Khalistan In A Day And Three Steps Here's How (Please Read)

[GtLoc]

You are absolutely wrong! Bhagat Singh & co were not sectarian. Bhagat Singh, few months before his death, wrote an essay claiming he was an atheist. Udham singh gave his name as Ram Mohammad Singh Azad when arrested. Bhagat Singh family was Arya Samaji we all know that (mother name Vidyawati). The trio would have fought the terrorists who were primarily responsible for op Blue star and for killing hundreds (before 1984) of innocent Punjabis.

Liar that essay was many years before even his arrest. He wanted to take amrit before shaheedi, and had become a chela of bhai randir singh.

You guys are Punjabi by name, you did not create Punjab. A trader's allegiance us to his money, you will change locations and names with the winds.

Also Hindu is not the traditional religio of majority of India.

Hindus talk so much today, where were their mouths before? The only warriors you can bring up are jatts and Rajputs who came from foreign lands and practiced ancestor worship.

Not the worship of vishu, brahma, and shiva.

Why do you even come here to talk bad? Punjab is what it is because of Sikhs, and the ancestral tribes of most Sikhs.

You're in the wrong place, there'll be space for you across. Yamuna.

Khalistan Zindabad.

ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਕਾ ਖਾਲਸਾ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਕੀ ਫਤਹਿ | |

Edited February 21, 2014 by GtLoc

[GtLoc]

I cant comment on Udham Singh, but he was definitely a Marxist. He also had religious sentiments. My family personally knows Bhagat Singhs family and are related to them too and he was an atheist and died and atheist and was born into a Arya Samaji family. Regardless, Khalistan is something that tells us to forget about our ethnic roots and I am not OK with that. The idea that our new religion can claim ownership of an ancient land bothers me. Its similar to the USA takeover of America, and Canada etc. I dont know about you guys but I am against colonialism and Khalistan is just like Pakistan-- a fake nation. Makes no sense whatsoever. Might as well try to change our Gurus names too and our Shaheeds names from Sanskrit-origin to Tamil-origin names and try to take away our links to the whole country. I dont know why our people like to think that Punjab is our Jagir or something. Its not.

10th master ordered self rule of Khalsa. He told Singhs to take jagirs in different places, they said we will rule in Punjab first.

Takeover is the natural way of the world. You cry of Usa, Canada. What about scythians taking north india, Arabs taking north africa, scythians taking europe?

ਸ਼ਸ਼ਤਰਾਂ ਕਿ ਅਧੀਨ ਹੈ ਰਾਜ

[tonyhp32]

I cant comment on Udham Singh, but he was definitely a Marxist. He also had religious sentiments. My family personally knows Bhagat Singhs family and are related to them too and he was an atheist and died and atheist and was born into a Arya Samaji family. Regardless, Khalistan is something that tells us to forget about our ethnic roots and I am not OK with that. The idea that our new religion can claim ownership of an ancient land bothers me. Its similar to the USA takeover of America, and Canada etc. I dont know about you guys but I am against colonialism and Khalistan is just like Pakistan-- a fake nation. Makes no sense whatsoever. Might as well try to change our Gurus names too and our Shaheeds names from Sanskrit-origin to Tamil-origin names and try to take away our links to the whole country. I dont know why our people like to think that Punjab is our Jagir or something. Its not.

So while the other communities of pre-partition Punjab have taken there price of the Punjab cake, Muslims having been 56% took 62% of Punjab in 1947 and the Hindus who were 65% of the population of Punjab took their 65% by getting Haryana and HP but it bothers you that Sikhs should not lay claim to the 35% of the old East Punjab which is now roughly the Punjab of today. Your attitude is the same as the Punjabi Hindus, they've had their piece of the cake and now still want a role in Punjab.

I see now you are actually a left wing nutjob who thinks only in terms of class struggle. Your views and your philosophy has never had any takers in Punjab. Your class struggle BS that pits one section of the community against another is as dead as a dodo.

I dont know about you guys but I am against colonialism and Khalistan is just like Pakistan-- a fake nation. Makes no sense whatsoever. Might as well try to change our Gurus names too and our Shaheeds names from Sanskrit-origin to Tamil-origin names and try to take away our links to the whole country. I dont know why our people like to think that Punjab is our Jagir or something. Its not.

The whole idea of Khalistan is about anti-colonialism. The colonialism of the fake nation called India which you actually seem to subscribe to. You really are clutching at straws about the Gurus and Shaheeds names.

Edited February 21, 2014 by tonyhp32

[GtLoc]

At Phb, true I mixed it up with the language essay. O well, the beard and joora say it all.

As for the other things who took Punjab from being jungles to farming? That's who created it.

Go look up r1a or r1b it's common knowledge where they come from.

Hindus were silent slaves before 47 is what I mean. This communal I'm a king attitude didn't exist. What did exist

Is a couple going for 1 rupee in Ghazni market.

Edited February 21, 2014 by GtLoc

[chatanga1]

Some idiots do not understand what they are squandering to achieve their narrow,petty hegemonic goals. Instead of feeling proud of their forefathers for giving us one of world's five classical languages (sanskrit) and so many other things, they mock their heritage for a language whose very name has foreign origins.

your forefathers gave us sanskrit? who exactly did they give it to ?

I see now you are actually a left wing nutjob who thinks only in terms of class struggle.

it was lefties like him, who gave the rich lands of hardworking sikh farmers, to people who had never spilled one drop of sweat for them.

[Jonny101]

Excellent post Jung. My op, cannot fight bigotry (perceived or real) with bigotry.

Some idiots do not understand what they are squandering to achieve their narrow,petty hegemonic goals. Instead of feeling proud of their forefathers for giving us one of world's five classical languages (sanskrit) and so many other things, they mock their heritage for a language whose very name has foreign origins.

Your ancestors the Punjabi Hindus gave us nothing. Rather it is us Sikhs who have given you Sanskrit. The knowledge of Sanskrit was all but lost to the Punjabi Hindu which is why 5 Sikh Nirmalas went to UP to learn the language. It was them who revived and spread the knowledge of Sanskrit to Punjab and gave it to Punjabi Hindus. Sikh scholars such as Giani Ditt Singh, Prof Sahib Singh, Pandit Tara Singh Narotham, Pandit Kartar Singh Dakha's knowledge of Sanskrit was unrivaled in Punjab. Punjabi Hindus were known as illiterate and even called Malech by learned Pandit Hindus from Kashmir and the rest of India. You should thank the Sikhs for teaching you Sanskrit.

