im happy he was knighted by Her Majesty, he did what he should have done and keep the peace by any means. they knew the dangers of their actions when protesting
wake up indians it was the gurkhas who were responsible for the massacre and they were highly commended by general dyer for their shooting accuracy. now these traitor gurkhas want gorkhaland in india. just kick those bustards out of india.
and white people are suppossed to be the civilized ones....yeah shooting at unarmed civilians for just assembly...yeah whitey you are really civilized.
GEN DYER IS NOT ALONE RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS, OUR OWN PEOPLE WHO SERVED BRITISH AND ACTUALLY FIRED UPON FELLOW COUNTRY MEN ARE EQUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT. IF MANGAL PANDAY COULD REVOLT IN 1857 WHY OUR SOLDIERS COULD NOT TURN THEIR GUNS ON GEN DYER IF AT ALL HE GAVE ORDERS TO FIRE UPON INNOCENT INDIANS.
This makes me feel sick, especially as I am British, and I deeply respect the courage of the Indians who faced the rifles...but this happened 90 years ago. We shouldn't be judging people today by something so long ago.
my blood starts boiling,when I see this video...I wish i could do the same right now to the british,and take back our Kohinoor diamond!...But well i'm not that inhumane,like that son of a whore Dyer.I swear if Dyer's grandson comes in front of me,i'll kill him!!
And now....atleast the British can never invade us,they will be fucked badly if they try to do that again.Because India had a bigger army and our air-force is also very good.And we also have nuclear weapons now.
I wish I was alive when the brits were in india. I would've followed the lead of Subhas Chandra Bose, Bhagat Singh, and Udam Singh...i would have violently revolted against those bastards, and I would've with great enthusiasm kill as many brit soldiers as possible. Peaceful resolution alone is not gratifying, its a tease, a farce, and we indians got no respect out of it...gandhi, jinnah, they were beggars. i would give anything to go back to that time
Of the 379 deaths in the garden most were in fact inflicted by Indians on other indians who literally trod their vulnerable women and children into the ground. Indeed 120 of them were so stupid they jumped into the well and were drowned.
They had their warning. "No meetings!" If the British had shot that idiot Gandhi back in South Africa, perhaps the jewel would still be in the Crown. Perhaps a few dozen more responses such as this might have cooled the traitorous spirit. General Dyer was the only officer in His Majesty's service that knew what had to be done, and had to balls to do it.
@redtihor1 Save your bayonets for the Chinese on your North, the Pakistanis to your West, and for the hundreds of millions of unreliable Muslim fanatics in your very midst. And since it will be quite a time before my liver will be available to you, may I suggest enjoying a nice roast prime Rib of BEEF, or perhaps some baby-back PORK ribs? Yummmmm.
@horselips Lick your lips as much as you want, you freaking asshole. Indians already control 10% of your economy. Soon this nation will completely dominate your pathetic economy and market. Laugh as much as you want. We already make all of Britain's tea, steel, housing and ships. Bangladeshis rule your food and textiles sectors.
British were barbarians when we were making cities. My neighborhood is older than London, you fucking barbarian !!
@redtihor1 Temper! Temper! Settle down there...now, chin up. Be a good lad - musn't appear out of sorts. It's bad form. Don't forget, we Yanks had also had our own bit of unpleasantness with the Empire back in the 18th and 19th centuries. We got over it and so should you. Be thankful you were properly colonized by the British - or you might be speaking Japanese today. Seriously though, keep an eye on those 400+ million Mohammedans - they tend to get excited now and then.
@horselips Japanese? Are you sure of this 'fact'? Even with their increasing realm, the Japanese had little to no influence on native culture. Apart from building the railways (whilst simultaneously decimating the ecosystem) and establishing the modern system of government found in India today, the Brits have done little good for India. Ultimately, colonization has proven itself to be quite an effective way of setting up countries for a corrupt, unorganized future. Albeit, with a few exceptions.
Such an honorable man for the British Empire. General Dyer proudly displayed to these "heathen wogs" what British rule meant. It's a shame British soldiers didn't go home from India in piles of body bags, like they did ifrom Afghanistan and Somalia. Arrogant murdering son of a bitch.
I wish we could march into Bradford and shoot a few Indians and Pakistanis there!!
Bottom line is, we owned India so it was up to us how we controlled the Indians. Bottom line is if the Indians were too gutless to fight back then they got what they deserved.
And i was in Jammu and Kashmir for four years and served in the India Pakistan war of 1999...So look beyond your own upturned english nose and don't dispute others with facts about their own country you hypocritical piece of spent chewing gum
@SuperdiptoC i recently read the news where it mentioned how our old govt officers were not getting pension..and they themselved blamed the corrupt indian administration..and even said that we were far better under the british
@NMSCENS2 u asshole...u can't justify these un-human acts...If we shoot u british motherfuckers with an m-16 uzi....and don't even warn u.....that would be quite good right...
may be Iam too late to add a note to this forum.. But this is what i feel from the core of my heart. Britishers were not only cruel to Indians, but they exploited us to hell in all ways... If we could rewrite our history with them (wiping out almost 300years of struggle), India also would have been called as a 'Developed' country and not a 'Developing' country. Look where INR is standing today in front of GBP. F****rs.
india will never be colinized again by britan because india has the 3rd largest standing army in the world and would annialate the british since india posseses nuclear weapons
As an Indian I cant forget this incident. these britishers havn't done only in in India but in many other countries, thats why new british generation is druggy, beggers and uneducated homeless bastards.
shut the hell up @rijualegend hw dare you justify this massarce and come and preach about british rule on this page. both muslims and hindus died that day, and one day both will unite and teach you and british counterparts a lesson
@rijualegend i will point some facts as well. india was made up of several kingdoms like Italy and was one of the richest countries in the world, why else would the british take so much effort to start trading with us. what the british did next was just rob india of it's wealth. it is easier to rule a country more efficiently like the british did with india, if the inhabitants are oppressed and have no say in how they are ruled. a modern example is china
@hanros98 one of the biggest conceptions that we ppl have was that india was a rich country..only the rulers and kings were rich..who had a lot of wealth...a common man was not rich..the kings looted the common man and was as also corrupt. obv there were exceptions.. the kings ruled in old fashioned way...and ancient rules of administration were followed..also there was also no unity back then at all..the british brought administration..brought education..brought discipline
@rijualegend jesus christ there is no point arguing, you bow down to the british. give me a while and i will find you a qoute from one of the first britishers to india who said that he saw no poor man
@hanros98 in india its not democracy..its over democracy..where murderers roam around freely..where corrupt politicians roam around freely..where police here themselves are the biggest robbers..i have to unfortunetly say this but life of a common man in india is hell...its good to be patriotic..but u need to read more books mate
@rijualegend people in china live in fear of the government but china gets things done like improving the infrastructure of china. india is a democracy so atleast people get a voice. however the problem with democracy, is that in poor or large countries like india, governments are corrupt, it is inevitable.
Cowboys massacring Indians all over again. Social injustice mirrored on both hemispheres. Unbelievably today's world still has Muslims selling slaves. God protect the innocent.
