Do You Agree With This Statement

[kdsingh80]

So basically you are saying two possibilities exist. Most of us (who haven't buried their heads in the sand), have a good idea of how the more kuttarh musalmaan would like to deal with us if they ever were in power. I live in a predominantly sullah area, I don't doubt that some would like to finish what their forefathers tried to do. If there is a dimwitted apni kuri wondering around, consider her fair game. Our history gives us a glimpse of what we can possibly expect if they ever were ever unchecked. But be under no allusion. others such as Jews, Shias etc. would also get it. The snidy label for us these days is 'Guru wallay' btw. The other so called 'liberal' alternative seems to involve a slower death over generations. If you live in London you can see 'Sikhs' in the advance stages of assimilation already. They have absolutely no physical or emotional connection to their language, culture or religion. This is how white man want it.

The strange thing is Sikhs seemed to have a better record of surviving and fighting the direct brutal type assaults (see 1700s), than the more surreptitious type of attack. For me this boils down to us being pretty unsophisticated in terms of grasping and thwarting insidious plans for us. We always seem to end up in the middle of bloodthirsty mobs before we realise there is a serious issue. This doesn't seem to be changing/

I think it is plain stupidity that makes some of you people seem to expect sulley to mold themselves to democracy and liberal values when they have a complete system that they should be following, which has clearly defined its boundaries visa vi the west. You must understand that the kuttarh sees surrender to western values as a betrayal to God. Besides, it is arse licky in the sense of independence, even if you take faith out of it. I have had goray blatantly telling me that they respect those pathaans for their stout resistence whilst at the same time laughing at Singhs for being their trained attack dogs for so long. In terms of masculinity, we are considered less than those who stoutly resist. Jannat said sullay are on a sinking ship, but I don't think we can be so complacent. If we are honest, they are dealing with the white man quite well. They have formed strong safe pockets in whiteys land. They have become a factor to be considered when making military and political decisions, mainly through the suicide bombing.

These people (sullay) aren't going anywhere, and I think they will get stronger and more emboldened soon because the west seems to be losing its war on sullay.....or terrorism...or whatever they are calling it these days. Plus the current economic conditions makes fighting the war even more riskier than it already is. Who knows, these current battles could be the ones that break the white man's back because of the economic downturn?

In the end, we have to learn to live with sullay. Like all aggressive quoms/panths they usually rely on weakness on the part of their perceived enemies to take them on. Anglos are the same. However, informing Sikhs of how they turned themselves into a strong force that deterred targeting from sullay during the 1700s seems like howling at the moon today. But this fear of sullay that is exhibited by the FordCapris of the world will only cause us more grief. Trust me, sulleh sense that shit like a shark does wounded prey. We need brave independent Singhs now. Not cowards or sycophants. Sullay make us up our game. You have to respect that.

A very good post as usual

Muslims at present have the biggest weapon and that is womb bomb.On the other hand white's as commmunity has the lowest Birth rate.so in Future old whites will become more and more dependent on Muslims For taking care of their oldies

As a sikh I have nothing to fear from muslims now.The reason is If I leave UK conflicts sikhs are not at all in any type of conflict with muslims anywhere.Sikhs hardly have anything to loose.The loser will be in Future are Hindu's,Whites and may be Jews.

[dalsingh101]

As a sikh I have nothing to fear from muslims now.The reason is If I leave UK conflicts sikhs are not at all in any type of conflict with muslims anywhere.Sikhs hardly have anything to loose.The loser will be in Future are Hindu's,Whites and may be Jews.

Higher birthrates and economic reliance on Arabs will alter this place (if it hasn't already). But be under no illusions, there are those that wish us harm amongst the whites and sullay - given no restrictions, they would exercise those desires. This will probably take the form of localised harassment of vulnerable Sikhs. This stuff is going on already actually.

The paradox is that as Sikhs get more integrated and financially successful here, they also get softer as a community and become more vulnerable to attacks.

