Talk:Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale/Archive 1

Legacy
Anonymous User 80.195.3.75 has vandalized this page, by writing rhetoric, opinions and rumours and has not cites any sources. Users are requested to show restraint, this is a encyclopedia and not a grudge airing platform. Please present facts (and cite sources) as they happened and not rumours and malicious opinions. adding such statements like "all sikhs are viewed as terrorists in India" adds nothing of value to this article and is a clear indication of attempts to air personal bias.kindly, kindly refrain. 202.140.37.2 06:15, 23 August 2005 (UTC) - forgot to log in Soujourner

Reply from Mr Bollox, the facts stated are real. Mr Benderwalle, was no intellectual. He had no knowledge of the English language. Yet some misguided folk attribute quotes in English - Fact. Mr Mark Tully described him as not being particularly 'intelligent' even his interpreter admitted he was a bit dense. In fact when he appeared on Newsnight in the early 80's, he could not speak English, he tried but the interviewer cracked up laughing as I recall.

Do you wish to dispute the above, then bring it on boy.

Talk history
He didnt unite all the SIkhs...And anybody that says he was a saint is a hardcore moron whos chained to their fundamentalism..The Gurus didnt teach people to seperate against there Hindu brothers & sisters...I mean this guy used the golden temple as a freakin hideout. He had weapons, bombs, anti missle tanks, and most sources say he was backed by Pakistan...I mean im not saying India is perfect...but the Hindus dont hate Sikhs...Were the same blood with the same teachings...I mean Indira Gandhi didnt attack the temple just cuz she was bored. She attacked the temple cuz Bhindranwale was hiding out there. What is she supposed to do have a cup of coffe? If u have a country, and there is a psycho guy who wants to seperate for his own homeland, you flush him out. Especialy when he used the holy temple as a hide out...Geez I mean innocent Hindus were killed to u know. And Sikhs were part of the army that invaded. Get your facts straight and stop living on conspiarcy theory ideas, you morons 71.107.62.213 11:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

--uhm ok the hindu's and the sikhs dont have the same teachings..and if u are apart of this religon and u noe ppl who knew him and u learned about him and saw his speaches you would know he was a good man. but ppl have their own opinion so im not going to argue with that. if she wanted to get Bhindranwale im pretty sure she didnt have to bring huge tanks missels and kill many many innocent ppl and her army could have shown some respect by taking off their shoes. i just think that she was scared that the sikhs were growing in number and that she was just scared. and by the way her army was "posing" and taking pictures with the innocent dead bodies.

OK first off Sikhs and Hindus do not have the same teachings, please read up on the religions. Its not the Hindus that are to blame, its the Indian Gov't at that time, it sat idle while thousands of innocent people died (mostly Sikhs.) It seems that everyone wants to call Jarnail Singh a terriost, what should we all call the "democratic" goverment that helped to kill thousands of its own citizens? Open up your minds and realize what happened. At this rate George Washington and his buddies should also be considered terriosts, they killed many British supporters... --Jghuman2 07:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

This page has been protected from editing because non-registered editors have been adding their opinions to this article. All Wikipedia articles must be neutral. Please discuss changes here so that this article may be improved. --"D ICK " C HENEY 19:38, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * Umm... This isn't like some political figure, this is a religious figure, so people are just trying to convey their image of a hero, without having it distorted. So that people who don't know of our religion don't get wrong facts.


 * Please check out the article on Neutral point of view. Wikipedia should not convey anyone as either a hero or a villain - Wikipedia must only convey dispassionate facts, and let readers form their own opinions. --"D ICK " C HENEY 01:47, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

He was the greatest warrier of the modern times, dedicated his life for the religion. (Osama Bin Laden)

Boley So nihal, Sat Sri Akal!!!! Allah ho Akhbar

Inspired hundreds of thousands into following Sikhism by speaking the truth about the plight of those who were suffering in India. He took a stand to demand basic human rights such as the freedom to practise the Sikh religion when and when it was denied and he saw injustices committed to Sikhs throughout Punjab he spoke out against them. He united Sikhs and showed them that there are alternatives to the status quo.

He was in no sense a sant (saint), he was a militant,a terrorist, he was accused of killing many people, furthermore, instigating other people to kill. --Girish 12:24, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

HE WAS INFACT A SANT (SAINT) WHEN SOMEONE PUTS TOGETHER PEOPLE OF A RELIGION TO FOLLOW IT, TO LIVE A LIFE OF PEACEFULLNESS AND LOVING, THIS IS INFACT A SIGN OF A SAINT. THE HINDUS HATE HIM THAT'S WHY THEY DEGRADE THE SIKHS AND ESPECIALLY SANT JARNAIL SINGH KHALSA BHINDRANWALE. HE IS THE GREATEST MAN IN THE 20th CENTURY!!! --Dalvir Singh, Proud supporter of Sant Jarnail Singh Khalsa Bhindranwale!!!

"PEACEFULLNESS & LOVING" LOL Read the unbiased BBC Report below, where it stated he uses violence, gun crime & intimidation... You can't fire Peace and love from a Gun my friend, but only bullets that wound & kill innocent humans.

Mr. Cheney, though calling him the greatest sikh warrior is biased, the article errs in not emphasizing the importance of the role of jathedar. The damdami taksal is very central to the sikh faith. The article depicts Jarnail Singh in a marginilized light, making it seem like he belongs to a splinter group, where as he is a leader of a very important part of a religion.

Furthermore, this article makes errors of omission. An explanation of the nirankari sect is very important to give balance to the issue. It is a very small sect, especially when compared to the 22 million sikh's who do not belong to it.

See the Article on Indira gandhi for a better approach to addressing the importance of Sant Jarnail Singh.

