It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sikh soldiers guard Queen Elizabeth II

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


No it was not Mason whom tried to derail this thread.

The thread was already derailed from the O/P's Posting. He has a personal vandetta against ATS UK Members and British people as a whole. I for one amnot going to back down from someone clearly needing to get over himself.

[edit on 1-8-2009 by Laurauk]




posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by IDK88
 


The Queen is head of The Commonwealth.
India is part of The Commonwealth.
Sikh's are very brave and excellent soldiers who have fought nobley for The UK and The Commonwealth.
The Queen is in safe hands.

Your anti-British phobia is worrying.
If it is due to a past relationship then I really think you need some professional help.



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Laurauk
 


Laura, I see your point, but mason insists on bringing Islam into almost every thread he contributes to.

The OP was about Sikh's guarding our Queen and the irrational fears / rantings of the OP....nothing whatsoever to do with Muslims.

I'll gladly enter into discussion with mason if he want's to start a thread about Islam's influence / role on other religions and apostasy.



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 





It was you who tried to derail this thread by mentioning Muslims and deliberately baiting people.

My point was that if Sikhism is an offshoot of Islam it would be deemed apostasy.
Apostasy is punishable by death.


It was a statement of fact said in a jocular fashion and no more than three lines long.

Sikhism is not an offshoot of Islam but the fusion of Hinduism and Islam. Ahmedism is an offshoot but not Sikhism. Sikhism is a product of Hindu cultural inclusiveness that absorbs all traditions. Similarly, Buddhism was absorbed to produce Advaita philosophy. Hinduism is a guru based tradition allowing the guru to dedicate himself and his followers to certain virtues. This is what Guru Nanak did and producied an inscrutable religion that challenged the Hindu caste system.

Regarding you judgement of what is considered an apostate is really a wholly legal decision best left to a Sharia courts in Islamic jurisdictions that even I as a Muslim am not entitled to comment on unless I can produce information in mitigation of the convert's decision. Epiphanies, mental illness, and being treated badly by other Muslims allows a person to leave Islam on the basis that there is no compulsion in faith. Nevertheless, you might possess excellent theological and legal understanding of Sharia which means I have to bow to your better knowledge.

All I know is that Muslims generally avoid confronting an apostate and killing one is considered distasteful and inhuman. It is a very rare event and largely ignored.


[edit on 053131p://pm3140 by masonwatcher]



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 05:07 PM
link   
3 thoughts on the topic:

1. Sikhism is not an offshoot of islam. Infact i have been reliably informed by many Sikhs that they actively despise the Islamic faith because they feel they invaded their homeland (which is India, not the middle east)

2. Sikhs have been in the British army since the time of the Raj. Absolutely no big deal.

3. IDK88 is by far and away the worst Wind-up merchant i have ever had the misfortune to see. Amusingly bad. Come on mate, up your game if you want us to bite!



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by masonwatcher
 


Thanks for the clarification...I may disagree with some of it but I did enjoy your post.

I know there was a hint of joviality in your first post...it's just that I failed to understand where the relevance was...and I can be a miserable bugger at times.



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


Thanks Freeborn. I can tell you are OK but you get as heated as I do. No harm done.



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by CRB86
 


I agree, Sikhism is not an offshoot of Islam but it is heavily influence by it.


Sikhism arose in a climate that was heavily influenced by Bhaktism and Sufism[citation needed]. Guru Nanak Dev was its founder. The Guru Granth Sahib contains the teachings and beliefs of eleven Hindu saints, four Sufi saints and later on followed by the subsequent additions from seven of the Sikh Gurus. Because of this diversity many people mistake Sikhism as being a branch of Hinduism or Islam, but it is clearly its own separate religion.en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by masonwatcher
 


It's not at all influenced by it

also sikhism and hinduism cannot by definition support islam because of halal food

hinduism mostly preaches vegetarianism
while sikhism encourages vegetarianism but is complete against an inch of pain to another living being

Unfortunately, in my opinion this makes a pretty big distinction
halal food is animal torture in my opinion

because it has to do with the very slow cutting of a living being while singing prayers



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Well I am a meat eater and have no problems with slaughtering an animal. Normally Muslim slaughter an animal with a sharp knife around the neck and allow it to bleed to death. While it is painful, if done correctly it is not cruel. Cruelty is about how an animal is treated life and upto the point of death.

Also in Islam we tend to not sing religious prayers but recite. It is basically a thanks to God for the food we are about to have.

I can understand why one is a vegetarian and I have toyed with the idea of being one because it appals me how mass processed meat is produced. I think we really don't need more than two portions of meat a week although I eat a portion every day. I try to eat mostly fish but need steak at least twice a week.