I wonder how the british would feel if they knew their ancestors in those day condoned what general dyer did and infact gave him a prize equal in currency today of $100,000. This was point in the indian independance movement where the future of british india was in question. Infact after this event, the british opproached gandhi to strike a settlement because they were so scared of an violent uprising. General Dyer himself wrote letters cursing gandhi in his death bed
Yes, it is true. Saheed Udham Singh's actions shook the british mentality. Most of the press worldwide remembered the story of Jallianwala Bagh and held Michael O'Dwyer fully responsible for the events. Singh was called "fighter for freedom" by The Times, London, and his action was said to be "an expression of the pent-up fury of the downtrodden Indian People".
part 3 yes slavery did exist..but u gotta remember if they were running admistration system..they would be the bosses...its lyke wen u work in a company..u work under some usually a boss..it was the same case here..and mind u there were lots of indians who had high posts at that time..but yes slavery did exist..iam admitting that..but unlike the dutch or french..the british were not as bad..go to indonesia...not a single work was by the dutch..infact that time there was no unity in india
part 6..10000 cases of kidnapping in delhi every year...the british system started by the british...is still being carried on in india..and for some reason u are blaming my granddad which i didnt really understand wat u were saying??.i ve seen young 14yr old maids working and the way they are being treated..its actually far worse then slaves...now let me tell u smting about myself..iam an indian and iam proud to be an indian..but iam not ignorant lyke other indians.because i ve seen the reality
Answer #1. You were born and brought up in a free country. So you do not know what is the actual meaning of freedom. As it is granted thing. You have full freedom to speak and remember, you have got this because you are living in a free India. You need to think deeply and realize one thing that nothing can be more valuable than freedom. It is hard for you to know its value, read history and learn how people were treated in a slave country. And that's why freedom is the most important thing.
part 2 and remember it was siraj ud daulat who first attacked the british..by his infamous black hole causal..u must have read it in history..british built the first guls school in india..british tried their best to abolish sati,dowry,and female oppression..now lets talk abut negative aspects..let me tell u one thing..all the bad incidents that happened were done by individuals lyke clive was a bastard.,so was general dier..but they were individuals..u cant just say every british were bad..
part 7..ive lived in india for almost 9years...my dad works in indian foreign service..that is y were posted to uk..i only stayed in uk for 4yrs..now we are posted back to india..so iam an india...but i really wished if india were ruled by the british for maybe another 20 years..india would have been in better conditon
@SuperdiptoC look u can say watever u want...in my debate i talked about teh good and bad done by the british...look at the state of india now..how many in india are actually happy with the way our country is runnin..very few of them..so let us try to improve the conditions of our country..happy independence day
I wish one day We Indians(Hindus and Muslims) will stop fighting. Live together. A united India(Hindustan and Pakistan). Just dreaming, who am I talking to.
part 2..take it this way if britishers didnt rule our country it would have been an islamic country by now..because the way islamic rulers were killing and converting hindus in2 muslims..they would have swept india..britishers improved administration system..they educated ppl..infact my grand dad worked IAS during british rule and he said that there was no corruption and it was a very disciplined..infact now its gone worse..unlike dutch portuagese,britishers were not as bad as u guy protray
most likely a sikh country maharaja ranjit singhs empire brought the mughals to there knees and showed the british how week they were. the last empire to fall to the british. what you gonna say they some smart scheme'n people ruled almort every continent on earth at one point gotta give it up
ok i ve never heard of ranjit singh..ill do some research on him..but all indians know that mughal empire for so many years..and indians could do nthing..if the british wanted they could have slaughtered india.. but the british just came to india for tradin..and remember one thing..it was siraj ud daulat who attacked first..remember the black hole theory..u must have read it in history..british just retaliated.all iam sayin is british were far better then mughals.
Yes, you have never heard of Ranjit Singh. Why will you hear about him? As your grand dad was working for General Dyer who killed thousand of innocent citizens in Amritsar. Now you can say, I never heard that there was Amritsar Massacre. Shame on you being Indian.
Your so called grand dad who worked under british and so many other Indian traitors like him helped India to remain slave because of the slave mentality and no self esteem and any character. No doubt, same slave mentality you have. If you have little bit character then do not show your face in India and go to England.
i ve never supported the british..all iam sayin is they brought a lot of good things to india..my grand dad worked in the indian administration system..and he said that administration during the british was far better. it was discipliined...infact now its all corrupted..as i said the british came to india for Trade..if the british wanted they could have slaughtered india..as they far powerful then our kings..they brought education.they built railway networks.
Answer#2. India had its own weakness as it was not that much united and powerful when India was attacked by mugals or british and India paid big price of this. It might take many thousand years to get the status back what it had long ago. You should not compare how britishers were better than muslims or what would have happened? The fact is britishers, when they were ruling India, had only one aim - how can they rule the whole country and extract as much as they can do.
They did not protect Indians from muslims and neither they had any interest in providing any service to indian citizens. It is obvious that if they need to rule such a vast country, they need lot of educated (english speaking indians) who are loyal to them and can help them to achieve their goals. So they hired lot of people who were their slaves and can follow their orders without any question.
How did they treat any citizen who had any objection - honest answer is - just suppress them by any means. Please read history and read more books. Not only they killed any person who had any objections with them, but they killed thousands and thousands of innocent citizens. Remember, if someone kills your family members and dis troy your house and then gives you a small gift, what will be your opinion about that person. That's what happened to those who had love for their country.
Infact, it is not true that they will directly give any gift to you. Let us assume that they build a road/railways for their convenience. Would you say that "Though Britishers have destroyed my house and family but they were good enough to make roads/railways. Think about this. Hopefully, if you are honest and deep thinker, you might get some glimpse of the reality what would have been their rule.
u are blabbering on and on about killings..go and do some research..how many indians were actually in during british rule..as i said there were a few incidents but they were done by the individuals..iam not supporting british here..y should i ..i am an indian..but i know the facts.. go and read about wat dadabhai naoroji said about british rule in india..as i said if the british wanted they could have slaughtered india in2 bits..do u know the british were the one who introduced remarriage for
I am proud to be an Indian. If we stand together no British or nobody could do nothing to India. Sill we did not learn the lessen, We Indians Hindus, Muslims, Christians we are fighting each other, Very sad. We killing each other. Worse than British did. Not just in India, All over midilEast.
America stand together fight against British, defeat them, A proud victory July 4 1776 . We get beaten by them, killed by them, divide India. We have to wait almost 200 more years to get freedom
the bad things done by british to india were actually done by only a few individuals lyke this incident ..and it was mostly done by the ones on the top..but the general british living in india were not bad ppl..britishers brought a lot of benifits to india..britishers tried their best to oppose dowry system..they even built girls schools..b4 the british our country was in a mess,,because all states were fightin..hindus muslims were fightin,,there was no unity.britishers brought discipline
Before you write anything here, pl read some literature and find out how British killed millions of Indians and how merciless they were. Any improvement was done to help them to govern this country, not to improve the quality of Indian people. It was not only India, with military power and their cunning and merciless actions, they ruled many other countries, almost whole world.
part 4 ..infact there was no unity in india.the marathis were fighting,bengalis were fighting..whole country was in a mess.and DONT FORGET THE MUGHALS..i hink they were farrrrrr worse then the british..the way aurangzeb was slaughtering hindus..infact i can clearly say that if the british didnt rule our country..we would have been an islamic country by now..now lets talk about the aftermath..after independence conditions in india has actually got even worse..
part 5..conditions have got even worse..there is no proper rules or regulations in india..the system is fully corrupt..kiran bedi who i respect a lot herself stated that even until now there was no registration file of casing..the women condtions in india is quite bad..in majority of indian places..the kinda suppression they are facing..it makes feel very sad..even now go to UP bihar delhi etc.a gul cant roam around late at night..as its so unsafe..do u know there were about 10000cases of kidnap
part 3 ..there were bad things done by the british but it was done by certain individuals...they taught us english,,they provided sanitation because the health care of india was quite bad...britishers only came to india for trading..not for bad intentions..infact u should know that in battle of plassey it was siraj ud daulat who first attacked britishers by the famous black hole incident which u must have read in history,
Traitors like you do not deserve to be in India and the present conditions of India is also because of the same reason as majority of people are like you who are so shallow and characterless. People like you are just selfish and very low mentality. India is corrupt and poor because a generation of slave mentality is everywhere. They do not have any love to their country.
Hands up how many Indians who are arguing with me live in India? Hundred pounds you are all US citizens. I've spent almost two years living in India and - when I spoke about the British raj with Indians - I never encountered this sort of moronic reactionary behaviour.
Between 300 and 700 were most likley killed at the Bagh. And very few of them were Sikhs. The Sikhs loved the British.
