proactive

Members
  • Content count

    1,475
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

proactive last won the day on September 20 2015

proactive had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,084 Excellent

3 Followers

About proactive

  • Rank
    Sri Harkrishan Dhiaeeai Jis Ditthay Sabh Dukh Jaae

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  1. Rape as revenge is implied here rather than just killing. Revenge is almost always universally proportionate, eye for an eye,, tooth for a tooth..life for a life. Singhs would have been killing the Muslims anyway in battle for killing them in revenge for rape would not make sense unless of course these Muslims were common Muslims rather than Muslims in the armies of the Mughals. The Guru implicitly forbids rape as revenge because the Panth is founded on higher principles rather than the Islam of Mohammed. The idea that carnal relations with a Muslim women is what makes a Singh into a Muslim is an interesting concept and tied into the idea that no one could be forced to become a Muslim unless they let their base instincts and lust get the better of them. Lust and rape is hence tied to Islam. A follower of the Guru was not to lust after or rape women. For the Singhs in the Gurus army there would only be two ways of them coming into a situation where they could have carnal relations with a Muslim women. 1. Having captured a Muslim woman and raping her. Here it is clearly shown that the Guru was against the rape of captured women even though Mohammed and Ali both did this with captured Arab women and hence this behaviour is central to Islam and has been done by Muslims throughout the last 1400 years the latest example being the way ISIS have raped Yazidi women in Iraq. So if a Singh in the Gurus army rapes a captured Muslim woman then he transgresses the Guru's instruction (Gur Shashtar) as well as following the example of Mohammed which incidentally Muslims believe is the ideal behaviour for a Muslim to emulate! 2. Carnal relations with a Muslim woman outside of warfare. Here it could be through either the Singh being captured and being offered his life for converting to Islam along with this in order to cement his conversion it was usual for him to be offered a Muslim woman as a wife. By accepting this the Singh has naturally become a Muslim. Also the rule in the Islamic state is that no Muslim woman can marry a non-Muslim. So if the Singh had a romantic attachment to a Muslim woman then for him to have carnal relations with her would mean his conversion.
  2. Gurdas Mann is a sell out, he sold his soul many years ago and is now just following the current trend which is of criticising the drugs culture of Punjab. He's not stupid, he knows songs about sharab aren't going to sell anymore and so he bring out this song bringing in Shaheed Bhagat Singh just to get some extra plaudits. He is one of those who contributed to making the Punjab into a drug addicted state. He has composed songs such as Apna Punjab howay which propagates alcohol drinking as something positive about Punjab. He is the follower of a deadbeat chain smoking fake baba called Laadi shah.
  3. The youtube account below provides some interesting personal eyewitness accounts of Sikhs who were affected by the partition. I have watched most of the them and personally feel the interviewer appears to a left wing liberal fool who doesn't make any comment when it is Sikhs being massacred by Muslims and yet has it is Muslims getting killed he claims it is a blot on the area that such things happened. In one of the videos when an interviewee states that some members of a Sikh Jathas were martyred when the fought with the military the interviewer interjects that they are not Shaheed but lootaray! The channel seems to have been set up to cater for the the families of those Muslims who left the area in question mostly Hoshiarpur and Jalandhar districts so that they can see their old houses and the villages where their elders lived. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcn73C3_GG5S_NUrkWglC1Q/videos?flow=grid&sort=da&view=0
  4. Firstly congratulations on the birth of your triplets!! In the Gurdwara I go to it is up to you how much you donate for the Ardas but I think the smallest amount people give is £ 11 and there is no upper limit. This is for the Ardas at the end of the service. I would contact the committee and ask them why you were quoted these prices. Even if the Ardas was just personally for you still it should not be that extortionate. On a side note, there is no requirement for a Giani provided you or another someone who can do the Ardas for you then you could easily go to the Gurdwara with that person and do Ardas. Just put whatever amount you wish into the Golak.
  5. The major mistake the Sikhs made was to allow the 'other factors' in the terms of reference to be vague and open to interpretation. The Sikhs should have held back on accepting the decision in advance unless the other factors were properly defined and equal weightage given to them with population. If equal weightage had been given then given that the Hindus and Sikhs virtually owned the whole of the city of Lahore and had a majority of the businesses, factories, schools, colleges etc and that the Sikhs owned about 58% of the land in Lahore district then it should have gone to East Punjab in 1947. As far as I know the boundary commission never had an appeals process. Because they representatives of all the communities could not agree to anything then Radcliffe was given the final decision and you are right he made a right hash of the partition line. The British chose someone who had never been to India and did not know the ground realities present in Punjab.