THE TRUTH

Not since Guru Gobind himself has anyone baptised as many Sikhs as Bhindranwale. (Note: One Sikh alone does not baptise. This can only be done by the Panj. He may have influenced many, though this is completely different.) His battle was with Sikhs cutting their hair and drinking and straying from Sikhism. Khalistan wasnt his goal it was simply the last resort if Sikhs didnt recieve equal rights in the country our jawans sacrificed their lives for. (Please explain how you have a Sikh PM of India? Kardkoos killing innocent people was all propoganda like the Nazis used against Jews, its to scare Hindus into believing they need to be afraid of Sikhs with turbans and beards. (Just your opinion too) And being the cowardly fools Hindus are they allowed themselves to be blinded and believed the lies .  (You seem to have a very negative image of Hindus ?Any Punjabi like me whose parents and family were there in Punjab at the time can tell you how it really was, if you wore a kirpan and they found out about you they killed you and your whole family, then they harassed everyone else in the pindh and tortured and killed others. If you were suspected of harboring them you were in danger as well, like my uncles who were beat and almost killed at the time for sheltering a few kardkoos. (What were these Kharkoos doing exactly, doing charity work ?) And when i say "they" I mean they as in the police officers. People like me know about things like "chaka jams", thats when all the streets get locked down and everythings at a standstill. Like it was said before here the only people that think of him as a terrorist are ingnorant Hindus who are too scared and in denial of the truth that their HINDUSTAN isnt as great as they think it is. The Hindu government doesnt just persecute Sikhs, there are thousands of Muslims (Itt wasnt a Hindu Government but a Congress led Government) who have died in areas like Kashmir, fallen victim to the Hindus plan of purifying Hindustan of minorities. The Government or any elected democratic body has an obligation to protect its citizens from Jihadis backed up by the likes of Osama Bin Laden who operate in Kashmir)You may read what the papers wrote on the incident, but read the accounts of people who were actually there during Operation Bluestar, their story actually makes more sense then the army's. They wanted more terorists to fight?  Maybe they figured theyd be able to get all the terrorists at the same time eh?  It was either done deliberately to have more people to murder OR the army is too incompetent and stupid to do recon before they execute an attack with innocent peoples lives in danger. And to say that Bhindranwale had stockpiled a large arsenal of weapons is plain ignorance, they had old rifles left over from World War 2, Really why did they have weapons I wander, they should have come out and fight and not used a sacred place of worship as a cheap operational tool. Thats what Hindus needed, an ARMY against a band of terrorists, thats how much the government feared Sikhs. Unfortunately we have to abide by the law of any country we reside in and not use mob rule like outside theatres. The attack on Amritsar was not an attack on Bhindranwale and his followers, it was an attack on Sikhism to destroy our moral and to teach us a lesson so that we never raise our voice in protest again. The mission according to the army may have been a success, but it was a failure. Sikhs have seeded and thrive in countries all over the world. We continue to grow and despite what the government had planned for us, we're still here and we wont leave until we choose to walk off this earth. (Your free to walk where you like) I beleive the weathers nice today :) cheer up.

India's history is of slavery. Hindus have been the slaves of Greeks, Muslims, and ofcourse the British.

Well...........The Sikhs wern't around when the Greeks came ? The Sikhs wern't around when Muslims arrived, and if I recall the Sikh gurus themselves were tortured by the Muslims ? True ? So where were the Sikhs then? In hiding ? No, the Sikhs emerged from Hindus who brought up their eldest sons as followers of Baba Nanak, now as for the British, I beleive many Sikhs joined the British in it's colonial endeavors, although some braver Sikhs such as the Namdharis stood up to such intimidation. India defeated Pakistan in 3 wars, what when wrong is when Bhindranwale (an uneducated) individual at best wanted power and helped bring the state into a state of anarchy, 20 years later you people still argue about who was right and who was not, well India doesnt need another Bhindranwale or theocratic regime when it's currently the second fastest growing economy on Earth nearly overtaking China, yes the future is bright, but Sikh fundamentalists need to learn from their mistakes, like joining forces with losers like Pakistan - Its a no brainer!!

Indira's reign
"Indira's later reign was most marked by a serious breakdown in Hindu-Sikh relations that would eventually lead to her own assassination. Alarmed at the rise in popularity of the highly political Sikh missionary and leader Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, India's leaders were disturbed by his proclamation that Sikhs were a sovereign and self-ruling community.

Fearing Pakistani support for the movement, in June 1984 Gandhi ordered Operation Blue Star, a military assault on Amritsar's holy Harmindar Sahib or Golden Temple, the central Sikh place of prayer, which had been occupied by Sant Jarnail Singh and his militant supporters with a heavy cache of arms. Gandhi ordered the army to fight its way into the main shrine where Sikh militants had established their headquarters. The army unit involved was headed by Major General Kuldip Singh Brar, GOC, 9 Infantry Division, a Sikh himself and the unit comprised several Sikh officers and soldiers. The occupiers refused to depart from their holiest shrine and a firefight ensued - with 83 soldiers and 493 occupiers -- including the leaders -- killed, and many more injured."

I think the people who has given the comments on this page.They need to study more about sikh history especially starting from 1947 to the reasons that led to the operation bluestar. I would say that Sant Jarnail Singh was great sikh hero of all the times,you should really know the facts about punjab.It was all the politics and not mention those people who still say they are the saviours of punjab.I hope you people understand what i mean,they are none other than who are now still ruling the villages in punjab.

I am a punjabi and sikh and gone through the period of bluestar although was infant that time but can clearly remind the difficult time it was, you are very right my dear jarnail singh bhindrawale was a sikh may be great one but its sure like Govt. of India he was equally responsible of innocent killings.if he was saint why he dont secrifies his life for the sake of lifes of people trapped in the Darbar sahib.why he dont surrender to the army. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.95.167.91 (talk) 14:56, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Why din't Guru Gobind Singh Ji surrendered in Chamkaur??? Muh chak ke na boliya karo. Pehla apna Ithihaas dekho. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Balbosti (talk • contribs) 19:56, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Factually incorrect & fulll of rheoteric
The article as it stands right now, is full of biased opinions. In the article he is accused of killing Hindus and moderate Sikhs, there is no evidence for that. He (or his supporters) were never charged with any such crimes. This biased information needs to be removed, only facts should be in this article.

Hi,

This whole article is factually incorrect.

1. There was never any relegious prosecution of Sikhs in India. Let alone Punjab. 2. Bhindrawale was no saint or martyr. He was a terrorist and should be rightly labeled so. No saint directs his desciples to kill innocent people. If he were a true SIkh at heart he would have never entered Har Mandir Saheb with arms and would not have used the holy pand as toilet during the seige. 3. No body ever wants to discuss how Bhindrawale and his followers were able to get such sophesticated weapons. Obviously no saint goes around shopping for the latest and most sophesticated weapons.

