Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing most liked content since 09/17/2017 in all areas

  1. 8 points
    The Bhai Kanhaiya episode cannot be used as an analogy to justify the work of Khalsa Aid. If Bhai Kanhaiya was bypassing wounded Sikhs wanting water and ONLY giving water to wounded Mughals then Khalsa Aid would be fully justified in it's activities. The best analogy for what Khalsa Aid does is for a Sikh whose wife and kids were starving at home in village Sikhpura where all the villagers are Sikhs goes to another village Rasulpur a Muslim village many miles away to donate his last money there because one of the houses in that village has burnt down. It is common sense to expect the other Muslims of Rasulpur to help out their Muslim neighbours but it is the height of idiocy for the Sikh to be neglecting his own family to help others. But KA has taken it's idiocy to new heights, they have over £2.4 million in the bank and yet are appealing for funds for the Rohingyas even from Sikhs in India! Imagine that, expanding our analogy further that would be like the Sikh asking for his starving wife and kids if they could donate their last meal for his relief work trip to the Muslim village! KA has been in existence for over 18 years now. The work they do in Punjab is in the last few years and as I wrote before probably the outcome of Sikhs questioning them about what they are doing about Sikhs in needs. Their is no issue in their helping in areas and communities where there is no other help such as the Yazidis in Iraq but KA is usually one of dozens of charities each vying with each other to get the most publicity. What great effect are the tens of thousands of pounds that KA will spend in Myanmar have against the millions of pounds the larger charities will spend! Consider what that tens of thousands of pounds could do for Sikhs in need. Why does KA have to run off thousands of miles away to find non-Sikhs in need when Ravi Singh just needs to step out of his door to see Sikhs sleeping rough in Slough and West London. But I suppose there is no publicity in helping them, the publicity is in plastering photos on facebook of KA helping Rohingyas thousands of mile away! I remember reading Ravi Singh's blog from the time of the Kashmir earthquake. He said how he was also fasting during Ramadan in the relief camps! What a joke, so he was going against the rehat just to show what a great humanitarian he was! The true fact was that such is the fanaticism among those Kashmiri Muslims even those who had lost all their homes that it was dangerous for him, someone who was saving the lives of these Muslims to even eat in his own tent and if it became known that he was eating during Ramadan it would have led to him being lynched! Karlo Sewa!
  2. 7 points
    The Rohingyas are a part of the demographic jihad, there is no such Sikh demographic jihad in Malaysia so your comparison fails. Also the Sikhs are a asset to any nation they migrate to, the same cannot be said of Muslims. You probably live in a make believe world that Muslims are great citizens and that Islam is some kind of gift that the Arabs gave to the world but whereas I wouldn't want to be so cruel as to burst your bubble but the truth is the opposite to what you believe. Muslims in which ever country they migrate to become a liability and a danger to the safety of other citizens of that country. More and more people are becoming aware of this and that is why Muslims are not wanted in any non-Muslim country. Don't be fooled by leftist fools holding up 'refugees welcome' banners in the west. A few months ago an opinion found that a majority of Europeans want an END to all Muslim migration into Europe. I hate Modi but in this case he is 100% right. The Rohingyas should be deported to Bangladesh without fail as well as the 20 million illegal Bangladeshsi in India. There are already Rohingyas in Pakistan and they are at the bottom rung of Pakistani society. I doubt Pakistan would allow Rohingyas to migrate from Jammu to Pakistan. The Arab countries don't want the Rohingyas. Even though these Rohingyas would be the first to demonstrate against Israel if Israel did anything to the Palestinians. Muslim govts don't want Muslim refugees. Maybe this is because the govts knows what Muslims are like and they can only control a certain number and any more than that it would be chaos. There are still lakhs of Muslim Biharis in Bangladesh who fought on the side of the Pakistan during the Bangladesh war and they haven't been allowed to go to Pakistan in over 40 years and you think Pakistan would allow Rohingyas there!