Edited February 21, 2014 by Jonny101

[Jonny101]

i am not, unlike narrow-minded (neo Tat Khalsa) like you, monopolise punjab's common heritage. Not only Sikhs, Punjabi/North Indian Muslims also have a claim over Sanskrit.

whether nirmalas 'revived' sanskrit or not, highly debatable. you are giving impression as if Sanskrit was taught in gurdwaras (or dharamsals as they were called earlier). This is true - Hindu,Sikh students used to study together and the syllabus included Hanuman Natak and Dasam Granth like Hindu (I can see some ultras squirming) scriptures

Sikhs are the ONLY ones who proudly lay claim to the non Sikh heritage of Punjab. Sikhs are proud of Muslims like Baba Bulle Shah, Varis Shah, Baba Farid among others while also being proud of Hindus like Raja Porus, GorakhNath, Pooran Bhagat, Shiv Kumar Batalvi. Sikhs are proud of their language and regard all of Punjab theirs. The other two communities do not do this. You yourself said in your previous post wrote:

"Instead of feeling proud of their forefathers for giving us one of world's five classical languages (sanskrit) and so many other things, they mock their heritage for a language whose very name has foreign origins."

This type of mentality is extremely unpatriotic of their own state and language. You do not even regard Punjabi as your mother tongue and say it has foreign origins. No other Hindu ethnicity in any other part of India shows this much contempt for their own language and state.

[Jonny101]

i am not, unlike narrow-minded (neo Tat Khalsa) like you, monopolise punjab's common heritage. Not only Sikhs, Punjabi/North Indian Muslims also have a claim over Sanskrit.

whether nirmalas 'revived' sanskrit or not, highly debatable. you are giving impression as if Sanskrit was taught in gurdwaras (or dharamsals as they were called earlier). This is true - Hindu,Sikh students used to study together and the syllabus included Hanuman Natak and Dasam Granth like Hindu (I can see some ultras squirming) scriptures

If Sanskrit was common place in Punjab then what was the need of those 5 Nirmala Sikhs to go to UP to learn Sanskrit and revive it by teaching it to others? I myself am not against Sanskrit. I think Punjabis on both sides of the border should discard the Bhaya languages of Hindi and Urdu and in their place learn classical languages like Sanskrit and Farsi as a secondary language while giving Punjabi it's rightful place as the state language. Linguistically Punjabi language can become a bridge between Sanskrit and Farsi much like Guru Gobind Singh Jee has shown in his Bani where words of the two classical languages are merged together to form in new word. Similarly the Sikh religion can also serve as a bridge between the Hindus and Muslims both of whom should forget their differences and unite by embracing Sikhi as they should have done long ago. That is the only way to Indo Pak unity.

Edited February 21, 2014 by Jonny101

[JungChamkaur]

I cant believe you guys (Sher and others) are fighting each by attacking each other's religious communities... first of all GTLOC... I cant believe no one argued with you when you said that "takeover is natural" and saw no problem with USA and the Europeans colonizing the Americas.... wow.. im speechless. Thats the stupidest shit I ever heard in my life. With that stupid logic the Govt of India might as well justify trying to takeover Harmandir Sahib.... WTF... why is everyone here so silent about his stupid argument? And Sher, your not a good representation of an objective Hindu... I dont know why everyone here attacks the Hindu community because of this guy... Your not attacking each other personally but using prejudice to attack each other personally since no one knows each other on a personal level. When Sher says stupid things dont attack his community, make him aware of his illogical claims and arguments without attacking his community. That way we dont look just as stupid as him to the whole world...... your not setting good examples of Sikhs to people that surf the internet trying to discover Sikhi. First of all, I dont think being a Sikh is uncompatible with being Indian... India doesnt belong to Hindus only.... India is India... Sikhs are organic, we are not an imported people. We are from this land, we have descended from the people of the era of the Pandavas just as much as Hindus or Indian Muslims. The only thing is that Guru Maharaj took avtar to bring noor to the degradation of India's dharm. Thats what we believe... Hindus or anyone dont have to agree. Thats our difference.... theres no need to fight over it. We believe in all the Avtars too, but for us Pehli Patshahi is Rab Swaroop.

[JungChamkaur]

Your ideas about Sikhi are contrary to our views.. for us, Sikhi is aad sach. We believe the idea of "Hindus" came out of Sikhi. We believe Sikhi is Satyug Dharm. We believe that the layman definition of "Hinduism" is actually a degraded form of Satyugi Sikhi principles. Biologically, most Sikhs come from these types of Hindus that were living life and interpreting Sat in a manner different to what we believe is Aad Sach, hence the arrival of Pehli Patshahi. I am sure everyone here has already explained this to you in an unpleasing manner. However, the truth is out there and you consistently make points that attempt to overlook, whether deliberately or negligibly I dont know, and negate OUR beliefs.

[JungChamkaur]

Look Sher, if a Christian doesnt believe in our Gurus, it doesnt mean their going to hell or being reborn as an ant or something, or that I think their going to hell. In the end its the persons character and karma that determines their souls future. I am just saying that I think that the Gurus re-established the truth on Earth. This doesnt mean I hate people or dont respect their beliefs and freedom to believe what they want. I do get really angry and worried about Deras but I am unaware as to the proper way of dealing with the perceived problem. I think the best way is via "passive revolution" (defined as per Gramscian theory), not through violence or coercion. I think everyone has the right, within certain limits, to put forth their opinion and debate on it. However, this does not mean that I have the right to slander people. I have the right to respectfully question, and hold beliefs but not the right to denigrate. Me saying that Sikhi is aad sach isnt denigrating Hinduism. I love hinduism just as much as I love sufism. I think Gurbani shows us that there are pure examples in all religions such as Bhagat Dhanna Jatt Ji and Baba Faridji. And like I said, we believe in Avtars but we believe that Gurus are Rab themselves. I am not disrespecting Hinduism at all by saying that I believe in the Guru's bani... Yes Hinduism and Sikhism are Indian religions and are very closely related but there distinction is still there if you want to perceive it as a distinction. For me its more of a reawakening in Kalyug.

[chatanga1]

However, the truth is out there and you consistently make points that attempt to overlook, whether deliberately or negligibly I dont know, and negate OUR beliefs.

this is amusing, from someone sounding liberal you have turn out to be another neo tat khalsa ....

isn't this your standard reply to anything you can't face upto?

[chatanga1]

Me saying that Sikhi is aad sach isnt denigrating Hinduism.

you have to think how this guy thinks. anything pro-sikh, or said or claimed by a sikh, will automatically mean it's anti-hindu to him.

