incendiary issues like Kashmir and Palestine to gather support for their cause.

That is their strength, most communities ignore their own crap and jump up and down about others. I don't see any different to this and what whites do myself. The difference between sullay and other 'minorities' is that they are generally united and insular enough to be something that needs to be considered when the west is marauding. Especially now that they have learned how to fight back via terrorism and suicide attacks. Otherwise they too would have to be sitting their grumbling taking it up the you know what impotently. In terms of end result I see little difference between the goals of Eurocentric whites and the more ambitious fundo sullay, both want cultural dominance, with the wests focus on the fiscal, they also want economic as well as cultural dominance. Hence these two locked together like they are right now in the symbiotic way they are.

Of course, two wrongs don't make a right but this Islamic blind-spot for truth and genuine justice infuriates me. The root of the problem is they think their faith and their God is the only truth and everything else is Kaffir. Now they are feeling the brunt of oppression and slaughter they fight back and complain about being on the end of injustices.

Same as goray and their progress. For this progress, first nation people, aborigines, the original inhabitants of the west indies before black (and some Indian) slaves were mass transported there. Their destruction is considered fair game for 'progress' and the accumulation of wealth. They like to keep that one under the radar.

But when they were the cause of destruction, misery and death it was all for the glory of Allah. So I suppose the above is a rather long-winded way of saying (or asking) I wonder whether the current fate befalling Muslims and their regimes around the world is some kind of karma for the thousands of years of horror, pain and absolute misery they inflicted wherever they raised the flag of their moon and crescent? Their recent suffering is a relative drop in the ocean compared to the amount they've dispensed to other parties for centuries.

First thing they've only been a round about 1 and a half thousand years. so the word 'thousands' seem inaccurate. I also question how much they are suffering now, they seem to be doing quite well to me. If anything they seem to be getting the better of the west in certain respects?

Nowadays we see how Islam is under attack on many fronts, be it from the military of various countries under the guise of combatting terrorism, and some quarters of the media and their genuinely Islamophobic policies which serve to stigmatise Muslims, etc., and it really does seem as if there is something happening in places that, if you're religious or even believe in a higher power without belonging to any particular denomination, then these events must have a deeper cause and must originate from somewhere especially if we believe in the concept of Hukam, cause-and-effect, etc.

They seem to be getting stronger not weaker in the face of these attacks you mention. Whitey has disturbed a hornet's nest methinks?

Of course, you could also argue what sins have Sikhs committed in the past that we've had to suffer at the hands of the Indian government for varying reasons, and what karma was in play since then? So as you can see the issue isn't as straight-cut as it seems. But like I said before if you believe in a higher power in whose hands this whole world functions then nothing happens with out His say. I don't know, I've just bashed these ideas out in a few minutes and they've been swirling around in my head for years, and therefore probably aren't in a logical or coherent order. Apologies if I've offended anyone.

I think we have really c0cked up myself. Truth is Islam does seem to represent the intention of its founder to a strong degree, which includes it savagery. Whilst we on the other hand seem to have completely rejected the underlying principles of the faith in our society (forget turbans and beards) I'm talking about egalitarianism amongst ourselves, spirituality over materialism, being militarily prepared at top levels. And say whatever you want, more sullay keep up their core religious rasms or obligations like prayers, learning Arabic etc. than our lot, relatively speaking that is. They seem more true to their thing than we to ours?

It's not all doom and gloom though, we just have A LOT of work to do and are going through a transitional phase from a generally geographically concentrated, semi literate, rural, pendu peasant society to a globally dispersed increasingly urbanised one.

[VanHelsingh]

@ dalsingh - Yeah, I just dropped that post in one sudden burst so some of it may have needed checking.

Akbar was tolerant, but we suffered greatly at the hands of that empire. It did us in good and proper, as well as the Buddhists of India (and Asia) which not many people mention.

The 'suffering' comment was from the perspective of how things are on the ground in countries where Muslims are migrants, amongst the proles of the populace (such as you and I). You must admit there is a fear, and in some cases, genuine anger towards anything Muslim. I'd say when large numbers of people -- whether they admit it or not -- do not like your faith or your general existence -- I'd say that it is a kind of overwhelming suffering which can't be remedied quickly. Sometimes the unspoken affects people a lot more than words.

