What's new

Sikhs rally in London over 1984 India temple attack

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes there is no khalistan movement, but thousands have been seeking JUSTICE of innocent killings of more than 10,000 sikh people in delhi, calcutta , kanpur , bhopal, lucknow since last 27 YEARS and not even single person has been prisoned for it..DOES IT MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE IN YOUR MINDSET TOWARDS INDIAN SYSTEM?? i don't think so..

You wanted to ask me something?
 
. .
Sikhs in the UK are free to express their opinions as are Sikhs in India.....

Don't be silly. :lol:

Indian Hindus have a long history of forming mobs and burning ethnic minorities in India.

So how does a Sikh march in the UK represent Sikhs in India? Unless the Khalistani movement shows up in the form of protest or armed uprising....This hasnt happened since '80s..

They represent the oppressed voice of the Indian Sikhs.

Wonder why I never see you use the same gifted logic when it comes to Tibetians who protest everyday from Delhi to New York? Bias is it?

I just havent seen any proof in the last couple of decades to say that the Khalistan movement in India has any momentum or even a spark.....

Because it's suppressed through mob fear.
 
. .
Did you got my question??
Please re-read post no 40 to read the QUESTION again.

PM me.....Becase I dont make my life public nor the events I have gone through....

But I do want to have this conversation with you.....
 
.
dont be silly.

Almost all Sikhs in India are too afraid to express their true feelings about Khalistan because Hindus will start burning them like packs of wolves.

25,000 is a lot out of the community of 300,000 british sikhs (1/12th). Many may not march but agree with the aims.

If this occurred in India, there would be millions of Sikhs marching.

How would you honestly know these things? I have heard the same things from you guys when you try to talk for the Christians, Muslims, Sikhs, etc in India. You dont have a clue. Today Punjab is one of the well off states in India. And like I said Sikhs today are very much a part of mainstream India. And are a part of a well off community like the Jain, Parsis, etc..

Yes, justice needs to be a meet. We all agree with that.


Indian Hindus have a long history of forming mobs and burning ethnic minorities in India.

I am from a minority group from India. I dont get harassed because of it either by Hindus when I go to India.
 
.
How would you honestly know these things? I have heard the same things from you guys when you try to talk for the Christians, Muslims, Sikhs, etc in India. You dont have a clue. Today Punjab is one of the well off states in India. And like I said Sikhs today are very much a part of mainstream India. And are a part of a well off community like the Jain, Parsis, etc..

Yes, justice needs to be a meet. We all agree with that.

They just don't want Hindu rule. Sikhs had their own state once. I dont think they forgot the taste of it.
 
.
Don't be silly. :lol:

Indian Hindus have a long history of forming mobs and burning ethnic minorities in India.



They represent the oppressed voice of the Indian Sikhs.



Because it's suppressed through mob fear.

You've officially fallen off the reservation.....

Its one random theory after another.....
 
. . .
They just don't want Hindu rule. Sikhs had their own state once. I dont think they forgot the taste of it.


I am not a Hindu, im from a small community from India. I dont see India as 'Hindu' ruled. Its Indian and that's it for us. Many Sikhs view it the same way. Along with the Parsis, Jains, etc.
 
.
Indian government should punish the culprits involved in the riots. Reconcilliation is one area where Indian Government has disappointed me. Crush the rebellion and then make efforts to reconcile with the community. The resentment will linger around otherwise, and that just leaves a bad taste in mouth.

As far as the demand for separate state :lol:
 
.
lol. India is Hindu ruled. Anyone saying it's not is in denial. They even elect the BJP Hindu fanatics.
 
.
Why didn't the Sikhs arm themselves in 1984, in self-defence?

I thought Sikhs were supposed to be the "martial" type, surely they could have seen off the National Congress thugs if they were armed.
 
. .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom