Jump to content

khalistan


are you in favour of khalistan?  

43 members have voted

  1. 1. are you in favour of khalistan?

    • Yes
      23
    • No
      7
    • Maybe
      10


Recommended Posts

Bibi Jessika Jeeo

Atleast with a separate Government… our own federal government… we wont have a non-Sikh army attacking Harimandhir Sahib like the Hindus did in 1984.

Sorry, but your comment does not reflect what a separate government will do today. I think a separate government back in 1984 would not have prevented an attack on Harimandhir Sahib because it was used as a headquarters for Sikh militants (stupid idea for basing their HQ at our holy shrine)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 38
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

i heard the sikhs said no to khalistan after getting independance from england. they said they would like to stick with the rest of india like brothers. i think we need more land for sure but i'm not sure about what the separate government plans to change
Sikhs were betrayed and left all alone during brit/india/pak dividing stuff during late 40's.. What's the reality? British strongly favored Sikhs to take their sep. land. They even offered Peace keeping brit troops (18,000 +) all around punjab just for security... But Clever guys like nehru/ghandi fooled sikh leaders very easily.. When master tara singh (?) was on tour to UK along with Jinnah and Nehru.. They had close door meeting with Brits about the dividing the brit india empire and at the end of that meeting finished .. Brit leaders specially take Sikh leader to the corner and said.. "SIngh, wait we have loads of stuff to discuss with you guys.. wait till these guys gone" (I forgot the book name, but i can find it for fact).. That Sikh leader told this to nehru later (Stupid eh?) and then Nehru said.. Forget them singh, we will rule all over india, i can make u vice-president (I think they did, but for few months).. So that's how we lost the chance of getting khalistan..
I thi

nk a separate government back in 1984 would not have prevented an attack on Harimandhir Sahib because it was used as a headquarters for Sikh militants (stupid idea for basing their HQ at our holy shrine)

So george washington (1st president of US) was big militant too.. (By brit)

So let say you are rite.. It's bad idea for freedom fighters to base their camps inside Golden temple (god forgive me for saying this).... Anyway.. It's a bad idea for them to do that.. SO.. DO YOU or DO YOU NOT Agree with THE ACTION Taken by military/Government ? (Compare that events with the last year Palestine/israel fight over couple of guys hiding inside the christ birthplace temple)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sunny, who gave indira Gandhi a non-Sikh the right to tell Sikhs like Sant Jee that they are not allowed to use the Akal Takht as his HQ? Sant Jee did not require anyone’s permission to stay at his father’s (Guru Jee) house. We certainly do not want non-Sikhs like Indira Gandhi and the GOI telling us whether or not we are allowed to stay at Akal Takht.

At least if we had our own Raaj, our own federal government, we would not have seen 1984 where the Sikhs were humiliated, thousands dying without mercy, instead we would have our own military of Gursikhs which would give a befitting reply to any enemy trying to attack the Harimandhir Sahib. Furthermore, if we had our own raj we would not have seen the Narakdharis going scot-free after murdering 13 gursikhs. That is why we need out own Raaj…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am going to respond to both comments in this post (too lazy to put two of them up).

Vicky, like all Sikhs I do not agree with the events of 1984 or the campaign carried out by Indira Ghandhi. Any competent person knows that it was completely wrong. But the fact that the Golden Temple was used as a military HQ raises my eyebrow. Why? Because it gave the Indian government an even greater motive to attack it with much greater force. Think about it. Sikh militants transformed the golden temple into a MILITARY target by basing their HQ there. It was no longer a holy shrine in the eyes of the government. It was a hideout for what they believed to be were terrorists. This was the Indian government's chance to strike a dagger through the heart of the Sikh nation. In other words, the fact that the Sikh militants staged their operations at our holy shrine confirmed their own fate - operation blue star.

Even if the militant fighters didn't base their HQ at the Golden Temple, I'm sure some sort of action still would ahve been taken against it (indira was attacking most gurdwara's throughout Punjab). But this action probably would not have measured up to the attack on Sikh militants hiding in their HQ (Golden Temple).

Vir Singh, I am not questioning the reasoning behind using the Golden Temple as a HQ. The freedom fighters did what they did.

You all refer to the past as a reason for creating a new Khalistan for the present, but times have certainly changed and the mentality within the Indian government has changed to. Sikhs are an important part of India's current society. Punjab is an integral part of India and India is important to Punja

b.

BTW, I voted no because I believe we are not ready for a Khalistani state. Why? Because our religious foundation is not strong enough. We must have firm religious cohesion and come together for one purpose. Why are we yelling pro Khalistan slogans when there are problems within our religion? I think dealing with our religion is more important than dealing with separatism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sunny

BTW, I voted no because I believe we are not ready for a Khalistani state. Why? Because our religious foundation is not strong enough. We must have firm religious cohesion and come together for one purpose. Why are we yelling pro Khalistan slogans when there are problems within our religion? I think dealing with our religion is more important than dealing with separatism.

