Jump to content

Sikhs and Saucha Sahib Pakhandis


Guest Jacfsing2
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, jkvlondon said:

veer ji the major difference is these new fakes are totally aggressive and violent to our people ... we have a God given right to defend people and match force with force as these people are misusing law, police and media to make us the aggressors 

Yeah, force with force, that is acceptable in every country except the UK (where if you beat a burglar, you will be arrested). Anyway, what is the justification for crashing a "Naam Charcha", which is just a bunch of Sirsa followers getting together to do whatever their fake baba tells them is their mode of worship?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 49
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

7 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

given that Sirsa wale has made more than 400 sikh youth into literal eunuchs and raped many sikh women I think why not...

Haven't heard about eunuchs, have a link? Or on the rapes?

8 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

We have a right to reclaim lost people hoodwinked by this fake , just as we have a right to protect our kids from groomers and jihadis

Yes, we do have a right to protect kids from groomers and jihadies, but that is on a far different level than people going to Sirsa. Groomers present issues of consent and sexual aggression. Jihadis of violence.

How is that the same as people voluntarily going to the Sirsa baba (admittedly fake)? We do not own the Dalits as our property which we can just force to only attend gurdwaras, and never go to deras. If by "right to reclaim lost people" you mean non-violent preaching as in approaching people and talking, handing out pamphlets, taking out advertisements, holding meetings and divans, yes we have that right, and also the Sirsa baba also has the equivalent right.

But if by "right to reclaim lost people" you mean the right to disrupt non-violent religious meetings, no, we absolutely do not have that right. What do you think we are, Muslims? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BhForce said:

Yeah, force with force, that is acceptable in every country except the UK (where if you beat a burglar, you will be arrested). Anyway, what is the justification for crashing a "Naam Charcha", which is just a bunch of Sirsa followers getting together to do whatever their fake baba tells them is their mode of worship?

did you ask similar questions when the premis attacked ordinary Singhs (numerous times e.g.2007, 2012, 2017 )  and smashed up a Gurdwara in 2007 in Haryana border area? So beadbhi of Gurughar went unanswered, beatings, mutliations,killings and rapes of sikhs is forgettable ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jkvlondon said:

did you ask similar questions when the premis attacked ordinary Singhs (numerous times e.g.2007, 2012, 2017 )  and smashed up a Gurdwara in 2007 in Haryana border area? So beadbhi of Gurughar went unanswered, beatings, mutliations,killings and rapes of sikhs is forgettable ?

Seriously? You're acting like I just created my account 5 minutes ago to post pro-Sirsa propaganda, as opposed to being one of the 4 or 5 most conservative posters on this site.

I just said numerous times during this thread that people (including Sikhs) do have the right to fight violence with violence. Answering violence with non-violence is cowardice. And using violence against non-violence is zulam (oppression).

Are you trying to say that beating up random Sirsa followers is acceptable as a response to the 2007 Gurdwara beadbi? If so, is beating up random British people in retaliation for Jallianwala Bagh OK? And Hindus killing random Sikhs in retaliation for the Indira assasination?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BhForce said:

Haven't heard about eunuchs, have a link? Or on the rapes?

Yes, we do have a right to protect kids from groomers and jihadies, but that is on a far different level than people going to Sirsa. Groomers present issues of consent and sexual aggression. Jihadis of violence.

How is that the same as people voluntarily going to the Sirsa baba (admittedly fake)? We do not own the Dalits as our property which we can just force to only attend gurdwaras, and never go to deras. If by "right to reclaim lost people" you mean non-violent preaching as in approaching people and talking, handing out pamphlets, taking out advertisements, holding meetings and divans, yes we have that right, and also the Sirsa baba also has the equivalent right.

But if by "right to reclaim lost people" you mean the right to disrupt non-violent religious meetings, no, we absolutely do not have that right. What do you think we are, Muslims? 

http://www.pressreader.com/india/hindustan-times-jalandhar/20120728/281651072237678

http://www.hindustantimes.com/punjab/cbi-court-rejects-sirsa-dera-chief-s-plea-for-joint-hearing-in-rape-murder-cases/story-r07OG7uhuP3h9frzJFR2pI.html

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chandigarh/Four-booked-in-Sirsa-for-raping-minor-sisters/articleshow/53257994.cms

https://www.nyoooz.com/news/chandigarh/81715/forensic-test-of-letter-ordered-in-sexual-abuse-case-against-dera-chief/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, BhForce said:

Seriously? You're acting like I just created my account 5 minutes ago to post pro-Sirsa propaganda, as opposed to being one of the 4 or 5 most conservative posters on this site.

I just said numerous times during this thread that people (including Sikhs) do have the right to fight violence with violence. Answering violence with non-violence is cowardice. And using violence against non-violence is zulam (oppression).

Are you trying to say that beating up random Sirsa followers is acceptable as a response to the 2007 Gurdwara beadbi? If so, is beating up random British people in retaliation for Jallianwala Bagh OK? And Hindus killing random Sikhs in retaliation for the Indira assasination?

the story is the sikhs legitimately protested and notified police chief who deferred to local inspector to deal with it . A Handful of sikhs turned up to the programme but they were arrested and two boys were also rounded up 12 and 14 year olds who were not there(seen footage will add URL)

http://www.sikhnewsexpress.com/sikh-dera-clash-mavi-kalan-police-post-in-charge-suspended-sne/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

When you said the Sirsa baba had made 400 Sikh youth into eunuchs, it sounded something like he was scooping up young Amritdhari Singhs into unlabeled white vans and chopping off their parts, and dropping them off in the streets. The article actually references Sirsa followers who were told to become eunuchs on the orders of the Baba. Now I don't endorse chopping off either your hair or your parts, but people are free to do what they want to do. We do not own people, and cannot prevent them from doing stupid things.

