Jump to content
superkaur

Is khalsa aid wasting sangats resources on muslim rohingya?

Recommended Posts

YOYO29    53
4 hours ago, proactive said:

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.

Your only problem with Rohangya is that they are Muslims.I bet if today Rohangya people convert to Sikhisim or Hinduism you would be the first one to support them and condemn burmese govt.I can't belive how you people are justifying the genocide of rohangya and at the same time many of you people have the audacity to shout sarbat da bhalla at the top of your head.So much for sarbat da bhalla huh

Edited by YOYO29
  • Like 1
  • Confused 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chatanga    1,068

Just before coming on the forum about 10 mins ago, I had a flick through the Sky Tv Channels. At least 8 channels are fundraising for Rohingyas.  I'm pretty sure that the Muslim community will be able to hold their own on this. There are thousands of poor Sikhs (and others) in India who could benefit from that KA help.

I dont want to be mean but there is no doubt in my mind that the international Islamic community would never come through to help the Sikhs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chatanga    1,068
8 hours ago, kcmidlands said:

 really man, it's a terrible shame that people think like this, it's like seeing someone injured on the road and saying "Nah man, leave it, someone else can help them".

 

Fair enough but if there 10 others in front of you, then do you need to push to the front to help?

 

The Rohinhgyas are getting a lot of international aid, and have been helped by golbal Muslim community for the last 2 or 3 years at least. Where did the Rohingyas get the weapons to attack over 30 police posts and other army posts to start this current phase of violence?

 

6 hours ago, superkaur said:

 

Guru Ji also said create an area of self rule because without political sovereign power with all the functions of a state you cant help your own people properly nor you can help needy others from other communities. Liberal far left ideology that tries to brainwash Sikhs into thinking rush out to foreign far flung lands to help everyone is wholly wrong, against logic and common sense and I would put it its wholly against the future progression of spreading Sikhi. As at the moment Sikh populations in important key area's are dwindling cos Sikhs are not helping them meanwhile abrahamic populations are increasing at an alarming rate in dharmic lands aided by their rich abrahmic political states while stupid Sikhs with no idea of future demographically impact are helping them survive and thrive at our own expense.

 

Absolutely.

 

5 hours ago, proactive said:

 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.

 

It looks like this to me as well. The fact is that every day, people all over the world starve to death. In India their own govt figures say that 7000 people, yes thats seven thousand people died on average every day from wont of food. And KA has 2.5 million in bank?

 

4 hours ago, proactive said:

 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. 

 

It has been proved by Kosovo. These Albanians infiltrated that land to such a degree that they outnumbered the Serbs and took over the land and threw the Serbs out.

 

Also remember that there was a fair population of Kashmeri Muslims settled in Panjab swelling their number up and taking away so much land they were not entitled to .

 

2 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

 but NOBODY was helping rohingya , yezidis and others when Khalsa aid got involved

 

That is not true at all. For some years now I have seen on Muslim Tv channels very regular fund-raising schemes for Rohingyas.

 

35 minutes ago, YOYO29 said:

You don't want to help Rohangya that is fine.

 

Help Rohingya? We can't help our own, how can we help anyone else?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akaltaksal    53
5 hours ago, chatanga said:

Just before coming on the forum about 10 mins ago, I had a flick through the Sky Tv Channels. At least 8 channels are fundraising for Rohingyas.  I'm pretty sure that the Muslim community will be able to hold their own on this. There are thousands of poor Sikhs (and others) in India who could benefit from that KA help.

I dont want to be mean but there is no doubt in my mind that the international Islamic community would never come through to help the Sikhs.

Muslims care for themselves and their own community.  Thus they should watch over their own kind.  It's survival. 

They won't come to the aid of Sikhs but would be more than happy to dig our graves. 

 

Khalsa Aid and all these other organizations needs to focus and channel their resources to needy Sikh populations across the world, and not to these rohingyas or other muslims, they already have a community to care for them.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akaltaksal    53
5 hours ago, proactive said:

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. 

The problem with a sizable muslim population is that their religion at one point or another will real it's head up, followed by Islamic nationalism. It's a group of people that cannot, and will not conform to the moral culture that's present in the rest of the world. But would rather seek to dominate. Even secular, pre-dominantly Muslim countries are becoming increasingly Islamic and conservative.  Bringing such people in, without an effective plan to dissolve, neutralize and integrate them is dangerous to the host country. Learn from Europe's mistakes.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
superkaur    322
4 hours ago, proactive said:

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. 

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.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
proactive    1,367

I think that YoYo guy is used to people tip toeing around Islam and accepting his BS that Islam is a religion of peace even as they see bombs going off all around them set off my Muslims. Truth is the only antidote when dealing with Muslims. Muslims cannot live in peace with non-Muslims. I have spoken with people who are in their 80s and who remember living peacefully with Muslims prior to 1947. Their recollections are that community relations were good but when the Pakistan demand was raised then these relations worsened, The fact is that the vast majority of Muslims in British Punjab prior to 1947 were non practicing and did not live by the dictates of Islam. This was why they had good relations with non-Muslims. After 1947 as Pakistan has become more and more islamicised and Muslims have started to become more and more religious then the lives of non-Muslims have become worse and worse. It is an unfortunate fact that the more Islam equals more violence against non-Muslims. 

Now that will come as a shock for YoYo because as I stated above he has had non-Muslims tip toe around him all his life so a dose of reality will come as quite a shock for him. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
YOYO29    53
11 hours ago, proactive said:

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. Y

Demographic Jihad ??? Complete nonsense n propaganda by anti Muslim , right wing websites.
 

 

11 hours ago, proactive said:

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! 

