Amritsar Mrs. Gandhi's Last Battle By Mark Tully

[namdhari555]

Gurfeteh

recently been reading this book and certainly have changed some of my views on what happened in 84 basically the book says that it had more to do with politics. Many issues it claims were political but turned into religious because of the Akali Dal.

the book is very harsh toward Sant Ji and Sikhs.

Has anyone else read it and what do you think of it.

Edited January 24, 2014 by namdhari555

[dalsingh101]

I read a few pieces from Mark Tully over the years. Essentially he is a very scared, genteel middle-class twat type of gora who appears to have shite his pants upon encountering masculine kharkoo Singhs. He is (was?) also an employee of the BBC which, inbetween its pedophilia, acts like a mouthpiece for conservative British values and politics - so we could never expect any sort of balanced appraisal from him.

[chatanga1]

Gurfeteh

Many issues it claims were political but turned into religious because of the Akali Dal.

This was the thinking of the rightwing Hindus, to taint any genuine political movement as being sectarian, anti-hindu etc.

the Anandpur Sahib resolution was for the benefit of Panjab, not just the Sikhs, and in turn would have benefitted the whole country. But because it was the SIKHS who were behind the demand, it had to be anti-hindu for some reason in their sick hindutva minds. You can see the what they are like from this forum in recent weeks.

[tonyhp32]

I read the book when it was first published in the mid 80s. It's extremely biased and presents the government's view with a few criticisms of the government just to keep some pretence at being objective.

Tully's daughter is married to some wealthy Hindu who has connections to the congress party. He is hardly and objective author.

[namdhari555]

This was the thinking of the rightwing Hindus, to taint any genuine political movement as being sectarian, anti-hindu etc.

the Anandpur Sahib resolution was for the benefit of Panjab, not just the Sikhs, and in turn would have benefitted the whole country. But because it was the SIKHS who were behind the demand, it had to be anti-hindu for some reason in their sick hindutva minds. You can see the what they are like from this forum in recent weeks.

In the book Tully claims the Anandpur Sahib resoulution was for the benefit of the akali dal not the whole punjab. more specially the jats which supported the dal.

Page 47

"in fact only one section of the sikh communtity has consistently supported the akali dal the jat caste of peasant farmers ...the anandpur sahib resolution is so heavily biased in favour of the farmers and against the traders and industrialists"

[chatanga1]

it was not against the traders or industrialists, the Anandpur Sahib resolution was about Panjab having more control over its waters, which concerned the jats/farmers.

[namdhari555]

it was not against the traders or industrialists, the Anandpur Sahib resolution was about Panjab having more control over its waters, which concerned the jats/farmers.

The way the book preasents it is that the akali dal is the party of the sikhs as said in the anandpur sahib resoultion.

for instance when it came to having a punjabi suba the akali dal wanted punjabi as the main language and Gurmukhi as the script. the book says that punjabi was the most spoken language but not written in Gumukhi it was written in the urdu script as well as hindi. So thats why the goverment wanted hindi as punjab's main language. The government said the akalis were trying to put sikh demands on the whole of punjab. but the akali dal claimed the goverment was trying to marginalize the sikhs.

Edited January 25, 2014 by namdhari555

[Jonny101]

Tully is an idiot. He knows if he writes the truth, it will not be a successful hit amongst the majority community of India. He writes whatever his audience(majority community) wants to hear i.e. Sikhs are bad, Bhindranwala bad, Akali Dal bad etc.

His book holds no credibility in my eyes.

[dalsingh101]

In my opinion, that emphasis on agriculture economics was one of the factors that later led to the movement getting a lukewarm response from nonJats. In retrospection, I think many people later began to perceive the movement as mainly an economical one and given the unabashed, extreme caste egocentrism coming from ground-level Jat quarters, people backed off.

In the early days it was perceived as a pan-Sikh issue but later, gradually this changed. There was so much confusion back then, with lack of clear leadership and propaganda from India that I feel it put a lot people off. A lot of people were baffled about what the heck was going on too - remember this was pre-Internet so no ground level accounts or images could be spontaneously posted globally.

