Indira Gandhi Bunaam Bush!

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#246 by dost-mittar on August 21, 2004 5:59am PT

Memoirs-
Anecdotes-
Anthology of poems-

That is what all religious books are- rest is all politics and struggle for power and control over the human minds and bodies!!
And what has Khalistan to do with Guru Granth Sahib?

AlephNull #245
I agree with your post in spirit and content. If we all discuss issues in this manner, Chowk will be such a wonderful place to learn from each other.

Few comments though. Sikh identity issue has two dimensions. First one - visible symbols like turban, beard etc. I agree that those are the issues that Sikhs have to deal with just like anyone else. I have no sympathy for that concern. In fact living in India assures that the Lite Sikhs (the ones without hard stuff) can deal with the issue much better than if they had their own country.

Second concern that Sikhs discuss revolves around the fact that Buddhism did not survive in India. It did prosper outside India and could have done wonders to India if following the teachings of Gautam Buddha, ordinary folks would have focused more energy on improving daily life through concern for community than worrying about next life etc. (This is just my layman’s understanding of one of their key principles). But some how our intellectual Hindu ancestors were so arrogant that they practically wiped out Buddhism and the weak society ultimately succumbed to external invaders.

What does that have to do with Sikhs? Well, Sikhs believe that more than just a few external symbols they have some fine teachings too that revolve around community (share food so that no one goes hungry, voice for every one in community, respect folks of other religion, oppose oppression). Although some of these teachings do wind up in India’s constitution, others will slowly whither away and we will just become a footnote in the history books. I understand and sympathize with the pain but do not have foggiest idea about how anyone can avoid that.

Regards.

Ballukhan # 240
You are right sir. Getting out is escapism. Still for most ordinary folks, it’s practical and builds economic foundation with best overseas education for their children. India will not miss a few million departing souls. Arab countries have been blessed with oil to export and India with smart humans and let’s take advantage of what we have.

Regards.

Gujju # 241
I have no use for Khalistan

I am very glad that people have overcome all bad memories. Time will heal the wounds and hopefully humans will not be hounded again to be burnt alive. For you it’s a distant event, almost like reading history books, devoid of any real feelings of pain since you were probably not even born in 1984. For others who were making frantic calls to India in first 3-4 days of November 1984 to see if their loved ones were OK and they could not tell us since their kids were traveling to the affected areas, it’s not easy to forget.

I still will advise every Sikh to be like you and other smart south Indians and focus on education and improvement of your own lot, if possible by moving overseas and join army as last resort if all else fails.

You should take this as complement.

canadadryer:
``There is no comparison between the two leaders. One was smart, witty, calculating, committed, and resolute. The other one needs to be committed.``

The victim of the former think that she should have been committed, too. In fact, one of them ``executed`` her.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

AlephNull#245
Good post!
I do not think that the sikhs mind being ``lumped`` with other punjabis. In fact, the modern sikh identity is associated with being a punjabi more than any other identity - religious, caste or national - much more so than is the case of hindu or muslim punjabis. In Ottawa, it is generally the sikhs who organise functions to commemorate Bulle Shah rather than the Pakistani muslims.
This sikh association with punjab and punjabi is somewhat strange and perhaps due mostly to guru granth saheb being in the gurmukhi script. While one can go into endless arguments about whether or not the sikh gurus wanted to start a separate religion (the tenth guru definitely wanted to start a new ``panth`` which may or may not be translated into religion for which there is no word in the Indic languages), there can be no argument, I think, that they never thought of themselves as punjabis first. Guru Nanak roamed throuout India and beyond and his message was quite universal. Guru Gobind Singh, the founder of Khalsa, was born a ``poorbiya`` and his mother-tongue was perhaps bhojpuri. His compositions are mostly in bhojpuri/braj-bhasha (ex. aagya bhayee akaal ki, tabhi chalayo panth, sab sikhan ko hukam hai guru maanyo granth). He even describes his previous birth place in the Uttranchal Province, Hemkund north of Badrinath which has a famous gurudwara. While Guru Granth Saheb contains the works of many saints, the compositions of the sikh gurus in it (e.g., japji saheb, jaapji saheb, sukhmuni saheb) are mostly in the common language of bhakti movement of that period, except that the sikh gurus used a more stylised, sankritised version of that language. They certainly did not use the classic punjabi of Ghulam Farid or Bulle Shah.
Sikh gurus thought of the whole of India as their country. Two of the five seats (takhats) of sikh religious power are outside Panjab (in Bihar and Maharashtra). They would perhaps be shocked if Khalistan was associated with Punjab alone.

Pardesi #235

I do not disagree with the spirit of most of your post. You are dead right about the general issue of center-state relations, at least as far as it involves money, investment funds, etc. In the case of Punjab it unfortunately got entangled with all-or-nothing ‘identity’ issues that are very difficult to deal with on the give-or-take/barter/compromise basis that works for other kinds of politics. It was Indira’s criminal stupidity to encourage a mad violent extremist (Bhindranwale) to corner the moderate Akali leadership (Longowal and company) thus depriving them of the political space to compromise before 1984.

I did want to comment on the issue of relations between Sikhs and Hindus (or more generally, non-Sikh Indians), since it is a recurrent motif in your post and also in those of other Sikhs. Sikhs’ self-perception of themselves as a community and their view of relations with Hindus, Muslims, etc., was likely formed out of several hundred years of history of North India, of interaction with Punjabi Hindus, Punjabi Muslims, the Delhi darbar, ‘poorbiyas’ of various persuasions [I learnt this word on Chowk and gather that it has strong derogatory connotations for Punjabis], etc. So the expectations from non-Sikh Indians were based on relations, good and bad, with a relatively small subset of India’s current population. The biggest post-independence tensions seem to have been with Hindus from Punjab and Haryana, who certainly do not make up 85% of India’s population (they may be 4% or so). IMO it is a mistake (though commonly made, in similar form, by members of every community) to extrapolate from the sub-groups with which you had the greatest contact to everyone else. I very much doubt that most Indians outside a particular region of North and North-West India have or ever had any resentment or hatred or animus towards Sikhs. Sacrilegious though it might be to some Sikhs, many other Indians may not see you as very different in behaviour and outlook from Punjabi Hindus (or even a larger group of North Indians). FWIW, the stereotype of Sikhs that I, a South Indian, imbibed, was basically the general Punjabi stereotype (again, FWIW) – energetic, enterprising, aggressive, easily adapting to new environments, perhaps not overly refined, etc. The incremental Sikh component of the stereotype was that they are less concerned with caste than Hindus, have no qualms about working with their hands or in ‘humble’ occupations, which is surely a positive perception. You might want to read gujju #241 for another viewpoint.

