Shasterkovich

I'm even more sorry that you are such an (UK slang) who can't even read.

Truth is for whoever who reads this thread and makes up their own mind. May God bless you.

OK, maybe it's time to cut loose and call it a day (amicably). Everything must come to an end, even friendships. I regret it if your feelings were hurt, but I regret doubly that I have to keep a tight rein on expressing what I believe is the truth about any particular issue (whether bodybuilding or anything else), simply in order not to upset the apple cart. In order to prevent this from happening, it looks like I will have to reassess my position so that I have only Sikh acquaintances rather than brothers, sisters and friends.

I did'nt tell you that you pound away with 50 yuppies at a gym. I gave that as an illustrative example. A comparison of benefits. I am not humiliating you. Besides, what are you threatening me with?

Summeet, You say you have never been to "a gym" but a gym is simply a place where you train. Many people have such spaces in their homes. You have no sense of humour, and it seems that the right you hold most dear is the right to take offense. I have known many Sikhs with the same attitude, and it just is'nt normal. It's weird and I reject it entirely. Besides, you should be grateful that I even care that you claim to have taken offense. What does that tell you about me? If I wanted to, I would be perfectly free to say: take offense and so what? You claim to be able to read and comprehend things but the evidence suggests otherwise. For example, I asked YOU if your routines were cosmetic or had something to do with holding a place in the cattle market. You have failed to address any of the points I raised in my first post in this thread (about the connection between fascism and bodybuilding culture). Therefore you have also missed the point behind my questions and the issues I raised. When you feel ready to accept my assistance, the door will be open. Trust me, you have taken offense over absolutely nothing.

Summeet, you're not showing a Canadian flag now. Just to give you an idea of the games the site admin staff play, you're now showing an Ethiopian flag on my computer screen. Before, you were showing a Union Jack. There was absolutely nothing insulting about my post. I told you the truth and that's all there is to it. For the second time you have stated that you have felt hurt. I do not accept that you know the difference between humour and rudeness. In any event, you certainly have made it absolutely clear that you don't take me for my word when I told you that my post was tongue-in-cheek, so I won't tell you a second time. Consequently, it's your choice to feel hurt. As I've already explained my reasoning in detail (which you seem to have selfishly ignored), it's not my duty to assist you with your hurt. It seems that you only take on board a very small portion of what I write, and then you construe it as an attack. Your problem, not mine.

SikhAwareness members, Look carefully for the alleged "insult" Neo might be referring to. If it's not there, consider why he said that there was an insult. Ask him about it, too. There was no insult. Note also Neo's invitation for me to join his organisation - the Wahabis. Neo = Jamuka ???

Summeet, I overlooked the fact that you may not be in the UK (despite your choice of the Union Jack) so you might not be fully conversant with the nuances of British humour. Ask any Britisher: the content of my post was just some humour, and it would be taken as such by anyone who is UK-based. There would'nt be any point in learning how to speak to a sister - convention and courtesy were the only reasons I used "Bhenji". Don't take this personally but I don't put anyone on a pedestal just for being a Sikh or a member of any other religious or ethnic or other denomination any more. I've seen Sikhs do all sorts of astonishing things (especially recently), and now I'm pretty much convinced that Sikhs are absolutely nondifferent in their lives, habits and customs from working-class and middle-class goray (i.e. drugs, smoking, sexual habits, plots and machinations, etc). They do those things with absolutely equal frequency to non-Sikhs. Hence, I would not deem any Sikh my brother or sister. Therefore, I have no sisters. I have truly shed the conditioning which was instilled in me by my upbringing: to regard Sikhs in a certain way. As such, to coin a phrase: I don't know you from Adam. That does'nt mean we can't be friends: I like making friends. But I can never be your sister, and I can't even be your friend if the foundations of such a friendship are religion. We have to accept each other for who we are. If we can't be friends, we will have to be strangers. This in itself is a realisation, because people who are too intense in their fixation upon a particular idea (religious or otherwise) tend to enter the names of their ex-friends into their "enemies" list, as well as the names of all dissidents. Again, I don't know if you are like that. On the subject of your training, I'm sure that it's consistent with the rest of your life: a part of a package in which everything has its proper place (to make you a "better" person) and in which passion and individuality are regarded as weaknesses to be subdued or disguised wherever possible. I don't judge you for being that way: I know that there may be a lot of pressures on you. However, I urge you to give yourself a chance. Give yourself permission to eat an ice cream and skip the gym session. Given that you are bound to deteriorate physically and mentally, and that eventually all trace of you will disappear, why not try working on something outside yourself instead of your body or mind? Such as a painting, some poetry (don't listen to criticism from Sikhs if its a Sikh-related poem), some music composition or whatever. I believe you will find it more fulfilling. This is because you will be sharing the output of your soul with others. It's less selfish than sticking headphones in your ears and pounding away on a treadmill with 50 other yuppies. Also, I'd like to see you try to apply a "routine" to your creativity (i.e. one completely original work of art every 2 days). If you can achieve that I will be impressed (I don't think it's possible). Otherwise, your other routines (such as exercise) are pointless. Why are you trying to rollerblade up Mount Rushmore (to coin another phrase, as I don't know where Mt Rushmore is or even if it's real)? Someone with different genes will be able to smoke, drink and live on porterhouse steaks, and still outlive you by about 20 years. A question: as a woman, do you train at the gym in the same spirit as when you book your appointment for other cosmetic routines (i.e. hairdresser, manicuring, pedicuring, bikini-line-waxing)? Truthfully, are you doing it to compete for or to hold a place in the cattle market?

