Agony Agony Of Women During Partition

[GPS]

Johny101 is spot on. It was a terrible tragedy but sikhs suffered most.They owned much of land

especially in Canal colonies of montogomery,Lyallpur, sargodha and sahiwal. They became landless.

[AJ111]

The lesson of the 1947 partition has not been learnt.

The majority on this forum still seek another partition of India based on religion as if the violence of 1947 and 1984 wasn't enough.

[West London Singh]

Johny101 is spot on. It was a terrible tragedy but sikhs suffered most.They owned much of land

especially in Canal colonies of montogomery,Lyallpur, sargodha and sahiwal. They became landless.

Homes can and have been rebuilt. Buisnesses can and have been started again. Land and wealth can and has been accumulated again. A human life, on the other hand, once lost is lost forever.

Think what type of people we appear to the outsider. When did we become a people that places a higher value on material possessions than human life ?

"The majority on this forum still seek another partition of India based on religion as if the violence of 1947 and 1984 wasn't enough."

That ^, is utterly ludicrous AJ111. Historically Punjab never was part of India. It was incorporated into India by the British after the Second Anglo-Sikh War and is only part of India now because of the lies India told the Sikhs in 1946/47. A thing that is based on lies, trickery and deceit has no moral value at all and will then naturally collapse anyway.

So...no Sikhs are talking about a 'partition' of 'India'. None of us interfere in 'India'. Whether or not they have a partition there is none of our business. What we are about is Punjab. Punjab always was and always will be a different entity to India.

[GPS]

West London sikh ji

Loss of human life is always sad be it of muslim or a sikh. Muslims were the first to start with around

Rawalpindi area and frontier province. Read the dates of March 1947.They had eliminated most of sikhs

and Hindus before partition in that area.

Riots in East Punjab was in response to these massacres. However it is madness and should never be condoned.

[chatanga]

None of this partcularly healthy. Unhealthy because anything that restricts our mind and thinking capabilities rather than expanding it is detrimental to us.

The fact of the matter is that the 'other side' have even more examples than us of how their womenfolk suffered.....including mass-suicide to escape mobs of sikhs and hindus.

The fact of the matter is that 2 and half times more Punjabi Muslims were murdered in Punjab during partition than Sikhs.

Put it this way: As horrendous and brutal as partition was from our point of view we would have to go through the same thing again once more and then half of it yet again before we even reach their numbers of suffering.

Remembering suffering is good and a must......but we should remember the suffering of all humankind....even the ones that suffered from our hands.

The fact is that they brought it upon themselves. They could have not supported the communalist muslim league, and clearly rejected pakistan. they could have said something about the Rawalpindi pogrom, but they didnt. The majority of muslims in panjab supported the Pakistan movement.

What happened in East Panjab after partition, was the chickens had come home to roost (to quote a muslim guy). For some years in Panjab, and over India, muslims were using violence as and when it suited them to further their political goals.

Kill the kafirs, and allah loves you, but when the kafirs bite back, whinge about it for decades.

In western panjab, the sikhs only being about 5 or 10 % of the population against some 80 or 90 % of the muslims, took severe casualties, but in East Panjab, where Sikhs were only something like 15-20% of the population, as against 30 to 49% of the muslim population, the Sikhs still gave them what for. In East Panjab, they still outnumbered the Sikhs in more or less every district by 2 to 1, or 3 to 1, yet they got they beat. Only where they could fight Sikhs 8 to 1 or 9 to 1, they managed to do something.

So, don't whinge about them, they had everything in their favour, but the scars of Rawalpindi, had proved too strong for them.

Why are you buying into the Pakistani propaganda that more muslims were killed. It's all lies, they dont even acknowledge that Rawalpindi saka happened, yet you lap up their propaganda.

I think we should not dwell too much on this. What we should focus on is what lessons should be learnt.

I'm not sure sure that the Sikh community has recovered from partition of panjab. Those Sikhs in the know about this are still bitter from my experience. But what we have to accept is that partition had happened, and how we can work towards restoring our heritage in West Panjab, and extending hands of mutual co-operation and acknowledgement across the border.

That means that the Pakistani curriculum tells schoolchildren the truth about what they did to create Pakistan, and lose their victim mentality over partition violence.

[proactive]

If I had a penny for every time WLS comes onto this forum to tell us how more Muslims were killed in 1947 than Sikhs and Hindus I would have been a millionaire years ago!