As to the ‘martyrdom for others’ business, again this expectation/tradition was formed by history (Mughal persecution and Indian Independence movement) but I doubt that most Indians today, even while acknowledging everything that Sikhs have done for India, either expect you to fight others’ battles or want to sucker you into becoming sacrificial goats. Perhaps some change in Sikh self-perception would help, though it may be difficult after the needless loss of life in the Punjab troubles.

Finally, there is the issue of the pressures of modernization, which were apparently one of the root causes of the Punjab troubles. They may have hit Sikhs earlier than other communities because of the changes caused by the Green Revolution, but they are faced by all Indians, routinely cause discord within families, and have led to occasional violence in many parts of India. No one is forced to shed his turban, shave his beard, smoke, drink alcohol or marry out of the community – these things mostly happen out of individual choice, partly driven by influences from a surrounding culture. Modernization pressures should not be viewed as intentional victimization by people out to get you, destroy your distinct identity, etc. In the meantime, you are no more unwelcome in any part of India than any other Indians.

Apologies for the length of this post. Just my opinion, FWIW.

#241 by gujju1 on August 20, 2004 7:34am PT

Unfortunately, belligerence has become a fashionable narcisstic statement that goes in the name of contemporary show of religiousity. Some modern Sikhs think that one has to wear the Kripan all the times in order to be a pure one, some Hindus like Togadia think that Hindus must wear the Trishuls to show off their religiousity, and the Jehadis think that blowining themselves proves the superiority of their faith.
All this obsession with showman ship and one up manship shows their irreligiousity.
The fact is that these statements are political and have nothing to do with religion. What has Khalistan to do with religion? or what has mob violence to do with religion? It is just that political violence is used to settle scores in the name of religion. So let us not confuse issues.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#23by Pardesi on August 19, 2004 3:27pm PT
The grievance is universal and holds good for all religious communities, ethnic and linguistic groups. May be the solution you prescribe for Sikhs also holds for all the groups in India. Whether muslim shia, bohra, vasihnav, shaivists, Purabi, Uttaranchali, Himanchali, Vidharba, Marathi, Haryanavi Jat, Haryanavi Gujjar etc etc. When each one counts the percentage of his group, sub-group, religion, sect, sub-sect, hindu caste, sub-caste, region, mohalla, gali then one finds in the minority situation. So, the prescription to migrate out of the country can be considered universally applicable??
I think we are looking at escapist routes !

well since we are well off topic anyway with golden showers and what not.

Could Ms Aditi (of the Oxford and St Xaviers fame) please remove her 1GB photograph from her chowk profile so that hapless dial-up users can get some chaino-sukoon.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

AlephNull # 226
{I suspect that there was one more crucial ingredient in the Punjab troubles, and that is that Sikhs more than any other identifiable group in India of comparable size have a long tradition of martyrdom and armed confrontation with governments. This started with the persecutions in the Mughal period and was reinforced during British rule. Finally there was the upheaval and holocaust of Partition. This long history has perhaps caused a susceptibility to feeling unjustly persecuted; such attitudes may lurk just beneath the surface, ready to rekindled by fairly minor causes, resulting in disastrous and self-defeating over-reaction}

Sikhs are not patient and do not take things lying down. Historically, they try to negotiate when the deal is unjust. If that does not work they pick up the arms.

The difference is that when they fought against injustice from Aurangzeb and british, Hindu India was cheering them on and Sikh fools did not realize that it’s not that most of Hindus respect them but that they are just happy that others are doing the dirty work for them. When Hindus became the rulers, the whole mess started with request for readjustment of state-center relationship (every one now recognizes that it was a good idea). Indira and Congress party were not going to give up their quota/license privileges and true color of “love and admiration” became obvious even to Sikhs.

Punjab had realized that Green revolution benefits will end soon. They were not going to get heavy industries due to being close to the risky border. Sophisticated small industry (we are talking here 60s) needed joint ventures with external companies and that was under federal control. I mean here in USA, NJ and NY compete against each other for say Japanese investment. In India everything was under Congress control due to “center knows best” policy and to get anything strategic it had to be away from border and determined by who has bigger voting block in Delhi.

So yes, Sikhs have to learn new ways of the world if they do not have a perpetual death wish. IMHO, they need to:

a) Focus on education, education, education.

b) provide their fair share of services recruitment and no more – get over this martyrdom for others business. India is huge and can take care of itself.

c) get out of India if possible – India is crowded and majority does not like them for various reasons, and law and order will not protect them if another crazy bastaxd/b*tch gets in mood to hunt Sikhs down as an entertainment sport (west may not like us but they are better humans. Even if they kill us, they will not burn us alive in front of our families)

d) develop flexible alliances with others in India based upon what’s right for Sikhs. No one is permanent enemy or friend.

As you pointed out they need to become less jumpy if the center is corrupt and justice is not being done to poor and underprivileged. It’s none of sikhs business to fix every damn problem in the society. They need to take advantage of the opportunities that the system will keep presenting rather than becoming unpopular by trying to change the system. Hindus can take controversial stand and no one will call them Pakistani agents. They are 85% and not 2%.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#229 by kaurasach
``the tree of freedom grows when watered with the blood of martyrs. ``

kaura,

please write a (long) post about your experience then and later in india etc, i would most certinly apreciate it (that is what is good about chowk). rhetoric such as above i can get from commie and other literature, so not very readable. events from your personal experience are priceless.

regarding martyrdom..i had a very close (mona) sikh friend, and we were in mumbai when mrs g was shot. him an me immediately went to his house as the news came and there, he showed me a huge sword which he had kept in good shape. thankfully, there was 0 problem in mumbai.

later he wanted to immigrate, for a gulf job, and was having much trouble getting a passport, as this needed a police enquiry. this is needed for all indian passport, but others, say with mumbai address could get it done quicker (in a day with proper bribes to cops). his enquiry had to go to panjab and with the general trouble there it took much time, and he surely did not want to go to panjab to facilitate a smooth enquiry. he was pissed, and was convinced that it was due to profiling. i asked a passport officer (connections etc) and he said that although they do match names against a list, in this specific case, the delay was due to police enquiry. since my friend was at the recieving end of the danda in this case, he was not impressed. there were so many roumors flying around those days. then he got his passport and he never looked back. i met him a few times, he is less pissed-off with GOI now (more with the Aussis).

bottom-line: danda receiver is not impressed with cool analysis.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#207 Pardesi

[quote]
Wrong. It was not mob violence my friend. It was unadulterated Federal government sponsored, funded, and managed massacre of a loyal minority. It was the second punch of the proverbial 1-2 punch.