Surprised you put "Kaur" in inverted commas. Sort of suggests that you're not who you say you are. As for your "routines", I find that routine dulls the mind. So perhaps you should keep them to yourself. In any event, I'm all about having a good time, so I would'nt have any use for your physical penances and tips on bodily ascetism. Still, surprisingly in good physical condition though. I suppose I'm lucky insofar as my genes are good enough that I don't need physical training.

Bhenji, I suggest that there's an exception to every rule or so they say, so perhaps if you know a Singh who is a strenuous exerciser and a moderate eater you've found the exception. I won't forget the Kaurs. However, it would be a fonder memory if they stopped pumping iron and popping steroids, and switched to hatha yoga. Just kidding of course...

The Singh approach to bodybuilding comprises moderate exercise and strenuous eating, n'est ce pas?

Bah. Bodybuilding ... Bodyfascism. None of the following is meant as an insult to any member of SikhAwareness: I know you're all fine people who do things (like bodybuilding) in moderation, sensibly. This is simply a call to be more aware of some of the issues around this pointless pursuit. It's fuelled by a pointless quest for uniformity and a perpetual dissatisfaction with one's natural body shape and proportions. Be happy with the form that God made you in. There have been plenty of slightly overweight Singhs. It does'nt mean they were any less worthy as Singhs. I've even seen overweight Nihangs. Being a bodybuilder is one step away from shaving your beard and pubic hairs, and going to saunas/steamrooms to open your pores and expurge your toxic impurities or whatever. The origin of this sort of vanity-based physical culture is in the gymnasia of ancient Greece. A sort of man-building and man-shaping exercise, to produce good soldiers to serve the ruler. Women would be encouraged to practice flexibility and aerobic exercises, to make themselves more attractive to men and in the belief that they would then produce stronger, healthier children. The Greeks would train with weights, shave their facial and body hair completely, and apply unguents and oils to appear more youthful. This is because homosexuality was a received and accepted part of their culture. In its "highest" expression, the Greek culture of bodybuilding found expression in the Spartan habit of leaving "imperfect" (deformed/disabled) babies to die on the mountainside shortly after their birth. If you look at the Greeks today, they are hardly some kind of master-race, so all of their fascism, cruelty and perversity availed them nothing. As for Sparta, it was crushed underfoot by God and there is no trace of it remaining. You may find it interesting that the bodybuilders' ideal is not ideal for the Army, and a serious bodybuilder is much more likely to fail a modern day Army-selection course than a serious jogger, for instance. Bodybuilding as a hobby is a reflection of fascist ideals. I know this because I have had long and in-depth discussions about things with a bodybuilder. I have more trust in each and every beer-guzzling slob (Sikh or not) than in any of those eugenics-promoting, BMI-calculating, steroid-pumping (all of the successful ones), diuretic-urinating self-avowedly-Darwinian egotists. Oh, and I would add that the Greek soldiery were defeated in the field by their own vanity. The Romans took advantage of Greek vanity by causing disabling (hence demoralising to any bodybuilder or anyone obsessed with being physically "perfect") rather than fatal injuries to Greek phalanx-men. This ruined the Greek discipline, and military losses inflicted on them using clever tactics such as this (by various enemies) brought down their civilisation. Also: the saddest thing about bodybuilding today is the forces that are driving it. Marketing, media, the agents of the New World Order. Young men and adolescent boys today take their cue from male models (with no beard or chest hair) in male perfume adverts. Get a grip and choose a real role model. No point in being a chicken in a battery farm.

