HSD1

So its okay for you to do it but not us. Now that is typical hindu mentality. Ang 478: Brahma wasted his life away, continually reading the Vedas. Ang 477: Those who know the Shaastras and the Vedas, astrology and the rules of grammar of many languages; those who know Tantras and mantras and all medicines — even they shall die in the end. || 2 || Those who enjoy regal power and rule, royal canopies and thrones, many beautiful women, betel nuts, camphor and fragrant sandalwood oil — in the end, they too shall die. || 3 || I have searched all the Vedas, Puraanas and Simritees, but none of these can save anyone. Says Kabeer, meditate on the Lord, and eliminate birth and death. The use of 'We' as in me and my relation to my ancestors. What about when some hindu buttmunch says 'we beat the mughals' or 'we beat the pakistanis in that war'? Of course that's different according to you. But its funny ripping apart your arguments on this forum. Funny you also said this: "But why do you call as enemies the same Hindustani people who the Gurus and the Shishyas descended from and not the oppressive Mlecchas?" So the hindus of today are the same as those around hundreds of years ago? Make your mind up you hypocrite. A SIKH RAJPUT IS A SIKH! GOD, HOW RETARDED ARE YOU? A SIKH IS A SIKH. MANY OF OUR ANCESTORS WERE MUSLIMS, HINUDS, CHRISTIANS, JEWS AND OTHER ASSORTED RELIGIONS. ARE THEY HINDU TOO? What a waste of time you are.

And your point is? Scared the chinis will do to you what you did to us in 1984? What F***king regiments? In 1699 the people who became 'khalsa sikhs' were already sikhs of the previous gurus. Rajputs and jatts did not join in regiments. What garbage. Regiments werent even used in the Khalsa until Maharaja Ranjit Singh modernised the sikh army. Your ignorance is shocking. As for Banda Singh, of course he wasnt a hindu, he became a sikh. No hindus at all. Just sikhs. Overwhelming odds? Like hell there were. The muslim invaders never outnumbered the hindus. You are so stupid I still cant believe the mods let you have a say. On sikhnet they would have shut you up a long time ago. Hindus got their asses kicked for centuries. Many chose collaboration and subjugation in order to survive. Gurbani mention many of these sanatans/brahmins who fulfilled this role in the south asian muslim empire. Err you are stupid. How can people who are dead be my enemies? Stop twisting what i say. Hindustanis today are not the same as some random hindus from thousands of years ago. Just because you may look like a monkey as your ancestors were apes millenia ago does not mean that everyone has such retarded issues with heritage. As for the origins of singh or khandas, what is your point? Paganism outdates hinduism. Some people even say that the aryans were an ethnic group who adopted their culture off a larger ethnic group before moving into india and killing dravidians (or those dark skinned demons your 'good' gods killed - sounds like something Hitler would have said if he won WW2). No cares where they came from. Bagpipes arent scottish. Loads of other things are used by nations even though they originated elsewhere. Do you whine about that? Of course not. What about sikh artillery? When the Khalsa captured Mughal cannons, they transferred them to local forts in their control. These were maintained by engineers and smiths in each confederate state as the sikh nation evolved. When Maharaja Ranjit Singh created an empire, the smiths/engineers built a centralised foundry and manufactured guns for artillery troops and forts, using what they had learned from the Mughal pieces. Does that make the guns used in 1800-1849 Mughal? Of course not, they were sikh guns. Your logic is retarded.

And here was me thinking that nationality/language/culture were meant to have no influence on our belief and understanding of sikhi. I'm guessing it only applies in certain cases.