  3. 7 points
    So is Khalsa Aid in Burma to counteract the poisonous propaganda about Sikhs? The Sewapanthis were in Muslim areas of Punjab as well as in Sindh because this is where their leaders originated from and that is where their Tikanas were. As with all Gurdwaras their institution would provide rest and langar for travellers and those in the local sangat. I doubt that they made a conscious decision to locate to these areas in order to help the Muslims at the expense of helping Sikhs in Sikh areas, How does this relate to what Khalsa Aid is doing. Is Ravi Singh from Burma? The Sewapanthi were originally a Sehajdhari order so where is the proof that the Khalsa is supposed to be going around the world spending the sangat's money on non-Sikhs? The Rohingyas are being driven out by the Burmese and it is amazing how much support there is for the Burmese government's actions from the Burmese people of various communities. This Khalsa Aid dalliance in Burma will have unforeseen consequence in that these Rohingya will find out what a soft touch Sikhs are if the Burmese govt does not allow them back into Burma they will want to settle in India and given the opposition to them in the rest of India the place they will go is Punjab, as Punjab doesn't have a Muslim problem already they will add to it. The background to the Rohingya is that most are settlers from Bengal during British times and that is why they are not accepted as Burmese citizens. Although there are indigenous Burmese Muslims in other states of Burma but the Burmese govt has no issue with them. We all know what a demographic Jihad is. Bangladesh has been trying to move it's excess population into areas of the North East like Assam and Burma in order to eventually create a Greater Bangladesh. The anti-foreigners agitation in the early Assam was because of Bangladeshi infiltration into Assam. The Bangladeshi population has exploded over the last 4 decades and there are thought to be over 20 Million illegal Bangladeshis in India. You even see them in Punjab now and they are increasing at an alarming rate. The Rohingyas have settled in Delhi and Jammu and now even the Jammu Hindus are waking up to what dangers they will face from these Rohingyas in future. If the Jammu Hindus attack the Rohingyas their is no doubt the idiotic Sikhs will be the first to welcome the Rohingyas into Punjab and sign the death warrant of the next Sikh generation. Add to this the idiocy of KA showing up what a soft touch Sikhs are then you have the perfect storm of Rohingyas making Punjab their home in future given that the Hindus do not want them in their states. Whatever you think of the Burmese, you have to admire the fact that they have woken up to the dangers the Rohingyas pose to them. A few years ago there were riots after the Rohingyas raped a Burmese girl. The Burmese have wised up to the Bangladeshi/Rohingya demographic jihad and they don't want their country to become an Islamic hellhole. You have to admire that they are ready to stand up to the world community as well as Islamic bullying by the Muslim countries. It would be so easy for the Burmese to sit back and let the Rohingya take over Rakhine state while the Burmese elites enjoy the fruits of economic development bought by globalisation and compliance to the will of the liberal establishments of the west.
  4. 7 points
    I can say that because the tens of thousands of pound of the sangat's money that KA will spend is being dwarfed by the many millions that the international community has given. The UK for instance has given £ 25 million more after their initial £ 11 million in aid. So that's £ 36 million they have given. The EU has given 3 million Euros and Canada has given $ 2.5 million. That is why I can say that KA is WASTING the sangat's money by being in the Rohangya refugee camps because what they will waste there will be a drop in the ocean to what the international community will spend there. What is looks like is that Khalsa Aid are pig headed by going there knowing this fact and is only there for publicity. Also asking for donations for Rohingya from the sangat when they have £ 2.5 million in the bank as well as knowing the international community will spend nearly £ 50 million there also shows their lack of common sense. You really are clutching at straws trying to justify why Khalsa Aid is not so active in Punjab given that Punjabis need aid as well. So Punjab is corrupt but Haiti, Kashmir/Pakistan, Nepal,, Bangladesh are not corrupt! The basic fact is that giving aid to Punjabis is not a right-on issue in charity circles. There is no publicity is helping Punjabi and lots of publicity in helping in Burma and other places.
  5. 6 points
    If Rohingya become Sikh or Hindu or even Jehovah's witnesses then they obviously stop being a part of the Islamic demographic jihad and stop being a threat to other Burmese communities and would not be kicked out of Burma. In a Jihad there are obviously two sides and you can't expect Sikhs to support the side that is engaged in trying to amalgamate the area of another country into a Muslim state.
  6. 6 points
    By the same contention the Burmese and Bangladeshi govts should be looking after the Rohingyas. Why is Khalsa Aid there? How do you define immediate danger, is a Punjabi farmer who is under debt due to economic policies of the govt which makes his hard work unviable not in immediate danger because of the stress and mental agony might lead him to commit suicide? If Khalsa Aid forgoes helping in Burma and concentrates the money it will spend in Burma to Punjab instead then it will save lives in Punjab. No one is going to die in Burma because Khalsa Aid doesn't go to the camps to help out. Millions have been and millions more will be pumped into Burma by the international community. Khalsa Aid's work is a drop in an ocean of international relief work. Soon charities will be stepping on each other toes to help the Rohingyas. No one is asking KA to turn Punjab into a paradise. Just to save a few Sikh lives instead of replicating the work of the bigger charities in Burma.
