Kowtowing to the Saudis, when they should be calling them to account. "Stewardess banned from carrying Bible," by David Millward for the Telegraph, with thanks to all who sent this in:
A second airline is embroiled in a religious row after a stewardess decided to take bmi to an employment tribunal because it refused to allow her to carry a Bible on flights to Saudi Arabia.The stewardess, who has not been named, claims that she has been subject to discrimination because of her faith....
But bmi, which is the only British scheduled carrier to fly to the country after British Airways pulled out of the route, insisted that it was only following Foreign Office advice....
A spokesman for bmi said the airline was complying with Saudi law and added that the stewardess had been offered the opportunity to switch to working on its short-haul routes. It could not, however, alter its long-haul rosters to accommodate her.
The Foreign Office website informs travellers to Saudi Arabia: "The importation and use of narcotics, alcohol, pork products and religious books, apart from the Koran, and artefacts are forbidden."
A spokesman said last night that the Saudi authorities would automatically confiscate a Bible from anybody trying to bring one into the country and it would not be returned.
A spokesman for Christian Solidarity Worldwide said: "It is worrying that a British company should be instructing its staff to conform to practices which are in violation of international standards on religious freedom....
No Korans should be allowed in Britain. Confiscate them and don't return them. Tit for tat.
Of course, that won't happen. It's always easier for a country to persecute its own people on behalf of another country then it is for that country to tell the other country to go to hell. After all, the stupid taxpayer only has the right to fund foolishness (like sending money to the palestinians), not to expect their government to stick up for them (like to bring a Bible on a flight to Saudi Arabia). Disgusting.
I get the impression that someone else is controlling the puppet strings in Britain (and other countries). How else to explain the eagerness to relinquish so many hard-earned freedoms? Or has the PC-brainwashing been that thorough? I tend to think that the bottom line in these decisions is always money.
confiscate the Koran, forbid passengers to travel in burkas, ban vocal praying and head bobbing, and ban head coverings (male and female).
stand up and do the right thing. quit acting like your airline belongs to Islam.
It is called British Airways.
Maybe you should change the name to Dhimmi Airways.
HOW about British Airways, pass out a glass of wine, a pork sandwich, a complementary bible and say a christian prayer before meal being served.
... make sure you have armed air marshals on board, you may need them.
Isn't the warning incomplete? I was under the impression Saudi Arabia confiscates Korans along with all the rest, unless it's a Saudi/Wahabbi-approved version. Makes for nice Koran sales to visitors.
It is time to cut off foreign aid to Saudia Arabia, discontinue sales of military equipment to Saudia Arabia, Ban travel to Saudia Arabia (except for one way tickets), Find ways to reduce the purchase of Saudia Arabian oil, monitor Saudia Arabian borders for illegal border crossings, Monitor all shipping entering Saudia Arabian ports, continue satellite photo reconnaisance of every square inch/mm of Saudia Arabia, Monitor all cell phone calls and internet traffic to Saudia Arabia, Monitor all financial transactions involving Saudi Arabians or Saudi businesses.
It is time to treat the Saudi as the enemy they truly are.
As soon as we have a decent alternative renewable energy source, we should boycott all Muslim energy sources and go green. A two edged sword: help the environment and stop sponsoring thugs all in one go.
I tend to think that the bottom line in these decisions is always money.
Posted by: Josephine at December 20, 2006 09:22 AM
Agreed. And those cesspoolians have lots of it and they buy up as many politicians as they can from all parties to advance their interests. Islamania doesn't need terrorist acts to destroy the West-it needs patience. Patience to let all that dirty money work its way throughout the West, defiling everything it touches. That's why we have so many mosques, so many "Islamic studies" sections in colleges, so many politicians who think we should solve every problem of the ummah (to our own detriment most of the time), so many media talking heads telling us Islam is peaceful. And that's why we're still stuck on the oil that funds all this- those Saudi princes will make sure any viable alternatives to oil will never see the light of day.
Like the recent case which Saudi warned Britain to stop the corruption investigations involving the royal family or it will abort the airplane deal and terminate its cooperation on terrorism leads; and the British government quickly obeyed. Is Britain no longer a sovereign nation? Disgusting!
http://www.flybmi.com/bmi/splash.aspx
HOW about British Airways,
Nothing to do with BA - it is BMI. It is rather like blaming American Airlines for something US Air might do.
