Muslims excluded from India's spy agency - report

Thomas Paine had a name for this.

Common Sense.

I would not trust a muslim as my bodyguard.

Muslims' only loyalty is to the Umma and not to any country or government.

"If we do not have any Muslims obviously this is a handicap," he told Reuters. "If there are no Muslims, there must have been a reluctance to take them in. It is also not easy to find that many Muslims."...

That last sentence is cryptic. Did this guy cut himself off from saying something like "It's not easy to find many Muslims that can be trusted"?
He shouldn't have-it's the truth. Or does he think Muslims are in short supply? If THAT is the case then what India is he speaking of?

In any case it's a double edged sword-it's best to have Muslims checking out jihadist groups but since this cult is so inherently deceptive you can NEVER be sure if the spy is loyal to the nation or really aiding the ummah. That's the nature of spying in general but it seemingly is worse when Allah's minions are part of the equation.

They are idiots. There are plenty of Muslims who are willing to work for intelligence for a large amount of cash. How do you think insurgents and militants are caught around the world? No intelligence agency can function in todays world without the presence of undercover Muslims. Sure they should be examined closely before being admitted, but barring them altogether is asinine and bigoted. The fact that Sikhs are not allowed is also worrying, last time I checked Sikhs have not committed any terrorist attacks in recent history.

There is a current case in the UK about a Muslim firearms specialist police officer sueing for discrimination. He has been removed from a squad providing protection for such top poltical figures as Tony Blair. He had been on the squad but was removed when checks revealed that his children attended a mosque where a cleric linked to terrorist extremists preached.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6123472.stm

I suppose the Sikhs have only themselves to blame for being excused bodyguard duties in India: the shooting of Indira Ghandi by her Sikh guards, whom she pointedly retained, despite the ferment over Khalistan, at the time, rather blotted their copy book.

there were many Sikhs as bodyguards in India, including as bodyguards for pm Indira Ghandi. But Mme Ghandi ordered troops to go into the Golden Sikh Temple of Amritsar in the early 1980s while going after Sikh separatists. Subsequently, her Sikh bodyguards shot her.

This is yet another example of terror coddling at it's finest- they feed the gators hoping to be the last ones eaten- Guess the example of Rrance & the permanent jihad they are now facing due to coddling didn't sink in with India?

Christian news and commentary at: sacredscoop.com ...

Speaking of Thomas Paine, could the King/British rule be compared to alla/sharia rule?

It makes sense to me. I don't understand the uproar...

Great to see that political incorrectness still thrives in some parts of the world.

Speaking of Thomas Paine, could the King/British rule be compared to alla/sharia rule?

That looks really bad. In tyranny not brutality.

"America's Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) are still reportedly struggling to recruit Arabic, Urdu and Farsi speakers five years after the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States."

=========

It seems that the best bet would to be to recruit from those who have fled the muslim boot in thier home countries instead of recuriting muslims (refugee dhimmis, apostates etc. that would have an axe to grind and want an opportunity to fight).

Muslim PC taken off Blair guard duties claims discrimination

A Muslim policeman is claiming religious discrimination after being removed from guarding Tony Blair because of fears he has links to extremists.

PC Amjad Farooq was dropped from an elite firearms unit after it emerged his children had attended a Mosque associated with an Islamic preacher linked to a suspected terrorist group.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=414971&in_page_id=1770&in_a_source=&ct=5

It's reassuring to know that Political Correctness (at least in India) has been side-stepped, when state security is paramount. Muslims have clearly demonstrated that they consider it divine obligation to obey their "holy" book by elevating loyalty to the Ummah above all others including national loyalties. India has a long, violent, history of battling Islamic Supremism and the West could benefit greatly by following their lead.

Like an incurable viral disease, Islam spreads without boundaries, infecting all who are vulnerable; from the young children who have no mechanism to question their indoctrination by family and mosques, to the criminals and losers who crave a support group to justify their depraved behavior, to the weak or unarmed who choose subjugation over death.

The dogma of deceit cannot be dismissed or marginalized, but must be avoided at all costs.

political correctness is going to be the undoing of us all- Terrorists love the idea of PC as they can force their way unbeknownst into the highest places & attack from within

Christian news and commentary at: sacredscoop.com ...

Re: "America's Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) are still reportedly struggling to recruit Arabic, Urdu and Farsi speakers five years after the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States."

If my memory serves me, a large contingent of Shephardic Jews volunteered their translation services after Sept. 11 but were turned down by the authorities (I assume the FBI). Musn't appear biased you know.

one other point- as a teen- I was a thug- I fit the 'profile' and people were justifiably cautious about hiring me- in htis life you HAVE to prove yourself, and it took me a long time to prove I'd changed & it wasn't a smooth process- but it was a fact of life that if I wanted respect the process had to be done. Muslims are NOT excluded from this process- yet Programsd like the ACLU want to force us all to sidestep that process and hire Muslims blindly becaue it is the PC thing to do- I think it's about time that we charge the ACLU with reckless endangement if and when a eprson they force into someone's business turns out to be a terorist.

Christian news and commentary at: sacredscoop.com ...

Clearly, common sense.

Interesting times in France. Isn't it time some patriotic frenchman brought back the O.A.S?

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/1636

Skeptic:

I think you're right, at least in terms of the question your response presupposes i.e. how to get inside these communities.

Apart from the bombing of Air India 182 in the mid-80s when the troubles over an independent Sikh homeland in India overheated I know of no widescale global campaign of terrorism that matches Islamic Jihad. Presently, the "Lord's Resistance Army" and some other Christian wackos are terrorizing Uganda, but again none of this comes close to matching global Jihad.

Therein lies the problem though. Given the nature of Islam historically, its literary sources and the activity of Islamic groups today, it seems reasonable to conclude that violence against non-Muslims, and at times even against other Muslims, is innate to Islam and its very hard for individual Muslims to overcome this and develop moderate positions that can withstand it. Given that its so we can not, in the name of a politically correct determination to be even-handed to all groups and treat everyone "equally", run the risk of enlisting in the agencies the state relies on for its security and the safeguarding of public safety elements that may, as a matter of principle, be disloyal.

Unfortunately, in Canada, the military is on a major recruiting drive to enlist more Muslims. Why? "To better reflect the diversity of the country” That is, not for some appropriate strategic ends like any advantage it could arguably give in military missions like the Afghanistan campaign, but simply because they're living here, and therefore ought to be represented in the military in direct proportion to their numbers in the general population. How idiotic! And to my knowledge, no one in the Defence Department or the federal government is even asking whether this is the right thing to do or whether there are security implications.

