Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, jkvlondon said:

it was a plan to distract Uk population from removal of workers rights, human rights and social security protection, increase of embezzlement from government agencies such as health , education , prisons by ministers. opening the country to attack from corporations within and without the country

So Brexit was a devious scheme by the evil corporations to gut various laws? 

The reality is the vast majority of those "evil corporations" were in favor of remaining in the EU.

2/3 of big corps wanted to stay in the EU. Only 2% favored a Brexit scenario.

Quote

Big business loves the EU because it is the font of regulations which help to suppress smaller competitors. When the EU introduces a new licensing scheme, a new set of product description regulations or employments laws it makes life a little more difficult for big business. But it makes life a hell of lot more difficult for small businesses, who have fewer lawyers and officers on hand to grapple with the consequences.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/19/2018 at 12:30 PM, BhForce said:

I'm trying to figure out what you're saying.

Are you saying it's bad that the British people don't want to take orders from the EU?

If so, what's bad about that?

Also, do you favor Punjab being able to do what it wants to do without interference by Delhi? If so, do you oppose the UK being able to do what it wants to do without interference by Brussels? And if so, why?

Everyone is entitled to freedom but the circumstances in Panjab can't be compared with brexit in the uk.

This sinner is nowhere near perfect but the chitteh should repay their karma and that's not my problem - many live too good a life compared to most of the world and they don't face the threat of non-existence either.

More greed and ego for some and more fights from silent death for many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brexit was the political will of the british public to get away from the dictates of the EU elite. The Banks, the EU and american obama administration was trying to scare the British public not to vote for brexit even david cameron prime minister of the UK at the time was confident no1 seriously would vote to leave the EU but the UK public had enough.

1) Main reason by far was crazy immigration rules which meant any tom,d1ck, harry from the now expanded EU could live in the UK and claim higher benefits than their home countries while their relatives in other poorer EU countries (bulgeria, poland, romania,etc) received money too if they had dependents like kids or disabled.

2) Many ethnic minority Brits also voted for brexit because of the benefits scandal the newly arrived eastern european immigrants from the EU were claiming benefits in UK and sending money back to relatives back home. This unfair and unjust system was not the same for non-EU british nationals and their dependants (eg jamacian/nigerian/Indian/pakistani/Chinese/Americam/Australian,etc) ...they could not claim benefits nor for their relatives outside the EU. But eastern european people could claim everything and their families back home and still can until the UK leaves the EU in 2019.

3) The EU when it was founded in 1970s and when britian joined was only 12 western european nations because at the time the soviet union was occupying most of eastern europe. The EU was great it was providing job opportunities and travel for the richer part of europe and their citizens. But when the soviet union collapsed then the EU expanded its borders and swallowed up poorer parts of eastern europe the citizens of those countries were delighted to join the richer EU club and recieved great preaks and benefits they never had under the old soviet union system But for the citizens of the western part of EU there was no benefits it was only more problems as poorer eastern europeans travelled to their countries to take jobs, welfare, housing, pressure on schools, transport and crime also followed.

4) The EU was pushing for handouts from richer countries like the UK to bail out greece, italy, spain, portugal,etc. The UK already has its own debt problems without having to bail out other countries. The EU also tried to push the euro currency on the UK population but they rejected it fearing the financial trouble that did eventually come in 2010 and still isnt resolved.

These are the main reasons but now we see how Russiaphobia is being used as an excuse to keep UK within the EU as a pretext of security against the alleged expansionist and geo-political plans of putins Russia. The lengths the EU elite will only further anger the British public in sticking to their position of brexiting even if there was another referendum.

Edited by genie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, GuestSingh said:

Everyone is entitled to freedom but the circumstances in Panjab can't be compared with brexit in the uk.

Well, why don't you give 2 or 3 reasons why it's different? I've yet to get a good answer from any opponent of British freedom who is also a proponent of independence or more state power for Punjab. If Britain should be forced to share its wealth with the EU, then why shouldn't Punjab be forced to share its wealth with India?