The Bagh (garden) is in Amritsar and the occasion was Baisakhi (a harvest festival celebrated by sikhs, a predominantly farmer community). The likelihood of scarcity of sikhs would be a billion to one. The fact that you are a UK citizen causes you to think that all those who have responded to your post are US citizens and as a result shows the narrow outlook of your underdeveloped childish mind...If you're an adult then stop commenting on incidents that only remotely concern you
Wanting to be accurate about history does not make me racist or a white supremacist. All I'm saying is that thousands of people did NOT die in the Jallianwallah Bagh massacre, according to numerous historical sources (both Indian and British).
Secondly, I am saying that the general responsible for the massacre was then feted by Amritsar's Sikh community, and even made an honorary Sikh.
But no, I would not try to justify the massacre and, as Brit, I am not proud of it.
@willheavenCK The fact that some Indians live in other countries don't make them less Indian!! Well, I'm living in India and I'm saying, British were cruel, ruthless and racist. There were interracial marriages, but again, these British guys, deserted their wife and kids and left the country. Very inhuman behavior :O And are you saying that you're not racist outta fear or what??
"At the close of this century, the world would be dominated by the West, but that in the 21st century, India will conquer her conquerors." ~ Dr. Arnold J. Toynbee (1889-1975) British Historian
Think about it guys its like fighting with your sibling and you say "remember that time, that christmas 2 years back you ate MY pie thus i shall label you evil and brutal" sounds stupid doesn't it? we and by we I mean us human beings act the same way when it comes to our countries. Once again the past is past. I am Indian and I stand for forgiveness and burying resentment.
As I said before the British were also human, they were probably driven by hunger for power..I dont know, I wasn't there back then. But whatever their drive was they did things that were..harsh or brutal, but they propably regreted that later on. They learnt their lesson by the fall of the British Empire and keep in mind that the whole of Europe not just the British were stuck up back then.
Its not like us Indians did anything to not let these people die in vain, we killed our leader Ghandi and look at us now, we are progressing but look at all the chaos that's a result because of our corrupt political leaders. Its not like we live up to the names of those freedom fighters either right? To all those people who are calling the british brutal and what not, who are we to judge if we don't do any justice to these poor souls ourselves?
Ok people relax, lets take a deep breath. What happened was atrocious and I completely agree but it happened over a 100 or so years back. I dont know about the fact if they apologized or not but its not fair to stereotype British people for their past actions. We're all human beings, they are too. Even General Dyer, I'm pretty sure the English didn't treat him like a hero for this act. Let's not hold grudges, the british were brutal but that's past tense, WERE not ARE
Not to diminish this monstrous act, but General Dyer (to whom I imagine you're making reference in the introduction), was knighted for military action in the First World War by George V before the massacre.
The British did try to kill Gandhi and Bose, and did manage to kill Azad and Bhagat Singh and many others. As for Germany and others, I guess those are the countries the middle east and indian sub-continent people should be thankful to for helping win their idependence.
I dont think the point,vishy intends to mke here s about the number of people that died my friend,......but the fact that India s still not recieved any kind of and apologetic guesture from the british govt ,till date. Anyway Good to know that u know so much bout Indian history.......cheers!
acidangelster: I can understand that Indians might want an apology from the British Government, I just like the examination of history to be as accurate as possible.
Indian history is one of my special interests - such an amazing country : )
The most satisfactory thing is: the balance of history has been restored. England has been buried and will probably remain so for a thousand years now. Not for a 1000 years shall the flag of England be able to even come close to the height at which India stands. All that is left of the British people is a broken nation, a slave to the whims of America, her traditions trampled upon, her history disgraced. Long live India!
Hey, fuck you. I'm no lover of Imperialism but I still love my country; I had no control over what our governments did back then or still do now, so don't go judging our entire nation by the same standards that you'd use to judge a small elite power core.
I tend to judge a country's level of standing by things other than world political domination.
We're a 'broken nation' just because we no longer control the Earth?
I haven't judged the entire British nation by its imperialism of 100 years ago. In fact, I am typically quite friendly to England and wish England well, but only in a somewhat patronising manner. It's just that I see England as a "junior nation". There was a time Churchill used to see India that way. This is just the forces of history at work.
WillheavenCK, I stand by my original claim and I think its important to understand that when their is so much disagreement about how many people are killed in a war that's going on (Iraq), it is not practical to expect agreement on how many people were killed in a massacre many decades ago.
I agree. Despite the 1942 October cyclone, WWII, the invasion of Burma by Japan, and the halting of rice imports by the the Japanese, I think Britain could have dealt with the crisis better.
I'm still going to fight the other point though - "thousands" were not killed in the Jalliianwallah Bagh massacre.
Churchill, by the way, said of the massacre: "The incident in Jallianwala Bagh was an extraordinary event, a monstrous event, an event which stands in singular and sinister isolation."
Frankly, I consider Churchill worse than Hitler, Idi Amin, Mussolini, Saddam Hussein, Pinochet, Bush, and all the other power-hungry head-of-states from the last century. I wish the British Government would apologize for the deeds of Churchill and his predecessors, just as Germany is doing till today to the Jewish people for the National Socialist Government there in the 30s.
Wow, Vishy7, it has taken me ages to realise that you're a troll! You remind me of those frat boys in Borat. Churchill "worse than Hitler"? Go back to school.
Too right mate. Vishy7, get a grip. What happened in Amritsar was appalling, but don't compare Winston Churchill to those tyrants you listed (probably from wikipedia.) You obviously have a very obscure opinion. Perhaps you should consider bias when you're reading the 'sources' with which you form your views.
Vish may have gone over the top; but lets be honest the history i was taught about winston churchil was very very very BIASED! this is coming from a Canadian which is part of the commonwealth. I was only taught that we was ambitious young man who fought for liberty and freedom during ww2 against the nazis; but I never knew how much of a bastard he was to anyone other than british especially indians. british history has not covered this portion of his life, therefore vishy isnt necassarily wrong
One sad thing I noticed in the SIkh experience is all Sikhs really have is Sikhs. Under Mughal Rule Sikhs were massacred. Under the British the Khalsa was destroyed, and Sikhs were killed. Under even the Secular Hindu Indian government Sikhs are mistreated. Sikhs only have themselves.
may i ask u where doese white supremacy feeling comes from among the british is it taught, brainwashed cause is it from the bible where doese this feeling come from?
What can you tell me about the Indian veterens in world war 2? I have been doing lots of research on the 1942 volunteer draft. Mostly, I've been reading about them on the battle of Monte Casino
What can you tell me about the Indian veterens in world war 2? I have been doing lots of research on the 1942 volunteer draft. Mostly, I've been reading about them on the battle of Monte Casino
You have been in India 2 yrs, i have been in the Indian Army 12 years...Jallianwala Bagh is massive and would have been jam packed during the festive occasion of Baisakhi...Hunter committee was english, so was Irwing and this tivraj was a boot-licking bug under their thumb...I'd be damned if the death toll was anything below a few thousands at least!!
And i'm not even counting the infants, still in their mothers' arms and children, who were singled out and systematically executed.
with all due respect, the number of dead has never been finalized and confirmed. Yes some indians have claimed a thousand died; and I was even reading that even a british parliament member in those days said the british intentionally supressed how many people died to avoid a panic attack. Please be honest the british have lied about the atrocities commited in india and even an idiot can see that.
the bengal famine was a terrible incident caused by the british intentionally shipping food from the food rich bay of bengal to war. winston churchill literally sat in bengal sipping his tea while watching thousands of bengalies starve without rice and wheat. I was not taught how much a tyrant winston churchill was in my canadian history system and yet you expect we indians to believe that only a few hundred died in bagh when the british are too ashamed to paint its history in right perspective
1. there were many race of people in india who were hired by british raj, including sikhs specially during war against afghanistan.
2. general dyer was not honoured by group of sikhs instead was honoured by sell out british appointed arur singh who requested additional security after sikhs threatened to kill him for that action.
