Infernal Monk

true.

but my frustration isn't about people trying to look attractive.

it's about... argh... i'm not even gonna try and explain it.

while we're on this topic..how many of you tie your beard?

:wink:

haha...she said 'eh'

canadians are soooo "cool"

i thought it was a draw... last time i checked it was 10 - 10.

im, how do u know if a mellon's ripe?

sukhi, the question was directed at u! answer the question...

instinct

it's me..just look at my id...and my avatar...hahahaa

no no...sexy won the poll, we must be fair....and I do not like any kind of bananas....prefer mellons :wink:

wait...what's a "chav"?

Is that Canadian?

To Clarify for everyone..the poll is about ME:

AM I CRAZY OR NOT?

hehe.

are you saying you don't mind having the discussion?

yes...and I don't mind people having different opinions than me...it is good for discussion. But, I don't understand you: I don't know what I said that was offensive. You seem to take things off the internet way to seriously, and seem to wound up. And I have never passed judgement on you or resorted to personal attacks...simply replied to what you posted...or what type of personality your posts posses. Btw...it's not "in my nature to be unkind" But then again, you pass judgement on me...

I don't get it, you get offened when I haven't done anything to you, and then you judge me? lol...

but whatever floats your boat...

huh? you didn't even respond to me...wtf?

and the crazy stuff was for me..you know when some one says "I'm crazy" they are usually referring to themselves..

This is why I said I would stop responding to your posts..cause you don't make sense...you change the topic all the time, and bring up khalistanis in every thread...even when the topic has nothing to do with it...lol

So I'm not arrogant when I said I would stop talking to you, I gave a reason, not that I'm better than you, but you don't seem to want any discussion. Peace

I am making this thread because you seem to have gotten the wrong idea about me. I never resorted to personal attacks or anything of that kind. It is for this reason I see no need to apologize. If you don't believe me, other people who read this can probably vouch, that I didn't say thing against you in any post..lol

But seriously relax with the pms man...you seem to wound up.

I really don't care for e-drama...so say what you like...lol

I made a poll too..cause I like em..

Quote of my reply from other thread.

Um...the reason I didn't reply is because I posted I didn't want to continue going back and forth with you. read up post.

But since you want to send me pms, I will reply. Um my silence does not speak volumes about anything...I was silent because I said I didn't want to respond to you and go back and forth.

Unkind? Sorry if you feel it is in my nature to be unkind..nowhere in any of my posts have i been unkind or resorted to personal attacks. I don't know what I have said that offended you so much? I am being honest here...I have reread by posts, and I don't see antying deeply offensive toward you..please clarify.

Um...the reason I didn't reply is because I posted I didn't want to continue going back and forth with you. read up post.

But since you want to send me pms, I will reply. Um my silence does not speak volumes about anything...I was silent because I said I didn't want to respond to you and go back and forth.

Unkind? Sorry if you feel it is in my nature to be unkind..nowhere in any of my posts have i been unkind or resorted to personal attacks. I don't know what I have said that offended you so much? I am being honest here...I have reread by posts, and I don't see antying deeply offensive toward you..please clarify.

will there be donuts?

i don't like em bro.

ok.

This is my last post in response to you as you don't really seem to care for open OBJECTIVE discussion. Was fun while it lasted. :wink:

it doesn't bother me enough to want to go to the police.

it might if the offenders were dangerous people though..

hehe...and you've never tried to imply anything in a subtle manner...lol :roll:

guess you got it pinned bro, the people on this site are khalistani terrorists cause they don't agree with the policies of the Indian govt...lol

propaganda aside i want anyone who thinks they know me to step out in defense of what you believe and say so.

this is an ideal opportunity to set the record straight. going round in circles arguing on the internet here.

GO ON "EXPOSE" ME. Hacking my computer and making innuendo and threats seems to be about the best you can manage.

haha...damn man..you really need to relax.

I never threatened you anywhere or tried to hack your comp..lol, and I don't know you: that comment was based on the fact that you seem so paranoid about white people and such...and then you call someone else paranoid...I just found it funny..

