Jump to content
InderjitS

Brothers charged with unlawful behaviour at Leamington Gurdwara cleared

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, GurjantGnostic said:

How do we know they lied?

They said they were protesting the use of funds, maybe they were...even if they were protesting the use of funds for a marriage. 

The criminal penalty was steep.  You really want them to go to prison for a long long time?

I hear people saying the sangat needs more sacrifice, maybe it does, but are those calling for it willing to do it themselves?

Maybe if they'd been charged with disturbing the peace they could just plead guilty , but they were up on serious charges totally misrepresented by police and media. 

Please explain your thoughts further.. I am unable to reconcile your position.. First of all the charges they were up against would probably at the worst led to a fine. 

Secondly how did the media and police misrepresent the protest. A bunch of masked armed men shut down a gurdwara 

The literature the protesters put out clearly stated that they were protesting against the marriage and made no mention of any misuse of funds. 

What sacrifice did they make? As far as I can tell they made none whatsoever since they denied protesting against the marriage 

Thirdly since the acquittal the literature published has been misleading by protesting group not stating at all that the two protesters denied being there against the wedding but rather spinning the story and presenting it as a vindication. 

I'm sorry but the evidence is overwhelming and clear they didn't have the backbone to stand up for what they believed in.. The penalty of which would have been a fine at the worst 

Their actions have cheapened and discredited their cause end of 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Sukhvirk1976 said:

Please explain your thoughts further.. I am unable to reconcile your position.. First of all the charges they were up against would probably at the worst led to a fine. 

Secondly how did the media and police misrepresent the protest. A bunch of masked armed men shut down a gurdwara 

The literature the protesters put out clearly stated that they were protesting against the marriage and made no mention of any misuse of funds. 

What sacrifice did they make? As far as I can tell they made none whatsoever since they denied protesting against the marriage 

Thirdly since the acquittal the literature published has been misleading by protesting group not stating at all that the two protesters denied being there against the wedding but rather spinning the story and presenting it as a vindication. 

I'm sorry but the evidence is overwhelming and clear they didn't have the backbone to stand up for what they believed in.. The penalty of which would have been a fine at the worst 

Their actions have cheapened and discredited their cause end of 

In the united states that's a big deal. Like 20 years in prison. Maybe uk is different. 

The evidence isn't overwhelming, but your opinion is clearly entrenched. I'll leave you to it. 

I expect you'll make a great sacrafice for Sikhi. 

Share this post


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

In the united states that's a big deal. Like 20 years in prison. Maybe uk is different. 

The evidence isn't overwhelming, but your opinion is clearly entrenched. I'll leave you to it. 

I expect you'll make a great sacrafice for Sikhi. 

As I said what sacrifice did they make other than shut a gurdwara down which doesn't seem like something to celebrate.. Behaviour of common thugs some may say.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they did lie to avoid legal ramifications I agree it is shameful behaviour. If you claim to be Sikh and were part of the protest then have the strength of character and conviction to stand by your views and beliefs. Did Singh's in the past who took part in various protests and deliberately court arrest, them tell lies to escape ramifications?? 

The whole episode was wholly avoidable, the flagrant disregard for Sikh rehit Maryada in the interest of making money by the notorious committee of this Gurdwara was the sole cause of this embarrassment. It backfired massively, the committee thought by deliberately fabricating and sensationalising their statements to the police a heavy handed approach would cause the protest to fail and send our a message to the community to deter future protests and allow the committee to carry on undermining rehit for financial gain.

The youth are the only ones to take a stand on such issues, if the community tried to rely on organisations such as Sikh Council etc etc  who have proven themselves to be toothless we would see very little action...These organisations claim go represent Sikhs then hold secret meetings with the Indian government without causing consulting the community they claim to represent...shameless. 

Edited by Cisco_Singh
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/02/2018 at 7:42 PM, Cisco_Singh said:

The whole episode was wholly avoidable, the flagrant disregard for Sikh rehit Maryada in the interest of making money by the notorious committee of this Gurdwara was the sole cause of this embarrassment. It backfired massively, the committee thought by deliberately fabricating and sensationalising their statements to the police a heavy handed approach would cause the protest to fail and send our a message to the community to deter future protests and allow the committee to carry on undermining rehit for financial gain.

I have to disagree with how you dovetail your comments with a unfounded and unsubstantiated attack on the committee.... The gurdwara and Sangat have every right to believe in their interpretation of sikhi.. It is by no means whatsoever that so called mixed faith marriages are against maryada. The SGPC is a political organisation, moreover their edict supposedly against mixed faith marriages is flawed on many levels.. 

You don't know that they do it for financial gain and to just throw that out there is slanderous... 