WillheavenCK, I agree with you that there are "so many lies about the Amritsar massacre", but I believe they are coming from Britain and British people who are not being taught about the 'holocaust' they committed on India in their about 200 years of forced occupation there. Perhaps, you have not heard of Bhagat Singh who is arguably one of the most revered heroes from the colonial slavery era. Or about Udham Singh, who had to go to England to kill Michal Dwyer to revenge the massacre.
I would never try to defend the British occupation of India or the Amritsar massacre.
My point about the Sikhs is this: many wish to claim that Jallianwallah Bagh was the site of a huge Sikh martyrdom.
This isn't true - out of loyalty to the British, most Sikhs stayed away from the protests. It was in fact a shocking murder of mostly Hindus and Muslims.
There are so many lies about the Amritsar massacre. And I'm sorry to say, most of them are coming from India.
I also think it is absolutely disgusting that Vishy7 continues to claim that "thousands" of people were killed in the Amritsar massacre.
Not one historian believes this: the official death toll is 379. Although this exact count is disputed, there is not one reputable academic who believes the death toll to be more than more than 500.
I can only guess that Vishy7 harbours anti-British feelings and wishes to provoke prejudice with his lies.
The idea of the sikhs being even slightly loyal to the british is a fabrication...It is impossible for a singular community of a widely diverse nation to be chummy with an oppressor.
And Udham Singh himself was a member of the sikh community...So there!!
1. Out of the 291 killed in the massacre whose jat was indentified, only 22 were certified Sikhs.
2. The Sikhs were very loyal to the British colonial forces, even General Dyer whom, according to historian NIgel Collet "they shamelessly flattered and humoured".
3. Dyer was invited just a few weeks after the massacre to the Golden Temple to be made an honorary Sikh, being presented with a kirpan, turban and siropa.
willheaven you seem to want to convey at the time the british were trying to avoid killling sikhs. maybe sikhs had it a little easier than the hindus muslims and christian but so what what are you trying to prove. I find it very bigoted that you would single out sikhs and care less about the other indians. Any sikh would tell you all humans are equal and therefore would not appreciate your flattery of them over the other hindus.
second of all the sikhs as well as other indians who served in the british forces did so because of promises of full autonomy and commonwealth status and finally independance all of which were cruelly broken even after ww2. The oh so honourable british was not even willing honour the wishes of the dead indians soliders whom fought in ww that had no relevance to them. Part of the biggest reason british left was because the sikhs lost faith in britis after ww2. sikhs were loyal but british wre not
shut up ok with ur fabricated facts and statistics. so are you saying the 20 odd million people of punjab arew lieng NO U FUDU you guys also hung people for no reason all they were doing on vaisakhi was protesting peacefully. and if one was to shout inquilab zindabad they were hung. u british cant accept ur a bunch of racist morons! you complain about indians in england well screw u we arent wrecklessly hanging people by their necks or stealing shit. without these rif raf as u say england=shit!
It is impossible that the number of sikhs in a garden in Amritsar on the day of Baisakhi would be so low. What is your source for this data..? NAME THE EXACT WEBSITE!!
Vishy7, your treatment of historical facts is truly worrying. O'Dwyer was knighted before the Amritsar massacre, not because of it (and he was assassinated by Udham Singh in 1940).
Furthermore, both General Dyer and O'Dwyer were forced to resign after the massacre and officially censured by the Hunter Committee as early as November 1919.
Not one Indian or British historian claims that "thousands" were killed in the massacre, as you suggest.
NAME THE EXACT SOURCE PLEASE...Unlike us it won't be your grandpa or some one, so please state the name of the website you're getting this knowledge from.
My friend, you have a name like 'martyr', yet your comments are filled with hate and ignorance. Hindus and Sikhs are one people, and any differences between them (brothers) can not be a basis for supporting a massacre of old, sick, women, and chidren.
I am glad you hate what the British government is foing in Iraq and Afghanistan now, but lets face the truth- The country of England has never apologized for millions killed during its imperialism, it has never offered any compensation, nor returned anything that it had stolen from India or elsewhere. It also continues to partner with the US in the latest round of imperialism in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Gaza.
Dear WillheavenCK, we can debate endlessly the exact death toll of this horrible massacre, but we are unlikely to reach a figure that we both will agree on.
Gen. Dyer was a close associate of Michael Dwyer who was knighted by the British queen, and though both of them died in infamy, neither one was officially condemned by the British government. In fact, to this day the British government has not apologized for its complicity in the massacre or its colonial occupation of India.
1. General Dyer was not "knighted by the British queen".
2. The official death toll for the Amritsar massacre was 379 - there were not "thousands" killed.
3. The crowd was not "celebrating a festival" - they were peacefully protesting against British rule.
I am a 21 year-old British student. I have visited Jallianwallah Bagh. But I believe we do not need to distort history to understand the grave nature of this barbaric massacre of innocent people.
I as a hindu enjoy reading history especially indian history. the brits very much resented the indians especially hindus during their rule. we were treated less than dogs and when we finally demanded more self rule they responded by sending this asshole o dyer to disperse the crowd and they used the justification that a horny indian man had raped and beaten a white nun; whom ironically was saved by an indian. england never treated us fairly infact winston churchill hated indians with a passion
recently the bagh massacre was included into british textbooks but even today coward historians try to remove it because they think its anti british. Sometimes i wonder whether the brits actually secretly are proud of the deceit atrocities that they committed in india. If germany has the guts to admit it then why not uk. Its time for UK to come to terms with its past because the UK has caused just as much death if not more than germany and still not come clean on everything.
sad fact is during those times, most brits actually supported this asshole dyer. Infact they gave him 10 000 pounds which only god knows what that is equivalent to today. a few people in the british government condemned this mans actions but the sinister part was that they never tried him as a war criminal or killer; they called him a hero and man who stood for honor and shit like that. That is what really hurt the indians the most even more than the 100's of death.
My friend, I salute the martial spirit of the Sikhs, but when people gather to peacefully celebrate a festival, they are unlikely to be psychologically or physically equipped to fight against bullets and tanks.
The important thing is to be nice to the British today. As on date, they are the most pathetic country in the world.
Watching England go down the drain is such a wonderful feeling. The worst insult is to offer their pathetic, spineless, loser nation some help as they are stretched between being America's poodle, a member of the EU, and a sovereign nation even as savage Islam rips their insides apart.
Fuck white people, they all have calcified pineal glands, no melonin in their mind or skin!!! brown and black ppl have everything stolen from these reptilians...
Back in his headquarters, Brigadier-General Reginald Dyer reported to his superiors that he had been "confronted by a revolutionary army"
In a telegram sent to Dyer, British Lieutenant-Governor of Punjab, Sir Michael O'Dwyer wrote: "Your action is correct. Lieutenant Governor approves.Some senior British officers applauded his suppression of "another Indian Mutiny".
Dyer said he would have used his machine guns if he could have got them into the enclosure, but these were mounted on armoured cars. He said he did not stop firing when the crowd began to disperse because he thought it was his duty to keep firing until the crowd dispersed, and that a little firing would do no good.
He confessed that he did not take any steps to tend to the wounded after the firing."Certainly not. It was not my job. Hospitals were open and they could have gone there"his response
Dyer admitted before the commission that he came to know about the meeting at the Jallianwala Bagh at 12:40 hours that day but took no steps to prevent it. He stated that he had gone to the Bagh with the deliberate intention of opening fire if he found a crowd assembled there.
"I think it quite possible that I could have dispersed the crowd without firing but they would have come back again and laughed, and I would have made, what I consider, a fool of myself." — Dyer's response
im happy he was knighted by Her Majesty, he did what he should have done and keep the peace by any means. they knew the dangers of their actions when protesting
ILCR1234 4 days ago
wake up indians it was the gurkhas who were responsible for the massacre and they were highly commended by general dyer for their shooting accuracy. now these traitor gurkhas want gorkhaland in india. just kick those bustards out of india.
skbnee 1 week ago
if i was the general of the indian army i whould have done the same things to the British.
shehraj1000 1 month ago
and white people are suppossed to be the civilized ones....yeah shooting at unarmed civilians for just assembly...yeah whitey you are really civilized.
jattatheart111 1 month ago
Bitches love killing , DIE BITCH
supriyaarunnair 1 month ago
Everybody has to pay for Sins. The sins that British committed payed in the World war II form Nazi Germany when Hitler attacked Britian.
duttadinesh2000 3 months ago
GEN DYER IS NOT ALONE RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS, OUR OWN PEOPLE WHO SERVED BRITISH AND ACTUALLY FIRED UPON FELLOW COUNTRY MEN ARE EQUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT. IF MANGAL PANDAY COULD REVOLT IN 1857 WHY OUR SOLDIERS COULD NOT TURN THEIR GUNS ON GEN DYER IF AT ALL HE GAVE ORDERS TO FIRE UPON INNOCENT INDIANS.
