India PM warns of Sikh militancy

[AgNoStIc MuSliM]

Balochistan Insurgency related posts moved here:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/general...-new-post.html

[solid snake]

Originally Posted by Jana

someone tell this to Manmohan Sing. The poor soul is short of finding any internal affair of Pakistan to meddle in.

I've always said each time India makes these kinds of comments, we should reply in the same vein. We should make comments about the BLA and the Taliban being given help from foreign hands and drop stuble (yet very obvious) hints that India is behind it.

It is unacceptable to let India tarnish our image unopposed.

[Always Neutral]

Originally Posted by solid snake

I've always said each time India makes these kinds of comments, we should reply in the same vein. We should make comments about the BLA and the Taliban being given help from foreign hands and drop stuble (yet very obvious) hints that India is behind it.

It is unacceptable to let India tarnish our image unopposed.

I think people read to much into the Indian PM's statement. From all credible sources based in UK the Khalistan movement is now but a pipe dream of few old men spread over countries like India, UK, USA and Canada.

Khalistan movement gained momentum from a selfish movement started by the central government in order to further their devide and rule policy against the local sikh party therby unbottling a genie which came and bit everybody in India on the back sides. In a way the Lal Masjid episode was a similiar event and this time it was Pakistan Central Govts fault in allowing it to reach a proportion which then needed them to solve the same militarily.

The bottomline is that and what the PM of India fails to acknowledge is that the Khalistan movement was not started by Pakistan but was due to their own faulty policy of proping up a religious fanatic called Saint Bhindarwale to topple the local Govt. there.

Hopefully both India and Pakistan have learnt their lessons about proping up radicals to neutralise democrats.

As regards re-starting the Khalistan movement even if the Pakistan Govt. wished ( I have no reason to believe that) it would be a hard task as most of the funds were collected in UK, USA, Canada etc and they will not allow it as they did in the past since in the end it caused acts of terror on our own western soil.

The more important part is that no sane Govt. of Pakistan would ever think that they can control a sikh religious movement capable of defeating India ( I take it that Indian side of Punjab has been liberated and named Republic of Khalistan) which would not later turn on Pakistan and demand control the land where their founder was born which unfortunately lies in Pakistan.

Regards

[dimension117]

Originally Posted by Salim

Dimension,

You need some rest.

You are fever crazed.

You are hallucinating!

Your post is too long and raving for dissection!

It is adequate to indicate that Sikhs are the Chief Minister of Punjab and it was a Sikh who took it on himself to prove that Sikhs are not the ones who are behind the problem.

If Khalistan was indeed an issue, then it would be like the Taliban in the NWFP and adjoining areas where the might of not only the Pakistan Army and the irregulars but also the might of the US has not been able to control!!

Heyyy... thats exactly what I was missing! All the Shakespearean language... Where were u all this time? Did u manage to get out of that sanitized operation theatre? I must admit your condition is pitiable indeed... b8 it is not us b8 our lives that destroy us...Yes?

??? Which Sikh took it to himself to prove that sikhs were not behind the problem? Dude Khalistan is a sikh ideology or r u trying to tell me that it is'nt. The whole problem of Khalistan is to do with the mistreatment & rights not being granted to the Sikh community.

Thats what i said. U guys r lucky the Khalistanis (atleast most of them) have moved to foriegn nations but it won't change the fact that they have suffered constantly under Indian mistreatment.

[salman nedian]

Originally Posted by Salim

The carnage in Punjab of the Partition, where ******* were butchered as Hindus and Sikhs were in Pakistan, should indicate the frenzy of the
Sikh when aroused. Nothing like that happened during the Khalistani movement.

So, quit day dreaming!

No one resigned from the Indian Army. So, don't bring in balderdash of which you have no clue.

I can understand your concern but it is the reality.

"The military assault on the Golden Temple caused an uproar among Sikhs all over the world. In India, many Sikhs resigned from armed and civil administrative offices and returned their government awards.[5] Revenge for the desecration of the Sikh shrine was pledged by many of the community resulting in assassination of Indira Gandhi by her Sikh bodyguards".

