Jamuka

Up to 'ju' N30H.

Dear Lalleshwari, don't let your ego get the better of you. Believe it or not, not all of us will be right all the time which is why we have discourses. You are obviously extremely ignorant to the rights of Iranian women. Have the left gone this far? We are doomed then! Anyway, please read the following and educate yourself. Women in Iran want equality, respect and the right to participate in all social, political and economic activities. They want to live their lives productively and with dignity. Throughout the 20th Century Iranian women have organized and fought for human and political rights, from the Constitutional Revolution at the turn of the century to the democratic movement that overthrew the Shah of Iran. (1) Iranian women were strong participants in the 1979 revolution, but fundamentalists, led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, seized control after the revolution. Once in power, the fundamentalists betrayed the work and humanity of women by implementing a crushing system of gender apartheid. Fundamentalists built their theocracy on the premise that women are physically, intellectually and morally inferior to men, which eclipses the possibility of equal participation in any area of social or political activity. Biological determinism prescribes women’s roles and duties to be child bearing and care taking, and providing comfort and satisfaction to husbands. Men were granted the power to make all family decisions, including the movement of women and custody of the children. "Your wife, who is your possession, is in fact, your slave," is the mullah’s legal view of women’s status. (2) The misogyny of the mullahs made women the embodiment of sexual seduction and vice. To protect the sexual morality of society, women had to be covered and banned from engaging in "immodest" activity. (3) Based on these woman-hating principles, Khomeini and his followers crafted laws and policies that are still in effect. The hejab, or dress code, is mandatory in all public places for all women. Women must cover their hair and body except for their face and hands and they must not use cosmetics. Punishments range from a verbal reprimand to 74 lashes with a whip to imprisonment for one month to a year. Stoning to death is a legal form of punishment for sexual misconduct. Women are banned from pursuing higher education in 91 of 169 fields of study and must be taught in segregated classrooms. A woman may work with her husband’s permission, although many occupations are forbidden to women. The legal age at which girls can be married is 9 years (formerly 18 years). Polygamy is legal, with men permitted to have four wives and unlimited number of temporary wives. Women are not permitted to travel or acquire a passport without their husband’s written permission. A woman is not permitted to be in the company of a man who is not her husband or a male relative. Public activities are segregated. Women are not allowed to engage in sports in which they may be seen by men; or permitted to watch men’s sports in which men’s legs are not fully covered. Although these laws were implemented with great brutality, women have always resisted. Recently in Iran there have been signs that women are increasingly rejecting subordinate lives ruled by the mullahs. Women have campaigned for inheritance rights equal to men’s, and for more rights to custody of their children. Women keep modifying or enhancing their public dress in ways that press the limits of the hejab. More publications by or about women are appearing. Women are demanding they be allowed to participate in and view sports events. Many Iranian women want change. Some analysts have said that the election of Mohammed Khatami to the position of President was due to the votes of women. Khatami’s strongest distinction seems to be that he was not the hard-line government’s favorite candidate. His election was no doubt a vote against the hard-liners. His upset election has garnered him the label of "moderate," and raised expectations of people inside and outside of Iran. (4) Khatami has been in office one year now. Is he a moderate? Has the status of women markedly improved in Iran since his election? There is a widely held view that Khatami supports the rights of women, but his statements and appointments don’t validate that view. Prior to his election Khatami said, "One of the West’s most serious mistakes was the emancipation of women, which led to the disintegration of families. Staying at home does not mean marginalization. Being a housewife does not prevent a woman from having a role in the destiny of her people. We should not think that social activity means working outside the home. Housekeeping is among one of the most important jobs." (5) Under Khatami’s leadership the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution decided not to sign the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), the most important international agreement on the rights of women. (6) An international study comparing workforce conditions for women around the world ranked Iran 108th out of 110. (7) In urban areas women make-up only 9.5 percent of the workforce, and in rural areas the percent is 8.8 percent. (8) Even Khatami’s advisor on women’s affairs acknowledged that there is discrimination in employment and promotion against women in government offices: "Some officials are of the opinion that men have more of a role in running the family, so they favor the men."(9) Khatami has not called for an end to the most savage and sadistic punishment in the world – death by stoning. This form of torturous killing was initiated by fundamentalists when they came to power after the Islamic Revolution. Law specifies the size of the stones and the method of burying a person to be stoned. The purpose is to inflict great pain and suffering before death occurs. Since Khatami has been president at least seven people have been stoned to death in public, four of them women. (10) Khatami’s advisor on women’s affairs, Zahra Shoja’l, says she is an advocate of women’s rights, but all within a fundamentalist defined Islamic context. She defends the restrictive and symbolically oppressive hejab, calling the chador "the superior national dress of the women of Iran." (11) Khatami’s highly publicized woman appointment is Massoumeh Ebtekar, Vice-President for Environmental Protection. She has a long association with the fundamentalists: after the Islamic Revolution in 1979 she was spokesperson for the hostage takers who captured the U.S. embassy in Tehran. She does not favor loosening restrictions on women that would give them more personal freedom or stop the most barbaric institutionalized violence against women. She supports the law that requires women to get their husband’s permission to travel. She justifies this law by saying, "Man is responsible for the financial affairs and safety of the family. Thus, a woman needs her husband’s permission to make a trip. Otherwise problems will arise and lead to quarrels between them." (12) She also defends stoning women to death by saying, "One should take psychological and legal affairs of the society into consideration as well. If the regular rules of family are broken, it would result in many complicated and grave consequences for all of the society." (13) Since Khatami was not the hard-line mullahs' favored candidate for presidency, his election has created factions within the Iranian government. A power struggle has ensued, but this is not an ideological fight between those loyal to religious fundamentalists and proponents of secular democracy. All sides, including Khatami, are committed to a theocracy based on velayat-e-fahiq – the absolute supremacy of the mullahs. After 1979, the measure of the success of the Islamic Revolution was the depth of the suppression of women’s rights and activities. Now, nineteen years later, battles among factions within Iranian government are played out over women’s rights, hejab and segregation. Draconian laws and discrimination are not things of the past. Women’s public clothing continues to obsess the mullahs. In the last year, the Martyr Ghodusi Judicial Center, a main branch of the judiciary, issued a stricter hejab, or dress code. The new guidelines call for prison terms from three months to one year or fines and up to 74 lashes with a whip for wearing "modish outfits, such as suits and skirt without a long overcoat on top." The regulations ban any mini or short-sleeved overcoat, and the wearing of any "depraved, showy and glittery object on hats, necklaces, earring, belts, bracelets, glasses, headbands, rings, neckscarfs and ties." (14) Women continue to be arrested for improper veiling. In November, an Agence France Presse correspondent in Tehran witnessed approximately ten young women being arrested and placed into a patrol car for improper veiling or wearing clothing that did not conform to Islamic regulations. The women were wearing colorful headscarves and light make-up. (15) In June Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told senior official that it was time "to crack down on wanton behavior by women." (16) By mid-August 1,800 women and men had been arrested for "mal-veiling and lewd conduct." Most of the women were wearing makeup or in the company of young males who were not related to them. Women who fail to conform to the strict dress code are boarded on minibuses and taken to a center for fighting "social corruption." (17) Under fundamentalist’s interpretation of Islamic texts, women are banned from being judges because they are not considered capable of making important decisions. One of the claims of moderation in Iran is the appointment of women as judges, but in actuality no women are allowed this rank. Judiciary Chief Yazdi recently made the issue clear in his Friday prayers sermon: "The women judges I mentioned hold positions in the judiciary, they receive salaries, they attend trials, they provide counsel, but they do not preside over trials and or issue verdicts." (18) In the past year, women’s groups campaigned for a bill that would give women the same inheritance rights as men, but, Parliament overwhelmingly rejected the bill saying the proposal was contrary to Islamic law, which stipulates that a woman’s share may only be one half that of a man’s. (19) Women made a small gain by getting Parliament to pass a law that granted women some custody rights to children after a divorce, but only if the father was determined to be a drug addict, an alcoholic or "morally corrupt." (20) New laws strengthening gender apartheid and repression of women are not a thing of the past. During the last year Parliament and other religious leaders proposed a number of new laws or policies that will adversely effect the health, education, and well being of women and girl children in Iran. Temporary marriage, in which a man can marry a woman for a limited period of time, even one hour, in exchange for money, is permitted in Iran. Earlier this year, Ayatollah Haeri Shirazi, a prominent religious leader called for a revival of this practice so clerical officials could have religious sanctioned sexual relationships with women. This practice is an approved form of sexual exploitation of women, and allows the regime to have an official network of prostitution. (21) In April, Parliament approved a new law requiring hospitals to segregate by sex all health care services. This will compromise the health care for women and girls because there are not enough trained women physicians and health care professionals to meet the needs of all the women and girls in Iran. (22) Another new law approved by Parliament imposes more restrictions on the photographs of women that can be published in newspapers and magazines. (23) The Iranian state television announced on August 1 a decision by the Justice Department in Tehran to shut down a newspaper and put its proprietor on trial. One of the charges leveled against the publication, Khaneh, was that it had published "obscene" photographs of women playing football. (24) Parliamentary deputies submitted a plan to make girls' schools a "no-male zone," which will require all teachers and staff to be women. (25) This requirement will make education for girls even more inaccessible and difficult. Official statistics recently released reveal that 90 percent of girls in rural districts drop-out of school. (26) More ominously, the Parliament also approved a law prohibiting the discussion of women’s issues or rights outside the interpretation of Shari’a (Islamic law) established by the ruling mullahs. (27) In a further effort to repress all discussion of women’s rights, in mid-August, the Parliament passed a bill prohibiting the publication of material in the media that defended women’s rights in a way that would create conflict between the genders. Advocates of women’s rights are subject to imprisonment and lashing for violations. (28) In early July 1998, Mohsen Saidzadeh, a cleric, was arrested after writing articles that opposed these bills. He said that laws that deprive women of their rights are based on incorrect interpretations of the Koran. So freedom to criticize the government position on the rights of women does not exist even for fellow mullahs. (29) In some Western writings Khatami is said to have given new freedoms to the press, but the experience of publishers is contrary to that claim. In February, the newspaper Jameah started to publish articles critical of the government, color photographs of smiling women harvesting wheat, and an interview with a former prisoner. By June a court revoked their license. (30) Also, police filed charges against Zanan, a monthly women’s magazine, for "insulting" the police force by publishing an article on the problems women face with the authorities on Iranian beaches, which are segregated by sex. (31) Although Khatami is the President of Iran, he is not the Supreme Spiritual Leader, the most powerful position in Iran. The supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, controls the armed forces, the police, the security and intelligence services, radio and television, and the judicial system. The velayat-e-fahiq is a serious impediment to any reforms that may benefit women or society at large. Ayatollah Khamenei’s opinion of women and their place in society is the same as his predecessor Ayatollah Khomeini’s - women should be wives and mothers. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has publicly stated: "The real value of a woman is measured by how much she makes the family environment for her husband and children like a paradise." (32) In July 1997 Ayatollah Khamenei said that the idea of women’s equal participation in society was "negative, primitive and childish." (33) There is no moderation in Iran. Both the U.N. Special Rapportuer and the U.S. State Department found that there was no improvement in human rights in Iran since Khatami took office. The Iranian government engaged in summary executions, extrajudicial killings, disappearances and widespread use of torture. (34) The hard-line mullahs will not lift the severe restrictions on women; in fact, they favor stronger gender apartheid. Khatami, although not aligned with the hard-liners, does not support the empowerment and emancipation of women from the velayat-e-fahiq or supreme rule of the mullahs. If the women in Iran want the rights and freedoms they deserve they will have to look elsewhere for change. http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/khatami.htm And here is another case for you. Read it and weep if you really care. Women in Iran Deem Rape Laws Unfair Run Date: 12/21/03 By Shadi Sadr WeNews correspondent In Iran, a woman awaits a new execution date for killing the man she says tried to rape her. There, if a woman is raped, she can be charged with adultery. If a woman kills her attacker, she can be charged with murder. Both are punishable by death. TEHRAN, Iran (WOMENSENEWS)--One week after Afsaneh Nowrouzi learned that her execution had temporarily been stayed by a Supreme Court decree, she eagerly anticipated a visit with her husband to celebrate the news. Convicted for killing the head of security police on an Iranian island in the Persian Gulf, the 34-year-old mother of two has spent the last six years in a desolate prison in southern Iran, despite her claim the man attempted to rape her. Nowrouzi's husband Mostafa Jahangiri was told he could have a private meeting with his wife. But after traveling to the Persian Gulf port city of Bandar Abbas, where Nowrouzi is being held at the notorious Bandar Abbas prison, Jahangiri was turned away by prison authorities. Upset by the news, Nowrouzi hit her head repeatedly on the wall of her cell. A prison guard sprayed her with tear gas to subdue her, infecting her eyes for almost a week. Nowrouzi's execution date--most likely by hanging--was set for mid-October. But after widespread protests by the Iranian press, female members of parliament and international human rights organizations, the date was temporarily delayed earlier in the month by Ayatollah Hashemi Shahroudi, the head of the judiciary, which is the highest court in Iran. Nowrouzi's attorney has filed an appeal with the Supreme Court for a new trial. Her stay of execution has turned a spotlight on the complicated national law, which gives women almost no recourse against rapists. In Iran, if a woman is raped, she is considered an adulteress and faces death by stoning. But if a woman fights off a sexual predator and kills him, she can then be tried for murder and face death by hanging. If a man is proven to have raped a woman, his punishment is execution by hanging. But in almost all cases, the man is set free because judges traditionally look for signs in the behavior and clothing of the woman in order to explain away the act of rape. A Persian-language proverb goes like this: "It is the tree that hosts the worm," meaning rape is caused by women and their suggestive behavior. The penal code, which is based on Iranian interpretations of Islamic law, states that if a woman injures or kills a rapist in self-defense, she will not be prosecuted. But proving self-defense is very difficult. The woman must demonstrate that her defense was equal to the danger she faced. Additionally, she must prove inflicting harm was her the last resort in escaping rape. According to press reports, in the last year one woman successfully argued self-defense while being tried for murdering an alleged rapist. The Iranian government does not publish prison records, and there are no official statistics about the number of women who have been sentenced to death by stoning for rape. In 2002, the press reported four cases, but it is generally believed the number is higher. New Start Becomes Death Sentence In 1997, Nowrouzi moved with her family to Kish Island, Iran's tourist spot and free trade zone in the Persian Gulf located about 180 miles from Bandar Abbas. Her husband Jahangiri hoped his friend Behzad Moghaddam, who held the highest position within the security police in the island, could help him find a job. The family stayed at Moghaddam's house. Shortly after their arrival, Moghaddam arranged for Nowrouzi's husband to carry some merchandise to Tehran. Many Iranians make a living by buying imported electronic goods and home appliances from the island's duty-free shops and selling them at higher prices on the mainland. According to trial testimony obtained by Women's eNews, Nowrouzi says that after her husband departed, Moghaddam attempted to rape her. "When I went upstairs, I saw Moghaddam naked. He pulled me into the room and threw himself on top of me," she testified. "As the children heard noises and walked up the stairs, he gave up his intention." Nowrouzi says she could not sleep that night and, as a precaution, hid a knife under her pillow. In her testimony, Nowrouzi says she wore a skirt and blouse, as well as a pair of pants underneath her skirt. She says she covered her hair with a headdress and also wrapped her veil around her waist, a common practice by traditional women to cover their legs. She says the next day after finishing a shower, she again found a naked Moghaddam lying on the bed waiting for her. "I showed him the knife and told him if he attacked me, I would strike him," Nowrouzi said. Nowrouzi says Moghaddam grabbed her, and in defense, she stabbed him in his chest, torso and face with the knife. According to the local coroner's office, Moghaddam sustained 34 stab wounds. Nowrouzi fled the house and took her children to Tehran to join her husband. When Moghaddam didn't report to work, local police became concerned and went to his house the next morning, where they discovered his body. Nowrouzi was arrested in Tehran several days later. When asked by the judge why she stayed in the house after Moghaddam's first rape attempt, Nowrouzi responded, "At 10 o'clock in the evening where would I go? I didn't know any place. My husband was absent. I didn't have any money." Nowrouzi also admitted Moghaddam caught her stealing some of his jewelry to buy food for her children. She says Moghaddam told her he would report the theft unless she submitted to his advances. "When he attacked me, I first warned him that I would report him," Nowrouzi said. "He replied to me 'I am the head of police in Kish; nobody would believe you.'" Torture, Confessions During her three-year pretrial investigation, Nowrouzi made several contradictory confessions. She says that at first, investigators tried to convince her that her real motive in killing Moghaddam was stealing his money. "They beat me so much that two times I confessed against my husband so they would leave me alone," she testified at her trial in 2000. Police also theorized that she and the victim had an affair. "They were beating me with cable wire from morning until noon and again at night," Nowrouzi said. Under Iranian law, obtaining confessions from suspects and defendants under torture is illegal. But few defendants are ever able to prove they were tortured during detainment. For example, this year, Iranian-Canadian photographer Zahra Kazemi died while being interrogated. But a recent special commission that investigated the charges ruled that Kazemi accidentally hit her head while in custody. Judge Mortazavi did not believe Nowrouzi's confessions were obtained under torture and rejected her self-defense argument. "This woman is presumptuous and opportunistic," he wrote in his verdict convicting her of murder. Now, Nowrouzi waits for news of her appeal. If the Supreme Court decides to overturn her conviction, she will face a new trial in another court. 'What Should a Woman Do?' Golku, a student in her 20s, says all women in Iran feel trapped by the lack of legal protection they have against rape. "Which of us does not put a knife in our purse, when we leave our house? All of us contemplate about how to defend ourselves, if we feel unsafe in a situation," she writes in her public Web log, an increasingly popular means for young women in Iran to talk freely and anonymously about social and political issues. In an open letter last August, journalist Fereshteh Ghazi, who writes for the Tehran-based daily Etemad newspaper, told the presidents of the executive, legislative and judiciary branches of the Islamic government that women who face rape have almost no recourse under Iranian law. "What should a woman do, if she found herself in Afsaneh Nowrouzi's situation?" she asked in her letter. Sahar Sajjadi, a medical student and member of the Tehran-based Women's Cultural Center, says women have no control over their own bodies. "In this country, we cannot discuss this simple concept that no means no," she said. Shadi Sadr is an independent journalist residing in Iran, who covers women's issues. She is also editor in chief of the Web site Women in Iran. http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn...context/archive What nonsense. Of course it is relevant! FYI, try protesting in countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran and see how fast your dead body is buried in an unmarked burial site in the dessert. This is merely your opinion and just because the majority do not agree with your point does not justify any stupid conspiracy theories you may harbour. In almost all 3rd world countries the media are mere govermental mouthpieces. 'Some else's land'....You make judgement calls despite not knowing the facts. Anyway, that is another story. Is your idea of freedom againts any form of violence? If thats the case let me assure you my friend, the 'freedom' that you currently enjoy was achieved through 'violent' means in the 2nd world war otherwise you would probably be German speaking today under harsh Nazi rule. Are you joking? Are Northern Indian women forced to don the Hejab and need permission to travel alone? What do you mean by 'most progressive'? Is it by any chance marriagble age changed from 9 to say 12 that you mean more progressive? Please refer to the articles I have provided to know more about 'womens rights' in Iran. You ask that despite repeated threats from the Mullahs to the Jews?? Should we wait for a strike before we can be confirmed they will actually use it? No my friend, it is not speculation. I really wish I could say that but unfortunately it's not. Prejudiced? Really? Was Churchill prejudiced when he kept warning Europe of the impending doom with the rise of Hitler? What I say is not based on prejudice but firsthand experience, something you would probably not understand. "See on tv"....HA HA HA HA HA HA!!! Please forgive me for laughing dude but why do they have to watch 'tv' when it is happening rigth under their noses? Havent you heard of the on going church bombings in Indonesia? Havent you heard of Jemaah Islamiah and Abu Bakar Bashir? Did you not hear of Bali bombing and more recently the Jakarta bombings? What about Mahathirs speech at the OIC summit requesting Muslims around the globe to 'arm themselves to the teeth'? What about 4 Muslims in Malaysia renouncing Islam and subsequent to that are in jail. They have yet to be released. Havent you heard of the MILF and the beheading of tourists. What about the recent bombings by Muslim separatists in Southern Thailand? FYI Singapore too have banned the Hejab, go figure. Here is a few links so you may educate yourself to what is happening in the East. http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/...donesia.cleric/ http://quickstart.clari.net/qs_se/webnews/...h.Rg0m_DNI.html http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=3656 http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/7DC...BFD9387AA5F.htm http://www.aph.gov.au/library/intguide/FAD/sea.htm I see 'peace at any cost', even at the cost of Operation Blue,1984 Delhi Massacre, thousands of Naga separatists being killed and Tamil Nadu separtism given a crusshing blow, Kashmir.... Peace at any cost , eh? I'm sorry but I don't agree. A far more powerful Union like the Soviet was dismantled peacefully and the same can be done for the Indian Union. No, nobody is asking what you stated. We are requesting the Beeb to be fair. If a Hamas terrorist is killed, please use the word 'terrorist' instead of 'guerilla'. Is that too much to ask? I have actually seen actuall footages where BBC journalist tried inducing a Palestinian to cry at the wall which is currently built. This is too much and downright dishonest. Despite what are our convictions, truth should be reported truthfully with no hidden agenda. What? What about the recent sacking of that show host (forgot his name) who made a statement that angered the Muslims in the UK? I usually get my news via the internet. I find it far more accurate then any news channel. Wrong, Islam is a cult. If a Muslim were to renounce Islam in a Muslim country, he or she will be punished with death. Read the Quran and see the source of hate in it. It is a cult. Bigoted? How am I a bigot, can you please enlighten me? Short sighted? No, like I said earlier, I talk not just with knowledge but with first hand experience so you cannot claim it is 'short sighted'. There is nothing to 'interpret' when it is clearly written "kill the disbeliever" or "make him pay a jizya(tax) for his life". I really don't care for Coke or McDonalds but I do care if I have the choice to Coke and McDonalds and not some dumb Islamofascist telling me it's againt Islam and should be banned. Please try to understand that. Same answer above. Yes but why must it always be an issue with Muslims? Why can't someone have the choice instead of some Mullah theocrat making the decision for the rest of the population? Freedom of religion does not mean the freedom to shove ones belief down the throats of others. Shastekovich, I supect your ignorance is far more deeper then what I though it to be. I have seen with my own eyes a convert brought up in a secular environment embrace Islam acting far more intolerant then a Muslim who was brought in a village in a Muslim country. Oh yeah, please show me the constitution of Iraq under Saddams rule. I guess some people see black and white and some people see gray. Dear Shashterkovich, I've lived in the U.S for 5 years and have experienced firsthand what a true democracy is. I know reside in a 3rd world country with semi dictatorship at it's helm. I hope I don't offend by you saying this, but you are downright ungrateful. You are taking your freedom for granted. I see, see no evil thus it must not exist. Good logic. Complete nonsense. If I havent lived in the US I would probably agree with you. My dear Shasterkovich, had the US lost the war there woudn't been any 'Guantanamo bay' for them. It would have ended with a bullets in their heads. I am lost for words. I see, while you enjoy the freedom to either frequent the local McDonalds or not, Gopi the low caste in India is starving in the streets and the likes of 'Gangu Brahmins' live a life of merryment. Same old mumbo jumbo leftist spit out while Islamofascists are spreading their vile cult around the globe. FYI, everybody prospered with these 'puppet regimes' including you when you're able to pump gas into your car. The threat from Iran to invade Iraq and Kuwai followed by Saudi Arabia was no joke. Everybody kept mum when the US put up these puppet regimes and go ask yourself why. I very much doubt what you say. The last opinion poll conducted by Guardian revealed that more then 60% of UK's population supported the war. Good lord, I really hope the right wins in the upcoming elections! No offense but I will do no such thing. I will starting a thread soon exposing what this cult is all about and you may cross swords with me then. Prove me wrong and I will stop using the word. Lets say I live with a sizable Muslim population, the type that supported Osama when 9/11 happened. May you always have the choice to say no to McDonalds and not vice versa.