At least the government of India, unlike Canada's is not cutting off its nose to spite its face the way we are to be reflexively politically correct, but is taking into account the reality that Islam is a major challenge to the country's security.

The Indian government's policy may be one-sided, but it would seem that we in the more developed democracies of the West are at risk of erring in the opposite direction, with the potential for disastrous consequences.

In Singapore that is surrounded by Malaysia and Indonesia, the army do not have many Malays at the higher levels. Malays are 99.9% Muslims. That's the reality.

tgusa: could the King/British rule be compared to alla/sharia rule?

Templar- Yup- and Canada is QUICKLY going the way of France- they're already seeing increased 'protests' from the Muslim comunities and it won't be long now before Sharia law trumps Canadian law just like it does in France- the French government is scared whitless & can't confront the terrorists that are breeding and growing right under their noses now because France was too cowardly to recognize that PC-ness was a poison pill. Canada will soon be as bad off as France & Europe. al aeda is actively funding radical Muslims in both countries,- Why? so they can bring their 'religion of peace' to the world through murder and violence & the coddlers of terrorists bow their faces to the ground and hope the sword is sharp enough that it will cute hteir heads off in one fell swoop.

Christian news and commentary at: sacredscoop.com ...

Null,
Yes, not a very good post, I do have a British heritage myself so I know the difference. I am only talking the legal argument that the Signers of the Declaration of Independence made referring to British rule and their rights within that rule, not the same as a British citizen even though we were primarily British.

"If we do not have any Muslims obviously this is a handicap," he told Reuters. "If there are no Muslims, there must have been a reluctance to take them in. It is also not easy to find that many Muslims."...
"The need for Muslim officers in intelligence-gathering is acute," another former RAW chief, Girish Chandra Saxena, was quoted as saying. "There are very few people who have knowledge of Urdu or Arabic. The issue has to be addressed."
India is not alone in failing to recruit Muslims to the top levels of its security and intelligence apparatus.
America's Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) are still reportedly struggling to recruit Arabic, Urdu and Farsi speakers five years after the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States.

During WWII, did the Allies try to find and recruit Germans in MI5, OSS, NKVD, or did they rather have their own agents learn Deutsch, and go ahead on operations. Does Shin Bet and Mossad hire Muslims - be they Palestinian, Egyptian or Israeli Arabs, or do they rather either use their own people, or recruit Lebanese Maronites or Egyptian Copts?

In other words, why is it a good idea for the CIA or RAW to hire Muslims in order to fill up their Arabic and Urdu skills? Why not, in the case of Arabic, hire expatriate Arabic-aware Infidels, or in case of Urdu, Hindu or Sikh experts? If India needs Arabic aware agents, why not import some as well from, say, Israel, or even Infidels from among its Arab neighbors? If the CIA requires Urdu speaking agents, why not tap the expatriate Indian community, since Urdu and Hindi are very similar - it's just the Farsi/Arabic/Turkic terms that would have to be mastered.

Bottom line: if there is a problem with assuming Muslim loyalties, how does tapping them, because they have any particular skills, make sense? Rather, look for those skills elsewhere, and go on.

Skeptic, Templar

Muslims could be used as agents, but recent events highlight that if a Muslim feels that his actions will harm the Ummah or an Islamic state, he could refuse the order. Worse still, he could except the order but then feed misleading information, which could be more harmful then any potential information that maybe useful.

There is also the more inviduous situation that some Muslims in the secret service may become moles, damaging the Infidel state far more from within then anything else.

When it comes to national security, it is far better to be safe then sorry.

Common sense and having the balls to do it. I wonder how the Indians taming the Arabs when they need oil?

correction: Worse still, he could accept the order but then feed misleading information, which could be more harmful then any potential information that maybe useful.

Infidel Pride,
Does the name Garbo sound familiar? It should, he received the Iron Cross from Hitler and the Victoria Cross from the UK. He’s the agent who lied to the Nazis regarding the Normandy Invasion, among other things. They bought it. Rumored to be a Spaniard it has never been proven. MI-5 tracked down many German agents in the UK during the war and gave them a choice, work for us or we put a bullet in your head right now. It worked. The OSS had no lack of German American agents volunteering to go behind enemy lines. I don’t know if we can count on these guys to step up though.

American, conciliation-seekers are forced to come to grip with Islamist world's contradictory world-view.  Might Westerners evolve to "Two worlds, too far apart to bridge," fast enough to thwart the pursuers of "One world, indivisible, under Allah?"

NY's 'Jewish Week' article (by Walter Ruby) depicts a conciliation turned actualization by attendees of an Evening of Dialogue (28 Oct) between NY's prominent Imam Omar Abu Namous (of NY's Islamic Cultural Center), moderator Joel Cohen, and Rabbi Marc Schneier of the New York Synagogue. Mr. Ruby writes:

"To the evident mystification of the audience, Abu Namous asserted that “the Arabs never rejected independence or sovereignty for Israel in 1948,” and that the Arab states did nothing to pressure Jews from Arab countries to leave for Israel...

Several congregants said afterward that the dialogue left them more pessimistic than before about hopes for Jewish-Muslim reconciliation. “The imam’s words left me feeling that we are even farther apart than I had imagined,” said one woman, “so far apart that we really have nothing to say to each other.”...

Rabbi Schneier said he came away “concerned, frustrated and deeply disturbed by [Abu Namous’] misinformation and misinterpretation of the facts about Israel … He is more extreme in his views than I had understood.”

But he insisted the dialogue was worthwhile. “I could have gotten someone else if I wanted a polite dog-and-pony show, but it seemed to me important for our people to hear what the head of the most prominent mosque in New York City is thinking.”

Incredibly Indians have more common sense than the Bush Crime family..

While India excludes Muslims from their intelligence service..Dubya's government excludes non Muslims from their branches which snoop on, translate and report on Islamism.

Read Infiltration: How Islamic spies and subversives have infiltrated Washington especially Chapter 16 "Jews (Arabic speaking Sephardim) Need not Apply to Fight Terror.

Cottshop, you are exaggerating the situation in Canada - Do you know anything about this country? Canada will not go the way of the Netherlands or France or old Europe generally speaking. Unlike those countries, there are a lot of people here who have experienced first hand in their history the atrocities committed in the name of Islam. Armenians, Sikhs, Serbs, Croats, Hindus, Russians, Asians (generally speaking), Euro-exiles etc... have all faced their fare share of Islamofascism.

