genie

The Black Prince - New Film Based On Sikh Maharajah Duleep Singh

163 posts in this topic

42 minutes ago, genie said:

We're making films on Ghadars now? If 200 years from now we start making movies on Badal; this will prove our gulami mentality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

We're making films on Ghadars now? If 200 years from now we start making movies on Badal; this will prove our gulami mentality.

Who's a gadhar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

We're making films on Ghadars now? If 200 years from now we start making movies on Badal; this will prove our gulami mentality.

How you come to that conclusion that he was a ghadar?

He was kidnapped, forced to convert to Christianity, his riches, his kingdom/empire stolen and he was brainwashed to live a life of a english christian country gentleman in the UK under the guardianship of queen victoria. He joined freemasons as was the custom of subjugadted kings and princes of india and under the freemasonary cult his power and riches were slowly being drained from him. He did not realise until much later on in his life his real roots and so re-embraced Sikhi again and tried to fight the british occupation on punjab by asking for help from the russian tsar and trying to raise a rebellion. But he was unsuccessful in his quests, I wouldnt say he was a ghadar he was a victim of circumstances and actually tried his best with little ability he had left to regain Sikh sovereignty against overwhelming odds against might of the british empire.

Badal family can rightly be called gadar's and should be done for treason by the Sikh kaum.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, genie said:

How you come to that conclusion that he was a ghadar?

He was kidnapped, forced to convert to Christianity, his riches, his kingdom/empire stolen and he was brainwashed to live a life of a english christian country gentleman in the UK under the guardianship of queen victoria. He joined freemasons as was the custom of subjugadted kings and princes of india and under the freemasonary cult his power and riches were slowly being drained from him. He did not realise until much later on in his life his real roots and so re-embraced Sikhi again and tried to fight the british occupation on punjab by asking for help from the russian tsar and trying to raise a rebellion. But he was unsuccessful in his quests, I wouldnt say he was a ghadar he was a victim of circumstances and actually tried his best with little ability he had left to regain Sikh sovereignty against overwhelming odds against might of the british empire.

Badal family can rightly be called gadar's and should be done for treason by the Sikh kaum.

Also last time i looked, duleep singh, didnt kill lakhs of sikhs to stop an uprising, steal from harmandar sahib golaks and pump drugs/alcohol onto his own people. Some ppl round here r so thick its insane. As if a young 10yr old, givin up his empire/dharam/kohinoor/wealth for sum crappy posh houses in england was his actual choice?! Do me a favour. Everyfink u sed is the truth genie!

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, StarStriker said:

Also last time i looked, duleep singh, didnt kill lakhs of sikhs to stop an uprising, steal from harmandar sahib golaks and pump drugs/alcohol onto his own people. Some ppl round here r so thick its insane. As if a young 10yr old, givin up his empire/dharam/kohinoor/wealth for sum crappy posh houses in england was his actual choice?! Do me a favour. Everyfink u sed is the truth genie!

he didn't get anything from gorey he died in poverty in Paris 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

he didn't get anything from gorey he died in poverty in Paris 

indeed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Satinder Sartaj as Duleep Singh?  And Duleep Singh is wearing a Patiala Shahi pagh?

 

Looks like a very poorly made movie ...

Edited by californiasardar1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Furthermore one of Duleep singhs' daughters went on to become a lead campaigner as a suffragette so he indirectly helped the womens rights movement via his princess daughter rebelling against the British political system and social order norms of the age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, californiasardar1 said:

Satinder Sartaj as Duleep Singh?  And Duleep Singh is wearing a Patiala Shahi pagh?

 

Looks like a very poorly made movie ...

yep , Rani Jindan didn't sit down to tea with the firangis, she was totally blind when she met her son again and discovered his kesh de beadbhi by touching his face and head .