[JungChamkaur]

As far as Sanskrit goes, our Guru Maharaj sent Sikhs to learn Sanskrit from Kashi and I remember that some Sikhs were turned away from the Brahmins there. And this does not mean that all Brahmins are bad. Sanskrit is actually a beautiful language. I wish I could learn it. I cant even read or write Punjabi or Hindi though. And Brahmins in Punjab have always knew Sanskrit to a certain extent, I am not sure if they knew how to speak it fluently or just remembered the paaths they did. Yes the word Punjab is actually a foreign word, like I said in another thread, the real word is Panchnaad. Punjabi has a lot of Persian influence because of the Mughals and has lost much of its native Sanskrit origin words. For instance, we dont even know months in Punjabi anymore. We dont even know our own tribal history anymore. We are losing touch with who we are. This is one of the reasons I am against Khalistan but for Khalsa Raj. Khalistan is a fake name and nation like Pakistan. Sikhs are not colonial. Khalsa Raj is a better term. However, I would not want Khalsa Raj to consist of Sikhs going around and beating up people who break Rehit Maryada and Pakhandis. This only makes us look evil and makes us a tyrant instead of a defender. I see videos on youtube of Sikhs going around and beating up people who are sometimes older than them as if being a Sikh gives you the right to hit an elder person, its disgusting. We look like a Sikh version of the Taliban in those videos. And for me, Being a Sikh does not mean I cannot be proud or aware of my ethnic tribal identity. I know people will throw in quotes and say "Once you take Amrit you are no longer a Jatt, Tharkhan, or Rajput etc". But I feel like this is wrong because Dasmesh Pitaji tells us about His lineage in Shri Dasam Granthi SahibJi Maharaj. Apparently He also said something like "Hum Brahmin ke poot nahin, Kshatriya ka hoon" or something along those lines. I strongly believe he DID NOT say that because Bhai Mati Das and Sati Das were from Brahmin families and Guru Maharaj had several Brahmin Sikhs serving them so I dont think they would say something like that. Also, just because the soul has no caste and ethnicity doesnt mean that the society should not have caste. I think they wanted to end caste discrimination and birth-based caste. In Mahabharat the Kshatriyas could come from any family. It was not birth-based, but karam-based. Shri KrishanJi Maharaj also says this. Kings of Ancient Bharat were appointed according to merit and not birth and thats the whole point of the Mahabharat story. Kalyug is where caste is birth-based and not karam based, hence when Guru Maharaj established Khalsa Raj where anyone could become a Kshatriya according to merit and not birth, then they said "We have brought Satyug in Kalyug". Jatt, Rajput and some tribes of other communities are not even castes in the first place so the lines get blurred and I am unsure as to how I should view them according to Gurmat. Also, I am not saying that we should have excessive pride, hankaar, in our lineage but still have pride and still acknowledge it. Anyways, we shouldnt fight each other because of our different religious beliefs. This is against both of our religious tenets and all of us should stop saying "Sikhs this, Sikhs that" or "Hindus this, Hindus that"... this is where we show how primitive our thinking is. If we cannot discern between the actions of individuals and collectivities and make assumptions about whole communities and claims about them then were are no more righteous than Hitler.

[Singh123456777]

Rehat pyari mujh ko sikh pyara nahi

[chatanga1]

Apparently He also said something like "Hum Brahmin ke poot nahin, Kshatriya ka hoon" or something along those lines. I strongly believe he DID NOT say that because Bhai Mati Das and Sati Das were from Brahmin families and Guru Maharaj had several Brahmin Sikhs serving them so I dont think they would say something like that.

it is in Dasam Bani, no matter how strongly you feel.

[JungChamkaur]

Oh wow. I didnt know. Im sorry. Wow, feel like shit now.

[Amarjeet Singh_1737]

Oh wow. I didnt know. Im sorry. Wow, feel like shit now.

Better feel like shit son, research before peeking into the abyss.

[Singh123456777]

Better feel like shit son, research before peeking into the abyss.

Lool

That's my quote now!

[Jonny101]

Better feel like shit son, research before peeking into the abyss.

lol!!!!!!!!!!!!

[JungChamkaur]

Honestly, I feel so bad... and you just threw salt on my wounds. Its ok though, I deserve it. I just hope Maharaj forgives me for my galty.

[mrsingh]

All water and most of the power comes from outside Punjab. without bihar coal, Punjab thermal plants would shut down overnight.without Himachal rivers Punjab would turn into desert in less than a decade or have enough food to feed its own teeming population. divert riversto states like rajsthan and you would have new food bowl but what Punjab would do, become a begging bowl?

Armed forces, simply ask lakhs of jawans employed by the Indian armed forces what they want employment with dignity or khalistan with starvation. get over such idiotic thinking.

My family were against Khalistan, the term coined by Indira Gandhi prior to 1984. The actions of the terrorist central government and their proxies 1984-1995 compelled me to support Khalistan as a way of obtaining freedom from terrorist central government rule and Genocide of Sikhs during that period. However, my current vision is that Khalsa Raj should indeed be established all across India as a pre-cursor to Global "Just Rule" (Khalsa Raj) rather than simply a vision confined to a small area in India where Punjabi is spoken. Nevertheless, if anti-Sikh policies continue against Sikhs and there is no justice within India or increased federalism I would support the democratic right of a population to achieve independence albeit if that area were sadly limited to east Punjab state.

Having said that, an independent Punjab would be able to source coal other than from Bihar and it would be able to get better prices for its agricultural produce as well. Mutually beneficial riparian agreements would need to be worked out for the benefit of all. But a new state would need armed forces (so Sikh soldiers would hardly be unemployed as you suggested) to ensure its own safety from extrenal threats and to tackle drugs smuggling from Pakistan etc.

it is inevitable. one day khalsa would go extinct.

The Khalsa Panth will never go extinct no matter how much the RSS may wish for that. Even if 5 brave men from Gujarat, Orissa, South India, Hastinapur and present day Pakistan stood up in 1699 out of a Sangat of 50,000 the concept of the Khalsa Panth as a global force for ensuring justice, peace, equality and unity worldwide will never perish.

Khalistan is a Jat-centric idea and they are just 30-35% of the population. out of this, there are moderates, congress supporters, dera supporters, namdharis, Nirankaris, communists, atheists ...lets looks at the remaining 65% population - 40% hindus simply count them against Khalistan. 30% SCs (Hindus and Sikhs) simply count them against Khalistan...where the numbers would come from?

Creation of landlocked countries is a bad news for every one. Sikhs cannot be braver than the Afghans or Gurkhas. Look at Afghanistan or Nepal's economy...if you want sell khalistan to even jat sikh tabka...tell them where the water, power, fertilisers, coal, and most importantly employment would come from. even if you manage to grow surplus food one year, where you would sell?

You are absolutely right that currently there is no democartic support of any consequence for Khalistan. However, Khalistan is not a Jat-centric idea. That is simply RSS propaganda. Most Jats are in fact Muslim and with Hindu Jats like Sajjan Kumar and his tribesmen from Haryana Jats very much anti-Sikh. Even in Punjab Jats are 30% or less of the population and everyone is well aware of which community General Brar, KPS Gill, Beant (CM) hail from. Support for the idea of Khalistan was a response to the terrorist Genocide of the Sikh population by Indira Gandhi and her son via their proxies. Switzlerland and Austria are also landlocked countries both far more prosperous, democratic and peaceful than other countries with a coastline. After democratic elections in 1997 support for Khalistan waned considerably as a consequence and even more so after Manmohan Singh became Prime Minister of India in 2004.