And after the massacre –
1. Indian “street smart voters” rewarded Rajeev with a record parliamentary mandate
2. The “democratic/judicial system” never allowed the inquiry.

This is India’s shame. Now, do you blame overseas or Indian sikhs’ alienation and anger at India?
[end-quote]

I agree with you 100%. Without a doubt the violence could and should have been controlled within a few hours. I respect Sikhs who are angry and alienated about these horrific events. Until they are officially addressed by the Goverment of India (Apology, jail for perpetrators, compensation to survivors) all indians should continue to press for this to take place. I certainly will.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Weren`t nirankari sikhs being hunted & killed by Bhindranwale`s goons? Indira no doubt gets the blame for fishing in the communally polluted waters of punjab. For those who claim that she wanted to finish off sikhs, you`re being hot headed. Figurehead tho he was, Zail Singh was the president. She did have Sikh bodyguards even after so many desertions from the army. Akali politicians are among the worst communally minded set, not much different from the RSS/BJP or the rabid sections of the muslim league. Like with other fundamentalists, parochialism was a comfortable perch to ease a sense of (imagined) victimhood.
I remember siege of the Temple being considered but since there were supposed to be so many underground tunnels, and worshippers were being allowed in and out, the idea was dropped. If a bunch of armed goons used the Kashi VIshwanath temple as a base for waging a de facto war with active help from pujaris and pilgrims, then the state would have a similar obligation to stop that. What happened to the Temple was unavoidable. One could quibble with the timing, but it had to happen.
In contrast, the murder and mayhem of 1984, and the subsequent behavior of congress policians from Rajiv Gandhi on down is beyond despicable. I am ashamed to have been born in a country where religious minorities are hunted down in this way.

Comparison to what`s happening in Nijef where a cleric is staring down an illegal occupation army and a puppet regime is far fetched.

#219 Alephnull
The green revolution had another effect - the increased mechanization required larger farm sizes, and small farms, which were labor intensive, were bought out. This led to large unemployment among young farm workers who could be recruited into the various militant outfits.

jang #221

{{Only madrasi fugitives in karnatak jungles seem to escape the heavy hand of GOI.}}

The Veerappan case has its roots in the archaic laws governing the cultivation and commerce in sandalwood and probably other forest products, dating back to Tipu’s days. The state has an effective monopoly on sandalwood; this give locals every incentive to engage in sandalwood smuggling and other activities that are illegal according to the prevailing laws of the land. Veerappan may be just an exposed tip of a hydra of corruption whose tentacles reach deep into two state governments. Veerappan has escaped so far because powerful interests in the state governments want him to get away.

Re. Punjab, one keeps hearing complaints from Sikhs that they got a raw deal from the GOI (prior to 1984), in water sharing, army recruitment, status of Chandigarh, etc. etc. This is very difficult to square with the massive investments the center made in Punjab, which Sikhs with their usual energy and industry took full advantage of. The more level-headed of them would have understood all along that the much-maligned sarkar had not unreasonably limited their opportunities to thrive anywhere in India. Beyond that, given that India is and will continue to be a land of comparative scarcity and competition for resources, almost every state, community, linguistic or religious group can complain that it has been short-changed, given a raw deal, etc. To me these complaints would have been somewhat more plausible coming from Bihar or Orissa or Assam. For that matter Indira was playing her games everywhere from Andhra to Kashmir but it’s Punjab that blew up.

I suspect that there was one more crucial ingredient in the Punjab troubles, and that is that Sikhs more than any other identifiable group in India of comparable size have a long tradition of martyrdom and armed confrontation with governments. This started with the persecutions in the Mughal period and was reinforced during British rule. Finally there was the upheaval and holocaust of Partition. This long history has perhaps caused a susceptibility to feeling unjustly persecuted; such attitudes may lurk just beneath the surface, ready to rekindled by fairly minor causes, resulting in disastrous and self-defeating over-reaction.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#211 Humsab

i have been in there and perhaps escaped getting killed in a bus-stoppage incident.

#219 Aleph

i knew that the green revolution had something to do with it, but did not figure out the tractor-beard connection.

Overall, GOI and India are both still fairly insecure to threats of armed rebellions, and will more often use brutal techincs, be it against separatist or the maoist. Only madrasi fugitives in karnatak jungles seem to escape the heavy hand of GOI.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#213 by kaurasach on August 19, 2004 6:10am PT

Whether it is Bhindrawale killing the innocent people or Congress/BJP goons killing the innocent minority members- both have commited un pardonable crimes- and only the innocent citizens were the victims of these political rivalries. But to call Bhindrawale a ``simpleton`` is to glorify a criminal mind. It is like calling Osama a mild mannered gentleman. Also, to equate India with Indira Gandhi is like equating Germany with Hitler.

Tell me - Was Bhindrawale a Sikh martyr in your eyes??

stuka #179

{{Why June 30th? Why Gurpurab?}}

The date was 5th-6th June, 1984 (presumably Gurpurab for that year).

#178

{{basis of the problem}}

I would be grateful if you would read and comment on this article (please don’t be put off by the rather lurid-sounding title).

