Lurker Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 What pisses me off is that why is 1984 associated with deaths of Sikhs. Way more Hindus were killed by Sikhs prior to Blue Star n after. I used to live near the border of haryana n punjab and my parents gave shelter to so many hindu families who moved from interior Punjab. They had so many horror stories to say about how their Hindu neighbors were shot n burnt alive. No one talks about their life. Why do we only have to talk about attrocities on Sikhs forgetting how Punjab was/is majority Sikhs and killed way many innocent Hindus. Even Air Canada blast n death of 200 Indians was done by Sikhs but no it's only Hindus who r at fault!! No one the less Sikhs r really nice n patriotic people n I only have respect towards them but seeing Bhinderwala pic in Gurudwars in Canada boils my blood to no limit. Because it is a dummy that has been sold brilliantly over the years. Just as credit is due where it is deserved, similarly criticism is also deserved where it is. If one has to look before the 1984 "rebellion" maybe one can also look at the 1857 Indian freedom movement and see where Sikhs had landed then. And yes I am just a hater :finger: Both Canada and UK have enough extremist pockets where folks like Brar simply should not go. And frankly it is great that these chewtiya Khalistani lovers are out of India really...:winky: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
achilles Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 I like the way the warriors shy away from a debate when quoted with uncomfortable facts. FTR, there was NOTHING wrong with what Gen Brar did. I'm appalled that these same people who deride him, see absolutely nothing wrong with Bhindranwale bringing in Rocket launchers, grenades, rifles and his own army into the Golden Temple. But its all cool, coz it suits you. However, Golden Temple suddenly becomes a place of peace when the Indian army goes in to weed out the terrorist? You mean, it isn't a place of peace when Bhindranwale took in rocket launchers, grenades and rifles? Amazing double standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silva Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 What pisses me off is that why is 1984 associated with deaths of Sikhs. Way more Hindus were killed by Sikhs prior to Blue Star n after. I used to live near the border of haryana n punjab and my parents gave shelter to so many hindu families who moved from interior Punjab. They had so many horror stories to say about how their Hindu neighbors were shot n burnt alive. No one talks about their life. Why do we only have to talk about attrocities on Sikhs forgetting how Punjab was/is majority Sikhs and killed way many innocent Hindus. Even Air Canada blast n death of 200 Indians was done by Sikhs but no it's only Hindus who r at fault!! No one the less Sikhs r really nice n patriotic people n I only have respect towards them but seeing Bhinderwala pic in Gurudwars in Canada boils my blood to no limit. Any facts to back that up? Im not saying your lying but I don't think anti hindu sikh violence comes anywhere close to the thousands sikhs killed during the Anti sikh riots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 What pisses me off is that why is 1984 associated with deaths of Sikhs. Way more Hindus were killed by Sikhs prior to Blue Star n after. I used to live near the border of haryana n punjab and my parents gave shelter to so many hindu families who moved from interior Punjab. They had so many horror stories to say about how their Hindu neighbors were shot n burnt alive. No one talks about their life. Why do we only have to talk about attrocities on Sikhs forgetting how Punjab was/is majority Sikhs and killed way many innocent Hindus. Even Air Canada blast n death of 200 Indians was done by Sikhs but no it's only Hindus who r at fault!! No one the less Sikhs r really nice n patriotic people n I only have respect towards them but seeing Bhinderwala pic in Gurudwars in Canada boils my blood to no limit. The difference is that while Hindus were victims of terrorists, the Sikhs in the aftermath of Indira Gandhi's assassination were victims of state sponsored violence with the likes of Tytler and Sajjan Kumar leading and inciting riots and being influential politicians from the ruling party. Terrorists are going to be terrorists, but when the state indulges in such heinous crimes it takes matter to a different level - the state is supposed to prevent such atrocities. Regarding the attack on the Golden Temple, there are divergent views but one particularly strong and compelling one is that there was confirmed intelligence that within a few days the terrorists would launch an attack from inside in concordance with a Pakistan attack from the border. You've got to understand that this wasn't some ordinary 15-20 terrorists holed up somewhere with a handful of weapons. There were an estimated 1000+ terrorists in there with sophisticated weapons like rocket launchers and anti tank missiles. They were under the command of Shabeg Singh, who himself was a former and decorated Major General of the Indian army. They had been trained for months or even years by him. These kind of operations usually don't last more than a day and 40-50 commandos are usually enough. This was something on an entirely different scale. If the intelligence report about a coordinated attack from Pakistan and from inside the temple on Amritsar were true, it would have turned out to be a catastrophe. By attacking, Indira Gandhi saved many lives and possibly territory. sarchasm, do you think that the revolt of soldiers from the Sikh regiment is not a fact? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnterTheVoid Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Here you go, a picture of Mr Bhindranwale outside the entrance of one of Canada's gurdwaras! Amazing! http://www.sikhtimes.com/bios_060604a.