Infidel Pride - your response is the one that makes the most sense. If India wanted, it could recruit any number of ex-pat Indians who have lived in the Gulf states for years and have learned Arabic, Farsi and Urdu while there. There was no dearth of people who knew Urdu in that country who weren't Muslims after partition, and although fewer in number now, there are still many who know or can learn Urdu through a college/ university degree program. It is idiocy that India can train IT zombies, but can't train people in Arabic or Farsi or Urdu or Dari or Pashto or Uzbek, etc.. The problem with a country like India is that it isn't serious. If it was, India would have taken out Pakistan in 1947, 1965, 1971, or in 1999 when Pakistan attacked it.

The only people Indians (read upper caste Hindus) can kill are their own compatriots, as in the Sikhs, Tribals, Lower Castes Hindus or the Indian Muslims, and occasionally the Christians - lest they become too secure. I'm not going to go into the reasons for Indira Gandhi's killing or the genocidal acts against the Sikhs before and after that event. However, it doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in India when not one person is convicted of murder after the events in Delhi in November 1984, or in Gujarat. Its a wonder all the minorities don't quit India, and not a surprise that they band together if they choose to stay.

Worse still, he could accept the order but then feed misleading information, which could be more harmful then any potential information that maybe useful.

There is also the more inviduous situation that some Muslims in the secret service may become moles, damaging the Infidel state far more from within then anything else.

Posted by DP111

I agree. On the whole I oppose the notion that Muslims are a reliable partner in the resistance to Jihad. I just wanted to acknowledge Skeptic's point that we do need ways to infiltrate Muslim communities. Not being an expert in Intelligence and Counter-espionage, I keep an open mind to those who might argue the necesity of recruiting people from within these communities, provided that this is the exception to the rule and, if done at all, is done no more than strictly necesary, is proven to be necesary, and is at least highly unlikely to lead to more harm than good. But the suggestion that we rely on people who know the languages needed and so on sounds far better to me as long as we ensure that they have all the necesary background and training to do what they're asked to.

I do not think any muslim would be ready to undertake the oath of loyalty to Indian Constitution and Indian State, which is a prerequisite before they would be commsioned. So that might also be a deterrent apart from the active avoidance of agencies. Regarding Sikhs, it is the panic after losing a prime minister.

Given how thankless and barbaric Islam is (remember the 7/s bombings in Mumbai?) can you blame India?

Why just spy agencies? What about critical infrastructure, transportation nodes, communications, universities, law enforcement and the military? Come to think of it why are we letting muslim students take subjects like, chemistry, nuclear physics and other advanced sciences? Even if you can “trust” this fine “moderate muslim”, his kids could be one verse away from becoming a snarling, foaming at the mouth jihadi. His brother, cousin, friends etc could blackmail him, force him or intimidate him into helping with the jihad or just turning the other cheek. Yes, they could do that to almost anyone, no they do not have the same level of access to non muslims, the threat is simply lower. Putting a muslim in a position of trust is like asking a pedophile to baby sit your children, nothing might happen but are you willing to take the risk?

This has no easy solution and it does not just concern us. We have to consider these same issues as the muslim populations among our traditional allies grow. Two ways to look at this: “oh, my God we are surrounded” and “shoot outwards you are bound to hit one.”

Before I get attacked by someone claiming to be, know of or thinks they might become a “moderate muslim” as long as you, your friends, family members or neighbors read that koran, they are all potentially just one verse away, bottom line we can not afford to trust you. Nothing personal, you don’t think it is fair? It hurts your feelings? It is insensitive? So is another 9/11, get over it.

While India excludes Muslims from their intelligence service..Dubya's government excludes non Muslims from their branches which snoop on, translate and report on Islamism.

Posted by: Nariz at November 7, 2006 04:53 PM

Dubya and the Bush family is loyal to the riches of Saudi Arabia, than USA. Being a president gives Bush all the power he needs to sell out USA at all levels in all possible ways. And the results are for all to see.......

If you want to spew jihazi propaganda, please get our language right…

Dubya and the Bush family are loyal to the riches of Saudi Arabia, more than they are to the USA. Being the President gives Bush all the power he needs to sell out the USA at all levels in all possible ways. And the results are there for all to see.......

Amatuers!

Off topic:

Irish rockers U2 campaign for terrorist suspect David Hicks

Ummah News Links

The super group,
By whose standard? Yeah they had a few decent tunes but you had to buy/suffer through the other 9 on the album. How many, Beatles, Zepplin, Doors, and many others do you hear today, 30 years later as opposed to U2? Like they say, one day you are the top of the heap the next you are ****.

what the heck are muslims in India, they need to leave and go to pakiland right now.. is that not why pakiland was made, for a safe haven for the muslims to go to? so the heck with muslims in India, let them get a one weay ticket to their favourite cesspoolstan!

Bono is one of the worst leftists in the media. He only champions the third world, preferably muslims, and people with aids from immoral activities. Never champions the cause of any other disease. Only the disease of aids and only africa, where most of the population has received the virus from sex with prostitutes or sex with men who visit prostitutes.

Why doesn't he champion the anti-honor killing movement, or the anti-female circumcision movement, or the anti-killing people movement?

No. Not Bono. A virus is a greater moral outrage to him than murder and rape and mutiliation.

Why doesn't he champion the cause of testicular cancer, or chrone's disease, or some childhood disease. More people die of the influenza in the west than die of Aids. Why doesn't he champion the cause to find a cure for influenza if he is so concerned about human misery?

No. Not Bono. Influenza is a huge killer in the western world. So it is not Bono's concern. Africa is what is trendy.

But why doesn't he campion the cause of the blacks being killed by the muslims in Sudan? Why doesn't he champion the cause of Indians being butchered in India by muslim hordes.

Because the bad guys there are not white. They are equally brown, and more importantly, they are muslims. Thus, Bono has no interest in that human misery. The only human misery he is concerned with is the one that suits his political bent.

Hell, why doesn't he champion the cause of putting the Christ back into Christmas?

Why would he? He would rather bring us rammadan than even mention the name Christ.

No. Not Bono. Not a hardcore leftist.

He is only concerned about the welfare of islamic terrorists, and people with a completely, and unforgiveably, preventable communicable disease.

Bravo, Bonehead.

You wear your politics on your sleeve but you disguise it as humanitarianism.

That is what I hate about these liberal, leftist celebrities. They champion their own perverted political agenda under the guise of humanitarianism.

And most of his young audience buys it hook, line, and sinker.

Ummahnewslink:

A suggestion/request: send your links to Robert and his helpers either at director@jihadwatch.org or using the "Contact Us" feature on the home page. That way people interested in a particular story don't have to wade through off topic comments.