I took this article from: http://www.mcb.org.uk/02-04-04.html 'We must unite to defeat this threat' by Inayat Bunglawala Yesterday, the Muslim Council of Britain took the exceptional step of writing to the Imams and Chairmen of each and every mosque in the UK – over 1000 of them – calling upon them to observe the utmost vigilance in the face of a common terror threat that hangs over us all. The MCB letter has been issued in the wake of last month’s atrocious bombings of the Madrid trains. There can be little doubt now that our country has become a premium target for terrorists. Tuesday's huge counter-terrorist operation involving over 700 Police officers across London and the Home Counties which saw twenty-four premises searched, eight men of Pakistani descent arrested together with the seizure of half a ton of ammonium nitrate will inevitably be seen as evidence of the increased threat facing our country from terrorists. At the Muslim Council of Britain, we see it as the duty of all Britons, Muslims and non-Muslims, to work together to thwart any danger to this country and its inhabitants. Yet, very often, British Muslims have been told that they have not condemned terrorists loudly enough and need to do more. Last week’s semi-literate lecture in Italy by Lord Carey admonishing Muslims for being backward and not speaking out against suicide bombers was a classic case in point. This time though, it was heartening to see Peter Clarke, Head of the Metropolitan Police's Anti-Terrorist branch, making it clear that: "the overwhelming majority of the Muslim community are law abiding and completely reject all forms of violence." Clarke even urged the media to refrain from using the term "Islamic terrorist" - a term which has caused a lot of hurt to British Muslims because of the utter incompatibility of the teachings of Islam and the blessed Prophet Muhammad with the vile and destructive phenomenon of terrorism. Still, the immediate spotlight will fall on Britain's two million strong Muslim community. The British press has been awash with provocative stories since 9/11 about the inflammatory rantings of Abu Hamza and Omar Bakri. Yet the wild level of coverage given to these two loudmouths is out of all proportion to their minuscule following in this country and has arguably helped them to further their divisive agenda to the detriment of good relations between Muslims and non-Muslims. This is not to ignore the real possibility that there may well be a tiny group of Muslims who have decided to embark upon the path of violence. They should be caught and tried according to the law. If found guilty, then the full weight of the judicial system ought to be brought to bear on them. We will have no sympathy for those who plan to endanger the lives of innocent people. The Qur’an teaches us: “He who killed any person, unless it be a person guilty of manslaughter, or of spreading chaos in the land, should be looked upon as though he had slain all mankind, and he who saved one life should be regarded as though he had saved the lives of all mankind.†(al-Qur’an 5:32) We in the Muslim community need to do everything we can to ensure that mischievous or criminal elements are prevented from infiltrating our community and provoking any unlawful activity. Certainly, any suspected criminal activity should be reported to the police. Our youth should be provided with correct Islamic guidance and not left to be preyed upon by ideologues with sinister motives. Muslim communities around the country need to liaise with the local Police and give them the fullest cooperation in dealing with any criminal activity including possible terrorist threats. “Help one another to virtue and God-consciousness and do not help one other to sin and transgression.†(al-Qur’an 5:2) Once in receipt of this information, it is then the duty of the police to verify the exact nature of the threat. A real concern we do have is that Tuesday's arrests should be seen in the wider context of events in this country since 9/11. Many of you will recall reading about the arrests in November 2002 of six men for allegedly plotting a cyanide gas attack on the London Underground. Do you, however, remember reading anything further about that case, such as a trial hearing or any convictions being secured for that dastardly plot? No, neither can I. Similarly, you will recall the high-profile police raid on the Finsbury Park mosque in January 2003 involving some 150 police officers. Seven men were arrested at that time. All, except for one man - who was charged with immigration offences - were later released. There are a number of other examples of incidents that have received prominent media attention only for the individuals to be subsequently released without any charges brought against them. The impact of such ordeals on the persons concerned and their families is usually crushing. Indeed, according to Home Office figures, between 9/11 and December 31st 2003, 537 people were arrested under anti-terror legislation, with 94 of them being charged with terrorist-related offences; 263 people were released without charge and only 6 convictions had actually been secured. The British Muslim community has faced a severe backlash following the Madrid bombings. Just last week, in Plumstead, South East London, over 40 graves were desecrated in a Muslim cemetery. In Ilford, a Christian fanatic abducted a Muslim schoolgirl and with a razor blade slashed crosses on her hand, upper arms and side, while demanding that she recite the Trinity during an hour-long ordeal. So we would urge caution from all concerned in the wake of Tuesday's worrying development. We have been told in recent weeks by the Prime Minister Tony Blair, the Home Secretary David Blunkett and the Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir John Stevens that our country is facing an unprecedented terror threat. Who can now doubt them? All of us, Muslims and non-Muslims, need to work in a united manner to defeat it. Inayat Bunglawala Secretary, Media Committee, The Muslim Council of Britain