If Britain should be forced to share its natural resources (fish) with Europe, then why not Punjab (water)? If Britain shouldn't have the right to determine the terms of trade, then why should Punjab be able to set the terms of trade and prices of its wheat and rice?

20 hours ago, GuestSingh said:

This sinner is nowhere near perfect but the chitteh should repay their karma and that's not my problem - many live too good a life compared to most of the world and they don't face the threat of non-existence either.

OK, so you think loss of British freedom is payback for taking our Sikh Raj. Just a note: Loss of British independence will not bring back the Sikh Raj.

Also, what a classic case of cutting off your nose to spite your face. I mean, you would seriously rather live in Islamic Britain just to stick it to the white man who destroyed our Kingdom? It would be better to live in Christian Britain and constantly remind them about the British duplicity in Punjab/India, if that's your desire. Because you won't be able to say a word in Islamic Britain.

Need I remind you that in Pakistani children's textbooks the picture for the world zaalam (tyrant) is a picture of a Sikh?

What a wonderful life you'll have with those people in charge in Britain, but, hey, at least it's not the evil "gora" in charge!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/21/2018 at 2:17 PM, BhForce said:

Well, why don't you give 2 or 3 reasons why it's different?

Read the end of the 2nd paragraph and last sentence in my post again.

I've yet to get a good answer from any opponent of British freedom who is also a proponent of independence or more state power for Punjab. If Britain should be forced to share its wealth with the EU, then why shouldn't Punjab be forced to share its wealth with India?

Panjab is already forced to share its wealth with Bharat i.e. water - 50% flows directly to Rajasthan and around 20% to Haryana. What revenue is generated from these diversions?

If Britain should be forced to share its natural resources (fish) with Europe, then why not Punjab (water)? If Britain shouldn't have the right to determine the terms of trade, then why should Punjab be able to set the terms of trade and prices of its wheat and rice?

Not sure whether fish is a uk natural resource - the same fish could be caught elsewhere in another country. However, river water flows directly from the Himalaya mountains into Panjab. Wheat and rice require hard labour, too.

Also, both are in two different continents, therefore, they're governed by different laws - the same legislation won't exist for every country because each government will have different problems and ideas, both influenced by a different culture.

OK, so you think loss of British freedom is payback for taking our Sikh Raj. Just a note: Loss of British independence will not bring back the Sikh Raj.

Do you think karma and payback are different or the same?

Also, what a classic case of cutting off your nose to spite your face. I mean, you would seriously rather live in Islamic Britain just to stick it to the white man who destroyed our Kingdom? It would be better to live in Christian Britain and constantly remind them about the British duplicity in Punjab/India, if that's your desire. Because you won't be able to say a word in Islamic Britain.

Who says this sinner will still be living here if it turns islamic?

 

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

    • Ahmediyas: a historically persecuted -- at the hands of mainstream Islam! -- Muslim sect that's held up as an example of the "good", acceptable, and tolerant side of Islam. Yet, this is what happens when you give any Islamic group an inch; they reveal their true hand, and reach for a mile! This is EXACTLY the reason I roll my eyes when people get misty eyed about fringe Muslim sects -- such as Sufis -- being an antidote to the mainstream khattar orthodoxy of the Sunni & Shia crews. The fact isn't that Ahmediyas and Sufis don't share the beliefs and the aim of their Ummah brethren, i.e. the establishment of the Caliphate and the subjugation of the Kaffir. The difference is these minor sects desire the same outcomes as their bigger brothers, only they aren't too fussed on getting to that destination in a hurry, as opposed to the Sunnis and Shia who want it all yesterday. The Ummah reigns supreme. Muslim apologists and sympathisers are either too dense to process this FACT, or are willfully omitting these inconvenient truths in order to strengthen their narrative of #notallmuslims.
    • As per usual,  our openness and tolerance is seen as weakness for others, and they take full advantage. 
    • This is nothing new. I tried setting up an initiative to defeat this trend; happened a good few years back on this forum, but some of us decided to establish a body of sorts which would publish and distribute literature regarding the falsity spread by other faiths vis-a-vis Sikhi. Because we were based in different countries we used to stay in contact via email to exchange ideas and finalize publications in our own respective countries. I wrote and dispatched a particular article on the falsity that Bhagat Fareed was a hardcore Muslim and by incorporating his Bani into the Adi Guru Granth Sahib Ji, the Sikh Gurus proved their respect for Islam and hence all Sikhs should become Muslims. Here are some examples of what I wrote: "For Bhagat Farid, and Sufis in general, life is but nihilistic. Such a perception, logically, leads to renunciation and asceticism. Farid asserts:

