Why aren't British Sikhs as active/engaged as their Canadian counterparts in politics?

[YOYO29]

2 hours ago, GareebSikh1699 said:

Who oppresses the so-called lower castes in Pakistan?

 Answer = Muslims!

True .Since most Pakistanis are Muslims chances are Muslims will discriminate lower castes.In India it would be Hindus discriminating Dalits.In Punjab there would be upper caste Sikhs discriminating dalit Sikhs.

 

2 hours ago, GareebSikh1699 said:

Which religion has the highest percentage of people from previously oppressed but newly liberated backgrounds?

Gave detailed answer in previous post.

[Ranjeet01]

1 hour ago, MisterrSingh said:

True.

I know 2 well-to-do uk-based Sikh families who were ready to make the move to Canada a few years ago. I'm talking very well educated and wealthy people, not families living hand-to-mouth. Then all talk of it just fizzled out the more they looked into the social and communal aspects of it. It apparently became clear to them that it would almost be like a step backwards to Punjab.

In the UK one can still continue to avoid the Islamic encroachment to a certain degree, but Muslim or not, even some of our people's aadataa (in terms of Punjabi arrivals to Canada) are verging on absolute third-worldness. It's strange how the Sikh families who make their way into the UK after spending years in places like Spain, Italy, Bulgaria, etc., are a lot more subdued and sensible compared to the janta that goes straight from the pind to cities like Vancouver and Toronto. Makes one wonder what's going on, lol.

 

1984 is a watershed moment for Punjabi's in Canada.

Pre-84 immigration is very different from post-84. 

The pre-84 set are a different species from post-84 set. 

A lot of things happened where the host community in Canada acommodated a lot of things where multiculturalism was very much accepted. 

This is why pendus that come to Canada don't need to adapt.

Countries like Spain, Italy probably won't put up with a lot of stuff that pendus would get away with in Canada.

[TejS]

8 hours ago, YOYO29 said:

Actually I have read his book bloodied partition.Rawalpindi massacre started in March 1947.And before that there were sikh/muslim tensions in punjab.Remeber Shahedganj Gurudwara controversy in Lahore in 1935.Now Muslim refugees started to come into Pakistan in mid august.This clearly shows that Sikh leadership had this plan to get rid of Muslims of East Punjab all along.Otherwise I don't see why they waited for 5 months to take revenge of Rawalpindi massacre.If all the Sikh attacks in East Punjab were mere revenge attacks for Rawalpindi massacres then these attacks should have been spontaneous.Why wait for 5 months ? As you know these revenge attack/riot happen at the spur of moment you don't wait around months to take revenge.This clearly shows that Sikh leadership  had made up their mind to exterminate Muslims of East Punjab. Rawalpindi massacre just gave them excuse they were looking for.I have no doubt that with or without Rawalpindi massacres Muslims would have met the same fate.

Remember the Chota Ghallughara? Remember the Vadda Ghallughara? Remember the desecration of the Golden Temple by Massa Ranghar? Remember the demolition of the Golden Temple by the Muslim Durranis? Remember the Nankana massacre?

The above is a history of Muslims persecuting Sikhs for centuries. I'm not talking about a single year like 1947, but literally hundreds of years of constant persecution of Sikhs by Muslims. But you people love playing victim. Muslims have always been the aggressors. Whether you want to accept that or not is up to you, but that is the truth. Muslim Punjabi vastly outnumbered Sikh and Hindu Punjabi put together, what makes you think the Sikhs, who historically have never been the aggressors, all of sudden would have unnecessarily wanted to instigate such a large community in the first place? They didn't. 

And the Sikh retaliation was not due to the Rawalpindi massacre. It was the large scale killings that Muslims started in West Punjab during August 1947, something Ishtiaq Ahmed also states. It was then that Sikh/Hindus started large scale killings in return. The history is clear, Muslims started the killing, they started religious cleansing for a "Muslim homeland". It wasn't the other way around. The Muslim League proposed a country on the basis of religion first, not the Sikhs or Hindus.

Quote

Sikhs jathas must have thought that once the rest of East Punjab is emptied of Muslims these muslims will also migrate.

These are all your own assumptions based on your own prejudices. Sikhs do not think like Muslims. We do not go on cleansing regions in the name of religion. Sikhs are able to co-exist without labeling people as momins and kaffirs. 

Quote

Even Muslims of different sects are not safe.The less is said about the plight of other non Muslim minorities is better.I hope someday this madness will end.

No the more that is said, the more light is shed on the true nature of Pakistanis. You are an inhumane people to anyone that is non-Muslim.