Sikh_fauge, where are you studying?

I took this article from the MCB website: http://www.mcb.org.uk/presstext.php?ann_id=76 Appalling Desecration of Muslim Graves in Plumstead On the morning of Thursday 18th March, at least 40 Muslim graves were found to have been desecrated at Charlton cemetery in Plumstead, South East London. This act of vandalism is being treated as a faith hate crime by the Metropolitan Police. Detective Inspector Karl Amos of the Greenwich Community Safety Unit said: "We utterly deplore the sentiments behind this crime as well as the crime itself and are seeking to reassure the faith leaders in our community that this sort of crime will not be tolerated." Resentment towards Muslims in the UK has once again increased after the Madrid bombings. The MCB is in regular contact with the Metropolitan Police over this issue. "We are urging the Metropolitan Police to investigate this matter thoroughly and find the perpetrators so that such appalling incidents and Islamophobic crimes do not recur. This is vital to prevent community relations deteriorating further," said Mr Iqbal Sacranie, Secretary-General of the Muslim Council of Britain. The MCB welcomes the statement of support today from the Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, pledging to work with London’s Muslims to combat Islamophobia. At the same time, the MCB urges the media and senior government officials to show greater responsibility in their use of language when talking about terrorism. The association of Islam with terror is unacceptable and is clearly contributing towards a backlash against Muslim communities. For further information please contact tel: 07860 375 725 or 07956 353 738 For further information please contact the MCB: The Muslim Council of Britain Boardman House 64 Broadway Stratford London E15 1NT Tel: 020 8432 0585/6 Fax: 020 8432 0587 admin@mcb.org.uk

Without a doubt, this is what I believe you are trying to do. Bakri's views are those of a very small minority of Muslims. Why don't you reproduce here the Muslim Council of Great Britain's declaration that all UK-based Muslims should report any terrorist-related activities they hear about to the authorities?

Just speculating, but perhaps you should consider whether your own inability to love someone is the real cause for why you have become a hate-filled anti-Semite intent on whipping up anti-Muslim sentiment? None of my business of course - just trying to help. By announcing that you are willing to enter into a contract with a member of the human race for sex, you have shown that you have no respect for the sanctity of the human body. God knows what you do with your own.

