Sunny Hundal website



  • Family

    • Liberal Conspiracy
    • Sunny Hundal
  • Comrades

    • Andy Worthington
    • Angela Saini
    • Bartholomew’s notes
    • Bleeding Heart Show
    • Bloggerheads
    • Blood & Treasure
    • Campaign against Honour Killings
    • Cath Elliott
    • Chicken Yoghurt
    • Daily Mail Watch
    • Dave Hill
    • Dr. Mitu Khurana
    • Europhobia
    • Faith in Society
    • Feminism for non-lefties
    • Feministing
    • Gender Bytes
    • Harry’s Place
    • IKWRO
    • MediaWatchWatch
    • Ministry of Truth
    • Natalie Bennett
    • New Statesman blogs
    • Operation Black Vote
    • Our Kingdom
    • Robert Sharp
    • Rupa Huq
    • Shiraz Socialist
    • Shuggy’s Blog
    • Stumbling and Mumbling
    • Ta-Nehisi Coates
    • The F Word
    • Though Cowards Flinch
    • Tory Troll
    • UK Polling Report
  • In-laws

    • Aaron Heath
    • Douglas Clark's saloon
    • Earwicga
    • Get There Steppin’
    • Incurable Hippie
    • Neha Viswanathan
    • Power of Choice
    • Rita Banerji
    • Sarah
    • Sepia Mutiny
    • Sonia Faleiro
    • Southall Black Sisters
    • The Langar Hall
    • Turban Head

  • 15th July, 2010

    America, Christians, and Religious Extremism

    by Jai at 9:30 pm    

    There is a view in some quarters, including here in the UK, that modern-day Western societies are free of some of the caricatures often associated with some non-Western cultures; in recent times, negative comparisons have been drawn with Islam and Muslims in particular.

    Similarly, there are uninformed arguments being made that, whilst – for example – it would be highly inaccurate to assert that the most ultraconservative, tyrannical and bigoted historical versions of Catholicism or some of the more fanatical and regressive versions of Christianity in general prevalent in some parts of the United States should be extrapolated to stereotype & denigrate Christianity and its diverse followers all over the rest of the world, Islam and Muslims do not demonstrate the same level of diversity either in the modern day or historically. The logic (not to mention the gross ignorance) of claiming that one particular religion and its followers encompass the spectrum of interpretations from liberalism & moderation to the ultraconservative opposite extreme, and that other religions and their followers do not, is patently faulty.

    Matthew Harwood has recently written an excellent article for Comment is Free on the Guardian demonstrating this perfectly, titled ”America’s Paranoid Religious Right”. He specifically discusses the ‘Call 2 Fall’ movement in the United States. A few extracts, as follows:

    The Call 2 Fall movement captures the mood among Christian nationalists – that God is punishing America for its sinful ways.

    Continue Reading...

    How should lefties deal with party loyalty and ‘collective responsibility’?

    by Sunny at 9:28 am    

    Madam Miaow (and I think Harpymarx agrees) says this about Ed Miliband’s position on the Iraq war:

    Broadly, Ed M, like the other guys, was quiet over Iraq when he was in power, probably the most important issue of his Labour government’s tenure. While he was relatively good at the New Statesman hustings, this raises the question of why he is only talking about it now. The elephant in the room is the issue of career. If he remained silent so as not to rock the boat and send his career off course, then that says something about his character and indicates how he is likely to perform as leader of the party.

    I think this deserves a response in itself, and I think there are two issues here.

    Continue Reading...
    Filed under: Party politics
    14th July, 2010

    Prevent Violent Extremism comes to an end

    by Sunny at 7:15 pm    

    Some Muslim orgs will be happy, others will be livid. Be interesting to see how it all pans out.

    The government’s £60m “preventing violent extremism” programme is to be dismantled after a widespread loss of confidence in it within Muslim communities, it was confirmed today.

    The plan to spy on Muslims in Birmingham especially was the last straw. It also sounds like the programme to tour imams (run by Radical Middle Way) will also come to an end. Big development, although entirely expected.

    Filed under: Muslim,Organisations

    Alexander Meleagrou-Hitchens single-handedly makes libel lawyers obsolete

    by Sunny at 10:00 am    

    Alexander Meleagrou-Hitchens is the son of Christopher Hitchens. That’s about the only thing going for him it seems. Yesterday, he wrote an article for Guardian explaining his side of the story, in response to an article by David Miller.