Operation Blue Star - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On November 1, 1984, large mobs largely formed by supporters of the ruling Indian Congress party from suburbs of Delhi and bordering villages of Western Uttar Pradesh descended on eastern and central Delhi. Sultanpuri, Mangolpuri, Trilokpuri, and other Trans-Yamuna areas of Delhi were the worst affected. The mobs carried iron rods, knives, clubs, and combustible material, including kerosene. They used voters' lists to identify houses and business establishments owned by Sikhs. The mobsters swarmed into Sikh neighborhoods, arbitrarily killing any Sikh men they could find. Their shops and houses were ransacked and burned. In other incidents, armed mobs stopped buses and trains, in and around Delhi, pulling out Sikh passengers to be lynched or doused with kerosene and burnt.
Many historians have noted that these events should not be called riots, but be described as one sided pogrom or a crime against humanity. The Congress party still has it's secular claims questioned due to the incidences of 1984.

1984 Anti-Sikh riots - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by Salim

Flawed logic!

Calcutta is in Bengal and there are a lot of non ******* there. In fact, they are the majority. Is it your way in Pakistan where the majority is handed over to whosoever wants?

Who has said that Bangladeshis claim Calcutta? Let your perverted imagination not superimpose itself on the Bangladeshis. The fact that they could have their own country indicates that they are an intelligent lot and not prone to day dreaming as you are!

Daijiworld Media Network - Mangalore (NR)
Mangalore, Jan 13: The valedictory function of 'Deshabhakthi sandesha
jathre' was organized by the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) here
on Saturday, Jan 12. Also as part of the programme, a procession of the
'Deshabhakthi sandesha yathre' was taken out, in which thousands of students
participated.
Speaking on the occasion to mark the 150th year of Independence
struggle and students' convention, ABVP national joint organizing secretary
Surendran alleged that the anti-national activities in the eastern part of
the country is increasing and that neighbouring country Bangladesh is
hatching a plot to divide the country, he added.
According to him we are facing a threat from Bangladesh more than
Pakistan. And therefore, he warned that if the Centre fails to consider the
matter seriously, there is danger of the country being divided once again.
Mooting a 'Bruhat Bangla' conspiracy theory, he said illegal
immigrants from Bangladesh were trying to create a bigger Bangladesh by
attempting to separate 11 districts of Assam, four in Bihar, eight in West
Bengal, four in Tripura and three in Chhattisgarh.
Further he pointed out that in the name of Naxalism and agriculture
revolution, the country had become divided. All leads prove that Pakistan is
responsible for the terror activities, he pointed out.
While clarifying that all the Muslims in the country were not
anti-nationals, however he did condemn those who celebrated the victory of
Pakistan over India in a cricket match as anti-nationals.

Sourcehttp://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.bengali/browse_thread/thread/8570d9417a1c7ca3

Further there is a link of a Bangladeshi blog where they want greater Bangladesh.

Rongila dot Com - Bangladeshi Blog » Blog Archive » Bangladesh’s Hidden Land Expansion

[dimension117]

Originally Posted by Always Neutral

I think people read to much into the Indian PM's statement. From all credible sources based in UK the Khalistan movement is now but a pipe dream of few old men spread over countries like India, UK, USA and Canada.

Khalistan movement gained momentum from a selfish movement started by the central government in order to further their devide and rule policy against the local sikh party therby unbottling a genie which came and bit everybody in India on the back sides. In a way the Lal Masjid episode was a similiar event and this time it was Pakistan Central Govts fault in allowing it to reach a proportion which then needed them to solve the same militarily.

The bottomline is that and what the PM of India fails to acknowledge is that the Khalistan movement was not started by Pakistan but was due to their own faulty policy of proping up a religious fanatic called Saint Bhindarwale to topple the local Govt. there.

Hopefully both India and Pakistan have learnt their lessons about proping up radicals to neutralise democrats.

As regards re-starting the Khalistan movement even if the Pakistan Govt. wished ( I have no reason to believe that) it would be a hard task as most of the funds were collected in UK, USA, Canada etc and they will not allow it as they did in the past since in the end it caused acts of terror on our own western soil.

The more important part is that no sane Govt. of Pakistan would ever think that they can control a sikh religious movement capable of defeating India ( I take it that Indian side of Punjab has been liberated and named Republic of Khalistan) which would not later turn on Pakistan and demand control the land where their founder was born which unfortunately lies in Pakistan.

