Politics These Are The Names Of 21 Children Killed In Gaza

[Tejwant Singh]

The Arabs came up with ALJazeera because they claimed CNN BBC etc were Biased...just recently the Egyptian Govt was on their Tail...why ?? Biased Al jazeerah !! ha Ha..RT had the MH17 Crash news BEFORE the Plane was Shot Down....nobody is worthy of being swallowed hook line and sinker..we decide based on our own intellect ..AL Jazeerah is an Arab News source but based in Malaysia...far far away from the very same Arabs they represent..and censored in many instances in the very Islamic countries it supports...thats reality of politics today..

Gyani ji,

Guru Fateh.

I beg to differ with you about Al Jazeera. Firstly, it is based in Doha, Qatar and is considered one of the best non-biased news services. Despite it being from the Arab Countries, it has been banned in many of the same countries because its news in unfiltered and it gives all sides of the story. 3 of its journalists were caught by Ex President of Egypt Morsi and are sentenced to jail for no reason.

This is an interesting article:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/26/opinion/opinion-egypt-al-jazeera/

Even Bush attacked its HQ in Iraq during its invasion because AL Jazeera was giving the news to the Arab world which the Bush Administration tried to hide from all over the world.

You may have a different News service in mind.

Regards

Tejwant Singh

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

Gyani ji,

Guru Fateh.

I beg to differ with you about Al Jazeera. Firstly, it is based in Doha, Qatar and is considered one of the best non-biased news services. Despite it being from the Arab Countries, it has been banned in many of the same countries because its news in unfiltered and it gives all sides of the story. 3 of its journalists were caught by Ex President of Egypt Morsi and are sentenced to jail for no reason.

This is an interesting article:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/26/opinion/opinion-egypt-al-jazeera/

Even Bush attacked its HQ in Iraq during its invasion because AL Jazeera was giving the news to the Arab world which the Bush Administration tried to hide from all over the world.

You may have a different News service in mind.

Regards

Tejwant Singh

Tejwant Ji,
Gurufateh Ji.

Thanks for the update ji. I am referring to the same TV Station but apparently I didnt realise the Kuala Lumpur Station/Stdio was closed down in 2011 at the same time its Washington Base was shut down.

I had been an invited guest at its inaugral celebrations in the Petronas Twin Towers Kuala Lumpur when it commenced Operations some years back.

2. I agree with you that Al Jazeera does step on many toes...and its one of my fav alternate sources of news even on "MALAYSIA" on the few ocassions when our govt desires its citizens to not know certain events..maybe that why it has MOVED OUT of Kuala Lumpur !!!

Regards

jarnail Singh

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Tejwant Ji,
Gurufateh Ji.

Thanks for the update ji. I am referring to the same TV Station but apparently I didnt realise the Kuala Lumpur Station/Stdio was closed down in 2011 at the same time its Washington Base was shut down.

I had been an invited guest at its inaugral celebrations in the Petronas Twin Towers Kuala Lumpur when it commenced Operations some years back.

2. I agree with you that Al Jazeera does step on many toes...and its one of my fav alternate sources of news even on "MALAYSIA" on the few ocassions when our govt desires its citizens to not know certain events..maybe that why it has MOVED OUT of Kuala Lumpur !!!

Regards

jarnail Singh

Gyani ji,

Guru Fateh,

The bureau was closed but the new TV channel called Al Jazeera America opened about two years ago. Al Gore sold his TV channel called Current TV to the petro dollars and made a bundle. It is doing badly in ratings because of the anti arab sentiments here, although the programming is pretty good.

We do not get Al Jazeera International on iphone app. which we used to, because of AJ America. I watch it on the net though.