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silva Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Because it is a dummy that has been sold brilliantly over the years. Just as credit is due where it is deserved, similarly criticism is also deserved where it is. If one has to look before the 1984 "rebellion" maybe one can also look at the 1857 Indian freedom movement and see where Sikhs had landed then. And yes I am just a hater :finger: Both Canada and UK have enough extremist pockets where folks like Brar simply should not go. And frankly it is great that these chewtiya Khalistani lovers are out of India really...:winky: You also have to understand that the Sikhs where pissed off that Hindus helped the British during the Anglo sikh wars. I'm actually surprised that their are still so many pro Indian sikhs Considering their history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 You also have to understand that the Sikhs where pissed off that Hindus helped the British during the Anglo sikh wars. That is one of the points brought up Yes. And in my opinion a very fair point indeed. Hard to stand up alongside the same soldiers who you were battling 10 years ago. By the same token it is equally weird to see how the Sikhs were siding with the Brits only after being mauled by them 10 years ago. That too against the fellow "countrymen". The larger point of course is the role in 1857 revolution is checkered at best, and absolutely anti-Indian interest at worst. 'm actually surprised that their are still so many pro Indian sikhs Considering their history. I know right!! Just as some Southies have grievance that Northies are different, Dravidian culture yada yada. Or how some of north Eastersns feel rest of India doesnt care about them. Call me cynical but it may very well be that the silly BIMARU states guys are the only who think it is their country without any historical grievance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranvir Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Sikhs did not kill anywhere near the amount of Hindus than Hindus killed Sikhs. There was no massacre like there was in Delhi. Yes you're right Sikhs should not be too patriotic, we did too much for the Indian Independence struggle especially given our tiny population in India. But still are not considered a separate religion by the state(still have to get married under the Hindu marriage act) You won't ever hear me shout Bharat Mata Ki. But I support the cricket team and other Indians because I like the people and consider them similar to me. What the Indian government did in Delhi and throughout Punjab in the 80s was far worse than the Air India bombing which killed 200 or so. The Delhi riots were state terrorism, there are many accounts of how the police just stood by and watched as the rioters butchered people. The rioters were given addresses of where Sikhs lived by government agents, that's how organised it was. There was no mass retaliation in Punjab against Hindus after the Delhi riots. But in India guys like Tytler, Saajan Kumar and Modi can walk freely and are still in power. This shows why India is still a third world country, where state sponsored riots occur. Why were Tamils not massacred after Rajiv Gandhi was killed? Because most of them are Hindus! State terrorism is by far the worst form of terrorism because the state has so much more power than a bunch of militants. As for Bhindranwale some people think of him as a terrorist and some as a freedom fighter, just like Bhagat Singh and Udham Singh back in the days of the British Raj. At the end of the day he was given power by Indira Gandhi. I believe she was a truly stupid woman, first of all she gave the go ahead to storm a very religious building when it was packed with more worshippers than usual, she did not get the president's permission which is illegal and then she kept her Sikh bodyguards. This kind of behaviour demonstrates how naive she was. The whole Khalistani movement gained massive ground after Operation Bluestar, that was the event that really kick started it, especially abroad. So all in all had operation Bluestar not been carried out we would not have all these problems. There were other ways to flush the militants out without smashing the entire place with tanks. The fact that there was a media blackout in Punjab proves how dodgy the event was. I don't agree with what Bhindranwale did but Indira Gandhi played a huge part in making him what he was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trichromatic Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 The whole Khalistani movement gained massive ground after Operation Bluestar, that was the event that really kick started it, especially abroad. So all in all had operation Bluestar not been carried out we would not have all these problems. There were other ways to flush the militants out without smashing the entire place with tanks. The fact that there was a media blackout in Punjab proves how dodgy the event was. I don't agree with what Bhindranwale did but Indira Gandhi played a huge part in making him what he was. We would have much bigger problems then? :dontknow: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 As for Bhindranwale some people think of him as a terrorist and some as a freedom fighter, just like Bhagat Singh and Udham Singh back in the days of the British Raj. What do you consider him - freedom fighter or terrorist? The whole Khalistani movement gained massive ground after Operation Bluestar, that was the event that really kick started it, especially abroad. So all in all had operation Bluestar not been carried out we would not have all these problems. There were other ways to