The attitude and actions of the police force will be paramount to what happens. I know in the 70s and 80s the many policemen were openly supportive of the NF (forerunners to BNP) and although we do have a better ethnic representation in the force today, it is still pretty much a racist organisation, albeit on a less open scale than previously. But there are closet BNP supporters deeply entrenched in the force and legislation prevents them from being openly fascist like they could be before. So you can say their racism has become covert and possibly more intense as a result of suppression.

What has changed today is that brown people are now more fragmented/disunited than before and this is along religious lines. I would say this process started in the lates 80s/early 90s. So there is no united Asian Front as before. Previously, it would be unthinkable that any Sikh would consider joining forces with the neo-nazis. Truth is that Sikhs and sulleh fought a common white enemy together in the past. Today we have so called Sikhs kissing the arses of the very people who would murder and attack Sikhs (and others) in the past. Some of these fools even want to join them. In the not so distant past, I would say that some Singhs would give the goray a good run for their money and there was some fear/respect of Sikhs from white yobs on a street level. This has all but evaporated now whereas there is a strong fear of sulley. The sullay have cornered many criminal markets and enterprises and have the muscle and courage to dirty their hands if required.

Anyway, watch this and you'll see that what we are facing is not as new as some may think.

Edited December 18, 2009 by dalsingh101

[kdsingh80]

The paradox is that as Sikhs get more integrated and financially successful here, they also get softer as a community and become more vulnerable to attacks.

I think sikhs are quite money minded community.Everywhere we see them becoming Rich and with richness its obvious a community become soft

The attitude and actions of the police force will be paramount to what happens. I know in the 70s and 80s the many policemen were openly supportive of the NF (forerunners to BNP) and although we do have a better ethnic representation in the force today, it is still pretty much a racist organisation, albeit on a less open scale than previously

Police always have soft corner for their community.The only exception is Punjab police who do not hesistate to fire at their own sikh brothers.

What has changed today is that brown people are now more fragmented/disunited than before and this is along religious lines. I would say this process started in the lates 80s/early 90s. So there is no united Asian Front as before

And who is responsible for that? After 1984 sikhs had soft corner for muslims but in UK Muslims have shown their true colors.

Today we have so called Sikhs kissing the arses of the very people who would murder and attack Sikhs (and others) in the past. Some of these fools even want to join them.

May be history repeating itself 1857 sikhs joined Britishers against revolt predominantly a muslim one.

and that was just after 9 years they lost to britishers everything

[dalsingh101]

Some fair points there KDS. Your point about the 'uniqueness' of Punjab Police made me laugh and cry at the same time! It's so true.

And who is responsible for that? After 1984 sikhs had soft corner for muslims but in UK Muslims have shown their true colors.

It's true that sulleh broke with unity on the asian banner. But a significant part of that was rejecting what they saw as Panjabi/Sikh kunjar culture (which was at the time the predominant and most popular of the asian cultures centred around bhangra) for a stricter more conservative Islamcentric way of life. I think that helped them form their own less permissive society in contrast to the generally more permissive Sikh society. With hindsight I think this was quite smart even though many in that community resented the strictness and enforcement at first. Whereas people back then looked on with envy at Sikhs partying and enjoying themselves openly. Today they laugh at such behavior as base and vulgar.

Edited December 18, 2009 by dalsingh101

[kdsingh80]

But a significant part of that was rejecting what they saw as Panjabi/Sikh kunjar culture (which was at the time the predominant and most popular of the asian cultures centred around bhangra) for a stricter more conservative Islamcentric way of life

Could you please tell me what are the relations of Muslims with Hindu Gujarati's ,Tamils and other non white communities? May be they do not like punjabi kunjar culture but I think it should mainly blamed on strict islamic norms where they believe that they should not associate with kafirs

[HSD1]

The 'split' between sikhs and muslims was always going to happen. 'Sikh kanjar culture'? Hell no. Some of them do twist it and say the immorality of some sikhs is why they treat us all like shit, but they were always good at coming up with excuses for being intolerant. The reason for the split is the constant india -v- pakistan conflicts (and guess which country we belong to!). Is that clearer now?

As for all this multiculturalism, all i can say is whatever. Dogs like fordcapri are full of shit. The rest of us including me arent much better. I cant think of a magical solution which will save all the sikhs from the coming storm. But I will ask you, are we as a community in the UK worth saving?