It is always tempting (and may be natural for some mentalities or cultures) to lay the ultimate responsibility for major events on the proximate actions of allegedly pivotal human actors, so-called ‘heroes’ or ‘villains’ – thus ‘Jinnah and his typewriter’, ‘Indira Gandhi the dain’, ‘Zia and his generals’, etc. In my opinion it makes more sense to look at broad trends or waves, which individual politicians may try to ride or channel for their own generally myopically perceived advantage, but which they cannot really control beyond a point. I suspect that Athale’s article linked above is a better explanation of genesis of the Punjab troubles than the ones which make Indira the villain of the piece.

urstruely

should you not be attending noor mohameds funeral?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Hindu People

I have been following this discussion intently. One thing that everyone seems to agree on is that it is government in India that kills minorities - whether they are sikhs, Mulsims in general, Muslims in Gujrat, or Muslism is Kashmir. Whose government then it is any way. If your country is a democracy then it should be your government but then how counld it kill you. Well in Pakistan when government kills its population it makes sense because it is a government of a puppet despot and a rogue military but what is wrong with you people.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Good amusing discussion going on among those who most probably were not there when Punjab was burning except dullabhatti ji who may have seen some part of action. And none among the crowd here has seen Punjab from within Punjab for a long time now. One unanimous conclusion that Indira was responsible seems to be the only absolute truth. Rest of the arguements from both sides are coming from prejudiced mind.

Regards all.

#179 by stuka

[That is the whole point. Why did Black Thunder succeed? Why did the siege on Hazratbal succeed?]

Black Thunder was conducted by NSG commandos, specially trained for counter-terrorist operations, and the number of terrorists then was nowhere near the number at the time of Blue Star. The Hazratbal siege succeeded because there were only a handful of terrorists holed inside the shrine with limited access to food and water. The Golden Temple had more than 500 terrorists holed in and an unlimited supply of food and water. A siege would have lasted for months on, in which time the already grim situation in Punjab would have deteriorated further.

[No one is denying that action was needed. But was a full scale assault required?]

Perhaps the Army overestimated the number and strength of the terrorists holed inside the temple, but in view of the limited intelligence they had, they probably decided to err on the side of caution. In retrospect, the number of casualties they took (238 dead, twice as many injured) justified the overwhelming force that was used.

[That immediacy can only be conjured up by bringing the Pakistan factor in. The whole argument of Blue Star hinges on immediacy.]

Pakistan’s attempts at exploiting trouble inside India are not new. The 1948 and ‘65 wars are testimony to that. Operation Gibraltar (‘65) was envisaged with a view to occupying Kashmir by first sending raiders into Indian Kashmir for conducting guerrilla activities and to help the locals in organizing a movement to start an uprising against India. Once the uprising gained momentum, the Pakistan Army would invade J&K and annex it. The situation in Punjab in ‘84 was a mirror copy of J&K in ’65. So in that, the Indian Army was not mistaken.

[I cannot cooraborate a negative.]

Well, can you at least cite a source that denies Pakistan mobilized its Army at that time?

[Why June 30th? Why Gurpurab? Would Iindian Army attack a temple on Diwali if the situation required it?]

I agree the timing was wrong. They could have done that a day earlier or later. But again, you and I can only speculate. My opinion is that if it could have been avoided, the GoI would definitely have done that. Mind you, the Sikhs are not a miniscule minority and IG would have been conscious of the repercussions.

And if there is a threat to India’s integrity, I’m all for attacking even a temple on Diwali, and I’m sure the Indian Army would do so too.

[I believe that Indira Gandhi`s game plan was not just to cleanse the Golden Ttemple. Her real intention was to launch an attack on the Sikh faith and to give the message that she was all powerful.]

That’s stretching things a bit too far. What is the basis for your belief may I ask? A baseless statement if there ever was one.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

pmishra2 # 183

“Sikh community allowed itself to be hijacked by extremist elements, and did not act forcefully against these elements even after mass murders were committed in their name”.

You are absolutely right. Shame on Sikhs, and Sikhs paid price as they got clobbered by army later.

”Indira Gandhi used this extremism for her own ends, supporting it when convenient, successfully selling the bogeyman of ``sikh extremism`` to other indians when convenient”

You are right again. Shame on Indira, and Indian masses who bought the arguments from her. Indira paid the price, but her name does not live in infamy and majority of the folks still think that she was the best thing that ever happened to India.

“And at the end of all of this came the horror of the mob violence against innocent sikhs in Delhi”.

Wrong. It was not mob violence my friend. It was unadulterated Federal government sponsored, funded, and managed massacre of a loyal minority. It was the second punch of the proverbial 1-2 punch.

And after the massacre –
1. Indian “street smart voters” rewarded Rajeev with a record parliamentary mandate
2. The “democratic/judicial system” never allowed the inquiry.

This is India’s shame. Now, do you blame overseas or Indian sikhs’ alienation and anger at India?

Please remember, I am not even touching the topic of attack on Golden temple.

#194 by kaurasach on August 18, 2004 1:47pm PT

People who yearn for purity only end up mummifying the histories of their ancestors. They put the collective experiences of the past communities which were themselves a product of their violent times and struggles into a preservative box- the purists want to clothe these experiences into preservatives and put them on their show cases.
In doing so they try to become a part of that history which they can never ever share. It is like the Japs who still live in jungles thinking the WW is still on. I think it is time for these purists who have this un controllable desire to participate in the struggles of their ancestors to pack their bags and go- they MUST throw away all the weapons that were used in the struggles of the past and move on with the present.
However, there is nothing one can do in letting any one to follow some Khalsa or purist Arya Samaj or some RSS faith- The issue is just DO NOT IMPOSE on others! Bhindrawale acted like a warlord- he tried to impose his own purist moral code of conduct- he even participated in the collection of taxes- he was violent and vulgar. No issues with those who admire him, praise him, worship him. Just do not let him try to control the lives of others!!!Do not let him take the powers of state.
Finally, those who forget that culture is an ever evolving entity fail to understand that the actions of the religious leaders mutated as per the circumstances of history.
So, respect the choices made by others- do not spite your own blood and the choices they make. Who knows there might be a great prophet amongst them who would tell you that the previous gurus were wrong.

``this India day parade i saw a large contigent of local sikhs waving the tri-color with more gusto than other indians``

Yup. Can`t wait till a few Hindus are killed in the midwest coz of mistaken identity. Wonder what flag they will fly...

KKANK

Exactly. And that is what the government did subsequent to 1984. But it is against a Bamman`s nature to ever admit wrongdoing.

#199 by kkkandk

may not be the rigtht answer, but a siege at that time was though to be more dangerous, whereas a rescuing the temple from outlaws was politically thought to be lesser of the evils. i personally dont buy the idea that IG wanted to break the ``Sikh Back``. i think that she was in deep trouble and took what she thought to be politically less costly alternative. she probably would have gotten killed either way.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

kaurasach
//..the harsh and offensive pressure from the likes of RSS, //

You blame RSS for loss/dilution of Sikh identity ..... and RSS blames western culture for dilution if Hindu identity. You blame bollywood for the the damage it`s doing to ``naadan`` young sikhs .... and RSS blames Valentines` Day for exactly the same, in this case - naadan hindu kids.