British Midland is a private company part-owned by Lufthansa and SAS but majority owned by Sir Michael Bishop whom the Saudis would not appreciate as he is gay
We should declare Saudi Arabia as a funder of terrorist, invade their oil fields, kick out all Saudi's nationalist, repopulate it with prisoners from the US and their allies. The prisoners would have the option of going to the oil fields and work, taking their family with them or remain in prison to finish out their term.
Also on another topic, it has been reported that 70% of the insurgencies in Iraq is funded by Iran. Thus, for every attack send a cruise missle to Iran.
I would target those who are in control, that is the political and religious factions.
My points are extreme, but we are at war, thus we should fight with our gloves off. Screw what the muslims and the lefties think of us.
Is Britain no longer a sovereign nation? Disgusting!
Posted by: FreedomSeeker33 at December 20, 2006 11:09 AM
All Western nations increasingly bow to the Sowdi masters and their dirty oil money. It's the lubricant of corruption. If Western leaders weren't in such (well paid) thrall of Riyadh they would heve wiped out the royal family and their Wahabbi puppet masters long ago.
A spokesman for bmi said the airline was complying with Saudi law
.. LOL.. there is price for complying with Saudi Law. It is called 'fine in billions'. LOL
Saudi Arabia as signed several agreements on religious freedom and the Western world Asia stand up to these primitive tribal cultures the royal family of Saudi Arabia is no more royal then the average man on the street they just happened to be the biggist warlord when the kingdom was founded and once oil was found we have been paying jizha ever since to them
FIVEOFNINE-
Nice ideas you have and as far as I'm concerned they are not that extreme (although using prisoners to work the oil fields doesn't seem feasible-many of them are quite stupid-that's why so many become Muslims). We need to make being a mullah, an imam, a scholar or whatever other titles these "holies" go by a very dangerous profession for them since these are the ones who fill empty heads with jihadist crap. Zap enough of them and many might think twice before taking up such a profession. It's time to initiate a "holy man" shortage in the Islamaniac world-there's far too many of them out there doing "holy work" for Illah.
Like AIG once said.... Saudi Arabia exports Islam. Oil is only the means. How profound and how true!
That's it, I will no longer call it the "United Kingdom". From now on it United Republic of Islam.
it's the*
FreedomSeeker33
If you want to see how quickly the hypocritical Brits surrender their political correctness when it comes to Saudi money, take a gander at some of the comments on the BBC's "Have Your Say" board.
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?threadID=5041&&edition=2&ttl=20061220171207
When one sees that there is no reciprocation of religions in islamic countries, how does one answer articles like these:
"The Cost of Islamophobia"
http://civillibertarian.blogspot.com/2006/12/cost-of-islamophobia.html
What does "islamophobia" mean?
I mean just how, in what words, can we reply? Legal words? To inform that islam instends to bury the West.
I just want to have help - here - to help anybody in this website - write a book called:
"Islam For the StreetWise" or some such title.
Someone should write such a book - and an eye-catching cover.
With all your experience - people - more than me - and your way with words - can that be done. It's an idea whose time has come. We're on the cusp - either to advance or regress as a culture. I don't mean via a war or confrontation with swords - I mean now this has come to a matter of putsch, legally - verbally - in courts of law, in community councils, in courthouses.
CAIR is convincing and using our own laws to take over - how do we overcome this. How do we turn things around legally.
With what words, do we also convince others that it is NOT a matter of being "phobes" - but insisting on our way of life? And stopping the advance of a new Dark Ages (Anybody read the "Darkover" novels?).
We can't do this by wanting to "bomb" them - or kill them or things like that - this will only alienate people against us - and push the fence-sitters to the "pro" side.
And if we go on the defence - this psychologically will state that we've already lost.
Instead, we must be firm - hold our grounds - place our feet squarely on the earth and not budge - yet we can't be agreesive either.
To present a just system of government - such as the Iroquois Councils.
To present this systems of justice -in public councils - and congressional committees?
Allat
The Bible might introduce dangerous, foreign ideas into Saudi Arabia - like: it's sinful to take bribes in return for awarding government aircraft sales contracts.
