I’m going to start a new thread on this on Monday as I have something interesting to kick it off with. Then I’ll respond to Jagraj and other points.

Sunny, I thought i’d say greetings since it’s my first time. I must say I’ve been a little bored reading some of the comments above esp. about religion. Never mind.

you say in your article: how can sikhs educate the west to ensure their looks are not confused with militant Islam. Can you please explain in full detail the difference between Teleban and Sikh with who wears a turban and bearded. Even I get confused when I see them on tele. my children come ruunning ‘daddy daddy look there a singh on the tele’

How would you educate the West to tell the diffence between a mona sikh (thats if you except them as Sikhs) and Pakistani Punjabi Muslim or a Iranian. I remember after the 9/11 when Sikhs were attacked in America. the brainless sikh leader were telling Sikhs to wear saffron colored turbans. And were telling white Americans we are not Muslims. Basicly this ment that anybody not wearing safron turban could be target.What clowns. In stead of defending the vitims of racists attacks (which is the Duty of every true Sikh to defend the weak) Its like saying to the BNP am not a Paki Muslim Iam a Sikh Wog, what difference is that going to make, you still go to get your head kicked in. My friend please make sure your brain is engaged before you open your mouth. GOOD NIGHT

RENCONIZE THE HUMAN RACE AS ONE (GURU GOBIND SINGH JI)

Keen to listen, my surprise soon turned to annoyance and then frustration. Once the programme had finished, I has left with a sour taste in my mouth and feeling that I had been violated in some way, and perhaps betrayed. By whom? By Radio 4 of course. A supposed bastion of intelligent thought, it seemed to me that some real questions had been left unasked and a biased programme had been broadcast pandering to the thoughts of the presenter who had undoubtedly convinced a “progressive” editor that he was uncovering some hidden issues.

So what was I annoyed about and what questions hadn’t been asked.

At the initial part of the half-hour programme, 30 seconds were given to explaining that since 1984, many Sikhs had been involved in a struggle for an independent land, following an attack on the Sikh temples and anti Sikh pogroms in Delhi. In the next 20 years, thousands had died following police unlawful killings etc. But it also implied that that the situation had calmed down and many people here and in India felt that it was finished.

It set the stage for its own unique viewpoint, i.e. that Sikh militants have not given up violence, rather they are trying to have a revival:
(a) Ideologically they are committed to reviving the struggle and even though 2 major organisations are banned, their members are very active abroad; and
(b) that financially the Sikhs in the Diaspora are still very much funding the campaign and that apparently Sikh temples in the UK are a battle ground where extremists are trying to take control in order to take finance this struggle.

Underlying these 2 major claims is a recurrent theme, to portray the Sikh militants in the same light as Al Qaeda and the British Police as lacking with understanding or will to prosecute Sikh militants “glorifying terrorism”.

I suppose as an intelligent listener, the first question I would have asked is:
Why are the Sikhs so annoyed about being a part of India and has anything changed that should have settled the issue to an amicable end?

The presenter did not talk about this at any point in the programme, even later on. Any one listening to the programme must have pondered, as I did, so what’s all this about. Much like you never cure a disease by treating the symptoms, the fact that the Indian police and government colluded to kill and torture so many young disaffected Sikhs that in the end, those left gave up hope or moved abroad, still does not mean that the causes of their disaffection were dealt with.

What is galling however, is the assumption that the Indian Government had stopped its violence now. The programme asked: have the Sikh militants given up violence? It concluded that it hadn’t. It did not ask if the people in Punjab felt that their situation had improved, compared to start of the (as yet unexamined) independence movement.
Listening to the presenter questioning a Sikh (freedom fighter/militant) the presented tried to get him to say whether he had killed anyone. It was quite disturbing, since the issue was moot, he had been acquitted and stated he was looking to politics to solve the issues. Was this question asked to any of the police interviewed? No.
It seizes upon his statement that he retains his right to pick up arms if they are not treated with justice, even though he clearly states that he is now committed to the political process. This is exactly what every movement in human history has had to struggle with. The situation in Ireland would not have been resolved had the British not moved on from such un-intelligent analysis. Acceptance that both sides killed and that it had not achieved any resolution would have sufficed.

