I was reading recent reports of a pastor in usa,who planned to burn 1000 copies of quran on 11th september and i couldn't help myself wondering,how can this happen in a country that prides itself to be the doyen and protector of democracy around the world.How can someone issue such outrageous,blatant and inflammatory statements,especially someone in the united states but the more cause of concern was the support that pastor had.Yes!!no one in the govt. was interested in taking the pastor head on and were just content issuing lame statements like........its not good for america,u will endanger lives of our people,etc etc.Imagine had this happened in our country!!!Granted we have had our share of riots and all but they were old times,before the so called information age.But here i am not going to defend india and defame usa,i am gonna talk about what is 'logical' and how any of us have no control over it.
Ok lets take usa first.For some time now it has followed the big stick policy of being the international policeman,with the 'stated' aim of ending dictatorship and ushering in democracy around the world and most of us,courtesy cnn,bbc etc actually believe it to be true!!!.But don't we know that usa supports one of the biggest monarchy or lets say dictatorship in the world,yes,saudi arabia.Egypt is a dictatorship no matter what they claim.Most of the countries of south america have puppet rulers,even when they had elections and chose their representatives,most of them were removed by CIA sponsored coups.They did the same thing in iran that culminated in the Islamic revolution of 1979.And since then as iran stopped supporting usa in any of its endeveors,it was declared as an evil state,threat to the world peace,harbour of criminals and so on.They attacked iraq on the same pretext and we all know what they found there.........NOTHING........ .Yes its true that saddam hussein was no saint,he mercilessly killed anyone who opposed him but atleast fot the past 10 years or so iraq was seen largely as a peaceful nation.And look at it now,shattered,destroyed with children dying on the streets having nothing to eat,people beaten up in their own country by nato soldiers.And this nation claims to be the savior of people!!!come on people,u got to wake up.
Coming back to the question of religious tolerance..........what the fuck do westerners know about it??i mean usa has only 5 % minorities,among that only .6% of muslim people.India has got 15-16% muslims and still we have been living peacefully(except godhra)...for centuries.Whtevr clashes we have had is due to the shear size of minorities,i mean its not .6%,,,,its substantial enough and if u have two major religions so close to each other and in big numbers its bound to create problems.But whats america's problem????Is it just by chance that they have attacked only the muslim countries,or is it the new age crusade???
From all the discussion above it is certain that usa claims about being protector of democracy are a blatant lie,helped by the fact that no one has courage to disagree with it let alone oppose it.And who knows maybe even european union is also enjoying cheap iraqi oil and thinks being silent will serve it good.But make no mistake fellows,,,,,,,,usa maybe good for its own people but considering its actions elsewhere it is no different from a terrorist.
Friday, September 10, 2010
Thursday, September 2, 2010
terrorists???(part 2)
A few days back i posted a blog on kashmir which i am sure will whip the passions of many,,,,,i may be labelled as a fool,pakistani agent,anti-national and so on but whatever i said or wrote is a reality....and no one can deny it or for that matter change it.I asked three very simple questions in the end.In today's entry i would be trying to answer those questions and offer the solutions(if thats possible at all)
First of all,,,to call pakistanis terrorists is just a matter of our opinion just as calling 'us' is theirs.Yes,thats true,,India is not that sober as it projects itself to be.There are reports from various sources that we supplied weapons to rebels in balochistan to spread dissent.And supposedly pakistan even presented a dossier of proof to india....and don't forget manmohan singh was persuaded to add balochistan in joint statement at sharm-al-sheikh.Why did india agree to it in first place????Even though it may not be possible prove our link to balochistan insurgents, we would be considered 'naive' if we reject this outrightly.Remember our spy satbir singh(or whatever was his name).The only difference is that they have been successful in spreading terror and we have failed to do so(or maybe not!!).The reasons for our failure(to spread terror) are many.First of all pakistan is able to whip up the sentiments of muslims there by highlighting our supposed 'mistreatment' of muslims and gujrat riots galvanized the negative attitude towards us.And a new jehadi coming to india on any mission(suicide,bomb blasts etc)can easily go undetected due to our big country and sizable muslim population.It is not to suggest that muslims in india are hand in glove with terrorists but 'some' of them like SIMI and INDIAN MUJAHIDEEN have gone astray and have been known to be assosiated with terrorists.
India on the other hand can't do much in pakistan.It can't motivate people to go to pakistan for terror attacks!!we have no agenda.Its not a matter what we want or not,its a matter of what we can do or not.For terrorism to breed there should be a group of unhappy people.True,people there are fed up with setup but can they side with india(a hindu majority state that dosen't treat muslims well,so they say!!!) against their country.NO.But the very same group of people that would refuse to hurt pakistan on india's insistence are bleeding pakistan on insistence of who????Taliban........religion has a very powerful influence,no one can deny it....not even an atheist(yes u heard it right).And it would remain as a big factor forever,as religion in toto includes not only praying but some customs and mannerisms associated with it and no two religions will have these in comman.This view may not be shared by many(including me) but we are in a minority and i am talking of things in general.
Now coming back to the problem of kashmir.....i think the above paragraph explains all.Kashmiris will never,i repeat,never join India if a voting is done.India maybe secular,much more progressive,tolerant,developed that pakistan but they simply won't join india.period.
The last thing is what do we do????The answer is nothing,keep on doing what we have been doing for last 62 years,suppress kashmiris 'cause accepting any form of political solution would be suicide for india.Other nations may intervene,case may go to international court of justice and why do u think india dosen't want this......because deep down it knows its on a slippery ground.
Whatever i wrote is the ground reality(at least according to me,lol) but after all this u ask me what would i do.The answer is simple............I am an indian...
First of all,,,to call pakistanis terrorists is just a matter of our opinion just as calling 'us' is theirs.Yes,thats true,,India is not that sober as it projects itself to be.There are reports from various sources that we supplied weapons to rebels in balochistan to spread dissent.And supposedly pakistan even presented a dossier of proof to india....and don't forget manmohan singh was persuaded to add balochistan in joint statement at sharm-al-sheikh.Why did india agree to it in first place????Even though it may not be possible prove our link to balochistan insurgents, we would be considered 'naive' if we reject this outrightly.Remember our spy satbir singh(or whatever was his name).The only difference is that they have been successful in spreading terror and we have failed to do so(or maybe not!!).The reasons for our failure(to spread terror) are many.First of all pakistan is able to whip up the sentiments of muslims there by highlighting our supposed 'mistreatment' of muslims and gujrat riots galvanized the negative attitude towards us.And a new jehadi coming to india on any mission(suicide,bomb blasts etc)can easily go undetected due to our big country and sizable muslim population.It is not to suggest that muslims in india are hand in glove with terrorists but 'some' of them like SIMI and INDIAN MUJAHIDEEN have gone astray and have been known to be assosiated with terrorists.
India on the other hand can't do much in pakistan.It can't motivate people to go to pakistan for terror attacks!!we have no agenda.Its not a matter what we want or not,its a matter of what we can do or not.For terrorism to breed there should be a group of unhappy people.True,people there are fed up with setup but can they side with india(a hindu majority state that dosen't treat muslims well,so they say!!!) against their country.NO.But the very same group of people that would refuse to hurt pakistan on india's insistence are bleeding pakistan on insistence of who????Taliban........religion has a very powerful influence,no one can deny it....not even an atheist(yes u heard it right).And it would remain as a big factor forever,as religion in toto includes not only praying but some customs and mannerisms associated with it and no two religions will have these in comman.This view may not be shared by many(including me) but we are in a minority and i am talking of things in general.
Now coming back to the problem of kashmir.....i think the above paragraph explains all.Kashmiris will never,i repeat,never join India if a voting is done.India maybe secular,much more progressive,tolerant,developed that pakistan but they simply won't join india.period.
The last thing is what do we do????The answer is nothing,keep on doing what we have been doing for last 62 years,suppress kashmiris 'cause accepting any form of political solution would be suicide for india.Other nations may intervene,case may go to international court of justice and why do u think india dosen't want this......because deep down it knows its on a slippery ground.
Whatever i wrote is the ground reality(at least according to me,lol) but after all this u ask me what would i do.The answer is simple............I am an indian...
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
the bloodbath(4)
Post 1982,congress was suddenly bhindranwale's nemesis.Suddenly his mentors were all bad people out to destroy sikhism.Anyone who spoke against him was labelled either an rss worker or a nirankari and one way or other killed.People in hundreds lost their lives.Contrary to the popular perception majority of the people killed were sikhs only!!!( Of a total of 11,694 persons killed by terrorists in Punjab during the period 1981-1993, 7,139 - more than 61 per cent - were Sikhshttp://www.satp.org/satporgtp/publication/nightsoffalsehood/falsehood4.htm ).Now these are official values,so no one start his or her version.
But still there are many opinions on this particular topic.According to many people,some of my friends whose families had witnessed those times,all these people were killed on the behest of indira gandhi and bhindranwale was maligned for no reason.But this explanation seems quite absurd,however no one can completely rule it out.