The story on Bono is an worthwhile one but it should be in a separate thread if it's going to be featured here. That way, readers who don't know very much about a particular story or don't care to comment on it, don't have to be distracted by it in the threads they're interested in. Not only that but I think the story, if someone posts a thread on it, will draw more attention than it will buried in a thread on something wholely unrelated, like this one.

templar,
As I am also an offender, I must say I enjoy the links. We might not see them if they weren't posted here in the comments. Please just forgive our exuberance, and scroll over if you aren't interested. :)

templar,
Who made you the JW hall monitor? Lighten up, it is all part of the battle. The jihad is all encompassing, or haven’t you noticed? I had to read your post and you didn’t even have a link.

Sorry, Carolyn & Tgusa, and of course, Ummanewslink:

Its not my intent to be mean spirited or obnoxious. You're right, Carolyn, it isn't difficult to skip past comments that one doesn't want to read. There's usually nothing wrong with off topic comments in any case. It's just that I've seen it happen that a thread gets sidetracked completely, making it a little difficult to find information on the intended topic.

Ummahnewslink's submission though seems to me very relevant to Jihadwatch, and my comment was meant to be helpful, not really critical. I regret not being clearer about that. Like you say, Tgusa, the battle is all encompassing. What goes on in the culture wars effects society's ability/will to muster itself against Jihad, and I think it would be worthwhile to have a wider discussion of a story like this one on Bono. So I would hope that Robert et al would be willing to dedicate a thread to it.

I couldn't find any common sense anywhere in this related article.
So much for better safe than sorry.

West Point Bows To Mecca

INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

Posted 11/2/2006

Political Correctness: A chief concern of the U.S. military is Islamist infiltration. Yet the Army, in a show of blind tolerance, just made that easier with the dedication of a new mosque at West Point.

The U.S. Military Academy's first worship hall for Muslims boasts green carpets, shoe racks and a pulpit facing Mecca. Officials agreed to set up the mosque, large enough for dozens of followers, after Muslim leaders complained that the office where Muslim cadets gathered for Friday prayers had become too crowded.

The mosque is shocking enough. But now we also learn that the Army has been recruiting international cadets from Muslim countries such as Afghanistan.........read it ALL.

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=247363882578735

History of muslim treason in Indian History
1. 710 AD, muslim soldiers in Raja Dahirs army defect to the side of Mohd Bin Kasim, leading to loss of Sindh
2. 1330 AD, muslim soldiers in Kashmir stage a coup, leading to loss of kashmir
3. 1565 AD, muslim generals in the Vijayanagar Army defect to the bahmani sultanates during battle of Talikota leading to destruction of Vijayanagar
4. 1750 AD, Hyder Ali, a general in the hindu kingdom of Mysore stages a coup
5. 1947-48. Indian muslim soldiers in kashmir defect to the pakistani side, causing loss of Skardu, Muzzaffarabad, Gilgit

Good points Malinois but if your going to post everything the Army does that is stupid you will never catch up. Don’t forget West Points new motto “Duty Honor Allah” now I’m going to go get sick.

Possibly the Indian government has learned from the recent experience of the British governmment which has reported infiltration by Al-QAEDA into its intelligence-related services (never a good sign).

The American government should take a cue from the Indians and eliminate Muslims from its military, intelligence and other defense-related departments.

Islam is the self-avowed ideological enemy of anything related to freedom and democracy. It is not possible for any democracy to protect itself with practicing Muslims present in any of its defense-related departments.

Who will tell the people this?

Before I get jumped on by all the ring knockers out there, I know there is no new motto (yet) but building a mosque was the first step. Unless they have plans for a synagogue, and separate church’s for all the Christian faiths etc, they are dhimmis. I would bet there are no other religions getting preferential treatment. I don’t know who caved or why but someone did. Next we will see a shining sea of grey burkas on the female cadets and little gray kafias on the men, so sweet.

Since 1947, there has been an unwritten rule to minimise muslims in army and secret service and police

All other religions are represented proportionally except muslims

A handful of show piece muslims are let in for PR purposes, such as the Indian president Kalam

Muslims are 13% in population and 2% in army

A lot of this 2% are shias who hate pakistan

Well I hope the 98% like the sound of adhan issued in monotone over multiple loudspeakers by multiple muezzins from multiple neon clad minarets appended on top of their once historic landmarks 5x a day.

tgusa

I was indeed unfamiliar with Garbo. Thanks for filling that in.

Jalandhar

I actually hadn't thought about the Infidel Indians in the Gulf when I posted that, but your suggestion is brilliant - tap them as agents after they (inevitably) return. I agree with you - the seriousness of the Indian government is restricted to self preservation. They know that if they hire Muslims in RAW or the SPG, Manmohan Singh might go the way of Banda Bahadur, so there, they feel completely free to discriminate; however, elsewhere, they refuse to take anti-Islamic steps. Look at 7/11 - some 200 Hindus are killed, and they crack down on Hindu blogs. (And Urdu is very much known in UP - in fact, in UP, the Hindi that they speak there is very much urduized, as opposed to in MP or Rajasthan, where its the more Sanskrit variant. So you are correct there as well.)

However, excluding Sikhs from the SPG any more is unjustified - what Beant and Satwant Singh did was in response to a series of major policy missteps by Indira Gandhi, and not because they had loyalties to Khalistan. Manmohan Singh becoming PM was a watershed moment in the process of reconciliation that had been going on - why would any Sikh want to assassinate him? It is a shame that those guilty in the 84 Delhi riots were never brought to justice. However, I wouldn't put Gujarat (I'm assuming you mean Godhra) in that category, unless you mean punishing the rioters who lit up the train.

I do disagree with you though that the only people Indians can kill are their own compatriots - Indians can't go around killing Pakis, Afghans, Bangladeshis, unless either India declares war on these countries, or their citizens come to India (which is where they should be bullying Bangladeshis). The blame for this goes more towards the totally dhimmified Indian government, rather than any upper/middle/lower caste Hindus.

A few points
1. Both the Prime Minister and the General of India's Army are Sikhs.
2. The list of the chiefs of the Indian Army, Navy and Air Force are listed here.
Army
By my count (cursory glance) since 1947, there has been at least christian (S.F. Rodrigues), one Zoroastrian (S.H.F.J. Manekshaw) and several SikhS and Hindus.
Navy
By my count since 1947 one Zoroastrian (Jal Cursetji), 2 christians (R L Pereira , O S Dawson), and "others" ;)
Air Force
By my count since 1947 one Zoroastrian (Aspy Merwan Engineer), one Muslim (I.H. Latif), and Christian (D.A. La Fontaine)
Self Righteous farts like "Jalandhar" need to shove it.
We also had a Jewish Vice-Admiral Benjamin Abraham Samson.