It is time to treat the Saudi as the enemy they truly are.
Posted by: exsgtbrown at December 20, 2006 09:51 AM
Amen to that. It is do able but for the special interests of oh, I don't know, the US President perhaps.
Hugh is spot on that the best way to end this conflict with Islam is to crush them economically.
Look if you are flying INTO Saudi Arabia you are going to have to obay local Law. Of course I would ask why the hell are you flying into Saudi Arabia in the first place!
which is greater saudi law or un law
Off topic:
Good for Goode!
Ummah News Links
It is time to cut off foreign aid to Saudia Arabia, discontinue sales of military equipment to Saudia Arabia, Ban travel to Saudia Arabia (except for one way tickets), Find ways to reduce the purchase of Saudia Arabian oil, monitor Saudia Arabian borders for illegal border crossings, Monitor all shipping entering Saudia Arabian ports, continue satellite photo reconnaisance of every square inch/mm of Saudia Arabia, Monitor all cell phone calls and internet traffic to Saudia Arabia, Monitor all financial transactions involving Saudi Arabians or Saudi businesses.
It is time to treat the Saudi as the enemy they truly are.
Posted by: exsgtbrown at December 20, 2006 09:51 AM
Why are we giving then any aid in the first place ? Arn't they filthy rich? They should be the ones giving aid to their neighbours for housing etc. Instead, they are freely donating wordwide to the building of mosques, and bribing educational institutions to further their religious agenda.
Why are we not banning them ?
If the stewardess left her bible on the plane, how would the Saudis ever know she had it? There were other options for the airline.
DISCONTINUE FLIGHTS TO MUSLIM COUNTRIES.
How about this ?
A plane could fly over Saudi and other muslim countries dropping bibles and Christian literature all over the landscape. Inundate the place ! Maybe the Gideon Society and the Jehovah's Witnesses could organize it.
Better that bibles should be dropped on muslims than languishing in all those motel room bedside table drawers.
It's curious how Muslim's are so eager to show their intolerance to others, while everyone in the world is just as eager to ignore it.
I think that is great that Saudi Arabia is this open about her intolerance, when do we wake up and ban the Quran from the West, and do it with a Saudi smile?
Niv
"That's it, I will no longer call it the "United Kingdom". From now on it United Republic of Islam."
You mean you haven't been calling it this already?
I wish I could say something profound
But I'm sitting here going fucking mad with dispair!
God Jesus Fucking James Arginold Christ - - - Is it just me?
Is it just me screaming?
Fucking Hell we need a regiment and a military coup!
"Who will rid
me of this
meddlesome
priest?"
BAN THIS!!
Can someone help me, i seem to not be able to post on jw since last weekend or so???
So is Saudi Arabia actually admitting that it discriminates based on Religion?
Cool. Let's pass this fact on to everyone, especially the peace loving Muslims like Maryam and my favorite Muslim apologist, Liska.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/holnus/004200612201428.htm
Keralite spared death sentence by Saudi court
Alappuzha, Dec. 20 (PTI): A Keralite, who was reportedly facing death sentence in Saudi Arabia, has been set free due to timely intervention of Indian authorities.
Jojo Joseph of Edathua in the district was on Monday ordered to be beheaded for entering the holy place of Medina despite a bar on non-Muslims.
According to Jojo's family members in Edathua, the Saudi authorities later took a lenient view of the case after they were convinced that he did not deliberately commit the mistake.
Jojo, employed in an electronic shop in Jeddah, ran into trouble while rushing in a cab to a hospital where his wife had given birth to a child. The taxi driver took a wrong route and strayed into the prohibited area, his family members said.
The Indian was then spotted by religious volunteers, who handed him to the police.
Jojo's brother-in-law sought former Kerala Chief Minister Oommen Chandy's help in the matter. Chandy contacted the Overseas Indian Affairs Minister Vayalar Ravi and Minister of state for External Affairs E Ahmed. The two Ministers acted swiftly and secured the release of Jojo through the intervention of Indian embassy in Saudi Arabia, they said
Early candidate for Anti-Dhimmi USA in 2007:
Representative Virgil Goode of Virginia, District Five.
"The Muslim representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens don't wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran," Goode wrote.