    Miller explained how his website SpinProfiles got shut down after complaints by Hitchens Jnr. I expect this sort of behaviour from these idiots, but here’s an immortal line by Hitchens in that article:

    People who are profiled by his websites should be allowed to reserve the right not to have any association with him

    But, but they wrote nasty things about me!!! Richard Bartholomew calls this an “insult to the intelligence”. But actually, apart from the wailing, this is quite clever and we should take up Hitchens on his call. Why not extend that principle to other websites?

    I think there’s a lot of racist garbage posted by commenters at Harry’s Place. The next time they write about me, clearly what I should be doing is contacting their ISP and demanding they take it down. Muslim organisations too should start collecting objectionable views posted on Standpoint magazine’s website. When Hitchens writes about them they should demand their right not to be associated with that website. Win!

    I fully endorse this brilliant new development in our media culture. Why even bother with legal arguments or trying to prove libel when all you have to do is say you don’t want to be “associated” with that publication / website so they can’t write about you. I bet British Muslims are cursing they hadn’t thought of this earlier. Clearly there’s something inherently clever in that Hitchens gene. That Harry’s Place didn’t feel this development contradicted their strap-line (‘Liberty, if it means anything, is the right to tell people what they don’t want to hear‘) is testament to their continuing fearless crusade against… err.. censorship.

    Filed under: Civil liberties,Media
    13th July, 2010

    Child rapist freed by Switzerland

    by Rumbold at 10:02 pm    

    After a concerted campaign by rape apologists, Roman Polanski has been freed by a Swiss court, thus freeing him from possible extradition to America, which he had fled after raping a child decades earlier. The fact that people still defend him and praise him is disgusting, and chilling when one considers that only his fame and talent (rather than natural justice) allowed him to escape a crime for which he was convicted. Whether his films are any good is irrelevant. He drugged and raped a child, and fled before he could serve his sentence.

    Filed under: Sex equality
    12th July, 2010

    Express apologises to Interpal

    by Sunny at 4:47 pm    

    The Daily Express admits: “we incorrectly described the charity Interpal as “Hamas-supporting”.” - smearing Palestinian charities to imply they have links to terrorists has become de rigueur for Israel supporters now. Despite the apology, I doubt many others will stop their smearing.
    via Tabloid Watch

    Filed under: Media

    The problem with the left and their political parties

    by Sunny at 4:15 pm    

    Michael Tomasky makes an excellent point:

    If you boil my 6,000 words down to one sentence or idea, it would be that I want people to stop saying things like if only Obama were tougher like FDR and LBJ, we’d have a climate bill by now or a union-friendly card-check bill or we’d have had a public option or any number of other things. That’s an extremely naive point of view and ultimately a kind of toxic one that leads to liberal despair, because it makes progressives think that the only thing preventing their desires from becoming reality is that their leaders are selling them out. There are many things Obama could have done differently up to now, no doubt. But the above view just doesn’t reflect the more complex reality. American liberals need to think about deeper systemic reforms and forms of pressure.

    What makes this worse is that right-wingers, even crazy ones like the Tea Party movement, are far more pragmatic and strategic when it comes to pushing their projects.

    In about a year from now all those socialists going around saying the Labour party and the Tories were essentially the same will be eating their words.

    Coincidentally, Hopi Sen made a similar point a few days ago:

    So if David wants Labour to be the repository of the “reasonable hopes of reasonable people”, perhaps one place to start would be admitting that the total transformation that progressive politics promises is often an illusion. The consequence of great dreams and high standards is great dissappointment. A certain modesty would be attractive in modern progressive politics. We cannot fix all. We can only seek to improve a little.

    True, true. But there’s two (somewhat contradictory) reasons why the Left does this badly. Firstly, some lefties within party politics place too much emphasis on Westminster without looking at how the wider Left movement could be mobilised to put pressure on politicians. Leaders can sometimes set the tone on an issue and lead us, but mostly they’re just reacting. Plus, people are paying less attention to politicians nowadays.

    The second problem is that Lefties outside Westminster politics don’t pay enough attention to the machinations of Parliament. Many of them act like those people camping at Democracy Village: with lots of intentions and nice, fluffy words but no coherence in their place and no strategy on how to take it forward. They’re angry. They just don’t know what to do about it.