flush the militants out without smashing the entire place with tanks. The fact that there was a media blackout in Punjab proves how dodgy the event was. Don't know which world you live in? There were 1000+ terrorists holed up with rocket launchers and anti tank missiles under the leadership of a former Major General of the Indian army with the threat of a Pakistan attack and an internal mutiny happening at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Yes you're right Sikhs should not be too patriotic, we did too much for the Indian Independence struggle especially given our tiny population in India. But still are not considered a separate religion by the state(still have to get married under the Hindu marriage act) You won't ever hear me shout Bharat Mata Ki. But I support the cricket team and other Indians because I like the people and consider them similar to me. Can we get off that high horse please? It has started to sound like a nagging housewife who keeps reminding of the sacrifice she has done for the family. Looks cute the first time and gets boring after a while. Everybody contributed, not just Sikhs. End of story. And please for eff sake don't have a Bihari or UPite do that comparison on who did more, or less. And feel free to dig some on who the Sikhs were killing in 1857 revolt, Brits or Indians(Purabias, Marathas, Ghazis etc) :nice: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranvir Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 What do you consider him - freedom fighter or terrorist? Don't know which world you live in? There were 1000+ terrorists holed up with rocket launchers and anti tank missiles under the leadership of a former Major General of the Indian army with the threat of a Pakistan attack and an internal mutiny happening at the same time. I consider him to be a creation of Indira Gandhi who then turned on her. He never asked for Khalistan nor was he against it. I don't agree with him putting weapons in the golden temple. But I don't support storming the Golden Temple by tanks and soldiers when they could have patiently surrounded The complex for a few days and let the worshippers go. They were not being held as hostages. The army completely desecrated the Golden Temple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 I consider him to be a creation of Indira Gandhi who then turned on her. He never asked for Khalistan nor was he against it. I don't agree with him putting weapons in the golden temple. But I don't support storming the Golden Temple by tanks and soldiers when they could have patiently surrounded The complex for a few days and let the worshippers go. They were not being held as hostages. The army completely desecrated the Golden Temple. Firstly, was he a terrorist or not? And secondly, no it could not have waited because there was a threat of a Pakistan attack coupled with an internal attack launched from Akal Takht. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asterix Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Indira Gandhi could've justified anything. I don't believe the threat of external attack was real. Bhindrawale was Indira's creation. She and the nation paid for it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Really, Pakistani attack ? I mean i knew of their open support for the Khalistan movement but unki itni jurrat :ohmy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Indira Gandhi could've justified anything. I don't believe the threat of external attack was real. Bhindrawale was Indira's creation. She and the nation paid for it... Bhindrawale was Indira Gandhi's creation and she abused the Indian democracy on many occasions including Kashmir for which we are still suffering. However, the threat of an external attack was real. Neutral writers have corroborated it and entire regiments were moved to the India-Pakistan border not Amritsar at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surajmal Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Really' date=' Pakistani attack ? I mean i knew of their open support for the Khalistan movement but unki itni jurrat :ohmy:[/quote'] Revenge for Bangladesh creation. (not that Pakis need an excuse to stir up trouble) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffee_rules Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Indira Gandhi could've justified anything. I don't believe the threat of external attack was real. Bhindrawale was Indira's creation. She and the nation paid for it... I don't believe Political leaders can take such decisions without input from the Military Intelligence. Deciding to waste 1000s of civilian life is not a trivial one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Really' date=' Pakistani attack ? I mean i knew of their open support for the Khalistan movement but unki itni jurrat :ohmy:[/quote'] Not sure if your comment is sarcastic, but neutral sources have written about a real possibility of an internal attack being launched from Akal Takht while Pakistan attacked the border. You've got to realize this wasn't your ordinary seize - it was 1000+ militants with state of the art weapons under the command of a decorated former Indian army officer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surajmal Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 I have seen support LTTE posters & Prabakaran photos in shops owned by many Tamil business men in Bangalore' date=' [b']Canada doesn't care much about India, it is a true democracy...not like a fake one in India where corruption is so rampamt & there is no value or security for common person, especially if it's a minority. When the time comes for some money making opportunities through trade, watch RCMP round up the Khalistanis. True Democracy...:haha: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts