tonyhp32

You would have thought with all that damage wrought by the floods, these people would have given the bombings a rest.

Your question is a bit like asking is Mangu Ram a Hindu because he worships Shiva but Babu Ram the Hindu worships Vishnu. When you open up a can of worms like 'Sanantan' Sikhism then you are left with a free for all with every tom dick and harry claiming to be an Udasi, Nirmala or whatever. On a side note, I remember attending a Niddar Singh talk and there was some Hindu guy dressed in what I could see as normal clothes, no tikka or bindis or any other paraphenalia but a Singh next to me told me 'he's an Udasi!' I have no doubt there's lots of people around now claiming to be Nirmalas, Udasis and Nihangs who probably have no knowledge of any of these orders but like the fact that they can look 'cool' to their friends.

Pakistan hadn't won. As JB said, the money is probably in the politicans' bank accounts, the common people get shafted and are dying of hunger after the flood. There's probably another disaster on the way in the form of a natural catastrophe or even a nuclear explosion. Pakistan has lost big time from both the first Afghan war and during the war on terror. The country lurches from one calamity to another. When the US leaves, Pakistan will be in bigger danger as they will then face a more belligerant Taleban who will claim to have defeated two superpowers. The likelihood is that there will be violence in Pakistan for a long time yet. As for balkanising Pakistan, the state could probably quite easily split in four or even five independent states while the same could also be said of India but the successor states would be more in number.

Did the NF also provoke Muslims to attack Sikh and Hindu shops in Bradford? It's good the court system threw those tossers in jail. The EDL is the outcome of a frustration when the goray see Muslims trying to take over the country with their sharia BS. The mainstream parties have let the white working class down and so they see another outlet for their frustration. Mind you, I have to agree with the EDL guy saying most of the muslay should be in Guantanamo, never a truer word said.

I understand what you are saying but you also need to understand that the Sikh Panth today is infiltrated with people who have no hamdardi for Sikhism and are only out there for themselves. Look at any issue and you will see that it involves a certain number of so-called leaders who will rake up an issue, shout themselves hoarse and when they see their kursi in danger, they will then join up with the same people they only criticised as 'anti-Panth' the day before. This started up in the political sphere with the Master Tara Singh and Sant Fateh Singh dispute and then carried on through to Badal-Barnala-Longowal. Because the political leaders controlled the religious establishment as well they brought their dispute there as well. It is nothing to do with Punjabiyat but all to do with politics.

Don't blame him, he's just being a typical Mooslam!

Funny how some of our people will always try and self deprecate their own people when the issue has nothing to do their people. So are you saying that you are also willing to do anything for money as well?

It's not illegal as the Royal family used to take part in this practice. Queen Victoria's inbred descendents ruled most of Europe before WW1.

These types of programmes are a part of a BBC crusade to show that Muslims are as loyal as any other community, just in case the sight of blown underground trains deflect goray from that belief.

My Mahapursh is allowed to do that 'cos your Mahapursh also did that.. calm down guys.

It was funny how the Moulana guy kept on trying to bypass the fact that Pakistanis are getting more retared than normal because of their marrying their cousins! He kept saying "What about the figures for other communities" Talk about having his head in the sand. The Pakistani social club lot were no better. They are 'under attack' if people mention that their traditions are making their kids more likely to have genetic defects! Having all those people in that club saying, "My wife's my first cousin, both my parents are also first cousins and my wife's parents are also first cousins" To lighten the mood maybe the presenter should have said "I've never seen so many Bahench*ds in one place"! Or even "So who was the first Bahench*d in your peerhi, your grandfather or great grandfather?" On a serious note, do Pakistanis call their cousins sisters 'Bahenji' when they are younger or do they have another word for them as the Quran apparently makes them legitimate as their wives? These kind of programmes are getting quite amusing nowadays. Whether it's undercover mosque and some Imam being secretly filmed saying 'pssst..we all hate the kafirs.. but don't tell them that' or that Saudi school teaching kids to hate Jews and Christians. Then the BBC Panorama about the so-called Gaza Aid ship and how they showed the Muslims were the ones all tooled up for a rumble and the Israelis went in with paintball guns, it's can't be easy being a Pakistani in the UK and then you get forced into marrying your cousin the goat herder!