Actually it does. And when it does, you blame Singh Sabha for gurbani not being what you want it to be. Any actual evidence? Did it prove it? more like this is more genuine silliness from yourself. What makes you think that you know what our Gurus intended for our religion? Just because you write ridiculously long posts shows your genuine fanaticism about hindu loving. Seriously, go get some help. The british didnt care after beat the sikhs, as long as they held most of our religous artifacts. Muslims and hindus did incredibly well under the british. Hindustan wouldnt exist without them. Why are so many hindustanis anglo-phobic? If it wasnt for the british, most of you would be sikhs or muslims by now. Oh dear. Quoting Dr jakobsh? She is a silly cow. That just shows the massive ignorance underpinning your logic. Sikhi is monotheistic. What about Guru Nanak Dev ji taking the mick out of hindus in the ganges? On many occasions he showed the stupidity of hinduism. By the way, we jatts are the descendants of Hunnic invaders who crashed into the punjab at a later date than the races you mentioned. All this gibberish about india this hindu that is annoying. Our Gurus told us that nothing lasts forever. People like you make me eager to see the end of the last bastion of paganism and superstition in this world. The true Khalsa will return, and we will shake the neo-Mughal State (hindustan) to it's foundations. LOL!How can they tell they were jatts. It also doesnt take a genius to give an alias of a sikh name. You use sheer ignorance to prove some of your twisted views, then take massive leaps of reasoning to justify others. It would be laughable if so many people didnt buy into these conspiracy theories. Give it time and the assasins will be revealed to have received payments from the indian govt. HOW DOES THIS PROVE ANY LINK BETWEEN SIKHS/PAKIS/CHINESE AS I ORIGINALLY ASKED FOR PROOF OF? I find people like you very annoying. You answer certain points by giving answers to questions i didnt ask. Other points you ignore in order to spew your propaganda. On Sikhnet the mods are very good at picking up on this. I hope the admin on here take note. http://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=91741 You can also see indian troops using chinese weapons on youtube. America gives loads of equipment to pakistan, some of which ended up in khalistani hands. Are they supporting the dissolving of india too? On another note, why should we care if china attacks india? Chinese ambassadors have visited Harmandir Sahib on many occasions (and not using commandoes or tanks!) Surely hindustan has plenty of hindus who can fight them off? Why dont they be like that maratha twat you mentioned earlier? Waheguru says nothing lasts forever. That includes hindustan. I therefore welcome our soon to be chinese overlords. Cant be much worse than hindus. I prefer noodles to cow piss as well.

Well they are not linked are they? If so, then the Khalsa Raj of Maharaja Ranjit Singh and the Freedom Movement for Khalistan were part of the same thing - the sikh nation's constant striving for sovereignty. The sikh army punched well above its wait. Hindu resistance was crushed for centuries. When the Mughal empire showed cracks the maharattas (the only hindus with balls at the time) moved in. The Mughals messed about with them but then made peace as they wanted to concentrate all their forces in fighting us sikhs. Obviously we were a more potent enemy than the maharattas. Also, i have to correct you on many points. Maharaja Ranjit Singh's main expansion was in afghanistan after he signed a co-operation treaty with the british. His empire was already fairly large then. As for hindu's giving first born sons into the sikh faith, that happened on a few occasions when grateful hindu women were rescued from afghan and persian raids into india. The Khalsa frequently marched on delhi and was unopposed. The maharattas also never ruled much of india. They used their cavalry to dominate a territory, but once the enemy sent reinforcements they scurried off. Look at the history of the portuguese colonies were masses of maharattas were slaughtered for nothing trying to take a village or two off a handful of european mercenaries. Oh and there was this hilarious battle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Assaye Dont give me this gibberish that sikhs were the cogs in a hindustani war machine back then. We stopped the invaders of the north by ourselves, so people like the maharattas could run around killing peasants and calling themselves mighty hindu warriors. If hindus created all that why did the sikhs do all the fighting? What were the hindus doing for 900 years? Can you prove that Guru Gobind Singh adopted anything off the rajputs? At this point i would request the mods to step in and stop this hindu tarnishing of our faith and heritage. If it's allowed to carry on, some unfortunate home truths may have to be said to put these people in their place. What if sikhs dont want to be part of hindustan? Why cant we have our own country? What have hindus ever done for us? Which sikh generals insisted on attacking Harmandir Sahib? The indian army and police are still involved in the imprisonment and killing of innocent sikhs. So much for unity. More hearsay and half truths. Seriously get a life, you remind of those muslims who think that the jews are behind every bad thing. Like do you think singh sabha bogey men are going to get you?

