Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
13Mirch

Sant Jarnail Singh Ji and the Akali-Dal

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, KhoonKaBadlaKhoon said:

Pretty good summary I'd say so. 

Akali Dal has betrayed the Panth since inception. The Sant was well aware of this fact. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The akali dal, has been responsible for murdering more sikhs than even the congress party and probably even the mughals/aurangzeb. The badal family will go down in history for their genocide of r ppl.

CySIus8XAAARUKT.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, StarStriker said:

The akali dal, has been responsible for murdering more sikhs than even the congress party and probably even the mughals/aurangzeb. The badal family will go down in history for their genocide of r ppl.

CySIus8XAAARUKT.jpg

The sad thing is you will see a lot of Punjabi Hindus(on the internet) claiming that it was 30k to 39k Hindus who were killed by Sikhs since 1984 which is a blatant lie of course because they are just taking the figures of the Punjab Congress of Sikhs killed and saying "look! thats how many Hindus you guys killed". 

 

Not surprising since telling the truth is not a virtue they are known for.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Preeet said:

What does the Human Rights title stand for in that table?

Thats their estimation of sikh deaths, and the last column is state magistracy estimation of sikh deaths, which tells u, the ppl of the court r fully aware of the sikh genocide, n isnt a fabrication.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jonny101 said:

The sad thing is you will see a lot of Punjabi Hindus(on the internet) claiming that it was 30k to 39k Hindus who were killed by Sikhs since 1984 which is a blatant lie of course because they are just taking the figures of the Punjab Congress of Sikhs killed and saying "look! thats how many Hindus you guys killed". 

 

Not surprising since telling the truth is not a virtue they are known for.

Wats funny is this whole "35,000" hindus were killed by sikhs is a new phenomenon, n wats amazing is, they have NO proof, bcoz it never happened. If the kharku's wanted to, they cud of murdered every single hindu in panjab, n made it into a sikh only state, but our lads r not of that ilk.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, StarStriker said:

The akali dal, has been responsible for murdering more sikhs than even the congress party and probably even the mughals/aurangzeb. The badal family will go down in history for their genocide of r ppl.

CySIus8XAAARUKT.jpg

Another reason we are not taken seriously, Akalis or any other pindu they come out and throw numbers like "ik lakh do lakh Sikh maar te" without giving anything to back the statement up. Even if you go by khalras numbers I don't think even close to 100k people were killed by Punjab police. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, KhoonKaBadlaKhoon said:

Another reason we are not taken seriously, Akalis or any other pindu they come out and throw numbers like "ik lakh do lakh Sikh maar te" without giving anything to back the statement up. Even if you go by khalras numbers I don't think even close to 100k people were killed by Punjab police. 

how do u know research wasnt done on this? U can clearly see the source written at the bottom of the picture, from a book, which i have recently purchased. Inderjeet singh did ground level research, not to mention he asked human rights orgs/courts, which is how he got the figures in 1st place. If this had been written by a gorah, wud u have questioned the figures? Stop denying the facts. We have had convos on this b4, go back to those threads n re-read wat i wrote on their, coz i cant b arsed to repeat everyfink all overagain.

The akali dal have been responsible for majority of sikh deaths since the 1970s, gal kattam!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Jonny101 said:

The sad thing is you will see a lot of Punjabi Hindus(on the internet) claiming that it was 30k to 39k Hindus who were killed by Sikhs since 1984 which is a blatant lie of course because they are just taking the figures of the Punjab Congress of Sikhs killed and saying "look! thats how many Hindus you guys killed". 

 

Not surprising since telling the truth is not a virtue they are known for.

Hindu scriptures and the Koran are notorious for emphasizing fabrication. With the amount of right wing fundamentalism injected into India, Hindus are making some absurd claims. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, KhoonKaBadlaKhoon said:

Another reason we are not taken seriously, Akalis or any other pindu they come out and throw numbers like "ik lakh do lakh Sikh maar te" without giving anything to back the statement up. Even if you go by khalras numbers I don't think even close to 100k people were killed by Punjab police. 

Khalara actually researched his subject, I have always believed that the Akalis did him in. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, 13Mirch said:

Khalara actually researched his subject, I have always believed that the Akalis did him in. 

That kutthaa badal and kps gill discussed how to eliminate khalra, and gill openly wrote in a newspaper that he will make him the next victim of hundreds of thousands of already killed sikhs, if he didnt stop "stickin his nose" in the genocidal campaigns. Which other country in the world wud allow this to happen in a newspaper openly? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/30/2016 at 11:32 AM, StarStriker said:

Wats funny is this whole "35,000" hindus were killed by sikhs is a new phenomenon, n wats amazing is, they have NO proof, bcoz it never happened. If the kharku's wanted to, they cud of murdered every single hindu in panjab, n made it into a sikh only state, but our lads r not of that ilk.