SuperBobbyjatt 3 months ago
Lol brits u r time will come soon...ull be fucked on roads....
U have to pay for wat ur ancestors did!!! and u will soon...already UK is a islamic terrorists hotbed hahahahaha
silverthunderable 3 months ago
This reminds me of that incident that happened at Ramlila grounds on Saturday..
saurabhiit2003 7 months ago
This makes me feel sick, especially as I am British, and I deeply respect the courage of the Indians who faced the rifles...but this happened 90 years ago. We shouldn't be judging people today by something so long ago.
BlueLeader12 8 months ago
@BlueLeader12 you cant change the history that was the fact of british nature and treatment. if its been 90 yrs still the fact is the same.
arjunhiral 7 months ago
@BlueLeader12 how convenient, we shouldnt judge you, but whitey can judge everybody
jattatheart111 1 month ago
my blood starts boiling,when I see this video...I wish i could do the same right now to the british,and take back our Kohinoor diamond!...But well i'm not that inhumane,like that son of a whore Dyer.I swear if Dyer's grandson comes in front of me,i'll kill him!!
And now....atleast the British can never invade us,they will be fucked badly if they try to do that again.Because India had a bigger army and our air-force is also very good.And we also have nuclear weapons now.
BLASTXyzzzz1234 9 months ago
I wish I was alive when the brits were in india. I would've followed the lead of Subhas Chandra Bose, Bhagat Singh, and Udam Singh...i would have violently revolted against those bastards, and I would've with great enthusiasm kill as many brit soldiers as possible. Peaceful resolution alone is not gratifying, its a tease, a farce, and we indians got no respect out of it...gandhi, jinnah, they were beggars. i would give anything to go back to that time
eldiablo10028 11 months ago
bastards......
HardikG121 11 months ago
English bastards!!!!
Frankdanny51 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Of the 379 deaths in the garden most were in fact inflicted by Indians on other indians who literally trod their vulnerable women and children into the ground. Indeed 120 of them were so stupid they jumped into the well and were drowned.
johnsammyanfal 1 year ago
They had their warning. "No meetings!" If the British had shot that idiot Gandhi back in South Africa, perhaps the jewel would still be in the Crown. Perhaps a few dozen more responses such as this might have cooled the traitorous spirit. General Dyer was the only officer in His Majesty's service that knew what had to be done, and had to balls to do it.
horselips 1 year ago
@horselips
Why you fucking gora, I swear if you come in front of me, I'll tear your liver out and feed it to my dog...
That bloody empire of yours will pay for it's atrocities and they'll pay it at the tips of Indian bayonets.
redtihor1 9 months ago
@redtihor1 Save your bayonets for the Chinese on your North, the Pakistanis to your West, and for the hundreds of millions of unreliable Muslim fanatics in your very midst. And since it will be quite a time before my liver will be available to you, may I suggest enjoying a nice roast prime Rib of BEEF, or perhaps some baby-back PORK ribs? Yummmmm.
horselips 9 months ago
@horselips Lick your lips as much as you want, you freaking asshole. Indians already control 10% of your economy. Soon this nation will completely dominate your pathetic economy and market. Laugh as much as you want. We already make all of Britain's tea, steel, housing and ships. Bangladeshis rule your food and textiles sectors.
British were barbarians when we were making cities. My neighborhood is older than London, you fucking barbarian !!
redtihor1 9 months ago
@redtihor1 Temper! Temper! Settle down there...now, chin up. Be a good lad - musn't appear out of sorts. It's bad form. Don't forget, we Yanks had also had our own bit of unpleasantness with the Empire back in the 18th and 19th centuries. We got over it and so should you. Be thankful you were properly colonized by the British - or you might be speaking Japanese today. Seriously though, keep an eye on those 400+ million Mohammedans - they tend to get excited now and then.
horselips 9 months ago
@horselips Japanese? Are you sure of this 'fact'? Even with their increasing realm, the Japanese had little to no influence on native culture. Apart from building the railways (whilst simultaneously decimating the ecosystem) and establishing the modern system of government found in India today, the Brits have done little good for India. Ultimately, colonization has proven itself to be quite an effective way of setting up countries for a corrupt, unorganized future. Albeit, with a few exceptions.
Dzongka 5 months ago
@horselips u son of a bitch i will fuk ur mother........... all fukn white pepole will be our servants........
TheLuntewaj 4 months ago
@horselips teri maa ki chut chumm ke yummm karna zahil ki nasal, bhadve ki pedaish.
arjunhiral 7 months ago
Fuck u mother fuckers brits,one day in future we'll make u knel before us,u assholes.....the process has started now..mother fuckers
silverthunderable 1 year ago
@silverthunderable well u got a fuckin fight on ur hands thn man cuz we dont take shit frm u
halojayjayjay 1 year ago
Such an honorable man for the British Empire. General Dyer proudly displayed to these "heathen wogs" what British rule meant. It's a shame British soldiers didn't go home from India in piles of body bags, like they did ifrom Afghanistan and Somalia. Arrogant murdering son of a bitch.
hectorbolshevik 1 year ago
General Dyer must be enjoying in hell..........fuck u bastard fuck ur mom bastard
manishgreener1 1 year ago
THE BRITISH ARE HIPOCRATES.........SENDING HIPPIE BOATS TO HAMAS TERRORISTS IN GAZA........THEY ARE EVIL......
BENREDARES 1 year ago
what movie is that?
KakashiSenseiRox 1 year ago
I wish we could march into Bradford and shoot a few Indians and Pakistanis there!!
Bottom line is, we owned India so it was up to us how we controlled the Indians. Bottom line is if the Indians were too gutless to fight back then they got what they deserved.
Good film though, I love watching this bit :-)
NMSCENS2 1 year ago
@NMSCENS2
How would you feel if your dad killed your mum...?
He runs, bottomline, owns the family doesn't he...? So it'll be his wish how he conducts himself, isn't it...?
SuperdiptoC 1 year ago
@SuperdiptoC Go fuck yourself, I spent half a year working in Srinagar.
boobyrooberts 1 year ago
Comment removed
SuperdiptoC 1 year ago
@boobyrooberts
And i was in Jammu and Kashmir for four years and served in the India Pakistan war of 1999...So look beyond your own upturned english nose and don't dispute others with facts about their own country you hypocritical piece of spent chewing gum
SuperdiptoC 1 year ago
@SuperdiptoC i recently read the news where it mentioned how our old govt officers were not getting pension..and they themselved blamed the corrupt indian administration..and even said that we were far better under the british
rijualegend 1 year ago
@NMSCENS2 u asshole...u can't justify these un-human acts...If we shoot u british motherfuckers with an m-16 uzi....and don't even warn u.....that would be quite good right...
arshdeep987 1 year ago
hey guys,
may be Iam too late to add a note to this forum.. But this is what i feel from the core of my heart. Britishers were not only cruel to Indians, but they exploited us to hell in all ways... If we could rewrite our history with them (wiping out almost 300years of struggle), India also would have been called as a 'Developed' country and not a 'Developing' country. Look where INR is standing today in front of GBP. F****rs.