Of course it's not the Qur'an that is the problem, but the contents of the Qur'an, loyalty to the ummah over any secular institutions, and shari'a law, but whatever. I'll take what I can get.
Just as good, under pressure from CAIR:
It's about time!
Anti-Dhimmi in 2007, and President of the United States Virgil Goode in 2008!
Or, what Ummahnewslinks said. I was too excited to check around for other posts.
Confidence in our technological superiority put us here, and diligence toward it will get us out. When the west can deliver a barrel of ethanol, to Asia particularly, for half the cost of a barrel of oil, the medieval pigs that now gloat at our dependence will be severely weakened. Petroleum will still be an important commodity, but if its link to the global energy market can be obviated, its value will drop. And those who direct its profit to the dissolution of our culture will wither.
It comes down to the simple expedient of underpricing the competition, one way or another, in energy. The sooner we once again do this (we've done so often before), the more strength we'll retain. And if we don't do this soon, we give our children a bloody, violent and bleak future.
"Is it just me screaming?
Fucking Hell we need a regiment and a military coup!"
No, you are not the only one screaming. And we, in the U.S. have it from both ends- Not only Islam but the OPEN BORDER WITH MEXICO!!
http://jillosphy.blogspot.com
A spokesman for bmi said the airline was complying with Saudi law
The Arab Charter on Human Rights was adopted by the Council of the League of Arab States on 15 September 1994 and affirms the principles contained int he UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Interncational Covenants on Human Rights and the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam. A number of traditional human rights are provided for, including the right to liberty and security of persons, equality of persons before the law, protection of persons from torture, the right to own private property, freedom to practise religious observance and freedom of peaceful assembly and association. The Charter also provides for the election of a seven-person Committee of Experts on Human Rights to consider States' reports.
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Adopted and proclaimed by General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948
Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Article 19.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
I do not think the Koran should be banned. I think it should be more widely read in the West - read and compared with the Bible, especially, of course, the New Testament. The Koran is rather boring as lecture, but it is eye-opening.
Compare the hatred which the so called Allah shows for humanity on every page of the Koran with the ethical message of the Bible. Compare the strange, untrue stories of the Koran (there is one about what happened to Alexander the Great in his old age, though he died young) with the historical accounts in the Old Testament.
And you might also throw in the Taoist Book of the way with its exhortations to leave "the ten thousand things" alone, not to kill or destroy them.
I did buy into the talk ot Islam being just a religion much like every other one, until I read the Koran. Then it became clear to me that whoever Allah is, he is not God, and whatever Islam is, it is not an effort to find the way to God.
I do not think the Koran should be banned. I think it should be more widely read
....I disagree, it should be outlawed and no one should be allowed to have one , much less read one. Most of the Muslim violence around the world centers around those who proudly use the writings from this book to justify their actions.
This book is an evil text. When was the last time you heard about anyone carrying a Bible and using its words to slay at will.
exsgtbrown
The Koran is an evil text. That is exactly my point.
But cultural relativists tend to quote some of the harsh passages in the Torah and say that these are just like the Koran. Now I am not a specialist of Jewish theology, but as far as I know, it is said that those Torah passages are not valid in our times. And of course the New Testament is about loving your fellow humans, as Christians know, but the cultural relativists do not.
As long as you do not compare the texts, you might believe the cultural relativists (or rather, the enemies of the Judaeo-Christian civilization). If you see for yourself with unprejudiced eyes, you come to the conclusion that the Koran is an evil text. And if you read the Suras in chronological order (you can find the chronological order on the Internet), you see how its evilness progresses.
The Koran unlike the bible and other religious texts has commands for ALL time to kill nonmuslims in the name of allah. Its the most vile book ever written --Ive read it and lots of the hadiths.
It makes Hitlers Mein Kampf look like like a boyscout manual. (By the way Mein Kampf is a runaway bestseller in muslim nations according to a previous jihad watch article).
Qur'an:9:5 "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war."
Qur'an:9:29 "Fight those who do not believe until they all surrender, paying the protective tax in submission."
Qur'an:8:39 "Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah."
Ishaq:324 "He said, ‘Fight them so that there is no more rebellion, and religion, all of it, is for Allah only. Allah must have no rivals.'"