      'Farid, had my throat been slit on the same day as my umbilical cord, I would not have been prey to trouble nor weathered such hardship. Farid, I alone thought I was in pain, but the whole world is in pain. I ascended my roof and witnessed each and every house in flame.' 
      -Saloks 76 and 81, ASGGS, Ang. 1381-82.

      When Guru Nanak Dev Ji had entered Multan, the local Sufis had tried to eject him on the pretext of his criticism of the Sufi order. The Guru had rejected their renunciation and described their acts of obeisance as charades. With this particular incident in mind, Guru Arjan Dev Ji elected to reply to Farid with the following:

      'The world is akin to a garden, Farid, in which poisonous plants take root. They for whom the Master cares suffer not at all.' 

      And:

      'How sweet be this life oh Farid! With health the body blooms, but they who love their dear beloved Lord are rarely found.' 
      -Mohalla 5, Saloks 82-83, ASGGS, Ang. 1382.

      The writings of Farid were incorporated into the Sikh canon to refute the notion that life, in general, is painful. For the Gurus life is what one makes out of it. Ignorance, naturally, leads to pain whilst knowledge leads to joy. By positing their views below Farids', the Sikh Gurus refuted the Sufi notion of life being suffering in toto.'   "The Sufi path of asceticism is best summed up in the following conversation between Sayid Muhammad Gesu Daraz and a suppliant. Daraz was the acolyte of Shaikh Farid Nasir-u'd-Din-Chiarg-i-Delhi, the disciple of Nizam-u'd-din Auliya who was the successor to Baba Farid. This conversation is recorded in the 'Jawama-u'l-Kilam' and focuses on the physical suffering weathered by Baba Farid in his search for the Divine. Pledging his mind to the Lord's path, the latter Farid hung upside down in a well for forty days and nights. 

      'Then one day when Sayid Muhammad Gesu Daraz was recounting the pledge of (Baba Farid), a man queried: "how is it that blood does not run out of the eyes and mouth of the person who undertakes it and how is it that foodstuff and other bodily elements do not come out of him?" The Saint explained that in a body as emaciated as that of Farid, the question of food and blood no longer lingers as austerities have reduced such a body to mere skeleton.' 

      Bhagat Farid writes:

      'Farid, if one were to hack my body, not a drop of blood would ooze from it. Those who are imbued with the Lord's love have no blood left in their beings.' 
      -Salok 51, ASGGS, Ang. 1380.

      Guru Amardass Ji comments on this Shabad in the following way:

      'The body is all blood, without blood it cannot exist. Those who are imbued with the Lord's love have not a single drop of selfish blood in their bodies. When the fear of Divine enters one's being, it becomes emaciated, and the blood of greed departs. As flames purify metal, so too does the fear of the Divine cast out impure inclinations. They alone are beautiful, Nanak, who are dyed with the love of the Lord.'
      -Mohalla 3, ASGGS, Salok 52, Ang. 1380. 

      Farid's ascetic undertones are sidelined, by the Guru, to provide a more rational interpretation of his words. Farid's "blood" becomes "selfish blood" and the external is transformed into the internal. It is not the physical frame which matters but the internal, the spiritual. Only through spiritual austerities can inimical inclinations depart; physical austerities only invite weakness and prolonged suffering."   "Now, we will look at the Bani of Bhagat Farid along with the relevant commentary by the Sikh Gurus. 

      'Farid, she who did not enjoy her spouse when black-haired, will she enjoy him when grey-haired? Love the Lord with such love that your hair's color will never change!'
      -Salok 12, ASGGS, Ang. 1378.