To everbody here, please read the story of how Guru Har Kishen ascended to Guruship. Also please take note why Ram Rae incurred the wrath of his father Guru Har Rai and why he has not given the Guruship instead. GURU HAR RAI ( 1630-1661, Guruship 1644-1661 ) Guru Har Gobind had five sons and one daughter. The eldest son was Baba Gurditta who had two sons, Dhir Mal and Har Rai. Dhir Mal turned out disloyal and disobedient. He had some influence in the court of Emperor Aurangzeb and was in communication with the Guru's enemies. When Guru Har Gobind moved to Kiratpur, Dhir Mal with his mother, remained at Kartarpur and took possession of the Guru's property and also of the priceless original copy of the Adi Granth. He thought that as long as he had its possession, the Sikhs would look upon him as their religious leader and thus as mentioned in the last chapter, Dhir Mal refused Guru's invitation to come to Kiratpur on his father's death. Guru Har Gobind nominated Har Rai, younger brother of Dhir Mal, as his successor before he departed for the heavenly abode on March 3, 1644. One day as a child, while passing through a garden, his loose flowing robes damaged some flowers and scattered their petals on the ground. This sight effected his tender heart and brought tears in his eyes. After that he always walked with his skirts tucked up, and resolved never to harm anything in the world. When he grew up, he carried the same spirit with him. He used Baba Farid's quotation frequently: "All men's hearts are jewels; to distress them is not at all good; If thou desire the Beloved, distress no one's heart." Guru Har Rai was most magnanimous. His food was very simple, he did not desire dainty dishes. Whatever valuable offerings were made to him, he used to spend on his guests. On the advice of his grandfather, Guru Har Gobind, he kept twenty-two hundred mounted soldiers. In the afternoon he used to go to chase. The Guru took some of the animals he had obtained from the chase, freed them and protected them in a zoological garden, which he had made for the recreation of his followers. In the evening the Guru used to hold his court, listen to hymns sung by his choir, and then give divine instructions. The Emperor Shah Jahan had four sons, Dara Shikoh, Shuja Mohammad, Aurangzeb, and Murad Bakhsh. Dara Shikoh who was the heir-apparent, was very dear to his father. Aurangzeb was very clever, cunning and ambitious, and aimed at succeeding to the throne. It is said that Aurangzeb administered tiger's whiskers in a dainty dish to Dara Shikoh who became dangerously ill as a consequence. The best physicians were consulted but in vain. The Emperor, filled with anxiety, sent for astrologers and diviners from every country but of no avail. The wise men arrived at a conclusion that until tiger's whiskers were removed from Dara's bowls, there was no hope of recovery. They were of the opinion that if a chebulic myrobalan weighing fourteen chitanks (14/16th of a pound) and a clove weighing one masha could be administered to the patient, he would be restored to health. The Emperor searched for these articles everywhere in his empire but in vain. At last some one told him that the required items were available in the Guru's storehouse. On the advice of his courtiers the Emperor found it necessary to humble himself before the Guru, and accordingly addressed him the following letter: "Your predecessor, the holy Baba Nanak granted sovereignty to Emperor Babar, the founder of my dynasty; Guru Angad was exceedingly well disposed to his son, Emperor Humayun; and Guru Amar Das removed many difficulties from my grandfather Akbar's path. I regret that the same friendly relations did not subsist between Guru Har Gobind and myself, and that misunderstandings were caused by the interference of strangers. For this I was not to blame. My son Dara Shikoh is now very ill. His remedy is in your hands. If you give the myrobalan and the clove which are available in your store, and add to them your prayers, you will confer an abiding favor on me." A noble carried the letter to the Guru at Kiratpur, who commented,"Behold, with one hand man breaks flowers, and with the other he offers them, but flowers perfume both hands alike. Although the axe cuts the sandal-tree, yet the sandal perfumes the axe. The Guru is, therefore, to return good for evil." He sent the necessary medicine which was administered to Dara Shikoh. The medicine effected a speedy and complete cure. The Emperor was naturally very pleased, forgot all enmity against the Guru, and vowed that he would never again cause any annoyance to him. One day during a ride, the Guru halted and knocked at the door of a poor woman and said,"Good lady, I am very hungry, bring me the bread you have prepared." The woman, throbbing with joy, brought out some coarse bread which he partook on horseback, without washing his hands, and relished it very much. He then blessed the woman and cut off the shackles of her transmigration. Next day the Sikhs prepared dainty dishes with great attention to cleanliness and offered them to the Guru at the same hour. He laughed and said,"O Sikhs, I ate food from that woman's hands because she was holy. This food which you have prepared with attention to ancient ceremonial is not pleasing to me." The Sikhs asked,"O true king, yesterday you ate bread on horseback from the hands of an old woman whom you did not know. There was no consecrated space and the food was in every way impure. Today we have prepared the food for you; no impurity is attached to it, yet you reject it. Be kind enough to explain the reason." The Guru replied," The woman with great devotion and faith prepared food for me out of what she had earned from the sweat of her brow. On this account the food was very pure, and I partook of it. The Guru is hungry for love and not for dainty dishes. In the matter of love for God, no rule is recognized. It is not what man eats that pleases God, it is man's devotion that is acceptable to Him." GURU'S PREACHING TOURS: Guru Arjan had practically completed the organization of his followers on peaceful lines and under Guru Har Gobind, Sikhism had added into itself an army. Apart from laying emphasis on the free kitchen and religious congregation and faith in the Adi Granth, Guru Har Rai undertook extensive tours in Malwa and Doaba regions of the Punjab. These regions provided good opportunities for the Sikh faith to sprout. Guru Har Rai made some notable conversions among the landed families of the Punjab who were, at that time, considered the natural leaders of the people. On one of the Guru's tours, he stayed at Mukandpur in the present district of Jullundhur. There he drove a bamboo shoot into the ground in memory of his visit; and it still survives as a stately tree. From there he went to Malwa and visited the tank near Nathana where Guru Har Gobind had fought. Kala and Karm Chand, two brothers of Mahraj tribe, came to him to complain that the people of Kaura tribe did not allow them to live among them. The Guru tried to settle the matter amicably but when Kaura tribe refused to listen, he helped the Mahraj brothers to take forcible possession of a piece of land and settle there. He remained for some time at Nathana preaching to the people, and Kala and his friends frequently waited on him. He made many disciples. His hearers abandoned the worship of cemeteries and cremation grounds, and embraced the simple worship of God. One day Kala with his two nephews, Sandali and Phul, whose father was killed in the battle during Guru Har Gobind's time, went to visit the Guru. When the children arrived in his presence, Phul who was five years old, struck with his hands his own naked belly like a drum. When asked for the reason, Kala explained that he was hungry and wanted something to eat. The Guru took compassion on him and said," He shall become great, famous and wealthy. The steeds of his descendants shall drink water as far as the Jamna river; they shall have sovereignty for many generations and be honored in proportion as they serve the Guru." When Kala reached home and his wife heard Guru's benediction, she put pressure on him to take his own sons to him, and teach them to strike their bellies in token of hunger. When Kala and his own sons appeared before the Guru, he told him that he acted in obedience to his wife. The Guru said," The parents of these children are alive, but at the same time they shall have their own cultivation, eat the fruit of their toil, pay no tribute, and dependent on no one." This prophecy has been fulfilled and their descendants owned twenty-two villages called the Bahia. Phul had six sons. From the eldest, Tilok Singh, the Rajas of Nabha and Jind were the descendants. From Phul's second son, Ram Singh, the Maharaja of Patiala was the descendant. These three were known as the Phul ke Raje, or Phulkian chiefs. After India became independent in 1947, these states along with other hundreds of states in the county, were annexed by the Government of India. The Guru, having been convinced of the deterioration of Masand system, evolved Bakhshishs or missionary centers. Six centers were manned by Suthrashah, Sahiba, Sangata, Mihan Sahib, Bhagat Bhagwan, Bhagat Mal and Jeet Mal. Bhagat Bhagwan was appointed as the incharge of the preaching work in the east, where he along with his followers, established as many as 360 gaddies (centers) to carry on these efforts. Bhai families of Kaithal and Bagrian were made responsible for missionary work in the land between the Jamna and Satluj rivers. Bhai Pheru was responsible for the area between the Beas and Ravi rivers. Another center was established in the central districts of Punjab. Bhai Aru, Sewa Das, Naik Das, Durga Chand and Suthra Shah were the important priests of the Guru's times who did missionary work in Kashmir. THE GURU, HIS SON RAM RAI AND MUGHAL EMPEROR: The Emperor, Shah Jahan, kept his eldest son Dara Shikoh near him. He made his second son, Shujah Mohammad, the governor of Bengal. The third son, Aurangzeb was appointed governor of Dakhan and Murad Bakhsh received the province of Gujrat. Their ambition was not satisfied and each one of them was eagerly seeking to become Emperor, and for that purpose they amassed wealth and armies in their respective regions. When Shah Jahan became ill and showed no signs of recovery, a war of succession broke out. Dara Shikoh dispatched Raja Jai Singh against Shujah Mohammad and sent Raja Jaswant Singh of Jodhpur to Dakhan. Jai Singh defeated Shujah Mohammad but combined armies of Aurangzeb and Murad forced Jaswant Singh to retreat. Upon this Aurangzeb prepared to retaliate and tried to seize the reigns of empire. Dara proceeded with great pomp and show to oppose Aurangzeb, and pitched his camp at Samugarh near the margin of the river Chambal. Aurangzeb soon appeared at the head of his own and Murad's armies and ensued a determined battle. Aurangzeb succeeded in capturing Dara's several nobles. Dara himself fled from the battle field. Aurangzeb came to Agra and imprisoned his father and his brother Murad, and then proceeded to Delhi. Dara fled towards Lahore. Famous Muslim saint Mian Mir was Dara's priest from whom he had heard Guru's praises. Dara's life was saved with the medicine from the Guru. In view of these circumstances Dara had great regard for him. Since Dara became governor of Punjab, there were healthy relations between the Emperor and the Guru. Shah Jahan had an order against the Hindu temples while Sikh temples were exempt from such an order. While Dara Shikoh was on his way to Lahore, the Guru happened to be in Goindwal. They both met. Many writers give their own fanciful accounts of the assistance that the Guru gave to Dara. What type of assistance Dara asked or the Guru gave to Dara, is a big question? He had all the royal wealth, he had his generals and he had his army of thousand` and thousand of men. He enlisted twenty thousand men in his army within days at Lahore. He had everything but he lacked a brave heart to fight in the battle-field. He fled from the field and ultimately was captured through a Pathan who betrayed him. He was brought to Delhi and was executed. Having made his position secure on the throne of Delhi, Aurangzeb embarked on his religious crusade against the Hindus. After Dara the enemies of the Guru got a chance to poison the mind of Aurangzeb that he had rendered assistance to Dara against him. Upon this Aurangzeb summoned the Guru to his presence in Delhi. The Guru had vowed not to see the Emperor. Instead he sent his eldest son Ram Rai to Delhi instructing him to rely on the divine power of the Gurus, not in any way recede from the principles of his religion, and in all his words and actions to fix his thought on God, everything would prove successful. When the Emperor was informed that the Guru had not come himself but sent his son, he thought that if his object in trying the Guru was not fulfilled by his son, he would send for the Guru himself. It is said that Ram Rai performed seventy miracles. The Emperor sent him poisoned robes which he wore but was not hurt. In one interview a sheet of cloth was spread over a deep well so that Ram Rai when asked to sit, would fall into the well. The sheet did not give way and Ram Rai was miraculously preserved. The Emperor was shown the sight of Mecca while sitting in Delhi. After seventy such miracles were shown, Aurangzeb was almost convinced of Ram Rai's powers and became friendly to him. Then came the last question. The Qazis' asked Ram Rai," Ram Rai, your Guru Nanak has written against the Muslim religion. In one place he has said, 'Mitti Musalman ki peirei paee kumiar; Ghar bhandei itan kia, jaldi karei pukar.' (Asa Mohalla 1, p-466) 'The ashes of the Mohammadan fall into the potter's clod; Vessels and bricks are fashioned from them; they cry out as they burn.' (Translation of the above) What is the meaning of this?" Ram Rai had won Aurangzeb's respect so much that he perhaps did not want to displease him and forgot his father's parting injunctions not to recede from the principles of his religion. So in order to please the Emperor, Ram Rai replied," Your Majesty, Guru Nanak wrote, 'Mitti beiman ki', that is the ashes of the faithless, not of the Musalmans, fall into the potter's clod. The text has been corrupted by ignorant persons and Your Majesty's religion and mine defamed. The faces of the faithless and not of the Musalmans, shall be blackened in both worlds." All the Mohammadan priests were pleased with this reply. The Emperor then conferred a mark of favor on Ram Rai and dissolved the assembly. The Sikhs of Delhi immediately sent an envoy to Kiratpur and informed the Guru of the pomp and honor with which Ram Rai had been received in Delhi, and detailed miracles he had exhibited. The envoy then explained how he had made an alteration in a line of Guru Nanak in order to please the Emperor. The Guru was much distressed at the insult and remarked that no mortal could change the words of Guru Nanak and that 'the mouth which had dared to do so should never be seen by me.' The Guru decided that Ram Rai was not fit for Guruship. He confirmed," The Guruship is like a tigress's milk which can only be contained in a golden cup. Only he who is ready to devote his life thereto is worthy of it." After Ram Rai had resided in Delhi for some time, he decided to go to Kiratpur and try to convince his father to reverse his decision regarding him. He pitched his camp near Kiratpur and wrote to his father for permission to visit him. He confessed that he had suffered for his sins and desired forgiveness. The Guru replied,"Ram Rai, you have disobeyed my order and sinned. How can you aspire to become a holy man? Go whither your fancy leads you. I will never see you again on account of your infidelity?" The Guru feeling his end approaching thought of his successor and called for a meeting of his Sikhs. He seated his younger son, Har Kishen who was only five years old, on Guru Nanak's throne. He then placed a coco-nut and five paise before him, circumambulated him three times and had a tilak or patch put on his forehead. The whole assembly then rose and did obeisance to the young Guru. Guru Har Rai enjoined all his Sikhs to consider Har Kishen as his image, to put faith in him, and they would obtain salvation. Guru Har Rai closed his eyes and went to his heavenly abode on October 6, 1661. FN-1: It is also said that Ram Rai told Aurangzeb that Guru Nanak did not mean the ashes of Musalman but he actually meant that of the 'beiman', the faithless. Ram Rai thus did not alter the original verse but only changed the meaning of it. http://members.dancris.com/~sikh/chap09.html