As for 1857, the sikhs wanted revenge on the sepoys who wanted to be part of the neo-Mughal empire and had attacked the sikh state a few years before. The english lost the indian mutiny. Their women were being raped and their children mutilated. Their 'soldiers' were fleeing south and would have jumped on any royal navy ships if the mutiny had spread south. It was us sikhs who turned the tide in that conflict. What choice did our ancestors have? A gora-run hindustan or a musi/hindu neo-mughal empire? Not much of a choice was it?

I'd also like to point out an vaguely amusing yet disheartening parallel of today and our past. In the 1920s and 1930s many sikhs in india feared the muslim population explosion which was swamping the punjab. Some hindus said that in a hundred years there would be more muslims on the subcontinent than non-muslims. The sikhs were so scarred that they threw their weight behind the hindus. We lost west punjab. We went through partition. Then delhi eroded our freedoms, before the hindus got us in the 80s. Now we in the UK are in a similar position and we are walking into the same trap. Do muslims affect multiculturalism? Of course they do, especially with larger numbers. But so do whites. I'll be honest whites and muslims are pretty much the same in my opinion. If it wasnt for the different colours and habits, it would be really hard to differentiate them. Do you honestly think we will live in peace after the muslims have been kicked out? Ask fordcapri. His response will be along the lines that his family owns a lot of land in india so it doesnt really matter to him as he can just piss off there. Which is a complete arseface way of thinking, wouldnt you agree? So what's it to be? Grow up, stop acting like monkeys on high horses and face the reality? Or carry on burying your head in the sand and wiggling your ass at the world? Because at the moment an awful lot of people are talking out of their rear ends.

[fordcapri]

The most dangerous thing bout multicutraisim is mixed marriage which leads to the ultimate no no - mixed breeding.

This leads to loss of identity and heritage.

I have no problems with a multi cultral society, but dont agree with mixed marriages.

[HSD1]

The most dangerous thing bout multicutraisim is mixed marriage which leads to the ultimate no no - mixed breeding.

This leads to loss of identity and heritage.

I have no problems with a multi cultral society, but dont agree with mixed marriages.

WTF is identity and heritage? Morris dancing and calling one self a sikh? Identity and heritage are lost all the time. We lost an awful lot of heritage when the british looted the punjab after the anglo sikh wars. It was also the beginning of the end of our seperate identity. Where does shagging and inter marriage come into all of that? Wasnt it the british who came up with the idea of mulattos and anglo-indians to create a sub-class to control the wogs? Now the tables are turned with black and brown men taking their pick of their apple bottomed women, and they dont like it. I cant believe how much you sound like your white mates. People like you and them are enough to make me interested in white women, maybe enough to marry one and have a mountain of kids. Does that scare you? Or are you just annoyed you cant get a woman, which would explain the anger you had on sikh sangat towards them. BTW how's that Spy-On-Your-Daughter private detective agency going on?

[dalsingh101]

I guess once the white threat had diminished 'brownies' were destined to turn on each other. Thing is, what people are equating as a sullah threat is in truth more of a Stani threat from what I see. Equating them as the same as say Iraqis or Iranians is bull. They are very different quoms, even if they are sullay.

HSD I disagree that this is simply down to an Indy-Pak narrative. This is as much about cultural practices as nations. Fundos back in the days really used to hate the way Panjabi culture would have droves of sullay drinking and dancing at bhangra gigs. When they clamped down they did it to their kurian first. Within no time at all, no sullian would turn up at these gigs but the guys would turn up for what I imagine were the equivalent of brown 'up for it' Essex girl types. That's when upneeans reputation went down the twalet. Sullian who would turn up would get publically slapped about. The people who preached and turned the Stanis in my part of London all came from Up north or the Midlands. I know now some of them were panthers from B'ham on the run. Some of them were the original staunch, all beard, no mouchaan types. lol

As for all this multiculturalism, all i can say is whatever. Dogs like fordcapri are full of shit. The rest of us including me arent much better. I cant think of a magical solution which will save all the sikhs from the coming storm. But I will ask you, are we as a community in the UK worth saving?

