India's Guilty Secret

[13Mirch 1,149]

La Noche Triste

 

Pav Singh’s 1984: India’s Guilty Secret and the continuing Sikh night of sorrows.

Is catastrophe a precursor to genocide or is genocide a spontaneous outburst of violence- essentially a riot? The misnomer of riot to veil genocide is nowhere more evident than in the Indian state’s treatment of the anti-Sikh pogroms of November 1984. Whereas the political-cum-social discourse of the majority community has condensed the event into the misbranded Delhi Riots, for the survivors they were a well-executed genocide. It is axiomatic that justice delayed is justice denied; Pav Singh in his 1984: India’s Guilty Secrethowever goes a step further- on the basis of the survivors’ accounts which he recounts lucidly- Singh contends that November was by no means a riot. It was the culmination of a long drawn out plan to inflict such wounds on the Sikh psyche that the community would never again agitate for civil rights in the Indian union, and assimilate into the greater neo-Hindu political fold (Hindutva). Radical, in scope, 1984 has swiftly dethroned existing analyses of that apocalyptic November and portends change in the global perception of genocide.  

1984, from the onset, does not exercise restraint. It is vivid in it’s recounting of the horrors which the Sikhs faced in the aftermath of Prime Minister Indra Gandhi’s assassination. Whereas the mass rapes of Sikh girls and women have often been downplayed in the works of Khushwant Singh and Nayer, Pav Singh elects to focus on how it was employed as a tool to humiliate Sikh males before they were doused in kerosene and set on fire. His almost calm narration of events is enough to render even the most staunch of readers chilled. A fourteen year old boy is forced to witness the gang-rape of his mother; a whole family is hurled out of their residence to witness their daughters being stripped nude, urinated upon and then raped by hordes of mourners (as consecutive political accounts would refer to the culprits). Sikh males are set alight whereas groups of Sikh women are rounded up and held outside Delhi in a semi-concentration camp where they are continually violated. The myth that only Sikh males were targeted is effortlessly effaced by Pav Singh who dedicates an entire chapter to the sexual atrocities suffered by Sikh women. The attitude of doctors, police, and general society towards the victims of rape are also scrutinized. Elements of all three would be instrumental in evicting victims from aid camps and returning them to their prior locii which, in most cases, would be in ruins. The fortunate would escape; the unfortunate would once again fall into the hands of their violators. 

Another complex facet, of the November pogroms, which has hitherto been obscured is what happened to the Sikh policemen and military personnel in Delhi? 1984 unabashedly substantiates, based on official documentation, how all Sikh serving personnel in Delhi were ordered to take leave in the early hours of November 1st ’84. Most would have had no idea, other than that Indra Gandhi had been gunned down by her Sikh bodyguard duo the night before, of the inferno which awaited them outside their official precincts. Weaponless, they would have walked straight into effective death traps. Military personnel, serving or otherwise, would have fallen prey to armed mobs on the nation’s railway network. Were Sikhs only targeted at train stops? Pav Singh systematically exposes this canard, again relying on official documentation, to evidence that at least forty-six unauthorized train stops were made which allowed assembled mobs to slay all Sikhs on board.  

For Sikhs, the primacy of Pav Singh’s work hinges on three crucial factors:

1.) It effectively refutes the misnomer of riot.

2.) Whilst paying tribute to the few brave souls who risked life and limb to save Sikhs, it also depicts the callousness of politicians, police and neighbors who betrayed the Sikhs by rendering them defenseless in the face of bloodthirsty mobs.

3.) It refutes the theory of Delhi Riots. Detailed maps provide evidence of sanguinary pogroms executed in Gujrat, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Assam, West Bengal and Agartala. 

Candid, impenitent and critical- Pav Singh’s 1984 is radical in it’s approach to the November pogroms. Though sections of the Indian media are criticizing Singh, his work should be judged with impartiality; India’s Guilty Secret not only recounts the atrocities inflicted on the Sikhs, but also exposes the political/social cohesion via which the events of November ’84 transpired. The theory of Nanak Jayanti, an alleged rumor which posits that the pogroms were intended for execution on the birth celebrations of Guru Nanak Dev Ji (founder of the Sikh faith) for maximum damage, is also analyzed by Singh. Victim statements are taken into account which depict the conditions outside Punjab in the aftermath of the ill-construed Operation Bluestar. Sikh businesses and residences were often transcribed with a S symbol in the lead-up to November; on the night of 31st October teams were employed to scour several cities in a mission to place this S on all Sikh locations. On the 1st of November the grim significance of this symbol would become transparent as mobs  marched on all such identified locations.  Nanak Jayanti, caught out by Gandhi’s demise, had been implemented earlier to teach the troublesome Sikhs a bloody lesson.   