She was alone with him at that meeting and in those few minutes her words cut him to the soul and he became a sikh again. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5158dfdde4b052be7736ea5e/5204e857e4b0d17bc5f20329/521513e0e4b086b165f538d2/1377113227543/DuleepSingh_Headshot_Yuba_City.jpg?format=750w

Is this a pathan type paghs, which i believe was the "in-thing" during sikh raj? Id imagine hari singh nalwa got influenced from the locals and made it in fashion. Or am i wrong?

Edited by StarStriker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, StarStriker said:

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5158dfdde4b052be7736ea5e/5204e857e4b0d17bc5f20329/521513e0e4b086b165f538d2/1377113227543/DuleepSingh_Headshot_Yuba_City.jpg?format=750w

Is this a pathan type paghs, which i believe was the "in-thing" during sikh raj? Id imagine hari singh nalwa got influenced from the locals and made it in fashion. Or am i wrong?

remember this is a royal comissioned painting and he was mona by this point so this more like a victorian fantasia on the supposed costume of the sikhs . His own father's dastaar was small and simple ...

Edited by jkvlondon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, StarStriker said:

Who's a gadhar?

Who converted to Christianity is the one who's a Ghadar

1 hour ago, genie said:

How you come to that conclusion that he was a ghadar?

convert to Christianity, 

Oh look, you answered your own question and yet still asking Daas why he's a Ghadar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

Who converted to Christianity is the one who's a Ghadar

Oh look, you answered your own question and yet still asking Daas why he's a Ghadar.

who was forced to convert to Christianity and groomed to become a christian by his british guardians

again how does that make him a ghadar? someone at 10years old forced to convert to Christianity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, genie said:

who was forced to convert to Christianity and groomed to become a christian by his british guardians

again how does that make him a ghadar? someone at 10years old forced to convert to Christianity

What did his new religion do to Punjab everyone knows. From building a big cathedral/clock near Harmandir Sahib, to missionaries to this day decreasing our population and brainwashing the innocent Dalits with money, Shastar ban, limit Sikhi prachar, Jalialwala Bagh, as well as others: this is just Punjab, imagine the entire subcontinent and even further how these Christians massacared the Indigenous people everywhere. For that reason he's a Ghadar. Punjab was split and now because of this Christian-Lover, Sikhs haven't had any real power in the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

What did his new religion do to Punjab everyone knows. From building a big cathedral/clock near Harmandir Sahib, to missionaries to this day decreasing our population and brainwashing the innocent Dalits with money, Shastar ban, limit Sikhi prachar, Jalialwala Bagh, as well as others: this is just Punjab, imagine the entire subcontinent and even further how these Christians massacared the Indigenous people everywhere. For that reason he's a Ghadar. Punjab was split and now because of this Christian-Lover, Sikhs haven't had any real power in the world.

Yes thats all true about the Christians british white imperialists

However how is that his fault? a 10year old forced to convert to Christianity

Who was groomed to learn the ways of the english and live like them if he wanted to survive in England. How was what the british christian white invaders did in punjab any of it his fault? I fail to see how he is a ghadar particularly as he actively fault against the british rule in later life and tried to regain his lost sovereignty after re-discovering his sikh roots thanks to efforts made by his mother jindan.

what your doing is a bit like victim blaming, so for example if a woman was raped or a man mugged you blame the victim (duleep singh) rather than the actual aggressor thief (the british) who is really to blame for what happened to punjab and thus fate of the Sikhs.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jacfsing2 said:

Who converted to Christianity is the one who's a Ghadar

Oh look, you answered your own question and yet still asking Daas why he's a Ghadar.

He was only young when he was forced to convert to Christianity.:p

Edited by CHaamCHrick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's face it Sikhi was sidelined by Maharaja Ranjit Singh way before the British set their sights on the Punjab.  The Nihung Singhs had already started to protest against Ranjit Singhs anti-Sikh ways and it would have just been a matter of time before there would have been a violent clash between the secular monarchy and the real Sikhs of the time.  Duleep Singhs fate was already destined to be separated from Sikhi.  Maharaja Ranjit Singh had brilliant qualities of a leader but his lavish and anti-Sikh lifestyle is the reason we are facing the problems of being stateless today.