Qur'an:4:95 "Not equal are believers who sit home and receive no hurt and those who fight in Allah's Cause with their wealth and lives. Allah has granted a grade higher to those who fight with their possessions and bodies to those who sit home. Those who fight He has distinguished with a special reward."
"confiscate the Koran, forbid passengers to travel in burkas, ban vocal praying and head bobbing, and ban head coverings (male and female).
stand up and do the right thing. quit acting like your airline belongs to Islam.
It is called British Airways.
Maybe you should change the name to Dhimmi Airways.
Posted by: exsgtbrown"
I can understand the compulsion to meet Saudi Arabia's blatant discrimination with equal discrimination, and it would give one a momentary sense of delicious poetic justice to disallow the bringing of the Koran into non-Muslim majority countries because Saudi Arabia bans the importation of all other religious texts, but two wrongs don't make a right. And there are inevitable complications to your proposal: for example, "head bobbing", I believe, is a part of Jewish prayer, not Muslim, although perhaps when Muslims cannot actually get down on the floor to pray they do this to compensate. I don't think we would get anywhere with a ban as extreme as this. What if someone is just bobbing their head to music on the headset? I can see the security reasons to forbid the face-concealing burkas and hijabs, but why pick on "head coverings"? Would this include Sikh turbans, which are worn by all Sikh males from age of about 4 onwards, and the head coverings that many Catholic nuns still wear? How about older Russian Christian women who just like to wear scarves because they keep their heads warm? And would you make only "vocal" Muslim praying a crime, or all praying? can you count on the flight staff to tell the difference? ("I'm not speaking Arabic, miss, I'm speaking Latin.") My other point is that not all Muslim countries have such disgusting rules and laws, nor do their airlines. Single out Saudi Arabia by all means, it's the worst of the worst, but that's no reason to piss on them all.
Mentioning Sikhs reminded me that all baptized Sikh males are compelled to carry a kirpan, a concealed "ceremonial" dagger, and there was recently a court case in Ontario in which a Sikh student was given the right to wear his to school. Most Sikhs don't insist on wearing this thing everywhere, and don't make it an issue. I very much doubt that in this day and age any of them have attempted to wear them onto a plane. (Am I wrong about this?) Would any of them actually have the audacity to literally make a federal case of this? Most Sikhs in my country are model citizens, but this community has also grappled with religious extremism and terrorism in the past - let's not forget Air India in 1985 - and periodically continues to do so. Reading Kim Bolan's book "Loss of Faith: How the Air India Bombers Got Away with Murder" I perceived quite a lot of creepy parallels between what was going on with Sikhs in the 80s and what's going on in many Canadian Muslim communities now, the main difference being the aggression of Muslim extremists tends to cast a much, much wider net.
How can we help,where are those who fight for freedom ,lets all help if we can tell me how can I help,who can I write to.
You are easily the most inane poster I've seen on this site, bar none - not even our Mohammedan trolls, such as Nasseem, MSaleem or Motago. Do you even read this site? Every day, there are stories from all sorts of places - Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Syria, Egypt, PA, Lebanon - the list goes on and on and on. Singling out Saudi Arabia for oppobrium is exactly what Muslim taqiyya masters do, in a vain attempt to displace criticism of Islam by putting it squarely on the feet of Wahabism, and trying to insinuate that Wahabism is a major departure from Islam. Just because Saudi Arabia is uniquely bigoted doesn't mean that what other Islamic countries do is even tolerable, let alone acceptable. Look at the treatment of the Copts in Egypt, the Maronites in Lebanon, the Assyrians in Iraq, Christians in Turkey, and on the moderate end, Christians in Indonesia and Hindus in Malaysia. And you're trying to sell us the Mohammedan lies that excepting Saudi Arabia, there are no problem countries? And if you are just thinking about countries that ban books, how about the fact that The Truth about Muhammad has just been banned in Fuckistan, and that the Satanic Verses are banned in almost all Muslim countries?