Regards

We don't plan to control the movement but help them gain their freedom and take what is theirs as we did in 1947 when we fought for an end to Indian oppresion and mistreatment where we were safe from Hindu fanatics. I've had enough of the Indian democracy bullshit cauz we aren't safe in India. These Indians call us betrayers and all but they don't understand what they are doing is resulting in the current attitudes.

Sikhs gained nothing from it at all. In 84 50000 Sikhs were killed & 80000 were jailed most of them innocents thats according to a rights group.

Khalistan movement has a lot in common with movement for Pakistan in 47 and therefore I believe every Pakistani should support it cauz one day our forefathers fought for freedom from Indian bias & discrimination so that they could live as free men without having to worry about their children being killed by a hindu mob or being discriminated against & looking at what a mess muslims r in India we know we made the right choice! Ask me! (i am supposed to be f4m hyderabad afzalganj & lucknow chowk area near police chowki)

Compare the reasons of theirs for wanting Khalistan & u'll see that we all want a free land for the same reasons:

~Freedom to practice our respective religion without bias and interference (an example: can pray in the street car or park without being afraid of hindu mobs killing us)
~ End to Indian mistreatment and bias in fields such as employment, education etc.(eg. a hindu kid being favored f4 a position in a govt college cauz of his religion rather than a muslim)
~ End to fearing f4 life, constant riots & uncertainity(84 riots, gujrat riots just happened without anyone predicting them & thousands of lives were destroyed)

So if they are fighting for the same reasons why should we not help them? Just because they follow another religion despite the fact that our forefathers fought for exactly the same reason?
~

[Malang]

Originally Posted by dimension117

Dude her personal bodyguards whos were closest to her killed her! It proves that many sikhs were supporting the Khalistan movement. Thousands were killed fighting u guys in the golden temple mate.

the Nepalese royal family was murdered by the heir apparent. do all Nepalese sons kill their family???

Suppose one of the bodyguard of the India PM was a Muslim and AQ brainwashed him and he killed the Indian PM what would be the conclusion??

the fact is that a single individual act is not representative of the whole community.. further, this is the argument raised by Muslims in response to suicide bombing and terrorists attacks of some Muslims..

the fact that the Sikh bodyguard killed her, gives more credence to brainwashing than give insight into the stance of Sikhs...

Revolutionaries during the time of Indian Independence used violence but most Indians were pro-Gandhi...

also, Even during the time of British.. Many Sikhs were fighting for Independence at the same time many Sikhs were fighting foreigners for the crown...

I think a survey of "Indian" Sikhs would be useful in this case.. the bigger the sample size the better

U're getting it all wrong mate. Hindu Indians murdered raped, tortured & siezed property of 1000's of Sikhs.

I have conversed with Indian Sikhs you have conversed with Canadian Sikhs.
Probably the Canadian Sikhs Living in Canada know better than Sikhs living in Delhi and Punjab?

In response to indian oppression constant bias f4 example in education & employment & interferance in their religion they fought back making them freedom fighters.

education ?? the amount of Sikh run Schools,Colleges are amongst the highest (even in absolute terms)in India. and even in Pakistan, Sikhs had Khalsa Colleges pre-Partition, I don't know if they are there anymore.

employment?? Sikhs face particularly no bias in employment and are visible all over India and rate amongst the highest in economic statistics and also have a high urban-rural ratio

interference in religion?? Sikhs have their places of worship in almost all Indian cities and towns, open to visitors of all faiths. In fact Scriptures are composed of verses by Hindus and Muslims besides the Sikh Gurus. So I wouldn't expect them to be bothered.

And sikhs as such have not murdered innocents exept some who were really carried away. U shud'nt destroy their houses 2 see less of that.

terrorists have no sense of right or wrong.

Why wud fellow sikhs kill sikhs in a hindu sikh riot????

Sikh police officers killed Sikh terrorists and Khalistani sympathisers..

KPS Gill is seen by many sikhs a person who is a traitor to the sikh cause.

.." seen by many Khalistanis as a traitor to the Khalistani cause."

Why is that? Because he was in the indian army killing sikhs while he shud have been fighting f4 freedom

He was a police officer.

