Jump to content

Amritsar Mrs. Gandhi's Last Battle By Mark Tully


namdhari555

Recommended Posts

Gurfeteh

recently been reading this book and certainly have changed some of my views on what happened in 84 basically the book says that it had more to do with politics. Many issues it claims were political but turned into religious because of the Akali Dal.

the book is very harsh toward Sant Ji and Sikhs.

Has anyone else read it and what do you think of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Gurfeteh

recently been reading this book and certainly have changed some of my views on what happened in 84 basically the book says that it had more to do with politics. Many issues it claims were political but turned into religious because of the Akali Dal.

the book is very harsh toward Sant Ji and Sikhs.

Has anyone else read it and what do you think of it.

harsh towards "sikhs"? which way?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I read a few pieces from Mark Tully over the years. Essentially he is a very scared, genteel middle-class twat type of gora who appears to have shite his pants upon encountering masculine kharkoo Singhs. He is (was?) also an employee of the BBC which, inbetween its pedophilia, acts like a mouthpiece for conservative British values and politics - so we could never expect any sort of balanced appraisal from him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I read a few pieces from Mark Tully over the years. Essentially he is a very scared, genteel middle-class twat type of gora who appears to have shite his pants upon encountering masculine kharkoo Singhs. He is (was?) also an employee of the BBC which, inbetween its pedophilia, acts like a mouthpiece for conservative British values and politics - so we could never expect any sort of balanced appraisal from him.

:) AR Arshi for Nobel prize (Literature)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gurfeteh

Many issues it claims were political but turned into religious because of the Akali Dal.

This was the thinking of the rightwing Hindus, to taint any genuine political movement as being sectarian, anti-hindu etc.

the Anandpur Sahib resolution was for the benefit of Panjab, not just the Sikhs, and in turn would have benefitted the whole country. But because it was the SIKHS who were behind the demand, it had to be anti-hindu for some reason in their sick hindutva minds. You can see the what they are like from this forum in recent weeks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the book when it was first published in the mid 80s. It's extremely biased and presents the government's view with a few criticisms of the government just to keep some pretence at being objective.

Tully's daughter is married to some wealthy Hindu who has connections to the congress party. He is hardly and objective author.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was the thinking of the rightwing Hindus, to taint any genuine political movement as being sectarian, anti-hindu etc.

the Anandpur Sahib resolution was for the benefit of Panjab, not just the Sikhs, and in turn would have benefitted the whole country. But because it was the SIKHS who were behind the demand, it had to be anti-hindu for some reason in their sick hindutva minds. You can see the what they are like from this forum in recent weeks.

In the book Tully claims the Anandpur Sahib resoulution was for the benefit of the akali dal not the whole punjab. more specially the jats which supported the dal.

Page 47

"in fact only one section of the sikh communtity has consistently supported the akali dal the jat caste of peasant farmers ...the anandpur sahib resolution is so heavily biased in favour of the farmers and against the traders and industrialists"

Link to post
Share on other sites

it was not against the traders or industrialists, the Anandpur Sahib resolution was about Panjab having more control over its waters, which concerned the jats/farmers.

The way the book preasents it is that the akali dal is the party of the sikhs as said in the anandpur sahib resoultion.

for instance when it came to having a punjabi suba the akali dal wanted punjabi as the main language and Gurmukhi as the script. the book says that punjabi was the most spoken language but not written in Gumukhi it was written in the urdu script as well as hindi. So thats why the goverment wanted hindi as punjab's main language. The government said the akalis were trying to put sikh demands on the whole of punjab. but the akali dal claimed the goverment was trying to marginalize the sikhs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tully is an idiot. He knows if he writes the truth, it will not be a successful hit amongst the majority community of India. He writes whatever his audience(majority community) wants to hear i.e. Sikhs are bad, Bhindranwala bad, Akali Dal bad etc.

His book holds no credibility in my eyes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, that emphasis on agriculture economics was one of the factors that later led to the movement getting a lukewarm response from nonJats. In retrospection, I think many people later began to perceive the movement as mainly an economical one and given the unabashed, extreme caste egocentrism coming from ground-level Jat quarters, people backed off.