  7. 6 points
    Just because our moorakhs waste their time and effort and the Panth's money in running off to Myanmar to help Muslims it frees the Muslims to target our people for conversion. Don't expect Muslims to ease off just because our moorakhs are helping Muslims in Myanmar.
  8. 5 points
    When muslims have 50+ countries over 1 .3 billion population and huge rich governments of iran, saudi, turkey, central asian republics, gulf states, etc and muslims and commanded to only give charity to muslim causes via zakat. Why are our very few Sikh charity organisations wasting our very limited financial and manpower resources helping non-sikhs in far off non-sikh lands where the people have no interest in Sikhs or sikhism and would not come to our aid if we ever get in trouble as in 1984 proved. Sikhs 30 million population, no country to our name and struggling religious minority fighting for faith and nation since 1947 due the treacherous dogs of sikh leadership who continually sold the kaum out. christian aid they have 3 billion christian population rich western countries and vatican bank chuch isnt helping rohingya, hindus have 1 billion population they never helped non-hindus charity causes ever. Rohingya will be helped by their muslim breathin eventually there is no doubt about that. Us Sikhs do not need to go off on far off adventures to far off places aimlessly if are not there to help the people embrace sikhi with parchar. Question is why is khalsa aid continuing to pursue non-sikh charity causes when there's plenty of causes within the Sikh community that needs urgent attention and help but no help is given. (ie afghan Sikhs dwindling population due to persecution and discrimination, pakistani sikhs struggling financial hardships, indian sikhs in deep poverty and struggling especially families of Shaheeds killed by govt violence). Whats the agenda? foreign adventures? collecting money? Ravi singh is doing a great job showing he is a humanitarian and at promoting the humanitarian side of Sikhi which is great however, where is his and his orgs priorities? They seem to be lost in my view.
  9. 5 points
    I don't think that something like Khalsa Aid as it now could have existed in WW2. The Sikhs of that generation would have been perplexed at Khalsa Aid if they were going around the world helping German or Japanese refugees. Those Sikhs had stronger character and self belief than the pappus that run Khalsa Aid have today. Khalsa Aid and other such 'disaster relief at the drop of a hat' type organisations within the Sikh community are a product of the puppufication of Sikhs ever since 1947. We have accepted outright lies like Mian Meer laid the foundation stone of Harmandir Sahib and that Sikhi is just a religion like all the others and that we don't seek converts and that quality rather than quantity. Some even think that Khalsa just means pure so hence Raj Karega Khalsa just means the pure ones will rule and that the pure ones can be a person of any religion. This pappufication is there for all to see. There is a facebook account which is run by Khalistanis and they posted a video of a Hindu girl being slapped by a BJP women councillor because the post stated that she had been 'just having a coffee in a restaurant with a Muslim boy' . The truth was that the Hindu girl was openly having an affair with a Muslim boy which she admitted. Now look at how even Pappufication has taken over those who claim to be Khalistanis! They will lie in order to show Hindus oppressing the Hindu girl because she was innocently with a Muslim boy. The same account has more stories about the so-called oppression the Rohingyas than anything about Sikhs or Khalistan. This is how far the rot has spread. When I commented and stated what the truth was and if the other people commenting how bad the slapping was would be ok with their daughters or sisters opening having an affair with a Muslim boys. The comments I was on the lines of 'What is it to you, it's her life' and these comments were from Sikhs! I could expect such rubbish from Muslims or Goray but Sikhs stating this rubbish just showed how much pappufication has taken deep roots on todays Sikhs. The same Pappu Sikhs will think that it's great that Khalsa Aid is wasting the sangat's money in Burma while Sikhs in need are ignored a few miles from where these pappus live.