[Jonny101]

Typical reaction ... one of the most respected journalist is an "idiot" in mod edit eyes as he told the truth as it was. None of the parties (Indira, zail singh, Longowal, Tohra, Badal, JSB, Amrik Singh, Subheg Singh, SGPC, Punjab Police...) involved in Op Blue Star can be absolved of its share in what was clearly a botched military action. It was a national tragedy which could have been avoided if a number of actions were either taken well in time or were carried out in a much more professional way.

Fanatics going blastic over Tully's book as there is no room for criticism, counter-argument, sacrifice, selflessness or dissent in their scheme of things (every asset, every right and Sikh panth belongs just to Jat Sikhs. Anyone who disagree is a panth dokhi).

Majority community in india was never bothered about APS Resolution which was, among other glaring flaws (sectarian, casteist), was also sexist. Every state, community has its own problems. Akalis agitated for sectarian Punjabi suba to grab power. Indira gave Punjabi suba after brief agitation (compare it with telengana agitation -decades have passed and 1000s sacrificed their lives to get it approved by the Centre). Akalis/Sikhs reneged when it came to honouring the agreement made to create Punjabi suba.

Tully may be a respected journalist for the majority community. Not Sikhs. The only fault Sikhs have in regards to operation bluestar is that they dared to defend themselves instead of surrendering like cowards against an army which came equipped with all the weapons of a conventional war.

Anandpur Sahib resolution is not castiest and neither is it sectarian or sexist. Show us where before making such blanket statements. It is the HIndus who opposed the Punjabi sooba by disowning their own language(how shameful!). Today Punjab would have been a big state. Punjabi Hindus would have been ruling it had they not disowned their own language by listening to their Arya Samaj leadership. Because of them opposing their own mother tongue, today Punjabi Hindus have become a minority in Punjab, Himachal and Haryana.

[1234]

Sher your criticisms of the asr would make me laugh if I didnt know you were serious.Your whole post sounds like Colbert/Stewart style satire the only difference being your not mocking hindutva fanatics who share those views but actually believe those are valid criticisms. I seriously cant believe you typed all of that out.Your shameless hypocrisy and hatred for sikhs renders every single point you make moot.

Edited January 26, 2014 by ThunderousDominater

[1234]

About the actual book though it is heavily biased I do like this one quote about OBS

One officer told journalist Satish Jacob

Boy what a fight they gave us if I had three Divs like that I would admin cut the hell outta Zia(then pakistan president) any day
Amritsar Mrs. Gandhis Last Battle pg 187

[chatanga1]

"..its waters"? Satluj originates from Goindwal or bhatinda? Beas gets waters from Kandi area glaciers, right? Ravi definitely sprouts from Sidhu sahib da tubewell in Gurdaspur.

Under international law, any waters that go through a land are the property of that land. although the rivers of panjab start in the himalayas, the stretch of river that runs through Panjab is the property of Panjab. You know this, stop trying to be clever.

Typical reaction ... one of the most respected journalist is an "idiot" in mod edit eyes as he told the truth as it was.

Yet your people arrested and charged Brahma Chellany with waging war against the state, for his work on OB.

Was that a typical reaction as well? Slap a case on anyone who speaks the truth, and exposes state murder?

[Genie Singh]

sexist Resolution 10"

1. Hindu Succession Act be suitably amended to enable a woman to get rights of inheritance in the properties of her father-in-law instead of the father's.

Could someone help elaborate on this issue, why exactly is this sexist and why is it relevant? From the base assumption I have, what I gather is this inheritance has to do with when there is no will and what the government decides. In the olden days men were always preferred as inheritors of wealth. Since a girl who marries off goes and lives with the groom she then some what becomes some what of an owner of that property in that way. Different families have different ways to adjust that about.

I would have imagined in a fair world if a father dies the property would be shared between siblings from the state and the siblings can decide between themselves donating their share to the one who may require it more.

But what I gather is if a woman is a widow and she lives with her father in law, the property won't automatically go to her, so she can end up homeless if there is no will? What's the inheritance laws, maybe someone can look that up.

If it says there should be a change then it reflects previously a woman would only get her fathers inheritance, so if her father dies she can attain the property. However if her inlaws are greedy they might snatch it away from here. I don't really see the point of this inheritance law and it's effects.

[Genie Singh]

Jathedar sahib, children and children. why classify them as "daughters" and "sons"? this mindset is one of the major reasons behind such a high rate of female foeticide among the Punjab agrarian communities (dominated by Jats of course) as they don't want their small fields to be divided further.