Aside from migrant Muslims, you just have to look at places like Syria, Egypt, Tunisia, etc., to see their populations suffering rather a lot at this moment in time.

Although your point about them getting stronger even in the face of such hostility is accurate , as I think it's a classic case of "back to the walls", and when a person or a group is being assailed from all sides you find that is when those being put-upon rally together and fight back as best they can, occasionally overcoming even apparently impossible odds.

And say whatever you want, more sullay keep up their core religious rasms or obligations like prayers, learning Arabic etc. than our lot, relatively speaking that is. They seem more true to their thing than we to ours?

There's not really much to keep up though is there? Well, nothing on the scale of what we've been instructed as Sikhs to do. Surely our job is much harder if all the rehatnamas, etc., are to be adhered to fully and without exceptions?

When their idea of heaven is something that can be realised on earth (and probably has been by a few Saudi kings over the years :nono:), then what exactly is the point of it all for them?

[Singh559]

In relation to what you said - DalSingh. It's important to note Babur was an extremely zaalam character and all his invasions prior to India and the invasion of India was a brutal and inhumane one until he met Guru Nanak Dev Ji. After that the generations of Mughal rulers up to Jahangir were peaceful and tolerant ones. Guru Nanak Dev Ji knew that eventually there would be a need to form something equivalent to the Khalsa so Guru Ji passed along the knowledge of weapons all the way to Guru Hargobind Sahib through Baba Budha ji.

Jahangir concluded that the previous rulers had softened up to the area and he needed to revisit the roots of Islam and bring Islam to all of India. Jahangir was offended that the Sikhs had a growing following and that Muslims and his own relation were respecting and learning from Guru Arjan Dev Ji. Jahangir's request was simple - to simply put his name in the Aadi Granth of the Sikhs but Guru Arjan Dev Ji replied that even Guru Sahib himself could not put his own name in this beacon of light for the Universe. At the denial of this Jahangir ordered the torture and shaheedi of Guru Arjan Dev Ji on the thati thavi with hot sand poured down on Guru Sahib.

Perhaps we should understand what caused the change of heart of Babur when he met Baba Nanak and what eventually (or perhaps inevitably) brought the violent aspect of the rule back? Another important point is that Guru Nanak Dev Ji, as I believe, knew that there would be a need to defend the Sikhs in the future (as did Guru Arjan Dev Ji) otherwise the Sikhs would have been wiped out like the Buddhists were and their belief system and way of life gone for the most part.

[VanHelsingh]

Going on from what Singh559 has written above, my original assertion regarding the bloodthirsty and over-zealous (an understatement) ways in which Islam was propagated by the Mughals throughout India can be read below. It was where I first discovered what exactly the Mughals did, outside of being told of their exploits in a theological sense from parcharaaks, kathavaachaks, etc. It's from McAuliffe's Sikh volumes -- if you don't mind a bit of light reading on a Saturday, lol.

[dalsingh101]

Kaljugi

Hmmm.....a few years ago I would have gone along with what you were saying (i believed it myself), but now, having read a lot more history I'm wary of conceptualising Abduls as one big marauding monolithic block.

I just think it is lazy and prevents one from actually drilling down a bit more and learning about important nuances between times and various groups. Again, I'm not saying that Islam is misunderstood and yada yada yada but if we do take the example of the Moghuls, as I said before, we find a lot of different shades. Sure, brutality and rape and pillage have been norms for Islamic armies but if we go back, this type of behaviour seems to be the norm for most armies. Crusaders weren't adverse to some sick 'ish' themselves for example.

With Moghuls the story is even more fascinating and illuminating, because if we trace these mofos back to before they became Abduls, you probably know that we are talking about the dreaded 'Mongols'. It appears as if Islam for period at least may have become a tad bit civilised and has a thriving, relatively cultured and sophisticated centre around the Baghdad region, where literature and sciences were flourishing. When the Mongols came across this sophisticated Islamic culture they did their thing.....and sent it back to the dark ages. Over generations, those conquering Mongols converted to Islam of whom Babur is descendant.

Today in practical terms, it does Sikhs no good to perceive the Islamic world as some savage behemoth. We must see it in more detail than our ancestors may of. Not every soola is our natural enemy, and given that some elements of the comunity will be aggressive and proactive against us, combating this involves isolating and identifying the actively hostile elements and dealing with them in a way that doesn't cause a whole bunch of other soolay, who would otherwise have NOT been involved, to jump in against us - i.e. exactly the opposite to what whitey have been doing in their recent wars.