Although the story of Duleep Singh is sad we must not forget that the Sikh 'nishaana' of the time was never to be ruled by a secular Monarch but to establish 'Khalsa Raj' and to be led by the 'Khalsa'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, genie said:

what your doing is a bit like victim blaming, so for example if a woman was raped or a man mugged you blame the victim (duleep singh) rather than the actual aggressor thief (the british) who is really to blame for what happened to punjab and thus fate of the Sikhs.

Personally Daas thinks the ingenious American peoples who converted to Christianity were also Ghadars; especially the South American tribal royalty. Even the Pope states the forced conversion of the the Americas was a crime against humanity: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/24/world/americas/24pope.html There are Ghadars on all sides; whether it's the form of South America or whether it's from the East and Sub-continentals. As far as I'm concerned the only reasonable thing they did for their faith was to protect their holy land from the Muslims in the Crusades, (even though I feel they were on the right side; they were still wrong once they freed their holy lands)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Jacfsing2 said:

Personally Daas thinks the ingenious American peoples who converted to Christianity were also Ghadars; especially the South American tribal royalty. Even the Pope states the forced conversion of the the Americas was a crime against humanity: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/24/world/americas/24pope.html There are Ghadars on all sides; whether it's the form of South America or whether it's from the East and Sub-continentals. As far as I'm concerned the only reasonable thing they did for their faith was to protect their holy land from the Muslims in the Crusades, (even though I feel they were on the right side; they were still wrong once they freed their holy lands)

ingenious = clever or indigenous= of the land, native ....

RC conversions were done at the point of a sword after massacres upon massacres and enslavement...at the time RC church was after the gold so didn't care  it's all very well sitting on top of a pile of booty to say sookhi sorry

They were forced by circumstance of possible onwards march towards Rome to defend else they were quite happy to ignore the local problem.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

ingenious = clever or indigenous= of the land, native ....

RC conversions were done at the point of a sword after massacres upon massacres and enslavement...at the time RC church was after the gold so didn't care  it's all very well sitting on top of a pile of booty to say sookhi sorry

They were forced by circumstance of possible onwards march towards Rome to defend else they were quite happy to ignore the local problem.

 

+1 for offering spell check. So you think it was ok that they converted? Here's the thing, they've been so brainwashed by Catholicism that to this day in post-independent South America, Central America, and Mexico, they still practice the religion that killed their ancestors: (in fact they are even more devout than the ones who spread Christianity to them in the first place). And Catholicism is paying a huge price for their crimes that most of their population has become irreligious and Christian-In-Name-Only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jacfsing2 said:

+1 for offering spell check. So you think it was ok that they converted? Here's the thing, they've been so brainwashed by Catholicism that to this day in post-independent South America, Central America, and Mexico, they still practice the religion that killed their ancestors: (in fact they are even more devout than the ones who spread Christianity to them in the first place). And Catholicism is paying a huge price for their crimes that most of their population has become irreligious and Christian-In-Name-Only.

think about just how they were treated, they died in their thousands and those who were the priests/ medicine men/ shamans  who could give them knowledge of the faith and culture were killed  thus no guidance ...it's easier to overwhelm the people then . That's why it is important to have each and everyone gianis of our granths and shastar masters so the knowledge is spread throughout the network (like the neural network of the brain ) so if some are lost others can still cover  the gaps .

 

RC is not christianity it is the disguised Roman empire ... using the christian doctrine's appeal to land and wealth grab.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

RC is not christianity it is the disguised Roman empire ... using the christian doctrine's appeal to land and wealth grab.

and sh@g kids. That's part of their thing too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

RC is not christianity it is the disguised Roman empire ... using the christian doctrine's appeal to land and wealth grab.