Francis
raji1973 1 year ago
india will never be colinized again by britan because india has the 3rd largest standing army in the world and would annialate the british since india posseses nuclear weapons
8000jk 1 year ago
As an Indian I cant forget this incident. these britishers havn't done only in in India but in many other countries, thats why new british generation is druggy, beggers and uneducated homeless bastards.
arjunhiral 1 year ago
shut the hell up @rijualegend hw dare you justify this massarce and come and preach about british rule on this page. both muslims and hindus died that day, and one day both will unite and teach you and british counterparts a lesson
hanros98 1 year ago
go and read my earlier messeges...ive never supported the british...iam layin out the facts..read my earlier messeges first then reply
rijualegend 1 year ago
@rijualegend i will point some facts as well. india was made up of several kingdoms like Italy and was one of the richest countries in the world, why else would the british take so much effort to start trading with us. what the british did next was just rob india of it's wealth. it is easier to rule a country more efficiently like the british did with india, if the inhabitants are oppressed and have no say in how they are ruled. a modern example is china
hanros98 1 year ago
@hanros98 one of the biggest conceptions that we ppl have was that india was a rich country..only the rulers and kings were rich..who had a lot of wealth...a common man was not rich..the kings looted the common man and was as also corrupt. obv there were exceptions.. the kings ruled in old fashioned way...and ancient rules of administration were followed..also there was also no unity back then at all..the british brought administration..brought education..brought discipline
rijualegend 1 year ago
@rijualegend jesus christ there is no point arguing, you bow down to the british. give me a while and i will find you a qoute from one of the first britishers to india who said that he saw no poor man
hanros98 1 year ago
@hanros98 in india its not democracy..its over democracy..where murderers roam around freely..where corrupt politicians roam around freely..where police here themselves are the biggest robbers..i have to unfortunetly say this but life of a common man in india is hell...its good to be patriotic..but u need to read more books mate
rijualegend 1 year ago
@rijualegend sounds like the USA to me. lol
ThaLinguist 1 year ago
@rijualegend people in china live in fear of the government but china gets things done like improving the infrastructure of china. india is a democracy so atleast people get a voice. however the problem with democracy, is that in poor or large countries like india, governments are corrupt, it is inevitable.
hanros98 1 year ago
General O'Dyer was responsible for the Jalianwala Baugh Massacare. He was taken care by Shaheed Udham Singh
Never forget 1947.
Jai Hind
Vande Mataram
OurThoughtExactly 1 year ago
Cowboys massacring Indians all over again. Social injustice mirrored on both hemispheres. Unbelievably today's world still has Muslims selling slaves. God protect the innocent.
micaofboca 2 years ago
I wonder how the british would feel if they knew their ancestors in those day condoned what general dyer did and infact gave him a prize equal in currency today of $100,000. This was point in the indian independance movement where the future of british india was in question. Infact after this event, the british opproached gandhi to strike a settlement because they were so scared of an violent uprising. General Dyer himself wrote letters cursing gandhi in his death bed
mechysonu2010 2 years ago 2
@mechysonu2010
Yes, it is true. Saheed Udham Singh's actions shook the british mentality. Most of the press worldwide remembered the story of Jallianwala Bagh and held Michael O'Dwyer fully responsible for the events. Singh was called "fighter for freedom" by The Times, London, and his action was said to be "an expression of the pent-up fury of the downtrodden Indian People".
MegaUniverse123 1 year ago
part 3 yes slavery did exist..but u gotta remember if they were running admistration system..they would be the bosses...its lyke wen u work in a company..u work under some usually a boss..it was the same case here..and mind u there were lots of indians who had high posts at that time..but yes slavery did exist..iam admitting that..but unlike the dutch or french..the british were not as bad..go to indonesia...not a single work was by the dutch..infact that time there was no unity in india
rijualegend 1 year ago
part 6..10000 cases of kidnapping in delhi every year...the british system started by the british...is still being carried on in india..and for some reason u are blaming my granddad which i didnt really understand wat u were saying??.i ve seen young 14yr old maids working and the way they are being treated..its actually far worse then slaves...now let me tell u smting about myself..iam an indian and iam proud to be an indian..but iam not ignorant lyke other indians.because i ve seen the reality
rijualegend 1 year ago
@
Answer #1. You were born and brought up in a free country. So you do not know what is the actual meaning of freedom. As it is granted thing. You have full freedom to speak and remember, you have got this because you are living in a free India. You need to think deeply and realize one thing that nothing can be more valuable than freedom. It is hard for you to know its value, read history and learn how people were treated in a slave country. And that's why freedom is the most important thing.
MegaUniverse123 1 year ago
I was in this movie I played Reginald Dyer.
Thats me at the start
RC501 2 years ago
@RC501
Though it was just acting. But honestly, could you sleep at night after this horrible acting.
MegaUniverse123 1 year ago
part 2 and remember it was siraj ud daulat who first attacked the british..by his infamous black hole causal..u must have read it in history..british built the first guls school in india..british tried their best to abolish sati,dowry,and female oppression..now lets talk abut negative aspects..let me tell u one thing..all the bad incidents that happened were done by individuals lyke clive was a bastard.,so was general dier..but they were individuals..u cant just say every british were bad..
rijualegend 1 year ago
part 7..ive lived in india for almost 9years...my dad works in indian foreign service..that is y were posted to uk..i only stayed in uk for 4yrs..now we are posted back to india..so iam an india...but i really wished if india were ruled by the british for maybe another 20 years..india would have been in better conditon
rijualegend 1 year ago
@rijualegend
I have been in India 33 years...i.e. my whole life.
Past twelve were in the Indian Army.
Your dad's appointment in the Indian Foreign Service in no way validates your position as an Indian.
Don't be known by your family name...Make your own mark...or be crushed under the feet of those who do!!
SuperdiptoC 1 year ago
@SuperdiptoC look u can say watever u want...in my debate i talked about teh good and bad done by the british...look at the state of india now..how many in india are actually happy with the way our country is runnin..very few of them..so let us try to improve the conditions of our country..happy independence day
rijualegend 1 year ago
@RC501 :P
91Sheetal 1 year ago
I wish one day We Indians(Hindus and Muslims) will stop fighting. Live together. A united India(Hindustan and Pakistan). Just dreaming, who am I talking to.
nevinmp 2 years ago 14
part 2..take it this way if britishers didnt rule our country it would have been an islamic country by now..because the way islamic rulers were killing and converting hindus in2 muslims..they would have swept india..britishers improved administration system..they educated ppl..infact my grand dad worked IAS during british rule and he said that there was no corruption and it was a very disciplined..infact now its gone worse..unlike dutch portuagese,britishers were not as bad as u guy protray
rijualegend 1 year ago
most likely a sikh country maharaja ranjit singhs empire brought the mughals to there knees and showed the british how week they were. the last empire to fall to the british. what you gonna say they some smart scheme'n people ruled almort every continent on earth at one point gotta give it up
grapevinezzz 1 year ago
ok i ve never heard of ranjit singh..ill do some research on him..but all indians know that mughal empire for so many years..and indians could do nthing..if the british wanted they could have slaughtered india.. but the british just came to india for tradin..and remember one thing..it was siraj ud daulat who attacked first..remember the black hole theory..u must have read it in history..british just retaliated.all iam sayin is british were far better then mughals.
rijualegend 1 year ago
@rijualegend
Yes, you have never heard of Ranjit Singh. Why will you hear about him? As your grand dad was working for General Dyer who killed thousand of innocent citizens in Amritsar. Now you can say, I never heard that there was Amritsar Massacre. Shame on you being Indian.
MegaUniverse123 1 year ago
part 2 ..take it this way ..if british didnt rule our country we would have been an islamic country by now
rijualegend 1 year ago
Your so called grand dad who worked under british and so many other Indian traitors like him helped India to remain slave because of the slave mentality and no self esteem and any character. No doubt, same slave mentality you have. If you have little bit character then do not show your face in India and go to England.