What of the judiciary and the aftermath? Singh, in a brief list, provides an exposition of all the failed commissions which attempted to tackle November ’84 but failed to provide even token justice for the victims. He ends on a poignant note; the survivors of ’84, forgotten by all, are shown as suffering from the trauma of the atrocities inflicted upon them. The state is continually failing in it’s mandate to provide them justice; the social discourse veils their trauma whereas the same ideology which preyed upon them is today gaining ground nationwide. Justice delayed is justice denied, justice denied is justice perverted.   

https://tisarpanthdotcom.wordpress.com/2018/02/25/la-noche-triste/

 

[Premi5 150]

Good reviews on Amazon

[MisterrSingh 3,231]

This is the kind of activism that works in this day and age. Now expect various Indian sympathisers - or paid agents - in the western press to inexplicably push a few anti-Sikh stories into the foreground to counter any potential good this work might do.

There's one line that's trotted out whenever there's a conversation of India's mistreatment of Sikhs, and it's, "If India was anti-Sikh, why was a Sikh elected as Prime Minister?" It's a completely reductive argument that conveniently bypasses countless instances in history where a few select ambitious individuals (who lack any wider sense of affinity for the plight of their brethren) from within a "troublesome" minority community are purposefully selected and elevated to key positions in the majority's administration in order to muddy the waters and give the impression to outsiders that there is no systemic discrimination. There were Jews in Germany who collaborated with the Nazis for business reasons and for their own selfish purposes, and that's arguably the most concise and striking example to offer someone who's peddling Indian propaganda about Manmohan Singh. This is before we even get into the argument of the turban not signifying religious adherence, as much as being white doesn't denote a devotion for Christianity.

 

Edited February 25, 2018 by MisterrSingh

[GurjantGnostic 525]

6 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

"If India was anti-Sikh, why was a Sikh elected as Prime Minister?"

Yeah. That's like saying America isn't knee deep in racists because Obama was President. 

Yet made clear in the very next election....and in some way or another every day for the last 400 years....

[13Mirch 1,149]

20 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

This is the kind of activism that works in this day and age. Now expect various Indian sympathisers - or paid agents - in the western press to inexplicably push a few anti-Sikh stories into the foreground to counter any potential good this work might do.

There's one line that's trotted out whenever there's a conversation of India's mistreatment of Sikhs, and it's, "If India was anti-Sikh, why was a Sikh elected as Prime Minister?" It's a completely reductive argument that conveniently bypasses countless instances in history where a few select ambitious individuals (who lack any wider sense of affinity for the plight of their brethren) from within a "troublesome" minority community are purposefully selected and elevated to key positions in the majority's administration in order to muddy the waters and give the impression to outsiders that there is no systemic discrimination. There were Jews in Germany who collaborated with the Nazis for business reasons and for their own selfish purposes, and that's arguably the most concise and striking example to offer someone who's peddling Indian propaganda about Manmohan Singh. This is before we even get into the argument of the turban not signifying religious adherence, as much as being white doesn't denote a devotion for Christianity.

 

For Indians to be pushing this line of reasoning is hypocritical. Pick up any text book on the so-called British Atrocities and you will see that at least several chapters are entitled to demeaning traitors who acquired prominence with the white man by betraying the black.  

[MisterrSingh 3,231]

27 minutes ago, 13Mirch said:

For Indians to be pushing this line of reasoning is hypocritical. Pick up any text book on the so-called British Atrocities and you will see that at least several chapters are entitled to demeaning traitors who acquired prominence with the white man by betraying the black.  

It's not just Indians who play these games, sometimes it's our own people and others, such as the British and Americans, who've been conditioned to believe these lies. They point to the United Nations hearing when Manmohan Singh was directly asked whether India had purposefully targeted Sikhs for elimination during the 80's and 90's, and his reply in the negative apparently settles all arguments, because "one of our own" categorically denied such a thing took place, therefore it must be true(!). 

When going toe to toe with such people for whom facts and truths can conveniently assume many forms dependent on the time of the day, lol, you've got to be prepared with as many direct and easily relatable comparisons that they simply cannot refute. The Nazi and Jew collaboration angle is perhaps one of the most suitable, because of the West's continued obsession with Hitler and his regime. It's a language they understand, because it's the only one they speak. Same with the previously identified Obama example. "Did racism suddenly evaporate in the United States when the Obamas made the White House their home?" Too many are all too eager to defend that which should never be defended for their own vested interests. The facts are alien to such people. Ideology and politics are the only things that matter to these people.  The only weapon that's effective in such moments is the truth.