  10. 5 points
    Nobody said that Sikhs don't commit crimes. But nice try at trying to use the figures for one prison to represent it as a norm. If you look at the national prison figure they tell a different story. On 30 June 2004 there were 6571 Muslims in prison out of a total prison population of 74.488 so Muslims were 8.9% of the prison population whereas Muslims were only 3% of the total population. On 30 June 2014 the respective numbers were 12,106 Muslims out of 85,509 total prisoners making Muslims 14.2% while being only 4.8% of the UK population. For Sikhs the numbers were 498 in prison in 2004 being 0.68% of prisoners while being 0.6% of the UK population. In 2014 the figures were 732 Sikhs making 0.85% of all prisoners while Sikhs were 0.8% of the UK population. So Sikh prisoners are roughly the same percentage as the Sikh population as a whole. HOWEVER Muslims are three times their number in prison as in the total population. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31794599
  11. 5 points
    There is nothing that deteriorates more than an area that becomes a muslim dominated one. It sucks out the vibrancy out of an area. For starters, the diversity of shops gets sucked out of the area. You are stuck with halal fried chicken shop , halal butchers, Islamic book shop and a hijab fabric shop. You lose all the other type of facilities. This puts off people coming into thsee areas (even muslims ). At least in Sikh/Hindu areas you get a much more variety of shopping and it actually attracts goreh to come. Southall even though traditionally Sikh area is quite international because you get overseas visitors buying clothing or visiting jewelry shops, dining in the restaurants, visiting Havelock gurdwara. The fried chicken shops are open late at night and they tend to attract all sorts of weirdos. It creates more hygiene problems because the increase in these fast food joints (muslims seem to be very keen on this type of business) means more litter and rubbish which means rat infestation. Muslim owned restaurants seem to have the most Health and Safety issues in terms of hygiene. How many times can one hear of cockroach infestations or rat droppings in these places. These areas tend to attract a lot of drug dealers and brings all sorts of other stuff such as pimping/prostitution, particular since the mini cabbing brigade has a big part to play in this. The parking gets far worse in these areas (even compared to hindu/sikh areas) because muslims have a bigger chip on their shoulders and think they can get away with more. This happens particularly when there is a mosque close by. The area becomes overcrowded and more slum like. One of the things muslims tend to do when venturing into new territories is to open up a halal based establishment in a non muslim area. This is done deliberately to try to attract muslims into an area. It's like planting a flag. Property prices drop very quickly and more move in very quickly.
  12. 5 points
    Its not that we do not want them to live in their own muslim area's thats exactly what we want them to do, to live amoungst themselves and away from us non-muslims. The problem is that they come into our Sikh or other non-muslim area's slowly one by one in order to eventually take it over. So yes they do live to live in Sikh dominated area's not because they love to live with us but to take advantage of our safer hard working community neighborhoods with a view to eventually overrun it. So wherever you flee to, eventually the islamic question the islamic problem will come to your doorstep even if it isnt there yet eventually within 10-20years your area too will be overrun by muslims unless its somewhere out in the countryside or some sleepy far off town no one wants to live in except the elderly or rich. The amount of muslim migrants and refugee's that the west allows in is disgusting. All muslim immigration should have been stopped 30years ago because the demographics trend is that the poor countries around the world are mostly muslim dominated and so naturally they would want to migrate to richer non-muslim lands because islam is a failed economic ideology. They produce huge amounts of children and then feed of the state in the west contributing little or nothing for the nation.
  13. 5 points
    It wasn't a Muslim doing something stupid, it was a Muslim following the dictates of Mohammed treating a non-Muslim girl as his sex slave, the same as Mohammed allowed his followers. In fact that same that happened in most every country that Muslims have settled in. So this kind of treatment of non-Muslim girls is an Islamic trait. So if the Burmese start to riot because they see an Islamic trait being exercised in their country then you cannot really blame them. The Muslim rape jihad in Europe is well known around the world now so the Burmese do not want their women to face the same thing. You are right, the Rohingyas were on the British side during WW2 but do you also know that the Rohingyas used the weapons given to them by the British to defend Rakhine from the Japanese to attack and kill Buddhists. This is where the animosity stems from.
  14. 5 points
    Those were different times. The vast majority of Sikhs still had their heads in the sand about the issues that SP were dealing with. Now the issue of grooming is out in the public sphere no doubt the liberals are doing their level best to push it under the carpet again but that's not going to happen. Look at the work of SAS, they are admired even by non-Sikhs for the hard work they have been doing all these years. We shouldn't expect every Sikh to support us but as long as enough do then we are winning. The youth need to get involved in the Gurdwaras otherwise they will always be working from a position of weakness. Run the Gurdwara and yours is no longer the contrarian opinion.
  15. 5 points
    We need to get rid of the bleeding heart liberals from their positions of power. If the Gurdwara committee is full of these fools then get like minded youth together and take over that Gurdwara through the electoral process. A start has to be made and just as we fight the enemies without we have to also fight the enemies within.