Regards

Tejwant Singh

 

[linzer]

Here's and editorial from Alternet that relates to the topic

World <?xml:namespace prefix = "o" ns = "urn:fficeffice" />
AlterNet / By Stephen Pizzo
Israel Is Simply Wrong This Time
Israeli settlers are stealing land. There's no other way to put it.
During my lifetime there have only really been two things that divided friends and family. The first was the Vietnam War. I was on the political left side of that one. My parents, and most of their generation, were on the political right side.
Those of us against that war were accused of everything from being communists, to cowards, to outright traitors to our country. It was the age of "America: Love it or leave it!"
Many of my generation did just that, leave it, fleeing to Canada or Europe or just going underground until the whole thing blew over. It was the most divisive and painful national event since the American Civil war a century before.
Now we have another one, only this one is not our doing, but another country's. Still it once again is pitting friend against friend, family against family, community against community. And yes, it's in the Middle East. But it's not Afghanistan or Iraq or Syria or Iran. It's Israel.
I have Jewish and Israeli friends... some whose fingers are now hovering dangerously over the "unfriend" button with my name on it. Not because I am pro-Hamas or a closet anti-Semite. I am neither. (You'll simply have to accept my word for that. It's all I can offer as proof.)
What got me in this trouble is simply seeing matters differently than those who, for religious, ethnic or familial reasons, have a dog(s) in the current events in Israel and Gaza and the occupied West Bank. They are circling the wagons, are hyper-defensive and increasingly angry at those of us who just don't see it their way.
Like with the Vietnam War, offering opinions about what's going on that decidedly un-Holy Land, is dangerous. The safest thing to do is to be certain before you open your mouth that you are with fellow travelers on the subject. Because, if you're not, you're in for being accused of an array of horribles; you're an anti-semite, an apologist for terrorists or just plain uninformed.
If you take Israel's side then you are an enabler of war-crimes and a racist regime.
Well, I am none of those things. I am a former journalist who worked during an era when trying to sort things out in a fair and objective manner was the prime directive. Anything less was a mortal sin.
So this is how I see it. And if you don't like it, well, I'm sorry. But I believe I am being as objective as it is humanly possible to be.
Israel's position is that it was just sitting there, minding its own business, when Hamas started shooting missiles into Israel. I don't think that's true. Israel was minding business, but not minding its own business.
First let's dispose of the kidnappings. Three Israeli teenagers were kidnapped and killed by someone, likely Palestinians. Israel immediately blamed Hamas, though never produced credible evidence. Then some fundamentalist Jews kidnapped and killed a Palestinian kid -- *** for tat in the land where both sides live by the Old Testament's "eye for eye" rules.
The missiles started flying from Gaza shortly thereafter. It's easy to conclude that the kidnappings were the spark. But you'd be wrong. The kidnappings alone would not have ignited the fires that blaze now. No, there was a lot of ignitable gas in the air long before those events.
You have to divide Israel's Palestinian operations into two halves; Gaza and the West Bank. They are different, yet based on the same template. It's the way American politicians and settlers dealt with their Native Americans long ago. We of European origins saw ourselves as the superior culture. we wanted and needed the lands the indians were on. They had to go.
So, with a mix of false promises, covert and overt violence, we took what we wanted, moving the indians onto easily controlled reservations. They were either herded there under the gun, or lured there with the promised of being granted their own lands. But those promised lands continued to shrink and shrink as our settlers moved in. The rest is history.
Tiny Gaza has become a classic reservation for Palestinians. It is small, crowded, geo-policially isolated and its population restricted -- actually imprisoned -- within its fenced and mined borders.
The West Bank, on the other hand, is a work in progress. The false promise of their own Palestinian state has lured Fatah into trading peaceful compliance to Israeli occupation for the hope of negotiations leading to their own state. But, whenever those negotiations get anywhere close to defining that state's borders, Israel uses one pretext or another to torpedo the process.
Meanwhile, while the kabuki dance of negotiations go nowhere, new Israeli settlers move deeper and deeper into the West Bank, setting up settlements that effectively dismember the West Bank and along with it any realistic hope of a unified and sustainable Palestinian state.
I got in trouble with one Israeli friend last week when I used the term "stealing Palestinian land." She accused me of incitement and said that before I used such inflammatory terms I should consider how Israel come into possession of that land in the first place. I replied that, yes, I know, the 1967-war when Israel was attacked by virtually all its Arab neighbors. Fine. I get it. It's occupied territory gained in war. But we were blindsided by Pearl Harbor, fought Japan and won. Did we keep Japan? No.
I repeat, Israeli settlers who have moved and are moving into settlements deep inside the West Bank are stealing Palestinian land. There is simply no other way to see it, and still be intellectually honest. (The settlements clustered along and one the 1967 border are another matter, and should be open to a fair acre-for-acre trade in any finally agreement.)
A two-state solution was promised. The captured land - the West Bank - was to be the new Palestinian state. But, while Israel was allegedly "minding its own business," over the past three years the number of settlements and settlers on the West Bank has exploded. The number of Israeli settlements being started in the West Bankmore than doubled during 2013, the Israel central bureau of statistics has said. Work began on 2,534 new housing units in the settlements in 2013, compared to 1,133 in 2012. (Chart Here.)
One Fatah negotiator said that negotiating with Israel over land is like negotiating with a guy over a pizza while the other guy keeps eating the pizza.
Recall that the next time you hear some Israel politician claiming that all Israel was doing was minding its own business when Hamas started shooting missiles at them.
Like I said, Israel was indeed minding business... and a dirty and duplicitous business it is too.
That's it. That's what I see when I look at the facts. So unfriend me if you want. Just don't accuse me of bias.
_______
Stephen Pizzo is the author of numerous books, including Inside Job: The Looting of America's Savings and Loans, which was nominated for a Pulitzer.

