|
Post by Tony on Jan 11, 2010 18:18:29 GMT
The bit about people getting pulled of buses is actually true. I used to see the pictures on the front cover of Des Perdes.
But not to sure if it was just Sikhs picking of Hindu's or were Hindus doing it to inside / outside of the Punjab.
|
|
|
Post by Pendoo on Jan 11, 2010 18:23:33 GMT
The bit about people getting pulled of buses is actually true. I used to see the pictures on the front cover of Des Perdes. But not to sure if it was just Sikhs picking of Hindu's or were Hindus doing it to inside / outside of the Punjab. Hindus did it post Indras assassination. I've never heard of Sikhs initiating it in the run up the Golden Temple attack
|
|
|
Post by GhabruJatt on Jan 11, 2010 18:49:40 GMT
The thing that angers most moderate Sikhs including myself was the fact that Bhindrawale took refuge in Harminder Sahib and used it as a fortress. No one has the right to do that -he knew it was going to get destroyed, surely if he was such a great man would he not of been better sacrifising himself rather then our shrine? The Indian Govt had no right to attack it, we all know that and god damn those Bas!*rds There is a thing called negotiating and im sure Bhindrawale would of come out eventually. As for the Bus killings there was a lot of that happening-weekly photos in Des Pardes as Tony mentioned
|
|
|
Post by thereturnofbugs on Jan 11, 2010 20:03:14 GMT
They had the chance to take out Bhindrenwale many a time before june 3rd. He was walking around freely, within distance of Indian snipers this was NOT an attack on Bhindrenwale, it was attack on SIKHS and Sikh identity. Bugs
|
|
|
Post by Munda UK Da on Jan 12, 2010 0:19:21 GMT
this was NOT an attack on Bhindrenwale, it was attack on SIKHS and Sikh identity. Bugs agree 100% the attack was carried out under the banner that the govt was trying to aprehend Bhindrwale, BUT there was no risk to anyone inside the Darbaar Sahib, Bhindrawale was not holding any hostages so there was no risk of the army not acting leading to the innocent killings of people - it was the actions of the Indian army that led to the killings of thousands of innocents!!!!!! You can argue that Bhindrawale should or should not have taken refuge in the Darbaar Sahib, but the fact remains that him being there was not a threat to anyone - the army made that threat when they parked up outside the Darbaar Sahib, we should decimate a hindu mandar and see what they make of it! Sikhi is full of kurbaniya (sacrifices), where as the rice eating PDY hindus have always been pu551es, they came to Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji for help when they were getting bummed by Emperor Arungzaeb and Guru Ji without hesitation went and sacrificed Himself for a religion he did not believe in!!!!!!! General Brar might think he did the right thing and might feel secure with his bodyguards around him, but he should know when he stands before the Almighty there will be no bodyguards or tanks to help him.
|
|
|
Post by 5abi_Xtasy on Jan 12, 2010 0:47:38 GMT
im frm tha states..is there a way for us to see it.. !! the video doesnt allow us to see it...only Uk folks..thats kind of a dropper... Tony..any alternatives???
|
|
|
Post by JackWilshere on Jan 12, 2010 4:00:22 GMT
Some of the early part of the programme is questionable, I don't think the period around these events was covered too well - the anti sikh elements in punjab at the time, some of the interviews were lost in translation too. Heartbreaking stuff at the end of the programme, the widows colony etc. It was a BBC programme, so I knew they would play it safe, and sadly they did. Just watched it, still digesting it, but nothing new here or something I didn't already know.
In terms of Bhindramwale, some of his actions were questionable, but none of those take away from him being the foremost figures of modern sikhism.
|
|
|
Post by panjab1 on Jan 12, 2010 8:24:04 GMT
Probably one of the worst moments of the programme was when she asked the young kid running the stall selling items of Bhindrawale if he'd personally suffered any attacks on his religion in college/school etc. He said no not personally and from that Sonia concluded that Sikhs were not treated differently in India at all.