I could go on and on but nevertheless, I would also like to point out that Bhindrawale is porbably revered only outisde of India. In India he is considered a terrorist (yes even by Sikhs) and rightly so. Asheesh.

You speak crap literally, my father was almost killed in that time because of the crimes being comitted by police officers in Punjab. There is evidence that many innocent Sikhs were killed (women, children and old tooo) You can say things of Bhindrawale, but many innocents were killed and im sorry you need to open your eyes!!!
 * wow it sounds like you know evrything, hmm if i were you i would calm down, get a drink of water and then read a book on sikhism before you start writing about this everywhere. ppl have opinions and theres nothing wrong with thatit just sounds like ure putting a bad name on us and i noe many mnay true sikhs who believe he was great man.

Who says that there was no religious persecution of Sikhs in India. What about the thousands of innocent Sikhs who were killed after the assasination of Indira Gandhi. Terrorism is defined as the the threat ot use of violence against civilians for a political purpose. Clearly the people who engaged in killing Sikhs after the assasination of Indira Gandhi were also terrorists. Terrorism has no religion. I am not going to argue that Bhindrawale was a saint but if he was a terrorist, Indian Government and the many police officers in Punjab were also terrorist.

Like all religious nuts,he was an ass.

I have noticed that anyone making the 'terrorist' comment is a Hindu.... they are still upset at the fact that 250 Sikh Brothers, killed off 10,000 hindu army! and then to top it all off, they are still cryin over the death of their 'mother' Indira Gandhi... 7 shots to her chest made her look like a siv. get over it hindus!

another view...

Both the views presented above sound bombastic and biased. I will not try to give my account of things. But I think to have a thorough view of the times(Before, bluestar and after), please view the following 6 part article on rediff.com.

http://www.rediff.com/news/2004/jun/03spec.htm

After reading this, the reader can come to a better position to judge BHINDRANWALE.

WAHEGURU JI KA KHALSA. WAHEGURU JI KI FATEH.. BOHLE SO NIHAL!!! SAT SRI AKAL!!!

J.S.B IS GREATEST MARTYR FOR ALL SIKHISM. KHALISTAN ZINDABAD.

Greatest Martyr ??? Are you sure ? What about The Gurus who were tortured alive by the Muslims because they would not convert to Islam ?

What about Banda Singh Bahadur who was forced by the Muslim Empire to eat his own sons intestines just because he did not convert to Islam? Seems you don't know your own history

Like it says above JSB wasn't just an ass compared to the Gurus, but more like an uneducated ass like Bin Laden - period.

What is Government? Do you know the meaning for Government? If yes, Then does not it matter if Indian Government or Other Country or State Government !

All these sikh from pind/village from poor family with no academic qualification and support Bhindranwale. None of these writer here in this page ever experience the time when this Bindranwala was based in the most holity place for the sikhs. He wanted to be the eleven guru. I heard when he was alive. There was propoganda by his gang that is the recreation of sixth guru and even i heard falcon flying over his heard that falcon might be looking for Guru gobind singh.

As sikh from freedom fighter (british rule) clans and blood. I will go and question him. Why Sahib shri Guru Gobind Singh asking all the sikhs to follow Shri Guru Granth Sahib Ji None of Bindrawala's blood fought againt british. Where this guy come from what was his childhood stories.

Thanks to those educated sikhs whom save the sikh identity. like K.P.S Gill and many other. http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/publication/nightsoffalsehood/falsehood4.htm

Read above article. Also read End games in Punjab AND Freedom from Fear. What is Politics ??

Why he was based at Akal Takht Shahib above shri Guru Granth sahib when sikh pant do not allow anybody to sleep above the Shri Guru Granth Shaib Binddrenwale made sikh image from Sadar to Terrorist.

Bindrawala hijack the Sikh religion by his hypocrisy It is shame to find out that we sikh posting his pictures at our sikh gurudawaras instead of Sahib Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji Khalasa.

Thanks to K.P.S Gill from saving sikh image.

KPS Gill isnt a sikh. no sikh would ever help in attacking a gurdwara... hes an ass just like bin laden... indira gandhi's puppet

Complete Rewrite
I've completely rewritten the article. Hopefully this is more NPOV. --143.182.124.2 6 July 2005 17:44 (UTC) (Forgot to login --Vivin Paliath ( &#3381;&#3391;&#3381;&#3391;&#3368;&#3405; &#3370;&#3390;&#3378;&#3391;&#3375;&#3364;&#3405; )) ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Im just wondering if any of these anti-Bhindranwale (anti-Sikh) people have any proof of who or what was behind these murders. Its so easy to blame a Sikh freedom fighter whos sole purpose was to protect our religion from Hindu elements and keep our unique identity alive. The fact of the matter is the GOI (government of India) was behind all these killings and was trying to defame Kharkhoo Singhs (freedom fighters).

Vandalism
Power users take note, 200.80.39.186 and other anonymous users are indulging in vadalism by reverting to an old and factually incorrect article. Anonymous User 200.80.39.186 kindly track any changes that you do to the page WITH reason and proof. Kindly do not present a biased article to the viewer.

Anti-Hindu POV on Talk Page
This talk page into anti-Hindu rhetroic. Well i'm not knowledgeable about this but i believe most Indian Sikhs do not support Kahilstan. This article makes it seem as if majority of Indian Sikhs want Khalistan but most Sikhs save for a few Non-Indian Sikhs are not in favour of Khalistan... Would it be appropriate to reduce the vitriol comming towards Hinduism from comments above...

Nirankari
As the article stated above, in the brackets that Kuldip Singh Brar was also a nirankari, is absolutely wrong. No nirankari can ever bring firearms into the holy place of any Gurdwara Sahib, which he did. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.181.139.139 (talk &bull; contribs). so how come Bhindharwale and his merry men brought firearms into a holy place? obvious hippocracy!