In the early days it was perceived as a pan-Sikh issue but later, gradually this changed. There was so much confusion back then, with lack of clear leadership and propaganda from India that I feel it put a lot people off. A lot of people were baffled about what the heck was going on too - remember this was pre-Internet so no ground level accounts or images could be spontaneously posted globally.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tully is an idiot. He knows if he writes the truth, it will not be a successful hit amongst the majority community of India. He writes whatever his audience(majority community) wants to hear i.e. Sikhs are bad, Bhindranwala bad, Akali Dal bad etc.

His book holds no credibility in my eyes.

Typical reaction ... one of the most respected journalist is an "idiot" in mod edit eyes as he told the truth as it was. None of the parties (Indira, zail singh, Longowal, Tohra, Badal, JSB, Amrik Singh, Subheg Singh, SGPC, Punjab Police...) involved in Op Blue Star can be absolved of its share in what was clearly a botched military action. It was a national tragedy which could have been avoided if a number of actions were either taken well in time or were carried out in a much more professional way.

Fanatics going blastic over Tully's book as there is no room for criticism, counter-argument, sacrifice, selflessness or dissent in their scheme of things (every asset, every right and Sikh panth belongs just to Jat Sikhs. Anyone who disagree is a panth dokhi).

Majority community in india was never bothered about APS Resolution which was, among other glaring flaws (sectarian, casteist), was also sexist. Every state, community has its own problems. Akalis agitated for sectarian Punjabi suba to grab power. Indira gave Punjabi suba after brief agitation (compare it with telengana agitation -decades have passed and 1000s sacrificed their lives to get it approved by the Centre). Akalis/Sikhs reneged when it came to honouring the agreement made to create Punjabi suba.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it was not against the traders or industrialists, the Anandpur Sahib resolution was about Panjab having more control over its waters, which concerned the jats/farmers.

"..its waters"? Satluj originates from Goindwal or bhatinda? Beas gets waters from Kandi area glaciers, right? Ravi definitely sprouts from Sidhu sahib da tubewell in Gurdaspur.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical reaction ... one of the most respected journalist is an "idiot" in mod edit eyes as he told the truth as it was. None of the parties (Indira, zail singh, Longowal, Tohra, Badal, JSB, Amrik Singh, Subheg Singh, SGPC, Punjab Police...) involved in Op Blue Star can be absolved of its share in what was clearly a botched military action. It was a national tragedy which could have been avoided if a number of actions were either taken well in time or were carried out in a much more professional way.

Fanatics going blastic over Tully's book as there is no room for criticism, counter-argument, sacrifice, selflessness or dissent in their scheme of things (every asset, every right and Sikh panth belongs just to Jat Sikhs. Anyone who disagree is a panth dokhi).

Majority community in india was never bothered about APS Resolution which was, among other glaring flaws (sectarian, casteist), was also sexist. Every state, community has its own problems. Akalis agitated for sectarian Punjabi suba to grab power. Indira gave Punjabi suba after brief agitation (compare it with telengana agitation -decades have passed and 1000s sacrificed their lives to get it approved by the Centre). Akalis/Sikhs reneged when it came to honouring the agreement made to create Punjabi suba.

Tully may be a respected journalist for the majority community. Not Sikhs. The only fault Sikhs have in regards to operation bluestar is that they dared to defend themselves instead of surrendering like cowards against an army which came equipped with all the weapons of a conventional war.

Anandpur Sahib resolution is not castiest and neither is it sectarian or sexist. Show us where before making such blanket statements. It is the HIndus who opposed the Punjabi sooba by disowning their own language(how shameful!). Today Punjab would have been a big state. Punjabi Hindus would have been ruling it had they not disowned their own language by listening to their Arya Samaj leadership. Because of them opposing their own mother tongue, today Punjabi Hindus have become a minority in Punjab, Himachal and Haryana.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tully may be a respected journalist for the majority community. Not Sikhs. The only fault Sikhs have in regards to operation bluestar is that they dared to defend themselves instead of surrendering like cowards against an army which came equipped with all the weapons of a conventional war.

