amandeep

This initiative is just a money making excercise. The registration demands that you make a Premium Rate Phone call which costs 50pence (about $1) not 0.5pence (as is stated). There really isnt a great deal of merit to this other than some supposed publicity.

Sorry to hear of your troubles, that is really out of order. With regards to your letter - there are a number of minor grammatical errors and a couple of spelling errors. Ive cleaned it up and attached it. On a more general note, the opening few paragraphs are fine as you detail the events. However the last couple of paragraphs lack some punch. You need to explain exactly what you want BWIA to do ? Do you want a personal apology? a corporate apology ? Do you want Chittar to be chastised in some way ? Do you want BWIA to institute training? Compensation? What exactly do you want them to do. If you dont state anything then they will write a non-commital reply "regretting that you were inconvinienced by their securty measures" and then throw your letter away. I woudl also be inclined to strip out all unecessary verbage and get the letter down to just a few paragraphs. Also put a time limit on their reply (14 days) and if you dont get a reply then escalate the issue from customer Srvices up the chain of command (short letters get read long ones get ignored) I would also encourage you to let SMART/SALDEF becuase they have dealt with these cases before and a legal approach from them can simply scare an airline into compliance. You may want to look at their website for some good resources. Good Luck (and please see the re-worded letter below) Aman I am writing to complain about discrimination that I had to endure from one of your employees at Piarco Airport on xxdatexx. While in transit at Piarco International Airport in Trinidad and after clearing security I approached the BWIA counter for check-in Mr Maniram Chittar (A BWIA employee) checked my docume nts and told me to have a seat. After checking the other in-transit passengers Mr Chittar re-inspected my passport meticulously before a very rude and public interrogation began. Again, Mr Chittar demanded that I return to where I was sitting and I was made to wait another fifteen minutes. By this time, passengers were being called to the gate since boarding was about to start. I was again called to the counter where Mr. Chittar’s impoliteness towards me grew Information that was clearly stated on my passport was repeatedly asked of me; it was clear that Mr Chittar thought that I was carrying a false passport. I had no problem with this because since my last passport picture was taken, I have since grown a beard and I wear a turban which is a requirement of the Sikh religion. Mr Chittar made no attempts to make this interrogation private; I was questioned in the presence of all other travellers and passers-by. As his questioning continued, I could see the reaction of other travellers towards me; they were looking at me as if I had done something wrong. My humiliation grew when Mr. Chittar, publicly asked me how long I had grown that ‘that thing’ on my face; he was referring to my beard. Appalled at this disrespectful question, I asked Mr Chittar if he was referring to my beard. He demanded that I answer his questions regardless of how he asked them. I remained calm and explained to Mr. Chittar that I am a Sikh and keeping a beard is a requirement of the religion; I went on to tell Mr. Chittar that referring to my beard as ‘that thing’ is very disrespectful and hurtful. Mr. Chittar responded, ‘Yeah Whatever’. Shocked at Mr Chittar’s indignant response, I asked him if he was harassing me because I have a beard. This direct question obviously infuriated him as he told me that he can do whatever he wants to anyone he chooses. Determined to assert his authority. Mr Chittar instructed another BWIA employee that my bags should be removed from the plane so that they could be searched. Obviously upset at this point , I told Mr Chittar that he had no right to speak to me in such a manner since I have paid for my ticket and am entitled to the same respectful treatment as other passengers but my words seemed unheard by anyone. I was then summoned by Mr Chittar to the boarding area and made to wait until everyone boarded the plane, even though I was seated in section 1OF. This horrible encounter mercifully came to an end. I am very humiliated and hurt by the actions of Mr. Chittar and I am determined not to let this prejudice go unnoticed. I want everyone to realize that this discrimination still plagues visible minorities, and it is not restricted to normal civilians; it is evident even in the Airline Authorities with whom we place our trust. Persons like Maniram Chittar should not be allowed to get away with such