Is this a joke?
Copied from the main page:

"is this page a joke? Bhindranwale was no saint! He used a holy temple as a hide out! Is that what saints do? I mean for god sakes he had guns, weapons, anti missle stuff, and was ready for a fight. How the hell r u gonna tell me he was a freedom fighter? I mean since when was Guru Nanak a sectarian, his own parents were Hindu. Were the same god dam blood, with the same god dam teachings. When u make a page like this ur a disgrace to the gurus teachings. The gurus didnt teach use to hate our own blood or to seperate from eaach other. Dam I mean innocent Hindus died that day to u know. Sikhs were part of the army that invaded u know. Get your facts right & stop living in this conspiracy theory world that Hindus hate Sikhs. U sound like a fucken moron. If u dont like India, go to Pakistan and see what thats like" &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.107.62.213 (talk &bull; contribs).

Yes, Hindu's don't hate Sikh's, they see them as equals just following another path to the divine. Why can't you accept there are many ways to reach the divine, the day you'll accept that you'll learn to live in harmony. Why pick on organisations like the R.S.S when they haven't done anything bad to you. It is fundamentalist Sikh organisations outside of India that ignite hatred amongst Hindu's and Sikhs. If R.S.S did the same as these Sikh organisations then there'd be riot. Don't push your limits there's always a limit to what someone can take.

Does anyone get a say?
I have rewritten the article twice now, with a lot more info only for Sukh to change it back to the original page. Why not ammend what I had written as it was more in depth and provided a lot more information and it was totally unbiased. Originally i had used the words Sant & Ji which i later changed as this was not acceptable for 'Sukh'. But why not? India Government and in all the media knew him and spoke of Sant Jarnail Singh Ji Bhindranwale!

So, despite me trying to add bits numerous times and having rewrote this article twice, it is still exactly the same as before! '''I thought this was supposed to be a Community Encyclopedia. Just seems to be Sukh's Encyclopedia in this section!'''

I'll try ammending the article again now, lets see how long that will stay there...


 * You're more than welcome to contribute to this article. It definately needs a lot of work.


 * However, I didn't bother to read your changes. I merely selected a few random phrases and searched for copyright violations.  I found at least four separate articles where significant text had been directly lifted, ,  and.


 * Even if your comments are completely valid, you cannot simply lift text from other websites. Having an anonymous user post large amounts of information in one go (that isn't wikified) obviously raises suspicions.  You're welcome to add your *own* work.  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 18:22, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * All work that had been used was referenced correctly. Obviously, i used a lot of quotes from Sant Jarnail Singh Ji Himself and other sources. There will bound to be places elsewhere on the net using exactly the same information. Am I allowed to use this and write teh rest out in my own words? Thought i would ask first because I dont feel like wasting another few hours typing stuff up and researching if its not going to be used.


 * Well, it's perfectly reasonable to quote what a person said if it's relevant to the article. However, it's not reasonable to get paragraphs of text from another source and place it into your own text without highlighting the source.  In fact, I would say that there is no need to quote large chunks of text from any other source here; you should interpret and rewrite what you read and include citations to the appropriate sources.  Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 12:53, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

BIAS?
It is impossible to write an unbiased article, read any post-modernist critique of empiricism to back this up (e.g. Barthes, Jenkins, De Certeau, Foucault etc). To get a 'balanced' account of this subject, you should all read Mark Tulley and Satish Jacob's Amritsar, Mrs Gandhi's last battle which gives a decent narrative of these events. There is little to be gained by hysterical accusations of genocide.

SORT IT OUT!
Sukh... Come on, sort it out! After doing many edits without registering and EVERY ONE being straight reverted, not cut down, just reverted, i again decided to do an edit and registered first. Did an edit. Used quotes and take a read of it (link underneath) - I would say it is much better then what is there no, but no. Again within an hour of me doing it, its a straight revert back to old version!

My Edited version

Tell me Sukh, since i first saw this page (last year i think) it has said it needs work to improve it. I HAVE DONE 4-5 EDITS AND EVERY ONE HAS HAD A STRAIGHT REVERT. How are we supposed to make it better if you dont let us?


 * To be honest, I'd much rather revert controversial changes (which I have done on both sides of the spectrum - not just to you) rather than attract POV trolls that lurk on related topics.


 * The reason for this recent revert is:


 * "He spoke of equality, the current injustices of the time and the importance of following one's religion." - POV statement
 * "the nirankari sikhs held a march slurring abuse at the Guru Granth Sahib and at Sikhs. " - no reference
 * "Jarnail Singh and some other Sikhs decided to go and talk to these nirankari's. However, upon arriving at the scene, they were fired upon both by the nirankari's and the police escorts they had. " - no reference
 * "many people still believe him to be alive and well." - no reference. And, this is patently false.  A few (frankly deluded) people think he is still alive.  The vast majority of Sikhs and non-Sikhs know he is dead.
 * No need to quote heavy sections - this is an encyclopedia


 * Arguably, I felt the original version was better than the version you had changed it to. Please reference reliable sources, preferably published sources such as newspapers and books.


 * Rather than adding lots of text in one go, it's better that you add short sections that are properly referenced. Each individual fact should be referenced.  It takes a *lot* of work to produce even a few paragraphs of referenced, neutral text, and so this is not something that will happen overnight. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 20:49, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Let's all take a step back and relook at the facts: A comment
We wouldn't assume and argue an issue (especially with such passion expressed at both ends of the spectrum) if the facts were clear. We don't argue the legitimacy of the martyrs that we read in ardaas everyday, do we? No, the facts of those martyrs and the incidents surrounding them have long been established. We need to step back and look at the facts and then we can better discuss concerns we may have. However, for articles like the one in question, we need committed groups that can provide an accurate history fit for an encyclopedia. One such group that comes to mind is the Sikh Research Institute (www.sikhri.org). Until Sikh organizations like this one create appropriate articles, we ourselves can read books such as "Fighting for Faith and Nation,"1, "Struggle for Justice," "The Sikhs in History," "The Sikhs of the Punjab Unheard Voices of State and Guerrilla Violence," "Human Rights Watch World Reports," Amnesty International Reports and other books & articles. Once we are better aware of the facts, then we can -collaboratively- approach organizations like the Sikh Research Institute or Sikh Coalition and together create an accurate draft of our recent history.

For a description of any of the books mentioned above (below is the brief description of the first book mentioned) or to discuss or comment please email me at ipnindersingh@gmail.com

I.S.