It is sexist as a daughter is being denied a right in her ancestral property because of her gender. Also discriminatory as not all of the daughters get married.

if i am not wrong a father (or mother) cannot deny a daughter her share in the property if the father has inherited it from his forefathers. About the assets accumulated by father, he can disown his daughter but would need really good reason to do so. I can be wrong about this understanding of inheritance law.

What about from the inlaws do you feel a daughter in law has no claim in inheritance legally from her in laws?

[Jonny101]

Jathedar sahib, children and children. why classify them as "daughters" and "sons"? this mindset is one of the major reasons behind such a high rate of female foeticide among the Punjab agrarian communities (dominated by Jats of course) as they don't want their small fields to be divided further.

It is sexist as a daughter is being denied a right in her ancestral property because of her gender. Also discriminatory as not all of the daughters get married.

if i am not wrong a father (or mother) cannot deny a daughter her share in the property if the father has inherited it from his forefathers. About the assets accumulated by father, he can disown his daughter but would need really good reason to do so. I can be wrong about this understanding of inheritance law.

female infanticide is more common amongst the urban Punjabi Hindus than the rural Sikhs. Where as Sikhs still have 2-3 children average, the urban Punjabi Hindus will rarely even have 2 children being satisfied with only 1 child. As a result of this 1 child policy of the urban Punjabi Hindus has resulted in a very disturbing trend of parents being very selective about only wanting male children because of which the female fetus is aborted while in the womb.

[chatanga1]

Jathedar sahib, children and children. why classify them as "daughters" and "sons"? this mindset is one of the major reasons behind such a high rate of female foeticide among the Punjab agrarian communities (dominated by Jats of course) as they don't want their small fields to be divided further.

It is sexist as a daughter is being denied a right in her ancestral property because of her gender. Also discriminatory as not all of the daughters get married.

if i am not wrong a father (or mother) cannot deny a daughter her share in the property if the father has inherited it from his forefathers. About the assets accumulated by father, he can disown his daughter but would need really good reason to do so. I can be wrong about this understanding of inheritance law.

You totally dont understnad indian culture evidenced by the turd of a post you have written.

female infanticide is more common amongst the urban Punjabi Hindus than the rural Sikhs. Where as Sikhs still have 2-3 children average, the urban Punjabi Hindus will rarely even have 2 children being satisfied with only 1 child. As a result of this 1 child policy of the urban Punjabi Hindus has resulted in a very disturbing trend of parents being very selective about only wanting male children because of which the female fetus is aborted while in the womb.

the haryanvis are even worse.

[chatanga1]

Himachal has the first right over the rivers which either originate in that state or get bulk of their water from himachali glaciers. Himachal has NEVER tried to blackmail Punjab or ask for royalty for the waters generated in Himachal. Punjab on the other hand has abrogated all water treaties it has with other states and has (Amrinder Singh) suggested that it might ask for royalty for "its waters". Imagine how ballistic Sikhs would go for if Himachal asked for royalty for "its waters" or decided to sell "its waters" to the other states

Turd, himachal is not an agrarian state, nor do they need the water, or want it.

what would happen if they didnt let one drop of water through to Panjab (which HP has every right to), they would all DROWN!.

They are so glad to see the monsoon waters rush through to Panjab causing destruction, whilst causing minimal casualties in HP.

And FYI, the waters of Panjab, start even further back than HP, in India, so those countries would have more rights than Himachal.

Im sure Sikhs would go ballistic. The govt would do the same as well.

[1234]

..

[Jonny101]

Turd, himachal is not an agrarian state, nor do they need the water, or want it.

what would happen if they didnt let one drop of water through to Panjab (which HP has every right to), they would all DROWN!.

They are so glad to see the monsoon waters rush through to Panjab causing destruction, whilst causing minimal casualties in HP.

And FYI, the waters of Panjab, start even further back than HP, in India, so those countries would have more rights than Himachal.

Im sure Sikhs would go ballistic. The govt would do the same as well.

First of all, we need to understand what is the water issue. Jammu and Kashmir, Himachal and Punjab are all riparian states to which the rivers flow through or which have water under it's land. Punjab is not taking water from Himachal just as Himachal is not taking water from J&K. The water of these three states belongs to these three riparian state's land as it naturally flows there. Haryana and Rajasthan on the other hand are not riparian states, they are getting water directly from Punjab at Punjab's expense and this is against national and international riparian laws.