Not many non-Jats in the khalistan movement which was convincingly and comprehensively defeated nay trounced in a short span.

Anyway, not wasting much space over this moronic idea, wish you all the best in converting punjabis to your cause. you want to start with ravidassi sikhs who have, sickened by supermacist jats, made their own religion?

The Khalistan movement was not a Jat movement full stop. Only the RSS push that lie. It was an organic response to persecution, terrorism and state sponsored Genocide against the Sikhs in the years primarily between 1984-1995. As terrorism against Sikhs diminished so did the desire to resolve matters via dialogue increase within the Sikh Panth. All Sikhs are Ravidassi Sikhs by virtue of the fact that we bow to the words of Dhan Dhan Baba Ravidas Ji Maharaj daily. If you are referring to the Congressi sect centered at Ballan their apartheid like view of Hindu Chamars only marrying Hindu Chamars may garner some support in the short term but it is an organisation that will hopefully fail in tandem with its Congress paymasters.

Mind if i ask you what kind of weed you take? asking you as you stopped with india

Khalsa Raj should indeed be global. Peace, justice, education for all, healthcare for all are aims the Khalsa Panth will continue to fight for until they are achieved globally. Logically, Khalsa Raj cannot stop at just Malwa, Majha and Doaba and nor indeed India for that matter.

Gurdwara in Baghdad Hahaha! That does not exist mate, get some bloody knowledge. stop living in sakhi world.

Hinduism would die from Punjab. ok, fine with me. Muslims would become majority in India? ok, fine with me. i would be gone in 5-6 decades, what happens after me doesn't matter.

There was a Gurdwara in Baghdad in Iraq hundreds of year ago, however fervent Islam reduced it to dust and re-branded as a Pir's tomb when in fact Pir Bahlol was a Sikh of Guru Nanak.

If you don't care what happens after you die, why are so against the Sikh faith by spewing such false propaganda against Sikhs?

The weed taken by Bhagat, Udham and kartar singh is called Desh Prem. I wonder what they would have done with traitors asking for division of their revered motherland.

India is strong and would continue to tackle khalibans with danda they deserve. absolutely no support for khalistan in Punjab. Sikhs in Punjab (one of the most prosperous state of India) enjoying complete freedom. Guru sahib has much larger laaj (Hind di laaj) to keep, don't make him look like a petty sectarian like yourself.

Bhagat Singh, Udham Singh, Kartar Singh indeed had desh prem in trying to free slaves from the ghulaami of the British. However, their vision of justice was universal and they did not do their actions simply to give freedom to Indians. They wanted universal Justice as Sikhi continually emphasises Sarbat Da Bhala. Punjab di laaj, Hind di laaj etc are essentially anti-Gurmat non-universal messages. Sikhi is universal for the betterment of all humanity, Sikh and non-Sikh alike.

You are absolutely wrong! Bhagat Singh & co were not sectarian. Bhagat Singh, few months before his death, wrote an essay claiming he was an atheist. Udham singh gave his name as Ram Mohammad Singh Azad when arrested. Bhagat Singh family was Arya Samaji we all know that (mother name Vidyawati). The trio would have fought the terrorists who were primarily responsible for op Blue star and for killing hundreds (before 1984) of innocent Punjabis.

Bhagat Singh was an Amritdhari Sikh just prior to his shaheedi. Bhai Randhir Singh was a great influence in guiding towards this way. Essentially the discrimination inherent in so-called religions of God like Islam and Hinduism horrified as did the suffering of the poor and innocent - whom Guru Sahib had taught the Khalsa Panth to fight on behalf of. Upon understanding the meaning of Vasakhi 1699 readily took Amrit and gained shaheedi as an Amritdhari Sikh.

Excellent post Jung. My op, cannot fight bigotry (perceived or real) with bigotry.

Some idiots do not understand what they are squandering to achieve their narrow,petty hegemonic goals. Instead of feeling proud of their forefathers for giving us one of world's five classical languages (sanskrit) and so many other things, they mock their heritage for a language whose very name has foreign origins.

this madness, fanaticism for a young language (the word 'Punjab' came into usage in the 16th century and Punjabi language much later) needs to be curtailed.

Sikhi is against pride. One's language is not as pertinent as one's actions on behalf of the better of humanity's condition.

Hindi is not mocked for being a language whose name has Arabic origins.

Why you feel the desire to speak Punjabi is madness or fanaticism I'm not quite sure!?

Surely all human beings have the birthright to speak their mother tongue without another language being forced down their throats?

Edited February 23, 2014 by mrsingh

[mrsingh]

Your insecurities, your paranoia..your undiluted fanaticism, they are appalling. it's good you are on mod's cut side. terror loving bigots is one reason khalistan movement failed so miserably. Narrow-minded neo Tat Khalsa zealots like you tend to appropriate everything that is noble and glorious about Sikhi including Banda bahadur who was clearly a practicing Hindu when Guru sahib approached him and also Bhagat singh who was a die-hard Marxist. "Sikh freedom fighters..." shows how low you can stoop to find some glory from the past.

Your continuous glorification of khalistan (and other) terrorists is really shocking and so is your apathy for the terror victims. You have absolutely nothing to show in the name of "oppression" in the pre-1984 period.

Banda Singh Bahadur was born a Hindu and indeed believe in Hinduism in his younger years. However, all that changed when he met the truth of Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj. He received Amrit from Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj and in course became the leader of the Khalsa Fauj. Similarly, Bhagat Singh was always Sikh and died an Amritdhari (albeit that he may have confused his desire to help humanity via direct seva as communist ideals when in fact they are direct commandments of Sikhi).

i am not, unlike narrow-minded like you, monopolise punjab's common heritage. Not only Sikhs, Punjabi/North Indian Muslims also have a claim over Sanskrit.

Of course all communities that speak Indic languages have an equal connection to Sanskrit. The word Sikh itself derives from a Sanskrit root (unlike the more recent word Hindu coined by Arabs).

khalsas declaring Granth sahib to be their sole property even though not one word in it has been written by a Khalsa.

No Khalsa has declared the Guru Granth Sahib to be their sole property as you and the RSS like to claim. Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Maharaj is Jagat Guru and for the upliftment of all. Khalsa means "The Pure". So in your opinion, all Guru's and Bhagats anre not worthy of being accepted as "pure"? You imply this, even though you will inevitably deny that in response.

Sikhs are just a footnote even in the history of India.

Glad you think of us that way. Humanity itself is a footnote in the history of planet Earth. That does not demean humanity's achievements on the planet.