Qualifications: My Thesis was on Repression of Minorities in India, I have a Degree in Political Science (Much of my senior year was dedicated to conflicts in Asia).

1. A book by anthropologist and Notre Dame professor, Cynthia Keppley Mahmood, who carries out interviews and an investigation of the years up to the 1984 conflict and its aftermath.

Illegitimate Personal Attack
Quote "As a child he was hyperactive and anti-social, once described by a BBC journalist as 'not being particularly intelligent' and with his acute learning disabilities he failed to attain any qualifications and dropped out of school at an early age. Being unable to read, write or speak any English, his only career option was to enter religious politics and eventually made a career by becoming an attention seeking firebrand cleric by fusing sectarian politics with religion."

So the author means that just because one can't speak english, the person is likely to be left with the only option to become a firebrand cleric. The person who wrote this piece has lack of of intellectual turpitude and is a Racist. It is an ad hominem attack further unsubstantiated by unreferenced BBC reporter.

Factual Inaccuracy
The articles starts off by saying that Bhindrwale was self-appointed, whereas the fact is that he was succedded by Kartar Singh Bhindrawale and was the consensualy appointed by Damdami Taksal.

Identifying Castes
Article states that Bhindrawale was a Sikh but Jatt Sikh. Jatt is a caste among Hindus and not sikhs. I think the article needs a lot of factual editing and is filled with historical inaccuracies.
 * Actually there are groups of Jatt Sikhs such as the Cheema.Sikhs are generally not endogamously divided but some sections are.Hkelkar 05:08, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

No Jatts among Sikhs!!! Sikhs are not (generally) endogamously divided!!!

Absolutely false information

Jatt (also spelled as jutt or jat) dominate sikh community in each and every sphere. simple reason - numeric superiority. they are the largest single caste group among the sikhs (60% of the Sikh pop). Jatts are also the most racist of all the Punjabi social groups. this fact, jatt racist tendencies, is reflected from modern day Punjabi (or Bhangara) music industry. every second song glorifies Jatts.

Sikhs follow casteism with equal vigour, if not more, as their Hindu counterparts.

A Schedule caste having an affair with a Jatt girl knows that he is a marked man who may have to pay for his defiance very swiftly. interestingly, a jatt wouldnt mind marrying his daughter to an upper caste Hindu man but SC son-in-law (even though practicing sikh) is out of question.

Sikhs dont believe in castes. "jatt" is i know way related with religion its cultural so get this idea of "jatt" sikhs and cheema sikhs out of your mind as a true sikh doesnt believe in castes

Bhindrawale Declared as Martyr by Sikhs
The article has partisan point of view in presenting Bhindrawale with no mention of the fact that the controversial allegations made on him of Anti-social remarks and activities were never substantiated by the Government of India. In an Encyclopedic writting its paramount to both sides of the story on a personality that is controversial in its aspects to this present day. The article on the other hand purposedly decides to have a consensus on Bhindrawale on itself. http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/jun/06sikh.htm

POV Pushing
I have seen that recently there has been various incidents of POV pushing, and I would appreciate if all editors of this article would read WP:NPOV. I know many of the editors are Sikh, and are trying to glorify Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, but this is an encyclopedia. Encyclopedias are supposed to maintain a neutral point of view, and even if you think the person is a glorious hero for Sikhism, keep your personal views out of the article. Thanks. -- Nish kid 64 23:15, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale
The article on "Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale" has been having almost nothing but opinions written on the matter, with little or no evidence. So I, as a new member of Wikipedia, have replaced this narrow minded article that has been on here for so long, with a part of an essay that has more sources in it for information regarding the man and the issue behind him, than any referenced by others editing the article before. The website from which I have excerpted this Essay from is the following: Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale. And I am presuming this is the same website "Hkelkar" and others have regarded as being Extremist Website, which I would like to say is a very false statement. I would like to mention, for those who do not know, The Sikh Coalition is an unbiased and organized resource for Sikhs facing the problems of today's post-9/11 world. Here is a link to the Sikh Coalition's homepage, it will tell you all about their mission and their goals: Sikh Coalition. Also I would encourage the Administrators to read the Essay I have provided from that website, and decide for yourselves if it is an "extremist article" or not, because in my opinion it is the least biased article which I have found on this man "Sant Jarnail Singh," and is one that is not filled with mainly extremely malicious or appraising opinions, but one with many facts and verifiable sources. Singh27
 * New user might want to read wikipedia policies of WP:RS, NPOV,WP:NOR & WP:V first. I won't deny that there are problems with the article but your solution of mass-reverting, blatant copyright violations and extremist POV-pushing are not helping.Pay particular attention to the WP:RS clause regarding Partisan sources.Hkelkar 01:44, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I have read all those you have referenced to me, and as far as the Essay I posted, if you actually read it, you'll see it is clearly not "extremist POV-pushing"; rather the Conclusion to that Essay does not Conclude as pro-creation of "khalistan" but actually gives 3 possible scenarios for the situation at hand and their possible outcomes. But, that would actually require reading the Essay I provided, which I doubt anyone against an unbiased "non malicious" matter on "Jarnail Singh" would like to do.


 * Just because someone references to the guy as "Sant" does not mean they're putting him up to a level of a "Hero", rather only referring to him as what he was commonly known as. But that way of thought would require shattering ignorance in some peoples' minds, which I've seen may not be possible, for Hkelkar seems to like using the "popup" feature to edit any changes made to the article that may shed some light on the issue.


 * Also, the Essay I provided is a verifiable source, because if you actually read the Essay from the link, and go and research the Mass of Sources provided on that website, they are very much verifiable. Here is the link for your reference, I encourage you to ACTUALLY READ it, before you go on to make bold statements such as the Essay being "extremist POV-pushing." Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale


 * Here is the website with information on Sikh Coalition, which will clearly show you it is not some "extremist website." Sikh Coalition


 * You have stated I am “copyright violating”, my question is how am I doing that if at the end of my article I am referencing the website from which the Essay has been excerpted? I would understand if I was copyright violating if I copied the material and posted it on here, then claiming it to be my own, but I have only excerpted a section of the Essay onto Wikipedia and given reference to the Weblink from which it is from.