Making technicalities doesn't make me sympathize Christians any more. The 3 groups of Orthodox, Catholicism, and Protestantism each had their goals to mass convert the population. What made the Anglos different wasn't their strand of Christianity they were preaching, but the style they were preaching; they were less direct and wanted to fight the Panth indirectly. The Hispanic tribal population were still Ghadhars since unlike us who practice our Sikhi and not becoming Christian fanboys/girls, they gave-up their original religions. The Pagan Europeans also gave-up their own religion, and they didn't give it up because of their love for Jesus Christ and something about him being the messiah to save them, but they converted because of their own weakness; (which is why Sikhi will always have a head-up, because the ones who converted to Sikhi have always been by choice rather than force, even when the Sikhs ruled Punjab; the population was still allowed to practice their religion, and every single Sikh convert converted for love of Guru Sahib, Christians can not make the same statement without lying!)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_conversion You won't be able to see Sikhi in any list of force conversions, no matter how hard you tried, the 3 Abrahamic religions will be first to show-up in force conversion.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

Making technicalities doesn't make me sympathize Christians any more. The 3 groups of Orthodox, Catholicism, and Protestantism each had their goals to mass convert the population. What made the Anglos different wasn't their strand of Christianity they were preaching, but the style they were preaching; they were less direct and wanted to fight the Panth indirectly. The Hispanic tribal population were still Ghadhars since unlike us who practice our Sikhi and not becoming Christian fanboys/girls, they gave-up their original religions. The Pagan Europeans also gave-up their own religion, and they didn't give it up because of their love for Jesus Christ and something about him being the messiah to save them, but they converted because of their own weakness; (which is why Sikhi will always have a head-up, because the ones who converted to Sikhi have always been by choice rather than force, even when the Sikhs ruled Punjab; the population was still allowed to practice their religion, and every single Sikh convert converted for love of Guru Sahib, Christians can not make the same statement without lying!)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_conversion You won't be able to see Sikhi in any list of force conversions, no matter how hard you tried, the 3 Abrahamic religions will be first to show-up in force conversion.

 

orthodox are more like jews in that they don't do the missionary thing , jesuits/RC are the most aggressive after the baptist/evangelists again the protestants are trying to gain 'souls' empire building like the islamists .... totally mental Waheguru doesn't hand out brownie points for forced conversion or even freewill conversion ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • @harsharan000 i miss your words of wisdom posts... hope all is well. 
    • It's not just RS, you have other cults out there too. They use gurbani to lure people to fill their pockets. They are leeches, do not follow these so called cults... so called baba trilochan das has even started charging money for prashad. Rebranding Ayurvedic as guru prashadam and sell it to their followers - google it.... People Need to wake up. Faith is a business for these so called pakhadis.
    • God doesn't have a name, if you were a true Sikh you'd know that from Jaap Sahib. Nice try but your Devta Pooja Bhajans are just that, don't lump it with the supreme essence of God, that stuff there is trash compared to it. You didn't even know that the name Raam used in Gurbani isn't a name but a divine attribute.  Nice try but that song is talking about a being filling the person with energy and being their life support. You're so biased that just because the word Raam is there you start screeching its about God, when the person who sung it has a page devoted ENTIRELY to Ram Chander.  Well what do you expect. She had no come-back for the fact that she thinks she's got more knowledge and insight than a Brahmgyani, Honestly I'd rather watch "cartoons" than the drivel she does and above all I'm certainly not a massive hypocrite like her, my feet aren't in 2 boats with one sinking down to hell and the other rising up.   Since we're on the topic of "Bhajans" and Blasphemy. Here guy, according to Preeto this is also Praise of God.   I'll let you in on a little secret....this time it uses the word God.  
    • You know you don't have to hide behind a Sikh mask and can admit to being Hindu; nobody going to judge you, but when you try to use Sikhi as a shield to preach Hinduism; that's when it gets on people's nerves. Now your insulting his taste in t.v., when you've been watching Bhagat Beadbi of Ravidas.