Anandpur Sahib resolution is not castiest and neither is it sectarian or sexist. Show us where before making such blanket statements. It is the HIndus who opposed the Punjabi sooba by disowning their own language(how shameful!). Today Punjab would have been a big state. Punjabi Hindus would have been ruling it had they not disowned their own language by listening to their Arya Samaj leadership. Because of them opposing their own mother tongue, today Punjabi Hindus have become a minority in Punjab, Himachal and Haryana.

whom you are fooling Joony, Anandpur sahib resolution not only sexist and racist but also sectarian, anti-Constitutional and anti-national.

First and 2nd points reads:

'1. Propagation of Sikhism, its ethical values and code of conduct to combat atheism'

2. Preservation and keeping alive the concept of distinct and sovereign identity of the Panth and building up of appropriate condition in which the national sentiments and aspirations of the Sikh Panth will find full expression, satisfaction and facilities for growth"

Purpose was to impose a strict Sikh theologial state:

4. Vacation of discrimination on the basis of caste, creed or any other ground in keeping with basic principles of Sikhism.

Total, unashamed attempt to force Tat Khalsa version down other Punjabis throats:

5. Removal of disease and ill health, checking the use of intoxicants and provision of full facilities for the growth of physical well-being so as to prepare and enthuse the Sikh Nation for the national defense. For the achievement of the aforesaid purposes, the Shiromani Akali Dal owned it as its primary duty to inculcate among the Sikh religious fervour and a sense of pride in their great socio-spiritual heritage through the following measures:

(a). Reiteration of the concept of unity of God, meditation on His Name, recitation of gurbani, inculcation of faith in the Holy Sikh Gurus as well as in Guru Granth Sahib Ji and other appropriate measures for such a purpose.

(B). Grooming at the Sikh Missionary College the Sikh youth with inherent potential to become accomplished preachers, ragis, dhadis and poets so that the propagation of Sikhism, its tenets and traditions and its basic religious values could be taken up more effectively and vigorously.

©. Baptizing the Sikhs on a mass scale with particular emphasis on schools and colleges wherein the teachers as well as the taught shall be enthused through regular study circles.

(d). Revival of the religious institution of dasvandh among the Sikhs.

(e). Generating a feeling of respect for Sikh intellectuals including writers and preachers, who also would be enthused to improve upon their accomplishments.

(f). Streamlining the administration of the gurdwaras by giving better training to their workers. Appropriate steps would also be taken to maintain gurdwara building in proper condition. The representatives of the party in the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee would be directed to pull their weight towards these ends.

(g). Making suitable arrangements for error free publications of gurbani, promoting research in the ancient and modern Sikh history, translating holy gurbani into other languages and producing first-rate literature on Sikhism.

(h). Taking appropriate measures for the enactment of an All India Gurdwaras Act with a view to improving the administration of the gurdwaras throughout the country and to reintegrate the traditional preaching sects of Sikhism like Udasis and Nirmalas, without in any way encroaching upon the properties of their maths.

(i). Taking necessary steps to bring the Sikh gurdwaras all over the world under a single system of administration with a view to running them according to the basic Sikh forms and to pool their resources for the propagation of Sikhism on a wider and more impressive scale.

(j). Striving to free access to all those holy Sikh shrines, including Nanakana Sahib, form which the Sikh Panth has been separated, for their pilgrimage and proper upkeep.

unquote

the APSR proposes the gross violation of a basic human right (prosecute atheists), in other words it was also horribly anti-Constitution (secular). where are non-khalsa Punjabis in this sectarian resolution.

only one point would make some sense to NKPs:

3. Eradication of poverty and starvation through increased production and more equitable distribution of wealth and also the establishment of a just social order sans exploitation of any kind."

"just social order" Hahaha! The APSR did have sense of humour, i must admit.

sexist Resolution 10"

1. Hindu Succession Act be suitably amended to enable a woman to get rights of inheritance in the properties of her father-in-law instead of the father's.