 * You also state that I am mass-reverting, and that isn’t helping any. May I ask then how this article on here is not a mass revert of the first original article that was placed on here, for it is the complete deletion of an old one and reposting of a new one? This article has tremendously changed from earlier editions of it, which in my opinion had many more facts and sources than this article which is filled with opinions, with nothing to back those opinions up.  Atleast, I have provided you with a source, that in itself is filled with sources and facts, on the issue. Singh27 20:41, 10 October 2006


 * Er any verbatim copy, even a section, is a copyvio and can be removed IMMEDIATELY from wikipedia. Listen to the admin Nishkid64 above.Plus, you may link Sikh Coalition ref but it must be qualified as partisan per WP:RS and yes, it is partisan.Sat-Sri-Akaal and good luck to you.Hkelkar 04:26, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Photograph
It would be much appreciated if some one uploads a GNU lic. photograph of Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale. He holds an important position in the Sikh and Indian history for whatever reasons it may be. So anyone who reads the article from a NPOV would find it helpful to relate the context. Just an opinion. --IndianCow 20:34, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Request for Action

 * Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale is under NPOV disputes since ages, but today the article looks more like an propganda letter...Texts like this one are part of the article...
 * "It is hoped that this article has gone some way to redressing the balance, Sikhs of today must wash off their masochistic tendencies of condemnation of their own community, which appears to have been imbibed in them as a result of continued mischievous propaganda against the Sikhs by the brahmin majority."

I understand this is a NPOV issue but this an encyclopedia, not a forum. --IndianCow 20:11, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I found the link below, by a prominent Academic 'From Bhindranwale to Bin Laden' a very useful study in the understanding of Secular Pluralist Diversity vs Monoist Theocratic fundamentalism of which Bhindranwale & Bin Laden tried to ferment.

BHINDRANWALE WAS UNEDUCATED, ie HAD LEARNING DIFFICULTIES
Would it be possible to jus remove this article from wikipedia until a completley neutral article can be made. As i looked at the references of the current article the majority of them are from papers of authors who don't like sant bhinderanwale. In addition, rather then providing false info to wikipedia users it would be better to provide no information at all. Therefore i am humbly asking that this article be removed completely until a factual one can be made.
 * Did you take a look at the page? It has been improved after other editors did a major rewrite of the article. There is absolutely no reason for the article to be removed from Wikipedia, and I would not remove the article even if it was written badly. Sorry... Nish kid  64  18:13, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
 * However, there is still a lot of information that is disputed, and I suggest people add sources to any insertions they make to the page. Nish kid  64  19:13, 28 October 2006 (UTC)


 * The issue I am seeing is this, what you have on wikipedia is definitely not "NPOV" material on Jarnail Singh. You state that to praise the man is extremist and POV-pushing, and then on the other hand you have authors rewrite everything on him which only write a very negative opinion about him. Isn't that POV-pushing itself, and aren't you being a hypocrite?  I agree, this article on an encyclopedia isn't here to praise the man, but neither is it here to throw negative opinions at him, and to do either is POV-pushing.  Therefore, till you can have an actual NPOV article produced about him, this article needs to be removed because all that exists on here is profound ignorance, and it is hypocritical on your part to not remove this article like you did the earlier version, which you believe to be "POV-pushing." And by the way, I did not make that first comment up there about the removal of this article, I am only seconding that person's opinion. -Singh27
 * Neither of you have cited which parts of the article do you consider to be "negative opinion".Hkelkar 20:43, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, you know that Sikhs glorify him, while others seem Bhindranwale in a different light. I am a neutral contributor to the article, and when I asked other editors to pitch in, I only did so in hopes of re-writing a neutral article that would sit well with all other editors. Apparently, you think I am POV-pushing when I'm just trying to help the article out.  Nish kid 64  02:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I do not believe you are correct in your generalization that "All Sikhs glorify him". Sikh society is not like that of the daleks or cylons where everybody agrees with everybody else. There is a continuous spectrum of opinion concerning Bhindranwale in Sikh society, with many Sikhs categorically condemning his actions and beliefs, many Sikhs condemning his actions but not necessarily his beliefs, some Sikhs tacitly condoning both and a small (but loudmouthed) minority of Khalistani whack-jobs revering him as the eleventh Guru (Yeesh!). Hkelkar 02:29, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

---

I just want to add that Sandeep Singh Bajwa who you source as a reference from sikh-history.com personally knew Bhindranwale and he himself has said that Bhindranwale failed school at 3rd grade, he was monoistic, segragative and had a short temper, hardly sikh qualities.

Assessment remarks
NPOV status - fine, its fairly neutral. Content - more content can be added, key incidents in his life etc. Others - I think as more info is added, it will be best to present views of both sides without coming to any judgemental areas or arriving at conclusions.

All the best. ­ &#2384; Kris (&#9742; talk | contribs) 14:02, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

POV
Have editedarticle to less NPOV. If you feel article is POV please leave message here and will try to correct. Thank you.
 * Some of the removals were justified (see what I removed), but some of the additions/modifications you made were definitely POV. I think the revert of your edits was appropriate.  Nish kid 64  19:57, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I think some of the edits were inappropriate and are now your POV.

Why was the part of his education and joining the Damdami Taksaal removed? It obviously played a role in his life so why was it removed? Nothing was POV in it.

What was wrong with the part about his philosophy? Isn't what a person lives by important? Is that POV?

'and became a hero in the eyes of young unemployed Sikhs' This makes it look like ALL Sikhs agreed with him. Thats why i put some. Some=An unspecified quantity or number of. All=Every individual or anything of the given class, with no exceptions.

'He asked the Sikhs to live according to his rules' Were his not rules the same as the Guru Granth Sahib seeing as he followed its teachings.?

What was wrong with the other vices listed? Is that POV?

So the links that promote him as a terrorist are ok but people with different views and agree with what he did are not welcome? Adolf would be so proud of you.