The presenter pushed a claim that Sikh militants (Babbar Khalsa) were training in Pakistan with Kashmiri freedom fighters/militants (probably true). This is to the extent that the FBI has started to keep a list of 100 Sikhs who are being trained by these Kashmiris. It however made an amazing jump from this to then linking these Sikhs and Al Qaeda. Where did this come from?
Even when the interviewee is clearly stating that the Sikhs had an Anti-Indian “marriage of convenience” with the Kashmiris, the presenter was intent upon ensuring that both the Kashmiris and Sikhs are associated with Al Qaeda. There is a wealth of literature about how the Kashmiris are trying to disassociate their regional independence movement from the “Islamic world jihad” preached by Al Qaeda. They are trying to be independent from all 3, India, Pakistan and Afghanistan. A very tenuous link that was not questioned in the slightest, at least not intelligently.

The programme then moved to the UK, where it brought up the ideological and monetary support being given to such militants. What is surprising about this part of the programme is just the pure lack of analysis. It linked a series of statements to build a case that did not seem to make sense. Yes there are Sikhs here committed to seeking Independence for the Sikhs from India. Yes, they took over temples and sent money abroad. Yes, they want to change things in India. But what? This is just not discussed. What we get instead is you-tube videos of speeches that the police ignore, of disenfranchised old men trying to talk about issues, inspire the youth here about what is happening in India. We get told about the Sikh federation lobbying parliament for Khalistan.
Well, great, the Sikhs are trying to do things politically. Was the question ever asked as to what the British government has done to address their concerns? Was the question asked as to what the current situation in India is for Sikhs and what they would like to change?

When we got told that there were 500 people disrupting a temple meeting, it was directly following an interview about money from Southall, especially since 1984, being sent to India. Fundraisers fighting for the liberation of Punjab were asking people to give money to buy a tank. We were told that although the situation had calmed down since then, recently opposition groups have been disrupting services in congregation, bringing in thugs who were drunk, the head priest was assaulted, and that the sanctity of gurudwara was violated, and this threat loomed again.
I had 2 questions here. Who were these opposition members and did the want to send money to India? Or as more likely, are they just the opposition who want to be in charge, much like the current committee of self-important community leaders who are just as remote to the common British Sikh youth. I say this as a Sikh who has lived in Southall, dealt with the committee. I suspect the latter.
The other question is that if the Sikh community gave such vast amounts of money when told explicitly that it would be used to buy a tank, does this not beg the question that this must have been an important and popular struggle. One can hardly see Sikhs donating money to if they did not feel that something as warlike as a tank was required to deal with the concerns of the time. So again, what were these concerns and have they been addressed or is the case that the symptoms, i.e., armed struggle, have been suppressed. But in any case, such intelligent and more important questions were not asked.

The final point was brought up was the idea that even though money was mismanaged and there are threats of this happening again, that Sikhs are not prepared to talk about it. I wish at this point Radio 4 or BBC news had broadcast an ad asking for volunteers but I wasn’t so lucky. Instead, my old friend, Sunny Hundal was brought in, as one of those who was prepared. Since his career is as an ethnic affairs journalist, I suspect he was rather keen to do so. Sunny believes that the community is in a mess, that there is no intellectual debate and that although “most Sikhs in the UK care about the human rights abuses in India, they are also interested in what’s happening in the UK”. He dismisses the freedom movement in Punjab as a “1st Generation Issue”.
Knowing Sunny quite well, I realised that although most of what he said was true and straight forward, he’d been used by the presenter, Portrayed as a bold Sikh prepared to speak out, if you ask him, as I often have, he doesn’t see himself as a Sikh and doesn’t speak enough Punjabi to decipher what the temples/speeches are about. He’s wrong, its not a “1st generation issue”, it’s a current issue and one that needs to be addressed at root cause. That being so, he is right that intelligent debate is missing from the Sikh community, and unfortunately, also from this Radio 4 programme.

The reality is probably closer to this. There are a lot of young Sikhs who are interested in their religion and this number is growing quickly. These young Brits are daily shocked and in tears when they read about what happened to their people since 1947 and 1984. The brutalities of the Indian Government in dealing with the Sikh desire for independence were extreme and more importantly state sponsored. Yet the freedom fighter/militants also committed atrocities and need to face that they failed their Gurus.