Look as bad as we are, all of us can't just walk to our demise with no resistance if things got testy. Besides it may just be a rough phase that comes and goes in cycles and not armageddon! There is no magic solution and the way we are rapidly going from blue to white collars plays its part. Upnay in general just don't see any worth in having a tukra fauj of streetwise gubroos anymore.

Thing is, when things are rock bottom, that is when people start to think sometimes. Communities in much worse positions than us have come up i.e. Jews. Keep chardhi kala. FordCapri, veecharee is probably just scared tuttiless, I imagine there are lots like him hidden under the rocks.

[dalsingh101]

The most dangerous thing bout multicutraisim is mixed marriage which leads to the ultimate no no - mixed breeding.

This leads to loss of identity and heritage.

I have no problems with a multi cultral society, but dont agree with mixed marriages.

I tell you straight. I have no problems with mixed marriages as long as the kids are brought up Sikh. I think the genetic mixture could actually be good. You are nuts Ford Cortina! Only a few days ago you were cussing the Grewal family fotr being inbred, now you are promoting inbreeding! You seem confused. Thing with modern Sikhs is that they have really poor experience with integrating others into the panth. We have to learn this soon or stand and watch others assimilate us into their societies in droves. I have a nephew who is half Jewish by descent. But he is Sikh by faith. He has adopted the identity off his own back. So it can be done. You just have to make sure the kids feel maan of being a part of the panth, that's all. But if you're acting like a scared giddarh, how will they do this? Most of how they behave is learned from observing you - remember that! In my view Sikhi is strongest as an belief system, not a racial category.

This is about belief - not DNA! Besides who promotes inter-racial relationships more than Anglos anyway. Open your eyes!

[fordcapri]

BTW how's that Spy-On-Your-Daughter private detective agency going on?

What started of as a company looking in to fraud, bogus sickness claims, general surveillance, turned in to people wanting to no what there daughters husband/wives get up to.

It’s not my company by the way.

..........”south Asians” are the biggest customers at times especially with daughters..............

[fordcapri]

I tell you straight. I have no problems with mixed marriages as long as the kids are brought up Sikh. I think the genetic mixture could actually be good. You are nuts Ford Cortina! Only a few days ago you were cussing the Grewal family fotr being inbred, now you are promoting inbreeding! You seem confused. Thing with modern Sikhs is that they have really poor experience with integrating others into the panth. We have to learn this soon or stand and watch others assimilate us into their societies in droves. I have a nephew who is half Jewish by descent. But he is Sikh by faith. He has adopted the identity off his own back. So it can be done. You just have to make sure the kids feel maan of being a part of the panth, that's all. But if you're acting like a scared giddarh, how will they do this? Most of how they behave is learned from observing you - remember that! In my view Sikhi is strongest as an belief system, not a racial category.

This is about belief - not DNA! Besides who promotes inter-racial relationships more than Anglos anyway. Open your eyes!

Gene pool can be spread enough with out marrying outsiders.

That lot across the border are a prime example of getting it all wrong.!!!!!!!!!!!

[dalsingh101]

Gene pool can be spread enough with out marrying outsiders.

That lot across the border are a prime example of getting it all wrong.!!!!!!!!!!!

They must be getting somethings right. They seem to have got everyone on a backfoot. What's your big masterplan? Crawl up whitey's arse? Besides haven't you heard? Apparently the BNP and EDL are trying to get a truce with sullay. If this is true, who will you try and hide behind next?

[HSD1]

If whitey and musi come to a truce, guess who ends up at the bottom of the pile? Yep, as usual it will be the sikhs.

[dalsingh101]

If whitey and musi come to a truce, guess who ends up at the bottom of the pile? Yep, as usual it will be the sikhs.

Just fly the flag the best you can. We will answer to God and our Gurus.

Oye!!! Keep your spirits up!!

[Dharma]

Also as I said above

birth rate of muslims is quite high so other religions will always feel threatened with them and their communal feelings will arise

Maybe so, but you must bear in mind that the Muslim birth rate thing is used by white racial groups like the BNP/EDL to stir people up. And a few large Muslim families isn't really a major thing when you consider that white people have totally dominated the land of the native Red Indian without any regard for them.