I will say it like it is, I to this day have not been convinced that so called mixed faith marriages are against maryada... But what I do know for certain is what you agreed with in your first paragraph, that even though I disagree with the protest I'm more disgusted that they engaged in a big protest. If anything the protest blew up in the face of the protesters.. Rocking up shutting down the gurdwara, masked faces with kirpans.. And then to deny the objectives to beat the charges seems a bit rich 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sukhvirk1976 said:

 

I will say it like it is, I to this day have not been convinced that so called mixed faith marriages are against maryada...

So you think there is some doubt, that maybe our Gurus would want Sikhs to marry non-Sikhs in the Gurdwara?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/02/2018 at 4:47 AM, Sukhvirk1976 said:

These muppets lied in court pretending they weren't there to protest against a so called mixed race marriage.. What a joke.. What kind of plastic singhs are they 

Well done to these Singhs who did what they had to do & escaped any legal ramifications.

If all Singhs who are actually willing to make a stand for values & maryada ended up in prison we’d be left with plastic sikhs like you who would run Sikhi into the ground with your liberal self appointed beliefs & protocols.

Theres a time & place to give sacrifice.... this situation was not one of those.... try understanding raj neeti.... to accomplish your task & avoid any damage, injury or loss is the perfect outcome.... try reading Dasam Bani to understand how TRUE Singhs & warriors function.

 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Mahakaal96 said:

Well done to these Singhs who did what they had to do & escaped any legal ramifications.

If all Singhs who are actually willing to make a stand for values & maryada ended up in prison we’d be left with plastic sikhs like you who would run Sikhi into the ground with your liberal self appointed beliefs & protocols.

Theres a time & place to give sacrifice.... this situation was not one of those.... try understanding raj neeti.... to accomplish your task & avoid any damage, injury or loss is the perfect outcome.... try reading Dasam Bani to understand how TRUE Singhs & warriors function.

 

plastic ? I thought their type was papier mache one drop of water and phoooooss

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

    • Cookie parshad?! I am sold.
    • What a wonderful post, bro. I'm quite happy to see that you think this way. If you don't mind, could you answer: 1) Were you an atheist before? If not, did you used to think the same way your friend, and other people on the board, like @Kira did? 2) Does your friend speak Punjabi? Not limited to saying "enough" when getting langar. But really speak the language? If he did, perhaps he wouldn't be so confused as to what a "par nari" is. Also, can he read Punjabi? Or is he getting his "gian" from the English translations? And what tuks does he proffer to state that Gurbani condemns rape specifically? Understand that I'm not saying that Gurbani promotes or allows rape. I'm just interested in what he presents to say that Bani bans rape, specifically. The discussion on those tuks would also bring up interesting points which I believe would not be in accord with your friend's thought process. Also quite interesting that he managed to find a ban on polygamy, and not on fornication. What does he present to say that polygamy is banned? So he's saying that you can screw as many girls as you like, and discard them, but you can't enter into a socially binding contract (marriage) with them. That's his idea of "dharam". Agree with you. This is yet another case where the English "translations" are going to create major problems for us where some people are going to be come "lakeer de fakeer" based on erroneous translations. "par nari" does not mean "others' wives". It means "a woman not your wife". If not, Gurbani loses it real import: The atrocious English translation above says you become impure by perving on another's wife. Question: Do you not get impure by perving on your neighbor's unmarried daughter? Puratan Singhs understood the term to be "a woman not your wife". Consider rehitnama Bhai Nand Lal: OK, so according to your friend, you're supposed to call another's wife a "mother" or "daughter". But if she's unmarried, then sky's the limit? That renders the tuk basically meaningless. The Sikh dharam envisions an atmosphere of purity in regards to relations with women. Your friend's mode of thinking leads to constant sexual desire and tension towards unmarried women, which is exactly what Harvey Weinstein (and many others) were doing towards unmarried actresses in the whole MeToo thing.
    • I'm not quibbling over the import of the word "disassociate". What I'm saying is that your statement implied that if your husband (or wife) becomes an atheist you can divorce him.  And I said that that is specifically disallowed in Canon Law. On the other hand, if you were non-Christians in the first place, and you become a Christian, and your husband/wife divorces you, you have not violated anything if you remarry. But: If you were non-Christians in the first place, and you become a Christian, and your husband/wife does not divorce you, you cannot divorce him/her in Canon Law.
    • well bro what does disassociate mean to you ...I heard seperation of ways , but also I understood it to be a grey area since canon law still maintains that they are married despite the dharmic arth of the instruction..
    • hobson's choice , if you have a preselected array who have blessing from on high by centre there is NO choice only eyewash ....even Kejriwal showed his true colours when he didn't oppose the transfer of Jaggi to Tihar Jail
×