    The Tea Party movement’s potency comes from the fact that it’s a grassroots movement but it’s very focused on trying to destroy the Democrats. Many on the left are actually happier arguing and fighting against other Lefties because it’s easier than looking outwards to the real enemy.

    The liberal movement in the US assumed that with Obama elected their job was done. No, you dimwits, it had just begun. Politics is war: you have to fight constantly and continuously. You have to fight the other side to immobilise them, and you have to fight your side to make them go further.

    Hot off the press: the Al-Qaeda magazine!

    by Sunny at 9:33 am    

    That’s right, the loose terrorist group has published a magazine. Going through it quickly (note to security services: I didn’t go to Pakistan to attend training camps, just in case you’re reading).

    Seems to me, the magazine is more aimed at the Western media and non-Muslims than Muslims themselves. For example, there is an article on: ‘Make a bomb in the kitchen of your mom’, which is actually titled: ‘Open Source Jihad’. No, really! Check out page 31.

    Also interesting to note their comments on the niqab:

    As mentioned above the niq?b is not mandatory on Muslim women according to many scholars. But because it is a right of Muslim women and because it has become a symbol of being a Muslim today, Muslims need to take a firm position in this battle and dig in their trenches.

    For this reason we promote that Muslim women in the West who do not view wearing niq?b as being a religious duty to wear the niq?b as a public sign of their rejection of forced assimilation, as a
    symbol of their pride at being Muslim, as a public statement that is carried as a badge of honor in face of a decadent Western way of life, and a statement that proclaims that even if I am not obliged to wear the niq?b, I will wear it because I refuse to have the West decide for me how I am going to practice my religion.

    Unsurprisingly, this pretty much mirrors what people who want to ban the niqab say about the women wearing them. They say these women have already rejected the West and should be forced, AQ want them to wear it for the same reason. Neither cares what women think or feel about it.

    11th July, 2010

    Cutting aid to India

    by Rumbold at 3:22 pm    

    The new Conservative minister for aid is considering slashing Britain’s £250 million aid contribution to India. The move comes after sustained criticism of giving aid to a country that spends billions of pounds on nuclear weapons and a space programme.

    Is this a good idea? Let us assume for a moment that giving aid is a good thing, and that the aid we give India is effective, and doesn’t just go to erecting giant statues of politicians. The case for continuing large scale aid to India is that despite its huge economy, it is a poor country on a per capita measure; hundreds of millions still live in poverty, and this is likely to stay the case for years to come. Moreover, there is no guarantee that the Indian government or private donors would step in to continue any cancelled aid projects.

    Against this are two arguments; opportunity cost and providing cover for the Indian government. The latter relates to the notion that foreign aid frees native governments fro having to provide equivalent services from their own resources. For example, if Britain is providing access to clean water for villages in the Punjab, the Punjabis will not bother to lobby their local politicians to provide this service. Thus the government will not be obliged to do so and the Punjabis will remain dependent on British aid unless they are rich enough to fund it privately themselves.

    The former, opportunity cost, is the next best thing the money could be used for; either tax cuts, national debt reduction, spending on other departments or aid to other countries. So if it was used for aid for other countries, would spending in, say, Ethiopia, be more effective than spending the same amount in India?

    There is no easy answer to this. Withdrawal of British aid cannot be conditional on the Indian government agreeing to provide the same services, as the government would simply refuse (knowing then that the aid would stay in place). Perhaps the best solution would be a phased withdrawal of aid, whereby no new projects are funded, and the old ones run their course. This would allow aid to be spent on other countries without imperilling potential vital projects which help some of India’s poorest.

    Filed under: Economics,South Asia
    10th July, 2010

    Go Sarah Palin!

    by Sunny at 6:14 pm    

    I really, really want Sarah Palin to run as the Republican candidate for President in 2012. She is Obama’s best hope. Chris Matthews from MSNBC lays out what that path might look like.

    And this blog post is also spot on:

    Palin has smartly positioned herself as the champion of the conservative counter-revolution. By December, she will almost certainly be the de facto front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination.