  16. 5 points
    Classic commentary from the forum's own homosexual.
  17. 5 points
    Unfortunately being goody goody has deadly consequences in that you are diverting money that could be used to help Sikhs to being non-Sikhs. I imagine a lot of Sikh lives could have been saved but instead KA wanted the publicity of helping non-Sikhs for whom there were already lots of charities helping these non-Sikhs anyway. What KA did in places like Kosovo, Haiti etc were drops in the ocean to what the overall aid effort was from the international community. I support what they did in Syria because that was a unique case where the Yazidis were the forgotten people by the international community and were facing the worst kind of persecution by the Muslims. They were facing what the Sikhs faced in the 18th century.
  18. 5 points
    I enjoy reading your posts, and I can see where you are coming from in your analogy about Bhai Kanhaiya. I can see how helping rohingya is aligned with Sikhi. However, your analogy is not very applicable here, if Sikhs/khalsa aid were in Burma helping Sikhs, and if they don't help fellow Muslims in the same position then that will be going against Bhai Kanhaiya and Sikhi. In this situation, it is different, we are not helping fellow Sikhs in Punjab, but going out of the way to help Muslims, when Muslims are in much better position to help. It is like Sikhs going out of the way to help Palestinians get a country when Sikhs cannot even get their own country or Bhai Kanhaiya giving water to dying Muslims soldiers even when hundred of Muslims can give them water, but nobody is giving Sikhs soldiers any water. Presently, Sikhs are helping fellow Sikhs and everyone else who needs help in Florida and Texas (after hurricanes) and you can see in the videos that Sikhs are helping everyone who needs help, as Sikhs are there, and that is what Sikhs do. I think that is Bhai Kanhaiya and Sikh philosophy, and not the analogy you gave. At least, in my view.
  19. 4 points
  20. 4 points
    Offering to educate the children around your area can be a good start. If you can teach mool mantra and a few sakhis, for a start, then you can add punjabi language and japji sahib as well. Its just like tuition. One lesson per week can make a big difference to educating the community around you. This can create closer communities which means greater support. It is a great way to share your knowledge. Meeting to watch a religious video and discussions can help too.
  21. 4 points
    The Dogras were the most immediate cause of the empire's downfall, but the fundamental cause for the collapse of the Sikh Kingdom was Ranjit Singh's fatal decision to make himself king of the Sikhs and replace the Khalsa's republicanism (Sarbat Khalsa, Gurmatta, Jathedari) with a system of absolutist monarchy which centralized all power in his hands - this had no place in a 'Sikh' nation. His miscalculation ensured that the kingdom would all but fall apart his death and be vulnerable to vultures, particularly in light of the uselessness of his heirs. I disagree veerji. This Sikh kingdom would never have become as powerful as it did if not for non-Sikhs. The Sikh Empire was so successful while Ranjit Singh was alive precisely because he managed to integrate and secure the loyalty of the Punjabi musalman who constituted most of his subjects - and thereby ensured economic productivity and public order. The Khalsa army of the Lahore durbar was also not just made up of Sikhs - all cavalry were Sikh, but virtually the whole of the artillery was Muslim, as was a significant portion of the infantry of the regular army (included Pathans, Punjabi Muslims and Gurkhas). Secondly if not for the induction of non-Sikh European officers into the Sikh army, it would never have relinquished its fixation with irregular cavalry or its revulsion at the idea of infantry. Without the innovations of these non-Sikhs, therefore, the Fauj would never have advanced to first rank among the armies of Asia. An army composed entirely of cavalry is fine when you're fighting a guerilla war, not so much when you're building and defending an empire against men with guns and artillery. Furthermore not all non-Sikhs in the kingdom were disloyal to the durbar, and not all Sikhs were loyal. The Muslims of Punjab routinely resisted the calls of the Afghans (and later, the mutineers of 1857) to join them in jihad against the infidel Sikhs. The Fakir brothers (Muslims) were loyal to Ranjit Singh's memory to the last, as were several of the other Hindu Dogra generals of the Khalsa army (Dogras are a race, not a family. It was one family of Dogras in particular which caused most of the trouble). And while there were good, loyal Sikh nobles such as the Attariwalas and the Nakkais, there were many more who were fickle and treacherous. Rani Jindaan was notoriously corrupt , as were the Sandhawalias, who murdered Sher Singh, the only successor of Ranjit Singh with even a shred of competence, by blowing him to pieces with a shotgun. I think your stance is way too absolute bro. An empire is by definition multicultural and cosmopolitan. The Vatican is not the most apt comparison here (It is a country in name only).