The facts given by Jonny101 and Chatanga are correct. Look at it this way. One village of 50 people fights a village of 500. The village of 50 people lose 10 people and the village for 500 lose 20 people. So the village of 500 people may have lost the most but because it has a larger population base it will take a few years and the population will become 500 again. For the village of 50 people it will take decades before they can reach their population back to 50 again. Add to this that along with the loss of 10 people the smaller village also loses half of its land. So which village should be getting our sympathy? Which village has a brighter future? OK so the people in the bigger village now start to kill each other but that's their problem no ours!

Btw there is no evidence that more Muslims died that Hindus and Sikhs in 1947. We only have Pakistani propaganda to thank and their mouthpiece WLS for this notion.

For the Muslims 1947 was about getting their rule back and getting their hands on the lands of the Sikhs and the businesses of the Hindus. For the Hindus, 1947 was about getting to rule a country that they had been slaves in for the last 1000 years.

For the Sikhs 1947 was about surviving as a people. It was not for nothing that Master Tara Singh equated the coming struggle as the same terms as the annihilation that the people of Germany and Japan had faced in 1945. Had the Sikhs not taken to arms and had acquiesced to Pakistan, we would have been a minority like the Hindus and Christians are in Pakistan today. They have no rights and are waiting for another atrocity after the last one.

[West London Singh]

If I had a penny for every time WLS comes onto this forum to tell us how more Muslims were killed in 1947 than Sikhs and Hindus I would have been a millionaire years ago!

I don't just wake up and periodicaly think to myself "hmm, I feel like randomly mentioning the death rate during partition today".

The fact that I've mentioned it before is more a testamant to yourself and others like you who have ensured that an extremely large proportion of posts and threads on this 'Sikh' forum over the years have related to 'how terribly bad the muslims are'.

Btw there is no evidence that more Muslims died that Hindus and Sikhs in 1947. We only have Pakistani propaganda to thank and their mouthpiece WLS for this notion.

I'm fairly well read but I don't think, in all my life, I've read anything related to the death rate during partition written by any Pakistani.

Every single official report by the British and India concluded that the muslim death rate was far more than double that of us Sikhs. If official documents, reports and even writings of Indians is not 'evidence' enough for you than your standard of evidence is obviously way too high for me.

[chatanga]

If I had a penny for every time WLS comes onto this forum to tell us how more Muslims were killed in 1947 than Sikhs and Hindus I would have been a millionaire years ago!

Btw there is no evidence that more Muslims died that Hindus and Sikhs in 1947. We only have Pakistani propaganda to thank and their mouthpiece WLS for this notion.

If I had a penny for all the times he said he's "well-read" I would be a pound behind you.

The historians scholars, people with an interest have never been able to agree on a number of people killed. Figures have ranged from about 60,000 upto 1.5 million.

The only reason why some English writers say that more muslims died in E Panjab, was because they saw a lot of the violence there. There were very few english witnesses to what was happening in W Panjab. Even then some of the English men were working for the pakistan govt after partition, like Mudie, and it was people like him, who exaggerated such claims.

[West London Singh]

If I had a penny for all the times he said he's "well-read" I would be a pound behind you.

Well I am 'well-read' but I actually see that as a hindrance these days rather than something good. There was a time when a man like Coleridge was celebrated for being extrordinarily clever after reading every book available in the entire world but we live in today extraordinarily stupid times. We live in a world where the average published book is written either by dunces like Madonna and Jordan or those with the literary prose of a 10 year old...e.g Dan Brown of da vinci code fame. Thus, in this day and age, this upside down world we live in, a man who is extremely well read and does as Coleridge did, i.e reads every book in the world, will actually end up being far stupider than the man that reads no book at all.

So...leaving my meaningless and negative 'well-read' claim aside, when you take every single report, every single document, every single book, every single thesis on the matter of partition and add it to the oral history passed down from the elders in the Sikh dominated areas such as Jalandhar district and Ludhiana district I'm not sure how you can dispute the extremely high muslim death rate.

You can, however, because you want to. And we both know why you want to.

[GPS]

West London singh ji

Have you got any reference in support of your claim? If so put it here.

Malerkotla is a Muslim dominated town in E Punjab.No muslim was harmed there.

They are still there.