MegaUniverse123 1 year ago
i ve never supported the british..all iam sayin is they brought a lot of good things to india..my grand dad worked in the indian administration system..and he said that administration during the british was far better. it was discipliined...infact now its all corrupted..as i said the british came to india for Trade..if the british wanted they could have slaughtered india..as they far powerful then our kings..they brought education.they built railway networks.
rijualegend 1 year ago
@rijualegend
Answer#2. India had its own weakness as it was not that much united and powerful when India was attacked by mugals or british and India paid big price of this. It might take many thousand years to get the status back what it had long ago. You should not compare how britishers were better than muslims or what would have happened? The fact is britishers, when they were ruling India, had only one aim - how can they rule the whole country and extract as much as they can do.
MegaUniverse123 1 year ago
@rijualegend
They did not protect Indians from muslims and neither they had any interest in providing any service to indian citizens. It is obvious that if they need to rule such a vast country, they need lot of educated (english speaking indians) who are loyal to them and can help them to achieve their goals. So they hired lot of people who were their slaves and can follow their orders without any question.
MegaUniverse123 1 year ago
@rijualegend
How did they treat any citizen who had any objection - honest answer is - just suppress them by any means. Please read history and read more books. Not only they killed any person who had any objections with them, but they killed thousands and thousands of innocent citizens. Remember, if someone kills your family members and dis troy your house and then gives you a small gift, what will be your opinion about that person. That's what happened to those who had love for their country.
MegaUniverse123 1 year ago
@MegaUniverse123
Infact, it is not true that they will directly give any gift to you. Let us assume that they build a road/railways for their convenience. Would you say that "Though Britishers have destroyed my house and family but they were good enough to make roads/railways. Think about this. Hopefully, if you are honest and deep thinker, you might get some glimpse of the reality what would have been their rule.
MegaUniverse123 1 year ago
u are blabbering on and on about killings..go and do some research..how many indians were actually in during british rule..as i said there were a few incidents but they were done by the individuals..iam not supporting british here..y should i ..i am an indian..but i know the facts.. go and read about wat dadabhai naoroji said about british rule in india..as i said if the british wanted they could have slaughtered india in2 bits..do u know the british were the one who introduced remarriage for
rijualegend 1 year ago
@rijualegend
Widow remarriage was an idea propagated and carried out by Indian social reformer Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar...You call yourself an Indian..??
GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT!!!
SuperdiptoC 1 year ago
Comment removed
nevinmp 2 years ago
I am proud to be an Indian. If we stand together no British or nobody could do nothing to India. Sill we did not learn the lessen, We Indians Hindus, Muslims, Christians we are fighting each other, Very sad. We killing each other. Worse than British did. Not just in India, All over midilEast.
America stand together fight against British, defeat them, A proud victory July 4 1776 . We get beaten by them, killed by them, divide India. We have to wait almost 200 more years to get freedom
nevinmp 2 years ago
the bad things done by british to india were actually done by only a few individuals lyke this incident ..and it was mostly done by the ones on the top..but the general british living in india were not bad ppl..britishers brought a lot of benifits to india..britishers tried their best to oppose dowry system..they even built girls schools..b4 the british our country was in a mess,,because all states were fightin..hindus muslims were fightin,,there was no unity.britishers brought discipline
rijualegend 1 year ago
@rijualegend
Before you write anything here, pl read some literature and find out how British killed millions of Indians and how merciless they were. Any improvement was done to help them to govern this country, not to improve the quality of Indian people. It was not only India, with military power and their cunning and merciless actions, they ruled many other countries, almost whole world.
MegaUniverse123 1 year ago
part 4 ..infact there was no unity in india.the marathis were fighting,bengalis were fighting..whole country was in a mess.and DONT FORGET THE MUGHALS..i hink they were farrrrrr worse then the british..the way aurangzeb was slaughtering hindus..infact i can clearly say that if the british didnt rule our country..we would have been an islamic country by now..now lets talk about the aftermath..after independence conditions in india has actually got even worse..
rijualegend 1 year ago
part 5..conditions have got even worse..there is no proper rules or regulations in india..the system is fully corrupt..kiran bedi who i respect a lot herself stated that even until now there was no registration file of casing..the women condtions in india is quite bad..in majority of indian places..the kinda suppression they are facing..it makes feel very sad..even now go to UP bihar delhi etc.a gul cant roam around late at night..as its so unsafe..do u know there were about 10000cases of kidnap
rijualegend 1 year ago
part 3 ..there were bad things done by the british but it was done by certain individuals...they taught us english,,they provided sanitation because the health care of india was quite bad...britishers only came to india for trading..not for bad intentions..infact u should know that in battle of plassey it was siraj ud daulat who first attacked britishers by the famous black hole incident which u must have read in history,
rijualegend 1 year ago
@rijualegend
Traitors like you do not deserve to be in India and the present conditions of India is also because of the same reason as majority of people are like you who are so shallow and characterless. People like you are just selfish and very low mentality. India is corrupt and poor because a generation of slave mentality is everywhere. They do not have any love to their country.
MegaUniverse123 1 year ago
@rijualegend
Hmm..you have said twice that britishers came for trading...So how did they end up ruling...? I'll tell you: Deceit.
Sell your king for gold (which you won't get coz we'll kill you later).
Sell us your resources or watch you family being burnt alive.
Sell us your women...rather don't bother...we'll take them anyway.
SOME TRADE!!
SuperdiptoC 1 year ago
That was sad on seeing that kid just siting there and watching the killing happen. This was sad. :(
ORD6543 2 years ago
Bitch ass British mother fuckers...
Calibur316 2 years ago
Hands up how many Indians who are arguing with me live in India? Hundred pounds you are all US citizens. I've spent almost two years living in India and - when I spoke about the British raj with Indians - I never encountered this sort of moronic reactionary behaviour.
Between 300 and 700 were most likley killed at the Bagh. And very few of them were Sikhs. The Sikhs loved the British.
willheavenCK 2 years ago
Comment removed
mechysonu2010 2 years ago
WTF u are clearly misinformed
tanjainia 2 years ago
@willheavenCK
The Bagh (garden) is in Amritsar and the occasion was Baisakhi (a harvest festival celebrated by sikhs, a predominantly farmer community). The likelihood of scarcity of sikhs would be a billion to one. The fact that you are a UK citizen causes you to think that all those who have responded to your post are US citizens and as a result shows the narrow outlook of your underdeveloped childish mind...If you're an adult then stop commenting on incidents that only remotely concern you
SuperdiptoC 1 year ago
Oh. My. God.
Wanting to be accurate about history does not make me racist or a white supremacist. All I'm saying is that thousands of people did NOT die in the Jallianwallah Bagh massacre, according to numerous historical sources (both Indian and British).
Secondly, I am saying that the general responsible for the massacre was then feted by Amritsar's Sikh community, and even made an honorary Sikh.
But no, I would not try to justify the massacre and, as Brit, I am not proud of it.
willheavenCK 2 years ago
@willheavenCK The fact that some Indians live in other countries don't make them less Indian!! Well, I'm living in India and I'm saying, British were cruel, ruthless and racist. There were interracial marriages, but again, these British guys, deserted their wife and kids and left the country. Very inhuman behavior :O And are you saying that you're not racist outta fear or what??
91Sheetal 1 year ago
"At the close of this century, the world would be dominated by the West, but that in the 21st century, India will conquer her conquerors." ~ Dr. Arnold J. Toynbee (1889-1975) British Historian
studboy66 2 years ago
Think about it guys its like fighting with your sibling and you say "remember that time, that christmas 2 years back you ate MY pie thus i shall label you evil and brutal" sounds stupid doesn't it? we and by we I mean us human beings act the same way when it comes to our countries. Once again the past is past. I am Indian and I stand for forgiveness and burying resentment.
Roxylicious33 2 years ago
Comment removed
Roxylicious33 2 years ago
As I said before the British were also human, they were probably driven by hunger for power..I dont know, I wasn't there back then. But whatever their drive was they did things that were..harsh or brutal, but they propably regreted that later on. They learnt their lesson by the fall of the British Empire and keep in mind that the whole of Europe not just the British were stuck up back then.