Edited February 26, 2018 by MisterrSingh

[13Mirch 1,149]

2 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

It's not just Indians who play these games, sometimes it's our own people and others, such as the British and Americans, who've been conditioned to believe these lies. They point to the United Nations hearing when Manmohan Singh was directly asked whether India had purposefully targeted Sikhs for elimination during the 80's and 90's, and his reply in the negative apparently settles all arguments, because "one of our own" categorically denied such a thing took place, therefore it must be true(!). 

When going toe to toe with such people for whom facts and truths can conveniently assume many forms dependent on the time of the day, lol, you've got to be prepared with as many direct and easily identifiable comparisons that they simply cannot refute. The Nazi and Jew collaboration angle is perhaps one of the most suitable, because of the West's continued obsession with Hitler and his regime. It's a language they understand, because it's the only one they speak. Same with the previously identified Obama example. "Did racism suddenly evaporate in the United States when the Obamas made the White House their home?" Too many are all too eager to defend that which should never be defended for their own vested interests. The facts are alien to such people. Ideology and politics are the only things that matter to these people.  The only weapon that's effective in such moments is the truth.

Speaking of which:

 

They also have some of Santa Singh Nihang bowing to Rajiv Gandhi- will try finding those as well. 

 

 

[InderjitS 1,234]

On the subject of Des Pardes and after the professional hit on Purewal due to his refusal to stop publishing weekly pictures of shaheeds and reporting on the atrocities, did the police brush it under the carpet? 

[13Mirch 1,149]

37 minutes ago, InderjitS said:

On the subject of Des Pardes and after the professional hit on Purewal due to his refusal to stop publishing weekly pictures of shaheeds and reporting on the atrocities, did the police brush it under the carpet? 

Care to elaborate further?

[InderjitS 1,234]

11 hours ago, 13Mirch said:

Care to elaborate further?

There are theories that he was killed by Kharkoos, GOI (this was the word on the street back then), due to his publication on the front cover of Shaheed Singhs, others say it was because he knew too much about the Air India bomb plot or that he started digging up dirt on the likes of Jasbir Singh Rode misusing funds when he was head of ISYF. I know for a fact  he had received death threats in advance of him being killed. Here are some old pics:

 

[proactive 1,525]

On 2/26/2018 at 7:11 AM, MisterrSingh said:

It's not just Indians who play these games, sometimes it's our own people and others, such as the British and Americans, who've been conditioned to believe these lies. They point to the United Nations hearing when Manmohan Singh was directly asked whether India had purposefully targeted Sikhs for elimination during the 80's and 90's, and his reply in the negative apparently settles all arguments, because "one of our own" categorically denied such a thing took place, therefore it must be true(!). 

When going toe to toe with such people for whom facts and truths can conveniently assume many forms dependent on the time of the day, lol, you've got to be prepared with as many direct and easily relatable comparisons that they simply cannot refute. The Nazi and Jew collaboration angle is perhaps one of the most suitable, because of the West's continued obsession with Hitler and his regime. It's a language they understand, because it's the only one they speak. Same with the previously identified Obama example. "Did racism suddenly evaporate in the United States when the Obamas made the White House their home?" Too many are all too eager to defend that which should never be defended for their own vested interests. The facts are alien to such people. Ideology and politics are the only things that matter to these people.  The only weapon that's effective in such moments is the truth.

Manmohan Singh belongs to that small coterie of essentially keshadhari Hindus who would sell their own mothers to get power. This coterie included Zail Singh, Khushwant Singh and the Badals etc. Manmohan Singh served a useful purpose to the Hindu ruling elite in that having a visible 'Sikh' could be used to effectively deny that Sikhs were being discriminated against. I am in total agreement with you that we need to present MS in terms that the west understand. The best example would be Vidkun Quisling. a traitor who was used and allowed himself to be used by the Nazis to rule occupied Norway during WW2. His name is now a byword for traitor. He was executed by the Norway govt in 1945. Another example are those British the most prominent being the former King Edward VIII who is said to have stated before the Blitz began that peace between Britain and Germany would come once Britain was effectively bombed by Germany. Traitors exist in all nations and among all communities. The most effective response to those who use Manmohan Singh as an example of Sikhs being treated fairly in India is ask whether the other party is aware that had Hitler invaded Britain in 1940 there would literally have been thousands of British people such as the members of Mosely's British union of fascists who numbered over over 20000 in 1939 who would betrayed their country to be a part of Hitler's occupation government.