Yes they did but ask yourself, why didn't Guru Nanak identify himself as a Hindu? Why didn't they go about Saudi Arabia, sitting under some date tree and singing hyms about Waheguru? Did they? This shows your lack of understanding of Islam. Islam does not provide for it's members to sing hyms about some universal God with a disbeliever. This is specifically stated in the Quran. I don't have time now but I will be starting a new thread on the Quran. Get your facts right about Islam before making dubious claims about who is a Muslim and who is not. Mardana, by the strict standards was NO Muslim. In fact, he should have been considered an apostate and the punishment of apostasy in Islam is death. I really don't care what Mardana's descendans say nor do I give damn to Guru Nanaks descendans. Facts are not determined the opinions of the descendans of Mardana. Yes, I do realise Punjab was the center of Sufiism but neverthless, Sunnis officially do NOT recognize Shiites, Suffis, Ahmadiyas, Asmalis...This is why the Asmalis reside in India and why the Ahmadiyas are being persecuted by the Sunnis in Pakistan. I have Asmali friends who hide the location of their Mosques from the Sunnis and the usually don't even fast during Ramadhan. They believe in Aga Khan. Look buddy, did I say Suffis are not Muslims? I said they are sects. Do you understand what that word means? If a Muslim rejects the Quran, he/she is no more a Muslim, no arguments. Your friends personal belief does not constitute fact. I have Muslim friends who eat pork, so what of it? You are confusing the meaning of the word Islam with Muslim. I claimed Islam is a vile, ugly cult but there are good Muslims out there. But they are good because they are not strict Muslims. Strict Muslims or those who live by the strict code of the Quran and they are the likes of Osama Bin Laden. Please allow me to quote Ali Sina"A good Muslim is Osama and a good Christian is Mother Theresa"....Ali Sina ( a former Muslim). Ask yourself, if our Gurus did not look down at Islam and Hinduism, why start something new? Why not reform these two religions? Yes, Allah is mentioned in the SGGS. Sikhism is about truth. There is no truth in being cruel to people who belong to a cult even though the cult may be ugly. But that does not whitewash this cult. Sorry Jtsingh, I hadn't realised I didn't answer the question. Ok, your original question... Firstly, there are no exact accounts of the conversations that took place between Guru Nanak and Mardana. The Janamsakhis have been proven to be wrong on many of it's accounts. If Mardana did not find any fault in Islam, why join Sikhism? Then why start something new? Why the rejection of Hinduism and Islam? Remember the famous quote "Na me Hindu ta me Mussalman"...why? Get you facts right buddy. I claimed that Islam is a vile, ugly cult. I did not claim all Muslims are bad. There are good apples even in a barrell of rotten apples. These Afghans and Moghuls were converts, they were not following the religion/cult to the tee. They are specific passages in the Quran that denounces the type of acts committed by the likes of Pir Budh Shah. You know nothing about Islam and that is quite apparent. Go find out how Painde Khan who was raised by Guru Hargobind and how he back stabbed the Sikhs. Go find out how Guru Tegh Bahadhur admonished Painde Khan by claiming Painde Khans backstabbing was because of Islam. Jtsingh, these are not opinions but facts. What is written in the Quran is not opinion but pure facts. I am not an expert in Islam but you abviously know jack. I will give you a chance to cross swords with me on this one as stated earlier, I will be starting a new thread on this subject. Be prepared to have your arguments destroyed as truth is the mightiest sword that God ever made. Sikhism is not Islam dude nor is it a sect so how does this make me a hypocrite? You fail to realise, I am critisizing Islam and not Muslims. Kabir, Mardana and Sheikh Farid were no Muslims. They may have been born Muslims, but they are not Muslims, not by the standards of the Quran anyway. I fail to see how I am a hypocrite. If the Gurus recognized them to be bonafide Muslims, then why didn't Guru Nanak request Sikhs to pray to Allah? Why Jtsingh, can you tell? Why do we use their 'bhagats' but don't subscribe to the faith they were born into? Why does Sikhism reject Islam? If Sikhism is a sect of Islam, then you have a point in calling me a hypocrite. Rubbish! You cannot 'change' the meaning of a quote and hello, yuu hooo, dind' t Guru Hargobind admonish Ram Rae for not giving out the real meaning to the Muslims? Now you're beggining to sound like Ram Rae. The Gurus could not be straightforward about the cult simply because they were outnumbered. Sikhism would have been literally wiped out if it went against Islam directly so instead, they just went against bad Muslims. Besides, what better way to better a man by spreading love and truth instead of ridiculing his beliefs? This is by far a better way to win an enemy over. When you're the minority, the only way to get your enemy who is numerically stronger to leave or question their faith is by creating a diversion, spreading love and truth which was Sikhism. Truth will always appeal to most men as we are born with a conciense. However today the tables have changed. The followers of this cult are no more the dominant force in this world and a more direct approach would be better. MODERATOR NOTE:- We appreciate the need for individuals to raise their opinions and encourage good debate, however ask again, please can we keep things clean. Thanking you all.