Casteist (for the Jat, by the jat and of the Jat):

"The agricultural lands of the farmers should be completely exempted from the Wealth Tax and the Estate Tax."

Khalsa does not acknowledge casteism? Wrong!

"The session also calls upon the government that in keeping with the settlement already made, no discrimination should be made between the Sikh and Hindu Harijans in any part of the country'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sher your criticisms of the asr would make me laugh if I didnt know you were serious.Your whole post sounds like Colbert/Stewart style satire the only difference being your not mocking hindutva fanatics who share those views but actually believe those are valid criticisms. I seriously cant believe you typed all of that out.Your shameless hypocrisy and hatred for sikhs renders every single point you make moot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

About the actual book though it is heavily biased I do like this one quote about OBS

One officer told journalist Satish Jacob

Boy what a fight they gave us if I had three Divs like that I would admin cut the hell outta Zia(then pakistan president) any day
Amritsar Mrs. Gandhis Last Battle pg 187

Link to post
Share on other sites

"..its waters"? Satluj originates from Goindwal or bhatinda? Beas gets waters from Kandi area glaciers, right? Ravi definitely sprouts from Sidhu sahib da tubewell in Gurdaspur.

Under international law, any waters that go through a land are the property of that land. although the rivers of panjab start in the himalayas, the stretch of river that runs through Panjab is the property of Panjab. You know this, stop trying to be clever.

Typical reaction ... one of the most respected journalist is an "idiot" in mod edit eyes as he told the truth as it was.

Yet your people arrested and charged Brahma Chellany with waging war against the state, for his work on OB.

Was that a typical reaction as well? Slap a case on anyone who speaks the truth, and exposes state murder?

Link to post
Share on other sites

sexist Resolution 10"

1. Hindu Succession Act be suitably amended to enable a woman to get rights of inheritance in the properties of her father-in-law instead of the father's.

Could someone help elaborate on this issue, why exactly is this sexist and why is it relevant? From the base assumption I have, what I gather is this inheritance has to do with when there is no will and what the government decides. In the olden days men were always preferred as inheritors of wealth. Since a girl who marries off goes and lives with the groom she then some what becomes some what of an owner of that property in that way. Different families have different ways to adjust that about.

I would have imagined in a fair world if a father dies the property would be shared between siblings from the state and the siblings can decide between themselves donating their share to the one who may require it more.

But what I gather is if a woman is a widow and she lives with her father in law, the property won't automatically go to her, so she can end up homeless if there is no will? What's the inheritance laws, maybe someone can look that up.

If it says there should be a change then it reflects previously a woman would only get her fathers inheritance, so if her father dies she can attain the property. However if her inlaws are greedy they might snatch it away from here. I don't really see the point of this inheritance law and it's effects.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Under international law, any waters that go through a land are the property of that land. although the rivers of panjab start in the himalayas, the stretch of river that runs through Panjab is the property of Panjab. You know this, stop trying to be clever.

Himachal has the first right over the rivers which either originate in that state or get bulk of their water from himachali glaciers. Himachal has NEVER tried to blackmail Punjab or ask for royalty for the waters generated in Himachal. Punjab on the other hand has abrogated all water treaties it has with other states and has (Amrinder Singh) suggested that it might ask for royalty for "its waters". Imagine how ballistic Sikhs would go for if Himachal asked for royalty for "its waters" or decided to sell "its waters" to the other states.

Yet your people arrested and charged Brahma Chellany with waging war against the state, for his work on OB.

Brahma was NEVER arrested and government dropped the charges after Supreme Court intervention and journalists' pressure. he never revealed his sources. get your facts right. I have chatted with BC on Twitter about this radical Sikhs' claim. Also, like AR Arshi, isn't Brahma Chellany a "Hindu" writer?

Was that a typical reaction as well? Slap a case on anyone who speaks the truth, and exposes state murder?