A very typical student perspective, and the "correct" answer providing just enough detail and analysis to pass the exam. However, if you step outside this box you may conclude (as I do) that Dicey's "balance of powers" principle does not hold true. In reality, all power is concentrated in the executive. The judiciary may only intervene in certain very limited circumstances (ultra vires/irrational/unreasonable). Taking this reality on board, you can see that the "problem" of the position of the Lord Chancellor is merely a red herring on a wool sack eating ermine. I disagree with your reason for the UK not having a written constitution - it was never planned. All of the reasons were cooked up by Whiggish commentators trying to maintain the status quo and the position of the middle classes by inferring some kind of stability or certainty, without having the temerity to demand a written Constitution a la USA. The so-called "unwritten constitution" is just a set of customs and traditions that came about when people had had enough of the stupidity of kings, with a few attempts at written codes on the way (Magna Carta, Bill of Rights, Treaty of Rome, Maastricht, ECHR, etc). On Lalleshvari's point about the Iranians, I concur absolutely. From the perspective of personal experience, I wish to add that apart from being very intelligent and well-educated, in my assessment the Iranians are above all a people with a very fine national character. I have spoken to several knowledgable Iranians about Iran and the rest of the world. From my interactions with them, my assessment has been that they are sane and rational and trustworthy. And their knowledge extends to matters of religion (including Sikhism). Oh, and I've yet to meet even one Iranian Islamist, even though the Iranians are nominally Muslims. The Iranians are not extremists or any kind of threat. What's more, they are very close to (or the same as in many instances) the northern Indian people genetically.