Edit grammar

[edit on 063131p://pm3154 by masonwatcher]



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by masonwatcher
Well I am a meat eater and have no problems with slaughtering an animal. Normally Muslim slaughter an animal with a sharp knife around the neck and allow it to bleed to death. While it is painful, if done correctly it is not cruel. Cruelty is a judgement on how an animal is treated life and upto the point of death.


I do not agree with this
Death is very slow for an animal that is soon to be halal
they cut the animal extremely slow, while either singing or reciting prayers.


Originally posted by masonwatcher
Also in Islam we tend to not sing religious prayers but recite. It is basically a thanks to God for the food we are about to have.

God's children imo is not for you to eat
God creating all living beings, including animals
they have a right to live as much as we do

you can bring up ants and microscopic bugs if you wish, but the point is doing as much as you can.

I am a Hindu Punjabi, I am hindu, although I do not completely agree with any organized religion, I do practice many hindu rituals only because I am not religious but am a traditionalist. I believe it's important to prolong the education and beliefs that your grandparents taught you.

Ok that was off-topic, but my point is doing as much as I can.
I am hindu, but I very much respect jainism, despite it rejecting hindu scriptures.

Jainists wear a mask almost all day so that microcospic insects or bugs don't go in your mouth only to die.

They walk around with a broom all the time, sweaping so they don't step on any ants.

And such things.

You may consider that as extremism, and in a certain way I could understand that.

But it's really about doing as much as you can, but I don't have the discipline as jainists do.

But I have nothing but respect for them.

I can understand why one is a vegetarian and I have toyed with the idea of being one because it appals me how mass processed meat is produced. I think we really don't need more than two portions of meat a week although I eat a portion every day. I try to eat mostly fish but need steak at least twice a week.

[edit on 063131p://pm3131 by masonwatcher]



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by IDK88
Of course you don't want to see what I am talking about...you fancy yourself to one of those Persian Immortals. Historically speaking isn't Persian just a region of India anyway.

No it isn't. It never was. Historically speaking. Open a book once in your life, please.


You're an ignorant bastard trying to spread disinformation and prejudice.


Edited out some thing.


[edit on 1-8-2009 by Johnmike]



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Johnmike
 


Places we call Iran or Pakistan or Afghanistan or Bangladesh or Nepal were all a part of a Greater India in the remote past. Its not called the Indian Ocean for nothing. I once read a short article suggesting that Islam was Indian in origin and that the Kaaba was an Indian inspired structure. In a story called the first book of Adam and Eve, the Serpent was thrown to India, one of the only places mentioned in the story, as most places had no names in the distant past. The city of Bombay/Mumbai is the great city which corrupted the Kings of the Earth.

But all you can see is the obvious...it is no coincidence that your queens current guardians are Sikhs, in the sense that they are not the traditional guardians. From a certain perspective, your queen has been Captured or are you really that dense that this isn't obvious. Sure, they are British soldiers, but they are Sikhs first and foremost, and they are have your queen.

I suppose my warnings to you have arrived to late...best of luck to you.







[edit on 1-8-2009 by IDK88]



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


You probable guessed by now that I am a Muslim and eating meat is not forbidden for me. I also agree with your principles and cannot challenge it in a philosophical manner. All creatures have a right to life.

I put to you that if there were no meat eaters and no cows raised to satisfy our consumption of meat, there would be very few cows in the first place to live a life.



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 07:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by IDK88
reply to post by Johnmike
 

Places we call Iran or Pakistan or Afghanistan or Bangladesh or Nepal were all a part of a Greater India in the remote past.


Oh? Enlighten me. Tell me how the land of Persia was once part of India.



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by IDK88
 


The best Slave in history of British Slavery was the Indians even if Russel Peters says other wise.



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Johnmike
 


Timurids

I could only find this map...During Tamerlane's time, but he made at least to Delhi, so this map could easily modified to show that. The rest is self explanatory.

When Tamerlane moved from place to place throughout the region, his palace being in Samarkand, Uzbekistan, he was simply reassembling something that had once existed. Is this proof enough...buttcheeks?



[edit on 1-8-2009 by IDK88]

[edit on 1-8-2009 by IDK88]



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Isn't there enough human cruility around the world for you to waste sometime with? When you talk about cruility, starvation is also cruility, many in India are starving, not to mention the rest of the world.

I'm just saying I'm sick of animal activist who go around risking their lives to save animals and some even trees but do soo little for humans. It just goes to show.



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by IDK88


As I pull back the darkness which protects the British Monarchy (ha ha ha) it seems that what begins to emerge is the true nature of your "Queen".

Is it possible that she is not at all British, but instead an Indian Witch that has throughly pull the wool over the eyes of everyone in the UK.

news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


ive always been under the notion it was a german ancestory tree they had behind them ,



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by MrGrey1701
 


Well first of all, they aren't English, they are German.

and secondly, in my opinion this is a PC publicity stunt, so show how open an multicultural it is. In my opinion is stupid



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join