A more intelligent programme may have examined the issues that young Sikhs face when they educate themselves about issues that (mostly) occurred when they were babies, and unfortunately still occur today. Such as:

• Should the Sikh community here not do something to help the Sikhs in India?
• As a distinctive and nationalistic race, do they not have right to a degree of political and economic freedom from India?
• How is a Sikh here to attempt to try to sort the massive level of corruption in Sikh politics in India?
• How can the youth here try to introduce more English into Sikh temples?
• How can Sikh here educate often the more powerful elders that backward practices such as caste discrimination are at odds with the Sikh teachings?
• How can Sikhs here educate themselves about Sikhism, given the linguistic problems?
• Do young Sikhs work with elders who cling onto power and stifle innovation or wait their time or push them out?
• What can Sikhs offer the British people in terms of their Gurus teachings?
• How can Sikhs educate the West to ensure their looks are not confused with militant Islam?
• How are Sikhs to separate the bad things Punjabi culture brings, of alcohol and patriarchy from the Gurus ideals of spirituality and oneness?

These and many more are what trouble me however, its quite patronising for the programme to conclude that the fight for an independent homeland is casting a shadow over young Sikhs and that the politics and religion is at odds. Its not a shadow, its the reality and the root causes of the struggle for independence need to be addressed, the betrayal of the Sikhs by Britain and Hindu leaders, the land of Punjab being split into 3, the interference of the Indian government in Sikh politics all designed to keep Sikhs confused and disorganised. The reality is that at some point in the future the Sikhs will have their own homeland or freedom to practise their religion and politics within a federal India. It is what the Kashmiris want for themselves as well.

The community is indeed at a turning point. The point is this, previously Sikhs in India fought for an independent homeland. Now we in the West need to learn the Gurus way again, to meditate and spread the Gurus message, take it abroad and bring back the Sikh arts, the music, the hymns etc. and bring the debate into the 21st century. Freedom in Punjab will only come when we have freedom in India, and that will only come when we are a globally strong and organised community, like many others.

The situation in Punjab is not a shadow, its the reality that Sikhs have to face. Sorting it out will take 100s of years but if the Gurus mission was to bring peace to the world, we’ve got our job cut out for us for 1000s of years yet.

He is, however, banned.

Therefore Sunny must bare some responsibility for the ‘anti-intellectualism’ he spoke of on Radio 4 and the abysmal nature of this thread.

115 Sukhi.Murder of Baljit Kaur , showed the real side of Bhinderwala. I just want add some back ground facts to this heinous crime that only the likes of Nazis can commit. According to my conversation at that time with a Mr X .Baljit Kaur and her boyfriend, Shinda, who was a know gangster, were from the same village of Nirmnia, which latter changed its name to Jagpal. As you all well know that girls and boys from the same village are regarded as brother and sister. So they both left town and ended up at golden temple, were they joined up with the militants (one must not forget that those who joined the militancy were from the lumen elements of society, this is fact. During that period Shinda was prison, don’t know for what. When Shinda was in prison, Bhinderwala’s right hand man, Sodhi, misbehaved with Baljit Kuar who I presumed kept quiet at that time. Atfter Shinda’s release from prison, Baljit Kaur must have told him about Sodhi misbehaving with her. Sodhi was lured to a hotel by Baljit. The Mr X told me that Sodhi was shot dead by Bajit. After this incident they both went to the Golden Temlpe and informed the ‘Sant’ that they had done a good deed, that they had got rid of Sodhi who was a disgrace to the Panth, that you the Sant have always preached that the enemies of the Path should be put on the train (meaning bumped off ) May be the Khalistanis can verify this barbaric act or the Jathedars at the Golden Temple, who have just removed the portrait of the Butcher of Jallianwala Bagh and replaced it with the Butcher of Baljit and the Punjabis
WE MUST NOT FORGET THAT BHINDERWALA WAS THE CREATION OF THE CONGRESS PARTY, UNLEASHED ON THE PEOPLE OF PUNJAB. THE GOVERNMENT HAS MANY MORE IN STOCK, ALL TYPES OF BREEDS.