Sikhs are still being abducted in Pakistan. So? they would be extinct in Pakistan in not too distant. so? One of the main two Sikh shrines is still in Pakistan. So? what are your khalistani are planning to save your 'worriors' from getting kidnapped, raped and humiliated on daily basis? Absolutely nothing, just admin cut about Hindu this india that while sitting in their paki masters' laps. Disgusting.

True point that many overseas so-called Khalistani's like Chauhan etc are often silent about Pakistan's far worse Genocide of Sikhs but you are almost as bad by acting as an apologist for the more recent Genocide of Sikhs by the terrorist Indian Governments of the 1980's and 1990's.

It's one thing to be against Khalistan as most Sikhs currently oppose it too. You can democartically and academically make your arguments against why you oppose it. However, why do you feel the need to slander Sikhs in the process given that Sikhi is 100% against terrorism and Sikhs are the overwhelming victims of state sponsored terrorism by Indira Gandhi, her son and their loyal bureaucratic and armed proxies. If you want to see support for Khalistan diminish you are best advised to do as the AAP are doing in pushing the agenda of long awaited justice for Sikhs. If Kejriwal is a sehajdhari Sikh of whom I am proud there is no reason that you yourself cannot likewise become a brother sehajdhari Sikh in the future too rather than continuing as a mouthpiece for Hindutva and Arya Samaj type opinions on this forum. Central to this is acknowledging that terrorism and Sikhi are terms that can never be associated with each other. Once you understand you will begin to understand that Sikhi's simple political aim is the welfare of all humanity - Sarbat Da Bhala.

[mrsingh]

Let me preface my response to you by saying that I do not support the same tired old slogans for Khalistan that have not advanced our Qaum one iota in the last 30 years and that I strongly want our Panth to avoid that word as a dangerous distraction from the bigger more important short term objectives we face and should tackle related to human development of the Sikh Panth in terms of the indices of poverty, health, illiteracy, ending drugs usage and curtailing alcohol consumption, killing off social and tribal stratification as well as the evil practise of female infanticide. Thereafter, once those indices actually reflect progress for the first time since 1984, i can only envision an independent Punjab if Pakistan were to by luck disintegrate into linguistic successor states thereby allowing India, in consequence, to peacefully transition into linguistic successor states similarly (that could arguably share a common defensive pact and currency as stated in the Anandpur Sahib Resolution which was merely a federalist proposal). Once we as a Qaum are fully strong ourselves then we can focus more towards seva for non-Sikhs too as Sikhi's main aim is merely for Sarbat Da Bhala.

1. You are wrong. Khalistan was coined by by Sikh leadership in 1940.

Perhaps i should have said regurgitated and re-circulated by Indira Gandhi. However, the fact remains that the Anandpur Sahib Resolution, which was simply federalist in nature (and which would have strengthened India's Unity) was deliberately derailed by Indira Gandhi re-introducing the word Khalistan to whip up Hindutva votebank for herself and paint Sikhs as traitors+extremists in the process. Sikhs were a sovereign nation in 1849, so given the events of 1947 and the Pakistani Genocide of Sikhs in which 20% of our Qaum was killed off in Pakistan it is understandable that some Sikhs mooted the re-establishment of an independent Sikh state.

2. I see a total denial of the massacres and selective killings committed by the Sikh terrorists post 1978. is this omission accidental or you have something to hide?

True Sikhs cannot be terrorists. Sikhi unequivocally condemns terrorism targetted against innocents.

Self-defence during the Genocide of lakhs of Sikhs cannot be termed terrorism.

However, my current vision is that Khalsa Raj should indeed be established all across India as a pre-cursor to Global "Just Rule" (Khalsa Raj) rather than simply a vision confined to a small area in India where Punjabi is spoken.

3. You need to get some Assembly seats to show Khalistan (or whatever name you would like to give to it) has some support in Punjab (all across India, are you really serious or completely delusioned?)

I agree with you that there is very limited political support for Khalistan in India in 2014. Khalsa Raj across all of India is not an Empire in the same sense of the Nehru-Gandhi terrorist Empire. It is a premise based upon just rule for all for the welfare of all. No matter how unlikely that may seem today i do wish to see just rule globally and across all of India as Sikhi's parameters do not stop at Punjab. Sikhi is a universal faith for the betterment of all humanity.

Nevertheless, if anti-Sikh policies continue against Sikhs and there is no justice within India or increased federalism I would support the democratic right of a population to achieve independence albeit if that area were limited to east Punjab state.

4. That's total misrepresentation of the ground reality - Sikhs enjoy complete freedom, privileges in India. Sikh majority state is THE MOST PROSPEROUS state in India. You cannot have such riches if you are being discriminated against. India must be the only country where there is no income tax on the farming sector and number of other state policies, subsidies favour sikh farmers. I have given my evidence that there is no discrimination now it is your turn to give solid facts to establish your anti-Sikh policies argument.

You are absolutely correct that in no way, shape or form can Sikhs be called slaves in India when they are richer on average than Hindu's, are leading the country as Prime Minister, as Head of the Indian Army, as economic planners and chief UN representatives. Nevertheless there is a layer of the Indian bureaucratic system and judiciary that does indeed discriminate against Sikhs. Sikh victims of state-sponsored Genocide against Sikhs still have not received justice, they allow drugs to freely circulate in Punjab in order to deliberately drug out the youth and there is deliberate discrimination in the fields of education, Punjabi language and the freedom of political prisoners. Furthermore, prices for agricultural produce are artificially determined at low prices by central government so that is also tantamount to discrimination against Sikhs. Given that Delhi by virtue of its terrorist Genocide of Sikhs morally vacated the right to govern Sikh affairs in 1984, should ordinary Sikhs continue to suffer discrimination in the forms outlined it is inevitable that clamour for freedom from Delhi would increase. The best way you can be part of the solution is by joining the demand for full justice for Sikhs so that all communities can concentrate on mutual development rather than antagonism.

Having said that, an independent Punjab would be able to source coal other than from Bihar

5. Like what? from Indonesia or Australia by Dreamliners? Please elaborate.

Absolutely. There is not only one location that can provide coal. Aside from that Punjab has plentiful solar power possibilities and renewable energies are what would be best for the long term. The bottom line is that Punjab's Sikhs and Hindu's and others are industrious enough to generate electricity in the event that they democratically choose to peacefully establish an independent nation free from Delhi's interference. A peaceful velvet divorce as achieved in Czechoslovakia would not hinder Punjab from continuing to get coal from Bihar and indeed other successor independent states like Gujarat, Bijhar continuing to get agricultural produce from Punjab.

and it would be able to get better prices for its agricultural produce as well.

6. From whom? the price of the APs would go up once water, diesal, fertilizers, power et al are more expensive. India can import lakhs of tonnes from canada, USA or Australia at much more competitive prices (hundreds of crores spent on subsidies to Punjab farmers if we are to consider them a separate unit would be saved).

