Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site amdahl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!nsc!amdahl!dss00 From: dss00@amdahl.UUCP (dss00) Newsgroups: net.nlang.india Subject: Re: Response by a Sikh Message-ID: <2091@amdahl.UUCP> Date: Wed, 9-Oct-85 13:21:37 EDT Article-I.D.: amdahl.2091 Posted: Wed Oct 9 13:21:37 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 12-Oct-85 16:49:36 EDT References: <643@decwrl.UUCP> <101800005@uiucdcs> Organization: ..{ihnp4, hplabs}!amdahl!dss00 Lines: 36 In article Message-ID: <101800005@uiucdcs> reddy@uiucdcs.CS.UIUC.EDU writes among other things > Now to the attack on Golden Temple. Most of us non-Sikhs fail to fathom > what you consider to be "desecration of our holy shrine" or how any temple can > be out of bounds for the law. Suppose Rajneesh started raging a holy war > from inside his ashram, and the American forces had to attack it. Do you > think all the Hindus are going to cry that our holy shrine was desecrated? I strongly object to calling Rajneesh a Hindu. Even he does not call himself a Hindu. Please get your facts straight. Now for my own two bits... I do agree that, as a principle, religious places should not be used to hide from law. It is indeed tragic that a political problem got transformed into a Hindu - Sikh problem. What Bhindranwale did was deplorable but then neither was Mrs. Gandhi above guilt. Mr Bajwa is right on the dot when he points out that Congress(I) had a big hand in making Bhindranwale a force in the first place. What does make me feel good though is the fact that things are coming out in the open and we are talking again. While we may debate this issue to its death, let us not forget that as a conflict grows, all sides share some wrong doings. Unfortunately while we are quick to fault the other side (some times even without basis) we are blind to our own faults. Right on............. -- Deepak S. Sabnis ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,amd,nsc}!amdahl!dss00 (408) 746-6058 (Usual Disclaimer Here)