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

Are the Same Palestinians who show wounded children, demolished hospitals and ask for Donations..Here they are celebrating the kidnapping by hammas of one Israeli Soldier... They sure dont look like they deserve any sympathy or a cent of my hard earned money..NO WAY..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2uKCL_gL-A#t=25

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGpcCBo8I6I

REST go look on your own...Palestine is NOTHING like 1984 ....a completely different scenario...SIKHS would never and have NEVER celebrated even enemy deaths like this..

 

[Harry Haller]

..SIKHS would never and have NEVER celebrated even enemy deaths like this..

Gyaniji

I have vivid memories of celebrations after Indira Gandhi's death, I do believe some still exist on youtube taken at Southall Gurdwara, I remember watching thinking that these could not be real Sikhs, I have had that same thought many many times since about lots of scenarios

 

[aristotle]

In Hindi, हत्या and वध both signify murder, but with completely different meanings. IMO Indira's and Beant Singh's killings were examples of वध. Dont know how to put it in a better way, or perhaps there isn't a better way.

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

Harry Ji..I agree with you...those Southall types are the same type as the ones i showed in my videos on Gaza..same sentiment and same mentality. To a SIKH..there is no "Enemy" even on the battlefield..and Bhai Ghaniyah Jis LESSON by Guru Gobind Singh Ji has been completely LOST on us. Bhai Ghaniyah Ji was on the battlefield..Sikhs killing Mugghals and Hill raja Hindu forces..and vice versa..BUT to the SIKH like Bhai Ghaniyah the battle was not about persons but Principles..hence he wasnt dancing for joy looking at wounded mughals but tending to them like he tended to woudned Sikhs...thats the Humanitarian SIKH that Guru Ji wanted built.

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

That is also reason why Guru nanak ji has stated.."Asankh die on the battlefields as MARTYRS..fighting..and Shhaeeds...BUT this death doesnt guarantee MUKTEE !! Muktee has got to be EARNED while LIVING....and a Sikh like Bhai Ghaniyah Ji is JEEVAN MUKT....so getting yourself blown up in suicide bombing, or flying a plane into the towers or placing car bombs on trains planes buses stations and getting Martyred in the process is NOT automatic admission to shaheedee/Muktee...ones LIFE for decades before that has to be worthy of being called Jeewan Mukt...!!!Rann Mehn Chhutteh Praann.....A SIKH does not aim for mere death be it on the battlefield or elsewhere..he attempts to EARN IT..and be Jeewan Mukt before Physical death...Bhai Ghnaiyah would not have danced on Indira Gandhis body but attempted MEDICAL AID. Period.

 

[Abneet]

Gyaniji

I have vivid memories of celebrations after Indira Gandhi's death, I do believe some still exist on youtube taken at Southall Gurdwara, I remember watching thinking that these could not be real Sikhs, I have had that same thought many many times since about lots of scenarios

To me that death was a relief for the whole Panth but shouldn't be celebrated. No body's death should ever be celebrated. But her getting killed was much needed. Revenge was needed as Guru Hargobind avenged Guru Arjun Dev Ji's death.