But there is problem with a lot of our people in that they strangely seem to get 'cuddly' with outside groups very quickly on the slightest pretext and struggle with maintaining healthy boundaries (especially our jananis!!). So if I say (for example) that I've met a fair few Bangladeshis who aren't too keen on Paks, for some of our people this is enough for them to start imagining some sort of close relationship with Bangladeshis! That enemy of an enemy is friend crap doesn't work but too many of our lot are too dense to understand that - hence the BNP EDL arselicking.

Plus what do we make of the fact that Mullah Omar, the head of the dreaded Taliban no less, was favourable enough to Sikhs in Afghanistan that they actually felt protected whilst he remained in power?

Look these people aren't going no where and are growing, we have to learn to live with them to an extent. We just need to make sure we are not in an excessively vulnerable position, because we know from partition how that story can quickly and suddenly end up.

There's not really much to keep up though is there? Well, nothing on the scale of what we've been instructed as Sikhs to do. Surely our job is much harder if all the rehatnamas, etc., are to be adhered to fully and without exceptions?

Come on man. Using the argument that 'Our religion is more difficult to practice than Islam and that is why we have more difficulties' is lame. In the west, keeping any 'alien' faith that isn't in the western 'inert' grouping i.e. Hinduism and Buddhism is tough. And say what we want, these guys don't discard or disregard their faith like many of our own do. I'm not talking about external symbols here like kesh, but deeper internal identity constructs. Even the most westernised looking Abdul knows what he is and generally wouldn't sell out or slag off his faith. Compare the behaviour of apneean to sooliyan, it's hard not to perceive our lot coming off worse in the comparison.

Dare I say it, we could actually learn a thing or two from them in certain departments - whilst we simultaneously abhor and protect ourselves from their more nasty, base side.

[VanHelsingh]

Well, as you can tell I have a bit more discovering and learning to do. I never said I was the finished article! :biggrin2: I guess the more a person learns, reads, and educates then long-held beliefs which may be inaccurate can be changed.

But I'm always willing to grow -- and I don't mean my stomach, lol.

[dalsingh101]

Well, as you can tell I have a bit more discovering and learning to do. I never said I was the finished article! :biggrin2: I guess the more a person learns, reads, and educates then long-held beliefs which may be inaccurate can be changed.

Don't knock yourself. You sound like a young brother, who is definitely smarter than I was at your age, and the thing I'm pulling you up about is something I was guilty about myself for years (until fairly recently actually). lol

I'll put it out there. I think it is about time that the standard Sikh historical narrative is updated in light of a LOT of research in many disciplines that has taken place since the Singh Sabha lehar.

But I'm always willing to grow -- and I don't mean my stomach, lol.

Why? A big, sagging tid is one of our nishaans as much as a pagh is! lol

[VanHelsingh]

It is amusing, in a way, how much there is so much to decipher, interpret, absorb, etc., about everything, and yet it doesn't guarantee we will ever come close to the truth. I guess the process itself is the reward rather than the destination.

[dalsingh101]

It is amusing, in a way, how much there is so much to decipher, interpret, absorb, etc., about everything, and yet it doesn't guarantee we will ever come close to the truth. I guess the process itself is the reward rather than the destination.

I don't think it is futile. In a world full of spin and outright deception, making endeavors to pierce through it without going into wacko territory doesn't seem like a bad idea to me. I mean, imagine if we had just lapped up what is put around us here in the west. That are we in the midst of some enlightened, civilised, honest society with no dirt behind it, either now or historically - what kind of muppet morons would be be in terms of having a grasp of at least some reality.

Anyone who stays awake and conscious in life is inevitably going to be questioning and trying to decipher things they encounter. And whilst man is prone to deceive and manipulate - we'll have plenty to cut our teeth on. That's how it seems to me anyway.

Take this thing with Sikh girls in the UK as another example. If we just merrily took the cues from OUR OWN society and the police here - we'd be blissfully bowling about in complete ignorance until reality slapped us in the face.

Behind the seemingly calm facade of life, a lot goes on that people would rather we didn't know. So we may never know it all - but being completely ignorant is completely unacceptable. That's how I feel anyway.