Why do Sikhs want a seperate state for Sikhs?
The foundation of Golden Temple was laid by the famous Muslim Saint Hazrat Mian Mir and Sikh Guru, Tegh Bahadur gave up his life for Hindus. This would be conduct unbecoming a true Sikh.

Even during the times of Sikh Empire of Maharaja Ranjit Singh Sikhism was not enforced or other religions mistreated. He infact had quite a secular govt. with Muslims and Hindus, and also built mosques and temples for his Muslim and Hindu subjects.

Yes, next u're going to say muslims & hindus r the same ignoring issues like Kashmir gujrat riots, muslims being the poorest & most illiterate group in India, the constant riots & favoring of hindu fanatics & murderers by the police & government.

I didn't get it.

According to the true sikhs the marriages with hindus r eating up the sikh religion.

true Sikhs? please point out Sikh scriptures or Sikh history that disallows marriages to non Sikhs??
those living in Canada are true Sikhs? and those in India, false?

They say that they will be in the museum if Khalistan is n8 created soon because hindus kidnap their girls & marry the helpless women... some women run away with hindus... What do u say about that?

If I remember these are the Sikhs who in the past protected women(of all religions) from Invaders and rescued them from Nader Shah's captivity(while he was enroute to Iran after looting Delhi) are you trying to tell me they can't protect their own womenfolk now???

FYI: in UK some Sikh(and Hindu) girls were forcibly kidnapped and converted to Islam.. in fact there were minor riots in Birmingham after one such an incident surfaced... try googling it...

How cud the same line of argument be used? Put it into action... lets see u try it. I am sure u won't be able to find any single link with urself & the outfits we r fighting against.

I didn't get it.
you said Pak is accused of supporting separtists movements while as I inferred you said Pak doesn't but should since their name is already maligned they should.
the word Pak can be safely replaced by India and it would make sense is all I am saying..

We gained freedom n8 u?

???

We were fighting against indian oppression & mistreatment & to safeguard our religion & not be slaughtered by u indians all the time

I have read Agnostic_Muslims's posts in this regard. You should ask him.

as the sikhs r today.

I think today the Sikhs are hailed as the model to be emulated.
A Sikh COAS, PM and Planning Commission chief at the same time.

Mr. Khushwant Singh was moved to call this achievement as the culmination of the goal that Sikhs will rule(Raj Karega Khalsa).

For a minority who numbers are contemptuous in India and the world, this is an unparalleled achievement.

They have finally realized that they have no future in India. Furthermore its sad that there r 146 million muslims in india & u r treating them like animals.

I quote Gandhi here. "A nations standard is judged by the way its animals are treated.." no offense to anyone but Gandhi meant to say that Indians generally treat even animals with care and love. further India actually has a bill of rights for cows...

Well i guess u're just jealous that theres so much in common about our cause & we see the cause of Khalistan as a noble one indeed.

Common??

1. Muslims didn't want to be ruled by Hindus. Sikhs in turn are ruling Hindus in India.

2. Muslims felt that they would be slaughtered by Hindus in India. Sikhs have two regiments in Indian Army slaughtering the enemies of India.

3. Muslims feels that Islam puts them at loggerheads with Hindus and Hinduism. Sikhs gave up their lives fighting for people of different faith, recite prayers written by Hindus and Muslims, and also built places of worship for different religions.

4. Muslims wanted to protect their elitist tag. Sikhs lost everything in partition yet today are one of the most prosperous community living in the most developed state of India.

What is common here????

in fact Sikhs believe that Sikhs will rule, and they have turned their belief into reality against all odds... at the same time w/o dividing people or sacrificing ideals of brotherhood and unity in diversity.....

[qupte]It talks volumes about the support they get! The murder of indira by her personal guards also speaks volumes. Use youtube or google & u'll notice how many thousands of sikhs there r supporting the Khalistan cause!!! Only thing is u're lucky that those who were persecuted in 1984 escaped outside or their children would be fighting against indian mistreatment oppression & murder of their forefathers in 1984.
[/quote]

this is your inference... I differ...