      Bhagat Farid holds that youth is conducive to following the spiritual path, in old age it is a lost cause. Guru Amardass Ji, who became the third Nanak at the age of 72, provides a commentary on this shabad:

      'Farid, whether one's hair be black or grey, the Lord is ever present if one remembers him. True love does not come from one's own desire, that cup of the Master's love he himself gives to whomever he desires.'
      -Mohalla 3, Salok 13, ASGGS, Ang. 1378.

      Bhagat Farid believes effort to be necessary vis-a-vis the spiritual path; the Sikh Gurus concur but to an extent. All transpires due to the Divine Will and man's efforts have a limit. Divine Will is more pontificate than man's efforts; man should elect to reside in this will and recognize where effort ends. From a Nanakian perspective effort is necessary in the temporal paradigm, but in the spiritual paradigm success depends on the Divine initiative. Guru Nanak Dev Ji states:

      'Does it matter if one is a swan or heron on whom the Lord casts his glance? Sayeth Nanak that if he so desires, crowns turn into swans.'
      -Mohalla 1, Salok 124, ASGGS, Ang. 1384. 

      The Lord is supreme in all that he does.

      Bhagat Farid then utilizes martial scenery:

      'One who is not welcome by her in-laws, and who has not place at her parents' house; and whose spouse does not care an iota for her, is she truly a happily married wife?'
      -Salok 31, ASGGS, Ang. 1379. 

      The 'parents' house' symbolizes societal life, the 'in-laws' spiritual life and the 'spouse' the Lord. Bhagat Farid is commenting on those spiritualists, those devotees, who desire the best of both spiritualism and societal living. He feels that by pursuing both concepts, one ultimately fails in all that he/she commits to. Guru Nanak Dev Ji comments:

      'At her in-laws and at her parents' house, she belongs to her spouse, the Divine beloved who is inaccessible and unfathomable. Oh Nanak! That one is indeed a happily married bride, who pleases the indifferent one.'
      -Mohalla 1, Salok 32, ASGGS, Ang. 1379.

      In contrast to Farid, the Guru elaborates that via Divine Grace both the temporal and spiritual paradigms become successful for the devotees. The true spiritualist is one who pursues both fields rather than renouncing one over the other. Nonetheless, hypocrisy in both fields should be avoided."   "In Suhi Lalit, Bhagat Farid forewarns:

      'You could not construct a raft when required. Now that the ocean is full and overflowing, it is hard to traverse. Do not touch the saffron flower for it's color will depart, my beloved. Rahau.
      The bride is weak and her husband's command is too hard to bear. As the milk does not return to her breast, nor will the soul return to the body. Sayeth Farid, friends, when the spouse calls this soul departeth crestfallen and the body is reduced to ashes.'
      -Suhi Lalit 1, ASGGS, Ang. 794.

      Guru Nanak Dev Ji, prior to Farid's verse, expounds:

      'Make meditation and restraint the raft via which to traverse the flowing stream. Your pass will be comfortable as if there is no ocean or overflowing stream. Your name alone is the unfading matter with which this cloak is dyed; my Beloved Lord, this color is perennial. My dear companions have departed, how will they meet the Lord? If they are united in virtue, the Lord will unite them with himself. Once united the mortal does not separate if the union be true. The cycle of birth and death is nullified by the True, Eternal Lord. She who removes her own self-centrism sews herself a garment to please her spouse. By the Guru's words, she obtained the fruit of the nectar of the Lord's word. Sayeth Nanak, my companions, my spouse be dear to me. We be the Lord's handmaidens; he our husband.'
      -Mohalla 1, Suhi 4, Ang. 729.

      Bhagat Farid provides a picture of doom and gloom by lamenting lost opportunities. He focuses on old age, where mental and physical faculties are too frail to be attuned to Divine contemplation. Guru Nanak Dev Ji, instead, expounds that it is never too late to focus on the Lord (one should remember Guru Amardass Ji here) for the Beloved is not harsh nor his commands. Via the saffron flower, Bhagat Farid warns of the fleeting pleasures of the world -here today, gone tomorrow- Guru Nanak Dev Ji instead elaborates that all pleasures belong to the Lord and via merging with him, all pleasures become permanent for he is the highest pleasure of all. 