And of course - everybody blames pepsi. Pepsi is the common threat for everybody`s identity.

But the truth is - people know what they want ..... And unlike these insecure little busibodies(kaurasach or RSS or whoever) nobody is afraid of Pepsi - nobody is tilting at wind-mills - nobody has time for such bullsh!t. Nobody thinks his/her culture so weak that it can be conquered by a company that sells colored-water.

And they are right.

So kaurasach ... I don`t know what you do... if you have full time job ..... but this is just pathetic, blaming Pepsi for loss of sikh identity.

here is what i think (my read without taking into consideration all the panjab subha etc)

sikhs are and were very respected in india.

they became richer out of 3 reasons

0. sikh military hiring by the british indian and indian army.
1.large GOI spending during the green revolution (panjab got irrigated by british, and then the Bhakra Nangal)
3. hard working diaspora to UK/Canada

so the sikh developed a stronger sense of nationhood, a sense that they are better than the rest of poorer, lazy bums of india, which further mutated into separatist movement with help from IG.

Bluestar:
Like most of you I too have read Brar`s interview and was not much impressed by it. He would have been more correct if he had said that he was a soldier carrying out the order; it was not his job to question the judgement of his political masters.
I do not know how many of you are aware that a month or so before the operation bluestar, there was a siege of another gurudwara in panjab also siezed by the militants. In that siege, the govt. had cut-off the electricity and water to the gurudwara. Many of us at that time thought that this was a dry-run for what was about to happen at the Golden Temple. Why it did not and what were the real motivations for Indira`s actions will probably never be known.

191
//..It took Bhindrawala 4 years to `hijack` the gurudwara. For several months, he was outside the boundary.....where was the govt. then...//

No doubt - govt scr1wed up big time. Indira Gandhi is entirely at fault to allow the situation to go that far - where the only option left was to attack a temple. For that only she deserves what she got.

But once the situation has gone that far - what do you do? There weren`t any other viable options.

The point basically is that the assult on the Temple was not designed to be an assult on sikhism - the religion or culture. It was a military action designed to achieve some specific military results which was to drive out terrorists. Nothing more nothing less. If that was understood - then the emotional outrage from Sikhs would have been more tempered

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

jang, mohar11:
My post#180 gave my perception of the recent sikh history. Many, maybe even most, sikhs may not agree with my some or all of my formulation.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

is bunty singh a dilution? if so, to what? how about bubbli, dolly or ginni?

#188 by jang
//...so, for idenitity insecurities of some, with no deliberate threat from others, we shall face the consequences....//

Exactly. And then - what if the other communities too start obessessing about purity in their identity. After all, isn`t that RSS`s raison-d-eter .... hindu identity/culture blah, blah...

Sikh identity geting ``diluted`` : with this kind of alarmist bullsh!t, problems are deliberately created where none exist, by people who should know better.

#180 DM

``These trends cannot but cause alarm among the sikh leadership who naturally do not wish their identity to disappear like those of jains before them. ``

so, for idenitity insecurities of some, with no deliberate threat from others, we shall face the consequences. boy, thankfully i have no faith in justice. BTW jains are doing just great. they rarely even marry among the hindus, and give themselves indian but non-hindu pantheon names like ``yogendra`` or ``Neeti``..(Laxmi being the only exception to the rule since its related to money) and run shops like Mahavir Gen. Stores. they have huge processions, their temple trusts are well cared for, and their dharmshalas are everywhere and very clean (if you can get in as a non-jain).

DM
//...These trends cannot but cause alarm among the sikh leadership who naturally do not wish their identity to disappear like those of jains before them. ...//

Are you part of that ``leadership`` who ``do not wish their identity to disappear like those of jains``?

How exactly has Jain identity dissapeared - after all, we are still talking about them. Did the Jain identity merge into hindu identity? And what exactly is a hindu identity?

This obsession with purity of identity - is that a good thing?? Sikh identity is getting ``diluted`` - is that a bad thing?? So what should we do now - start a revolution to restore the sikh identity?

#71 by aslam644 on August 14, 2004 11:15pm PT
Thousands killed tortured in punjab and kashmir, shouldn’t states be given the option of opt out if they don’t want to be part of India, as is the case in Britain

Dear Aslam
What about the Pakistani refuggess struggling in Bangladesh. Pakistan is not willing to accept them because there is no real estate involved unlike Kashmir. What about the Northern parts of Pakistan such as Chitral, Swat, Peshawar and many others which are legally speaking part of Afghanistan. U must read the article written by Aslam Effendi about the “History of Durrand Line”, a popular journalist who writes for Jang. for more infomation please refer to the following website http://afghanland.com/history/durrand.html

Have u forgotten the bloody revolution in Baluchistan. What about the freedom struggle, self-determination, plebiscite uprising, revolution going in Karachi for the last 20 years. What about PONM (Pakistan’s Oppressed Nations Movement). These are the thing, u should ponder .

Iqbal Singh - Amritsar

``The Centre wanted to break the back of the sikh; they were successful in many ways.``

Does that imply that government at the Centre irrespective of the ruling Parties or coalitions have acted against Sikh religion? You mean the Central Governments have been partisan and non-secular in their dealings with Sikh religious leaders? Are we viewing contemporary politics as a continuation of policies of Delhi darbars during the ancient Sikh history??

``Bhindrawala was worshiped especially by rural sikhs because he was the sole opponent to the grievences of sikhs and rural Punjabis. Punjab was and is screwed by the prejudiced centre. Water is one of the main issues. ``

This is an exaggeration as far as I understand Punjab politics. Bhindrawale only wanted to appear as another Sikh martyr who shouted shrill and rebelled against the Delhi darbars. He wanted to show that he had the guts to do and mixed his own ambition with a few political issue like water. I do not think he was anything more than an ambitious war lord who deserved his `martyrdom`.It is also an exagerration that Bhindrawale was the ONLY representative of Sikh Punjabis in the political front?