Toutlook and Frontline are communist magazines which deliberately introduced this report to harm Indian security. The reason Sikhs are mentioned is because if they had only talked about lack of Muslims it would not have passed the laugh test. It is a deliberate attempt to make the Sikhs feel aggrieved - It is not going to work - The Sikhs are overrepresented in all the armed forces and bodyguard roles everywhere - also do not tell me that the Sikh PM is discriminating against Sikh bodyguards. This is because the Commie scum are just realizing that the two major pillars of Indian security are the military and the police (surprising it took them so long to figure this out). This is just the beginning - the Commies have declared war on India - this is just the first shot across the bow.

Almost every single major battle that the Hindus lost for over a thousand years was because of the treachery of local Muslims. To expect anything else is ridiculous. Jalandhar tell me which country you are from - we will send a lot of our Muslims over to your country where you can display your generosity and magnanimity.

Infidel Pride,

Agree with you. Indira Gandhi was a wily politician (how conveniently people gloss over her emergency excesses) and no statesman. Deserved what she got. Bhindranwale was the Frankenstein nurtured by her. Ditto for her sons.

IPKF's huge losses(of Armymen in Sri Lanka) is attributed to dismal intelligence of RAW and Rajiv Gandhi's quixotic adventurism.

Sikhs should consider themselves blessed. What honour is there in guarding "gutter politicians" of India? If Hindus are shrewd, should clamour for their "muslim brothers"(sic)to be appointed as commandos for ALL politicians,film personalities and VIPs. All those pc *bleeding hearts'* love for muslims would be assuaged for good! And no training is required as none can kill as alacritously as muslims. What better way to protect the appeasers?

Contemporary India has no clear objectives other than harping on its "growing econmy" and IT boom.

A lot of Army Personnel are quietly asking themselves to be discharged (wise move) and moving to other stress free, paying careers. There have been a lot of suicides (going unreported)among people guarding our borders. Let us see how effective cricket, movie business and piss oops, "peace process" are:)

Don't we know how india honours its Soldiers?
When Armymen declare, but for Israel's timely help during Kargil war victory was impossible, hubris filled india barks and pontificates at Israel. Such useful and useless idiots!

ummahnewslinks

Funny how these rock stars and actors never,ever get up in front of an audience and bring up human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia, Iran or anywhere else in Dar al Islam. Hey Bono, no mention of that rape victim getting 90 lashes? More concerned with a jihadi thug in Gitmo are we?
I have no respect for any of these multi-millionaire self-serving cowards. Their opinions are worthless.

Sikhs should consider themselves blessed. What honour is there in guarding "gutter politicians" of India? If Hindus are shrewd, should clamour for their "muslim brothers"(sic)to be appointed as commandos for ALL politicians,film personalities and VIPs. All those pc *bleeding hearts'* love for muslims would be assuaged for good! And no training is required as none can kill as alacritously as muslims. What better way to protect the appeasers? Posted by: Crows&Cows

I love such simple but brilliant ideas - actually, since Indian pols are now clamoring for reservations for Muslims, we could take your idea a step further and apply it right here - implement 100% reservations for Muslims in the SPG for politicians. After all, as an argument can be made, why would any Muslim want to kill Shahrukh Khan, Mullaham Singh Yadav or Irfan Pathan? Provide this to Rahul Dravid as well - the wonderful cricketer who wants to open up Bangalore to Pakistani tourists.

However, my original comments supporting the exclusion of Muslims from RAW, CIA, IB, et al still stands.

ik is right! Plenty of Sikhs in India in intelligence, defence, et al. Don't forget 2 Supercops, Julio Rebeiro and K P S Gill, who turned the tide of terrorism in Punjab. No Indian in his senses would have any problem with a Sikh defending India! [Aside: The demand for Khalistan on the western international border of India arose out of prevalent Cold War geopolitics, amply funding and supporting non-resident Sikhs with foreign citizenship to import separatist militancy into the stronghold of anti-jihadi defence in India! It took its severe toll, including the dastardly attempt at serial bombing of Air India planes mid-air, including one that was blown apart over the Irish Sea of Cork; this was the ISI-backed seed that eventually culminated in 9/11! Ultimately, it was the loyal Indian Sikh population of Punjab that finished off the terrorists in its midst!]

As for Muslims, the Officers are tried, tested and respected, with strong secular credentials. But there's only a few of them. [Aside: Just as there are Sikhs who haven't forgotten their Hindu origins, there also are upper crust Muslims who are strongly loyal to India and equally contemptuous of Pakistan.]

But majority Muslims go to the madrassas, to study the Koran, Urdu and Arabic. That renders them ill-equipped for 'secular' jobs! Secondly, there is a clear Koranic injunction on not seeking government employment in the Darul Harb. This motive has been overlooked by PCs who indulge in self-flagellation over Muslims falling behind in employment! Lastly, we do know about this thing called the "Sudden Jihad Syndrome". There was this incident in Iraq, with a Muslim soldier enlisted with the US going berserk and shooting at his 'comrades in arms'! The scary thing is that in places like Mumbai, there's vast hordes of illegals from Pakistan and Bangladesh, living in slums, hired as private security guards, guns and all! They've started doing checks on the private security agencies now, hired by the MNCs and private enterprise in general, but its a mind-boggling task!

On the other hand, the Indians (Mandarins, if you parden the correct word, inscrutable as they come) manning the Indian administration are quite savvy, used to doing their jobs to perfection, and more canny than is commonly understood! They are not given to empty jihadi bombast like their Paki counterparts. They outlive the appeasement politicians, and are the real guys who formulate policies. They stay in the background, as it should be!

But here's something you must not miss, about the Jewish Major General who was among those responsible for 90,000 Pakistani soldiers surrendering to the Indian forces in 1971!!! And pardon the hyperbole, since the writer of what appears below is himself Jewish, but the Indian forces at the time were led by a Parsi gentleman called Field Marshall Sam Maneckshaw, while the army chief was a Sikh, J S. Arora!

'In the annals of modern warfare, the 1971 war between India and Pakistan is regarded as a template of brilliance. Within 13 days, the Indian army routed Pakistan in one of the swiftest campaigns of the 20th century.

Occasionally compared to Israel’s victory in the 1967 Six Day War, and studied at military academies as a textbook example of efficient planning, the Indo-Pakistan war gave rise to a new state, Bangladesh, and established India as a regional superpower.