In any case, the courts are taking up a case against the Sirsa dera regarding this, so why do Sikhs need to disrupt Naam Charcha meetings for?

13 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

Did you notice the article says "Court rejects Sirsa dera chief’s plea for joint hearing in rape, murder cases"? Meaning the court gave a rejection to the Sirsa chief. Which means the courts are moving against the scum. So why do Sikhs need to disrupt the Naam Charcha meeting?

14 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

The article says "Four booked in Sirsa for raping minor sisters". It doesn't say "four released", or "four rapists totally ignored."

Secondly, while the two girls went to the Sirsa dera for "satsang", the article does not say they were raped in the dera, just a village inside Sirsa district. For example, "Amritsar" is the name of both a place (the Amrit Sarovar), and a city, and a district. A girl who went to Amritsar for darshan, and then was raped in a village of Amritsar district would not make the President of the SGPC responsible.

Again, the four were booked, so why do Sikhs need to disrupt a Naam Charcha meeting, and how does it advance the rape prosecution of these lowlifes?

14 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

Another article about an ongoing case against the Dera chief. So why do Sikhs need to disrupt a Naam Charcha meeting, and how does it advance the rape prosecution of this lowlifes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

the story is the sikhs legitimately protested and notified police chief who deferred to local inspector to deal with it . A Handful of sikhs turned up to the programme but they were arrested and two boys were also rounded up 12 and 14 year olds who were not there(seen footage will add URL)

http://www.sikhnewsexpress.com/sikh-dera-clash-mavi-kalan-police-post-in-charge-suspended-sne/

Did you read my analysis above? It is patent that the Sikhs were invading the Sirsa followers space. That is not a "legitimate protest". Again, a legitimate protest is standing outside the venue raising slogans, holding signs, distributing leaflets, talking to people, etc. But your own reference, by the "Sikh News Express", by, I assume, a pro-Sikh outlet, says:

"Some Sikhs had barged into the venue where the dera followers were holding a congregation in Marouri on July 23 and had disrupted their proceedings by brandishing swords."

How is that a "legitimate protest"?

Would it be OK for Muslims to disrupt katha of Guru Nanak Dev ji's visit to Mecca by brandishing AK-47s?

It should go without saying that the minor children should not have been arrested (or taken part in the invasion of the Sirsa meeting, either). That does not excuse the invasion itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BhForce said:

When you said the Sirsa baba had made 400 Sikh youth into eunuchs, it sounded something like he was scooping up young Amritdhari Singhs into unlabeled white vans and chopping off their parts, and dropping them off in the streets. The article actually references Sirsa followers who were told to become eunuchs on the orders of the Baba. Now I don't endorse chopping off either your hair or your parts, but people are free to do what they want to do. We do not own people, and cannot prevent them from doing stupid things.

In any case, the courts are taking up a case against the Sirsa dera regarding this, so why do Sikhs need to disrupt Naam Charcha meetings for?

Did you notice the article says "Court rejects Sirsa dera chief’s plea for joint hearing in rape, murder cases"? Meaning the court gave a rejection to the Sirsa chief. Which means the courts are moving against the scum. So why do Sikhs need to disrupt the Naam Charcha meeting?

The article says "Four booked in Sirsa for raping minor sisters". It doesn't say "four released", or "four rapists totally ignored."

Secondly, while the two girls went to the Sirsa dera for "satsang", the article does not say they were raped in the dera, just a village inside Sirsa district. For example, "Amritsar" is the name of both a place (the Amrit Sarovar), and a city, and a district. A girl who went to Amritsar for darshan, and then was raped in a village of Amritsar district would not make the President of the SGPC responsible.

Again, the four were booked, so why do Sikhs need to disrupt a Naam Charcha meeting, and how does it advance the rape prosecution of these lowlifes?

Another article about an ongoing case against the Dera chief. So why do Sikhs need to disrupt a Naam Charcha meeting, and how does it advance the rape prosecution of this lowlifes?

the murder case and rape cases have still not been actioned its been 4 years plus, just defer defer defer

the picture- everyone is calm not angry/scared  maybe media just making a storm in a teacup?

there have been other directly related cases of rape and abuse ...any woman or girl is our sister daughter so our problem just as all guys who are being attacked and hoodwinked by this S- for brains man into cutting off their manhood to achieve mukhti are my sons and brothers.

what was the nature of the 'disruption' nothing said just repetition of the same phrase across the Hindian Media

Why should we tolerate new people being swindled do we not owe care to our fellow citizens knowing what we do ? JUst because he uses the phrase naam charcha , does it mean the same as you assume ? he called his mockery of Guru Pita ji his initiation ceremony too ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BhForce said:

Did you read my analysis above? It is patent that the Sikhs were invading the Sirsa followers space. That is not a "legitimate protest". Again, a legitimate protest is standing outside the venue raising slogans, holding signs, distributing leaflets, talking to people, etc. But your own reference, by the "Sikh News Express", by, I assume, a pro-Sikh outlet, says:

"Some Sikhs had barged into the venue where the dera followers were holding a congregation in Marouri on July 23 and had disrupted their proceedings by brandishing swords."

How is that a "legitimate protest"?

Would it be OK for Muslims to disrupt katha of Guru Nanak Dev ji's visit to Mecca by brandishing AK-47s?

It should go without saying that the minor children should not have been arrested (or taken part in the invasion of the Sirsa meeting, either). That does not excuse the invasion itself.

most of the protest was centred in the gurdwara try reading again , it was in the hundreds sangat, the police went to the gurdwara not where there was a problem ...and reinforcements also so any arrests was from there first , then after the fact they arrested 14 others supposedly from the sirsa satsang.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use