I have noticed this too. This myth of 30k Hindus dying only started a few years ago. They are basically just quoting the official government figures of total killed during the years of militancy(1984-1994) which includes Sikh miltants killed, policemen killed(also Sikhs), relatives of militants killed(also Sikhs). If one were to count all the Hindus killed during the decade long militancy the figure only goes into a few hundred at most. Yet they lie and quote the 30k figure in order to have some sort of moral high ground which they know belongs to the Sikhs since it was a decade long genocide of Sikhs killed yet Sikhs never retaliated against the Hindu population of Punjab. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/12/2016 at 10:31 AM, StarStriker said:

how do u know research wasnt done on this? U can clearly see the source written at the bottom of the picture, from a book, which i have recently purchased. Inderjeet singh did ground level research, not to mention he asked human rights orgs/courts, which is how he got the figures in 1st place. If this had been written by a gorah, wud u have questioned the figures? Stop denying the facts. We have had convos on this b4, go back to those threads n re-read wat i wrote on their, coz i cant b arsed to repeat everyfink all overagain.

The akali dal have been responsible for majority of sikh deaths since the 1970s, gal kattam!

I have read the book twice, I know exactly what is written in it. And about the sources lol. Fact is 200k Sikhs were not killed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, KhoonKaBadlaKhoon said:

I have read the book twice, I know exactly what is written in it. And about the sources lol. Fact is 200k Sikhs were not killed. 

Meh, whatever, and wat is ur estimated death count of sikhs from 1977-1995? this includes deaths of all over india.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ...   
    • He had proposed some decent policies. The way he was hounded out of power with certain allegations made me quite suspicious that he was a threat to the status quo from an economic perspective. Unfortunately, he seemed to relish courting a certain burgeoning minority from which he was selecting key shadow cabinet posts, lol, that the Indian demographic perceived to be a problem for understandable historical reasons. It will never be discussed openly (because it would cause the asking of certain awkward questions that the architects of the current cultural climate have deemed to be off the agenda), but the Indian vote was absolutely key in the previous election. The Red Wall of the North may have been the obvious reason for the Conservative win, but the Indian swing behind right-wing candidates in response to a potential sticky situation had the Islamo-Left come to power was a deciding factor IMO. I feel this is a phenomenon that is being discussed quite openly behind neo-liberal, leftwing (if we can pretend those two factions represent the same thing) closed doors, and it will be addressed implicitly in the future come election time.
    • Well, if I could afford a house worth a million pounds in the UK on a 30k pound salary, I should move over there!     I completely agree with you about the healthcare system and vacation time.   I think the reason the US doesn't have a universal healthcare system like the UK is simple. Here is something that I have noticed about social safety net programs: 1. It is EXTREMELY difficult to establish social safety net programs (it takes a lot of political power and will, and there is resistance from the wealthy and powerful, who launch media campaigns to scare people away from such programs and stigmatize them). 2. Once a social safety net program is established, people realize how much they like it, and it is EXTREMELY difficult for politicians to take it away. Even right-wing politicians will largely concede that they need to protect these programs.   Because of point 1, social safety net programs typically can only be established during extraordinary times when people are desperate or receptive to big changes for various reasons. The NHS was established in the post-war period, for example. The US made various strides in adding to the social safety net during the 1930s, 1964-66, and 2009-2010. But the politicians in power fell short of establishing an NHS-style system during these very brief windows of opportunity. Outside of these once-in-a-generation opportunities, it is virtually impossible to get anything done. Long story short: the UK left made better use of its once-in-a-generation opportunities than the American left.   Other than that, I see similar political problems in both countries. People keep voting for right-wing politicians who will screw them over economically instead of voting for people who are proposing new programs that could help them. Why? Right-wing politicians know how to scare people away from changes that could help them, and they know how to distract people by getting them to focus on culture war issues.   Americans keep having to choose between corporatist politicians. One corporatist party (Republicans) caters to racist whites who hate black people and immigrants. Another corporatist party (Democrats) pretends to be progressive, but focuses mostly on identity issues instead of economic issues (because their corporate masters don't mind them focusing on identity politics, but they do mind economic reforms that would make them pay more). In the UK, people generally have to make similar choice, but you had opportunities in 2017 and 2019 to vote for a Labour party that was actually proposing real, sweeping changes that would benefit the average person. Americans have not had that opportunity in my lifetime.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use