The major general who masterminded and spearheaded India’s offensive, and who accepted Pakistan’s surrender, was Jack Frederick Ralph Jacob, the scion of an old Jewish family from Calcutta. A spry bachelor of 81 who retired in 1978 as the commander of India’s eastern army, he considers that war the highlight of a long and distinguished career as a soldier. Having written a book about it, Surrender at Dacca, published in 2001 by Manohar, he claims that the war was “surely the greatest military feat in our history.” ' [http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/showthread.php?t=4706]

Thanks IPride!

Unfortunately, victory that is procured by our Soldiers is disastrously managed by our (rigor mortis while typing *our*) politicians.

Territories captured were handed over back; puki pows were well looked after with biryani etc and returned back. Our men tortured and perished in their prisons. Field Marshal Maneckshaw said :

"We take orders from ministers who don't know the difference between a gorilla and guerilla".

>>>upper crust Muslims who are strongly loyal to India>>>

Is it any wonder,it is only in India they can have the cake and eat it too! Pampered and appeased when they bare their fangs and revered as "peaceful and loyal well integrated "parasites when they don't detonate bombs but write Urdu poetry, soullessly muttering " jihad means internal conquest...this is not islam..."

Infidel Pride - I agree with much of what you wrote. Sikhs should not be discriminated against today, nor should they ever have been in Independent India. One only needs to look at the example of the freedom loving Sikhs in fighting for Independent India to understand this. Sikhs were ever loyal, only to be betrayed by the upper caste Hindu community.

IK and others betray their upper caste roots with their commentary.

There are many legitimate grievances Sikhs have since the time of partition too numerous to mention here. A FEW examples include: inequtiable land distribution given to Sikh refugees versus Hindu refugees from Pakistan; Not recognizing Punjabi language rights when other language based states were created at THAT time - Only after the 1965 war was a Punjabi language state created and even then Punjabi speaking Hindus lied on the census sheets saying they spoke Hindi so that Haryana would get a larger share; Until today water and electricity rights of Punjab aren't recognized according to any legitimate riparian model; Sikhs not charged with any crime have been held in prisons in India for over 20 years; Thousands were murdered in state sanctioned killings in Delhi and in fake encounters in Punjab - Policemen were given promotions based on the number of Sikhs they killed, whether or not they were fighting for independence.

Infidel Pride is right with regards to Beant Singh and Satwant Singh who martyred themselves for justice. They are Sikh heroes in trying to prevent a total genocide of the Sikhs.

Sikhs do NOT want to assassinate anyone. Sikhs want religious freedom and to be left alone. Yet upper caste Hindus cannot do so. The RSS and Arya Samaj continue to denigrate the Sikh religion with their propaganda. They continue to try and divide the Sikh community from the message of the Sikh Gurus through cultural brainwashing and infiltration.

Sikh do not trust Muslim rule, which is why they chose to align with what was supposed to be SECULAR India, not Hindu dominated India. The minorities gave up British rule for Brahmin rule, which was my point. The Dhimmi gov't is Brahmin controlled. India could have taken all of Kashmir in 47', 65', 71' or 99' if they had the courage.

The treachery of Muslims is known, but Ik and others need to understand the treachery of Hindus. Hindu Dogras, Rajputs and Brahmins lengthened and supported Mughal Muslim rule by opposing the Sikhs fighting for freedom of all including the low caste Hindus of Punjab and North India. British rule only came about in the North (delhi, haryana, himachal, punjab, kashmir, today's pakistan) through betrayal of the Sikhs by Hindu Dogra Generals in the Khalsa army. IF not for the Dogras, Brahmin and Rajput treachery, there would be NO Pakistan today.

In light of the apartheid imposed on low caste Hindus and others by the upper caste Hindu community, why should minorities such as the Sikhs or Christians TRUST brahmin controlled India??

Dear Jalandhar,
I will not talk about the origin of Sikhs. I will not talk about the respect that this particular warrior panth got. I will mwrely ask you what history you have read.

Jalandhar.

Don't add to false motivated propaganda against Brahmins in India! The simple idea behind it, since Brahmins have done more for India and Indian civilisation and culture than any other community in India, is that once you finish off the Brahmins, India is ripe for the picking for all comers!

Brahmins are barely 4% of the Hindu population in most parts of India. Granted that they are the foremost community in India, but that is by sheer intellectual brilliance, adaptability and hard work, and secondly, on account of patronage by the Kings and also the British colonial rulers. Besides, Brahmins have been at the forefront of the fight for independence and also progressive reform movements in all regions of India for over 100 years! On the other hand, the Indian ruling classes are predominantly the Kshatriya group, the warriors, including Sikhs, Rajputs, Marathas and so on! In contemporary times, Brahmins probably form the largest section of the Indian diaspora, contributing to their adopted societies in many positive ways as professionals and in business. Blaming everything that is wrong in Indian society on the Brahmins is a pointless xenophobic exercise that covers up the real issues. It is highly commendable that Brahmins have mostly ignored the vile campaigns against them in a most dignified and honourable manner.

And if any single class was responsible for injustices against the lower classes, it was the landed ruling class, whether Sikh, Muslim, Jat, Rajput or Maratha! This has been well-enough documented in Indian sources, despite all the false propaganda against the Brahmins! Yes, every single group in India, including Sikhs, Muslims and Christians have perpetuated the caste system amongst themselves with a vengeance, and berating of the Brahmins is a clever ploy to divert attention from themselves!!!

I am not a Brahmin myself, but I am fair, and like arjun.sevak, I'd warn you select your sources with care if you want to be taken seriously. You seem to be stuck in a time machine like many bigoted anti-India overseas Sikhs who are out of touch with their homeland, while the Sikhs in India have got on with their lives in a mature fashion! It is fashionable among the overseas Sikhs to bad mouth India in their ignorance, while at the same time, in cases of ethnic targetting, they want the Indian government to speak up for them! There was a time in Punjab, when every Hindu family gave its first son into the Sikh Panth to nurture chivalry as Lions who would protect the vulnerable and defenceless Hindus.

Guru Gobind Singh, who forged the Sikhs as a militant fighting force against Islamic jihad, was inspired by the Goddess Bhawani of the Hindus. Jalandhar was the celebrated Nath Yogi of the Pan-Indian group of adepts venerated to-date as adepts and men of compassion. How far you have come from your origins, and does it make a better life for you after all, spouting baseless hatred against India? And do you remember with veneration the Brahmins among your nine gurus and their followers? Did this hatred originate with them?