  22. 4 points
    One of the top reasons for the muslim prison population was for drugs but wonder if the grooming cases has usurped that? If the authorities pulled their finger out and detained all those returnee "tourists" from Iraq and Syria, the muslim prison population would "explode" (pardon the pun).
  23. 4 points
    I did not state that the Kashmiris were part of a demographic jihad. They migrated to Punjab but the fact remains that they were not Punjabis and their numbers did boost the Muslim population in some districts. Lahore is an interesting example of how unfair the partition line was. Apart from the Sikhs owning a majority of the land in the district Lahore city was virtually all owned by the Sikhs and Hindus and they dominated the economic life of the city. Sikhs and Hindus owned over 67% of all the shops in the city, 80% of the registered factories, paid 10 times the sales tax compared to the Muslims, 13 out of 16 colleges etc. The reason that a part of Kasur tehsil of Lahore district was given to East Punjab was for a couple of reasons. Radcliffe probably wanted the make both Amritsar and Lahore equidistant from the border and to make more cities more defensible. Kasur tehsil had an even greater Sikh imprint than the other tehsils of Lahore district. The Sikh population was 29.7% in the tehsil compared to 18.3 % for the whole of the Lahore district. Sikhs also owned 63% of the total land in Kasur tehsil compared to 57% for the Lahore district. So it is natural that given the need to make both Lahore and Amritsar defensible Radcliffe chose to take a chunk of the majority Sikh owned Kasur tehsil and give it to East Punjab.
  24. 4 points
    You have misunderstood my statement. I am not claiming these areas because the Sikhs ruled over them but that Sikhs owned the land. The Turks cannot claim Palestine because it was a part of their empire but the Palestinians can because they owned the land. It's not about rule but land ownership. Sikhs owned 57% of the land in Lahore district, the fact is that the British took the district from the owners and passed it on to the tenants much as in the analogy I gave in the previous post. Maybe you should tell the Palestinians to move on and lose any hope of recovering their land that the Jews took.
  25. 4 points
    I think you are missing my point. There are rapists in every religion and every community. I have admitted that Sikhs raped and abducted Muslim women in revenge for what was happening to Sikh women in West Punjab and what had happened in Rawalpindi in March 1947. BUT the point is that these Sikhs were going against the teachings of Sikhism whereas a Muslim raping a non-Muslim women can find easy justification in the teachings of Mohammed. Those Burmese Buddhists weren't following the Buddha when they raped the Rohingya women although I do find it hard to believe that Buddhists would rape Muslim women in a majority Muslim country and whilst being held in incarceration in a detention centre.
  26. 4 points
    why speak on a subject you clearly misunderstand ... a person making up his own 'religion' cult is not a sikh or a muslim or anything he is a fool looking for other fools to fleece. I do not understand the stupid blood feuds going on in Islam , what happened many centuries ago why are you still trying to shed blood over it , surely the point is to submit to will of Allah and accept the past and move on by making your lives fruitful by doing your ibadat to realise hikikat?
  27. 4 points
    Cultural? But isn't sex segregation a TENET OF ISLAM? How can it be cultural when it is an accepted practice of Islam? You see you are now practicising taqqiya by telling a falsehood. You are refusing to put the blame of the rape jihad in the west on Islam.
  28. 4 points
    What those Sikhs did to Muslim women was deplorable and no Sikh I know has ever defended that. You can somehow understand why is happened because exactly the same thing was done by the Muslims to the Sikh women in the villages of Rawalpindi six months before. So it was a case of Muslims following Mohammed's command to rape non-Muslim women and six months later the Sikhs going against the teaching of the Gurus and doing the same to Muslim women. I doubt that if the Muslims had not raped non-Muslim women in Rawalpindi then the Sikhs would have indulged in rape of Muslim women. So there is the difference. The Muslims were following Mohammed's commands and the Sikhs were not following the Gurus.