Hmmmmm, a simple question deserves a simple answer but before I answer, here is a few from myself. Was Guru Nanak a Hindu? Was Kabir, Mardana and Sheikh Farid Muslims? Was Balo a Hindu? Please allow me to quote a few verses from the Quran. 89 They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them, (Quran Surah 4) 55 Lo! the worst of beasts in Allah's sight are the ungrateful who will not believe. (Quran Surah 8) 73 O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites! Be harsh with them. Their ultimate abode is hell, a hapless journey's end. (Quran Surah 9) So why didn't Mardana kill the 'disbeliever' Guru Nanak? What was Mardana doing hanging out with a 'disbeliever' chanting the name of Waheguru? Isn't this against the very basic tenets of Islam? The answer is quite obvious, Mardana was no more a Muslim then Guru Nanak was a Hindu. Muslim rule in Punjab at the time must have been a tad bit laxed. Had they been in Saudi Arabia, Guru Nanak along with Mardana would have beein killed. FYI, Mardana and Kabir were both Sufi Muslims. The Sufi sect for obvious reasons, is officially not recognised by the majority Sunnis although they might have been laxed with them in the past. And now, I have a very simple question for you. Please refer to the verse below. 'Mitti Musalman ki peirei paee kumiar; Ghar bhandei itan kia, jaldi karei pukar.' (Asa Mohalla 1, p-466) 'The ashes of the Mohammadan fall into the potter's clod; Vessels and bricks are fashioned from them; they cry out as they burn.' (Translation of the above) Oh, BTW this verse is from Guru Nanak which is written in the SGGS. Can you please explain to me what it means? I patiently await your reply.

Excellent movie.

