Jump to content

Some home truths for Ravi Singh Khalsa Aid


Recommended Posts

On 4/4/2022 at 8:14 AM, proactive said:

For years there was never a Punjabi radio station, then one started and a few years later there were nearly a dozen. The same happened with the satellite channel, Sikh channel started and then another channel came up and then another etc. This is pointless, what is needed is 1 Sikh channel or two channels, 1 in Punjabi and the other in English for the youth and for parchar. 

What would be best would be to have these channels and organizations under the direction of the Akal Takhat, like the various Catholics charities, missions, orders and monasteries are under the control of the Vatican, in some way or another.

But we are far to unorganized and divided for that.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 273
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The religion that breeds extremism is defended and protected from being labelled as such by a certain brand of SIKH, but Sikhs advocating for self-interests are labelled as budding... terrorists and e

The philosophy on which he bases his charity work is inconsistent at best. It panders to a particular minority that doesn't require "Khalsa aid" because the Ummah is more than capable of providing for

Yes but people take advantage of our generosity, it can't all be one way traffic.

Posted Images

5 hours ago, BhForce said:

What would be best would be to have these channels and organizations under the direction of the Akal Takhat, like the various Catholics charities, missions, orders and monasteries are under the control of the Vatican, in some way or another.

But we are far to unorganized and divided for that.

And akal takht is free? Nope everything is under control of India. It might seem to us that our gurudwaras and organizations are freee but they are not. They have been infiltrated at every level. Indians and their intelligence agencies are in different countries and keep eyes on us Sikhs everywhere. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, proudkaur21 said:

And akal takht is free? Nope everything is under control of India.

Badals right..? To be more specific 

4 hours ago, proudkaur21 said:

. They have been infiltrated at every level. Indians and their intelligence agencies are in different countries and keep eyes on us Sikhs everywhere. 

Yes and No...because they'd been caught in Germany years ago spying on Sikhs and arrested ....also most Gurudwaras have pics of Sant Ji and Shaeedes and years ago they'd come with their news channels and be like 'omg Khalistani in UK Gurudwaras' but they stopped because they know they have no control over Sikhs in the West and their views..however i know in Canada yrs ago they put pic of  pammer and others who were under terrorists in Canada and that caught alot of heat ..this is down to mostly lack of intellects leadership in our panth...we need Deep Sidhu intellects leadership

But if they get caught spying then you can take legal action 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kau89r8 said:

Badals right..? To be more specific 

Yes and No...because they'd been caught in Germany years ago spying on Sikhs and arrested ....also most Gurudwaras have pics of Sant Ji and Shaeedes and years ago they'd come with their news channels and be like 'omg Khalistani in UK Gurudwaras' but they stopped because they know they have no control over Sikhs in the West and their views..however i know in Canada yrs ago they put pic of  pammer and others who were under terrorists in Canada and that caught alot of heat ..this is down to mostly lack of intellects leadership in our panth...we need Deep Sidhu intellects leadership

But if they get caught spying then you can take legal action 

These countries trade with India. I dont know if they would collude with the Indian govt against us. Like can we guarantee it would not happen? Just see jaggi. I dont trust anyone anymore. Money makes the world go round.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

Amusing to hear this when there's upcoming non-Congress Indian intellectuals who are arguing the same about their own Hindu temples not being free.

There's apparently certain laws embedded in Indian legislation that prioritise secularism at the expense of the integrity and autonomy of Hindu religious practices, i.e. the immediate surrounding land on which Hindu temples are built in India isn't owned by the outfit that runs the day-to-day matters of the temple. That's why you get Muslims able to buy beef processing factories on that same land in order to pi55 off these Hindus. And we all know that in a country where secularism is publicly espoused while being home to millions of a specific sand-dwelling religion and its followers, secularism will lead to Islamisation if left unchecked. Eventually, that beef factory will become a mosque. That's the plan.

Open your eyes to the nuance. Don't get your ideas on India and politics from uncles sipping on tea, sharing conspiracy theories from the 80s and 90s in the gurdwara langar hall.

You see the similar tactics employed in the UK.

Wherever there is a muslim owned businesses, they tend to have a prayer room attached to it and it becomes a defacto mosque.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Ranjeet01 said:

You see the similar tactics employed in the UK.

Wherever there is a muslim owned businesses, they tend to have a prayer room attached to it and it becomes a defacto mosque.

It does beg the question regarding India of all places: why would Indian law create a backdoor for a group such as Muslims to almost colonise a land (over the imperceptible course of decades) through legislation that was originally created, supposedly, as part of a secular constitution? Who or what decided that was a good idea, and more importantly why?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

It does beg the question regarding India of all places: why would Indian law create a backdoor for a group such as Muslims to almost colonise a land (over the imperceptible course of decades) through legislation that was originally created, supposedly, as part of a secular constitution? Who or what decided that was a good idea, and more importantly why?

Secularism in India does not mean the same thing that we know it as the west

There is a reason in India Secular is called Sickular. 

In the west, Secularism means separation of religion and state. In India it means separation of Hindu and state.

The Indian secularists are the dhimmis. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Ranjeet01 said:

In the west, Secularism means separation of religion and state. In India it means separation of Hindu and state.

The Indian secularists are the dhimmis. 

I've come to accept, on principle, this isn't a negative once the shackles of secular and enlightenment emotional blackmail is discarded.

In a hypothetical Sikh state, would you want these same dhimmis advocating for a secular Sikh state that will - 100+ years in the future - come to resemble an Islamic or non-Sikh land? There's no point in any of the struggle if a group just breeds their way into demographic change.

Eventually, a government will need to stand up and say, "We don't want ANY of this particular religion / group in this country. We don't wish you any harm, but you can't come in, and those who are already here need to leave." There's no other possible way to overcome this issue in a peaceful way before letting the "problem" grow roots.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

We don't wish you any harm, but you can't come in, and those who are already here need to leave."

How would you get rid of people who refuse to go? 

This is actually a pertinent question in europe, because if things do get more right wing, some people  might face a similar circumstance in future. 

Plus it's not like intimidating people into leaving wasn't tried in the UK just a few decades ago. I saw it with my own eyes. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, dallysingh101 said:

How would you get rid of people who refuse to go? 

This is actually a pertinent question in europe, because if things do get more right wing, some people  might face a similar circumstance in future. 

Plus it's not like intimidating people into leaving wasn't tried in the UK just a few decades ago. I saw it with my own eyes. 

They should have just not let Muslims enter. Now they are done for. Same mistake low iq Sikh liberals have been making. I guess western euors didn't have a taste of Islam yet unlike Southern Euros. They are dying to see what it feels like to live under sharia so let it be. We should worry about our own land.

  • Like 1
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...

  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use