Planes are not temples, churches, mosques or anything else. They are public transport vehicles - authorities can do what they like. If it's a private airline, they too have the discretion of banning anybody and anything. I don't know about Britain, but here, in the US, it's standard to have on businesses signs that state "We reserve the right to refuse service to anybody". Using that model, a company could easily refuse to service Muslims, period, and there's nothing that could, nor should be done about it. On the issue of Kirpans, most Sikhs generally would put it in check-in luggage, although there were some incidents in India in the early 80's regarding sone Sikh passengers wanting to carry it with them, and not hand it over to the stewardess. Also, one flaw with the comparison between Sikhs and Muslims - the Khalistan campaign (by Sikhs for a country independent of India, along the lines of Pakistan), regardless of whether one supports it or not, was limited to India. Even the most extreme Khalistani didn't/doesn't have any ambitions of spreading Sikhism worldwide, and making it the only religion on the face of the earth, the way Islam does. And I'm not even going to dignify Islam by comparing its tenets with those of Sikhism - there's almost no comparison.
On the issue of banning Qurans into certain countries, it's no different from a government banning Mein Kamph or Kommunist Manifesto from the country. Therefore, your contention about it being poetic justice is flawed, but a little less ludicrous than your above assertion that Saudi Arabia is uniquely evil, and there is nothing worth condemning about other Islamic countries.
"...the Khalistan campaign (by Sikhs for a country independent of India, along the lines of Pakistan), regardless of whether one supports it or not, was limited to India"
Infidel Pride:
Your case against AngloIrishSlav is for the most part correct. There is no comparison between the 1400 years of creeping Islamic expansion (and sometimes not so "creeping") and the occassional extremism that arises in other religious communities.
However, on one point of fact I think you may be unaware of some important information. The extent of the terrorism that occured in the Canadian Sikh community was greater than your comment recognizes. There was a fairly widespread terrorist network on the West Coast during that period connected with the men eventually charged by the RCMP with the bombing of Air India 182 and a great deal of related street gang activity, some of which has been ongoing and at one point, during the early '90's I think, the then Attorney General of British Columbia, Ujjal Dosanjh, himself a Sikh, was attacked and severely beaten by one of these groups, ending up in hospital for a considerable time after.
So the problem of terrorism in that community, while probably fading now, has not always been confined to the territory of Khalistan. And on the point of terrorism in general I suppose we could also consider the current problems with the "Lord's Resistance Army" in Uganda but your point that Islam is unique is still correct because in every other religious community common sense and pacifist restraint always reassert control when violent fanatics take over, as has seemed to happen in the Sikh community in Canada. This is, of course, no coincidence - only in Islam, so far as I know, is the founding text a virtual declaration of war against the rest of the world.
I don't think it is necessary to ban the Koran from the West, on the contrary people need to be made aware of it's contents. The honest reading of Mein Kampf does not make one a Nazi, and the honest reading of Koran will not make a person a Muslim. Most human beings are decent people at heart, they want to do the right thing by each other. Knowing this, it is reasonable to conclude that upon reading the Koran, the overwhelming majority of people will reject Islam, and that includes the Muslims who haven't actually read it as well. Instead of millions of Muslims you will have millions of new infidels, and instead of millions of Dhimmis you'll be presented with millions of people who recognise Islam for what it is.
I agree, the Koran is an evil book, perhaps the worst book in human history; that is why it SHOULD be studied. Know thy enemy.
I am a little late to respond, particularly since this thread would be close to getting frozen, but just in case you're still reading this...
I wasn't aware of the points you were making re: Khalistani activity in Canada. However, my point above was that even if Khalistanis were in the majority of the Sikhs, their ambitions are constrained to within India. Despite the account you presented above (thank you), they do not have ambitions of converting Canada into a Sikh state and making you carry the 5 'K's, in the way Jihadis would like you to either recite the Shariah, exist as a Dhimmi or drop dead. The violence you alluded to seems to be some infighting within Sikh groups on whether the recognized representatives of the Sikhs should support Khalistan or not.
A few days ago, I myself found myself crossing swords with a Canadian Sikh, and in course of that conversation, I spelt out my position on Khalistan. I recognize that this is a movement that wants a separate country for Sikhs (along the lines that Pakistan exists for Muslims), and I lived in India throughout the 80's, including the military operations in the Golden Temple, the assassination of Indira Gandhi and the pogroms in Delhi against the Sikhs that followed. However, while the infighting between pro and anti-Khalistani Sikhs does take place in places like Canada, it's a mistake to think that they have grand designs on Canada in the way that Muslims do.