I'm sorry but that's absolute rubbish. They aren't even recognised in India or under the Indian Constitution. Sikh weddings aren't even classed as legal and they have to get a Hindu wedding certificate. Maybe they should have researched the issue more rather than making widespread statements such as that
I find it quite sad that after one programme lasting only an hour that there are Sikhs posting messages on Facebook saying Bhindrawale wasn't a Saint etc. Yeah I'm sure he did things wrong but what he did for Sikhs was unreal. The Head Giani in Amritsar who was there on the day even said he was an honest man sticking up for his faith. He never stood for any attacks on his faith and I admire him for that.
The issue I have with Sikhi today is that we're too easily divided. If you look at Muslims, any attacks on their faith they always stick together. For Sikhs there are too many uneducated people who'll watch a biased programme like this and turn a hero for Sikhs into a terrorist.
Bhindrawale stood up for what he believed in. He was a holy man reciting path over 100 times a day. He convinced a lot of people to take Amrit and was truly inspirational.
This programme was a whitewash much like I expected from Sonia Deol and co. She feels so at home and so close to her faith when she's in the Punjab. But when she's in England she talks modern english, wears english clothes and can't be bothered to change her name back. It's all words from her. Even when she was saying the name of a Guru she never said Sri in front or Ji at the end. Total disrespect.
I never really held her in that high regard. She's a poor presenter on radio and did Sikhs no justice in this programme either. She should be ashamed of herself for helping to turn the memory of a true Hero into that of a terrorist.
I look forward to the Sikh Channels own take on the 1984 massacre by the Indian Govt.
|
|
|
Post by Pendoo on Jan 12, 2010 9:43:06 GMT
Yeah the interview with the kid at the stall was a shambles...firstly conducted in english and secondly when she concluded that he didn't seem to have any evidence for his grievances towards the government and support for bindranwala.
The section at the end made me laugh the most. Something along the lines of her saying it fills her with pride knowing that she would change here name to her real name if she wasn't known as Sonia Deol. Pathetic cop out in my opinion.
|
|
psp
Full Member
Posts: 211
|
Post by psp on Jan 12, 2010 9:48:05 GMT
I just want to clarify and add alittle info to what Gubru Jatt mentioned: The problem with these 'moderates' is the lack of knowledge they have on there religion and there history. Firstly it was well known that the government conspired to attack the golden temple, infact BBC's Mark tully in his reports at the time even mentions that Indian Special Forces were trained by the SAS for this mission, 18 months prior to the attack. The indian army also built a replica of the golden temple in rajasthan and trained for months. And according to A R Darshi a high level MP in punjab at the time, this knowledge was well known not only within his circles but Bhindrewale also. So the facts are that the government were one way or another gonna attacke the 'foundations' of our faith, Bhindrewale was the stooge. So the questions of keeping arms and making it a fortress could be seen as defence. Throughout Sikh history harmindar sahib has been a fortress, it hosted guns, cannons etc, etc, infact Anandpur Sahib was a purpose built military fort. During troubled times, and at a time where Sikhi is being attacked, it's not just common sense but a neccesity. During the 80's government agencies were targetting Sikhs, as long as they were innocent, Bhindrewale offered them refuge.......nothing more then any Sikh should do. Bhindrewale on many occasions oponely stated that if they want to arrest him, all they have to do is say.......................infact he was arrested once already and released, so this nonsense about him refusing arrest etc is and bull, the indian forces gave no warning, nor did they ask for his surrender, nor did they negotiate, this was a timely planned attack to destroy the confidence of the Sikh people and to halt the 'Anandpur Sahib' accord being law and giving Sikhs there rightful ownership of punjab!!! On the so called Bus shootings by Sikh terrorist, firstly you have to differentiate between the different agencies at the time, Bhindrewale wasn't the only force at the time, there was Babbar Khalsa, ISYF and many others who were independant from Jarnail SIngh and infact were in conflict with him on many issues. Secondly, is evidence, on many occasions the indian media and police were caught falsifying evidence etc, and there is evidence to suggest that these encounters were orchestrated by the police. There was no evidence tying Bhindrewale or his men to these attacks, he was not anti hindu and did do alot for hindu people people aswell. Babbar Khalsa etc on the other hand lead a armed campaign, but vowed to only attack security forces and always 'owned up' to there actions. So as nobody claimed responsibilities for these actions, who did them? On the programme itself, it was badly researched and it placed itself on middle ground, not leading to offence the average indian or the average Sikh. Why? ?, it's blatently obvious, the presenter wants a career in media, she was never going to jeopardise that! Positives, from the programme is that Sikh youths and so called moderates are becomming open enough to discuss 84, and hopefully it will give them the inpetus to learn the truth!!!