You are giving wrong example and stop trying to prove as if i am defending the government's atrocities. unlike you, i am not in a denial mode ..tunnel vision may have problems accepting massacres committed by the sikh radicals, i am not defending anyone here Not indira not the government not KPS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sher your criticisms of the asr would make me laugh if I didnt know you were serious.Your whole post sounds like Colbert/Stewart style satire the only difference being your not mocking hindutva fanatics who share those views but actually believe those are valid criticisms. I seriously cant believe you typed all of that out.Your shameless hypocrisy and hatred for sikhs renders every single point you make moot.

If you are serious, and under 10-years of age, let me make it clear to you that i have quoted APSR verbatim.

I am not sure about hindutva fanatics but the secularists have too many problems with a resolution which reeks of a shameless sectarian agenda.

it is about promoting Sikhi, crushing everything non-sikhi (esp atheists) or just about the farmers (vast majority of whom, as we know, are Jats).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could someone help elaborate on this issue, why exactly is this sexist and why is it relevant? From the base assumption I have, what I gather is this inheritance has to do with when there is no will and what the government decides. In the olden days men were always preferred as inheritors of wealth. Since a girl who marries off goes and lives with the groom she then some what becomes some what of an owner of that property in that way. Different families have different ways to adjust that about.

I would have imagined in a fair world if a father dies the property would be shared between siblings from the state and the siblings can decide between themselves donating their share to the one who may require it more.

But what I gather is if a woman is a widow and she lives with her father in law, the property won't automatically go to her, so she can end up homeless if there is no will? What's the inheritance laws, maybe someone can look that up.

If it says there should be a change then it reflects previously a woman would only get her fathers inheritance, so if her father dies she can attain the property. However if her inlaws are greedy they might snatch it away from here. I don't really see the point of this inheritance law and it's effects.

Jathedar sahib, children and children. why classify them as "daughters" and "sons"? this mindset is one of the major reasons behind such a high rate of female foeticide among the Punjab agrarian communities (dominated by Jats of course) as they don't want their small fields to be divided further.

It is sexist as a daughter is being denied a right in her ancestral property because of her gender. Also discriminatory as not all of the daughters get married.

if i am not wrong a father (or mother) cannot deny a daughter her share in the property if the father has inherited it from his forefathers. About the assets accumulated by father, he can disown his daughter but would need really good reason to do so. I can be wrong about this understanding of inheritance law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jathedar sahib, children and children. why classify them as "daughters" and "sons"? this mindset is one of the major reasons behind such a high rate of female foeticide among the Punjab agrarian communities (dominated by Jats of course) as they don't want their small fields to be divided further.

It is sexist as a daughter is being denied a right in her ancestral property because of her gender. Also discriminatory as not all of the daughters get married.

if i am not wrong a father (or mother) cannot deny a daughter her share in the property if the father has inherited it from his forefathers. About the assets accumulated by father, he can disown his daughter but would need really good reason to do so. I can be wrong about this understanding of inheritance law.

What about from the inlaws do you feel a daughter in law has no claim in inheritance legally from her in laws?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What about from the inlaws do you feel a daughter in law has no claim in inheritance legally from her in laws?

'daughter' has claim on inheritance or assets of her husband not in-laws. Law talks about 'father's" property NOT parents' property or mother's property (which is wrong too in my opinion).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jathedar sahib, children and children. why classify them as "daughters" and "sons"? this mindset is one of the major reasons behind such a high rate of female foeticide among the Punjab agrarian communities (dominated by Jats of course) as they don't want their small fields to be divided further.

It is sexist as a daughter is being denied a right in her ancestral property because of her gender. Also discriminatory as not all of the daughters get married.

if i am not wrong a father (or mother) cannot deny a daughter her share in the property if the father has inherited it from his forefathers. About the assets accumulated by father, he can disown his daughter but would need really good reason to do so. I can be wrong about this understanding of inheritance law.

female infanticide is more common amongst the urban Punjabi Hindus than the rural Sikhs. Where as Sikhs still have 2-3 children average, the urban Punjabi Hindus will rarely even have 2 children being satisfied with only 1 child. As a result of this 1 child policy of the urban Punjabi Hindus has resulted in a very disturbing trend of parents being very selective about only wanting male children because of which the female fetus is aborted while in the womb.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...