Capt's statement was a political stunt, nothing more. He only made that statement for the sake of opposing the Akalis who had made a statement earlier that Punjab's waters which are it's natural resource are illegally being given for free to other (non riparian) states and as a natural resource Punjab deserves royalties. This is the same Capt who tore the unlawful treaty of Punjab's waters going to Haryana for free when he was in power and was applauded by Punjabis worldwide.

The fact that Sher here who himself is a Punjabi, yet is supportive of Punjab's waters being exploited by non riparian states shows exactly the kind of Hindus who had disowned their own mother tongue for a language which was not even theirs. He like other urban Punjabi Hindus only do this to oppose the Sikhs, there is no other reason for a community to become sellouts and be disloyal to their own state. It is interesting to note that no other Hindu in any other state shows such disloyalty to their own state only the urban Punjabi Hindus have this trait.

Edited January 29, 2014 by Jonny101

[Genie Singh]

First of all, we need to understand what is the water issue. Jammu and Kashmir, Himachal and Punjab are all riparian states to which the rivers flow through or which have water under it's land. Punjab is not taking water from Himachal just as Himachal is not taking water from J&K. The water of these three states belongs to these three riparian state's land as it naturally flows there. Haryana and Rajasthan on the other hand are not riparian states, they are getting water directly from Punjab at Punjab's expense and this is against national and international riparian laws.

Capt's statement was a political stunt, nothing more. He only made that statement for the sake of opposing the Akalis who had made a statement earlier that Punjab's waters which are it's natural resource are illegally being given for free to other (non riparian) states and as a natural resource Punjab deserves royalties. This is the same Capt who tore the unlawful treaty of Punjab's waters going to Haryana for free when he was in power and was applauded by Punjabis worldwide.

The fact that Sher here who himself is a Punjabi, yet is supportive of Punjab's waters being exploited by non riparian states shows exactly the kind of Hindus who had disowned their own mother tongue for a language which was not even theirs. He like other urban Punjabi Hindus only do this to oppose the Sikhs, there is no other reason for a community to become sellouts and be disloyal to their own state. It is interesting to note that no other Hindu in any other state shows such disloyalty to their own state only the urban Punjabi Hindus have this trait.

The baiyaahs are still learning the ways of punjab like it's water, history shows there was more fertility in some of the other parts of india before certain peoples kulaa destroyed them with a poor understanding of agriculture.

[Jonny101]

Once again Jonny, you are absolutely wrong!

There are scores of research papers on Punjab's rural communities (led by Jats), to put it bluntly, killing their daughters. Nothing new, its a centuries old trend. I do not say anything unless i have some evidence and here goes one 100 page report blasting your argument:

http://ncw.nic.in/pdfReports/IDENTIFYING%20AND%20CONTROLLING%20FEMALE%20FOETICIDE%20-%20PDF%20FORMAT.pdf

To quote from the report:

IDENTIFYING AND CONTROLLING FEMALE FOETICID AND INFANTICIDE

IN PUNJAB

"Peasant societies, as in Punjab, are highly patriarchal and have a strong male child

preference. In these societies patriarchy dictates its ascendancy in all spheres of socio-

economic and political life. Power structures emanating from land control percolate to all

social activity."

If you have any research data to prove your point, PLEASE share

Man you have no idea. I think maybe you have never been to punjab and so you get all you knowledge about these issues from google. Female infanticide is much more common amongst the urban people of Punjab who happen to be Hindus than it is amongst the rural people which is dominated by the Sikhs.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article398285.ece

“Over a decade ago, I couldn't save that infant and ever since I try to speak for the girls who never lived,” said Dr. Kaur, who has been awarded by numerous governments across the globe for her work in eradicating the evil.

Rampant female foeticide, the shameful act of selectively aborting the female foetus due to non-preference, continues to push the sex ratio of Punjab against females; unfortunately, the evil is more prevalent among the educated, the rich and the urban bred.