|
|
|
Post by panjab1 on Jan 12, 2010 10:15:26 GMT
Sonia's career is more important than the truth. That's the fact of the matter. What's to stop her changing her name back? I'd never change my name, it's given to me by my parents and has meaning.
She is a hypocrite on all levels. Is it a coincidence she's been given a new show on the Asian Network? She sold out big time. Can't interview for sh*t. And the interview with the young sikh guy was cringeworthy. Just jumped to the wrong conclusion.
What really sticks out is that the people who lost loved ones never criticised Bhindrawale. That speaks volumes.
For me the man was a Saint and Sikhs should be proud of him and what he stood for
|
|
|
Post by GhabruJatt on Jan 12, 2010 11:38:17 GMT
The majority of these bus attacks where conducted by criminals whose sole purpose was to loot. They where not associated with the Khalistan movement but posed as Khalistanis My familly back home in Punjab actually was forced to house some militants that where on the run from the Police. I speak to them about what happened and they say at no point where they scared or threatened by these men even though there where several women present
|
|
|
Post by panjab1 on Jan 12, 2010 12:33:30 GMT
It's easy to blame everything on Sikhs and the Khalistan movement. All Govt. propaganda. I am disgusted at the amount of Sikhs now saying Bhindrawale wasn't a Saint, he was a bad guy. Total disgrace
|
|
|
Post by AJ on Jan 12, 2010 14:58:32 GMT
But when she's in England she talks modern english, wears english clothes What has this got to do with the price of fish?
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Jan 12, 2010 15:21:31 GMT
Sonia's career is more important than the truth. That's the fact of the matter. What's to stop her changing her name back? I'd never change my name, it's given to me by my parents and has meaning. She is a hypocrite on all levels. Is it a coincidence she's been given a new show on the Asian Network? She sold out big time. Can't interview for sh*t. And the interview with the young sikh guy was cringeworthy. Just jumped to the wrong conclusion. What really sticks out is that the people who lost loved ones never criticised Bhindrawale. That speaks volumes. For me the man was a Saint and Sikhs should be proud of him and what he stood for Sonia Deol is her stage name. Ive said this before on another thread, loads of people in the media / showbiz change their names for what ever reason. Sonia is not the first & won't be the last. Same with a few other presenters( I think & not 100% sure it was to do with Sunrise Radio wanting presenters names easier to mention). I've known about Sonia's real name (Jaswinder Kaur Sidhu) for a few years & when I did ask her about it, I think it was at the Bhangrafest in 2005/6 she said the same thing back then, she wish she could go back to her real name, but it's to hard to do. Remember her entire media career has always been as Sonia Deol. rather then Jaswinder Kaur Sidhu Also the documentry was made by BBC 1 for more of a mainstreme level, to promote awareness of 1984. The fact that it got 1.3 million views at on TV at that time of night is VERY GOOD. Not to sure what the responce is like on the I player, but I can see it being just as good. Like J Skills said on his facebook page yesterday "you can slag Sonia Deol all you want, but where are other Sikhs in the media who shy away from 1984... why cus there scared that there image might be damaged, leave the hate she is the only SIKH in media who has been brave enoug to question 1984 on Air" As for her radio show, it's got nothing to do with the BBC 1 documentry. Remember Sonia has been with the Asian Network since day 1 more or less. Sometimes the station bosses get the presenters to do other stuff for the station. But does not mean that they are out of the station. Dipps Bhamrah, Anita Rani and now Jas Rao are all doing stuff for the Asian Network & are not just presenters. She also said that NOT Everyone in Punjab was in favor of Bindranwale & did not want to say it on Camera. As for the young lad Satnam, he knew what Sonia was saying, remember they probally speak better English out In India then we do over here. In fact I know so as 1 of my own brothers wife is from India & I have a few cousins who's wifes are from India & they speak the Queens English, although some do have a accent. The only thing is maybe he did not want to mention the RSS or other non Sikh groups or even all these Babe we got who are claiming to be sant's, who are roaming around Punjab with protection by the Punjab Police on camera. 2 more things: Panjab 1 are you telling me you always wear traditonal Punjabi clothes in the UK & always speak Punjabi in the UK to everyone?? Don't get me wrong here, I'm not having a go, just asking a question. Also at the end of the documentry, Sonia's closing statement was this "As for the events of 1984 should never happened. It was ill thought out & the reprucussions were devastating. I used to think 84 was all about politics, now I think it's about innocent people & the high price they had to pay. I can never visit India again without feeling the grive & sadness of the people I met"I personally think Sonia has been getting to much abuse for no reason. Also let other channels who are going on about the show produce their own documentry. It would be good to see a more indepth programme, but let's see who will pick up from where the BBC has finished from.