Then why doesn't India do just that? Let Punjab's agricultural produce be sold globally to the highest bidder with the trade off that subsidies offered to all Indian farmers are not offered in Punjab. True that the price of AP would go up in an independent Punjab but that would negate market demand for the same and a breadbasket type nation would hardly go begging given rising AP prices.

Mutually beneficial riparian agreements would need to be worked out for the benefit of all.

7. Mutually beneficial? what benefits Himachal gets for giving water to Punjab? Himachal much more poorer than Punjab, why not profit from its most precious resource - water?

Mutually beneficial would be that Himachal could indeed charge for its water to a limited level as mandated per UN guidelines for water sharing but with Punjab thereafter free to charge Rajasthan subsequently for diverting water resources to them that it needs for itself.

But a new state would need armed forces to ensure its own safety from extrenal threats and to tackle drugs smuggling from Pakistan etc.

8. Punjab has its own police force, we are talking about lakhs of army and para military jawans. giving employment to such a massive army would alone send Punjab/Khalistan broke. where the revenue would come from? Only industrialists and businessmen (mostly Hindu) pay income and other taxes in Punjab which is not enough. with exodus of these industrialists from Punjab once Khalistan is announced, you would be left with a v small percentage of tax paying population.

Lakhs of army jawans is not a problem to accommodate. In fact the army discipline would help to build a nation up development wise even quicker. They could be deployed to counter inflow of Pakistani drugs, to counter drug dealers across Punjab, to enforce anti-infanticide laws, to make Punjab roads civilised, to deal with infrastructure issues, rebuild schools, ensure the death of social straification and so on ... any surplus forces can readily be offered to the UN for peacekeeping services (who would pay their wages to boot).

The Khalsa Panth will never go extinct no matter how much the RSS may wish for that. Even if 5 brave men from Gujarat, Orissa, South India, Hastinapur and present day Pakistan stood up in 1699 out of a Sangat of 50,000 the concept of the Khalsa Panth as a global force for ensuring justice, peace, equality and unity worldwide will never perish.

9. I hope so too but the signs are no good. Sikh youth cutting hair in increasing number. atheism increasing along with materialism. More Sikh youth also realising spirituality has got nothing to do with growing hair or shaving heads. Tat Khalsa fraud being exposed gradually. we are not living in 17th century, youth with unshorn also want to be part of the global village and looked down upon as a freak or a bigot living in medieval days. Khalsa panth as... c'mon my friend, get real. Khalsa panth failed to give justice even to fellow (non-confirmist) Sikhs and innocent Punjabi civilians who were butchered in 1978-1993 period. get over such egalitarian ideals even Akal Takht doesnt believe in.

Khalsa Panth won't vanish due to some Sikh youth on drugs cutting their hair. In facts that cuts out the element from the Khalsa Panth who are not truly committed. When it comes to the Khalsa Panth as a small part of the wider Sikh community we simply need quality rather than quantity. When Panj Piare stood up as 5 from a Sangat of 50,000 that was enough to eternally establish the Khalsa Panth. You're correct that spirituality is not gained by merely keeping kes or shaving one's head. True Sant-Sipahi balance with the emphasis on seva whilst keeping Rehat will bless the Amritdhari and society far more than one changing hairstyle to keep up with western fashion trends. If the Khalsa Panth was unable to prevent the Genocide of lakhs of Sikhs by terrorist central government from Delhi in the 1980's and 1990's then all that tells me is that there needs to a be a greater population of the wider Sikh Panth out of which a greater number of truly commiitted Amritdhari's can arise. If the Mughals ruled India for a thousand years it doesn't spell to me that Islam is the correct way whilst Sikhi is wrong. Egalitarian ideals are at the heart of what Sikhi is about.

You are absolutely right that currently there is no democratic support of any consequence for Khalistan. However, Khalistan is not a Jat-centric idea.

11. Please name top 10 Khalistan leaders and let us see how many of them were non-Jats. How many Khali terrorists were non-jats - manochahl...who else?

Given that freedom from state sponsored Government of India was opposed by all sections of the Panth, your point is misleading. Those that advocate a Sikh state, whatever their faults, cannot ever be accused of being casteist. Each and every Khalsa Sikh sees themself as casteless. Those who retain affiliation to a caste are simply not Sikh. This is common knowledge in Punjab but not widely known in anti-Sikh circles ... that the percentage of Sikhs of a Jatt tribal background is just under 50%. So your assumption based on the fact that General Brar, KPS Gill, Sidhu of Dera Sirsa and Dhillon of the Radha Swami's are all from one community and thus so must those who opposed the terrorist Government of India back then is totally wrong.

That is simply RSS propaganda. Most Jats are in fact Muslim and with Hindu Jats like Sajjan Kumar and his tribesmen from Haryana Jats very much anti-Sikh.

12. You are distracting here. We know the demographics but you may like to give some evidence for your latter assertion about the HJs, Thanks. and why bring in RSS everywhere? I that collective Panth khatre ch hai! paranoia?

RSS or anti-Sikh whatever you may like to call it. It's common knowledge that it was Hindu Jatts who were Bhajan Lal's main hound dogs and that Delhi Police in 1984 (as now) is heavily dominated by Hindu Jatts. It's amazing that 80% of Jatts are non-Sikh but the anti-Sikh opponents have nothing better to throw at the Qaum than it supposedly being a caste-centric Qaum when the demographics and our itihaas prove otherwise. You may even be surprised to know that in Punjab the Jatts don't even have a monopoly upon farming any more.

Even in Punjab Jats are 30% or less of the population and everyone is well aware of which community General Brar, KPS Gill, Beant (CM) hail from. Support for the idea of Khalistan was a response to the terrorist Genocide of the Sikh population by Indira Gandhi and her son via their proxies.

13. Support, what support you are talking about?

I was referring to the historical support that existed at the height of the Genocide of Sikhs by the then Government of India

Switzlerland and Austria are also landlocked countries both far more prosperous, democratic and peaceful than other countries with a coastline.

14. Apples and oranges my friend. S&A are surrounded by co-religionist, developed countries who are part of the EU.

Not really. The criteria for the success of a landlocked nation first and foremost is good governance. If countries like Mongolia, Ethiopia, Bhutan and almost 50 countries (many of whom have smaller populations that Punjab) can survive then so could an independent Punjab.

After democratic elections in 1997 support for Khalistan waned considerably as a consequence and even more so after Manmohan Singh became Prime Minister of India in 2004.

15. Khalistan movement was defeated convincingly and terror acts came down considerably by 1993. 1997 as you can see came much later and MMS...well, 11 years later.

The desire for an end to terrorist central Government of India rule was suppressed by the Genocide of an entire generation of Sikhs. The government's Black Cats did indeed slow down their terror acts by the mid 1990's but please note that terror acts against innocent civilians cannot be committed by true Sikhs is Sikhi is 100% vehemently against terrorism. Those that commit wanton terror targetting civilians cannot be classified as Sikh.