On the topic of Islam Rev. Fr . Jacques Emily The events that occurred in the US on Monday, September 11th shocked the world both by their sheer violence as well as by the cool and calculated determination with which the emblems of "invincible American power" had been hit. It is not our intention to propose a political analysis of these events since it has already been done by more qualified and authorized persons. It is our duty rather as Catholics to analyze these events in the light of our Faith and to draw conclusions for our Catholic life. Indeed, if the 11th of September is an open declaration of war against the western world, it is obvious that all of us should be concerned by what will happen in the near future and we must prepare ourselves for this new situation. Actually, an event such as the one on September llth was not a random event. It simply marks a new step in the escalation of a war by the Islamic world to conquer the western countries. These attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon manifest the striking opposition which exists between two civilizations, two cultures, two different worlds - the Islamic one and the one we will call simply Judeo-Christian Democracy (although we know these terms to be so alien to one another). Many have refused to admit this opposition, others have simply ignored it, and a large number have never understood its inherent intensity. After September 11th it is no longer possible to be oblivious to the reality. It is important for us Catholics to understand the implications of this war since, for various reasons, the actual political and religious stakes are being deliberately concealed by our leaders. Indeed, the leader of the interfaith dialogue in the US, Bishop Todd Brown [of Orange, CA—Ed], just signed a joint declaration with Moslem religious leaders which states, "We believe that the One God has called us to be men of peace. There is nothing which is Christian or Moslem, that could justify the terrorist actions." At the same time and in the same vein the European bishops strongly condemned this unprecedented attack on the American people saying, "There is no justification for violence and destruction; there is no theological foundation for terrorism—not in the Christian, Jewish, or Moslem faiths." Mr. Tony Blair, Prime Minister of Great Britain, conducts exactly the same discourse and declares with apparent learned assurance that, "...such acts of infamy and cruelty are wholly contrary to the Islamic faith." Since we are inclined to want to believe that these leaders are sufficiently educated and cultured to know the true nature of Islam, we are obliged, unfortunately, to say that they are simply and boldly lying. They are deceiving themselves and trying to deceive others either to position themselves to fit the "politically correct" agenda or because they fear the consequences of denouncing the true enemy by whom, through irresponsible and short-sighted immigration and foreign policies, westerners have effectively surrounded themselves. When the coward fears the battle, he says to his enemy, "We are friends." The enemy answers, "Yes, we are; that is why, if you do not want me to continue to destroy your cities and your countries, you just have to surrender!" Whatever may be the reasons that motivate our political and religious leaders to vindicate Islam of its capacity for terrorism, they are simply continuing to lie and to refuse to address the true source of the problem. Islamicization of our western countries will continue to spread until the Blessed Virgin Mary intercedes to save what remains of Catholic civilization. Allow me to present a few quotations from the Koran [alternate spelling, "Qur'an," which is the religious charter of Islam from which the Moslems draw all their moral and political tenets. All quotations are taken from The Holy Koran, translation and commentary by Abdullah Yusuf Ali, Amana Corp., MD (1983)-Ed.]. These quotes should suffice to convince us of the real threat that Islam represents for the Catholic Church and civilization. Let us first quote Mr. Patrick Sookhdeo, Director of the Institute for the Study of Islam and Christianity, speaking of the extremist, violent nature of Islam: But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); But if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them: for God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful (Sura 9:5). The note that accompanies this particular verse in the respected translation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali states: When war becomes inevitable, it must be prosecuted with vigor. According to the English phrase, you cannot fight with kid gloves. The fighting may take the form of slaughter, or capture, or siege, or ambush and other strategems. But even then there is room for repentance and amendment on the part of the guilty party, and if that takes place, our duty is forgiveness and the establishment of peace. The Daily Telegraph (Sept. 17, 2001) reported: The World Trade Centre attack cannot be dismissed as merely the work of a small group of extremists. The Moslems celebrating the tragedy in America are doubtless recalling the words of the Koran, urging Muslims to "fight a mighty nation, fight them until they embrace Islam."... Ultimately, the aim of Islam is the Islamicization of the world as God revealed it to His Prophet: It is He Who has sent His Apostle with Guidance and the Religion of Truth, to proclaim it over all religion: and enough is God for a Witness (Sura 48:28). God sends His believers for the conquest of the world in His name. It is the Holy War, the well-known Islamic jihad, that commands to "fight them until they embrace Islam." They [the enemy—Ed] shall have a curse on them: wherever they are found, they shall be seized and slain (without mercy). (Such was) the practice (approved) of God among those who live aforetime: No change wilt thou find in the practice (approved) of God (Sura 33:61,62). O ye who believe! Fight the Unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that God is with those who fear Him (Sura 9:123). God hath purchased of the Believers their persons and their goods: for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His Cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in Truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his Covenant than God? Then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme (Sura 9:111). Finally, let us quote these verses of the Koran which will give us much to ponder following the events of September 11, and for those to come: And how many populations we destroyed, which exulted in their life (of ease and plenty)! Now those habitations of theirs, after them, are deserted - all but a (miserable) few! And We are their heirs! Now was thy Lord the one to destroy a population until He had sent to its Centre an Apostle, rehearsing to them our signs [i.e., verses-Ed.]; nor are We going to destroy a population except when its members practice iniquity (Sura 28:58,59). And the Unbelievers said to their apostles: "Be sure we shall drive you out of our land, or ye shall return to our religion." But their Lord inspired (this Message) to them; "Verily We shall cause the wrong-doers to perish! "And verily We shall cause you to abide in the land, and succeed them. This for such as fear the Time when they shall stand before My tribunal - such as fear the Punishment denounced" (Sura 14:13,14). Having explained in a previous note how infidels are illogical and argue in circles, Abdullah Yusuf Ali publishes the following commentary on the Sura 14:13 printed above: The arguments in a circle were explained in the last note. But Infidelity looks upon argument as an amusement. Its chief weapon is physical force. As its only belief is in materialism, it thinks that threats of force will put down the righteous. It offers the choice between exile and violence against conformity to its own standards of evil, which it thinks to be good. But Faith is not to be cowed by Force. Its source of strength is God, and it receives the assurance that violence will perish ultimately by violence, and that Faith and Good must stand and be established. In fact the good must inherit the earth and the evil ones be blotted out. Regarding Sura 14:14 (above), Ali says: "Fear" means here [in Sura 14: 14-Ed.] to "have present before their minds something which should cause them fear, so that they should shape their conduct in order to avoid the ill consequences of wickedness." The above noted quotations are sufficient to show that Islam cannot be considered a pacifist religion. This is a mistake made by Catholics of the Western nations resulting from their naivety and a mind-set molded by pervasive influences to think in a politically correct manner. The actual leaders of the Islamic countries do not leave us any doubt as to how to interpret these verses of the Koran. Mr. Alija Izetbegovic, the current President of Bosnia, published the following Islamic Declaration [The Declaration was actually a letter addressed to Moslem elites from Sarajevo in 1970. It explained to them the long-term goal of establishing a unified Islamic community that is to extend from Morocco to Indonesia and from tropical Africa to central Asia (Fideliter, Sept-Oct, 2001, p.7}.-Ed.]: ...[T]here is an incompatibility between Islam and the non-Islamic systems; there is no peace nor coexistence between the Islamic faith and the social and political insti­tutions which are non-Islamic....The Islamic renewal can­not begin without the religious revolution, but it cannot go ahead and succeed without the political revolution. Our way does not begin with the conquest of the political power, but with the conquest of the people....Thus, we must be, first of all, preachers and then soldiers....The Islamic movement must and can take power as soon as it will be naturally and numerically strong enough not only to destroy the existing power, but also to build the new Islamic power (quoted from The Daily Telegraph, Sept. 17, 2001). Upon reading the above passage, the inevitable question remains - How can any religious or political leader, after such a declaration and an honest consideration of these quotations from the Koran, dare to proclaim "there is nothing in Islam which can justify these actions," when the propagation of Islam, through subversion and violence, remains the ultimate objective in all their efforts? The specialists in Islam acknowledge the expansionist propensity and blatant aggression with which Islam has proceeded to engulf the West since the time of its foundation to the present day. History itself provides testimony for this assertion. The leaders of the Western nations are so blinded by the rhetoric of their own democratic principles that they refuse to identify the enemies of the people for whom they were elected to govern. This blindness and cowardice on the part of the leaders leave wide open the way for Islam, which, in turn, takes advantage of this weakness to make (through terrorism, for example) a revolution to overthrow the West. It is, then, just one step in a premeditated revolutionary process, a part of which the world witnessed on September 11, and yet, the Western nations do not appear to see or, at least, do not want to see. A few years ago, Fr. Vincent Serralda, a French priest who lived for 50 years in North Africa and who can be considered to be an expert on the Islamic World, prepared a study to analyze the Koran and to warn French families of the danger of Islam. He wrote in the preface of his book the following: Islam is always at war, even when it tries smiling. His war is the extinction of Christianity. That is what a careful reading of the Koran revealed to me It is this combat to death that I am proposing to unveil to the French families who have not yet suffered the Moslem hostility and who cannot suspect the pretension of their Imams for a world imperialism (Le Combat de Mahomet). What then, can we do to save the Church, to save what remains of Catholic civilization, from such a peril? Humanly speaking, the battle appears to have been lost. It is obvious that a war in Afghanistan will not solve the problem since Islam has spread worldwide and has been welcomed in all the Western countries in the name of Judeo-Christian Democracy. The democratic system is so absurd that in the name of the principles it acquired through the French Revolution the democratic countries grant to their enemies protection and liberty to establish and to develop within their own nations. Ironically, what kind of hospitality would these same democratic leaders receive if they would attempt to institute a Western democracy within an Islamic country, for instance Saudi Arabia or North Sudan, and build there, according to their religion, a Catholic church, a protestant temple, or a synagogue? We clearly know that this inane hospitality of our present Western world would certainly not be reciprocated. Oh the madness of modern democratic man. He is now imprisoned, blinded, and shackled by the system that he invented in 1789 - a system "to make him free!" To free himself from the sweet yoke of God, man replaced the rights of God with the so-called "rights of man" and he is now the chained slave ensnared by his proud and deceptive motto-"Liberty, Equality, Fraternity." Islam has exploited to the fullest extent the nonsense and weakness of this system and like a worm has devoured the fruit from the inside. In fact, it is very convenient for Islam that the political and the religious leaders in the democratic nations practically dissociate Islam itself from these acts of terrorism. The day approaches when, powerful enough, Islam will assume control within the various western nations through any means conducive to its thirst for conquest. Until that dreadful time, it continues its clandestine conquest unimpeded. Interestingly enough, even the literature of the Sikhs contains references to forewarn the sleeping democratic countries: "...they aim to make France an Islamic Republic by the year 2015, and Britain by 2025, through conversions, immigration and high Moslem birthrates" (Identity magazine). They have the boldness to publicly announce their intention and our leaders remain complacent. They have completely lost any sense of honor and patriotism. They even work to vindicate Islam! Western civilization, caught between a dying democracy and a vigorous Islam, appears to be condemned to imminent death. Islam, like a cancer growing faster and more efficiently on a weak and sick body, develops and grows on the ruins of democracy and weakened Catholicism. Democracy and Catholicism, having nothing left to oppose Islam, like the fatally wounded man imploring the mercy of his torturer, try in desperation to avoid the death blow by offering him dialogue. It is pitiful, but it is the discourse we hear everywhere: "Let us fight against terrorism. Islam has nothing to do with it, and thus, let us dialogue with Islam for peace in the world!" The discourse of the Pope, the recent visit of President Bush to the Islamic Center of America, the declaration of Mr. Henry Kissinger, the joint declaration of the Christian-Islamic Committee - they are all uniting their voices in this foolish concert, the purpose of which serves only to give a good, but nonetheless false, conscience to those who join this tiresome chorus. My dear faithful, let us not become discouraged and more than ever, have confidence in the might of Our Queen of Heaven, the Blessed Virgin Mary, and in the efficacy of her powerful weapon, the holy rosary. If humanly speaking the situation for the Church and the remnants of a Christian Civilization appear to be desperate, we know that our hope and our strength cannot rely on human power but only on a divine protection. "The gates of hell will not prevail" and "in the end her Immaculate Heart will triumph." Our combat for the reign of Christ the King in our society is the only true and just Cause and this Cause will lead us infallibly to victory. On the other hand, the so-called war of the western democratic nations against terrorism is a futile and false battle because it only considers the consequences of the problem and not the cause of it. For it to be an effective war, the center and cause of the problem must be attacked. While the West may address to some extent an aspect of the problem, it leaves, in the name and for the sake of Democracy, the source of the problem untouched. They are hitting the nail, but not on the head. Hence Islam methodically perseveres with its Holy War to render western civilization impotent, to subject it, and annihilate it for the triumph of its false god. On a natural level, the fate of democratic nations is inevitable. These