 

[Harry Haller]

To me that death was a relief for the whole Panth

I was young then, but I still felt a strong sense that 'this was not Sikhi', from the way in which the death was carried out, to the televised celebrations , to the stupid neighbours coming round with mithai, it all felt wrong and it seemed to cheapen and soil the religion that I felt was different to the others, I had been brought up on stories of Sikh heroes, brave fighters, warriors, who stood on battlefields against numbers far superior, but won because they were true, and the fight was just.

But her getting killed was much needed.

I would wager there are many thousands of families that would disagree with you

Revenge was needed as Guru Hargobind avenged Guru Arjun Dev Ji's death.

Revenge does not strike me as a particularly Sikh concept, Revenge is what happened at Sirhind, Revenge needs the presence of the thieves, it needs anger, lust, it blinds you, I do not see that it serves any purpose at all, other than the whole world going blind and toothless.

You cannot compare the situation at Gaza with any Sikh scenario, Gaza is simply a very clear scenario of what happens if you live by the rule, 'any eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth', and it will probably carry on as such for some time, till there are no eyes and no teeth left.

I googled Guru Hargobind and revenge, I could find many many quotes but most were along the lines of

Those who had worked to have Guru Arjan destroyed now turned their attention and efforts to convincing Jahangir that the fort, the Akal Takhat and the growing Risaldari were all intended to allow Guru Hargobind ji to one day take revenge for his father's unjust death.

which intimates that revenge is a concept for the ordinary man, but not for a Sikh

also,

A friendship and mutual respect soon followed, Guru Har Gobind, would even hunt with the Emperor on his grand Shikars (hunting was a life long passion of the Guru). On one remarkable occasion the young Guru saved the life of the Emperor, who he could have easily hated for the death of his father, by jumping beteen a Lion and the Mughal ruler.

I do not quote often from Sikh history, as a lot as been distorted over the years to satisfy agendas, but even in our distorted history, and our 'sakhis' revenge by a Guru does not seem to be present anywhere.

to my mind, a Sikh stands strong in the face of oppression, but the thought of Sikhs, especially a Guru, taking 'revenge' seems alien to me.

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

To use the word Revenge/Avenge in the same sentence as Guru Hargobind Sahib ji is as big an INSULT that I can ever imagine Jios. So did Guru Gobind Singh Ji also spend his life and 40 years avenging his father Guru Teg bahadur Ji too ??

Ordinary MEN...base MEN take revenge..harbour ill feelings..etc etc...NOT the GURUS..not even Huge SIKHS like Baba banda Singh bahadur whose name ha sbeen simialrly MALIGNED as the REVENGE SEEKER for Sirhind saaka...NO JIOS..a man who watched calmly his son being torn apart and his beating heart stuffed into hsi mouth..couldnt be a mere REVENGE SEEKER...thats a gross insult to him.

Please...No apologies for this harshness.

Regards

JSGyani

 

[Abneet]

I was young then, but I still felt a strong sense that 'this was not Sikhi', from the way in which the death was carried out, to the televised celebrations , to the stupid neighbours coming round with mithai, it all felt wrong and it seemed to cheapen and soil the religion that I felt was different to the others, I had been brought up on stories of Sikh heroes, brave fighters, warriors, who stood on battlefields against numbers far superior, but won because they were true, and the fight was just.



I would wager there are many thousands of families that would disagree with you



Revenge does not strike me as a particularly Sikh concept, Revenge is what happened at Sirhind, Revenge needs the presence of the thieves, it needs anger, lust, it blinds you, I do not see that it serves any purpose at all, other than the whole world going blind and toothless.

You cannot compare the situation at Gaza with any Sikh scenario, Gaza is simply a very clear scenario of what happens if you live by the rule, 'any eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth', and it will probably carry on as such for some time, till there are no eyes and no teeth left.

I googled Guru Hargobind and revenge, I could find many many quotes but most were along the lines of

which intimates that revenge is a concept for the ordinary man, but not for a Sikh

also,


I do not quote often from Sikh history, as a lot as been distorted over the years to satisfy agendas, but even in our distorted history, and our 'sakhis' revenge by a Guru does not seem to be present anywhere.

to my mind, a Sikh stands strong in the face of oppression, but the thought of Sikhs, especially a Guru, taking 'revenge' seems alien to me.