Coming back to the topic,bhindranwale's clout was increasing like a wild fire.People were impressed by his speeches,his adherence to basic sikhi principles and his tough stand vis a vis govt on various contentious issues.His speeches too which were earlier on towards the religion soon shifted towards 'liberation' of sikhs from the supposedly sinister hindu society.( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8gTaX6KChQ&feature=related).....This video shows him telling every sikh village to have one motorcycle,3 young men and three brand new pistols for self defence.!!!!!!!!Defence from who???
1)hindus???...........they form only 35% of punjab
2)government????.....at that time akalis were in power,they certainly won't kill sikhs
So we can see clearly that this demand had no justification whatsoever.
People kept on being murdered,made to move out of bus and gunned down in front of other people.Virtually whole punjab was in bhindranwale's grip,no decision could be made without his clearance.He was virtually running punjab.But pressure on police to arrest him started rising,fearing arrest he lodged himself in guru nanak niwas in golden temple complex.He remained there for some time untill the area was taken over by babbar khalsa gang.Now he had nowhere to stay,and at this time he took the extreme step of making akal takth(the epitome of sikh political power) his home.Technically it is sacriligeous for anyone except sri guru granth sahib to sleep there,but never the less giving a logic that everything is fair in war,he started sleeping there.Daily a darbar was held there,people came with their complaint,their grieviances and bhindranwale solved those.The gravity of the situation was known when a sikh,unarmed dig of police was gunned down inside the golden temple itself covering the sacred marble stone with blood.This event was only the second time in history of sikh religion,after ahmad shah abdali's raid that something of this magnitude happened there.
By this bhindranwale directly challanged the government.Still it was impossible for police to go,or even try to go near temple.***cont***
But still there are many opinions on this particular topic.According to many people,some of my friends whose families had witnessed those times,all these people were killed on the behest of indira gandhi and bhindranwale was maligned for no reason.But this explanation seems quite absurd,however no one can completely rule it out.
Coming back to the topic,bhindranwale's clout was increasing like a wild fire.People were impressed by his speeches,his adherence to basic sikhi principles and his tough stand vis a vis govt on various contentious issues.His speeches too which were earlier on towards the religion soon shifted towards 'liberation' of sikhs from the supposedly sinister hindu society.( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8gTaX6KChQ&feature=related).....This video shows him telling every sikh village to have one motorcycle,3 young men and three brand new pistols for self defence.!!!!!!!!Defence from who???
1)hindus???...........they form only 35% of punjab
2)government????.....at that time akalis were in power,they certainly won't kill sikhs
So we can see clearly that this demand had no justification whatsoever.
People kept on being murdered,made to move out of bus and gunned down in front of other people.Virtually whole punjab was in bhindranwale's grip,no decision could be made without his clearance.He was virtually running punjab.But pressure on police to arrest him started rising,fearing arrest he lodged himself in guru nanak niwas in golden temple complex.He remained there for some time untill the area was taken over by babbar khalsa gang.Now he had nowhere to stay,and at this time he took the extreme step of making akal takth(the epitome of sikh political power) his home.Technically it is sacriligeous for anyone except sri guru granth sahib to sleep there,but never the less giving a logic that everything is fair in war,he started sleeping there.Daily a darbar was held there,people came with their complaint,their grieviances and bhindranwale solved those.The gravity of the situation was known when a sikh,unarmed dig of police was gunned down inside the golden temple itself covering the sacred marble stone with blood.This event was only the second time in history of sikh religion,after ahmad shah abdali's raid that something of this magnitude happened there.
By this bhindranwale directly challanged the government.Still it was impossible for police to go,or even try to go near temple.***cont***
bhindranwale's power(3)
Let's discuss something about the 'man' himself who single handedly swayed masses in his favour sans his forceful speeches and his undaunting religious fervour.After the death of damdami taksal head he was appointed the taksal head at the age of 30 years only.He was the youngest head of damdami taksal,,the prestigious institution started by guru gobind singh himself.He did not study much but had the qualities of a leader instilled in him from the birth itself,,,,for whatever maybe opinion against him........that he was too radical etc,his courage,determination and valour were never questioned.