Do you have any proof? Or just more hindoo paranoid-hearsay-brainfarts? Or by those ungrateful fools who were protected by sikhs and our gurus and now twist our heritage? Hindoostan was created in 1947. Sikhi outdates it by centuries. Sanatan dharma as you see it is a relatively new creature. This is just another example of how hindu inferiority manifests itself as paranoid psychotic dribbles by people like Harjas 'Kaur'. As you see it, Hindu-Sikh unity involves sikhs becoming hindus, sikhs fighting the chinese and pakis followed by allowing hindus to kill us in riots and drive tanks into our gurudwaras whenever they feel like it. That's not unity. It's abuse. Oh and look how you blame Singh Sabha for adulterating our holy texts. Can you explain were you got all your quotes from then? Surely if Singh Sabha purged our literature, they would have taken those parts out of the Angs you mentioned? Oh wait, I see, you were twisting their meanings using selective quoting. I could quote the bible, war and peace or the sunday times and give skewed reflections of what was written in them. Were is your evidence that Singh Sabha actually changed any texts? It's obvious that your just upset that sikhi isnt as you want it to be.

It's called sarcasm stupid.

The arabs who are mostly muslim have done away with their pagan past so it is hard to verify what their ancestors believed in. If the europeans weren't so sure of the history of their roman/greek/celtic/slavic pagan faiths, the hindoos would probably say the whites used to be hindus before christianity showed up.

Where do I sign up? lol

Now just hang on a minute. They bloody well did nick our stone. The b*st*rds. All I ever hear is bullshit about how the young white male is being killed off in PC britain. Over and over and over again. How we asians/blacks are stealing his white women, taking his education out of his head (!), how we take his jobs and how we generally make his life shit. Do you agree with that? If not why are you defending them? At uni, I didnt steal any white women but i could have done with a bat to fend off those nympho's constant advances. I have been more than qualified for any job I have had. At school, white kids did not give two shits. They wanted benefits. The ones with brains expected to do better than sikhs because....well because they were white. They bemoan the fact they dont have an empire. So who is living in the wrong century? Look on facebook and see how popular 'Bring back the British Empire' groups are. They probably have some sikh members as well. How many 'Bring back the Khalsa Raj' groups are there? None. Face it, these people have major issues, which only multiply when you get them in larger groups. The poor white anglo saxon male moans because he cant go around raping and looting all over the world like his ancestors. I remember one posh bint I knew well at uni said she would have got me shot if the empire still existed when i wasnt interested in her. Maybe my experiences are just completely different to yours. And some things never change. Countries do stay relatively the same, even if the face of it changes. Oh so I'm stupid and dont have an education now. As for the Sikh Federation, talk about a bunch of old men who think the hindustani secret agents are about to jump on them for being too 'extreme'. Ironically they are about 20 years too late to start showing balls. Lets see how far they get with these grand schemes of theirs. Oh clever. I would happily pay tax for chavs and muslims to kill each other. Shame the hindus werent involved, that would really make it worth it. (joke)

What makes you think that others (non-sikhs) want that? If we could get everyone to stop being a fanatic, I would be overjoyed. But others dont want that. They use and even love their fanatics. If you live in the west, what kind of person do you think is the foot soldier in your country's army? A reasonable chap? Or a psycho who has been told that killing in Britain is a crime, but killing Johnny Foreigner is patriotic? How many hindus, christians and muslims are there? Billions? How many are fanatics? A small percentage. How many sikhs are there? 24 million. How many are fanatics? A larger percentage than the others. But do the number crunching. A small percentage of a billion is still a lot more than a fair percentage of 24 million. When two groups rub up against each other, its these people we need. Without them, the frontline moves to your doorstep. Are you ready for that? Being a hippy about what others want to do to us will do you no good in the end. At least have some respect for those who put their lives on the line for other sikhs and never look down on any of them, for they will fight for you Neo when no one else will. A 'kharkoo' who kills moneh is a fundamentalist and not a sikh. I have made it clear what a fanatic is, and they are not fundamentalists. Anyone who fights the innocent, unprotected or other sikhs is an idiot and not a sikh. There are also a lot more causes of human suffering and wars than religious fundamentalism.

