Jump to content

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


TejS
 Share

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, proactive said:

Why do they fight ISIS? Is it because ISIS is bringing dishonor to their religion by attacking non-Muslims and keeping their women as sex slaves? Where is the moral outrage against ISIS among Muslims? The fight against Islamic State comes from a number of disparate groups. One are the Shias who have religious differences with ISIS. The other are the Kurds who have political and social differences with ISIS. The Sunni that fight ISIS do so for political reasons. None is fighting ISIS because ISIS is attacking non-Muslims and keeping their women as sex slaves. What greater power could there be to galvanize the Muslim world and unite it to fight ISIS than to point out that their attacks on non-Muslims and keeping sex slaves is totally contrary to the teachings of Mohammed. BUT the problem is that ISIS are doing exactly what Mohammed did. 

well muslims who know about isil do condemn ISIL because most muslims are of the view that what ISIL does is against Islam.Some don't know anything on ISIL even I got to know about ISIL very late and that too when i was debating with an indian on facebook.I had no idea that isil is terrorist organization.I thought he was talking about our spy agency ISI lolz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, YOYO29 said:

Absolutely.You just love to generlize people.Should I also generlize the entire Sikh community for dicrmination some black sikhs face by your poeple in canadian gurudwara.i don't remeber that black sikhs name who made a video how he was discrminated in gurudwara. Should all sikhs be held accountable for this discrimination just like you love to make sweeping statments about arabs and other muslims ? 

 

Nothing wrong about knowing other people.There are sikhs on Muslim forums.Nothing wrong with that.

 

Ever thought of applying your advice on yourself ? if you read this thread from the start you will know who brought Muslims into that and started bringing other Muslim groups and their alleged discrimination into it and when i talked same discrimination happening right under your nose it did not sit well with you.Well,next time you wanna bring up discrimination in other groups you better make sure that you don't do any of this in your own home.

 

Would you say the same to those African converts and others who change their names to Sikh Indian ones ? Would they be promoting Sikh Indian Punjabi culture ? I don't understand your fixation on Arabs.Every religion is gonna have elements of native culture where it developed.

IT's not 'sikh punjabi' it is just sikh culture to have a name selected in the sikh manner , to do prayers in the sikh way and to live in the sikh manner.Fact is, you have been generalising majorly about a situation you were not alive for . Pakistani bias will come into your world view and you will try to accuse others without admitting the fault of the violence on muslim part that is hardly open and honest dialogue . Anyway , people who are known to be lionising Aurangzeb don't need to teach me history of my ancestors , ta.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this tripe will come to an end soon when WW3 Kicks off

I hope Tony Blair and his destruction of Iraq are happy with the complete destruction of the world, only decent people will remain when 95 percent of the land is submerged in water

JAM KAAL WILL BATTER THE GREEDY 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, YOYO29 said:

Fine !! now tell me why we don't see the same level of minority migration in Bengal ? If Muslims were so evil why they did not cleanse the East Bengal of minorities like they did in West Punjab.

 

Just a few points on this bro.

The Muslims did try to cleanse Eastern Bengal of HIndus. Read up on the Noakhali (1946) riots. Thousands of Hindus were killed and thousands of women were raped/abducted. What then held back the Bengali Muslims was the Hindu reaction in Bihar, where in revenge the Hindus attacked the Muslim community. But after Noakhali the Hindus were too fearful to return  to those districts.

 

Secondly the HIndu Mahasabha were very keen to kill Muslims but gandhi went to Bengal and stopped them. The mahasabha leaders were furious with his turning up but couldn't do anything. The same reason why the Muslims of delhi survived. They were living in camps in preparation for evacuation to Pakistan. They regularly came under attack from Sikhs (esp those who had come from W Panjab) and Hindus. Gandhi prevented the further killings of these muslims and they were allowed to stay in delhi. .

 

22 hours ago, YOYO29 said:

.There is reason that Muslim reaction was severe in West Punjab than in east Bengal which still has 10% minority population.

 

There is one very good reason of this. In Eastern Bengal the Hindus communities assets were nothing special. The Muslims on an economic level held their own. However in western Panjab, the Sikhs held huge amounts of lands whereas the Hindus controlled the banking and commerce. The major hospitals/clinics/colleges were also owned by Hindus. By leaving these in control of the non-Muslims what would be the point of making Pakistan? Pakistan was made to remove the Hindu moneylender and to acquire huge expanses of farmland. If there had been no removal of Sikhs/Hindus in W Panjab, the Muslims would have not benefitted even by the creation of Pakistan.