Also, "Muslim" effectively means brown people. You won't hear about a white guy with a beard & skullcap or a white woman in hijab being seriously attacked. It's brown people and Sikhs who get it worst.

Edited December 21, 2009 by Dharma

[kdsingh80]

Maybe so, but you must bear in mind that the Muslim birth rate thing is used by white racial groups like the BNP/EDL to stir people up. And a few large Muslim families isn't really a major thing when you consider that white people have totally dominated the land of the native Red Indian without any regard for them.

Also, "Muslim" effectively means brown people. You won't hear about a white guy with a beard & skullcap or a white woman in hijab being seriously attacked. It's brown people and Sikhs who get it worst.

Muslim population in Indian subcontinent in 1881 was 19.93% something Today it is 34% .Can we say it is white man's propaganda?

Higher Birth rate of Muslims is reality and That's why it is used by Their opponents Group Like BNP in UK and RSS in India.Also if you read Articles of some social scientists then they clearly say that White people's Birth rate is seriously low,so it is obvious that they get worried about it.

And if some misguided people are using Muslims For entire brown people then they are fools.I don't know

from where the question white racism comes here.It is bad and rejected by majority of white's but now it is the turn of muslims to show their liberal attituide inn all countries.but instead of that they are moving more and more towards shariat

[tonyhp32]

EDL and BNP looking for a truce! That would be political suicide for the BNP and as for the EDL they might as well go back to fighting between themselves. Muslims are the best recruitment sargeants for the far right parties both in the UK and in Europe. Take away the Muslim threat and the BNP would revert back to getting the votes of one man and his dog! Look at the minaret ban in Switzerland, the left wing media tried its best to portray a vote for the ban as a racist vote, but a majority of Swiss disregared this and voted for the ban.

As for some posters views that Muslims have been successful in controlling their communities, the only success they have is that they have managed to keep the problems within their communities and out of the media whereas Sikhs will go on forums and post any half truths and rumours about what is happening in Sikh communities.

I was looking at some interesting data from the Canadian Census which unfortunately is not collected for the UK census. It shows the numbers of inter-religious marriages.

It shows the number of marriages between couples of different religions between 1981 and 2001. For Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims in 1981 due to the communities being small the interreligious marriage rate was more than in 2001. But it the percentage rate which is important. Muslims are more likely of the the three communities to marry out. In 1981 13% of Muslim couples were mixed whereas 11% of Hindus and only 4% of Sikhs were in an interreligious marriage. This decreased to 9% of Muslims, 9% of Hindus and 3% of Sikhs in 2001. For women it was 6% for Muslims, 8% for Hindus and 3% for Sikhs. Sikhs were the least likely to marry out of their coummunity with 96.9% married to a fellow Sikh, for Hindus it was 91.2% and for Muslims it was 91.4%.

[kdsingh80]

It shows the number of marriages between couples of different religions between 1981 and 2001. For Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims in 1981 due to the communities being small the interreligious marriage rate was more than in 2001. But it the percentage rate which is important. Muslims are more likely of the the three communities to marry out. In 1981 13% of Muslim couples were mixed whereas 11% of Hindus and only 4% of Sikhs were in an interreligious marriage. This decreased to 9% of Muslims, 9% of Hindus and 3% of Sikhs in 2001. For women it was 6% for Muslims, 8% for Hindus and 3% for Sikhs. Sikhs were the least likely to marry out of their coummunity with 96.9% married to a fellow Sikh, for Hindus it was 91.2% and for Muslims it was 91.4%.

Its good that in Canada sikhs particulary women are least marrying outside Religion.but with Canadian census you cannot say that it is true for the entire sikh community.I think the situation is worse in Urban Indian cities

[dalsingh101]

KDS

I personally believe that the predictions of a rapid growth in the Muslim population is correct. Through a higher birthrate and conversions I believe most of us will see changes wuithin our own lifetimes. Totally shitting yourself about this isn't going to help anyone but sadly this is EXACTLY what BNP, EDL, RSS and FordCapri types do. This is a reality that we have to face bravely.