behaviour. I was the centre of harassment and embarrassment because I have a beard and wear a turban. Think about this for a second: I was treated like a criminal because of the length of my facial hair and the turban on my head; I was insulted because I chose to follow the requirements of my religion. Imagine being insulted because you wore a cross on your chain. I was exposed to this prejudice because Mr. Chittar Thought that tolerance was too good for someone like me. Mr Chittar is a paid employee of British West Indian Airways (BWIA); and on January 6th he was paid to make me feel less than a human being. He was given money, by his employers, to harass me because of my beard and turban. Of course this is not the intention of Mr Chittar’s employers, but should he continue to be employed, it would suggest that Piarco International Airport and BWIA condones and encourages this religious intolerance. It suggests that Mr. Chittar employers support his opinion that anyone who is different by his standards should be subjected to harassment and embarrassment. Mr Chittar should not be allowed to subject other persons to the prejudice and humiliation that I was made to endure and I sincerely hope that his emp loyees at BWIA share my sentiments. I will never forget this humiliation, but I do understand that these are people who do not understand my religion and culture; but this should not give anyone the right to treat another person with such disrespect because they have not been properly educated. So this is my mission: To make as many people aware of this actions of Mr. Chittar and those like him; to encourage anyone who has been discriminated against because of their race, religion, culture or nationality to stand up against this religious intolerance. We have a voice, the media is capable of reaching every corner of the world; and this is where my story intends to go. YOU REALLY NEED TO EDIT DOWN THE LAST 2 PARAs AND ADD EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANT BWIA TO DO. Eg Do you want them apologies personally, go on cultural awareness training and compensate you? Also have them reply to you in 14 days otherwise threaten to go to the CEO and also start publicising this through the wider Sikh community in North America. Try to get this onto 1.5 pages maximum {you may want to quote the following from www.sikhnet,com which has some good sources in it} You are not allowed to be discriminated against solely on the basis of being a Sikh or based solely on an appearance or dress that is associated with our religion and/or culture. o For example, selecting a man for an inspection solely because he is wearing a long beard or turban is unlawful discrimination, violating state and federal statutes and constitutional principles. o As a Sikh woman, you have the same rights with respect to your hair covering as a Sikh man has with his turban. o The authorities may search you in the same manner in which they search other passengers. That is, if they are requiring all passengers to disrobe, or if they are “randomly” searching passengers without regard to their appearance alone. Source: Norman Strickman, US Department of Transportation, Office of the General Counsel, email to Aviation In dustry, September 21, 2001 o You or your property are not to be inspected, searched, detained and/or denied transportation services solely because you are a Sikh, speak Punjabi, wear a Turban, or wear Punjabi clothing. Source: Carrying Out Transportation Inspection and Safety Responsibilities in a Nondiscriminatory Manner, email from DOT to Aviation Industry, October 16, 2001 o If you trigger a metal detector and security asks you to remove your turban, ask first that they check you with a hand wand, and if necessary, to pat you down. You may request that this be done in a public or a private setting. If security refuses to respect this reasonable request, ask to speak to a supervisor. Source: Carrying Out Transportation Inspection and Safety Responsibilities in a Nondiscriminatory Manner, email from DOT to Aviation Industry, October 16, 2001 o If a search or inspection is necessary for safety or security reasons, you must be provided with the choice of a public or private inspection. You must be given the opportunity to replace your clothing in a private area. Source: Carrying Out Transportation Inspection and Safety Responsibilities in a Nondiscriminatory Manner, email from DOT to Aviation Industry, October 16, 2001 o You have the right to be treated with respect and in a polite, respectful and friendly manner, just as the other travelers expect to be treated. Source: Carrying Out Transportation Inspection and Safety Responsibilities in a Nondiscriminatory Manner, email from DOT to Aviation Industry, October 16, 2001