Insulted them. They were brutally suppressed! When hindu mobs attacked sikhs after indiras murder then it was perfectly okay & the police did nothing b8 stood as expectators (obviously on orders f4m government b8 u will keep saying indian govt is secular cauz its ur nature) b8

HINDU MOBS?? It was congress party workers and/or sympathisers of Indira Gandhi not BJP/RSS/VHP etc. in fact if I am not wrong BJP/RSS etc played a positive role(for Sikhs) if they did play any role...

those sympathizers could have muslims amongst them as well...
and Tytler is I think a Christian??


PS: what is b8? I hope it isn't bait??

whenever sikhs rose up against hindu tyranny & murder of their fellow sikhs they were violently suppressed

it wasn't Hindu tyranny but if it was, it was Congress's tyranny...

Sikhs were violently surpressed by Mughals, Afghans, British, Congress

and the result was

1. Mughals were destroyed
2. Afghans conquered
3. British forced to leave India
4. Congress in turn being headed by a Sikh...

(offtopic/ and yes when you say tyranny it is most likely that they were violently suppressed not painstakingly nurtured.)

Even during riots sikhs tried to protect themselves but they were repressed. U c ur beautiful secular government let sikhs be slaughtered mercilessly & did nothing.

Secularity was in full bloom when Muslims were slaughtered (Secular means insensitive to all religions or equally sensitive to all religions)..
though this doesn't mean it was correct but Indian Govt was secular at both times...

So the excerpt above proves Sikhs had the will to resist indian oppression and misrule even then but they were brutally murdered. A sikh leader is really famous f4 standing against indian rioters & chasing them away... then the police camse and disarmed him. Later hindus came and killed him.

I wasn't convinced neither the 20million odd Sikhs in India or the billion+ Indians in India.

He is known as a hero by the true sikhs or the Khalistani sikhs.

true Muslims or suicide bombers???

I am glad that minorities r realizeing the truth. It is because of our stupid forefathers who stayed back f4 their jaidad we had to suffer constantly. Sikhs need a land to call their own as muslims gained one in 47.

Dimension, in fact the call for Khalistan was raised prior to partition.Further, Nehru believed that since Muslims were getting Pakistan, Sikhs by giving similar line of argument could get greater share for them (and India), and Sikhs were game for this since some Sikhs they didn't want to see Punjab divided and their "wealth, land and homes" lost.
Khalistan's map at the time consisted of most of west Punjab, it was Jinnah and the British who refused to grant them their "motherland" at the time..

So instead of chastising India you should be chastising creators of Pakistan who didn't give Sikhs their motherland...

Who are the Guilty ? PUDR-PUCL report of 1984

So what do u say now? And please don't display common indian nature here as well and try to deny cauz this is from indian human rights organization. PUDR (People's Union For Democratic Rights) and PUCL (People's Union For Civil Liberties).

I didn't happen to read it but what are you trying to prove??

Temme something? How many more people do u guys plan to kill? I mean atleast give me a number & tell me when & where u're going to strike atleast so that we can get our relatives out of there before u guys go f4 it...

sorry to disappoint you but I am not a soothsayer or pogrom planner..

Yes the way u feel sorry for kashmir, gujrat voilence victems, sikhs killed in 84, dalits being marginalized...

sorry?? I feel more sympathetic/empathetic.. ultimate I believe in karma so you get what you deserve thing...

i'm sorry we don't require ur sympathy.

I am not giving you I just feel..

We r happy here as we r accepted & treated well. Furhtermore i have more power & control here than i wud ever get in a so called secular democracy.

I think in a secular democracy you will ideally have as much power and control as the guy standing next to you ... so you cannot claim to have greater power and control .. if this is your goal/ambition then yes Secular democracy is not meant/ideal for you..

True i'm sure it must be my attitude b8 not the attitude of police and government towards minorities. Well in any case I am glad that many muslims r realizing the truth today and are leaving India. Our forefathers made a mistake thinking only about their wealth & property b8 thats okay & we will correct it. I can't think of myself as anything but a Pakistani now so please continue. I cannot change ur mindset u c. Theres a reason that there r few indian muslims who come & defend india & its name. PD is an example b8 anyway... I dunno what u're talking about cauz i dun see the courts giving justice f4 the gujrat riots, thousands murdered in kashmir or 84 riots etc. List will be huge so... anyway most ppl r locked up bf4 they hire a lawyer or go to court when they go 2 file a report so

You are entitled to your opinions

What words thou speaketh... they amazeth me... maketh me smile, maketh me laugh, maketh me shiver like the nights breeze...
U knw what it dus'nt feel like Von shakespeare is'nt here.... did salim leave the site? I really enjoyed his posts...