  6. The Sikhs were the ones which had fought for the partition of Punjab. The British were quite happy to leave the Punjab as a whole to Pakistan but it was the agitation by the Sikhs that forced them to deny Jinnah the whole of the Punjab. The Sikh agitation especially to stop the Muslim League minority government from taking power in Punjab was what convinced the British that the Sikhs would never accept Muslim rule in Punjab. The Sikhs especially after the March massacres in Rawalpindi knew that if the whole of the Punjab went to Pakistan then the Muslims would make life hell for the Sikhs. What the Sikhs were violently resisting was a partition line which was splitting the Sikh population in half and placing millions of Sikhs and the Sikh shrines in Pakistan/ That quote is attributed to Trivedi as South Indian who Nehru appointed as governor of East Punjab in 1947. Master Tara Singh was not a traitor. He became a Sikh out of choice and had he been a traitor as you allege then after 1947 and having in your view betrayed Sikh interests why did he fight for Punjabi Suba? Surely Nehru would have awarded his treachery and Master Tara Singh could have had an easy life. If anything his life was a life of struggle to get the Sikhs their due rights in India.
  7. If the population factor was detrimental to the Sikh cause then the Sikh leadership needed to think outside the box. There were the Sikh states which had a population of 3.5 million of which Sikhs were 39%, Hindus 34% and Muslims 24%. So they would have been the nucleus of a Sikh state. With the Muslims gone from these states the Sikhs would have been a majority. These states had treaties with the British and once the British announced they were leaving then these Sikhs should have reverted to the independent status they had before the British came.
  8. From what I have read there was definitely a plan by the Sikh leadership to create Khalistan/Sikhistan in 1947. The reason why this is never highlighted is that after the plan failed the Sikhs had to prove that they were as loyal as the others as Indians and hence the constant refrain since 1947 about how Sikhs were at the forefront of the freedom movement. After 1947 the Sikhs had to prove their nationalist credentials especially as their struggle for Punjabi Suba was being portrayed as an attempt at creating a Sikh state. Sikhs activities aimed at creating Khalistan/Sikhistan in 1947 normally gets a couple of lines in the standard books on partition. In the partition negotiations the only option the British have to the Sikhs was either to join Pakistan and thus the Punjab would not have to be partitioned or for it to be partitioned because the Sikhs wanted to join India. The Sikhs having experienced Muslim rule knew just what would be in store for the Sikhs in Pakistan so the Sikhs opted to join India and have the Punjab partitioned. The mistake the Sikh leadership made through Baldev Singh was the accept the Radcliffe award in ADVANCE as did the Congress and Muslim League. The Sikhs should have refused to accept the Radcliffe award in advance unless the 'other factors' in the terms of reference were defined ie Sikh historical Gurdwaras, Sikh land holdings etc The Sikh leadership could have derailed the whole British plan to leave India quickly by refusing to accept the Radcliffe award and then working with the Sikh states to derail Mountbatten's plan to force the Maharajas to join either India or Pakistan. The Sikhs could have played havoc with the carefully laid out British plans. Having made the mistake of accepting the Radcliffe award in advance, the Sikhs were left with only one option and that was the ensure that East Punjab was cleared of Muslims so that Sikhs who were left in Pakistan by the Radcliffe award would be able to come over to East Punjab. The Sikh leadership did at least make common cause with the Sikh Maharajas to ensure that the Sikhs were ready and able to drive the Muslims out of East Punjab and the Sikh states. The Sikh leadership knew that they could not start anything while the British were still in charge so the plan was to start after the Radcliffe award was announced. The Maharajas were to concentrate on taking over the districts adjoining their states. Faridkot was to take over Ferozpur district and Patiala was to take over districts to the east of the state. The Jathas reinforced by soldiers from the Sikh states and ex-soldiers from the Indian army were to take over Amritsar and Lahore and the canal colonies. Why did it fail? There are a number of reasons for this. At most the Jathas had 100,000 members split all over Punjab. Some Jathas were a few hundred in number and other were many thousands. The Jathas had a good strategy and the help of former soldiers as well as soldiers of the Sikh states made these Jathas very effective. They were also able to swell their numbers by getting