“Let’s bring closure to this argument about the need of a Khalisatan and concentrate on helping the victims and families of past human rights abuses, whether it be Delhi, Punjab or Gujarat and bring those responsible to book.

We must all state loud and clear this must not happen -NEVER AGAIN!”

Totally concur – PP this should be the final conclusion on this matter and hope to see further coverage of such issues going forward (as previously done by Mr Hundal on the Punjab issue).

here here!

Let’s bring closure to this argument about the need of a Khalisatan and concentrate on helping the victims and families of past human rights abuses, whether it be Delhi, Punjab or Gujarat and bring those responsible to book.

We must all state loud and clear this must not happen -NEVER AGAIN!

and build a truly puralist India.

I summarise below some outstanding points as closure from my side as I doubt any of the above issues are likely to receive a response (unless of course it is a threat) from the Khalistanis:

1. A common rhetoric heard amongst the UK and Canada based Khalistanis is that they have to march for their brothers in India since, in India one cannot preach the Khalistani rhetoric, sadly that is all these chaps have – rhetoric. Let us consider the facts, looking recent elections in Punjab (a dominant location for Sikhs) as a rough barometer to gage the political opinions of the Sikhs, it is hard to find any successful candidate with a pro-Khalistani agenda. In recent years, Simranjit Singh Mann broke this trend and websites like http://www.sikhsangat.com and http://www.tapoban.org were frequently singing his praises in the run up to elections, until of course Mr Mann’s party failed to even achieve 0.5% of the votes.

Similarly, if one considers the SAD (Shiromani Akali Dal) led by Parkash Singh Badal, it is clear that has had to avoid any mention of of ‘Sikh separatism’ or self-determination and even side with Hindu nationalistic parties to avoid painting itself as a ‘Sikh’ party, which only further goes to show that if indeed, as the Khalistanis like to argue, Sikh voters do hold separatist feelings, then surely the likes of Badal (a man well known for bending over backwards to support his political career) would have exploited any such opportunity to his advantage.

I will allow the readers to conclude for themselves what the majority of Sikhs (practising or otherwise) in India and the Diaspora truly feel about any ‘Khalistan’.

2. Khalistanis, particularly those from the AKJ and BKI schools of thought, not only love to rewrite Sikh history to support their personality cults, but also Indian history in general, no matter how antiquated or modern. In view of the earlier reference to Bhagat Singh, it is worth noting the long propaganda campaign by these two groups to somehow prove Bhagat Singh was reinitiated into Sikh rites at the behest of their founder Bhai Sahib Bhai Randhir Singh. Again, I will let the readers conclude for themselves as to the implications of such thinking and the motivations for attempting to show Bhagat Singh in such light.

- Kultar Singh, the brother of Bhagat Singh has publicly on Indian TV confirmed that his family followed the Arya Samaj and several others from Bhagat Singh’s family have made clear that the photograph in jail with a top knot of uncut hair as per the Sikh tradition (which the AKJ and BKI claim to associate with the influence of Bhai Randhir Singh – an event that all his family deny, yet to this date is mentioned in elaborate terms in Bhai Randhir Singh’s autobiography distributed free of charge in many Gurdwaras supporting the Khalistanis) to be incorrect since the photograph relates to his first term in jail during the 1920s and 1931 prior to him being hanged.
- For further evidence, the state museum in Chandigarh has the book which Bhagat Singh was reading the night before his execution (‘State and Revolution’ by Lenin) which has a page folded for purposes of a bookmark and furthermore Bhagat Singh’s own words are to the following effect:
“…I have read of atheists facing all troubles quite boldly; so am I trying to stand like a man with an erect head to the last, even on the gallows….let us see how I carry on…one friend asked me to pray….when informed of my atheism, he said: “during your last days you will begin to believe.” I said: “No, dear Sir, it shall not be. I will think that to be an act of degradation and demoralisation on my part. For selfish motives I am not going to pray.” Readers and friends: Is this “vanity”? If it is, I stand for it….”