I lost you here!!

There aren't a huge percentage of sikhs in delhi if thats what u're trying to tell me mate:
Now sikhs r only 4% of the population in delhi. Damn u're funny...

I am in Delhi at the moment... in all the areas that I go too there are quite a lot of Sikhs..
Though I haven't been to poorer sections of town much, but all the richer sections have a lot of Sikhs..
and most Sikhs in Delhi have chopped thier hair...

Obviously since they were poor that justifies them being killed rather than an educated sikh. Brilliant comment!

If you didn't know but Sikhs have quite a lot of caste based politics going on...

Dude how can u say an entire community votes f4 1n group? But yeah they have little choice anyway considering the fact that BJP is hardline hindu organization responsible for genocide as well.

genocide of Sikhs????

It wud be any sikh who has feeling f4 his or her sikh brothers. I am not talking about a terrorist or a killer b8 a sikh who understands the injustice done to his brothers & feels the pain they feel. A sikh who cannot let the sacrifice of those thousands of fellow sikhs who were killed due to indian bias & discrimination go in vain and will work f4 a better future f4 his community so that n8 a single sikh will be treated unfairly because of his or her faith again. Thats according to my sikh freind... who is a true sikh.

If I am not wrong then the Sikhs ought to take revenge from Muslims, British etc who slaughtered many of them, discriminated against them, took away their beloved Punjab, the birthplace of the Guru, The seat of their empire...

A profile of a true sikh & a defender:
YouTube - AkaalSoldier84's Channel

... a true sikh = Khalistani Sikh. I know I know thanks..
though if you happen to read Scriptures it is quite clearly mentioned who is a Sikh and who is a khalsa(baptised sikh) or not....

50000 sikhs were'nt all "criminals" as u call them. Less than 3000 were actually freedom fighters killed f4 the creation of khalistan. Possibly even only a thousand.

All definetly might not have been but many killed by police must have been....

Jarnail singh bhinranwala was arrested, bullied & harressed constantly by Indira.

In fact if you had happened to read history.. Bhindranwale was a crony of Gandhi and Giani Zail Singh nurtured to garner Sikh votes from Akali Dal... he was excessively pampered and allowed to do his thing... and this messed him up and he turned on them..

Please read any of the books on 1984 or Sikhs or Bhindranwale...

[quote]When he realized that the very religion he followed was under attack he started vouching f4 independence.

U shud knw he spent his early life as a very peaceful indian b8 obviously sumwhere along the line indian bias got in the way and he was arrested & ur ancestors tried to frame him f4 murder because they could'nt have a Sikh religious leader with too much influence.

Bhindranwale was the leader of DamDami Thaksal, and leader of Nihangs, a sect of Sikhism...
Mainstream Sikhs have always been at loggerheads with the "militant", ultraorthodox Nihangs and Damdami taksal... and both shun each other...
Mainstream Sikhs call Nihangs heretical and vice versa..

Also there were many innocents who were mercilessly slaughtered in the siege.

expected...

Ya ya whatever. They made a joke of the entire sikh community. If he had thought about sikhs thousands would'nt have been killed. He is een as an enemy of Sikhs by many. No sikh approves of the 84 murder **** & loot. Even the pro-indian ones think of it as "forget what happened in the past and move on"

Exactly why to think of past?? I don't see Sikhs thinking of taking revenge from Muslims,British etc...

U indians have no idea what secularism is & u always throw in something wierd. The proper most simple way to define secularism is when all ethnic, cultural, political, religious groups r treated equally regardless of their religion culture etc.

treated equally.. aka either I reject them all or I be sensitive to all..
If I allow a Muslim woman to wear a veil, I must allow a sikh to wear a turban, a Hindu to wear his tilak...
If I disallow a Muslim to wear the veil, I must disallow a Sikh to wear his turban and a Hindu to put a mark on his forehead...
in both cases the govt is secular...