[MisterrSingh]

1 hour ago, Ranjeet01 said:

Countries like Spain, Italy probably won't put up with a lot of stuff that pendus would get away with in Canada.

Speaking to Sikh guys who worked a few years in places like Italy before coming over to the UK, they say the same thing: whilst they weren't abused or mistreated, there was definitely a sense of low-key hostility or resentment towards them, on the part of the native host community, for almost having the temerity to come to those aforementioned European countries for which non-white immigration is a relatively recent phenomenon. It's certainly an eye-opener.

[TejS]

8 hours ago, YOYO29 said:

Nah I said what i meant.Read it again.Islam has a history of 1000 years in Sub continent.South Asian Islam is way different than Arab,Turkish islam.

South Asian Islam is just Persian Islam haha. It's still not your own culture. 

Quote

You speak as if you have done survey of 300 million Arabs.Besides I don't care how someone else view me.You should be worried about the discrimination your mazhabi sikh face in punjab. Muslims should be least of your worries.

I don't need to do a survey of all Arabs, when I can just look at their current traditions. Arabs are a very proud people unlike South Asian Muslims, they hate appropriating other people's cultures to the extent that they refuse to wear things such as jeans and collared shirts in their lands. They believe in blood purity and view themselves as the progenitors of Islam. 

If you go through my post history, you'll realize I don't talk much about Muslims, and the only reason I'm even having this discussion is because you, a Muslim, is arguing away with misinformation on a Sikh forum. I don't even understand what a Muslim is doing on a Sikh forum in the first place lol! You should be worried about Islamic extremism, killing of non-Muslims in Pakistan, discrimination of low caste Muslims in South Asia than be worried about Sikhs. Sikhs and Sikh issues should be the least of your worries as well, so adiós .

[TejS]

7 hours ago, YOYO29 said:

Tell me when was the last time you heard about lower caste Muslims denied entry into Mosque ?

Yes, here: https://books.google.ca/books?id=Q-F07ALiguEC&pg=PA268&lpg=PA268&dq=separate+mosque+for+dalits&source=bl&ots=V0F1aQZXaA&sig=FIYfVj0W3BAlgoLEO8IixLo0lTo&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjYn5jd7qvcAhVY1IMKHfaqCJcQ6AEIiwEwDg#v=onepage&q=separate mosque for dalits&f=false

You guys are even worse that you discriminate amongst the dead:

http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/mar/06bihar.htm

[TejS]

7 hours ago, YOYO29 said:

Never claimed to be egalitarian.Caste system in a reality in south Asia.Nobdoy denies that.It's you people who criticize hindus and muslims for caste system yet turn a blind eye towards the caste system in your own community.

Not really. We criticize Hindus and Muslims for their rituals. Yes, we are casteless by scripture, but of course there are issues in practice. With more education that will improve. Rituals ordained in scripture cannot though. 

Quote

And I would like to see your upper castes marry your daughters to Sikh low caste.Like I said countless times that you should not throw stones when you live in a glass house.Let me know when you have all finished caste system in your own community then we will talk about ours.

Oh, marriages like those have happened. Multiple times. The same can't be said for Muslims. Dude, you're the one initiating this conversation, you are the one that started throwing stones, but I'm not surprised. 

Quote

It was new to me.My experience is based on Pakistani mosques where i did not witness any of caste discrimination.

Well, you learn something new everyday. 

[TejS]

7 hours ago, YOYO29 said:

Emotional attachment.It's been centuries since we converted to Islam.I would prefer to stay this way.

Nice. Have fun propagating Arab culture for Arabs while being ridiculed by them. 

7 hours ago, YOYO29 said:

Like I said south asian islam is differnt from arab iranian turkish islam.But yes we do have some aspects of Arab culture visible in Pakistan which should not be a surprise as Islam was created by an Arab.Just like some convert Sikhs from western backgrounds will like Sikh Punjabi culture.Some even changed their western names to Sikh Indian names.So,yes when a religion is developed/created by some ethnic group it will definitely have impact on it and this impact will be visible wherever that religion goes.

South Asian Islam is basically Persian Islam. From the Sufi shrines to the prayer practices, it's all been taken from Persia. 

[Ranjeet01]

26 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

Speaking to Sikh guys who worked a few years in places like Italy before coming over to the UK, they say the same thing: whilst they weren't abused or mistreated, there was definitely a sense of low-key hostility or resentment towards them, on the part of the native host community, for almost having the temerity to come to those aforementioned European countries for which non-white immigration is a relatively recent phenomenon. It's certainly an eye-opener.

These types of countries are only transit countries.