And I already told you what I think about you, based on your posts...I'm sorry but that is all I'm commenting on, your opinions...

and not getting defensive at all bro...like I already told you I don't argue on the internet it's stupid. I was just replying to your comments..sorry if you didn't like em?

use a straightening iron if you're that concerned. ugh...

:roll:

she just says that cause she wants you to burn your face...

doesn't seem to be in shape to be a model? I think that is the rich Hotelier's son in NYC....he just a rich kid of 30 something...lol

agree wit da palm

rule of law was suspended and emergency powers implemented at the time of the punjab emergency. there is no way anyone could have attacked the site of the golden temple without stirring up even the moderate sikhs, and yet it was a catch-22 - couldn't get the bad guys without going in there and physically taking them.

yes, a lot of people took the heat who weren't to blame. but the extremists had succeeded in scaring the govt. the govt took the decision to utterly crush the seeds of any future rebellion, and a lot of crimes had the tacit approval of govt officials and police.

sikhs then and now comprise a very large (disproportionately large) segment of the indian armed forces and police.

counter-insurgency measures are a type of WARFARE and are very very painful. things should not have been allowed to fester for them to become necessary. bhindranwale and followers should have been taken out 8 years earlier, but he was actually a seed of indira gandhi.

I was referring to the riots that ensued after the assassination of Indira Gandhi...you know the mobs going around killing innocent Sikhs because "they" had killed her?

Not talking about the army attacking Harimandir Sahib.

And I agree with Palm, you seem to think yourself to be quite clever, and imply many things...interesting for disscussion though..

oh and don't worry you won't strike any kind of nerve here..lol:

"Arguing on the internet is like the special olympics. No matter who wins, it's still retarded." I don't get angy over what a stranger says on the net...hehe

is this some kind of fraud? on unitedsikhs.com his name is cited as "Mehtab Singh (Rochak)" and over here neo has said he's "Mehtab Singh (Sian)".

Photoshop??

I'm really sorry, but after reading all of your posts, you seem less interested in learning about Sikhi, than critizicing any miniscule aspect you find of it. While I think open discussion and questions are a good thing, you seem to just jump on any case you find..

Sorry bro, but it doesn't seem like you care much for learning...and neo is right about Sian, not a last name...lol

palm you wrote:

"which motherland is this, the motherland that is occupying my motherland! The motherland that has consistently tried to undermine the sikh peoples, their culture, histroy, language and traditions?"

this is exactly the problem. i don't think you understand the implications of what you're saying. nobody alive today was born in a sikh kingdom: everyone was born in India. if you're saying that punjab should have greater autonomy or even have total self-governance, say so. we might even agree.

but don't say anyone is occupying "your" land matey. it's both our heritage. the only way it will fall into "hindu" or sikh hands is if genocide (another word you bandy around irresponsibly) of one at the hands of the other really does take place. and nobody wants that.

as for destroying sikh traditions, religions and culture this is complete bollox man. sikh religion will be preserved for a very very long time, no matter what anyone tries to do.

hehe..sorry found that quite amusing coming from you, and yes you do seem to have double standards..but that's cool...through discussion maybe we can all learn something.

not as many times as others have posted about Mehtab Singh, for instance (a fine chap).

what's objective about your hate-pamphlet??

i'm not trying to be clever, but sikhs are far more aryan than dalit, if you look at things that way (i don't, but hey i would'nt touch this pamphlet with a bargepole).

don't assume so much, no where did i advocate this pamphlet...mine was merely an off-topic reply to your post.

ok, but I don't see how widespread killing of innocents is justified as a result of that? What did those people have to do with it? And I mean on both sides, but let's face it, the Sikh losses were much greater, and oh there was no rule of law to stop the free for all...the police just stood by

plus the some members of the govt. were involved in it. Govt. is suppossed to uphold the law, so if Sikh "terrorists" were causing problems, then take care of it, but is it lawful to kill innocent citizens that had nothing to do with it?

bruce I agree with some of your points, but others I don't

If you don't mind me saying...you seem kinda anti-sikh...not everyone who dislikes the way the Indian govt. runs wants a separate country...sorry bro, but you don't seem to be here for objective disscussion.

And you have a thing about Brahmins? you posted about them twice..Just wondering.

huh? you want to explicitly state what you are getting at?