I dont base any of my opinions on any websites. I base what I have written on encoutering and meeitng with the Buddha Dal in 1992-1993 including talking with Santa Singh on occasion. Their view os important as old photogrpahic records are quite clear that the Adh Chand symbol is somehting that they have been using exclusivly - this is clear in 19th century photogrpahs (I woudl point you to the book Warrior Saints for example). The Farlaa, too, has been used exclusively by them as a mark of rank. On these counts it does make sense to ask them what the two symbols mean - and I did, and the answers I got is basically what I have been writing. I realise that the answers will not be palatable to everyone but thta is what they believe. Once again, my poin tis that if you choose to wear that symbol then understand what it means to the peopl who have acted as guardians for it for at least 200 years. Instead we have folk sticking it on their head and not really understanding its origins but thinking it looks cool. A sawsticka can look kind of funky if you dont undertsand what it conjours up and of course we woudnt stick that on our heads - my point is that we shoud apply the same level of rigour to this. Deep Singhs question about the symbolism (if any) used by Guru Gobind Singh is the more important Q.

From "Sicques Tigers or Thieves, Eyewitness Accounts of the Sikhs, 1606-1809": Ancient accounts make reference to the original seven rivers of Punjab in the epithet Sapt Sindhava (the land of seven rivers.) In early Sanskrit literature only the five rivers are alluded to in the term Panchanad. Later Greeks accounts recounting Alexander the Great’s travel through the country also define the region by its five rivers in the term Penta Potamia. Gurû Gobind Singh refers to Punjab fondly in the autobiographical work Bachitar Nâtak using the ancient name Madra Deú as the Gurû recounts how he was bought from Patna and lovingly cared for in the country of his forefathers.

Navjot Singh Khalsa wrote " Santa Singh and his gang of Hindu worshipping drug addicts" . . . oh dear, clearly you would rather descend into childish nme calling than actually exchange ideas. This thread could go on for hundreds of pages and never be resolved. THe heart of the debate is whether you belive that Nihang symbolism is rooted in Shiv Saroop (as they themsleves believe) or whether you woudl rather accept the revisionist theories. In a sense, it really doesnt matter. THe Adh Chand symbol is there - the Buddha Dal woudl contend that it is a shiv symbol, and the revisionists woudl contend that it is a miri piri and a khanda knocked out in batches by ham fisted 18th century armourers! So, its your choice, if you want to wear one and you can reconcile the inherent issues with the revisonsint theory then go ahead - wear it with pride. As I said earlier in this topic the 3HOers simply said that the chand wasn't a shiv symbol but it was the swishing of the sword ! they reconciled it and are happy to wear it and you can mke that choice and do the same. But, as anyone with any knowledge of the Buddha Dal will tell you, that symbol is a symbol of the chand and a shivling Aman

This paragraph was hilarious : "Many years ago we asked Tarna Dal Jathedar Baba Nihal Singh Ji of Harian Belan about the Chand shape. He commented that the Chand shape is merely a simplification of the the Swords of Miri-Piri, with the two handles emerging from the bottom where the Torra is inserted into. He mentioned that the Singhs in the old days didn't have the capabilities to manufacture intricate shapes and designs, so the Chand and the two dangling handles repsented their simple Miri-Piri design. Knowing Baba Nihal Singh, I doubt if he would try to cover up the truth and just conjure up the above explanation." :wub: So let me get this straight, the armourers who could produce the most beuatiful damascus steel, fabulous recrved blades, the most dramatic and sought after blades in eth world from the hardest materials known to man coudlnt form a simply sword hilt from soft steel !!! and if theywere so hamfisted that they couldnt manage a intricate design then why go to the trouble of dangling the balls on small closed hooks - surely it woudl have been easier to simply rpoduce littel welded blobs !!!!that explanation is hilarious, absolutely amazing. Baba Nihal Singh has shown time and time again that he is quite prepared to gloss over some of the less palatable aspects of his own belief system in order to market his own brand of the Buddha Dal lifestyle - but this really does take the biscuit. I will respond to your pther points tommorow after I have stopped laughing aman

To MS514 First off a Khanda is not a shiv ling. My point is that the central "thing" in the Add Chand symbol is a shivling NOT a khanda. Its just that the central "thing" seems to be depicted as a khanda and seen as some but it isnt - here are some thoughts: a) THe BUddha Dal consider it a Shivling - thats a pretty good provenance since it was they who have kept this symbol alive and use it most prominantly. b) The Shivling has multitude of forms, eg in Bhutan it is a perfectly formed male gential, whilst in southern india it is simply a rounded stone and in between there are all manner of varaiations c) in the nineteenth century Akali Chands (in pictures and artefacts) the central art of a chand tora less closely resembles a khanda d) the two "balls" at the base of the "khanda" (as you put it) are not a khanda hilt !! THey are exactly what woudl be at teh base of a shivling Essentially the depiction is an artistic one and therfore there is some licenbse - hence why the trishul, Add Chand, Shicvling etc all look different but they are all from the same root - they are not exact representations. Think about it, if the modern day khanda was an exat depiction the central chakkar woudl be about 4 foot in diameter! the two swords on either side woudl be almost hemispherical in their curve - again this is simply graphic art. I woudl continue t contend that we are looking at a Shiv symbol. Incedentally, the shivling is a problematic symbol (look at the picture from Gurbarr akal and you can see that not only is it "in Situ" but it is also at its most potent). Since India become increasingly prudish about this symbol - a function of 200 years o f christianity in the country - there has been a movement to re invent the shivling away from its origins as shivs to a flame ! INa 100 years or so this may well become recieved wisdom and the same deabte will rage. That central "thing" in the Add Chand is similarly morphing from being a shivling to being a khanda - because the original expanation is considerd unacceptable. I woudl imagine that within a few years we will see Add Chands without the two "balls" at teh bottom just to finally put a nail in that coffin, THe more important Question was raised by Deep Singh, ie was the Chand incorporated by Guru Gobind Singh? This is much harder to answer Aman