The Khalistan movement was not a Jat movement full stop.

16. Khali movement was a Jat dominated.

Only the RSS push that lie. Hardly so just because all the Congress MP's in Punjab at the time were overwhelmingly Jatt as was KPS Gill and most of the higher echelons of the murdering Punjab Police back then ... it does not automatically automatically translate that thus those who opposed the state terrorists must all have been Jatt as well. It was an organic response by all sections of the Panth to persecution, terrorism and state sponsored Genocide against the Sikhs in the years primarily between 1984-1995. As terrorism against Sikhs diminished so did the desire within the Sikh Panth increase to resolve matters via dialogue .

17. Again RSS! why bring on those nikardhari idiots in this debate whenever a Sikh related issue is being debated?

Anti-Sikh or Hindutva or RSS or Arya Samaj ... their agenda against the Panth is one and the same - to falsely denigrate and slander the Sikh Panth. And they do so because they fear the societal impact Sikhi can bring to curtail their corruption via divide and rule tactics. Sikhi's message of universal brotherhood, peace, equality, healthcare for all, an end to poverty etc are exactly what the anti-Sikh enemies cannot stomach as they know that once that (Khalsa Raj) occurs their exploitation of the poor's blood, sweat and tears cannot continue in those circumstances.

Edited February 24, 2014 by mrsingh

[Amarjeet Singh_1737]

1. You are wrong. Khalistan was coined by by Sikh leadership in 1940.

Perhaps i should have said re-coined and re-circulated by Indira Gandhi. However, the fact remains that the Anandpur Sahib Resolution, which was simply federalist in nature (and which would have strengthened India's Unity) was deliberately derailed by Indira Gandhi re-introducing the word Khalistan to whip up Hindutva votebank for herself and paint Sikhs as traitors+extremists in the process. Sikhs were a sovereign nation in 1849, so given the events of 1947 and the Pakistani Genocide of Sikhs in which 20% of our Qaum was killed off in Pakistan it is understandable that some Sikhs mooted the re-establishment of an independent Sikh state.

2. I see a total denial of the massacres and selective killings committed by the Sikh terrorists post 1978. is this omission accidental or you have something to hide?

True Sikhs cannot be terrorists. Sikhi unequivocally condemns terrorism targetted against innocents.

Self-defence during the Genocide of lakhs of Sikhs cannot be termed terrorism.

However, my current vision is that Khalsa Raj should indeed be established all across India as a pre-cursor to Global "Just Rule" (Khalsa Raj) rather than simply a vision confined to a small area in India where Punjabi is spoken.

3. You need to get some Assembly seats to show Khalistan (or whatever name you would like to give to it) has some support in Punjab (all across India, are you really serious or completely delusioned?)

I agree with you that there is very limited political support for Khalistan in India in 2014. Khalsa Raj across all of India is not an Empire in the same sense of the Nehru-Gandhi terrorist Empire. It is a premise based upon just rule for all for the welfare of all. No matter how unlikely that may seem today i do wish to see just rule globally and across all of India as Sikhi's parameters do not stop at Punjab. Sikhi is a universal faith for the betterment of all humanity.

Nevertheless, if anti-Sikh policies continue against Sikhs and there is no justice within India or increased federalism I would support the democratic right of a population to achieve independence albeit if that area were limited to east Punjab state.

4. That's total misrepresentation of the ground reality - Sikhs enjoy complete freedom, privileges in India. Sikh majority state is THE MOST PROSPEROUS state in India. You cannot have such riches if you are being discriminated against. India must be the only country where there is no income tax on the farming sector and number of other state policies, subsidies favour sikh farmers. I have given my evidence that there is no discrimination now it is your turn to give solid facts to establish your anti-Sikh policies argument.

You are absolutely correct that in no way, shape or form can Sikhs be called slaves in India when they are richer on average than Hindu's, are leading the country as Prime Minister, as Head of the Indian Army, as economic planners and chief UN representatives. Nevertheless there is a layer of the Indian bureaucratic system and judiciary that does indeed discriminate against Sikhs. Sikh victims of state-sponsored Genocide against Sikhs still have not received justice, they allow drugs to freely circulate in Punjab in order to deliberately drug out the youth and there is deliberate discrimination in the fields of education, Punjabi language and the freedom of political prisoners. Furthermore, prices for agricultural produce are artificially determined at low prices by central government so that is also tantamount to discrimination against Sikhs. Given that the Delhi morally vacated the right to govern Sikh affairs in 1984, should ordinary Sikhs continue to suffer discrimination in the forms outlined it is inevitable that clamour for freedom from Delhi would increase. The best way you can be part of the solution is by joining the demand for full justice for Sikhs so that all communities can concentrate on mutual development rather than antagonism.

Having said that, an independent Punjab would be able to source coal other than from Bihar

5. Like what? from Indonesia or Australia by Dreamliners? Please elaborate.

Absolutely. There is not only one location that can provide coal. Aside from that Punjab has plentiful solar power possibilities and renewable energies are what would be best for the long term. The bottom line is that Punjabi's Sikh and Hindu are industrious enough to generate electricity in the even that they democratically choose to peacefully establish an independent free from Delhi's interference. A peaceful velvet divorce as achieved in Czechoslovakia would not hinder Punjab from continuing to get coal from Bihar and indeed other suuccessor independent states like Gujarat, Bijhar continue to get agricultural produce from Punjab.

and it would be able to get better prices for its agricultural produce as well.

6. From whom? the price of the APs would go up once water, diesal, fertilizers, power et al are more expensive. India can import lakhs of tonnes from canada, USA or Australia at much more competitive prices (hundreds of crores spent on subsidies to Punjab farmers if we are to consider them a separate unit would be saved).

Then why doesn't India do just that? Let Punjab's agricultural produce be sold globally to the highest bidder with the trade off that subsidies offered to all Indian farmers are not waived in Punjab. True that the price of AP would go up in an independent Punjab but taht would negate market demand for the same and a breadbasket type nation would hardly go begging.

Mutually beneficial riparian agreements would need to be worked out for the benefit of all.

7. Mutually beneficial? what benefits Himachal gets for giving water to Punjab? Himachal much more poorer than Punjab, why not profit from its most precious resource - water?

Mutually beneficial would be that Himachal could indeed charge for its water to a limited level as mandated per UN guidelines for water sharing but with Punjab thereafter free to charge Rajasthan subsequently for diverting water resources to them that it needs for itself.

But a new state would need armed forces to ensure its own safety from extrenal threats and to tackle drugs smuggling from Pakistan etc.

8. Punjab has its own police force, we are talking about lakhs of army and para military jawans. giving employment to such a massive army would alone send Punjab/Khalistan broke. where the revenue would come from? Only industrialists and businessmen (mostly Hindu) pay income and other taxes in Punjab which is not enough. with exodus of these industrialists from Punjab once Khalistan is announced, you would be left with a v small percentage of tax paying population.