My ability to protest is strictly irrelevant. Plus my protest in ineffective, when public opinion is being manipulated by the powers that be, who control the media and severely curtail the means I am allowed to use to express my dissatisfaction. Freedom means different things to different people. Your type of "freedom" may well be unpalatable to me, especially if it means something like having the freedom to use violent force to annex someone else's land, quoting a 3000 year old land transfer document in Hebrew as justification for doing so. Yes. You are referred to Lalleshvari's post about this. Until 9/11, the British government and the media held a STRONG line that Iran was by far the most progressive and liberal of the Arab countries, and that Khatami's administration was very forward-looking and to be encouraged. The position of Iranian women probably equates with women of northern India. Why would they do that? Speculation. Also, I believe that this statement shows a prejudiced and irrational distrust of Muslims that has reached the level of hatred. They may well believe that, if they believe everything they see on TV and read in the papers. After all, these are the sources we obtain news from. The question is, is their belief rational? Wrong. Dismantling leads to 1947-type situations. Devolution on the pattern of the UK may be the way forward. And it will only come about if India feels safe (i.e. it makes PEACE with Pakistan and is not threatened by internal violent insurgencies). So you're saying that if the BBC takes a side (the Israeli side to be specific), and complies with Israeli demands to call the PLO "terrorists", then it will NOT any longer be "blatantly biased"? It does'nt make sense. Seems like you and other Islamophobes are trying to bully the BBC to present the Israeli side. All the BBC has to do is report the news accurately (i.e. "today the Israelis killed [x number of] Palestinians). OK, tell me which TV channel to watch then, since according to you the BBC (with several UK mainland channels) is biased and gives inaccurate coverage. Islam is a major world religion, not a cult. That would be an incredibly bigoted and short-sighted thing to do. It's a matter of the interpretation of the Koran, not the words themselves. Those who know the real (esoteric) meaning of the verses you are referring to are secretive. It seems to be more a case of you wanting to shove Coke and McD down "cultists'" throats, and taking away their culture and religion whether they like it or not. I don't care. I've never placed my right to frequent cholestrol-dealers' premises among my list of "Important Civil Rights Necessary For Freedom To Exist". What are you saying anyway? THERE IS SALAD!!! EAT SALAD!!! Also, Muslim nations have moderated their restrictions on these worthless food and drink products. Nigeria, for instance, manages to accommodate different religious sentiments by having different restrictions and even different constitutional rights operating in different states (i.e. different rights for northern Muslim states than southern Christian states). Seriously, the more important civil right at stake here is "freedom of religion". That means that if a man decides he wants to follow Islam, his right to practice his religion has to be protected from violent people who believe he is a dangerous cult-member. Also, it means that when his religious sentiment is offended by strong intrusions into his consciousness (such as soft porn and Big Macs), he has a right to be shielded from seeing those things if it distresses him. It's not for you to blame him for having eyes to see a beautiful woman, or salivating over having a Big Mac or having a hot dog with a beautiful woman (close, I know). There's a limit to the amount of filth someone can tolerate. You will appreciate that a simple man from the village, who is trying to be a Muslim, will need to be eased into things he is not yet ready to deal with. Throwing people into the deep end without a life jacket will result in about 1 in 10 learning to swim instantly (and surviving) and the rest drowning to death. Every nation-state defines itself, its structure and processes by a constitution, whether written or unwritten. Pakistan is an example of a Muslim country with a written Constitution that merges Islamic rights perfectly with some secular Western rights too. That point is only relevant if you hold the arguable belief that democracy is the only valid form of government. Furthermore, there are many different definitions of democracy. My interpretation of a "democracy" may differ from yours. Some East European definitions of democracy are simply fascism (the traditional fascism - the one that's the real troublemaker). Anyway, what's so good about democracy at its most basic level? Is'nt it just giving voice and legitimacy to the aims and aspirations (prejudices and pettiness) of the mob (i.e. the greater number)? What about the Koranic principle (which is true) that the majority of people are very foolish? Do you want to make temporal power a "reward" bestowed by the mob on their favourite orator? Making an actor the king? Or make the "greater good for the greater number" your mantra as you boil religionists alive? I do not believe your account of dissidents being shredded alive. I have not seen the evidence. It's mere hearsay, which you have been spoon-fed by your locality's little Goebbels. You are quite right to say that there are no human rights. There is only power. The civil rights of the Western world are simply a propaganda tool. They were used initially in the propaganda war against socialism, and now they are being used in the propaganda war against Islam. If there are any human rights in America, what about the human rights of the prisoners being held in Guantanamo Bay? Or who-knows-where else in Britain and America? What about emergency powers legislation in Britain AND the States that strips from citizens even their most basic rights of habeas corpus? Or having access to a lawyer? Or a public trial? What about the N. Ireland law stating that it is an offence to be a terrorist, and that any person whom a police constable testifies is a terrorist (without giving any reason for his belief) will suffice as evidence to convict a person of being a terrorist? I don't believe it. Where is this proof? All there is to the Western world is wealth built up through invasion, plunder and slavery. Also, wealth that remains in the hands of the elite 10% always. Hold on a minute. Have you forgotten that Bin Laden is basically a CIA man who has gone renegade? Or how Saddam was built up and supported by the US and the UK (who sold him the alleged weapons of mass destruction) in order to use him against Ayatollah Komeini of Iran? Why did they do it? Because of irrational fear, a desire to interfere and cause trouble (sow the seed of division among Arabs). To restore themselves at the head of the new British Empire (the States being Britain's golden child). Ultimately, to steal the oil. Most of the world are very much aware of Bush's dominance, and his desire to crush all resistance to building his American Reich. Plus, the UK population is mostly against the war in Iraq (both the start and the continuation). Also, they see the war on terror for what it really is: the war on Islam, part 5. The UK is not a true democracy. The West Lothian Question needs to be resolved once and for all. Devolution is necessary for N. Ireland, Scotland and Wales. Proportional representation needs to be put in place, so that a few people in one constituency can no longer have the same clout as many people in another constituency. Need a 2nd chamber elected directly by the people (not the govt. of the day). Need to abolish Royal Assent. Need to fully legalise cannabis. I would ask you kindly to stop using the term "Islamofascists". Islam is a doctrine, based on a religion. Fascism is a doctrine, based on a political dogma. They are not the same. What country are you in? Please don't misquote me or imply that I have said things that I have not. I have never said that I supported Saddam Hussein's regime. I have only stated the truth: the US and the UK supported Saddam Hussein. The truth is that ff I was in government, I would not have supplied money and munitions to a brutal dictator, or have turned a blind eye to his human rights abuses. I would have tackled his abuses by dialogue and discussion, and offered rewards for reform. Not by ignoring them until the cancer had become too far advanced to deal with using herbs.

Nah girls. It means you want "someone" with some specific qualities. Does'nt matter WHO that person is, it's just SOMEONE who has the qualities that you want in your partner. You're not interested in taking a partner on the basis of who they are, for what they are. For all of their eccentricities, faults, habits and whatever else makes them a unique individual. Kind of like you're looking for a butler who is prepared to do overtime at unholy hours with you. It's not love. Just a convenient financial and heredity arrangement for people who don't love themselves, and so are incapable of loving anyone else.

http://www.greenparty.org.uk/ A reassuring pool of sanity. Something to discuss over some tea...??