|
|
|
Post by panjab1 on Jan 12, 2010 15:48:30 GMT
But when she's in England she talks modern english, wears english clothes What has this got to do with the price of fish? I don't think it has any effect on the price of fish but the point is that she went to great lengths to make out she was going to give an unbiased view of what went on in the first 10 mins of the programme and how she feels close to her religion when she is back in India, but really she talks rubbish. Listen to her on Radio and watch her on TV and there is nothing Indian about her. The only thing she succeeded in doing was raising awareness of what happened but convincing loads of uneducated people that Bhindrawale was a terrorist and that Sikhs aren't opressed in India. She was the most in appropriate person to present such a programme because she is so Un-Indian it's untrue
|
|
|
Post by panjab1 on Jan 12, 2010 16:14:40 GMT
Tony, I know you’re not having a go. You make some good points in your post. In response to your question to me, no I don’t wear traditional Punjabi clothes all of the time in the UK. I take your point on that but in response to some of the points you raise, I’d say the following.
She made some very general sweeping statements in that documentary. She said “Not everyone was in favour of Bhindrawale”. I’m sorry but you can’t make a statement like that and not back it up with proof. If you haven’t got people to come on camera to say it then don’t say it. She is in essence a journalist and journalists are renowned for making up stuff. I’m sure she’s no different. I could present a show and say “Every Sikh I came across said Bhindrawale was a Saint. Thank you very much” and leave it at that. Would that make it true? Would people believe that?
As for the kid Satnam, I’m not convinced he fully understood what she was asking. Maybe he did. But again the issue that I have was that from his response she stupidly concluded that there is no vendetta against Sikhi in India. Come on, she’s in the media, again a sweeping statement. One person’s experience doesn’t make it gospel does it? I could find you 100 Sikhs who would disagree
The issue is, and why a lot of people have taken exception to her ‘performance’ in this programme is, set aside the first 5 or 10 mins after that she immediately set about finding out why Bhindrawale turned from a peaceful saint to some bad man. She didn’t say it in those exact words but basically that was the gist of what she was getting at. Then she went and spoke to Mark Tulley who has changed his story about 20 times. For 50 mins she took the angle that Bhindrawale turned into a bad guy and she wanted to find out why.
J Skillz makes a valid point. Yes she went and explored the issue of 1984 and raised awareness. Fair play to her for that. But there’s loads of programmes on Operation Blue Star and videos of what happened. Some people just watch an hour programme on the BBC and take it as gospel that what they heard in that was true. But what I would take exception to J Skillz is, fair play she made the programme, but why make stupid comments and attack it from an inaccurate angle and put an unfair slant on things.
I know she’s been on the Asian Network for a very long time. I was just being cynical. For me she came out very badly from that programme, maybe not in the eyes of some people who are less educated on 1984 but people who have read independently on what happened in 1984 and the events running up to that sad day. For me, she comes into one of the uneducated people on 1984 and that shone through in her programme.
Talk to the older generation who were there in the times of Bhindrawale and see what they say about the man. She made too many unfounded statements and now has to accept the stick she is getting.