The 2006 National Family Health Survey shows that prosperity does little to curb the evil as Punjab's overall sex ratio at birth (considered a more accurate indicator of female foeticide) was 776 against 793 in 2001. In urban areas, it goes further down to 761:1,000. “The data clearly contradicts the belief that people don't want daughters only due to the expense of dowry and marriage, the practice is more popular amongst the prosperous urban population who commit the crime to avoid perceived social disgrace of not having a son and escaping property division,” said Parveen Singhal, retired professor, who continues to work on the issue.

“My study on girl students of higher secondary schools in urban areas revealed that 78.8 per cent did not want to give birth to a girl child. I was shocked to find that educated girls from urban areas can discriminate against their own kind. They cited the deplorable condition of their mothers and restriction imposed on girls from family as the main reason,”

[Jonny101]

You are not getting the point here. the population whom you call Punjabi Hindus (Brahmin, Khatri (inc Rajputs for convenience sake)and Banias are no more than 15% of the Punjab population. whatever they do, they cannot influence the birthrates in Punjab much.

You should also keep few imp points in your mind - 62 % of the punjab pop lives in the villages

the major female foeticide problem is in the agrarian communities where ever they live;

female foeticide much higher in Sikh majority districts (Fatehgarh sahib the worst in india if i am not wrong, Taran taran not far behind);

Hindu (non-Sikh) majority or dominated districts in Doaba have the best sex ratios Hoshiarpur is (961) in fact OVER the national average !!

The cities which are hub of the industrial activity (Ludhiana) have the bad sex ratio because of the migrant labour.

There is problem in sikh community killing their daughters from Gurus' days; even Singh sabhaites started a movement against Kurimars (killers of the daughters)

They are 15% but dominate Punjab's urban population where they dominate in every sense, and read the article which says the Urban people who are the wealthiest and most educated do the most female infanticide. So there is no doubt it is the Urban Hindus who commit this evil act

And Doaba is Hindu majority not because of the Urban Hindus. It is majority because of the Chamar community who declare themselves as Hindus. Nice try

Edited January 30, 2014 by Jonny101

[Jonny101]

nice commonsense you mean? 15% cannot influence the sex ratios of 85% much. Doaba region, where they are concentrated, the sex ratio is higher than the rest of India! Sikh majority districts like fatehgarh sahib taran taran really sad story.

I never said rural people don't do female infanticide. Yes they do, and it's unfortunate that they do. But statistically Punjabi urban Hindus have a higher rate of female infanticide.

So before you try to touch a topic perhaps you should first try to see if your own community is innocent of the crime or not. When you try to spit at the moon, the spit will only end up landing on your own face as it did now.

[tonyhp32]

The Punjabi Hindu sprouts half truths and propaganda and has little facts to back these up.

The Punjabi urban HIndu is the one who started the trend with selective sex abortions. The clinics that doted the cities then started to appear in the small towns and from there the rural people started to take part in these disgusting acts.

The Punjabi Hindus have always had a low sex ratio compared to the Sikhs. These are from the censuses of various years-;

1971 --------1981 --------- 1991 -------- 2001

Sikhs -------865----------882 ------------ 891 ----------896

Hindus ------- 863 ----------873------------ 867 ----------845

Our Hindu Punjabi friend seems to think that just because the Hindu majority districts have a higher gender ratio then it means that Hindus don't have sex selective abortions. It is actually the higher sex ratios in Sikhs that give these districts such high gender ratios.

Here are the figures for the Hindu majority districts in 2001

Gurdaspur Sikhs 906 (Rural 910 -- Urban 886 ) Hindus 877 (Rural 889 -- Urban 865)

Jalandhar Sikhs 929 (Rural 939 - Urban 906) Hindus 864 (Rural 886 -- Urban 847)

Hoshiarpur Sikhs 960 (Rural 963 -- Urban 936) Hindus 923 (Rural 936 -- Urban 878)

In fact the rural areas of these districts the Sikhs have a higher gender ratio than the Hindus. The Hindu Punjabi is plying propaganda that Jats are killing their daughters and the Banias of urban Punjab are not aborting their daughters. But the figures above show a different picture.

He also makes a big deal about Fatehgarh Sahib having a very low sex ratio. But it is the Hindus in that district having a low sex ratio that brings the whole district down to last in the sex ratio for Punjab.

Fatehgarh Sahib Sikhs 881 Hindus 774

Lying is a Hindu Punjabi trait especially when it comes trying to malign Sikhs.