For Tony

EDL and BNP looking for a truce! That would be political suicide for the BNP and as for the EDL they might as well go back to fighting between themselves. Muslims are the best recruitment sargeants for the far right parties both in the UK and in Europe. Take away the Muslim threat and the BNP would revert back to getting the votes of one man and his dog!

You're not picking up on the nuances. Fact is a (on the surface) softening on Muslims can actually help them increase their vote as many who are avoiding voting for them because they are afraid of being labelled a racist/Islamophobe, may well switch. I personally believe the Islam thing is a red herring anyway. They hate nonwhite immigrants full stop. Sikhs probably slightly less because we are useful loyal lackeys.

I've posted this before but watch this to get a true idea of what Mr. Griffin would like to happen:

Look at the minaret ban in Switzerland, the left wing media tried its best to portray a vote for the ban as a racist vote, but a majority of Swiss disregared this and voted for the ban.

That is what they are aiming for - mass popularity and making discrimination an acceptable norm. Then you will see what they are really like.

As for some posters views that Muslims have been successful in controlling their communities, the only success they have is that they have managed to keep the problems within their communities and out of the media whereas Sikhs will go on forums and post any half truths and rumours about what is happening in Sikh communities.

Look if you are talking about me, say it directly. No need to skirt around. Muslims or at least P'stanis HAVE been more successful in reigning in their kurian from slutty behaviour than apnay. I don't go out much nowerdays, but when I did, EVERY time you would see openly slutty apneean. I'm not disputing that they have issues, when I worked as teacher I saw this. But I still hold to the fact that our lot generally have less pride and adherence to their identity than them. You can just go to the many local mosques in East London that offer Islamic educational classes and see how they are packed out with youths and compare that to what most of our youth are doing. Yes, everyone is having issues, but they are doing a better job of addressing it than we are. I mean even the most slackest sullah generally wouldn't slag off his dharam and most of their kurian at least have some discretion or shame when they do kartootan. Compare that to apnay.

I was looking at some interesting data from the Canadian Census which unfortunately is not collected for the UK census. It shows the numbers of inter-religious marriages.

Look at the data. It shows Muslims marrying out and converting I imagine. In anycase Canada is totally different to the UK and they do not have the government drive to encourage inter-racial, inter-religious couples we have here. They are more like the states in that respect. Plus in Canada we seem to have the opposite situation to the UK at the moment. I have family there. You know there are quite frequent honour killings by apnay there, usually when a kuri wants to get divorced, they sometimes get shot in the head as guns are freely available. I'm wondering if this works as a deterent? Not that I am condoning it! Plus they seem to stick to their own out their more. The community has clear boundaries unlike here. You can't compare the two.

Anyway, in the UK pretty much all of the Sikhs I have met who have married across race/religion have adopted their partners lifestyle and even if they still claim to be Sikh, most seem indifferent to teaching their children about the faith. In contrast, almost every last sullah and sulli who have done this have converted their partner, this frequently results in white men with big beards and no mouchaan or gorian in a hijab. Big difference.

I only wish I was wrong.

Another important point I would like to make is - why feel anger at what sullay are doing? They are just doing what they need to be strong and grow and grasp power? If we are incapable of doing this ourselves (albeit in a different way) then surely we deserve to disappear, no?

Edited December 21, 2009 by dalsingh101

[Mithar]

Muslim population in Indian subcontinent in 1881 was 19.93% something Today it is 34% .Can we say it is white man's propaganda?

Higher Birth rate of Muslims is reality and That's why it is used by Their opponents Group Like BNP in UK and RSS in India.Also if you read Articles of some social scientists then they clearly say that White people's Birth rate is seriously low,so it is obvious that they get worried about it.

And if some misguided people are using Muslims For entire brown people then they are fools.I don't know

from where the question white racism comes here.It is bad and rejected by majority of white's but now it is the turn of muslims to show their liberal attituide inn all countries.but instead of that they are moving more and more towards shariat

I always think about this. Why do Muslims have such high birth rate than all the other peoples in the world? What could be the reason for this?