    By the time the Establishment GOP wakes up to this reality, it may be too late for them to do anything about it. Their view of Palin is that she’s useful to the party because she can help keep “the Tea Party types inside the tent.” And maybe she can serve coffee while she’s at it. Palin’s view is that (1) “the Tea Party types” are the party, (2) she is their standard bearer and (3) anyone who thinks “the Tea Party types” are there to lick envelopes and knock on doors should think again. They’re there, she asserts, to take back their party and to take back their country.

    via Andrew Sullivan. I can’t wait for the Republican implosion. I’m also going to look forward to Nick Cohen telling us how great Sarah Palin is, for the second time.

    Also worth noting: Liberal Groups in the US are organising themselves to get Obama to move on his promises, and regenergise the base so they can come out and vote. The danger for Democrats in the mid-term elections is that Republicans are far more fired up to go out and vote than Democrats.

    9th July, 2010

    Muslim scare-stories

    by Sunny at 3:32 pm    

    Yesterday on More4 Jon Stewart did an excellent take-down of Fox News and their scaremongering about Muslims in America. Thanks to Tim Fenton for the link.

    You can watch it online here, although I wish I could find an embeddable version. I’d like to write more but the programme speaks for itself. Two bigots worth noting also feature: Daniel Pipes and Robert Spencer.

    Save Sakine Mohammadi Ashtiani

    by Rumbold at 6:47 am    

    The campaign to save Sakine Mohammadi Ashtiani, who is facing the death penalty for alleged adultery in Iran, has continued to attract worldwide attention after the story was featured on the front page of the time. Numerous foreign politicians and other notables have called for her not to be stoned:

    Sakine Mohammadi Ashtiani is a forty-three year old mother of two children, 16 & 20 year old respectively. Both Sakine’s children and her lawyer tried everything they could to stop the stoning sentence, as a result of committing adultery. However, her stoning is finalized by the Iran’s court. Sakine is in Tabriz prison awaiting her imminent stoning sentence.

    Iran sits on the UN’s Commission on the Status of Women.

    8th July, 2010

    Simply, er, unexpected

    by Sunny at 4:41 pm    

    I am very surprised by this:

    The police’s use of controversial counterterrorism stop and search powers against individuals is to be scrapped immediately, the home secretary announced today. Under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000, officers can stop and search anyone in a designated area without having to show reasonable suspicion. Interim operational guidelines to be issued to the police say that in future section 44 powers will be used only to search vehicles, and officers will have to have grounds for suspecting they are being used in connection with terrorism.

    The Guardian’s Alan Travis was right - it’s amazing the Home Secretary didn’t bother challenging this or even ignoring it, as New Labour would have done.

    The assault on our civil liberties and people’s dignities was one of New Labour’s biggest stains when in government. It’s rather unexpected when the Tories, who are meant to be more authoritarian on this issue, are now far more liberal.

    Update: Kevin Blowe points out why Labour’s response to this is disingenuous.

    Filed under: Civil liberties

    More on Englishness

    by Sunny at 3:04 pm    

    Good to see more articles on Englishess, prompted by LabourList.

    This article by Rick Muir says:

    The English left needs to reclaim English identity – otherwise there is a dangerous vacuum in which all sorts of resentments over devolution, and immigration get channelled through the prism of a reactionary and belligerent Englishness. We all know the signs of this – and ippr research has found that concerns about immigration are often articulated through a sense of aggrieved English nationalism.

    This is not to argue for an English parliament, but rather for the left to re-discover its radical English heritage and defend our interpretation of our national history against that of the right. It is also a call for Labour in office to give some institutional or cultural recognition to England, so we can promote the same kind of shared civic identity that has been so successfully fostered in Scotland and Wales.

    And Sunder Katwala:

    If we want to remain British – as I do – then we have to sustain majorities for British identity in each of the British nations. The idea that this is best done by suppressing other national identities is wrong-headed, and denies the history of Britain and Britishness too. As a civic identity for a multi-national state, Britishness was inherently plural from the start. Just as, after Thatcherism, devolution to Scotland and Wales was necessary to save the Union so is demonstrating that British identity has plenty of room for Englishness too.

    The British left should have more confidence in its engagement in our national conversations. If some on the left have had an apparent allergy to expressions of national identity, that has never been universally true.

    Yes to both.

    I wrote about Englishness a few weeks back, and have nearly finished a follow-up article.

    Filed under: British Identity

    …and we’re back

    by Sunny at 4:15 am    

    So you lot can stop emailing me with complaints about the theme now, thanks. I had a stroke of UNIX genius and managed to recover old files. Voila.