I am sure you can use your own mouth to laugh at them. Dont start threatening moneh either.

Of course I am. I honestly believe that Akalis were blond haired, blue eyed germans who wore uniforms with the death's head on. They also all spoke fluent german, hated slavs and chatka'd wurst. They believed Hitler was their leader (forward thinking, eh?).* *The above is an example of sarcasm.** **By sarcasm I mean the proper definition of it, not some moronic notion of the word that some people who dont understand the meaning of anything will try to tar me with. Seriously, people like you are idiotic. You honestly think I thought the bad things the Waffen SS did is what the Akalis had in common with them? Maybe it's my fault for thinking some of you actually have some brain cells, but I was actually referring to how the SS and Akhalis both fielded large military units. Both were also 'pure' in order to reflect what was perceived the pinnacle of each society's citizen. Oh wow. How emotive. You really are a piece of work. Hindoos are renowned for being able to push people's buttons. Nothing like showing a beard being cut on a sikh forum to get people on your side. Unfortunately we saw through it. Fanatical intolerance? No I said Fanaticism. Get your facts right before you make yourself look stupid. Stop putting words in my mouth. Is sikh-hindu unity about sikhs fighting all the hindu's wars and letting them kill us every time they want to riot? Oh and the part I put in bold above is an excellent description of hindustan. Couldnt have described it better myself. Not according to the Indian Army. HAHAHAHA. At least you're good for a laugh. Now go on that link people. See how it gives definitions in black? And examples in blue? The examples themselves are just opinions. So there you go. What level of debauched machiavellian machinations that are at work in your mind is truly sickening. At least I can show others how people like you twist everything.

LOL, loving the use of apostles and apostates. Welcome to the forum. Feel free to express your opinion.

Is that a polite way of saying they want to kill ragheads? Maybe you should actually talk to these people you defend so boldly.

Me an island monkey? Not according to the BNP. I think of it like this: a Lion born in a pig sty is still a Lion. Make of that what you will. The mongolians have no idea of their history, thanks to the chinese and russians giving them a skewed vision of their own history. Similar to how some hindustanis portray our history. As for the italians, they have a hard time keeping their trousers up so are not a threat to anyone. The anglosphere is alive and kicking. Look at it like this. Every race aims to create a state. If this state is successful, it becomes a powerful state. If it grows even larger it becomes an empire. If it is an empire, history shows it takes 3 wars to bring that race to its knees. If its a powerful state or a consecutive empire (like the Khalsa Raj) it takes just 2 wars. Now the British Empire never lost any wars. The two wars which bankrupted it did not kill off the jingoistic numbnut patriots. So they still exist and reproduce. Hence the state of Britain today. These people will only respect others when they are showed they are not superior. That involves some humbling, usually with violence. Sucking up to them or pandering their cry baby nature will get us no where. Benefits? Me and my parents work. All I am doing is taking back what they stole from the punjab. I cant believe you think they are giving us any sort of benefits. We died in their wars, they took our resources and changed our nation/religion so much it hurts me to see sikhs defend them. Do you really think they are sorry? I didnt choose to be born here. Now before you tell me to go back to my own country if i dont like it, i would happily go back. Unfortunately, time machines havent been invented. These island monkeys go on about how they invented everything, usually after someone else comes up with it. You see, my country ended at the Battle of Gujerat. The brits took my country, killed our people (including many of the akalis you are fond of), stole our resources, plundered our religion and heritage, skewed our faith, created propaganda machines that were inherited by Hindustan which are used to this day to control the minds of sikhs, treated us like shit for doing the jobs they were to lazy to do, subject us to varying levels of racism, carry on crapping on our beliefs and you want me to be grateful?! No wonder singhs in india were crying when they saw you, i feel pretty sad too now. Waheguru, what has become of us?