In Punjab, the Chief Minister belongs to the erstwhile royal Sikh House of Patiala, who is not a Brahmin! And the RSS was subject to a vicious witch hunt after the assassination of Gandhi, being banned from 1948 until Indira Gandhi lost the post-emergency elections in 1977! Finally, it is the unalloyed loyalty of the RSS cadres to India that invites such attacks by those who would undermine the sovereignty of India through a thousand cuts!

templar

Cicero said it a good 2000 years ago

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist".

Pagandkapitat, in terms of trying to defeat Islamofascism or removing its oppressive yoke, what pray tell did the upper caste elites do? It seems to me India was under Islamic rule for what a 1000 years? One dynasty after the other.

How is it that this could happen without the connivance of the elites in India? Anyone who examines that period objectively will know that Brahmins, Rajputs and upper caste Hindus took up administrative positions, including Governorships, under the Muslims in aiding their rule and enforcement of Jizya and Dhimmi status on the masses.

In fact, it was upper caste Hindus (Hill Rajas) who PAID Mughal rulers (Aurangzeb) to attack the Sikhs, who they felt were acquiring too many converts from the lower castes. Thereby threatening their hegemony over these people. It was the ordinary lower caste Hindu, whose daughter or wife would be taken as booty during the raids by the Afghans into North India, and it was the Sikhs who would go out at night to harrass the Afghan caravans and rescue them back. There is no comparable upper caste Hindu history. Which is why the Sikhs are largely made up of converts from those castes and from Muslim converts.

In terms of modern India, tell me why is it that Dr. Ambedkar wasn't enamoured with the beneficient Brahmin? Why aren't Dalits supplicating themselves before their graciousness today?

Pointing out either Hindu or Indian faults and foolishness always leads to accusations of ingratitude, hatred and "anti-nationalism". You sound like the folks from CAIR. The RSS is a fascist organization. Your claiming that Guru Gobind Singh Ji, let alone any Sikh Guru, would draw on a hindu deity for inspiration is another clever piece of their propaganda. The Sikhs would like to live free in a SECULAR India, but people like you won't let it happen, which is why India and you (upper castes) come in for criticism.

You keep believing these things, but ORDINARY Sikhs, Christians, and minorities within India and without, know Brahmin perfidy quite well. Nixon and Kissinger had the good sense to acknowledge it. India as it stands, is an unreliable ally for anyone in the present scenario.

Jalandhar, your BS about brahmin elitism in so called Sikh persecution is so off the mark and entirely propaganda. I am astounded at your feeling of being 'victim' of Hindus or as you put it "brahmin". Pray how are you different from a muslim?

And yes, I am a Sikh but unlike you, I live in India .

infidel11
(formerly desi_singh)

p.s. Maybe the 'Khalistani' d*ckheads have also told you about how there are no castes in Sikhi or do you want me to expose the 'jutt' perfidy against bhapa/majhabi's which continues to this day?

WGJDKWGJDF

Infidel11 - my point again is that

1. India is an unreliable ally for any country tackling Islamofascism. India had opportunities in 47',65',71', and in 99' to decisively tackle the threat it faced from Pakistan and resolve the Kashmir dispute, but again lacked all courage necessary.

2. Only recently did India end its blind support of the Arab world by ending its consistent boycotting of Israel.

3.Indian elites have never sided with the common low caste masses. Read Dr. Ambedkar's history and writings, or speak with Dalit scholars today.

4. Throughout the period of Muslim rule, upper caste Hindus actively co-operated with the Muslim overlordship in subjugating the masses in extracting Jizya and enforcing Dhimmitude.

As for Sikhi, that conversation is best left to a Sikh centric site. However, I will say this - you need to check your facts and religious understanding. There is no place for casteism in Sikhism. Those Sikhs who believe-in/ practice casteism are engaging in anti-Sikh activities. Anyone who thinks there is a religiously sanctioned difference between Sikhs who are Jats, Adharmis, Valmikis, Ramgharia, Khatri, etc... is acting out of ignorance, prejudice or bigotry.

==>1. India is an unreliable ally for any country tackling Islamofascism. India had opportunities in 47',65',71', and in 99' to decisively tackle the threat it faced from Pakistan and resolve the Kashmir dispute, but again lacked all courage necessary.

India will do whatever is necessary in her own interests like any other country. In the '71 war, we should have sorted the matters decisively but it came with a rider (more muslim citizens) which would have taken India to pre-partition days. '47 was the best chance IMO where muslims shuould have been forced to leave India but for the buffoonery of Gandhi/Nehru combine.

As far as ally thingy, muslims attacked a train coach full of Hindus in Gujarat and burnt approx 60 Hindus alive and when the retaliation came from Hindus, Hindu's could clearly see its allies against islamofascism. NONE. To this day, if you talk about Gujarat, it is only about muslims killed in the retaliation, never Hindus, why?

In Jammu and Kashmir, all countries preach us about human rights of muslims, what about the rights of Kashmiri Hindus (Pandits) and Sikhs? The Hindu and Sikh daughters are abducted and forcefully married off to islamic jehadis, sons killed because they are hindu/sikh. Why don't you raise the voice atleast for the Sikhs?

==>2. Only recently did India end its blind support of the Arab world by ending its consistent boycotting of Israel.

Who came up with it? BJP/NDA or in your speak, high caste/low caste Hindu combine of BJP not the pseudo secular Congress.

==>3.Indian elites have never sided with the common low caste masses. Read Dr. Ambedkar's history and writings, or speak with Dalit scholars today.

Scholars like Kancha Ilaiah or Udit Raj? Kancha Ilaiah is a Shudra scholar and there is a world of difference between a shudra and a dalit. What this bugger does not say is the upper shudra's/dalits are more brahmanical than the brahmins themselves. These pay-per-view 'scholars' harp on caste discrimination rather than take the real measures that might improve dalits' lives.

I have read Indian history and it is a fact that had it not been for Hindu Rajputs, Islam would have conquered India and Sikhi would have never seen the light of the day. Later on, had it not been for Rajput, Sikh, Maratha and numerous others, India would have been an Islamic country like Iran. Tell me how a Maharana Pratap, Prithviraj Chauhan, Rana Sanga or Shivaji and their armies only chose to fight for high caste masses? Or do you know about the Maratha struggle against Islam which was a combination of the fighting powers of the 'low castes' with the statesmanship of the 'high castes'? Or about the Ahoms of Assam? Dalits, acc. to VHP (per you, high caste org), were warriors and freedom fighters who had fought against the atrocities of Mughals for a long period.