Our RELIGON has cohesion and perfection in its principles however, No RELIGON has a firm religous "cohesion" amongst FOLLOWERS. Social problems within the Sikh Community are not religous probelms. In the Sikh community we dont fight over who we are praying too. Our RELIGON IS CLEAR, everyone can follow its values even without being Sikh. Most of the World beleives in Sikh Values however, they may come across as Human Rights, the Red Cross, the Red Cresent and the U.N.

People who question our GURU GRANTH SAHIB, and believe otherwise have every right too but they do not represent a flaw within our Religon but simply there own personal opinions.

Anything to do with worldly poessesions are social problems, GURBANI is TRANSPARENT and CONVEY's one UNIVERSAL MESSAGE.

And about whos gonna rule Khalistan

To simply reject the notion of Khalistan due to the fact of the possible imperfections part of a community or of a group of people, is not a valid reason....Thats like sayin that since George Bush is in powe

r...there should not be an America anymore... or because some Americans may be sinful, or may engage in criminal acts that the entire American Population are not capable of governing themselves and should not be given the right of freedom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our RELIGON has cohesion and perfection in its principles however, No RELIGON has a firm religous "cohesion" amongst FOLLOWERS. Social problems within the Sikh Community are not religous probelms. In the Sikh community we dont fight over who we are praying too. Our RELIGON IS CLEAR, everyone can follow its values even without being Sikh. Most of the World beleives in Sikh Values however, they may come across as Human Rights, the Red Cross, the Red Cresent and the U.N.

People who question our GURU GRANTH SAHIB, and believe otherwise have every right too but they do not represent a flaw within our Religon but simply there own personal opinions.

Anything to do with worldly poessesions are social problems, GURBANI is TRANSPARENT and CONVEY's one UNIVERSAL MESSAGE.

And about whos gonna rule Khalistan

To simply reject the notion of Khalistan due to the fact of the possible imperfections part of a community or of a group of people, is not a valid reason....Thats like sayin that since George Bush is in power...there should not be an America anymore... or because some Americans may be sinful, or may engage in criminal acts that the entire American Population are not capable of governing themselves and should not be given the right of freedom

I was NOT referring to Sikhism as an entity/religion. Our RELIGION is perfect in the Guru G

ranth Sahib, but not perfect in PRACTICE. Social problems in our community DO have an impact on our religion. For example, we need to fix the gurdwara's because quite frankly some of them are money making machines.

You do not need to tell me that our religion is clear, everyone here knows it. I am not arguing against that. By religious cohesion I meant a community that embraces the SAME values and see's the light in the Guru Granth Sahib. If they can achieve this, you take care of one aspect of our social problems.

ANd what's with the George Bush example? That's like comparing apples to oranges. India is a totally different playing field.

I am not rejecting Khalistan entirely on the notion of imperfections within our community. THat is just one side of the story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Akaal108
.If we don't get Khalistan, I think Sikhi would disappear centuries from now. We r seeing it now as well.This is how badly we require Khalistan.

Sikhi is not like an season that would dis-appear.

Is this kinda faith guroo's sahiban expected from us?????????

Sikhi is an truth. Ever thought of truth dis-appearing???.

I dont know people worry about sikhi too much.

Our guroo's left an growing seed of sikhi everywhere. Just wait and watch CHAAINEVIE CRORE KHALSA AAOOOU Thairkaie (960 MILLION KHALSA SHALL BE)

wubb.gifrockon.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SOO true vir singh.. I learned all about sikhi while living here in US..

I did heard a lot about Singh Sabha Movement and i think my elder relatives participated in it too.. but i have no clue what it was about.. Can u pls shed more info on it.. (ur's personal info, cauz i like to learn that way hehe.. )

Vicky, like all Sikhs I do not agree with the events of 1984 or the campaign carried out by Indira Ghandhi. Any competent person knows that it was completely wrong. But the fact that the Golden Temple was used as a military HQ raises my eyebrow. Why? Because it gave the Indian government an even greater motive to attack it with much greater force. Think about it. Sikh militants transformed the golden temple into a MILITARY target by basing their HQ there. It was no longer a holy shrine in the eyes of the government. It was a hideout for what they believed to be were terrorists. This was the Indian government's chance to strike a dagger through the heart of the Sikh nation. In other words, the fact that the Sikh militants staged their operations at our holy shrine confirmed their own fate - operation blue star.

Okay Sunny bruv, let say you are right at some extent... But try to get another view point.. these hindia peeps made those singhs to be in that position.. You don't have clue veerjee how well organized they were and how step by step they potrayed normal family sikh male as militant.. Did u watched the

movie "Maachis"? Did u get any idea from that movie? (it does tell lil truth though !

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