3. Whilst we await the eagerly anticipated quotes from the Sri Dasam Granth which supposedly argue a case for Khalistan, readers can consider the following quotation from the Sri Guru Granth Sahib, the final seal and scriptures of the Sikhs and indeed for all Sikhs, myself included, the embodiment of the 10 Sikh Gurus and our eternal guide:

“Raaj na chao Mukt na Chao Man preet charan kamalarey” (SGGS 534)

[“I desire neither rule nor kingdom, only the love of your lotus feet”]

I am sure that readers can ascertain from the above the position of Sikh scriptures on the subject of Khalistan.

4. As mentioned above, the Dohra “Raj Karega Khalsa” is not composed by the Sikh Gurus and whilst I have no issues with this Dohra as a relevant Sikh practice, let us note its origins lie in the late 18th century, arguably the heydays of Sikh heroes and a time of grave persecution against the Sikh community, under which conditions it served to boost morale and also a message to then oppressors of the Sikh people, its relevance today is part of this tradition and legacy, what is worth noting in addition to my comments earlier on the same subject is that this Dohra was never sung after the Ardas prior to 1947 in the Malwa area of Punjab and even today many sects in the area simply end the Ardas with the Jaikara “Bole so Nihal, Sat Sri Akal!” [Truth is Eternal!], clearly pointing towards this being a tradition that has grown with the Sikh community rather than being some sort of divine mandate.

5. Finally, the term ‘Khalistan’ first came into use by the late Dr Jagjit Singh Chauhan during the early 1970s in UK. Pakistani authorities had assisted him in his travel to the UK, where deemed to be Pakistani Government agent, he was barred entry to the Singh Sabha Gurdwara in Havelock Rd, Southall. He went on to take out a full page advert in a Punjabi weekly paper in Southall for his “Khalistan Airways”, which in fact was a PIA plane (the PIA painted over but still visible) painted yellow and bearing the name Khalistan Airways, thereafter being appropriated by subsequent Khalistanis as a term for their dreamt up ‘homeland’.

Parvinder, you raise a good point, but to take it at a tangent for a moment, ever since that brief encounter with the “RSS is a cultural not fascist organisation” promoting Indy on another thread, I have to be honest and say that “Indian nationalism” even at the best of times seems to be a hang over from the late 19th and early 20th centuries, aping the British mentality of the time and to some extent even the Nazis.

The nonsense that Indy came out with under his other thread was ample enough proof of such a mindset and one that commonly pervades “educated” classes across India.

Shiv Sena’s tirade against Biharis and south Indians of late is similar to their objections against Bengalis a few years back. Scapegoating the ‘other’ is a hallmark of this nasty fascist party. However, Bihar is in a mess due to the mis-management and corruption of the state by leaders like Laloo Prasad Yadav, forcing people to leave in order to survive.

You do, however, hear some Punjabis moaning about ‘Bahiyaas’ coming into Punjab and doing the menial jobs. In rural areas, the landowning farmers and their families have almost stopped doing any work on the land and hire Biharis on mass. In the cities Biharis are getting a good reputation as skilled craftsmen and construction workers (as my own personal experience has shown), and relations with indigenous Punjabis is cordial. Shiv Sena’s attempt to whip up sectarianism in the name of Marathi chauvinism in Mumbai is quite dangerous. So much for their Indian nationalism.
see: http://www.tehelka.com/story_main37.asp?filename=Ne160208old_grouses.asp

What exactly are you trying to suggest under #162?

The article is hardly a surprise given Bal Thackeray’s openly known views on such matters – it is not a surprise either that he is commonly referred to as the Bhindranwale of the Hindus.

I would welcome your thoughts to the points I raised under #146.

J Singh,

As mentioned above by Parvinder, Rupinder and myself, as unplatable it maybe to stomach that members of our community could even fall to the depths of associating themselves with the likes of Al Qaida terrorists, and with due note of the issues that are inherent within Amardeep Bassey’s report (as highlighted adequately above by Mr Doshanj and others), should these assertions come to fruition and result in any truth, we need to be extremely vocal about the issue within the Community to ensure that we take on our own corporate responsibility.