Lakhs of army jawans is not a problem to accommodate. In fact the army discipline would help to build a nation up development wise even quicker. They could be deployed to counter inflow of Pakistani drugs, to counter drug dealers across Punjab, to enforce anti-infanticide laws, to make Punjab roads civilised, to deal with infrastructure issues, rebuild schools, ensure the death of social straification and so on ... any surplus forces can readily be offered to the UN for peacekeeping services (who would pay their wages to boot).

The Khalsa Panth will never go extinct no matter how much the RSS may wish for that. Even if 5 brave men from Gujarat, Orissa, South India, Hastinapur and present day Pakistan stood up in 1699 out of a Sangat of 50,000 the concept of the Khalsa Panth as a global force for ensuring justice, peace, equality and unity worldwide will never perish.

9. I hope so too but the signs are no good. Sikh youth cutting hair in increasing number. atheism increasing along with materialism. More Sikh youth also realising spirituality has got nothing to do with growing hair or shaving heads. Tat Khalsa fraud being exposed gradually. we are not living in 17th century, youth with unshorn also want to be part of the global village and looked down upon as a freak or a bigot living in medieval days. Khalsa panth as... c'mon my friend, get real. Khalsa panth failed to give justice even to fellow (non-confirmist) Sikhs and innocent Punjabi civilians who were butchered in 1978-1993 period. get over such egalitarian ideals even Akal Takht doesnt believe in.

Khalsa Panth won't vanish due to Sikh youth on drugs cutting their hair. In facts that cuts out the element from the Khalsa Panth who are not committed. When it comes to the Khalsa Panth as a small part of the wider Sikh community we simply need quality rather than quantity. When Panj Piare stood up as 5 from a Sangat of 50,000 that was enough to eternally establish the Khalsa Panth. You're correct that spirituality is not gained by merely keeping kes or shaving one's head. True Sant-Sipahi balance with the emphasis on seva whilst keeping Rehat will bless the Amritdhari and society far more than one changing hairstyle to keep up with western fashion trends. If the Khalsa Panth was unable to prevent the Genocide of lakhs of Sikhs by terrorist central government from Delhi in the 1980's and 1990's then all that tells me is that there needs to a be a greater population of the wider Sikh Panth out of which a greater number of truly commiitted Amritdhari's can arise. If the Mughals ruled India for a thousand years it doesn't spell to me that Islam is the correct way whilst Sikhi is wrong. Egalitarian ideals are at the heart of what Sikhi is about.

You are absolutely right that currently there is no democratic support of any consequence for Khalistan. However, Khalistan is not a Jat-centric idea.

11. Please name top 10 Khalistan leaders and let us see how many of them were non-Jats. How many Khali terrorists were non-jats - manochahl...who else?

Given that freedom from state sponsored Government of India was opposed by all sections of the Panth, your point is misleading. Those that advocate a Sikh state, whatever their faults, cannot ever be accused of being casteist. Each and every Khalsa Sikh sees themself as casteless. Those who retain affiliation to a caste are simply not Sikh. This is common knowledge in Punjab but not widely known in anti-Sikh circles ... that the percentage of Sikhs of a Jatt tribal background is just under 50%. So your assumption based on the fact that General Brar, KPS Gill, Sidhu of Dera Sirsa and Dhillon of the Radha Swami's are from one community and thus so must those who opposed the terrorist Government of India back then is totally wrong.

That is simply RSS propaganda. Most Jats are in fact Muslim and with Hindu Jats like Sajjan Kumar and his tribesmen from Haryana Jats very much anti-Sikh.

12. You are distracting here. We know the demographics but you may like to give some evidence for your latter assertion about the HJs, Thanks. and why bring in RSS everywhere? I that collective Panth khatre ch hai! paranoia?

RSS or anti-Sikh whatever you may like to call it. It's common knowledge that it was Hindu Jatts who were Bhajan Lal's main hound dogs and that Delhi Police in 1984 (as now) is heavily dominated by Hindu Jatts. It's amazing that 80% of Jatts are non-Sikh but the anti-Sikh opponents have nothing better to throw at the Qaum then it being a caste-centric Qaum. You may even be surprised to know that in Punjab the Jatts don't even have a monopoly upon farming any more.

Even in Punjab Jats are 30% or less of the population and everyone is well aware of which community General Brar, KPS Gill, Beant (CM) hail from. Support for the idea of Khalistan was a response to the terrorist Genocide of the Sikh population by Indira Gandhi and her son via their proxies.

13. Support, what support you are talking about?

I was referring to the historical support that existed at the height of the Genocide of Sikhs by the then Government of India

Switzlerland and Austria are also landlocked countries both far more prosperous, democratic and peaceful than other countries with a coastline.

14. Apples and oranges my friend. S&A are surrounded by co-religionist, developed countries who are part of the EU.

Not really. The criteria for the success of a landlocked nation first and foremost is good governance. If countries like Mongolia, Ethiopia, Bhutan and almost 50 countries (many of whom have smaller populations that Punjab) can survive then so could an independent Punjab.

After democratic elections in 1997 support for Khalistan waned considerably as a consequence and even more so after Manmohan Singh became Prime Minister of India in 2004.

15. Khalistan movement was defeated convincingly and terror acts came down considerably by 1993. 1997 as you can see came much later and MMS...well, 11 years later.

The desire for an end to terrorist central Government of India rule was suppressed by the Genocide of an entire generation of Sikhs. The government's Black Cats did indeed slow down their terror acts by the mid 1990's but please note that terror acts against innocent civilians cannot be committed by Sikhi is Sikhi is 100% against terrorism. Those that commit wanton terror targetting civilians cannot be classified as Sikh.

The Khalistan movement was not a Jat movement full stop.

16. Khali movement was a Jat dominated.

Only the RSS push that lie. Hardly so just because all the Congress MP's at the time were mainly Jatt as was KPS Gill and most of the higher echelons of the murdering Punjab Police back then it does not automatically automatically translate that thus those who opposed the state terrorists must all have been Jatt as well. It was an organic response by all sections of the Panth to persecution, terrorism and state sponsored Genocide against the Sikhs in the years primarily between 1984-1995. As terrorism against Sikhs diminished so did the desire within the Sikh Panth increase to resolve matters via dialogue .

17. Again RSS! why bring on those nikardhari idiots in this debate whenever a Sikh related issue is being debated?

Anti-Sikh or Hindutva or RSS or Arya Samaj ... there agenda against the Panth is one and the same - to denigrate it.

I remember when the news Indra was killed went out. The Jatts danced non-stop, when they found out it was a scheduled caste who did it they stopped. The moral of the story is the movement wasn't entirely dominated by Jatts. Gurbachan Singh Manochal was a low caste, and many others.