[Mithar]

Look if you are talking about me, say it directly. No need to skirt around. Muslims or at least P'stanis HAVE been more successful in reigning in their kurian from slutty behaviour than apnay. I don't go out much nowerdays, but when I did, EVERY time you would see openly slutty apneean. I'm not disputing that they have issues, when I worked as teacher I saw this. But I still hold to the fact that our lot generally have less pride and adherence to their identity than them. You can just go to the many local mosques in East London that offer Islamic educational classes and see how they are packed out with youths and compare that to what most of our youth are doing. Yes, everyone is having issues, but they are doing a better job of addressing it than we are. I mean even the most slackest sullah generally wouldn't slag off his dharam and most of their kurian at least have some discretion or shame when they do kartootan. Compare that to apnay.

I agree with you on this. Our girls seems much more morally loose (“sluttier” as you call it) than Muslim girls. I have relatives from UK. I've noticed that their girls have no shame or discretion when talking to boys, plus they also drink beer and other Sharaabs! Sikh girls in Canada on the other hand will have some shame and discretion when talking to another boy, especially if their relatives are nearby. I think this difference is because the Canadian community is largely new to Canada and still have traditional values while the UK Sikh community arrived in UK way back in the 50s and 60s. But seeing what has happened in the UK I wouldn’t be surprised if our girls in Canada 15 to 20 years from now also will become as westernised.

Sad thing is, our girls in India, the ones in the cities are also very slutty. 90% of them have a BF. That is probably why when alot of Canadian guys go to India for marriage, they marry girls from the villages rather the ones from the cities. The moral fabric of our Qaum is really breaking down. It is really depressing to think about it.

[dalsingh101]

I always think about this. Why do Muslims have such high birth rate than all the other peoples in the world? What could be the reason for this?

The answer is simple and I believe involves a mixture of some of the following:

Conservative attitudes towards contraception and divorce. Polygamy - it just takes a relatively small percentage of the massive sullah community to do this to seriously boost up numbers. Open attitudes to inter-religious/cultural relationships i.e. many sullay have relationships with other girls and get them pregnant, and their family don't bat an eyelid, whereas this would be a scandal for a Sikh man. An active desire to convert. An efficient system to assimilate mixed blood into the faith. Preference for large families as opposed to western preference for 2.4 children. An active desire to grow and compete against other communities, ways of life. Fear and a disposition from within the community to switch allegience for various reasons.

Mithar - Don't feel depressed dude. That wont help anything or anyone. lol

Chardi kala!

Anyway, it goes wrong for them too sometimes. Followers of this harami used to cause havoc when I was at uni, they were at the forefront of targeting dumb apneean. Look at the poetic justice.......Rabh unha nahin........God isn't blind.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1062375/Revealed-Radical-cleric-Bakris-pole-dancer-daughter.html

Edited December 21, 2009 by dalsingh101

[kdsingh80]

I always think about this. Why do Muslims have such high birth rate than all the other peoples in the world? What could be the reason for this?

Mithar ji

If you have some time then please read the following link you will get lot of information

http://www.bharatvani.org/books/imwat/ch5.htm

the only thing I want to quote from above link is this

Kingsley Davis rightly remarks that “in six decades (1881-1941)… at no census have the Muslims failed to improve their percentage and the Hindus failed to lose…” It is due not only to the “proportion of Muslim women married, but those who are married also have a higher fertility.”48 Today every seventh man in the world is a Muslim,49 and in this great rise of Muslim population their high fertility should have contributed its share.

----------------------------------------------------

[dalsingh101]

Mithar ji

If you have some time then please read the following link you will get lot of information

http://www.bharatvani.org/books/imwat/ch5.htm

the only thing I want to quote from above link is this

Kingsley Davis rightly remarks that “in six decades (1881-1941)… at no census have the Muslims failed to improve their percentage and the Hindus failed to lose…” It is due not only to the “proportion of Muslim women married, but those who are married also have a higher fertility.”48 Today every seventh man in the world is a Muslim,49 and in this great rise of Muslim population their high fertility should have contributed its share.

----------------------------------------------------

Less Hindus is no bad thing either.