Finally, I know all about stage names. But I don’t see what’s stopping her changing her name back. I think it’s rubbish. If people aren’t going to accept you because you have Kaur Sidhu rather than Deol at the end of your name then why work for them? She should have just said, I don’t want to risk my career and all that I’ve achieved by changing my name back. In reality her career comes before her faith otherwise she’d change her name. She made out that it was tearing her apart, but really it’s quite an easy choice. She’s embarrassed of her real name and doesn’t want to change it back. She can put whatever slant she wants on it but should just be honest about it, don’t try and fool people into feeling sorry for her because she has to use Sonia Deol as a name. I’ve been quite successful in my career using my original name and I’m sure quite a few guys and girls on here have as well.
|
|
|
Post by JackWilshere on Jan 12, 2010 17:05:09 GMT
The kid satnam obviously didn't know what was going on, the look on his face said it all. Even the conversation with the giani at the golden temple was abit weird, the subtitles didn't do justice to what he was saying, some people reading the subtitles might get the impression he was being very negative towards Bhindranwale, check it out again if you can.
The other thing, someone mentioned people on facebook saying bhindranwale wasn't a saint after watching this, If people have decided that Bhindranwale is some hairy monster after a one hour, basic level, shabbily made BBC programme then thats upto them, these sorts of idiots think Eastenders is real.
Back to the programme, played it safe, why not cover the government sponsored anti sikh elements during the rise of Bhindranwale, don't say him and his men killed some newspaper owner and leave it at that, why not talk about evidence which shows the government at best stood by as sikh men, women and children were being massacred, at worst, they encouraged and sponsored elements to wipe out sikh males and rape sikh women, why wasn't this covered? Why not talk about evidence which shows there was a rape programme? This programme didn't cover the REAL 1984. For me 84 wasn't about tanks in the golden temple, 84 is about the genocide of the sikhs. Yes, sonia made a bloody documentary, but lets not get carried away though, lets not get the awards out, this was a play it safe, very weak, biased, simple look at 84. Im not calling for a programme which bashes the indian government btw, but something which covered that time properly.
The other problem, Bhindranwale wasn't covered too well, either, his speeches about harmony between sikhs, muslims and hindus, his efforts for peace and dialogue, his meetings with influential hindu and muslim leaders, religious and political, none of that was covered, they had a one dimensional look at him, they did no justice to him either.
Sonia Deol and the people behind this should be ashamed of themselves, I keep saying it, but they played it safe, this programme was biased anti Bhindranwale.
Im not happy about the way Bhindranwale was portrayed.
|
|
|
Post by Pendoo on Jan 12, 2010 18:34:40 GMT
The kid satnam obviously didn't know what was going on, the look on his face said it all. Even the conversation with the giani at the golden temple was abit weird, the subtitles didn't do justice to what he was saying, some people reading the subtitles might get the impression he was being very negative towards Bhindranwale, check it out again if you can. In relation to the gyani conversation I too thought his responses were a bit muddled but after listening to it again the subtitles appear to capture what he said fairly clearly. He may not have wanted to be negative but it came accross that way expecially with the laughing bit.
|
|
|
Post by GhabruJatt on Jan 12, 2010 18:37:10 GMT
I have asked many older members both at work and home and the reactions they have towards Bhindrawala are very mixed, so lets not think all Sikhs thing the same way about him. On the subject did anyone watch the Sikh Channel yesterday Tru Skool was on it also-basically ripped the BBC1 and Sonia Deol apart
|
|
|
Post by $ukhjit on Jan 12, 2010 18:49:24 GMT
I have asked many older members both at work and home and the reactions they have towards Bhindrawala are very mixed, so lets not think all Sikhs thing the same way about him. On the subject did anyone watch the Sikh Channel yesterday Tru Skool was on it also-basically ripped the BBC1 and Sonia Deol apart I saw it, hopefully someone uploads it soon so you can all see. Did you see that other Singh swear, lol.
|
|
|
Post by Sarpanch on Jan 12, 2010 19:29:20 GMT
The issue regarding Giani Ji, i would think the comment about Bhindranwale smiling as he was putting in shells as a positive one, as if he was content with himself becuase he knew he was not doing any evil, lets not forget the fight against oppression and cruelty is something that is core to Sikhism.