In India this is in no way true. Having a sikh prime minister & muslim president to show the world a fake picture of India won't make it so either.

fake picture???
then why doesn't the whole world puts up such fake pictures..
if Obama wins a Black supremacist will call it a fake picture to show American equality....

[quote]What muslim country has relations with u exept bangladesh... u hav no defence ties with bangladesh exept sum small scale 1ns. My bengali freinds & cousins c themselves as closer to Pakistan rather than india despite the fact that it was indians who r the reason bangladesh was formed.[/quote

Saudi Arabia, Iran, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Malaysia, Indonesia, Maldives, Yemen, Oman all have close relationships with India...

Only mutual relations u hav r with the Khar-zai govt spreading terrorism in Pakistan with ur help. Please continue killing as is ur nature. U can simply not hold back f4m it as u want to punish us getting the hell out of ur country and calling this our home. U will chase muslims no matter where they run f4m indian "secularism" so...

spreading terror in Pakistan.. I thought it was Pakistanis spreading terror in Pakistan (and even in UK)...

Talk to them more often & u might manage to notice.

in fact my best friend is a Sikh...

Kyaa baat ki hai mainey... temme sumthing

I didn't get you...

Yes i'm sure u'd love to hear some nice jokes about puja diwali or holi like the sikhs hav to hear about their customs of wearing a pagri & having hair on their face. Sometimes u ppl don't even leave there gurus alone.

Most of the Sikh jokes told to me are by Sikhs only... they have a tremendous sense of humour... they don't mind cracking jokes on their religion themselves..

?????? Why might that be?

because Canadian Sikhs are true Sikhs .. rest all others are false...

Yes their population is 60000-200000 & r an extremely tiny minority. So if they had been in india u wud hav already killed of 5/6 of sikhism & the other wud be in jail considering the fact 50000 were killed & others r ******* in jail.

Glad to know they enjoy equal rights as Muslims in Pakistan..(does this mean a sikh man can marry a muslim woman?)

its sad that they aren't too visible in media... I will dig up some info on them though when I have the time...

U wud'nt? Well considering the fact that ur BJP has been trying to divide them & making noise about our hindu brothers being in Pakistan i won't believe that u don't.

really?? I thought BJP didn't care about Pak based Hindus??
wow this is news to me.. if they are treated well they should be left alone and if they are illtreated they should be allowed to seek asylum in Pakistan.. similar courtesies should be extended to people in India too...

This is what our hindu brother thinks about u guys. Hope u feel as glad as u did bf4 reading it.

I am glad he is patriotic.. I hate people who are disloyal to their motherland and loyal to other lands because of their religious beliefs...

I bet this is the best artictle i ever found!!!! A slap on the face of BJP... lolzZ

LOL.. ZZZ

Dude the Pakistani sikhs r happy to call themselves Pakistanis and don't want Pakistani land to go to Khalistan but only Indian land because that is where Sikhs have actually been mistreated. Khalistan Zindabad!!!...
Khalistan is a must!

as I said as per the original demand of Khalistan most of Pakistani Punjab was a part of it.. this is being disloyal to the cause of the original Sikh separatists...

[salman nedian]

(by Malang)the Nepalese royal family was murdered by the heir apparent. do all Nepalese sons kill their family???

Suppose one of the bodyguard of the India PM was a Muslim and AQ brainwashed him and he killed the Indian PM what would be the conclusion??

the fact is that a single individual act is not representative of the whole community.. further, this is the argument raised by Muslims in response to suicide bombing and terrorists attacks of some Muslims..

the fact that the Sikh bodyguard killed her, gives more credence to brainwashing than give insight into the stance of Sikhs...

Revolutionaries during the time of Indian Independence used violence but most Indians were pro-Gandhi...

also, Even during the time of British.. Many Sikhs were fighting for Independence at the same time many Sikhs were fighting foreigners for the crown...

I think a survey of "Indian" Sikhs would be useful in this case.. the bigger the sample size the better

The demand for khalistan was there before the murder of Indira Gandhi and Sikhs were the supporters of Khalistan. The question is not who killed Indira Gandhi, if you think that it was an individual act than genocide should not had happened.
They way you highlighted “Indian” show that you do not consider the NRI Sikhs as Indian. Or do you mean than NRI Sikhs are carrying foreign agenda and they have no relatives living in India?