 

22 hours ago, YOYO29 said:

.Both Bengals still have significant number of minorities. This is in clear contrast to Punjab.Why do you think Punjab situation was worse than Bengal ?

 

If you read about Bengali history as I have started doing, you will soon realise that these figures went down quite soon after partition. In 1950 and 64 there were anti-Hindu riots and thousands of Hindus fled to India. However in 1971 after Pakistan army action in Bengal, millions of Hindus fled, and thousands were killed as they were believed to be the inspiration for Bengali separation from Pakistan. The Hindu population of East Pakistan (E Bengal) was at 30% in 1947 but is only around 8-9% now.

 

22 hours ago, YOYO29 said:

 This is in clear contrast to Punjab.Why do you think Punjab situation was worse than Bengal ?

 

Because the Sikhs esp, were adamant they could not live under Muslim rule, and in a country controlled by the partisan Muslim League. The Muslim league had gone against its very own principle of weighted leverage for minorities wherever they were a minority themselves but refused to support the Sikhs on the same principle in Panjab. Plus one of the greatest failures of the ML was to not see that what they themselves feared in Hindustan (being outnumbered by different religion) the Panjabi Sikhs and Hindus feared the same in Pakistan.

 

22 hours ago, YOYO29 said:

Only thing I can think of is that Sikh leadership did not want to have their community permanently cut into half in both countries.So they decided to clear east Punjab of Muslims so that west Punjabi Sikhs could be brought and settled in there.Naturally Muslims followed suit and cleared West Punjab of Sikhs and Hindus to make room for East Punjabi Muslims.

 

No. Read above and you will see that this was not the case at all.  The Dawn newspaper had been printing that the removal of the HIndus and Sikhs was neccesssary for the survival of the Muslims before partition had been completed. The Hindus of Lahore were a soft touch. They were weak. They offered no danger to anyone physically but because of the assets ( basically everything of comercial value in Lahore) they held, they needed to go. The Sikhs owned great swathes of the best and valuable lands in W Panjab. But being in a minority they had to go.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@jkvlondon 
If you have been watching this thread whole time you would know that it was your people who started to categorize Muslims on the basis of social order (which is true to some extent) to which i suggested that you too discriminant your people in your own home state which seems to have hurt their feelings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, chatanga1 said:

If you read about Bengali history as I have started doing, you will soon realise that these figures went down quite soon after partition.

I was talking about the scale of violence in Bengal at partition time like in Punjab.I know Hindu population started to decline in east Pak (as shown in the table below) after the partition as West Pakistani establishment began to see them as behind Bengali Nationalism.1964 riots were related to Hazratbal shrine in sri nagar where hair of prophet was stolen from mausoleum .

bengal.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, chatanga1 said:

Pakistan was made to remove the Hindu moneylender and to acquire huge expanses of farmland. If there had been no removal of Sikhs/Hindus in W Panjab, the Muslims would have not benefitted even by the creation of Pakistan.

If that was the case then just like Nehru who did away with feudalism in India same thing could have been done to rich sikh and hindu land lords who have grabbed the land during ranjit sing's and British times at the expanse of Muslims.This land could have been given to the tenants. All it required was legislation by newly parliament.There was no need for all the bloodshed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, YOYO29 said:

@jkvlondon 
If you have been watching this thread whole time you would know that it was your people who started to categorize Muslims on the basis of social order (which is true to some extent) to which i suggested that you too discriminant your people in your own home state which seems to have hurt their feelings.

look the point is if we take the message that division based on birth is harsh and unnecessary and we develop compassion both for those people and refuse to play the demeaning game society will progress on both sides of the border . The reason progress is wanting in both countries is the lack of expectation of good coming from the poor downtrodden masses.

I would encourage Muslims and Sikhs  to understand that if people believe in the Creator  or not is not our job to judge or punish if you respect Waheguru/Allah/God's will . It is Allah's Raza that creation is diverse and beautiful , full of potential it our job as Humans to manifest the love Waheguru has for us to all creation by fair and complete justice to all, dignity of honest work and support when times are hard from all of us . This rancour serves the Hindu majority most just as it did in 47 , they stirred the pot and we paid the price. Leave their crappy caste mentality and encourage people to drop their mental limitations and strive hard for a better society.

Link to comment
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...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use