``Sikhs and weapons go together - Guru Gobind Singh told them to armed at all times. So, the weapons in Golden Temple were not against the tennets of sikhism. ``

Can`t we leave the weapons like AK-47 out of the purview of norms of the modern civil society. Tomorrow the Hindu Kshatriyas would consider arming themselves with AK-47 as being sanctified by their religion. That is exactly what Togadia and his goons want all of us to believe in this country. Bhindrawale used religion to arm himself and his goons with AK-47 in order to INTIMIDATE others and turn himself into a warlord- a legislator, a judge and the sole executor!!

``The Centre wanted to break the back of the sikh; they were successful in many ways.``

Does that imply that government at the Centre irrespective of the ruling Parties or coalitions have acted against Sikh religion? You mean the Central Governments have been partisan and non-secular in their dealings with Sikh religious leaders? Are we viewing contemporary politics as a continuation of policies of Delhi darbars during the ancient Sikh history??

``Bhindrawala was worshiped especially by rural sikhs because he was the sole opponent to the grievences of sikhs and rural Punjabis. Punjab was and is screwed by the prejudiced centre. Water is one of the main issues. ``

This is an exaggeration as far as I understand Punjab politics. Bhindrawale only wanted to appear as another Sikh martyr who shouted shrill and rebelled against the Delhi darbars. He wanted to show that he had the guts to do and mixed his own ambition with a few political issue like water. I do not think he was anything more than an ambitious war lord who deserved his `martyrdom`.It is also an exagerration that Bhindrawale was the ONLY representative of Sikh Punjabis in the political front?

``Sikhs and weapons go together - Guru Gobind Singh told them to armed at all times. So, the weapons in Golden Temple were not against the tennets of sikhism. ``

Can`t we leave the weapons like AK-47 out of the purview of norms of the modern civil society. Tomorrow the Hindu Kshatriyas would consider arming themselves with AK-47 as being sanctified by their religion. That is exactly what Togadia and his goons want all of us to believe in this country. Bhindrawale used religion to arm himself and his goons with AK-47 in order to INTIMIDATE others and turn himself into a warlord- a legislator, a judge and the sole executor!!

#153 Kaurasch

As an indian I remain deeply ashamed of the uncontrolled mob violence in Delhi in 1984 and the lack of justice to the innocent victims of the murders. At the same time, I would urge you not to minimize the extreme violence perpetrated by the khalistanis in Punjab, Haryana and Delhi. I remember well the daily reports of innocent people taken off buses in Punjab and murdered; in one single incident forty poor bihari workers were murdered in their sleep. ALL OF THIS WAS WELL BEFORE OPERATION BLUE STAR, indeed, it went for almost full five years (1978-83).

An honest approach would be to acknowlegde that a large part of the Sikh community allowed itself to be hijacked by extremist elements, and did not act forcefully against these elements even after mass murders were committed in their name. An honest approach would acknowledge that Indira Gandhi used this extremism for her own ends, supporting it when convenient, successfully selling the bogeyman of ``sikh extremism`` to other indians when convenient. And at the end of all of this came the horror of the mob violence against innocent sikhs in Delhi.

#175 by kaurasach
//...Golden Temple should not have been fortified, and should not have been attacked...//

Agree. But the temple WAS fortified. So it had to be cleared of the militants. What do you think - indian gov`t was just itching to humiliate sikhs??

The violence against the temple was of course a sacrilege - but under the circumstances it should have been understood.

If tomorrow RSS fantatics fortify themselves in Puri temple or Tirupathi temple or wherever ... with weapons and what not - what do you recommend the gov`t do? Sit there and twiddle thumbs??? Nope - the right actions would be to attack and clear out the place.

Didn`t some similar incident happened in one of the two big mosques in Saudi Arabia - where Saudis had to take armed action to flush out the militants?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

stuka #176

good arguments. kinda of reminds me of the iraq-wmd-intel ..

``Her real intention was to launch an attack on the Sikh faith and to give the message that she was all powerful. Hence I believe her death was essential. ``

if such courtesy (sp) is extended in iraq war case and is successful, god help us all.

rahulmal:
I have said earlier that no two situations are identical. Obviously, there is a difference between a domestic and an international situation. But the similarities cannot be ignored either.

ballukhan:
I`ll need to write a book to answer all your questions:-).
Yes, Tully`s book would be a good start.
To me, the whole sikh struggle, starting with the movement of the punjabi suba has been a struggle for identity. For a long time, the boundaries between hindus and sikhs were fluid. Before Bhindranwale, there was a large trend among sikh youth to give up their distint signs and assimilate with the majority community. The threat was real. In terms of religious philosophies, buddhism and jainism represented a bigger break from the vedic philosophy than gurbani. Still, over time, hinduism was able to swallow those religions` identities within its amorous embrace. If sikhs were/are to survive as a distinct identity, it was/is important to clearly demarcate boundaries. Until the early 20th century, a distinction was made between a sikh and a khalsa, the former being the one who merely believed in the teachings of the sikh gurus (the original meaning of sikh/shishya) and the latter who maintained five K`s. Slowly, the definition changed so that only khalsas were called sikhs but others could still be called sehjadharis; indeed, in my childhood, punjabi hindus frequently referred to themselves as ``monas`` (clean shaven) and not as hindus. However, all this changed in 1970s when a pronouncement from Akal Takht said that to be a sikh one not only had to believe in the teachings of the sikh gurus but had to renounce any other belief (e.g, in Ram or Krishna). It was at that time that the membership of some people in the Ottawa Sikh Society was cancelled since they did not conform to the new definition of sikh.
I believe that Bhindranwale was quite successful in consolidating the sikh identity. But lately, I hear reports that it is again getting diluted. Sikhs increasingly are cutting their hair and have even stopped using Singh prominently in their names. They seem to be more concerned about maintaining their panjabi than sikh identity. When I see panjabi videos these days, I am surprised at the men dressed in designer kurtas and women in cholis and bindis, presumably to increase their appeal outside panjab. These trends cannot but cause alarm among the sikh leadership who naturally do not wish their identity to disappear like those of jains before them.

``Unfortunately, that is the impression created by the separatists. But what you and others fail to see is that Bhindranwale and his followers had turned the Golden Temple into a near-impregnable fortress and it required massive force from the Indian Army to regain control of it. The large number of innocent casualties and damage to the temple were unfortunate, but I don’t think it could have been avoided at that moment. ``

That is the whole point. Why did Black Thunder succeed? Why did the siege on Hazratbal succeed?