Insofar as a “homeland” is concerned, personally I do believe that every community has the right to self-determination, however looking at the facts that stare us blatantly in the face, Khalistanis are a minority amongst the Sikhs in India and within the Diaspora, regardless of what internet presence they may drum up for themselves or how many Gurdwaras they may obtain control over to plaster photos of their heroes (usually in greater number than photos of any Sikh Gurus or Sikh female role models – unless of course it happens to be Mai Bhago, who has somehow become the ‘norm’ rather than the ‘exception’, displacing traditional Sikh role models such as the Guru’s sisters and wives and other devotees who are frequently mentioned in the Janam Sakhis, Gurbilas literature and even the Sri Dasam Granth Sahibm, to further they militant hyper-masculinity).

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/specialcoverage/2754186.cms

also glad someone here is familiar with Sri Dasam Granth Sahib in order to answer Harry’s arguments.

“Raj Karega Khalsa, if I’m correct, means ‘the pure shall rule’. So it doesn’t necessary say only a Sikh Khalsa should rule. Therefore, Khalsa Raj would denote ‘the rule of the pure”

Parvinder, with due respect, I do not think we should be liberalising the tradition to conform to modern day mindsets.

The term “Khalsa” in the Dohra (couplet) “Raj Karega Khalsa” clearly refers to the Khalsa Panth of Guru Gobind Singh, this much is clear when the full composition is read (incidentally the version recited in most Gurdwaras today is a shortened form of the original).

In any event, this composition, whilst perfectly valid in its own rights, is not the writings of the Sikh Gurus and hence any support for the notion of Khalistan built upon this Dohra is flawed insofar as suggesting that it is some sort of Divine mandate.

1. “freedom of havin to practise our way of life ie sikh weddings cannot be classed as law,this is in india allow the sgpc to be free from rule of goverment,make amritsar and anandpur,no booze or meat zone if look they are very simple request”

I cannot see where in the above you have addressed my question “why does following the 10 Gurus and having faith in the Sikh scriptures as the eternal Guru require one to be a Khalistani?”

Whilst we await your considered response, in response to the issues you now highlight:

(a)”freedom of havin to practise our way of life”

To my knowledge (and experience), Sikhs can freely move about the country adorning all facets of their faith upto and including various sized Kirpans (and in the case of Nihangs, even firearms), over and above this I cannot understand how Sikhs are limited to ‘practice their way of life’ in India?

(b)”ie sikh weddings cannot be classed as law,this is in india”

I would like to discuss this item with you further, before doing so, please could you expand upon your comment, what exactly do you think in the law prohibits Sikhs from being marriaged under the Akhand Karaj ceremony in India. I look forward to discussing this with you.

(c)”allow the sgpc to be free from rule of goverment”

Again, what exactly do you require the SGPC to do that it currently cannot undertake?

(d)”make amritsar and anandpur,no booze or meat zone”

Why? What demands that the cities of Amritsar and Anandpur be made alcohol or meat free? Particularly in the case of the latter, meat (with the exception of Khuttha) is not prohibited for Sikhs (regardless of what the fringe Sant Baba or Jathabandi personality cults may like to promote), this much is clear from the Sikh Rehit Maryada as supported by the Akal Thakt.

2 “khalsa raaj is khalistan my friend they are just words read the DASAM GRANTH BANI”

I am familiar with the Sri Dasam Granth Sahib, however please could you provide me with one reference to indicate where in the Dasam Granth the notion of “Khalistan” is supported. Again, I look forward to having this discussion with you.

3 “pls do not forget about the tens of thousands of sikh that hav been killed in the name of khalistan”

Harry, there are ‘tens of thousands’ young men and children being hired and trianed by the likes of Hamas and other organisation, these children are taught to memorise the Koran and are very “practising” in their faith, yet they go on to become suicide bombers – the pro-Khalistanis similarly think because scores of young ‘rehitvaan’ men and women, who no doubt, were very practising Sikhs and believed they were fighting for a just cause, that in of itself somehow makes the Khalistani cause justified and appropriate.

4. “i did not mention the dora your lack of knowlege in sikhi lets you forget about DASAM GRANTH JEE”

Harry, I am aware you did not mention that Dohra, I did since this is often quoted by Khalistanis as ‘Guru Sahib’s words’, the whole point being that I was hoping you could provide something more tangible to support your claim that Khalistan is a divine mandate from our Gurus – as above, please show me where in the Sri Dasam Granth Sahib (and if you can in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib) the notion of Khalistan is supported.

I am looking forward to your responses.

Deep Singh.