nations, having betrayed in 1789 their Catholic heritage, will pay under the Islamic yoke for their perversities and revolt against the One True God. Let us not forget the still very relevant warning of Our Lady at Fatima, "Wars are God's chastisement for sin." Who would deny that the western nations have to pay for their iniquitous laws of abortion, divorce, contraception, homosexuality and their licentiousness and immoral behavior against Christian modesty? This immorality which is now spread everywhere like a pestilence by sex education in the schools, by television, movies, books, magazines, immoral dress, etc., is leading so many souls to hell. Alas, we know that this corruption has been propagated by the enemies of the Catholic Church to de-Christianize our countries and to annihilate Christian civilization all under the banner of "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity." We are witnessing two forces radically opposed to each other: on one side, Democracy, which under the banner of the UN and the Charter for the Rights of Man works to establish a One World Government and to provide people with a corrupt and luxurious materialistic paradise on earth; on the other side, Islam, which under the banner of the Koran, works to establish a One World Islamic government and to provide its believers with the same kind of paradise, but as an idyllic one in the new garden of Eden in the next life: God hath promised to Believers, men and women, Gardens under which rivers flow, to dwell therein, and beautiful mansions in Gardens of everlasting bliss. But the greatest bliss is the Good Pleasure of God: that is the supreme felicity (Sura 9:72). A confrontation is inevitable and dialogue will not prevent it. It is only the conversion of both parties to the true God and to His Catholic Church which will save the world from disaster. In order that this conversion occur [and it will occur when Russia is consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary—Ed.], this blatant revolt against God and His Christ will have to be eradicated from the surface of the earth. Unfortunately, a lot of blood will be shed as the Blessed Virgin Mary warned us: France, Italy, Spain and England will be at war. Blood will flow in the streets. Frenchman will fight Frenchman, Italian will fight Italian. A general war will follow which will be appalling. For a time, God will cease to remember France and Italy because the Gospel of Jesus Christ has been forgotten. The wicked will make use of all their evil ways. Men will kill each other, massacre each other even in their homes (Our Lady at La Salette, France, 1846). Are the events of September 11th marking a signal for the beginning of civil wars in the Western nations of which Our Lady speaks? God knows. But what we do know is that this persecution by Islam has been raging for years in the Third World to the complete indifference of the Western nations. The following is a list of the slaughters perpetuated in the name of Islam. It is not exhaustive but it is sufficiently alarming and speaks for itself: Egypt. 1999: At Al-Kosseh police arrest all the Christians after the murder of a Moslem. They were dragged outside the town, beaten and tortured with electricity, the women and girls were raped and finally several men were crucified (Nouvelles Chrétiennes, No. 46). Nigeria, 1999: Shari'a [islamic law as the constitution of the country—Ed.] was proclaimed in June in the State of Zamfara. Five hundred Christians were killed within one month. The governors granted three days to the Christians to demolish all the churches. Stoning of people and amputation of hands were manifold. Christians were burned alive in their houses. In Kaduna alone, Moslems killed between 400-1000 Christians. Those Moslems in the south, where they are in the minority, practice terrorism: on the eve of Christmas, four churches were burned and 1000-2000 Christians slaughtered (Êglise dans le Monde [the review of Fr. Wehrenfried's organization, "Aid to the Church in Need"], No. 106). Senegal, 1999: Interdiction against the building of Christian schools; the transformation of churches into mosques (Êglise dans le Monde, No. 106). Indonesia. 2000: In Ambon [north of Timor, across the Banda Sea, on the island of Seram—Ed.], 800 Christians were killed and more than 20 churches destroyed. In Jabok, government troops massacred 22 faithful refugees in a church. Four hundred and seventy thousand refugees have been obliged to flee from the Moslem militia to the area of Ujung Pandang on the island of Sulawesi in the Indonesia Archipelago. The village of Wasi, one of the last Christian villages on the islands of Maluku [a.k.a. the Molucca Islands—Ed.], was completely burned. At Christ­mas, in Jakarta [the capital and largest city in Indonesia on the island of Jawa with 87% Moslem population—Ed.] and its suburbs, 18 bomb attacks on churches killed 14 peo­ple and wounded 119 (Action Familiale et Scolaire, No. 148; Êglise dans le Monde, No. 106). Saudi Arabia. 2000: Ten Christians, including five children, were imprisoned for meeting in a private place to pray (Nouvelles Chrétiennes, Jan. 26, 2000). Sudan, 2000: With an estimated 2 million deaths, the civil war in Sudan is by far the bloodiest in Africa's recent history. In spite of repeated condemnations by other nations and human rights groups, the Islamic government in Khartoum shows no sign of lessening its brutal conduct. The Arab-dominated Islamic government in the north of Sudan has declared a jihad against the South which is heavily populated by animists and Christians. In one day, 122 women and children were deported to the North, all the men having been killed and their villages razed to the ground. Yei, the most important city in the South was bombed—14 dead and 50 wounded. A Christian school was bombed; 20 children and their teachers were killed (Êglise dans le Monde, No. 110; Bulletin Saint Cyrille d'Alexandrie, No. 12). Philippine Islands, 2000: The Moslem group Abu Sayaf abducted 22 children and 8 Christian adults. The body of a Catholic priest, Fr. Gallardo, was found with evidence of having been tortured. Twenty-one Christians were kid­napped by the MILF, an Islamic terrorist group, led to a mosque, tortured and killed. Fear of Moslem guerrillas has compelled a community of Carmelite nuns living since 1981 in Marawi, southern Philippines, to abandon their convent. Already in 1986, some of them had been kid­napped by Moslems (ZENIT [official news bulletin of the Vatican]). Algeria, 1996-2001: Police arrested 16 young people for possessing Bibles and other Christian documents. Proselytism by Christians is considered a crime in predominantly Moslem Algeria. Moslems who convert to another religion risk a death sentence. In May 1996, an armed Islamic group murdered seven Trappist monks at the monastery in Thibirine. The following August the same group used a bomb to kill Bishop Pierre Claverie of Oran (ZENIT). If we are horrified by this worldwide Islamic persecution against mainline Christianity, we should be even more scandalized by the fact that for years, our Western nations did absolutely nothing to protect its victims from slaughter. As a logical consequence, the list has now been extended to include the US. What sensible person would believe, considering the texts of the Koran and the list of the world Islamicization quoted above, that Islam will stop its Holy War because a few bombs will be dropped in the mountains of Afghanistan? On the contrary, we must fear that the spiral of evil will escalate, that the sects of Islam will coalesce and mobilize, and that our list of horrors will continue to grow. The Western political leaders are perfectly aware of the inevitable issue of this process, otherwise they would not put all their police and armies on maximum alert. Still, we wage a war effort that will not hit the heart of the problem. Honestly, it is really difficult to imagine more cowardice, more blindness and more hypocrisy in so many people and all at the same time! Such are the fruits of liberal democracy! Facing such a desperate situation, what can we do for the Catholic Church and the civilization of which only she can be true Mistress? Both appear to be defenseless victims waiting for the lion (democratic West) and the tiger (Islam) to devour them? It is very important that Catholics resist a defeatist mentality, since, as we said above, in the end we are going to win this battle. We might have to give our life for it, but what is life compared to the reward to come, as St. Paul says. If Moslems are able to sacrifice their lives hoping to get a paradise of carnal pleasures, how much more should Catholics be ready to sacrifice their lives to surely obtain the paradise of eternal and infinite spiritual joys! That is why, in this gigantic war that Lucifer wages against everything bearing the name of Christ, I urge you, once more, to take up with faith, courage, and strength the weapons of the spiritual combat. The spiritual combat is the first and strongest way to really repel the evil forces. This is not the first battle that the Catholic Church has waged against the enemies of God and Jesus Christ, and in each battle the Catholic Church has won resounding victories when Her ministers and faithful fervently took the spiritual weapons of prayer and penance. The story of Judith in the Sacred Scriptures is quite informative and a relevant example for our time. I strongly encourage you to read and to meditate on this wonderful story, which shows how God delivered His people from a situation no less desperate than the one in which we find ourselves. God responded to the prayers and penance of the priests and people, sending Judith (an image of the Blessed Virgin Mary) to cut off the head of Holofernes (an image of the devil). Her Immaculate Heart will triumph. She will crush the head of the serpent. And all the people cried to the Lord with great earnestness, and they humbled their souls in fasting and prayers, both they and their wives. And the priests put on haircloths, and caused the little children to prostrate before the temple of the Lord, and the altar of the Lord they covered with haircloth. And they cried to the Lord the God of Israel with one accord, that their children might not be made a prey, and their wives carried off, and their cities destroyed, and their holy things profaned, and that they might not be made a reproach to the Gentiles. Then Eliachim the high priest of the Lord went about all Israel and spoke to them, Saying: Know ye that the Lord will hear your prayers, if you continue with perseverance in fasting and prayers in the sight of the Lord. Remember Moses the servant of the Lord, who over­came Amalec that trusted in his own strength, and in his power, and in his army, and in his shields, and in his char­iots, and his horsemen, not by fighting with the sword, but by holy prayers (Judith 4:7-12). What a similarity between the situation of the Israelites and ours today, and what a consoling promise from God through his high priest Eliachim. To the same causes, the same effects. I assure you that the victory will be ours, if, like the obedient Israelites, we have recourse to prayer and penance. God will then send us the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Judith of the New Testament, who, by her prayers and her intercession, will deliver us from the infernal enemy. Our Lady is as powerful as an army arrayed in battle and she will lead the combat for us against all the enemies of the Catholic Church. Let us not forget that when Europe was threatened by the Islamic invasions the popes organized Rosary Crusades, urging the faithful to have recourse to Mary. When the people began to pray the Rosary to plead for mercy through Our Lady, Europe was saved and Islam invariably defeated by the intercession of Mary. She, to whom nothing can be denied, is so willing to deliver our petitions to the foot of the Divine Throne when we do as she asks: "pray the daily Rosary" and "penance, penance, penance"! In 1571, Pope St. Pius V organized a great rosary crusade throughout all of Christendom. The graces obtained through this Rosary Crusade enabled the famous victory of the battle of Lepanto against the Turks. This great victory, attributed to the intercession of Our Lady, is commemorated on the Feast of the Most Holy Rosary, October 7. It is because of this victory against Islam that Pope St. Pius V gave to Our Lady the glorious title of "Our Lady of Victory" and added to the Litany of Our Lady the invocation to her as "Help of Christians." A century later, the Turks threatened again to invade Europe. This time it was Pope Innocent XI who organized another great rosary crusade. The victory of Vienna was the fruit of this rosary crusade. We celebrate it on the Feast of the Holy Name of Mary, September 12. Again, a century later, Islam was pounding on the doors of Europe. In 1717, Pope Clement XI, faithful to the example of his predecessors, organized another great rosary crusade for all Catholics by which yet another great victory over Islam was obtained. In gratitude to the Blessed Virgin Mary the pope decided to extend the feast of October 7th to the Universal Church and to change its name to "The Feast of the Holy Rosary" so mankind would be reminded that it was thanks to this powerful prayer that victory was won. The commemoration of these victories of Mary through her holy rosary enables the Church to teach her faithful each and every year an important lesson on the power of the rosary in the history of the Church, and encourages us to follow the example of our fathers in the Faith. With the peril of Islam more imminent than ever, we must follow the example of these great popes to preach and to spread the rosary with all our strength. The rosary has proven to win battles in the past. It is as powerful as ever and it will win the present battle if only we want to make the effort "to say it well," as St. Francis of Sales says. I ask you all to make a special effort to pray your daily rosary as Our Lady asks with so much insistence. This apostolate is of crucial importance. My dear friends, let us realize that the times are serious and the situation of the world and of the Church is tragic. We must fall to our knees and beg God and the Immaculate Heart of Mary to protect and to save us. "If my requests are heard," says Our Lady at Fatima, "Russia will convert and we will have peace." Let us heed these requests of Our Lady who desires peace and the salvation of souls. She wants us to convert. She wants us to change our life, to practice virtue, to go regularly to confession (promises of the five First Saturdays) and, of course, she wants us to pray the daily rosary. This is the crusade to which we are all called and to which Archbishop Lefebvre called priests and faithful for the reconquest of Catholic civilization. This is our Holy War for the Reign of Christ the King and the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. We Catholics have the monopoly in this Holy War, but how much different are our weapons from those of our enemies, and how much more different are the fruits and the results of our combat! "Give me an army which prays the rosary," says Pope St. Pius X, "and I will conquer the world." Let us form this army in whatever country we may be from. Please be sure to join in praying the rosary when it is recited before the beginning of the Holy Mass in our churches and Mass centers to manifest your commitment of bringing down upon the Church and the world the blessings which will come from it. Pope Leo XIII confirmed the strength of the rosary prayed in public when he said: Public prayers are much more excellent and more efficacious than private ones, so ecclesiastical writers have given to the Rosary Sodality the title of "the army of prayer, enrolled by St. Dominic, under the banner of the Mother of God." Above all, it is in each of our families that we want to implant the holy custom of daily praying the rosary. It is not by force, nor by arms, nor by any human power, but only by the divine assistance, obtained through the prayer of the rosary, that the Church, strong like David with his sling, will be able to stand up without trembling against the infernal enemy. It is especially in the home that we wish to see the wide­spread recitation of the rosary, for we will seek in vain to consolidate the crumbling bases of civil society if domestic society, the principle and foundation of the human community, does not rest on the laws of the Gospel. To attain such a difficult end, we affirm that there is no more fitting means than the recitation of the family rosary (Pope Pius XII, 1951). http://www.sspx.ca/Angelus/2001_December/O...ic_of_Islam.htm