help from Sikhs in the local area who were not members of these Jathas. According to a paper I read called The Master and the Maharajas, the Jathas had plans to evict the Muslims from areas of British Punjab that Sikhs wanted to be a part of Sikhistan but the East Punjab Muslims especially in the Sikh states were in an aggressive mood and started to congregate in large numbers at various places which became a security concern for the non-Muslim residents of these areas. Muslims also attacked Sikh and Hindu villages in these areas and therefore the Jathas had to operate in the Sikhs states to deal with these Muslims whereas in the initial estimation the Sikh states would have been considered as safe areas not requiring any Jatha activity until the main objectives had been achieved. The Jathas also were not in a position to openly challenge the Punjab Boundary Force (PBF)which were the only military force to operate in the crucial central Punjab area. The PBF could call upon tanks to support them and in one clash they killed over 60 members of a Jatha that had clashed with them because of their having support from tanks. If the Jathas has been supplied with anti-Tank weapons then they would have had a much better chance of success against the PBF. Also not much action seems to have been taken to bring over the Sikh troops in the PBF force over to the side of the Jathas. The PBF devoid of the support of the Sikh troops would have become ineffective. To create a viable Sikhistan, the Sikhs would have had to take areas allocated to Pakistan in the Radcliffe award such as Lahore, Nankana Sahib and the canal colonies of Lyallpur and Montgomery. In Lahore city the Sikhs were only 5% while the Muslims were 64% and the Hindus 26%. By the time of the Radcliffe award a majority of the Hindus and Sikhs had already left the city as the Muslims had burnt the Hindus out of their main base Shahalmi area, so to gain the city would have entailed a siege without much support from inside the city. Had the Hindus held out like the Sikhs had in Amritsar then the city could have been an objective for the Jathas. As the Jathas also now had to deal prematurely with the Muslims in East Punjab and the Sikh states there would have been no manpower to spare to take Lahore. The same was with the case canal colonies, the Sikhs there stayed put and were well organised but with no help coming from the Jathas from East Punjab, these Sikhs would have not be able to take the offensive against the Muslims in their areas. The only thing that was provided in the end was an order to move to India and some men to escort the Sikh caravans to East Punjab. The Sikhistan plan also envisaged that the Indian would be strong and may even assist the Sikhs with regular troops with which to take back the Sikh areas of West Punjab. Nehru was weak and it was felt that Sardar Patel might either take over the government and assist the Sikhs or that he might bully Nehru into doing so. It was also felt that the Pakistan govt would be weak and being a being far from Punjab in Karachi would not be able to take control of West Punjab. The Indian government was weak for more than six months and in West Punjab the Pakistan government was never put to the test due to the factors outlines above. The main drawbacks of the Sikhistan plan was that it relied on too many variables such as support from Indian govt, a weak Pakistan and a passive Muslim population in East Punjab and the Sikh states. Also the Sikhs were caught in a catch 22 situation. If they revolted before the Radcliffe award then they would have faced British troops and a unified British Indian army but if they revolted after Radcliffe award they would be fighting against an agreed upon border to which they had already accepted in advance. Also the plan needed to be better thought out. Sikhs troops should have been ordered to leave their barracks and make for Punjab and join the Jathas. Sikh troops of the PBF should have been won over and thus the PBF neutralised. Like the Jews did exactly a year later, the Sikhs should have aimed to arm the Jathas with more modern weapons and turned them into regular units. The Jews were even able to set up a small Air Force in Palestine just as the British left so something similar could also have been attempted by the Sikhs. There were a lot of Sikh soldiers who had experience in fighting in tank units and the Sikh states should have arranged for the supply of these types of weapons which would have turned the tide against the Muslims in West Punjab. Had this been done then it is likely that given what the Jathas had achieved in East Punjab then these units of paramilitaries could have taken over areas of West Punjab as well. Another drawback of the Sikhistan plan was that the Sikh states did not fight to become independent after the end of the British paramountcy over them ended in 1947. They meekly accepted a change of masters and had they held out against Mountbatten and with the support of the Sikhs in British areas threatening violence they could have forced Mountbatten to allow them to become independent or merge into an Independent Sikh state. With their eastern front defended by the Sikh state thus preventing any Indian intervention in Punjab, the Sikhs had they been better armed and formed into regular