Enjoy your next Hindutva rally.
 * Watch the personal attacks. I removed "Being unable to read, write or speak any English, his only career option was to enter religious politics and eventually made a career by becoming an attention seeking firebrand cleric by fusing politics with religion" because that is clearly POV. There is no source for that statement whatsoever, and is entirely biased. Are you saying that uneducated people cannot do anything but enter religious politics? Also, saying "attention seeking firebrand cleric" is a POV statement. That's not what he did. We have to keep things neutral and that section is definitely not neutral. Also, read WP:RS and WP:V. You added a bunch of information to the article, but failed to provide sources for any of that information. I'll see later if I can find sources for the Sikh hero information. I remember there was a lot of POV issues with that a few months ago, and many editors decided to do a complete rewrite to the article. I still feel the article has POV issues, as it does not show the view that some Sikhs approve of Bhidranwale. I mean, it's weird that the link we have about many Sikhs believing he was a terrorist comes from Sikh Times, but I know there are other sources that would say otherwise. I'll see what I can do, and remember what I said about personal attacks.  Nish kid 64  22:01, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

The bit about 'uneducated' people and religious politics were added by someone previously. When i moved this it was always reverted back and added. Sam as the firebrand bit. The sources i used i added in the external links at the bottom. Don't know how to add the reference links.

http://www.panthkhalsa.org/gursikh/gs_bhaijarnailsingh.php, http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php?title=Sant_jarnail_singh_bhindranwale, phttp://saintsoldiers.net/, (The title at the top suugests there is someone who thinks he was a hero/saint. http://saintsoldiers.net/ss/?p=jar (ref: his philosophy, women joining him as well as men,
 * I revamped the whole section, and I'll try to expand the section once I find more references and such. I need something that directly says he's a martyr, not something that implies it. Also, other wiki's are not considered reliable sources.  Nish kid 64  18:47, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

BBC Report in 1984
It was the BBC and many other Western News channels that described him as a terrorist, and as mentioned earlier Sandeep Singh Bhajwa knew him to have been uneducated and an academic dropout at school ie Anti Social Behaviour Disorder. Mark Tully described him as "not being very intelligent"

Now if you dont like those facts, then tough. these are not based on fundamentalist idealogies but actual facts. The problem with fundamentalists like yourself is that they never accept the facts or neutral opinions, as you start and view things from the fundamentalist subjective (not objective) premise

== '''LISTEN, IF THIS ARTICLE IS NEUTRAUL, THAN WHY DOES IT SAY THAT HE IS CONSIDERED BY SOME A EXTREMSISTS BY OTHERS A MARTYR, WHILE CONTINOUSLY WITHIN THE ARTICLE THEY MENTION HIM A A FUNDAMENTALIST??? Some feel that the fundamentalist Bhindranwale WTF?''' == —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 90.196.3.28 (talk) 08:47, 1 April 2007 (UTC).
 * I don't know who removed that from the article, but I'll try to get the Mark Tully source and fix it up somewhere in the early life section of the article.  Nish kid 64  21:03, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Removed "fundamentalist". Some POV issues still exist in the article, and when I'm completely back to editing, I'll try to fix them.  Nish kid 64  20:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

GA
Yes, it satisfies the GA, although for FA, I would imagine the level of detail would have to be 2-3 times more (if possible).Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:07, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

How to add Picture
Was going to add a picture of the Bhindranwale but I dont know how to. can someone teach me?
 * Fine. You may get information from here: Picture tutorial. In case, you require any further clarifications, please feel free to message me on my user page. All the best! --Bhadani (talk) 18:34, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, since almost all pictures of Bhindranwale are fair use, please make sure the image you add meets WP:NFCC. Thanks, Nishkid64 (talk) 20:47, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

This article is biased and cannot be a good article
Let us look at this piece: "Bhindranwale is more notable for his involvement in Operation Blue Star in which he and other militants occupied the Akal Takht complex, including the Golden Temple, in Amritsar.[4] He was killed by the Indian Army, who had orders from Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi to kill separatist Sikh militants inside the sacred temple".

Bhindranwale was not involved in Operation BlueStar. Operation Bluestar was a brainchild of Indra Gandhi to kill Sikhs morale. Bhindranwale was killed in this operation defending the Akal Takht. Also this article has no mention of Shubeg Singh. The person who helped Bhinderanwale protect the temple against the attack of the Indian army. Shubeg Singh was a decorated hero after the Bangladesh war. He later joined Bhinderanwale for the Sikh cause.

It is a very bad idea to include comments from Vir Sanghvi and Khushwant Singh as the distort the neutrality of the article and reduce article's stature. These are just opinions and do not reflect history.

Even the whole Un-Biased western media and US President Ronald Reagan described him as a 'terrorist' in 1984
QUOTE: "Bhindranwale, the extremist leader is 'DARING' the security forces to enter the sikhs vatican to try and capture him. He knows such action will unite Indias 9 million sikhs against the Government....He preaches violence to achieve his religious and political ends"

COURTSEY BBC

PROOF:-



Vandalism
Why does everyone vandalise?????? STOP IT! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.195.70.136 (talk • contribs)

Corrections needed
At the bottom in the references section, the link: "From Bhindranwale to Bin Laden, The Rise of Religious Violence" does not link up

So I include it here http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:mywhyctE5dEJ:repositories.cdlib.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D1024%26context%3Dgis+%22rise+of+religious+violence%22%2B%22bin+laden%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1

Also the BBC Video was removed depicting Bhindranwale ?? Why was it removed ??
 * Link fixed. It now shows . Also, which BBC video was removed? I don't recall there being a BBC video in the article. Nishkid64 (talk) 05:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Well it was there....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_6570000/newsid_6572600/6572653.stm?bw=bb&mp=rm&news=1&bbcws=1

Vandalism of discussion page
Why was the Etymology section removed ?