The goal is to get citizenship and then move to the northern EU countries. 

The resentment in part  from the local Italians can be attributed from all the Mediterranean crossings with boats regularly capsizing from Libya. 

Their country has been swamped. 

 

[proactive]

7 hours ago, YOYO29 said:

Actually I have read his book bloodied partition.Rawalpindi massacre started in March 1947.And before that there were sikh/muslim tensions in punjab.Remeber Shahedganj Gurudwara controversy in Lahore in 1935.Now Muslim refugees started to come into Pakistan in mid august.This clearly shows that Sikh leadership had this plan to get rid of Muslims of East Punjab all along.Otherwise I don't see why they waited for 5 months to take revenge of Rawalpindi massacre.If all the Sikh attacks in East Punjab were mere revenge attacks for Rawalpindi massacres then these attacks should have been spontaneous.Why wait for 5 months ? As you know these revenge attack/riot happen at the spur of moment you don't wait around months to take revenge.This clearly shows that Sikh leadership  had made up their mind to exterminate Muslims of East Punjab. Rawalpindi massacre just gave them excuse they were looking for.I have no doubt that with or without Rawalpindi massacres Muslims would have met the same fate.

 

Because they were living in a State ruled by a Muslim nawab. Plus they were well armed compared to Muslims in Sikh states who were sitting ducks.Nawab of malerkotla had good relations with Sikh ruler of Patiala .Then there was old history i.e haa da naara by sher khan.So all these factors saved their lives.Sikhs jathas must have thought that once the rest of East Punjab is emptied of Muslims these muslims will also migrate.

 

Even Muslims of different sects are not safe.The less is said about the plight of other non Muslim minorities is better.I hope someday this madness will end.

There would have been no violence from Sikhs had there been no Rawalpindi violence. The Rawalpindi violence started in the city where Sikhs and Hindus were equal in number to Muslims and were well armed. Being unable to massacre the Sikhs and Hindus in Rawalpindi the cowardly Muslim mobs moved to attack the smaller Sikh population in the villages. Sikhs remember the Muslim atrocities of the 18th century so a six month period is nothing. Even some Muslim politicians were worried that the Rawalpindi violence would lead to Sikh retaliation at some stage. You are right that the Sikhs did not retaliate straightway but that was because there still some chance of Pakistan being stopped. When it became clear that Pakistan would become a reality and that Sikhs in Pakistan would be sitting ducks and face a daily Rawalpindi, then a decision was made In light of the Muslim violence in west Punjab that Sikhs needed to clear East Punjab of Muslims. The Sikh leadership would have been grossly negligent if they did not take any action to provide space for the Sikhs fleeing Pakistan. After Rawalpindi thousands of Sikhs had fled to East Punjab mainly Patiala state. So in effect the Muslims had ethnically cleansed the Sikhs out of Rawalpindi so it is natural that given the stories that these refugee Sikhs would have retold to Sikhs in Patiala state then the anti-Muslim violence was worst in Patiala after partition. The Sikh decision to clear the Muslims was in response to the Muslim ethnic cleansing of Sikhs six months before partition. If you think that the much wealthier and economically active Sikhs and Hindus would have been allowed to retain their position in Pakistan then you are fooling no one. Pakistan was sold to the Muslim masses as a place where the most downtrodden Muslim would suddenly became a nawab and would lord over the Hindu industrialists and the Sikh landlords. The Sikh leadership understood what Pakistan meant for the minorities especially them so they saw to it that they enacted a greater Rawalpindi in East Punjab then had been visited on them six months before. 

What the East Punjab violence shows is how the Muslim elites created a Pakistan for their interests and having enacted a massacre of Sikhs were then unable to prepare the East Punjab Muslims for the revenge that the Sikhs were sure to enact. This shows the failure of Muslim leadership and how little they cared for the East Punjab Muslims. The East Punjab Muslims who in many places attempted to attack Sikhs and Hindus in areas where the Muslims were in a majority only made the decision to evict them all the more urgent. The Sikhs and Hindus of Lahore had also been ethnically cleansed in July so it was natural that the East Punjab Muslims would also be evicted.

You can see what a shythole Pakistan is for the minorities and where the cult of Islam not only kills others but also kills its own at regular intervals. The Sikhs made the correct decision not to have anything to do with Pakistan. It is impossible for non-Muslims to live a life of respect in a Muslim country. Even you have admitted that different sects of Muslims are not safe in a Muslim state. 

The only mistake the Sikh leadership made was that they didn't use their manpower in term of military experience and the base of the Sikh states  to carve out Khalistan.