I'm sorry Noor but that was not meant to be a personal attack. The attakc was not to you personally but to what you said and please allow me to explain. Lets analyze what you said earlier and why you said it. First of all PN cannot blame the behaviour of other Sikhs on his failure to live the life of a Khalsa. Sikhism has nothing to do with the behaviour of Sikhs which is why there is the SGGS. It is not fair for PN to blame his shortcomings on thebehaviour of sikhs at large. Secondly, Islam is not a religion. It is a vile ugly cult that deserves no respect and is no way comparable to any religion on this planet. You should have realised this but instead you decided to close your eyes to this ugly cult and shifted the blame to the Sikhs here and I suspect you did it to be 'politically correct'. Read Sikh history and you will realise Sikhs have suffered tremendously because of this cult and now Sikhs today are supposed to feel guilty just because one Sikh leaves it to join Islam? In fact I would say the Sikhs here have behaved correctly. Would you not try to persuade someone from embracing a cult? FYI, if a Muslim were to denounce/leave Islam in a Muslim country, he or she would be killed. The punishment for apostasy for Muslims residing in Muslim countries is death. Many cults like the moonies use similar methodologies in order to lure people to embrace it. Maybe I will start a new thread and will expose what is written in the Quran. To be honest with you, I feel exactly the same way as PN but I will not blame Sikhs for this. It maybe a shortcoming in Sikh organizations but this is where you must realise, Sikhism does not believe in actively seeking converts like Islam and Christianity. Anyway, in no way anybody should be feeling guilty. No I have not, you were merely echoing what liberals around the world would say in such a situation and you are right, Waheguru can tell. If I am not mistaken there is a verse in the SGGS that denounces Islam so you see, advising others not to join this cult is not against being a Sikhi. I am sick and tired of Sikhs always admonishing each other, always making themselves feel bad or guilty and this is despite such terrible history. I say enough is enough! Sikhs should feel proud of who they are and never succumb to feeling guilty or bad especially when they have been the butt of cruel and harsh treatment by others. If a member is leaving to join another religion, then I bid him good luck. At least he is given well wishes instead of being killed.