Thanks for posting that image - its a pretty good example - I was unsure how to post pics otherwsie Iwould have done the same. Virtually all images of Shiv show the Chand Symbol. More critically you will also see the trishul associated directly with Shiva. The Trishul is essentially a chand with a shivling in the centre that has become a trident. In the image that you showed you will also note that eminating from the top of Shiv's hair is a single "cosmic" strand of hair which becomes the River Ganges (Ganga) - mythological explanation. This piece of Shiv symbolism is also repeated in the Akali Nihang tradition with the Farla that is bestowed upon the Akali Sikhs of the Nihang order. In recieving (and wearing) a Farla the Akali become Maha Kaal and directly mimics Shiva mythology. THe Chand Tora/ Add Chand is simply an extension of that very same mythological root. THe picture you put up is a really excellent example. BUddha Dal philosophy is pretty clear on the link between their own symbolism and the Shiv Saroop. This is not a recent innovation and not a particularly contentious point in Buddha Dal thought. This contention that the Add chand refers to fighting night and day is pretty non sensical becuase there is no depiction of the Sun. I remeber many years ago when the 3HO people started debating (internally) about the Add Chand symbol. THey too were shocked at its ostensible "Hindu" origins and I heard one of the most implorable suggestions that the Chand wasnt a chand but was in fact the "swishing" of a khanda throught the air ! well that how they reconciled it - and I still see 3HOers wearing it One of the mosre honest opinions on tshi topic has been : "he wear s it becuase it looks cool" - that pretty well sums it up really !

The etymology that you provided is really interesting and as you say relates to the khanda (sword). this thows up an intersting point, because you have traced the word through to an origin in both shiv symbolism and as a standard or flag - this si probably the root of why Sikhs now refer to the symbol (2 tulwars, chakkar and bhangauti) as a khanda. The Add Chand as a Shiv symbol has such an ancient root and is so well documented that to claim otherwise would need some really solid proof (and I havent really seen anything like that on this topic. I know that Sikhs dont like hearing this, but the Add Chand is an ancient Shiv symbol which includes a central Shivling. This is not (as osmeone mentioned) a sexual connetation and it is not some kind of Nihang subversion. I have always contended that anyone that chooses to put any symbol on their turban (whether that is an Add Chand, Khanda or even a Nike symbol!) shoudl understand exactly what it is, what it means and its history. To place a symbol on your forehead and not undertsand it simply belittles it and the wearer. the Add Chand is a well understood symbol and so is the more modern khanda both have their histories and both make a statement in different ways aman

There has been an almost identical discussion on the tapoban site. At risk of repetition is may be worth reading this : http://www.tapoban.org/phorum/read.ppa?f=1...898#reply_19334

THe bullet marks have already been removed - when the re-guilding was done by the NIshkam Sevak Jatha they replaced the panels and simultaneously removed the bullet goles. That is our entire point - that the Harimandir Sahib's layers upon layers of history - from the original 17th century plinth to the 18th century structre, then the 19th century plating by Ranjit Singh and finally the marks from the 20th century (1984 etc) - were removed (without thinkin) by the jatha in their zeal to reguild for 1999. The impact has been that these layers of history have been wiped out and we are all the poorer for that. That has nothing to do with slander, the fact that this debate always descends into this kind of asccusation just goes to show that the counter agrument is pretty weak aman