Who was that aimed at? Anyway, the reason the brits loved sikhs is because we fought so hard after swallowing their propaganda. Like come on, imagine if there was another uprising in the punjab for Khalistan, but this time people from all over the world came to fight for us. Wouldnt that make you feel that the cause was truly righteous? By convincing others to fight for them, the English became even more confident that they were the ones who should rule and were always right. In Hitler's Mein Kampf, he clearly states the british empire would be used as a blue print for his Third Reich. He even envisioned an alliance of mutual respect before britain threw herself in with the french. They dont teach you that in GCSE History do they? No of course not. The british empire was all good and sweet according to them. They stopped slavery and built a railway across 'india'. Wow. So all the idiots in the rest of Hindustan could come to the punjab. Great. I hope an EU army beat these island monkeys and stick a giant railway network all over their supposedly beautiful countryside.

Woah, calm down Dalsingh, I'm on your side. One of the reasons i started this thread was to 'unload' the word fanatic among us. Lets face it these 'fanatic' qualities are what made us so hard to conquer, and able to form a Khalsa Raj. These feelings and attitudes are not to be ridiculed, but should be embraced and respected. Hippy fundamentalist sikhs are allowed to do what they want, so why cant the other side be allowed to do what is necessary? In the end we will all be grateful. Anyone can call me a fanatic, all I will do is laugh in their face. To me it shows they fear my faith and resolve, which makes me even more difficult to defeat. That may sound bad to some of you, but I am what I am, so are many of the youth today. You cant just ignore us or say we are wrong, nothing is achieved by not facing those who are your brothers.

Lol, I meant being in control, not joining the bottom and working your way up. Anyone who joins the army as a private and doesnt specialise (ie is just fighting infantry) will have a tough time. However, i want sikhs in the units like the parachute reg, specialist areas or as officers. The only way to win is to take the reins and control the power. We dont have the numbers to do what the muslims did and create a parallel social pyramid.

Fordcapri on sikhsangat. Thats all I'm going to say about sikhs like him. Now some of you have zombie plans *looks at Kaljug*, but now may be a good time to consider a 'BNP plan'. If the fires of race riots are stoked, are you ready to defend yourself/family/property/sangat/gurudwara? I now realise why old gurudwaras were built like forts. My local gurudwara wouldnt be much use in that respect. Something for the sangat to take up with their gurudwara committees? Also, if whitey cant do enough damage to muslims with large numbers, they will target smaller groups. The hindus have proved how good they are at rioting in recent times so they can look after themselves. Are we sikhs ready to make sure no one tries it on with us? If not, get started you bloody fools.

After listening to that mini-speech I think we should remember all those sikhs who were/are still imprisoned for practicing sikhi and fighting to protect our history. May there sacrifices be worth it in the end.

It's good to see a topic where people are discussing in a civil manner. My two cents with regards to the police is that at the moment they are very anti-sikh. I have been in dangerous situations with coppers which were made worse on a couple of occasions by over energetic 'sikh' policemen. I still dont know why they were gunning so hard for me, but they still ended up losing in the end. Do you know why? Because no matter how hard they sucked up or how much they chased after their own lot, it was never good enough for their bosses. So they never got promoted and one of them is now an unemployed fat singh sitting on his sofa moaning about his crap life. Regardless of my experiences, I echo Kaljug in saying if we want change we need to get educated singhs (i mean our kind of sikhs) in high parts of the police forces, rather than joining at the grass roots level. The same goes for the army and top universities like Oxbridge. Recently that pie gulping fat arse known as Nick Griffin said that he had the army on his side. Now i know that the lower ranks in many regiments are the type to vote bnp and that many of the officers are naturally racist because of their snotty upbringings. Now if we had a sikh regiment in the army, things would be different. Even if the shit does hit the fan, we would have at least 700 sikhs trained well enough to protect our community. Alas, no one bothered setting one up. If we want to safeguard ourselves, we need to get people in the top of every branch of the country. And that means all of you! If you cant do it, dont expect other sikhs to either. Mind you, if you are not a student, i wouldnt recommend joining the TA at the moment as they have had just taken major cuts to their new recruit training budget. The reason i say we need sikhs in the top sections is because we will never have the numbers to join and make a difference at the bottom. If we do this, it doesnt matter what the chavs think as we will be pulling the strings. If you are a well connected top police officer (not all clever/posh whites are racists, some even make good friends) you can sack the racists at your own leisure. When they are on the dole, their families will suffer, and you will have pushed these racists back to the bottom where they belong. Without a job or decent references they cant buy nice things, educate their kids or take advantage of opportunities. At the end of the day, it all boils down to knowing the rules of the game and being ruthless enough to go all out without remorse for those who wish ill on us.

Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't there at least 4 Akali Regiments in the sikh army before the Anglo-Sikh wars? If we had beaten the british at Mudki, they would have been at the vanguard of the sikh forces blitzing their way into british india. Like I said before, maybe it's something wrong with me, but I don't see the word 'fanatic' as derogatory. Anyway, what you mention is modern day stuff, in which case most of the sikh fanatics are in other parts of the nation. This isn't about what the british think. They portray people in many different lights, mainly as projections of things they see in themselves as well. As sikhs, we know that they were not crazed, brainwashed or psychopaths. But in the early 1800s, many of them probably had parents and grandparents who had been killed in the Holocaust the afghans inflicted on us. This obviously affected their outlook and even their motivation to become the crack troops of our army. Is that a bad thing? Many of the shaheeds of 84 and afterwards had suffered at the hands of the hindustani govt. Does that mean we cast doubt on why they fought? Of course not. Well I dont mean to cause offense, but the Akhalis were man made. From the time of Guru Gobind's creation of the troop to the regiments garrisoned on the borders of the Khalsa Raj, the Akhalis were a group of people who changed as time went on. When the Lahore Durbar went to war, they were the first in. The goreh say that was because Maharaja Ranjit Singh wanted them dead. I dont agree with this as the British Govt sends the SAS in first and the americans send in the USMC, not because they want them dead but rather they are the best. Ultimately, the Akalis were fallible. Their headlong rush to fight the british, without knowing who or what tactics/troops/equipment they would be up against led them into numerous disastrous battles. Many of the Akali regiments perished in the death trap that was Sobroan. Of course some of them survive to this day, but they dont control many gurudwaras, field forces of sizeable strength or prevent interference in their own affairs from outsiders. If we ever have a Khalistan, we could try to restore them as guardians of gurudwaras and have crack Akhali Divisions in the Khalistani Army.

The fact is you gave a definition of fanatic that is different to what you actually think the word means. Fanaticism does not always involve hate, but is also reactionary and wary of others. Like the Akalis who didnt necessarily hate the british or afghans but knew they were up to no good. Also, fanaticism is not fueled by an urge to eradicate other religions, but to protect ones own set of beliefs. Could you also explain to me what you mean by an extremist and give examples? Unfortunately, in some sikh circles Kharkoos are considered bad and even criminal. No one said that a certain appearance makes you a fanatic. A few amritdharis like you described are very docile and lax when it comes to doing anything about anything. On the other hand, many moneh themselves are what I would call fanatics.

An interesting point. Personally, I think that moneh are more fanatical against non-sikhs, though in most cases this leads them to learn more about sikhi and they sought themselves out in the end. I have come across amritdhari fanatics who focus more on other sikhs, especially moneh. Maybe there is a link? What do you mean by 'Aurangzeb used these types to send the Khalsa fauj back into lakhi jungle.'? But why were the akhalis untrusting? Its obvious the Akhalis didnt have an intelligence network across the subcontinent (or did they?). The thing is as both of us are sikhs we will avoid using negative words to describe our ancestors. The truth is that the Akhalis were a mixture of Knights Templar/Waffen-SS/SAS, if we had to compare them to western equivalents. Now is that a bad thing they were fanatics? When I discuss with other sikhs why we won major wars against afghanistan when the whites cant, the consensus is always that our fanatics (Akhalis) were more fanatical than their fanatics (Mujahideen). Without them, we might not even be alive, or even worse we could be muslims (joke). Lets face it, most of the world's armies have special units filled with people that you wouldnt want to live near. In a time of war, however, the nation is grateful to them. Is that not accepted in sikhi?