First they are Muslims and their religion is not in danger in Bangladesh.There has been some talk of rehabilitating them to Pakistan but I have heard peole saying that you can't control one MQM which is party of Urdu speakers in Karachi;how u gonna control them bihraris if they are allowed in Pakistan.Personally i don't agree with this.Rohangya case is different their religion is in danger as u know Pakistanis go crazy when Islam is in danger card is played.You don't live in Pakistan so u don't know how much sympathy exist for rohangya.Govt would be under severe pressure if they did not allow them to enter in Pakistan.

Edited by YOYO29

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
YOYO29    53
9 hours ago, chatanga said:

Also remember that there was a fair population of Kashmeri Muslims settled in Panjab swelling their number up and taking away so much land they were not entitled to .

What about thoses sikh who migrated to west punjab from eastern district to setlle in new colonies like lyalpur ? thus decreasing their numbers in eastern district.Most Kashmiris settled in Jalandhar and Amritsar.And both of these districts did not become part of Pakistan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
YOYO29    53
9 hours ago, proactive said:

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.

How can you be so sure that he was following muhammad's teaching he might have been hurt by burmese atrocities on his people and tried to take things in his own hand.Can you really say that Sikhs raping Muslim women in East Punjab were following the orders of Guru's ? Or that Sikh mob which attacked a Muslim girl hostel in Amritsar and made these girls walk naked in the streets of Amritsar were doing so because of guru's hukm. Absolutely not.They just wanted revenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
YOYO29    53
10 hours ago, proactive said:

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. 

They have been living in that land for last hundred years or so ,the only problem burmese govt has is that rohngya are not part of burmses society so they are kicking them out.It would make no difference even if they were hindus or sikhs.they would have met same fate.Like East African countries like Kenya did with Sikh/Indian people in 1970s by kicking them out from their countries.But i think you are blind from your hatred of muslims which has been indoctrinated into you right from childhood.And this hatred is clouding your judgement.

Edited by YOYO29

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
proactive    1,367
7 minutes ago, YOYO29 said:

Demographic Jihad ??? Complete nonsense n propaganda by anti Muslim , right wing websites.
 

 

First they are Muslims and their religion is not in danger in Bangladesh.There has been some talk of rehabilitating them to Pakistan but I have hear peole saying that you can't control one MQM which is party of Urdu speakers in Karachi;how u gonna control them bihraris if they are allowed in Pakistan.Personally i don't agree with this.Rohangya case is different their religion is in danger as u know Pakistanis go crazy when Islam is in danger card is played.You don't live in Pakistan so u don't know how much sympathy exist for rohangya.Govt would be under sever pressure if they did not allow them to enter in Pakistan.

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? 

  • Like 3

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

    • For starters, it seems that any Sikh orgs that do speak out against what's happening in general that may have "some" shared views with those that seem to be not of the liberal/left persuasion is seen as an abomination by left wing Sikhs.  It leads to me to believe that you are clearly on the left of the political spectrum. There is nothing wrong in being on the left of the spectrum. However, the left of the spectrum these days which claim to be tolerant and inclusive except they are very selective as to whom they are tolerant towards. Now with the increase in muslim population has meant an increase in certain crimes such as organised street grooming and terrorism.  Now with these happening more often, people are beginning to find patterns for this. A lot of this rooted in Islamic ideology. The fact the likes of SYUK will speak out against this you don't like. The people who support the left of the political spectrum like the Islamists for some reason and tend to walk on egg shells around them.  However, people on the left of the political spectrum (like yourself I believe) won't think twice about attacking people who want to stand up to the intolerance.  The contradiction I find generally with the left is that they want full rights for gays yet at the same time want full Sharia law for muslims. The irony is that the muslims will attack the gays if given half the chance. Muslims will not show tolerance and the people on the left will not speak out.  If someone not of the left points this out, it is pointed out as hate speech and you are shouted down called islamophobic or racist.  The left want diversity, just not diversity of opinion. In the Communist countries, freedom of speech is not allowed. The left claims to be liberal but act in the same manner of Communist countries. Communism has it's origins in Marxism and I suspect the left are Marxists in disguise. They might not be in power politically but there is cultural subversion going on. It seems that you are clearly influenced by this type of thought. That is why I suggested that you may be a Cultural Marxist.  I provided a link from the Telegraph to show what is happening in universities that has been overwhelmed by leftist though is now doing no platform which means freedom of speech is being curtailed.  This is cultural marxism taking over. However, if it is Islamic hate speech it is accepted. Your stance against SYUK seems to suggest that you are accepting of Islamist hate speech but not of people who would fight against it like Tommy Robinson.  I think the problem Sikhs on left of the political spectrum is that they think Sikhi somehow is the same as this leftist thought. It is not. They are influenced by the left (which is influenced by Marxism ) more so than Sikhi. That is why I called you a Cultural Marxist.  If you feel that is not articulated enough for you I can go on and on and on. The problem with your thought process is that it may eventually lead into a totaliterian system.  Totalitarianism is the antisesis of Sikhi.  
    • Our life is so short. We have so many constraints and chains. Remembering Bhai Sahib's beautiful life accomplishments as a Gursikh.
    • This is what I was referring to... 
    • Avoiding what my brother?  It appears to me that you use such labels as 'cultural marxist' without having a clear definition of what it is.. Please in your own words explain.. What examples have you provided of evidence of my indoctrination?  Using content produced by others just suggests to me that you don't really know what you are talking about... I'm sure you do... But without explicitly articulating your assertion, quite frankly it seems like you are more comfortable in being a sycophant than having your own opinions..  With all due respect  S
    • It's a reply to the other poster. He was mentioning that there are not enough sangat that attends the gurdwara but when we drilled down into the specifics. There are more people in the langar hall than the darbar.
×