THank you stopsingh2, I hope that others can see the folly of this petition. Actually Dr Rais latest press release betrays the petty politics that are at the heart of this deception. THe main thread of his argument is that the SGPC is not representative of all SIkhs and therefore shouldnt decide unilaterally on Sikh matters and secondly that the SGPC isnt the highest authority on Sikh matters. This is the heart of his problem - the SGPC and its powerful political position. Unfoirtunately he is using this issue (WHS) as a stick to beat the SGPC and at the same time whipping up sentiment in the UK and the US to dmamage what is an otherwise extremely positive step forward. I personally dislike the way the swagger of the SGPC and most of the things that they do but in this case they are unwittingly supporting a change that will stop them doing further damage to the buildings that they control. Aman

Hello and thanks for your message. I re-read the UNESCO page on the witnss84 site in case it had substantially changed since the last time - it hasnt and I do still retain my points. The last paragrpahs are really interesting becuase it is here that there is some common ground. The site asks: Why the community has not been consulted questions the SGPCs authority over the Harimandir ands ability to speak for Sikhs globally questions the SGPC jurisdiction why the SGPC have not responded to your valid questions Now, here I think that we can both agree that teh SGPC do not consult, do act as if they own the place and are incompetent in many matters o administration. However, this does not mean that there is a deep seated consipracy to "hand over the Harimandir Sahib complex" to UNESCo or the GOI - it just means that the SGPC are incompetent and vastly over inflated. The reason that I trust the the WHS application is that it has been lead by world class conservators who care deeply about the damage that had been done to the various buildings over the years. The SGPC and indeed the state and central govt need to be "on side" to make the application simply becuase they will be held to task if there is any threat to the fabric of the building or the architectural integrity . Nothing else changes at all - nothing - everything stays the same until such a time as someone tries to damage the building with unsympathetic conservation or even tries to erect neon signs (as they have at the moment in adjoining hoitels). It also stops the corrupt city officials from allowing buildings encroaching onto the site or further whitewashing of the Bab Atal etc etc Have a look at t eh myriad of sites that have WHS (on the UNESCO website) its quite clear that these have not ceded any kind of control in their functioning - its just offers a level of protection to the fabric of the buildings. aman

With respect to you all - and I have written before on this topic - but this petition is baloney. You are all being swept into internal SGPC politics here. World heritage Status does NOT mean any change in jurisdiction at all - it simply prevents interventions into the fabric of the building or the architectural integrity - THAT IS IT. if anyone - kar seva babas or Indian government, the SGPC or anyone else wants to mess with the fabric of the building then conservators will now be able to lobby UNESCO to provide expertise - that is it. What is happening is that there is an internal power struggle within the SGPC and you guys are bring swept into it - one faction is raising the spectre of GOI control and 1984 and whipping up sentiment in the west by using this issue as a stick to beat the other side - you guys are getting swept into that. Had WHS been in place in 1984 - the Sikhs could have easily taken India to task over the damage to the Harimandir and the destruction of the Akal Takht straight to UNESCO. We could have avoided the SGPC from pulling the Akaal Takht down and could have provided expertise in getting the building conserved properly. We could have avoided the bathroom tiles being used inside the Baba Atal Tower, we could have provided world class expertise during the re-guilding effort, we could have stopped the SGPC from pulling down the last of the ancient Bungas around the Harimandir etc etc - that is the value and importance of the WHS - it gives conservators more of a level playing field and nothign else. Aman

THe Neeldharis are a sect witin a sect - they orignate from the Namdhari panth. After their founder Sant Harnam Singh died (about 20 years ago) they split into varous smaller factions - all of which have been fighting it out for years. THey have a large following in South East Asia where many of the business commuinty seems to have been attracted to them. IN Singapore they are known as "Blue Belters" becuase they always wear a blue kamarkasa. I couldnt find any referece on their website, but I understand that there is a belief that those wearing a blue kamarkasa will be resurected when Guru Gobind Singh returns to earth ! As a reuslt of this Sant Harnam Singh (who died in the 1980s) was not cremated but his body was preserved and lies inthe basemant of one of their gurdwaras in Punjab. The SGPC have tried to get the Neeldhari leaders to cremate the body but as far as I knwo its still there aman