Sarbatdapala, I think your post reflects the cop out that many Sikhs take when confronted with the issue of Khalistan. Sikh nationalism can be compared with Zionism in the sense that it's objective is to create a state where the Sikhs or Jews can live in peace without fearing for their lives. Israel was not created because there had been a massive religious awakening amongst Jews but because the Jews faced a genocide many times greater that the Ghallughara of 1984. It was this event more than all the congresses and all the debates that led to the creation of Israel. Had there been no holocaust then I doubt that there would have been an Israel today. Quite contary to your assertion that a renewed religiosity amongst Jews led to Israel, it was infact the socialist and in many cases atheist Zionists who were on the forefront of the struggle for Isreal. Thw religious Jews in many cases were opposed to Israel as their belief was that the Messiah would lead all the Jews to Jerusalem and he would be the one to create Israel. In a sense many religious Sikhs do not support Khalistan even though the Raj Karega Khalsa injunction is probably the most striking example of the impetus toward a theocratic state amongst any religion. The cop out I refer to is that by stating that Sikhs must become 'worthy' of Khalistan is as nonsensical as stating that Raj Karega Khalsa mean rule of the Pure, which rather than just Khalsa it could mean pure Hindus, Pure Muslims and Pure Jews etc. No one is saying that if you support Khalistan that you have to pick up an AK 47 and face the oppressive forces of India, far from it, to be in support of Khalistan one just needs to become a believer in the fact that Sikhs need to free to decide their own destiny. Open to the idea that one day the situation will develop whereby Sikhs will wrest back their independence. If you do not beleive this then you should be ok with a non-Sikh government such as the UK government nominating it's own people to manage the Gurdwaras. If you do not believe in the sovereignity of a people then you cannot also believe in the sovereignity of your own self or of your household. If you support Khalistan, then if non-Sikhs ask you whether you are Indian, then you reply 'No, I am a Sikh from Punjab but we are presently ruled by India' There is nothing more likely to give an oppressive government like India nightmares then to have the majority of Sikhs subscribe to the notion of Khalistan.

Simranjeet Singh Mann went there when there was still a militant struggle going on in Punjab so it was natural for Sikh leaders to see the Kashmiri struggle in the same light as they saw their own. Mann's attempt was to see to it that the situation did not become one where Kashmiris kill Sikhs and Kharkoos kill Muslims in Punjab in retaliation. Until Chattisinghpora there had been no killings of Sikhs by Kashmiris and it is no coincidence that by 2000 there was no Kharkoo retaliation in Punjab as they had lost their ability to take such actions. Simranjit Singh Mann's actions were the need of the hour and if you take a moral position that this was akin to giving a green light to the killing of Pandits in Kashmir, then you also need to realise that Sikhs had no one to protect them and the Pandits have the whole of the Indian state to look after their rights. The fact that that state has done zilch to protect them is a moot point.

I think the tradition may have its origin in that when the Parsis fled to India in the 10th century they were allowed to settle in India and one of the stipulations by the local Raja was that they would not seek converts from the local Hindus. Since the vast majority of Parsis outside Iran are immigrants from India, the same tradition of not seeking converts continues outside India. The Parsis in Iran being dhimmis cannot hope to get converts and be allowed to live a peaceful life under Sharia. There is great scope for the Parsis with the use of new technology especially the internet to reach out to the disaffected youth in Iran and teach them about their pre-Islamic religion and culture. Their religion has the potential to supercede Islam in Iran. We might even see our bud Bahadur Ali become Bahadur Portugeusejee SOASwala!

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/87737/pak-hindu-body-demands-army.html

Too bad the puppet can't do anything to help his own community.

Dalsingh101 I am not advocating that we look for enemies amongst non-Pakistani Muslims but we also need to know that what the underlying reason is for the problems with Pakistanis. You have given an example of Iranians, but the majority of Iranians in the west are upper class or middle class refugees from the Ayatollahs and they are mostly agnostic. Gujerati Muslims are not located at the same areas as Sikhs.

I don't think you have anything to be worried about. Although I used to go with my friends (last went in 1998), I always found it easy to make friends there. It might be an idea to contact the organisers (the usually have a mobile number on the flyers) and ask if they could put you in contact with someone else going from Slough. You will meet the Slough campers from the pick up point in Slough as well.

Flipping heck! A day has gone by and a thread critical of Muslims hasn't had a "My Muslim mates are great..Islam is Peace..Sikh boys do it as well..blah blah" contribution from our friendly neighbourhood Islamophile. Will wonders never cease! On the serious note, does anyone still doubt that there is something inherent in Islam teachings which causes it's votaries to act in such a manner?