No one is denying that action was needed. But was a full scale assault required? The whole argument of Blue Star hinges on immediacy. That immediacy can only be conjured up by bringing the Pakistan factor in because then the majority of Indians believe their government.

I cannot cooraborate a negative. I can only ask you to look up Pakistani mobilization through the 1980s. There were only rwo on Record. One was the reaction to Operation Brass Tacks where the two countries almost went to war and then Zia came to India to watch a cricket match. The other was a military excecize called Zarb e Momin. There were no other large scale deployments through the 1980s and none on June 30th 1984.


``Seriously, do you think the GoI could have ordered the attack just to spite the Sikhs (who form a significant component of the Armed Forces) without provoking a rebellion/backlash from them? ``

I am not saying there would not have been a reaction. Brar`s argument though is bogus. If the reaction is going to be there then why attack unless you do not care about the reaction. In case you do care about the reaction then why the immediacy? Don`t lose sight of this point...the issue is not the requirement of action. Tthe issue is immediacy. Why June 30th? Why Gurpurab? Would Iindian Army attack a temple on Diwali if the situation required it?

The fact remains the Army did anticipate a reaction and hence launched Op Woodrose. That is the perfect response to Brar`s argument. Op Woodrose could have been launched and a siege started on Golden Temple. But as a Hindu I believe that Indira Gandhi`s game plan was not just to cleanse the Golden Ttemple. Her real intention was to launch an attack on the Sikh faith and to give the message that she was all powerful. Hence I believe her death was essential.


Jang:

``you made it sound like the army storming was against poor jathas/pilgrims and was with no reason or rationale. ``

That is the point. At least Jallianwala Bagh was a politcal rally. June 30th, 1984 WAS JUST ANOTHER DAY for pilgrims. In fact it was Gurpurab. It was full of poor jathas and pilgrims that had come here for the day. There was NOTHING that made that day different from any other day in the recent past. Hence there was no rationale for army action on that day. As far as pilgrims were concerned, Bhindranwale and his followers had been there for the past two years and the government seemed to be fine with it.

``you further go into totally emotional tirades like comparing to jallianwalla baug where the victims were armed with fists (and were not even in an anti-govt rally).``

Exact same scenario. The number of terrorists as given in the Government white paper was listed as slightly north of 400. On any given day there are 3000-4000 visitors to the Temple. On that day there were more because of Gurpurab. What is emotional about this?


``i pointed you to the raionale for operation blue-star. i dont know what is right, but there it is, the rationale. an analysis of the rationale will be helpful based on some arguments. ``

Sir, your rationale is based on two assumptions.

1. Need for action

2. Immediacy of the need where a siege was out of question and a full scale assault had to be launched.

I am not even arguing the first point. The key issue is the second point. That immediacy is based on:

1. Pakistan Action: Untrue. No historical record shows mobilization of Pakistan Army.

2. Countryside Unrest: The situation as it existed had been going on for two years. No countryside mass unrest took place. The writ of the state has to be impleneted but no immediacy is apparent.

So why a full scale assault? Why on that day?

Jang:

I disagree. The Sikh diaspora was very patriotic right to the 80s. Outside of individuals like JS Chauhan (completely homegrown and went to the UK late in life) there was not a single Sikh separatist orgainzation abroad. That is a desi cop out to avoid introspection.

The diaspora only came into play after Operation Blue Star. Even during the clah of Nirankaris and Sikhs in 1978 and before during the Punjabi Suba movement the Diaspora remained uninloved. After Op Blue Star i was natural to get involved. But post fact involvement cannot be blamed as the basis for the problem.

ballukhan
``IS there a way a Sikh can be `converted` to become a Hindu. ``

you raise a very important point. why do purer religions fear hinduism, there is no proseltysation. its not the arya samajis they fear but sheer weight of osmosis. if you stop being pure, you automatically become a hindu. a hindu is someone who lives in india and does not claim (emphatically) to be not a hindu. this kind of natural pressure is immense and only way to fight it is via seeking extra purity. for muslims its less of a probelm, (their iman is somehow unequivocal ) but it is a big problem for sikhs who intermarry with hindus and to a lesser extent for born-again christians, who start/continue followign all the pagan customs like magal-sutra and bindi.


stuka:
you made it sound like the army storming was against poor jathas/pilgrims and was with no reason or rationale. you further go into totally emotional tirades like comparing to jallianwalla baug where the victims were armed with fists (and were not even in an anti-govt rally). i pointed you to the raionale for operation blue-star. i dont know what is right, but there it is, the rationale. an analysis of the rationale will be helpful based on some arguments.

also, a rich (comparitively) diaspora, yearning for purity, who did not have to live with indinans, had a lot to do with sikh separatism. wonders what a rich diaspora yearning for hindu purity will do.

#172
ballu, read Mark Tully & Satish Jacobs ``Amritsar: Mrs Gandhi`s last battle``

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0836428269/qid=1092838363/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-6119470-7601638?v=glance&s=books

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#168 by dost-mittar on August 18, 2004 4:58am PT
Dost Saheb could you provide the details of religious beliefs of Bhindrawale and his followers.
What were their tenets? What religious beliefs they followed? What were their beliefs about non- sikhs, Muslims and other communities? Why did they kill and blow up the innocent people? What were their stated aims and objectives in arming themselves? Were they fighting a religious war against non-Sikhs? And was their occupation of Golden Temple accepted by SGPC? Were the ordinary Sikh believers awed by the display of arms in the temple precincts? Were they afraid of them?

DMji,

It is good that you compared the Iraq problem to Khalistan issue. In fact, it definitively proves that India has a tendency to forcefully occupy foreign lands. Tamils (and by extension, all South Indians) feel subjugated, Sikhs are alienated, North-Eastern people are exploited and Kashmiris (and by extension, all Muslims) are dying to join their Muslim brethren across the border. The Gujjus, Marathas, Bongs and Oriyas are feeling the heat; the whole world knows that their sub-cultures are under attack by Hindi imperialists. The only one who are reaping the dividends are the citizens of BIMARU states - they have one of the highest PPP in the world, roads like the cheeks of a famous actress, towns and cities bustling with technology and innovation and arrogance that would put the Yankees to shame. It is high time we got together and started a movement to free these communities from the yoke of Indian (aka BIMARU) control and cut India to size. Come to think of it, even die-hard nationalists like Farzana and Ishrat are with us :-)

Death to India!! Long live secessionism!!