    Filed under: Blog
    7th July, 2010

    Sikh centre given an award by the Queen

    by Jai at 5:01 pm    

    The Queen has recently given the Sikh Nishkam Centre in Birmingham an award for its exemplary voluntary services to society.

    The group running the centre is headed by “Bhai Sahib” Mohinder Singh, whom I previously discussed in the “Music of Unity/Politics of Division” article here (pictured).
    (more…)

    Subliminal messaging

    by Sunny at 4:42 pm    

    I’m tickled at how, on this Harry’s Place blog-post, they publish something innocuous about Muslims and nail-varnish (who said they’re obsessed by Muslims??) and then end up with a big picture of some evil-looking Hizbollah fighters.

    I mean I’m sure it’s entirely coincidental that HP bloggers have no problems sticking in videos or pictures of angry, nasty looking Muslims on every other post even if it’s totally unrelated to the topic. Oh wait, it is related - they are all Muslims after all!

    Filed under: EDL

    Tony Blair ”very much exaggerated” Iran’s role in supporting al Qaida

    by Sunny at 3:44 pm    

    Oh wait, it’s another Tony Blair makes up shit to support his foreign policy shocker today.

    These have become so regular that it’s almost difficult to get fazed by them. A few people keep defending Tony Blair on foreign policy with the view that he “wanted to do the right thing” etc etc. But here’s the point: if you started to list all the exaggerations and rubbish claims his administration made in order to justify foreign policy aims, you can only come to two conclusions:

    1. Either he was incredibly uninformed and made bad decisions on that basis (in which case he was unfit for purpose)

    2. He made decisions first and then bent facts and narratives to fit that. In which case he was also unfit for purpose on foreign policy.

    There really aren’t that many other options.

    Filed under: Party politics
    6th July, 2010

    Explain something about changing constituency sizes to me…

    by Sunny at 10:14 am    

    So the Coalition government has a plan to change constituency sizes by the number of people on the electoral register, rather than actual population size or people eligible to vote. Labour cllr Paul Cotterill doesn’t like the idea - he said so quite forcefully (in his understated way) at the Liberal Conspiracy Blog Nation event.

    Neither does Darrell Goodliffe, who says:

    Let’s be quite clear; the equalisation of constituencies based on voter registration is totally unacceptable. An attack on Labour as a Party it certainly is but what makes it unacceptable is the disenfranchisement of the voiceless; the making of them into ‘non-people’ as far as the government is concerned. In other words it is the antithesis of fairness and democracy; it must be opposed and stopped.

    Here’s what I don’t get. Those people who are not on the electoral register but not eligible to vote are already politically voiceless. Perhaps they want to remain that way. But if some Labour constituency sizes are reduced because they contain large numbers of people who don’t register to vote - then that is the fault of the Labour MP not of the system. The same goes for Tory MPs.

    In the US they have massive voter-registration drives to get people enfranchised and supporting candidates. The problem in the UK is that there are far too many MPs who get elected with minimal support from their local constituencies, and they have little incentive to get those people registered.

    Kezia Dugdale is right - instead of complaining, the Labour party should be organising voter registration days. That way they can get closer to their core voters and win some damn elections.

    The other problem is that these complaints of ‘gerrymandering’ aren’t going to get much traction with the public. It’s quite easy to make the argument (for the coalition) that everyone’s vote should count equally. Who will disagree with that? And how would anyone sum up opposition to that in one line? It’s a political non-starter, and I doubt there will be serious opposition to these plans even on Labour benches (though I could be proven wrong admittedly).

    Filed under: Party politics
    4th July, 2010

    Just fine words?

    by Rumbold at 11:01 am    

    The UN has announced the formation of a new body dedicated to advancing the cause of women:

    The General Assembly voted unanimously on Friday to launch a new agency called UN Women. It will begin its work in January, have a high-level leader, probably twice the $250m annual budget now allocated to gender issues, and will be tasked with challenging governments on women’s plights and rights.

    It is not clear how much of a positive impact this will have, as previous UN bodies have often proved to be detrimental to the cause they purport to represent. The UN ‘Human Rights Council’ was famously obsessed with attacking Israel (ignoring North Korea, Sudan, Zimbabwe, etc.), whilst the UN also debated a worldwide blasphemy law designed to stifle criticism of religion.