JTSingh, I believe sincerely that the Green Party is the only political party that is capable of doing some good right now. Bush and Blair's islamophobia is a deep-seated throwback to the days of the Crusades, and the pact with Napoleon as the Knights of Malta were expelled from Malta. Without a doubt, the real force behind the scenes is the Catholic Church, which has presented us with a drama of shadows to keep us amused, as a sort of smoke cloud to obscure their real intentions. Their real intentions are simply to "unite" the world UNDER them. No safeguards. No balance. There is no Islamophobia on the part of the people at the controls. Islam simply has to be defeated in order to impose Western values and WESTERN RULE in the Arab world.

For me it's a green day everyday thing (seriously - no kidding). I throw my support enthusiastically behind this party (a la Lalleshvari), if SikhAwareness members are interested. Awaiting your PM.

Lalleshvari you're spot on. Jamuka, I'm sorry I won't comment on Dr Kelly. The Islamofascist label you have applied to Bush-Blair's enemies is not appropriate. Bush and Blair have simply gone on the offensive against the Islamic world, with the object of world dominion at the forefront of their minds. They will not stop at Afghanistan and Iraq. They will put pressure on Iran to "submit", and if Iran refuses it will be bombed into oblivion and McDonald's put in its place. Then they will go for Pakistan, then India, etc. You've stated that I will be "amazed" at how popular Blair is with Asians outside the UK. Which Asians? The Pathans? Iraqis (OK, you may say Middle East but their genes are close enough)? Pakistanis? Chinese? If you're referring to the sickly false pretense at obsequiousness that Blair spews out for Vajpayee and extremist Hindu cronies, think carefully about that. The only way that the BJP can stick to power is to provoke and inflame anti-Muslim sentiment all over the world. Blair realises this, and so he guarantees his support in any measure India takes against domestic separatists (i.e. Kashmir, Assam, Punjab, etc). Go to fco.gov.uk and find how Vajpayee's "perfect Hindi" is "much admired" by his "counterpart" Blair, and how there is "mutual admiration" between the 2 men. The reference to "perfect Hindi" is not accidental. You mention the BBC. Go to news.bbc.co.uk and look at their report about Bush's speech yesterday about Israel-Palestine. Now get a transcript of the speech. You will see that the BBC is FIERCELY pro-Blair when it comes to the propaganda war against Islam. This is because in the UK we do not have democracy, and the BBC is a tax-collecting government agency promoting a government agenda within strict limits. The so-called "war on terror" is a war against Islam, led by Christianofascists. If Islam falls and the Arab governments are replaced by the Bush-Blair alliance with puppet regimes controlled from Washington, what is now the war on Islam will become the war on all Eastern religions. Why? Eastern religions underpin the Eastern character of Eastern countries. Destroy the Eastern character and replace with McDonald's (langar of the slobbery mensch) and Coke (suitable only for removing limescale from your kitchen sink), and you can replace their culture and value system with your own. Then replace their Constitution with one patterned after the Western world - a lot of very lofty but totally ignored "human" or civil rights. Install "democracy" (forbidding undesirables such as Islamists from taking part). Prepare for New World Order. Making you King of the Whole Wide World!!! Won't Mummy be proud? No... Mother Earth will reject the New World Order, because when variation proliferates, Darwinian selection ensures that only the most suitable system is allowed to survive into the future. Hence, as with all Empires, this new one will crumble and be replaced with comparative chaos. The Oedipus Complex prevents Bush and Blair from understanding this. I do not have anything but criticism for Bush and Blair, who wish to enslave the entire world, and to put themselves at the head of a brutal and inhumane empire, "for the greater good". I damn all things done for my protection. I have God for my protection and that's enough for me. I don't want Blair to use the excuse that he is protecting me as he maims and kills tens of thousands of people all over the world. I want them to live as I do: in peace, with enough food to eat and with their basic needs met. JTSingh, you wanted to know who to vote for. Without a doubt, you must vote with your conscience and that means vote GREEN.

Lalleshvari, would you mind explaining the gandharva rite please? I can't recall where I read it, but I believe that it's quite a violent marriage rite, involving the groom attacking the household of his bride, beating up or killing her male family members and snatching her away by force. Also, I seem to remember something about there being a legend of an expert pressure-point fighter, who abducted a girl using the gandharva process, and moved her around by prodding her expertly.