  29. 4 points
    Good reply, this yoyo is a mild muslim nationalist he doesnt realise how non-muslims see what we are seeing with their demographic threat to other cultures and religions. Islam is like the borg in star trek you wither get taken over and absorbed within it or destroyed there's no other way to co-exist with large muslim populations in the long term. The main bones of contention with the buddhists not only of burma but of sri lanka and thailand too is the looming muslim demographic population threat. They have held back for years not to rock the boat but I think they have realised they have to deal with the muslim question sooner or later and they are dealing with it now rather than later. Its sad on a human level the sane humans will sympathize with anyone thats being genocided, ethnically or religiously cleansed out of their lands or area's they lived for generations but in the wider historical and regional context this is a religious and ideological struggle for survival for the buddhists and Buddhism in their last bastions of self rule and existance. Whereas islam has 50+ countries as its state religion and vast area's of land and resources where rohingyas could be resettled and accommodated also the muslim illegal migrants and refugee's that headed to europe have no business being in non-muslim lands they should be settled in muslim rich lands to live the islamic life their faith requires.
  30. 4 points
    I've never heard a 7th grader refer to themselves as "daas".
  31. 4 points
    Agreed posting vids of mayaridden lost souls doesn't help anyone ... naamdharis already have missed the boat and are in the drink but don't realise they are drowning yet.
  32. 4 points
    The word Kharku was used in the Punjabi newspapers to describe the Sikh freedom fighters. Among the common people they were just referred to as 'Munday' or Boys. Newspapers in Punjab which followed the official line such as the Tribune had started to call them terrorists around 1984 but when they were threatened by the Kharkus around 1986 they just referred to as militants. Nowadays for such newspapers any Sikh who raises his voice for Sikh rights as called a radical.
  33. 4 points
    There are plenty good looking moneh punjabis, I assure you.
  34. 4 points
    I see that but words have power and the choice of words can either enhance your argument or it can turn people aggressive.
  35. 4 points
    This is just going to turn into a flame war and anything productive you have written will be lost. I think the other poster didn't like your reference to Sikh males as thin and fudhu. Just edit your posts and delete the swearing and move on.
  36. 4 points
  37. 4 points
  38. 4 points
    Khalsa Aid doesn't exclude Sikhs veeray, you can see a list of their projects on their website where they clearly set out the work they do with Sikhs in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq: http://www.khalsaaid.org/projects/kabul-refugee-aid http://www.khalsaaid.org/projects/displaced-sikhs-in-iraq http://www.khalsaaid.org/projects/displaced-sikhs-in-pakistan As well as Sikhs in Punjab and other parts of India: http://www.khalsaaid.org/projects/punjab-floods-2007 http://www.khalsaaid.org/news/sikligar-sikhs-project http://www.focuspunjab.org/ Muslims can help their brothers and sisters, but often they do not. The Palestinians for instance, despite the lip-service paid to their cause across the Islamic world, have been all but abandoned in practice. The response to the Syrian refugee crisis by the rest of the Arab countries was also shamefully tepid, and the plight of the Kurds elicits little sympathy from anyone. In a world which is increasingly full of chauvinism, I believe we should be glad to belong to a community which is one of the few that even attempts to rise above the divisions and embrace its responsibility to the wider human race, when most others are only concerned with looking out for their own - the people in their own house, or their own country, or of their own religion. I am happy to see the Sikh Panth taking steps towards realizing what I hope is its destiny as the moral conscience of the entire world.
  39. 4 points
    You guys are missing the point here, not all tasks need to benefit us. Forcing khalsa raj, pushing for publicity isn't the point of seva. It's selfless service (Helping just to help), once you attach an agenda behind it, it's not seva. That's what Ravi singh does, seva.
  40. 4 points
    2 completely different things. Ravi Singh is probably a great man, trying to be a good Sikh, but the comparison of Bhai Kanahaiya to him is not something I'd recommend. Bhai Kanahaiya served as a Sevak whoever he can, regardless of whether they were Sikh or not. Ravi Singh is trying to exclude Sikhs. If he helped Afghan Sikhs, Middle-Eastern Sikhs, or African Sikhs, nobody would bat an eye, but he excludes Sikhs, and it's not beneficial to anyone. Before any publicity, we need an independent Sikh organization that represents Sikh-interests support internationally. Fiancial Aid to Sikhs in Punjab or wherever, consueling for Sikhs, and only then will we no longer be seen as 3rd rate citizens in the world.
  41. 3 points
    Nothing wrong with forging relation with an enemy of an enemy. There is absolutely no wisdom in Sikhs making enemies out of Hindus and Muslims at the same time.