army units could have had a free hand in West Punjab against a weak Pakistan government. The Sikhs would have had to take West Punjab up to a river boundary so that it would have been easily defensible. The Ravi would have been a good boundary but it would have meant that Nankana Sahib would still be left out so it would probably have been the Chenab as a frontier and this ironically would have been same boundary as demanded by the Sikhs in their representations to the Radcliife commission. The repercussions of what was happening in Punjab would have been felt in other areas of India as well. It is likely that the Rajputana states would have held out for independence as well becoming a headache for India. Seeing what the Sikhs achieving in Punjab, the Dogras may have attempted for an Independent Kashmir and driving out the Muslims from Kashmir making more problems for the Pakistan government. Hyderabad would also have gone for Independence and this would have kept India busy in this area. When you think about it, had the Sikh leadership both in the British areas and in the Sikh states been better prepared the map of South Asia would have been unrecognisible from what it is today.
  9. Sri Hindu Takht was one of those organisation set up by Hindu gunday who would use the internet and post threats to Khalistanis via youtube. They are head quartered in Patiala in the area where there was clashes between Sikhs and Hindus during the Punjab Bandh of 2012 in support of Bhai Rajoana. They are a paper organisation who issue threats via youtube and the gunda that got killed only joined the organisation a few months ago and he could very well have been killed under orders of BJP so that they can terrorise the Hindus into voting for them. There is also the fact that they also had a clash with some left wing organisation in Ludhiana over the new year which could be a reason why this guy lost his life. https://thewire.in/94296/in-ludhiana-popular-protests-against-right-wing-vandalisation-of-leftist-bookstore/ The upshot of the whole issue is that there is one less gunda in Punjab.
  10. He was used by Rajiv Gandhi to divide the Sikhs just as the witch Indira had used Santa the Nihang to divide the Panth in 1984. Barnala also used the police in 1986 to invade the Durbar Sahib so giving the Indian government credibility as they could point out that EVEN a Sikh had taken the same action as Indira Gandhi had done. Rajiv Gandhi dropped him after using him and sacked his government when it looked like Congress would lose in Haryana in 1987. Although Barnala's government was bad it was many times better than the Badals, At least Barnala allowed Justice Ajit Singh Bains to look into the cases of Sikh youths in jail and released a majority if not all those whose had been falsely imprisoned by the govt.
  11. SA was pretty much dead before it actually died. That's not the SA I remember. The site was biased towards the Nangs and allowed them full rein to post whatever bukwas they wanted. The site was 'fake news' before fake news became famous. Lately they allowed their resident Jat hater Dal Singh to turn every thread into a Jat bashing thread. Don't know why they've gone down maybe Putin has some photos of Neo in a compromising position and he's forced him to close the site!!
  12. That site started off well but was heavily infiltrated by Nangs and from then on it went downhill because it allowed them to sprout their bukwas without forcing them to provide evidence to back up their comments. Not sure what happened to make them take the website down but Neo wrote something about a user called Drawof being the new owner and then it went down.
  13. No one is swallowing the narrative of the Anglos otherwise these Sikhs would be promoting the British take over of Punjab as a good thiing. What is happening is that they are commemorating a battle in which the Sikhs had they had a better leadership would have defeated the British. This has been discussed before. NO SIKH that I know would ever say that it was a good thing that the Khalsa kingdom was annexed. Even those Sikhs who lived south of the Satluj whose were already under the British in areas of Ludhiana and under the rule of the Maharajas lamented at the loss of the kingdom. In fact if we look at Sikh history this one event had the most negative impact on the future history of the Sikhs even more than the ghallugharas or Bluestar. Since 1849 we have gone from being an independent nation who controlled a territory about the size of France to a small minority whose future is tied to the whims of the Hindu majority.
  14. That is just available for Ealing borough as a whole Hindu Jewish Muslim Sikh All categories: Tenure 8,465 572 15,117 7,498 Owned or shared ownership: Total 5,362 426 4,848 5,120 Owned outright 2,020 236 1,578 2,446 Owned with a mortgage or loan or shared ownership 3,342 190 3,270 2,674 Social rented: Total 828 36 4,625 959 Rented from council (Local Authority) 479 15 2,751 587 Other social rented 349 21 1,874 372 Private rented or living rent free: Total 2,275 110 5,644 1,419 Private landlord or letting agency 2,011 103 5,066 1,123 Other private rented or living rent free 264 7 578 296
  15. The number of speakers of Somali language in 2011 in Southall were 2111. Asylum seeker info is not taken in census.