(by Malang)genocide of Sikhs????

Sikh Genocide Project

Sikh Genocide 1984

[su-47]

Originally Posted by salman nedian

They way you highlighted “Indian” show that you do not consider the NRI Sikhs as Indian. Or do you mean than NRI Sikhs are carrying foreign agenda and they have no relatives living in India?



Sikh Genocide Project

Sikh Genocide 1984

many of the sikhs in foreign countries are not of indian citizenship. then why should we refer to them as indian?

[Malang]

Originally Posted by salman nedian

The demand for khalistan was there before the murder of Indira Gandhi

in fact if you would have read my posts, the demand for Khalistan was raised at the same time Pakistan's boundaries were being drawn...

and Sikhs were the supporters of Khalistan.

some...

The question is not who killed Indira Gandhi, if you think that it was an individual act than genocide should not had happened.

how do you define genocide?? generally riots are not planned... genocide is...
They are spontaneous emotional reactions just like when Benazir was killed Sindhis started shouting anti-Pak slogans, and whole of Pak saw rioting...

They way you highlighted “Indian” show that you do not consider the NRI Sikhs as Indian.

Anyone w/o an Indian Passport etc. is not an Indian..
they are of Indian origin but most Sikhs who emigrated before partition to Canada call themselves as West Punjabis not Indian/Pakistani... (something like East Coast/West Coast in US rap lingo)..

Or do you mean than NRI Sikhs are carrying foreign agenda and they have no relatives living in India?
Sikh Genocide Project
Sikh Genocide 1984

don't Pakistanis have relatives in India??
don't suicide bombers have non-suicide bombers as relatives??
are the agendas of both states of relatives similar?

[salman nedian]

See my post I was talking about NRIs.

how do you define genocide?? generally riots are not planned... genocide is...
They are spontaneous emotional reactions just like when Benazir was killed Sindhis started shouting anti-Pak slogans, and whole of Pak saw rioting...

See the links in my previous post. Sikhs call it genocide and thousands of people died.

[Jana]

Originally Posted by su-47

many of the sikhs in foreign countries are not of indian citizenship. then why should we refer to them as indian?

where they came from then ????

it is understandable the there must be some law restricting the entitlment of being a native of country if that person lives in another country beyond the some time period.

In that case can you term him no more the native of the country of his origion.????

What if that person have relatives in India and he wants raise vioce for them and support their demand?

[su-47]

Originally Posted by Jana

where they came from then ????

it is understandable the there must be some law restricting the entitlment of being a native of country if that person lives in another country beyond the some time period.

In that case can you term him no more the native of the country of his origion.????

What if that person have relatives in India and he wants raise vioce for them and support their demand?

any person who is not a citizen of the Republic of India is not Indian. we can call them indian origin, but at the end of the day, they are not indian.

every person is entitled to his/her opinion. if they feel their relaives are mistreated, they can speak up. but if those relatives in India themselves feel happy where they are, and dont feel mistreated, then why should the relatives in foreign country waste their breath.

I agree that during Khalistan riots many innocent sikhs were killed by the indian armed forces, and treatment of sikhs wasnt fair. but fact remains that sikhs are an equal part of the community now. if they are happy in india, then their foreign bred relatives can shut the f**k up as far as i am concerned.

[Jana]

'84 riots: CBI pulled up, asked to file report12 Mar 2008, 1615 hrs IST,INDIATIMES NEWS NETWORK
Print Save EMail Write to Editor




NEW DELHI: A Delhi court on Wednesday pulled up CBI for its failure to file status report in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case involving Congress leader Jagdish Tytler.

The court also directed the CBI to file its report in the case involving Tytler within a week.

The CBI, in January, was granted some more time by the court to file the investigation report in the anti-Sikh riots case. The agency was supposed to submit its report on March 12.

The court had on December 18 ordered CBI to reinvestigate the case, rejecting its closure report, after the witness surfaced in the United States and expressed his willingness to record his statement against Tytler.

'84 riots: CBI pulled up, asked to file report-India-The Times of India