POV/Bias ?
How can any individual on Wikipedia be described as hyperactive and anti-social without a source describing them as such. At the very least there needs to be citation needed added to these descriptions. LeRAM (talk) 12:35, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Tully's statement seems quite familiar. I remembered seeing it a while ago when I was rewriting the article. I tried to search the phrase in quotes on Google, but I did not receive any hits. Nishkid64 (talk) 05:02, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

reverts of well sourced material
why is well sourced statements continuosly removed by an anonymous ip adress. further the description "he was anti-social....etc " is off the mark. Please discuss before removing sourced material.thanksAjjay (talk) 18:15, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Tully's quote
Mark Tullys quote describing him as "not being very intelligent" is not clear. The reader can, in no way, interpret what Tully was referring to. It might be a long description, from which, the contributor has made up his own lines. Therefore, he is requested, to provide the complete observation, and what it referred to. Thanks.Ajjay (talk) 18:27, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It would be nice and worthwhile, if the [IP address 90.196.3.244], instead of reverting cited material from a reliable source, provides the full quote and comprehensive detail about the quote of Tully. Because if he does not, then i am going to remove it very soon, as it is ambigious in it's present state.Ajjay (talk) 07:37, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Its not easy trying to make an Einstein out of a terrorist. The facts are is that he lacked a lot under the skull department, he was no philosopher and according to two references by the BBC TV he was not intelligent, he even drops out of school at 5th grade even sikhiwiki admit it (but expect some time soon some will say he was a PhD in Nuclear Physics)
 * Reply to unsigned comment
 * There is no such phrase in the book "Amritsar: Mrs. Gandhi's Last Battle" by Mark Tully and Satish Jacob. Kindly see Wiki policy on No Original ResearchAjjay (talk) 07:54, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Also please provide the "basis" for this edit Ajjay (talk) 08:24, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Have you actually read the book or watched any archive footage form the BBC ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.3.244 (talk) 23:38, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Ajjay, you obviously have your own agenda, thats quite visible form a long shot, but as I say Mr Bhindranwale was no Guru or Philosopher he was described as a terrorist even by the BBC in 1984. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.3.244 (talk) 23:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You have given the page no. to be 113 for your ref. regarding the comment. I want to tell you that page 113 is part of 9th chapter "President rule fails". It generalizes the reason for failures of president rule and as such. The schooling of bhindranwale, is described early in book(page no.53), and why he went to missionary school, because his family was poor etc.


 * A comment regarding his intelligence might have been in the bbc documentry, it is not in the book, please find a ref. for the documentary thing.


 * Provide the ref. You are not providing the detail required, because there isn't any . You are obviously lying.


 * Instead basing your arguments on your own research, No Original Research cite ref. ThanksAjjay (talk) 03:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Quoting Jimmy Wales
. ThanksAjjay (talk) 04:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Quoting Intelligent people!
Instead of wollowing in your own denial in typical fundamentalist fashion! I suggest you make an attempt to make actual analysis on the intellectual integrity with respect to the deceased ie Mr Bhindranwale.

I want this edit undone. It is plainly a disruptive edit. ThanksAjjay (talk) 18:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
 * ❌ Please establish consensus for this change. Happy‑melon 14:24, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Look what i found!
The reference given for the phrase is 'ref.no.6'. Same ref. is given in 'ref.no.9'. Now, was this guy "bhindranwale" making statements about his political ambitions while still in school. I mean he was unknown before 1980. It is pretty obvious that the anonymous IP user added this ref. just to add back the line, which was continuosly being removed by the admin. who were asking for reference for the particular phrase. The said ref. was originally added on 27 march 2007, to cite his political statement. Smart thinking, but he made a mistake by copying the entire ref. text.

As there is no mention of such phrase in the book, he added random stuff and cited an already mentioned source to lend credibility to his claims. Anybody doubting, can freely read and go through the book. thanks. Shalimer (talk) 06:57, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Removd "As a child, he was hyper-active........"
It is clearly original research, and biased, not NPOV. Shalimer (talk) 08:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

pov stuff
Please provide the name of militant organization to which he belonged and headed and whether that organisation was banned and listed as a terrorist organization. You cannot get a ref. from a source and add it in the lead without it being substantiated. Shalimer (talk) 11:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Original values of 'Sikhism' ???
I made this reference because the original values of Sikhism ie Teachings of The Guru Nanak and the scripture do not in any shape or form advocate the creation of a Theocratic state, if anything the teachings of the founding Guru and Mr Bhindranwale are absolutely antithetical (ie opposite) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.3.1 (talk) 20:29, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Mark Tully's observations
Please go through BBC Archives on Mark Tully, you will find it.

Secondly, it is a well known fact that Mr Bhindranwale was not a scientist, philosopher, guru, olympic athlete, Gangsta Rap artiste or whatever despite new claims in new books by his fundamentalist fan club ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.3.1 (talk) 20:37, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Shalimer AKA Ajjay
He is painted out to be some kind of intellectual in 'Early Life' when in fact nothing could be so far from the truth.

Ajay, he did NOT try to spread the "original values of Sikhism"
The Original values of Sikhism were founded by Nanak. Bhindranwale's main concern was politically motivated (see whole article) he was involved in the murders of innocents, involved with political parties, involved with many non-spiritual matters, he was even described in BBC news archive as a terrorist, he was the pre-cursor to flight 182 (www.flight182.com) he was involved in the formation of a theocratic state based on sectarian politics. Now Nanak, ie the founder of Sikhism was the total opposite to Bhindranwalwe, so how please prove or show how Bhindranwale could have ever with his limited educational and emotional problems teach on the same level as Nanak, indeed how can one compare a terrorist to a Prophet ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.59.97 (talk) 20:32, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Dont you guys think that theyre should be a sant before the main title.
Hi guys. Sant Jarnail Singh Ji was a sant for many people. why cant we have a sant before his name. its disrespectful to just call him Jarnail. its like calling your teacher bob or jack. i think it offends people even if it doesn't offend you. o yeah and we need a Ji behind his name. even in many other articles, Sri Guru Nanak ji is called just Guru Nanak. same goes with the other Guru's. Sri Amritsar Sahib is called Amritsar. we need some respect for the Sikh community to. i mean, if you can call Jesus by his name Jesus Christ then why not for Sikhs? perhaps we are slaves as Sant Ji used to say.........hmmm............Have a nice day! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gursikhzuber (talk • contribs) 15:24, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Bhindranwawle was a dope
U could call him a Saint except he was the opposite to Christ or Nanak and was poorly educated and failed all his exams (like most of his fans) and he usually carried an illegal hand gun which would by todays standards in England would mean he would be a wearing a t-shirt with the word ASBO on it and people would refer to him as a chav —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.3.218 (talk) 16:53, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey You saying dope
Wjkk20 says: You who dare calling Sant Bhindranwale dope, why didn't you put your full personal information by that shitty comment of yours or maybe you're a coward to do so, aren't you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wjkk20 (talk • contribs) 20:21, 15 October 2008 (UTC)