The history of India does not start and end with Ambedkar writings. Go through this if you really want to understand what is happening on the Dalit front today. POLITICS OF DALITISM: creating Dalits among Dalits We (Sikh/Hindu/Upper/lower/middle/wherever) are in it together. To fight islam, you need to read the history in full, no pickin' & choosin' what suits you. For a Sikh, SGGS is THE book to start off and if the treatment of our Gurus by muslims cannot open our eyes, I doubt what can? It is more than enough for me to see and recognize EVIL i.e. ISLAM.

Another question comes up when you say common masses, why did it take paki muslim 59 years to have the first Sikh in their army? Why no questions/concerns by various Sikhs org.'s against Sikh mass discrimination in muslim pakistan? IMO, it because most sikh orgs. outside India are in bed with islamists themselves and muslims are fooling the Sikhs with macho talk and brainwashing. Muslims do not do it because they love us. It is FEAR of the Khalsa which makes them do so but sadly, some of us are blind to our past history and are treated as plain useful idiots. In the Holey Qu'rap of muslims, we are infidels not houris who have descended from jannat.

==>4. Throughout the period of Muslim rule, upper caste Hindus actively co-operated with the Muslim overlordship in subjugating the masses in extracting Jizya and enforcing Dhimmitude.

What about the treachery of Khalistani's who got tricked by the paki muslims? They actively co-operated with muslims in killing Hindu's.

In the aftermath of Gujarat riots, Sikh groups of UK, US, Canada etc were falling over themselves to blame Hindu's and joined islamic org.'s in condemning the muslim killings but conveniently forgetting that Hindus were killed before.

We had Mumbai blasts with the evidence pointing to pakistani's, what Prime Minister Manmohan Singh (a Sikh) should have done? Waged war, if we pay heed to your macho/courage talk. No, he issued a statement later that Pakistan was a terror VICTIM like India.

Now, should Hindu's say that Sikhs have co-operated with muslims in terrorism against them? They do not, because too many Sikhs have given their lives for India and still fight for the country.

There are numerous Hindus who have done good for India but only the negatives are brought up to the surface(commie style). Go through the list of Paramveer Chakra awardees and you'll get the point. 'High caste' Hindus who laid down their lives for India are there and so are the 'low caste' Hindus and others. Let's accept there are good/bad people all over and move on. Only people who hold on to these statements are the communists, missionaries etc generally anti-Hindu. Casteism is a bane for Sikhism as well as Hinduism.

In the islamic period, greed, personal ambition, safety of their family or xyz have played a role, nobody denies it. What you are failing to see is that extracting jizya and enforcing dhimmitude are an muslim 'invention', courtesy Mohammed (poobah) and not Hindu. This is a good example of madrassa logic i.e. transferrence of blame from muslim to Hindu.

==>As for Sikhi, that conversation is best left to a Sikh centric site. However, I will say this - you need to check your facts and religious understanding. There is no place for casteism in Sikhism. Those Sikhs who believe-in/ practice casteism are engaging in anti-Sikh activities. Anyone who thinks there is a religiously sanctioned difference between Sikhs who are Jats, Adharmis, Valmikis, Ramgharia, Khatri, etc... is acting out of ignorance, prejudice or bigotry.

Where Sikhnet, where you have mish mash of paki punjabi masquerading as Sikhs. If you can discuss Hinduism on JW, why can't Sikhism be discussed here too? I have checked my facts and also, I have seen it up close where a high caste Sikh would not marry a low caste Sikh and it is not only in India. You need to visit Planet Earth and stop throwing the thunderbolt "There is no place for casteism in Sikhism" from up above. This same thunderbolt is repeated by the Hindu. You cannot wish it away by the usage of strong words like bigotry etc and blaming others. I am curious why are you more concerned about dissecting upper caste Hindu subjugating lower caste Hindu masses over ages and blah blah than what is happening within our religion's which you dismiss with a single stinging 10,000 volt thunderbolt?

Infidel11 - A few points.
1. in my original post I referred to India as unserious. Reason A - it chose not to act when it had the opportunity to secure itself and its citizens in 47', 65', 71', and 99'. Reason B - its past history shows that caste system advantages accruing to the elites ensures that they can be co-opted against their co-religionists and fellow citizens. Casteism is a disease perpetuated by Hinduism - they are part and parcel - you can't eliminate one without the other as Manu has amply demonstrated. This is a disease that has been used to enforce Jizya and Dhimmitude for 1000 years by successive Muslim dynasties both strong and weak.

2. Minorities in India are not secure. 84' Genocide of Delhi Sikhs, & Massacre of Muslims in Gujarat in 2002, both point this out. If India was a true democracy, there would have been many arrests and convictions related to both of those acts. The fact that Hindus were murdered at a railway station should not have resulted in hundreds dead throughout the state. It is well-known who works at the railway station and those individuals should have been questioned. If minorities are not secure, why should they have any more than a transient allegiance to India? Why shouldn't they emigrate en masse as Sikhs have been doing?

3. I am not siding with Muslims. Sikhs, as I mentioned before, know about Muslim treachery ala the Mughals and remember Muslim perpetrated atrocities DAILY. However, I caution you that we have had our fair share of Hindu perfidy as well. In many of our historical accounts, it is an upper caste Hindu who under guise of the Mughal Raj, who is behind the persecution of Sikhs and Sikh Gurus resulting in persecution of both Sikhs and the lower castes who had been converting to Sikhism and looked to the Sikhs for help. So why should the Sikhs, or anyone else, trust either the Muslims OR Hindus?

4. In Canada, casteism is dying or dead amongst Canadian BORN Sikhs. I have many friends and relatives who have married outside their "caste". Young people by and large don't care about this because they see it for what it is, alien to Sikh theology. Many Hindu girls, Khatri, have married Sikh boys here, Jats, and many Sikh girls have married outside the Jat tribe with Rajputs, Ramgharias, Adharmis, etc... because casteism is rightfully dead/ dying. The influence of a Hindu majority that a Sikh in India experiences, does NOT exist in Canada. Sikhs have been free of their influence both religious and propaganda (ala the RSS with its duplicity). Therefore, I say again that it is anti-Sikh to practice or believe in casteism. If Indian Sikhs do so, then they are a sad lot indeed. Sikhs in Canada love this country for the religious freedom and opportunities it has given us (we do acknowledge some warts, but those by and large are being addressed - ie: Komagatamaru)

5. Legitimate grievances against the Indian state almost always result in accusations of anti-nationalism. This is patently foolish/ stupid. How can India inspire the confidence of any ally when it treats its own citizens in this way - no justice for victims of any stripe, corruption to the hilt, criminals in all parliaments/ gov't houses, and fascists operating with impunity (vhp, rss).