    There are plenty of dedicated individuals and groups working for and with the UN. The question is, will the UN’s members allow them to really fight for women’s rights in various countries, or will this take a back seat to political considerations?

    3rd July, 2010

    Muslims And Music Lessons

    by guest at 10:15 am    

    This is a guest post by Sarah. She blogs at Same Difference.

    I love music. I’ve grown up listening to music and playing songs on everything from a Walkman to an Ipod. Today I rarely sit in a car without the radio on. And in school, a few too many years ago, I sang along at assembly and loved the songs used. I even tried, unsuccessfully, to learn to play a couple of musical instruments.

    I’m also, usually, proud to be Muslim. What’s the connection, you may ask? Well, when I heard reports on BBC London News that hundreds of Muslim parents are withdrawing their children from primary school music lessons because their beliefs forbid them from learning an instrument, I was more than a little unpleasantly surprised.

    The Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) said music lessons were potentially unacceptable to about 10% of Muslims. This could equate to hundreds of Muslim children being withdrawn from the lessons, the MCB said. Eileen Ross, its head teacher, told BBC London: “Some of the parents don’t want children to play musical instruments and they don’t have music in their homes.

    “There’s been about 18 or 22 children withdrawn from certain sessions, out of music class, but at the moment I just have one child who is withdrawn continually from the music curriculum.”

    Continue Reading...
    Filed under: Culture,Muslim
    2nd July, 2010

    Lefties cutting off their noses to spite their face, part 2

    by Sunny at 5:49 pm    

    I’m intensely frustrated by the attitude of many lefties on electoral reform, who are opposed to the Alternative Vote. Let me explain why.

    Late last year I posted this article by Ezra Klein at the Washington Post, who was then writing about Health Care reform. He said:

    Failure does not breed success. Obama’s defeat will not mean that more ambitious reforms have “a better chance of trying again.” It will mean that less ambitious reformers have a better chance of trying next time.

    Conversely, success does breed success. Medicare and Medicaid began as fairly limited programs. … As any scientist will tell you, it’s much easier to encourage something to evolve in a certain direction than it is to create it anew.

    As I said then, the left should not lose the stomach for revolutionary change or radical ideas. But it must also have the pragmatism to find ways to push for them, perhaps even incrementally, rather than constantly throw toys out of the pram when change does not go far enough quickly.

    We now have a situation where several lefties within the Green Party, Libdems and Labour saying that because AV does not go far enough, they will not support this change.

    It’s absurd. AV offers more choice, even if it’s not proportional. At the London Mayoral election I voted for Sian Berry as my first choice and Ken Livingstone as my second; I was able to support both without having to pick one over the other. There is no political appetite now for Proportional Representation.

    So to then say you won’t support AV because it’s not as good as PR is to misunderstand the politics of how things work - and setting back the cause of electoral reform for decades.

    And lastly, there are people who keep going on about how FPTP is great because it ensures Labour won’t need Libdems at the next election. Rubbish. This excellent article by academic John Curtice thoroughly pours cold water over that thesis; even under FPTP coalition politics is here to stay.

    Filed under: Party politics

    No turban searches at airports

    by Rumbold at 4:14 pm    

    Sikhs travelling through British airports will no longer have their turbans unravelled by airport staff if the metal detector goes off. It is not clear how many Sikhs were actually subject to this procedure, but the changes followed a campaign against the practice:

    A spokesperson for Birmingham International Airport said: ‘On Thursday the Department for Transport advised all UK airports to continue using the previous methods of screening religious headwear, which eliminates the need to carry out hand searches. We have reacted accordingly.’

    Sikhs who set off alarms at airport body scanners will now have their turban scanned by a hand held wand, and will only be subjected to searches by hand if metal is detected in the turban.

    This seems a sensible compromise to me, as it eliminates the need for turban removal unless there is metal contained within the turban, which there shouldn’t be.

    This ruling also drew comment from Sikhs in England, a Sikh organisation which suggested that Sikhs were being unfairly targeted (yet failed to provide any evidence of this), with the implication that security staff should focus on Muslims:

    Continue Reading...
    Filed under: Current affairs,Sikh
    more recent posts » — « previous posts

    Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
    With the help of PHP and Wordpress.