      For Farid, death is the final test; even the faithful, in his view, should fear it for the soul never returns to the body. Guru Nanak Dev Ji however believes death to be a joy and a privilege of the valorous, for it is via death that one perfects his/her union with the Divine.

      From a Nanakian perspective, Farids's words apply to the manmukh and not the Gurmukh. But even a manmukh is worthy of Divine Grace, provided he recants at the ultimate moment."   "Bhagat Farid, a Sufi, informs us:

      'My physical frame is oven-hot; my bones are the firewood. If my feet fail, I shall walk upon my head to meet my Beloved.'
      -Salok 119, ASGGS, Ang. 1384.

      Bhagat Farid utilizes the metaphor of a kiln to depict his love for the Lord. A Sufi, his ascetic concepts however were not in line with Gurmat. Guru Nanak Dev Ji refutes his call for such asceticism by commenting:

      'Do not heat your physical frame oven-hot; burn not your bones like firewood. What harm have they committed that you torture them such? Rather behold the Beloved within your soul, Farid.'
      -Salok 120, ASGGS, Ang. 1384.

      Bhagat Farid is of the mind that the human body is but a prison and the soul it's captive. The Sikh Gurus believe that the human body is a temple, a locus where the Lord resides and awaits his devotee. By utilizing this Shabad of Farid, the Gurus desired that their Sikhs imbue the same zeal as the Sufi did whilst also discarding his asceticism; hence the refutation. Throughout Bhagat Bani we find a similar concept at play. The Sikh Gurus initiate a written dialogue with the radicals of their time and provide an unalloyed picture of the Divine Truth. For Farid, creation is a falsity; for the Gurus it is a truth. Farid's asceticism renders the body as simply an object; the Gurus however perceive it to be divine and encourage their Sikhs to employ it in the service of the Divine by societal living." I printed all this out in pamphlet form and took it to a local Nagar Kirtan when I was in Australia and man, some of the Muslims burned. A few confrontations occurred, "how can you say Guru Nanak was a non-Muslim?!" "Gobind Singh made you anti-Muslim." "Your history is a lie, all Gurus were Muslims and they even married Muslims!" Basically they were clutching at straws. The pamphlets were enough to make the Sikhs ignore these idiots and they grew worried and left the scene. Later a famous attendant Gyani, from Taksal (and who I will not name), got hold of one of the pamphlets. After having it explained to him he called me over and asked me what jatha I belonged to. I told him none. Then he asked me where I got this information from. I told him my sources. Basically his problem was that I was not crediting any jatha on my pamphlet. He asked me to mention Taksal in them but I refused. Few days later all the pamphlets were thrown in the trash and I was told to abstain from publishing such (and here's how they described them) lies. The youth wanted more, but the Gurughar committee would have none of it. The main problem, here, is the liberal fuddu attitude our qaum has that respect all faiths at the expense of your own.  After this some of us decided to stick to the social media. There was veer Bijla Singh Ji with his Search Sikhism page which, back in the heyday of grooming, forced several Muslim preachers to quit their anti-Sikh proselytizing. There were a few more who set up Tisarpanth. Then there was The Truth of Sikhi and Shamshir Publications. Bijla Singh Ji advised us but out of the three initiatives set up, only one is going strong and the others were forced to close down. Why? Because they had to hit the streets and they faced the same problem which I did- our own elders were and still are shooting us down. If we had claimed affiliation with some jatha, then we would have been lionized.   
    • In that way you're right. It is a big deal. My heart would pain to see anyone lost to Islam especially on a large scale. And your cautionary message is well founded.  But in the fake news, shame Sikhi, propaganda way I feel it was being used. Pfft. In that context I feel more a response of "And? Big deal. Who gives a ****"
    • That's her father in law Tarsem Singh of Hushiarpur, he is the village Granthi.   Her father's name is Monohar Lal of Delhi and her name is Kiran Bala. Sikhs don't have names like Lal and Bala. These are typical Hindu names.
×