BTW, is any Chowky enrolling for the Mahdi army, or will the war in Najaf and Fallujah be fought like the wars of Palestine, Kashmir, Afghanistan ET all...from the confines of air conditioned offices and homes on the laptops...

#167 by stuka

[Shows the knowledge or lack of it. While there were desertions from the Indian Army, there was not a single case of mass desertion from Punjab Police.]

I don’t think Brar said that either. The GoI feared that since there were desertions from the Indian Army by Sikh soldiers who were based outside Punjab, the policemen who were inside Punjab and were privy to Bhindranwale’s inflammatory speeches were more likely to do so. Hence the alarm.

[In fact while KPS Gill is given credit, it was all the police chiefs including Rebiero who led the Punjab Police in battle.]

Julio Ribeiro headed the Punjab Police before KPS Gill but it was only after the latter took over that militancy was defeated decisively. This is not to underestimate Ribeiro’s contribution.

[The rank and file of Punjab Police was and is majority Jatt and they are the ones whi finally defeated terror.]

I’m not familiar with the composition of the rank and file of the Punjab Police and so cannot comment on it.

[The man makes the arguement that people would have picked up their swords and lances and converged on the Golden Temple to ``besiege the army that was besieging the temple``. First of all the image is laughable. Secongly, would people not do the same if the temple was actually attacked? What would the Army do then?]

It is easy to underestimate the gravity of the situation then, but only those at the helm who had to take that fateful decision would have known. It is not easy for someone to order an attack on a temple knowing it is as sacred to Sikhs (and many Hindus too) as Mecca and Medina are to Muslims. Seriously, do you think the GoI could have ordered the attack just to spite the Sikhs (who form a significant component of the Armed Forces) without provoking a rebellion/backlash from them?

[Basically this guy is justifying his role akin to Gen Dyer saying he had to open fire in Jallianwala Bagh to prevent a lerger violent reaction.]

This analogy is rather flawed in the sense that the Jalianwala Bagh protesters were unarmed, whereas the terrorists inside the Golden Temple complex were armed with sophisticated weapons. Even an armored carrier was blown to bits as it tried to enter the complex, which is proof enough of the kind of weapons the terrorists possessed. No one in his right mind would have hoped to clear it without use of force.

#166 by stuka

[Pakistan had not even mobilized, let alone cross the international border and Brar claims they might have attacked.]

Can you corroborate your statement?

[So one fine day Khalistan was to be declared and the Indian government had been sitting pretty till they had a three to four day window?]

I agree that was a mistake. Until then, the GoI had tried to negotiate with Bhindranwale and get him to surrender. They should have tried to do that earlier.

[But the entire Sikh issue as well as the Army operation was a giant hoax played by Indira Gandhi and her people upon Sikhs as well as Indian people at large.]

Unfortunately, that is the impression created by the separatists. But what you and others fail to see is that Bhindranwale and his followers had turned the Golden Temple into a near-impregnable fortress and it required massive force from the Indian Army to regain control of it. The large number of innocent casualties and damage to the temple were unfortunate, but I don’t think it could have been avoided at that moment.

ballukhan#162:

``I thought there is no ritual of conversion to make one a hindu? I may be wrong , but if I am I may be corrected. IS there a way a Sikh can be `converted` to become a Hindu.``

The RSS people do not want Sikhs to convert or reconvert to become a hindu. They do not believe that being a sikh means leaving hindu religion. This situation is the mirror opposite of Ahmedias in Pakistan. Here, the sikhs protest that they are not hindus while the RSS people insist that they are. It is the classic case of ``main kumbal ko chhodata hoon, par kumbal mujhe nahin chhodata``.

````Can you imagine if one fine day Khalistan has been declared, what would have happened? Pakistan would have recognised Khalistan and crossed the borders to support Khalistan, like we did in Bangladesh. The Punjab police might have crossed over to support Bhindranwale...``

Shows the knowledge or lack of it. While there were desertions from the Indian Army, there was not a single case of mass desertion from Punjab Police. In fact while KPS Gill is given credit, it was all the police chiefs including Rebiero who led the Punjab Police in battle. The rank and file of Punjab Police was and is majority Jatt and they are the ones whi finally defeated terror.

``People would have picked up their swords or lances and hundreds of thousands would have converged on Amritsar and the Golden Temple and besieged the army that was besieging the Temple! We can`t fire at these people, ``

This is almost retarded. The man makes the arguement that people would have picked up their swords and lances and converged on the Golden Temple to ``besiege the army that was besieging the temple``. First of all the image is laughable. Secongly, would people not do the same if the temple was actually attacked? What would the Army do then?

Operation Woodrose commenced right after blue star to pacify the Punjabi countryside. Two division of the Army were deployed, one along the border and the other spread through the hinterland. That could have been done regardless. Basically this guy is justifying his role akin to Gen Dyer saying he had to open fire in Jallianwala Bagh to prevent a lerger violent reaction.

Harish Hyd

You and Jang bring up similar point. I have read the entire interview when it came about. Asking Brar on Blue Star is like asking General Dyer on Jallianwala Bagh. Brar is worse then ignorant, he is lying. Pakistan had not even mobilized, let alone cross the international border and Brar claims they might have attacked. So one fine day Khalistan was to be declared and the Indian government had been sitting pretty till they had a three to four day window? The attack took place on a Gurpurab day when tens of thousands of innocent people were there.

Amritsar was after all Indian territory and the police had been present in and around Golden Temple since DIG Atwal was assasinated. Why were no precautionary steps taken? I am a Hindu and am not a supporter of the Sikh seperatists in the least. But the entire Sikh issue as well as the Army operation was a giant hoax played by Indira Gandhi and her people upon Sikhs as well as Indian people at large.

jang #159, bongdongs #163

Lt. Gen Brar`s interview is actually in four sections. You can access them from the bottom of this page (Parts I - IV):

Operation Bluestar, 20 years on

Part V gives a different perspective. Part VI by Lt. Col. Athale is a interesting angle on the genesis of the problem.

#144 by stuka

[Why was the government willing to conduct a siege for weeks during Black Thunder? Why was a siege conducted on Hazratbal? What was the immediacy of Blue Star? None.]

Here is the two-part interview with the man who commanded the Operation, Lt.Gen. Kuldip Singh Brar (retired), that will answer your questions.

Pakistan would have recognised Khalistan