Guru Hargobind might of been a different scenario when he was the first guru to actually go against the oppression and tyranny in India and had to start off giving vengeance to guru arjun dev ji. Guru Hargobind was thought to be crazy by Sikh sangat as all he wanted was to finish off that person who killed guru Arjun Dev Ji. A Guru never lies and he accomplished on what he said to do.

But 1984 was a way different scenario. Where Indira Gandhi attacked our holy place, killed many innocents, and was planning to do more killings of Sikhs in the future. Her death was coming and everyone knew it. Bhai Satwant and Beant Singh were something though. If you read about them since the Harmandar Sahib attack to the day of Indira's death they completely changed when they visited Harmandar Sahib. They chuked amrit etc... Now this isn't something ordinary though why would they chuk amrit and change so quickly. They were the only ones who could kill her. She had so much security on her and she thought that them two were brainwashed Sikhs..... It definitely was a wake up call for them to do the deed.

Her death shouldn't be glorified at that moment as the Panth was going through major struggles and mitai and celebrating isn't helping one bit either. In Sikh history we know we don't glorify killing innocents etc... but when it comes to those who attack Sikh Kaum and even try to finish all of us in the 80's and 90's its way different scenario. That was a time of tryanny and genocide happening so those who disagree with those Singhs picking up arms and defending the Kaum I don't get what they wanted them to do....protest with slogans? If you were an amritdhari you were a terrorist PERIOD..... Just like These Palestinians have no other choice because their own people are getting killed and at the same time they have Hamas on their side against Israel. Israel shot down a hospital and UN Shelter and they say they are protecting themselves and are aiming only at terrorists??? Those who support either side on this war should rethink.

 

[Abneet]

To use the word Revenge/Avenge in the same sentence as Guru Hargobind Sahib ji is as big an INSULT that I can ever imagine Jios. So did Guru Gobind Singh Ji also spend his life and 40 years avenging his father Guru Teg bahadur Ji too ??

Ordinary MEN...base MEN take revenge..harbour ill feelings..etc etc...NOT the GURUS..not even Huge SIKHS like Baba banda Singh bahadur whose name ha sbeen simialrly MALIGNED as the REVENGE SEEKER for Sirhind saaka...NO JIOS..a man who watched calmly his son being torn apart and his beating heart stuffed into hsi mouth..couldnt be a mere REVENGE SEEKER...thats a gross insult to him.

Please...No apologies for this harshness.

Regards

JSGyani

What should I say instead of avenge/revenge then? I can't think of wording it differently....

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

IN History can anyone quote an instance where the GUru Sahibs or the Sikh Sangats had a celebration....at the Death of Babar..Jehnagir..Shah Jehan..Aurengzeb..Zakriah Khaan..Wazir Khaan..Ahmad Shaha Abdali..Ahmad Shaha Durani...etc etc...The perpetrators of the Biggest Ghallugharas--wadda and chhotah which decimated the Kaum to near EXTINCTION !!!

The answer is NONE. Those days Gurus and Sikhs were not like the ones we have TODAY...

Revenge..vengeance..jelaousy..etc etc are NOT SIKH Traits. We Live in HIS HUKM..we obey His HUKM..we ACCEPT his HUKM...and His HUKM was that Beant Singh and Satwant Singh kill that woman...His Hukm was that Hawara blow up the butcher Beanta..BUT we DONT CELEBRATE....we Stay calm and composed..in happiness as in sadness..Khushee Gammee ek brabar...ONLY HIS HUKM MATTERS...we have forgottena dn keep forgetting and INSIST ON FORGETTING the valuable LESSON Guru ji taught us via BHAI GHANIYAH JI....DONT FORGET GHANIYAH JI...He was the Living Example of How to Live in His HUKM..and Guru ji REWARDED him with a tin of Balm !!!! we dont ahev that Balm..we possess only ANGER...Gussah Mann na Handhaiyeh..Gussha KILLS. Its like COAL..when red hot it BURNS..and when COLD it Blackens...:japosatnamwaheguru:

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

What should I say instead of avenge/revenge then? I can't think of wording it differently....

NOTHING. Because the Guru did not avenge...didnt have feelings of revenge/hatred towards anyone...ALL his 4 wars with the Authorities were self defence.

Regards

JS