It's interesting how the western liberal media is covering these events. The killing of stone throwing protesters bring images of the Intifada by the Palestinians. Had 20 Palestinian stone throwers been killed in Israel there would have been uproar in the western media and all news outlets would have led with the story but the fact that it hasn't shows how biased the western media is towards India. Where's the UN in all this, they usually have an 'emergency' session every week to condemn Israel. I have read that the UN called for calm in Kashmir which was roundly condemned by an Indian spokesman! It's also interesting that the MPACUK site which is run by Pakistani Muslims has virtually nothing on these events even through they usually have a write up if a Palestinian had complained that a Israeli had looked at him funny! Btw I wouldn't want the posters to think that I somehow sympathise with the Kashmiris, these bas*ards cut the hair of Sikh a few days ago, so the more that get shot the better!

Then the thing to do is not to put any money in the Golak in India and give that money to a charity working with these people, if there is one.

It's a publicity stunt. How can you calculate that a product can be a certain without having had a manufacturer number crunch the figures. The £23 price is probably based on a sale of 100 million or something and taking into account enconomy of scale. I seriously doubt we will see the product in the shops in the west let alone in India. The government would be better advised to provide clean water and 24 electricity to all it's citizens rather that coming up with cheap publicity stunts which like the others will be quietly ditched.

These are just statements made by a political party that is out of power. Statements such as these are made one day and forgotten the next. Why didn't they do something when they were in power up until 2004? Hindus and Sikhs have been fleeing Pakistan since the late 90s. Why didn't they expedite citizenship for the Afghani Sikhs and Hindus who fled to India after the invasion of Afghanistan by the US?

The CIA wasn't interfaring as you state, it was the cold war then. Just as the Russians supported the North Vietnamese and before that the North Koreans, so the USA was supporting the Afghans in their fight against the Russians. Whether they were right in their belief that the Russian invasion was a prelude to an attack on Pakistan and a grab for a warm sea port is a matter for conjecture. The fact is that both superpowers were doing their best to dislodge each other from their areas of influence as well as stopping each other acquiring new influence in other countries. To call the 9/11 attacks blowback for the CIA helping the Afghans in the 80s is an idiotic notion put forward by the liberal left wing media. Recently there has been media reports that the 26/11 attacks on Mumbai had a connection with Islamic terrorists from Bangladesh. There are also reports that Bangladesh is becoming the next extremist Islam stronghold. Now if there are terror attacks all over India by these Bangladeshi terrorists does this become blowback for 1971 liberation of East Pakistan? I have no great love for what the coalition is doing in Afghanistan, the British were the ones who facilitated and helped the Jehad of the wahabi Syed Ahmed against the Lahore durbar. They are getting their just desserts from another bunch of wahabi fanatics! But to claim that blowing up innocent people through suicide bomb attacks and fighting an army whose leadership has tied it up with concerns for human rights etc is not bravery. Do you think that just because some moron has been convinced through brainwashing that if he blows himself up he will end up with 72 virgins in heaven shows that he is brave or that his leaders have a war winning strategy is foolish to the extreme.

You seem to have a fixation with these Jehadis. To me they are basically savages who are getting the upper hand because their opponents the coalition has tied its hands up by trying to fight a war whilst respecting the 'human rights' of their opponents! Anytime the airpower of the coalition comes to play, it invariably gets presented as an attack on an Afghan 'marriage party', as if the missiles on the drones are on the 'marriage party' setting! The coalition needs a free hand to chase the Taliban into Pakistan. Obama promised this would happen but he's backed up since he became President. If they had a political and military leadership which would recognise the double game of both the Pakistani govt and army and force both to mend their ways then they might have a fighting chance of winning the war. It would require a Bush and the way he handled Mushie when he threatened him with an attack on Pakistan if he didn't join the US effort against the Taliban. Unfortunately the troops in Afghanistan have a thin skinned community organiser left wing idiot as their commander in chief! It might also help if they stopped the access they grant to the left wing media which then uses the access to write stories insinuating that the war is pretty much lost. They are in Afghanistan to stop the country from again becoming a base for planning attacks against the west, unless of course you are a 'troother'and believe that 9/11 was an inside job to justify the Iraq and Afghanistan adventures. What can the west do apart from being in Afghanistan? If it pulls out and in order to stop the attacks puts a stop to or racially profiles anyone coming from Afghanistan or Pakistan you can imagine the left wing cries of racism and violation of human rights! It's damned if it does and damned if it doesn't. I think your 80s sterotyping of the white man is getting a bit old now. Not everything the west does has to do with controlling other peoples lands. You seem to have a very simplistic view of the west and not much understanding of the Muslim mentality. The west would love to get the f out of Afghanistan and Iraq if it wasn't for the fact that any withdrawal under the present conditions would be seen as a Muslim victory and the Afghan savages could then make another tall claim of having now beaten the other superpower.