  42. 3 points
    Size and population does not mean anything. The Maharaja had signed the instrument of accession to India and land should have been freed up for the Sikh and Hindu refugees of West Punjab. If 5 Million Sikhs and Hindus could be driven out of the lands they held for generations then why not 2 Million extra Muslims being sent to Pakistan. The Kashmir dispute would definitely have been solved before it even began.
  43. 3 points
    Britain has in fact awarded majority population areas to minorities before. One of the counties in Northern Ireland had a catholic majority and yet it kept out of the Irish republic and given to Northern Ireland. Economic factors were actually used to award the Chittagong Hill Tracts to East Pakistan by Radcliffe even though the Muslims was only 3% in population there. This would have been akin to awarding Rawalpindi to India even though the Sikhs and Hindus were more than the 3% Muslims in CHTs. Such was the belief that the CHTs would go to India that the local tribes had raised Indian flags on govt buildings and these were only torn down by Pakistani troops from Chtiiagong port a few weeks afterwards. True to form the Bangladesh govt has settled Muslims there and they have been oppressing the Buddhists tribes there for decades and many of these tribes have migrated to India. https://www.amnesty.org.uk/groups/wirksworth-and-district/hidden-bangladesh-violence-and-brutality-chittagong-hill-tracts It's a guess whether Muslims would have fought back if Radcliffe had awarded all of the Lahore division and canal colonies to East Punjab. Given the fact that the Indian army was undergoing division itself the only fighters in this war would have been the common people. Jinnah and his deputies would have made a big show of being betrayed by the British but both Jinnah and Nehru was lawyers and such had great respect for the law and would have accepted Radcliffe's ruling. Nehru accepted the loss of the CHTs and Jinnah would in the end have accepted the loss of a slice of Punjab to East Punjab.
  44. 3 points
    Anyway with any knowledge of Islam will tell you that demographic jihad has been a part of Islam since it's very inception. The aim of Islam is to dominate. If it cannot dominate through force it will seek domination through out breeding the non-Muslims. You state that there is much sympathy for the Rohingya? Really, do you think a country where Muslims will happily bomb a Mosque belonging to another sect of Muslims who are their neighbours will have sympathy for a group of Muslims a thousand miles away? There are lakhs of Biharis in camps in Bangladesh who are not allowed to migrate to Pakistan by the Pakistan government. These Biharis actually showed their loyalty to Pakistan by fighting for Pakistan in the 1971 war. So if Pakistan doesn't even want to allow Biharis who incidentally speak Urdu the national language of Pakistan then why would Pakistan allow Bengali speaking Rohingyas who have less chance of integration than Biharis?
  45. 3 points
    I agree with the notion that we must first succeed as a community ourselves, before going out and fixing the issues of others, and of course, charity begins at home. However, what Ravi Singh is doing isn't bad at all. I think we as a community have developed a very bad habit of criticizing each other for any achievements whatsoever. I agree that Ravi Singh should be doing more for Sikh issues, but he's also not doing anything bad either, he's instead following Sikhi by helping people irrespective of their faith, creed, ethnicity (so basically recognizing the human race as one). I think we need to overlook some of his faults (which I agree he does have, but who doesn't) and instead see how we can get not only him more exposure, but our community good exposure as well. Name one Sikh that has won a Nobel Prize, none. It wouldn't hurt to have one, and so if there's a likely candidate such as Ravi Singh, why not back him up? @jkvlondon Of course the reward of seva is unmatched by anything, however a Sikh getting a Nobel Prize is a great achievement for our community, collectively. So I don't see what's wrong in helping Ravi Singh achieve that goal, which is ultimately a communal goal.
  46. 3 points
    I use to like kanwar alot too, but what you're saying is he went to go correct people; what kanwar said in his response was his band has mouths to feed and he goes wherever a program is booked
  47. 3 points
    This is pretty shallow thinking, you're implying if a person changes their mind they're wrong
  48. 3 points
    I'm sure you're not here to indulge in flame wars. Can you delete your post and lets move on. Discuss the issue and how we can resolve it rather than making it personal. I am sure both of you hate what these Muslim dawah people are doing but making personal attacks isn't going to help deal with the issue.
  49. 3 points
    Sometimes the best and most common sense decisions are made sitting on a nice sofa in a comfortable room in a nice warm house.
  50. 3 points
    I agree. Charity starts at home. Khalsa aid is a great organisation. But why should we give money to syria and rohinga. These people will laugh that we are helping them. Sikhs cant even build a Gurdwara in syria and other arab countries. We are also persecuted. yet we help these same people. Its a case of trying to be to goody goody.
×