How can Bush and Blair 'dominate' the world when they do not dominate their home countries? Your ability to protest and make a difference in the upcoming elections is proof of that, no? Do you think a citizen in Saudi Arabia have the same freedom that you have? As for the label 'Islamofascists', it is not a mere label it is the truth. Do you honestly believe Iran is a responsible nation fit to be armed with nuclear capabilities? Do you realise that Iran is not a democracy and you've got a bunch of crazed Mullahs running it. I have no doubt in my mind that if they were armed with Nuclear warheads, they would first level Jerusalem. This will be then followed by attacks on the rest of the world until they are able to spread their ugly cult to every nook and corner of this world. I was referring to Non Muslims in countries like Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan....I did not conduct a poll but to the ones I have met, they believe Islamosation of the world is an imminent threat. And isn't that a good thing? I don't know much about Indian politics but I know this, the Indian Union needs to be dismantled. Maybe now it's changing it's 'tune' but during the war, they were definitely biased. The scandal involving David Kelly is proof of that. Why do you think the Beeb is undergoing change of management and it's charter is being reviewed? Check out www.bbcbias.org and www.bbcwatch.com. This is evidence that the Beeb is biased.There is a campaign being waged against this news channel and since you mention Israel, the Beeb is banned there. Their constant refusal to use the word 'terrorist' and blatant biased coverage of the Israeli/Palestinian issue is the cause of it. You don't think this cult is a threat to humanity? Switch on the tv and all you hear are how members of this cult are creating problems all over the world. You don't think it's more then a coincidence that the problems in China's Sinjiang province, Russias Chechnya, Indias Kasmir, the MILF in the Phillipines, Church bombings in Indonesia by the JI,bombings in Southern Thailand....all caused by members of this cult in the name of their cult? Do you want me to quote you verses from the Quran? I'd rather have Coke and McDonalds rather then a cult being shoved down my throat. FYI, many Muslim nations have outrightly banned coke and McDonalds in their countries. At least you have the choice to either frequent McDonalds. This is not the case in the Muslim world. What 'constitution' do you speak of? Show me one Muslim country that is a democracy. Even Malaysia and Indonesia that purpots to be a democracy are pseudo democracies at the most. FYI women are not allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia, every friday there is public beheading and stoning sessions conducted by the goverment. Under Saddams rule in Iraq, dissidends were fed alive to plastic shredding machines, millions of Kurds were gassed and ditto for the Shiite Iraqis. Saddams nickname 'Butcher of Baghdad' was not given in vain mind you. What 'human rights' do you speak of? Mother Earth will prevail to the truth and right now, western secular rule is proven without a shadow of a doubt the best form of governance there is on this planet. 'Enslave', 'Brutal', 'inhuman epire'...excuse me, are we talking about Bush and Blair or Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden? You don't think freeing millions under a cruel tyrants rule as good thing? I'm sorry Shasterkovich, but you don't speak for me and the rest of the world who are very aware of Muslim ambition of world dominition. For those of us who are living outside of true democracies such as the UK and the US, the threat from these Islamofascists is very real. We don't share the same luxuries that you and millions others do. We don't have the protection of one of the worlds most powerful military on this planet. BTW, what kind of life did Iraqi's had under Saddams rule? Do you honestly believe they had the same priveleges that you do? Dear Canadian Jatti, yes I do keep abreast with world politics as I truly believe that one day, the members of this vile cult will wage a war against the civilized world. BTW, is the 'Sharia law' being implemented in Canada?

Shashterkovich, you have not given the answer yet. We are waiting.

You'd be amazed how popular he is with Asians outside of the UK and I would say the same for Bush. With the growth of radical Islam around the globe and a hypocritical UN with no backbone, the only ones with real guts to take on these Islamofascists are the Blair/Bush duo. I hope Bush wins in the upcoming elections as for the UK, it doesn't really matter, The Conservatives are for more pro US then Labor so either way it's a win win situation. If Kerry were to win in the next US election, prepare for the worst as these lefties have no guts,vision or brains to see the truth. BTW with the 'sexedup' dossier scandal involving David Kelly and the Beeb, woudn't you think Blair is still a better choice? You cannot deny that the left in the UK are plain biased to the point BBC has been accused of exxagerrating and fabricating it's news.

I make it a point to tell all my female colleagues how beautiful they are. Does this count?

I don't have concrete proof but I suspect it started out of convinience just like other aspects of Punjabi culture. With the arrival of Sikhi, it was incorporated in the religion. I think arranged marriages are not a bad idea as you can be paired to someone from a good family with good upbringing as opposed to meeting someone on your own.

I see that many here reside in the UK. Can I know why is Blair unpopular among you? Is it because of the war in Iraq?

I am sorry Rupy. Sometimes it is wise to read before posting, once again I apologize. Really? Can you point out what are the aspects that are not 'reliable'? Maybe I can learn from you. There is a forum there which I humbly believe is quite informative on world politics. Click on the forum and you'll see what I mean. I really hope Bush wins in the upcoming elections.

It is stupid, ignorant, liberalist attitude like yours that is providing enough fodder for this ugly violent cult to grow. I am not against PN leaving Sikhism. He may joing Reverand Moonsungs or be a Osho follower for all I care, but I will definitely advice him against joining this cult. This cult is the number one cause of problems for all mankind and if left unchecked, may bring the complete destruction to our civilizations as we know it today. I recommend you to check out www.faithfreedom.org. Believe me when I say this, this is not a religion but a violent,ugly,cult. I say this based on personal experience and what is written in the Hadiths and Quran. Raja Ranjit Singh once quoted "The pen is mightier then the sword but what is it without it?" Now think about it, is he advocating violence or was he being practical? Think about it.

Don't you guys like Blair? I think he's not too bad, isn't he?

Rupy you should be careful before you come to your own conclusions. I saw the supposed 'Independant Inquiry' on CNN and from what can be seen, it was hardly independant. For example, one of the senators asked Rice "What does Bush mean by not wanting to just sit around and swatting flies" Why is this senator asking her about what Bush said? Wasn't this inquiry about what actions did she take prior to 9/11? Liberals around the globe aren't being fair to the Bush administration. They are quick to question Rice when Clinton himself through his inaction allowed Americans to die when embassys were being blown up by Osama. They claim the war in Iraq not UN sanctioned but yet keep mum about NATO involvement in Koso and Bosnia. We are living in a world full of hypocrites. Islamofascism is not a joke I tell you and it's threat is growing. A leader like Kerry will not have the gall to stand up to these crazed lunatics. I recommend you to check out www.faithfreedom.org and www.littlegreenfootballs.com

I suspect I know who you are refering to. The answer is within this.... I'l wait and see if my prediction is true.

I am shocked by your decision especially seeing you hang out at Faithfreedom all the time. Dude leave Sikhism if you must become an Atheist, Christian or even a Hindu but don't end up being a Muslim dude! Have you not learnt anything from Faithfreedom? Anyway, I enjoyed all your posts. I have learnt more about Punjabi culture from you then from anybody else. Good luck buddy.

I was googling around and looke what I came across. Some of you may alreade be aware of this site but if you havent and have some time, give it a go and click on this link. http://www.hindutva.org/sikhism.html What I found shocking was what was written here. Check this out... Once when he had gone to have his morning bath, he disappeared into a nearby forest where it is said, God appeared before him and said "I am God, the primal Brahm" and you are the Guru. Whoa, is this true? Isn't this a contradiction to what is written in the SGGS?

Thats what I've been taught so far but it seems the rules are being changed. Nowhere in the SGGS does it state that to be a Sikh one has to don a turban and a beard. Bhai Khanaya who lived during Guru Gobind Singhs time never wore a turban yet he was respected. I suspect certain quarters of the community want to experience the 'feel good' factor by trying to define todays Sikhs and make themselves feel all important just because they are a Khalsa. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mod-note: Whilst Sikh Lore indicates that Bhai Ghanaya Jee never was amritdhari, the instance of the turban is not so clear as you have put forth. Bhai Sahib was a Sikh no doubt and clearly the founding father of the Seva Panthis, however as per being Turbanned or not, please qualify this statement.

Oh and having stupid debates as to should one sit on the floor as opposed to a chair in the temple langar halls makes one very 'Sikhi'? What about giving dubious 'Sant' titles to each other and placing more authority to what some Baba said as opposed to what the Guru commanded? Nowhere is it stated in the SGGS that to be a Sikh one must done a turban and a beard. It is modern day fanatics making up their own rules just so they may put themselves in a position of authority.

Is Hinduism even a religion? There is one way to shut these people up, question exactly who and what is a Hindu. Awareness should be raised on what constitutes Hinduism. Why doesn't Northern Hinduism recognize Tamil Hinduism God called Musniwaran? Why the discrepency? It is just a an umbrella term of various cults and beliefs and the truth to this cult needs to be exposed. Once it is exposed, then you will see these 'swami' types coming down from their high horses. For Gods sake, the word 'swami' is not even a Punjabi word. Why are these people so insecure?

I posted this in another thread and I am compelled to post it here as well as the message can serve this discussion here as well. Below are assertions of some of the writers here who claim it is ok in Sikhism to pray to a stone quoting Bhai Gurdas and Bhagat Dhanna. Sahajleen Kaur Khalsa wrote Pheena wrote Baba Manochal wrote Here is proof that Sikhism is totally against idol worship. This is straight from the Gurus, not from some Bhai,Sant or Baba. Those who advocate idol worship within Sikhism stating what some Bhai,Baba or Sant said I humbly believe have strayed from Gurus command and should not call themselves Sikhs anymore. What I can't understand is how some can quote some Baba,Bhai or Sant put choose to ignore the very crux of Gurus teachings. There were some who were in fact pretty emotional when I criticised this line of thinking. Well, below is what Guru Ji the only and final authority in Sikhism stated. Are you all questioning Guru Ji's teachings? This is also proof that Shashtras and Vedas were looked down upon which is why they were never included in the SGGS. Pheena wrote Ooops my bad.