I too was dissapointed the way Bhindranwale was portrayed, there was not mention of his work across the pindan in punjab and his movement of the youth of punjab away from drugs and nashe. Secondly the respect of his jatha across Punjab was not talked about. thirdly and most importantly the way Punjab is today and was back then was not talked about, I found many of my English friends saying that the allegations of the Indian Government meant that Bhindranwale could not be a saint, without knowing the corruption that is inherent in almost all levels of the Indian State, especially in Punjab.
|
|
|
Post by dulay2006 on Jan 12, 2010 21:03:31 GMT
panjab1 everyone has a right to their own opinion whether they have watched 100 hours worth of Operation Blue Star footage or one hour,it may not be the right opinion but what can you do? .I knew the BBC wouldnt broadcast the real goings on in 1984 (most likely cos of politics and im sure theres a BBC news channel on cable in India,why would BBC want to destroy its relationship with India over 1 program) regarding the Sikh Channel program yesterday can anyone give me any information on who came on the program,what was discussed and if i can watch it anywhere? Never will 1984 be forgotten but what can be done now that wasnt done during the same time especially with Indian Government being as corrupt as it always has been,the real issue BBC should have made a program on is these Pakhandi Babeh that are ruining Sikhi 3 names spring to mind but i dont want to cause a bigger argument on here
|
|
|
Post by panjab1 on Jan 12, 2010 21:25:40 GMT
Regarding the programme on britasia yesterday, the guy with the pagh next to truskool was his brother I'm pretty sure. Ranbir is his name. Thomas and Dulay, your posts are spot on.
Bhindrawale was made out to be a bad guy by this Indian govt. Sponsored programme. Sonia deol could have refused to front the programme if it was going to be whitewashed? Any Sikh with half a brain cell knows what happened and happens to Sikhs in India. But she went through with the programme. She went even further and played her part in saying that Sikhs aren't opressed inIndia and Bhindrawale was a bad guy. This programme and she desicrated his memory.
Read some of his quotes. He was an absolute legend and true inspiration. He wasn't like these people now who take cars and gifts off sangat. The Indian govt has screwed Sikhs for years and will continue to do so. Look at Shaheed Bhagat Singh, hung a day early and his mum was not even told, these govt. Sponsored death squads who went round killing Sikhs. If Sonia was that close to her faith she would know about these events and tragedies committed against Sikhs. From her programme it seems she didn't know or didn't want to say!
She was an utter disgrace and now needs to accept the stick coming her way. And I still don't get why she can't change her name and wants sympathy. Let's not forget why she changed her name. Not a career decision but because she wanted to fit in with friends. So when she got to 18 she still hadn't grown a brain cell and decided to pick up her original name again. Fact is now her career us ahead of anything else.
As for J Skillz, he's a musician, he could raise awareness. I ain't praising anyone who gives a msguided view of Sikhi. Sonia Ghandieol will not get any praise from me
|
|
|
Post by Pendoo on Jan 12, 2010 22:46:44 GMT
panjab1 you're being overly critical of her saying she was a total disgrace etc. Following on from Tonys post I feel obliged to stick up for her a little. You should appreciate the fact that she got off her backside along with Tommy Sandhu and others to film the documentary. It wasn't titled "1984: The Truth" and was always put across as her journey. They made an attempt, you, I and others don't necessarily feel it was great but it was an attempt. I'll re-copy this post when Sikh Channel actually produce a documentary on it rather than sitting in the studio lambasting this one.
Some of the comments on this thread are going over the top...sarpanch come on dude, in a 1 HOUR documentary which was not even able to get into detail on 95% of the issues you expected it to talk about Bindranwala's jatha?!? Also i'm not even sure some paid attention to what she said! I suggest rewatching it and actually listening to it properly.
As somebody already mentioned, anybody who makes up there mind on any aspect of 84 off the back of this documentary is a fool really. Yes it wasn't complete, yes it wasn't great, yes she made some naive and stupid comments/conclusions, but just look at the debate its caused. In a way it will encourage more people to dig deeper into the subject andmake there own minds up. This is definately a positive.
|
|