After the emergency,people, tired of indra gandhi's excesses voted janta dal to power in delhi and akali dal formed the government in punjab.Gandhi,sensing bhindranwale's clout among the rural folk and his not so pleasant relations with akalis,started supporting him(pre 1982-83).There are various examples of tacit support that congress gave bhindranwale
1)rajiv gandhi personally met him at cremation of bhai fauja singh(of akhand kirtani jatha)
2)Even after death of lala jagat narain,when everyone knew that he was the one responsible,nothing was done at all.In fact he stayed at circuit house for some days and giani zial singh made a statement in parliament that punjab situation was under control,which clearly was not.
Government(congress) had hoped to use bhindranwale as a tool to neutralise akalis in punjab.The plan may have worked except that bhindranwale started issuing more and more religious statements than doing any political bidding for congress.Akalis were clever to acknowledge his rising popularity and thus started supporting him in his religious endeveours.This lead to whole mixup and suddenly bhindranwale seemed to be bobbing towards akalis for the comman goodwill of sikhs.So indira gandhi had created a monster which she herself failed to control and this ultimately led to her demise.****cont***
After the emergency,people, tired of indra gandhi's excesses voted janta dal to power in delhi and akali dal formed the government in punjab.Gandhi,sensing bhindranwale's clout among the rural folk and his not so pleasant relations with akalis,started supporting him(pre 1982-83).There are various examples of tacit support that congress gave bhindranwale
1)rajiv gandhi personally met him at cremation of bhai fauja singh(of akhand kirtani jatha)
2)Even after death of lala jagat narain,when everyone knew that he was the one responsible,nothing was done at all.In fact he stayed at circuit house for some days and giani zial singh made a statement in parliament that punjab situation was under control,which clearly was not.
Government(congress) had hoped to use bhindranwale as a tool to neutralise akalis in punjab.The plan may have worked except that bhindranwale started issuing more and more religious statements than doing any political bidding for congress.Akalis were clever to acknowledge his rising popularity and thus started supporting him in his religious endeveours.This lead to whole mixup and suddenly bhindranwale seemed to be bobbing towards akalis for the comman goodwill of sikhs.So indira gandhi had created a monster which she herself failed to control and this ultimately led to her demise.****cont***
punjab burns......(2)
One would have thought that maybe death of baba gurbachan singh(head of nirankaris) would douse the flames.But people were in for a rude shock.Bhindranwale,tasting the blood became still stronger,making simply outrageous statements almost on daily basis(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZD32pV28Guc&feature=related)........this particular video shows him making comments after slaying lala jagat narain(of punjab kesri group),,,,and what was his fault u would ask?????He wrote some story on sikh gurus,that they used to live like princes and he dared to call akalis and bhindranwale terrorists and traitors.
Now regarding guru saheban,is it an insult to call them princes????was he propagating hatred towards sikhs>>>no.was he making any outrageous statements not previously known.>>>no,so where is the question of him being sacrilegous????Yes regarding the bold stance he took,he dared to challenge the autocracy of bhindranwale and gang.
To prove my point let me ask u a very simple question.If any state,take the example of kashmir,wants autonomy .....wants to function independent of india today what would u say????Yes the first thing that would come to mind is TRAITORS,ANTI NATIONAL and so on........the very same thing may have come to lala's mind when bhindranwale and akalis were shouting for autonomy.True lala may have exceeded his limits,we are no one to raise fingers on guru sahib,But there is a freedom of speech that has to be maintained and he said nothing out of the books.Anyhow people found those comments offensive and lala was shot dead in 1981.***cont***
Now regarding guru saheban,is it an insult to call them princes????was he propagating hatred towards sikhs>>>no.was he making any outrageous statements not previously known.>>>no,so where is the question of him being sacrilegous????Yes regarding the bold stance he took,he dared to challenge the autocracy of bhindranwale and gang.
To prove my point let me ask u a very simple question.If any state,take the example of kashmir,wants autonomy .....wants to function independent of india today what would u say????Yes the first thing that would come to mind is TRAITORS,ANTI NATIONAL and so on........the very same thing may have come to lala's mind when bhindranwale and akalis were shouting for autonomy.True lala may have exceeded his limits,we are no one to raise fingers on guru sahib,But there is a freedom of speech that has to be maintained and he said nothing out of the books.Anyhow people found those comments offensive and lala was shot dead in 1981.***cont***
punjab problem(1)
Today i am going to touch a very emotive and explosive topic especially for the sikhs.Yes i will talk about the punjab terrorism,its genesis,people responsible,their possible motives etc.
For what i know the problem essentially started in the year 1973 with the passage of the anandpur sahib resolution(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anandpur_Resolution.)Now if you read carefully u will realize that most of the conditions mentioned there are concerned only with the sikhs.....the so called end of 'discrimination' towards them,giving them more representation in the army due to their martial nature,prevent the 'deterioration' of sikh religion etc.There is nothing wrong in these things except that punjab has got about 30-35 % hindus.
1)Why was govt. only concerned about sikhs in particular when the very basis of sikh religion is equality to all??????
2)Were they not sowing seeds of animosity between the communities by coming up with such lopsided resolution???
Anyways the most ambitious clause in the resolution was the adoption of federal setup with decentralisation of power making the states autonomous with only defence,communications,currency and foreign policy remaining under the govt.They might have even succeded in making punjab an independent country but for some tough decisions.Uptill this point the demands were purely political, with akalis trying to appease the majority community(sikhs in punjab)
But tension was growing in rural punjab over different sects,who,according to akalis were weaning the sikhs away from the religion.Leading the protest was bhai fauja singh,a nihang well versed in the art of gatka and his group.....Akhand kirtani jatha.Another prominent leader, who would over the next few years alter the history of punjab,was also starting to assert himself.He was Jarnail singh Bhindranwale,who as the head of damdami taksal commanded considerable respect among the radical sikhs.Out of all these sects nirankari sect was the largest,and there were reports that its chief was spreading ill views about sikh gurus in public and openly denied their greatness.So under such conditions prevailing a clash was bound to occur.It happened on april 1978 in amritsar.Supposidly the sect head was giving some speach just near the golden temple ,,,,,akhand kirtani jatha ang bhindranwale group decided to do something.Against the wishes of many they marched out,about 150 of them towards the procession.Now what happened next is bone of contention between radical groups and other people.According to the police and administration bhai fauja sing and group attacked nirankari head and so for defensive purposes some had to be gunned down,but according to some sikhs the nirankaris attacked the first without any reason!!!!!In that clash 13 of the sikhs and 3 of the nirankaris lost their lives.
This incident added fuel to the fire and the conflict between radical groups and nirankaris escalated and it resulted in ultimately the death of its head by a sikh in 1980.There was no turning back for the sikh right after this and it lead to one of the bloodiest and darkest period for the sikhs in the history of their existence.****cont tomorrow****
For what i know the problem essentially started in the year 1973 with the passage of the anandpur sahib resolution(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anandpur_Resolution.)Now if you read carefully u will realize that most of the conditions mentioned there are concerned only with the sikhs.....the so called end of 'discrimination' towards them,giving them more representation in the army due to their martial nature,prevent the 'deterioration' of sikh religion etc.There is nothing wrong in these things except that punjab has got about 30-35 % hindus.
1)Why was govt. only concerned about sikhs in particular when the very basis of sikh religion is equality to all??????
2)Were they not sowing seeds of animosity between the communities by coming up with such lopsided resolution???
Anyways the most ambitious clause in the resolution was the adoption of federal setup with decentralisation of power making the states autonomous with only defence,communications,currency and foreign policy remaining under the govt.They might have even succeded in making punjab an independent country but for some tough decisions.Uptill this point the demands were purely political, with akalis trying to appease the majority community(sikhs in punjab)
But tension was growing in rural punjab over different sects,who,according to akalis were weaning the sikhs away from the religion.Leading the protest was bhai fauja singh,a nihang well versed in the art of gatka and his group.....Akhand kirtani jatha.Another prominent leader, who would over the next few years alter the history of punjab,was also starting to assert himself.He was Jarnail singh Bhindranwale,who as the head of damdami taksal commanded considerable respect among the radical sikhs.Out of all these sects nirankari sect was the largest,and there were reports that its chief was spreading ill views about sikh gurus in public and openly denied their greatness.So under such conditions prevailing a clash was bound to occur.It happened on april 1978 in amritsar.Supposidly the sect head was giving some speach just near the golden temple ,,,,,akhand kirtani jatha ang bhindranwale group decided to do something.Against the wishes of many they marched out,about 150 of them towards the procession.Now what happened next is bone of contention between radical groups and other people.According to the police and administration bhai fauja sing and group attacked nirankari head and so for defensive purposes some had to be gunned down,but according to some sikhs the nirankaris attacked the first without any reason!!!!!In that clash 13 of the sikhs and 3 of the nirankaris lost their lives.
This incident added fuel to the fire and the conflict between radical groups and nirankaris escalated and it resulted in ultimately the death of its head by a sikh in 1980.There was no turning back for the sikh right after this and it lead to one of the bloodiest and darkest period for the sikhs in the history of their existence.****cont tomorrow****
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)