Roxylicious33 2 years ago
Its not like us Indians did anything to not let these people die in vain, we killed our leader Ghandi and look at us now, we are progressing but look at all the chaos that's a result because of our corrupt political leaders. Its not like we live up to the names of those freedom fighters either right? To all those people who are calling the british brutal and what not, who are we to judge if we don't do any justice to these poor souls ourselves?
Roxylicious33 2 years ago
@Roxylicious33 U r an American. DO NOT POKE YOUR NOSE WHERE IT DOES NOT BELONG!
SuperdiptoC 1 year ago
Ok people relax, lets take a deep breath. What happened was atrocious and I completely agree but it happened over a 100 or so years back. I dont know about the fact if they apologized or not but its not fair to stereotype British people for their past actions. We're all human beings, they are too. Even General Dyer, I'm pretty sure the English didn't treat him like a hero for this act. Let's not hold grudges, the british were brutal but that's past tense, WERE not ARE
Roxylicious33 2 years ago
Not to diminish this monstrous act, but General Dyer (to whom I imagine you're making reference in the introduction), was knighted for military action in the First World War by George V before the massacre.
judgenot2487 2 years ago
Reginald Dyer was a son-of-a-bitch!!!!! Saying that he had no choice but to open fire on the poor Indians was a PURE LIE!
If he had to really maintain peace, he could have done it by other methods, but clearly not this one. He will never be forgiven by us.
I hope he burns in hell for killing all those who were martyred, just for trying to make a peaceful demonstration.
And speaking of Brutality, the British are Number 1!
Brutality=British
So alike, right?
namakishq 2 years ago 2
The gave the bastard general a fucking golden sword. It just shows how bad the attitude of the British were at the time.
Bloodlovefreak 2 years ago 7
Actually, he was relieved of command and censured by the Commons.
judgenot2487 2 years ago
I love to gloat on the fate of the miserable doormat that is modern Britain.
abhish1313 2 years ago
we should have killed ghandi.
As for the massacre u can blame germany, turks and the irish for shit stirring
chewymatty1 2 years ago
The British did try to kill Gandhi and Bose, and did manage to kill Azad and Bhagat Singh and many others. As for Germany and others, I guess those are the countries the middle east and indian sub-continent people should be thankful to for helping win their idependence.
Vishy7 2 years ago 2
@chewymatty1
How can we hold Germany, Turks or the Irish accountable...??
Or are u implying that the massacre was an act of misplaced aggression...?
If it was, then Dyer was a murderer whose wife wasn't "putting out" enough to satisfy him...
Or
If it wasn't then you are an ignorant american redneck outlander bum who's poking his nose where it does not belong...
Hmmm...American...What the hell are you doing in an argument between the Indians and the Colonials...Go AWAY!!
SuperdiptoC 1 year ago
Here are various death tolls for the Amritsar massacre, for the benefit of Vishy7 and mechysonu2987.
Hunter Committee: 379.
V.N. Tivraj, Allahabad secretary of the sewa samiti: 530.
Miles Irving: Deputy Commissioner of Amritsarr: 400-500
Hasan Immam, Bihar Leader: 941
Pandit Madan Malaviya: 1000
Dr Rozdon, British Health Officer in Amritsar: 415
As you can see, the figure is indeed disputed. But not one witness or reputable historian claims that "thousands" were killed. Face the facts!
willheavenCK 2 years ago
I dont think the point,vishy intends to mke here s about the number of people that died my friend,......but the fact that India s still not recieved any kind of and apologetic guesture from the british govt ,till date. Anyway Good to know that u know so much bout Indian history.......cheers!
acidangelster 2 years ago
acidangelster: I can understand that Indians might want an apology from the British Government, I just like the examination of history to be as accurate as possible.
Indian history is one of my special interests - such an amazing country : )
willheavenCK 2 years ago
cheers buddy....
acidangelster 2 years ago
@willheavenCK I agree that accuracy is important here but so is the wounded emotions of the many Indians.... What so you say for that?
91Sheetal 1 year ago
Comment removed
pratray 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Official British sources put it at 379.
Civil surgeon Dr Smith put the number at 1526.
Few hundred people were butchered, although probably the exact number wont ever be known
pratray 2 years ago
The most satisfactory thing is: the balance of history has been restored. England has been buried and will probably remain so for a thousand years now. Not for a 1000 years shall the flag of England be able to even come close to the height at which India stands. All that is left of the British people is a broken nation, a slave to the whims of America, her traditions trampled upon, her history disgraced. Long live India!
abhish1313 2 years ago
Hey, fuck you. I'm no lover of Imperialism but I still love my country; I had no control over what our governments did back then or still do now, so don't go judging our entire nation by the same standards that you'd use to judge a small elite power core.
I tend to judge a country's level of standing by things other than world political domination.
We're a 'broken nation' just because we no longer control the Earth?
Sangrenegra9 2 years ago
I haven't judged the entire British nation by its imperialism of 100 years ago. In fact, I am typically quite friendly to England and wish England well, but only in a somewhat patronising manner. It's just that I see England as a "junior nation". There was a time Churchill used to see India that way. This is just the forces of history at work.
abhish1313 2 years ago 2
WillheavenCK, I stand by my original claim and I think its important to understand that when their is so much disagreement about how many people are killed in a war that's going on (Iraq), it is not practical to expect agreement on how many people were killed in a massacre many decades ago.
Vishy7 2 years ago
Does it make the act any less evil if you can prove that lesser people had died ? You are monsters, and yes, the British were ruthless.
studboy66 2 years ago
I agree. Despite the 1942 October cyclone, WWII, the invasion of Burma by Japan, and the halting of rice imports by the the Japanese, I think Britain could have dealt with the crisis better.
I'm still going to fight the other point though - "thousands" were not killed in the Jalliianwallah Bagh massacre.
Churchill, by the way, said of the massacre: "The incident in Jallianwala Bagh was an extraordinary event, a monstrous event, an event which stands in singular and sinister isolation."
willheavenCK 2 years ago
Frankly, I consider Churchill worse than Hitler, Idi Amin, Mussolini, Saddam Hussein, Pinochet, Bush, and all the other power-hungry head-of-states from the last century. I wish the British Government would apologize for the deeds of Churchill and his predecessors, just as Germany is doing till today to the Jewish people for the National Socialist Government there in the 30s.
Vishy7 2 years ago 3
Wow, Vishy7, it has taken me ages to realise that you're a troll! You remind me of those frat boys in Borat. Churchill "worse than Hitler"? Go back to school.
willheavenCK 2 years ago
Too right mate. Vishy7, get a grip. What happened in Amritsar was appalling, but don't compare Winston Churchill to those tyrants you listed (probably from wikipedia.) You obviously have a very obscure opinion. Perhaps you should consider bias when you're reading the 'sources' with which you form your views.
boobyrooberts 2 years ago
Vish may have gone over the top; but lets be honest the history i was taught about winston churchil was very very very BIASED! this is coming from a Canadian which is part of the commonwealth. I was only taught that we was ambitious young man who fought for liberty and freedom during ww2 against the nazis; but I never knew how much of a bastard he was to anyone other than british especially indians. british history has not covered this portion of his life, therefore vishy isnt necassarily wrong
mechysonu1 2 years ago
One sad thing I noticed in the SIkh experience is all Sikhs really have is Sikhs. Under Mughal Rule Sikhs were massacred. Under the British the Khalsa was destroyed, and Sikhs were killed. Under even the Secular Hindu Indian government Sikhs are mistreated. Sikhs only have themselves.
canadianmma 2 years ago
KHALSA WILL NEVER BE DESTROYED!
MIGHTYKHALSA 2 years ago
@Vishy7
I fully agree. Churchill, in his fight against Hitler, defied very early on, any distinctions between the two.
SuperdiptoC 1 year ago
may i ask u where doese white supremacy feeling comes from among the british is it taught, brainwashed cause is it from the bible where doese this feeling come from?
chetansingh2006 2 years ago
@willheavenCK
What can you tell me about the Indian veterens in world war 2? I have been doing lots of research on the 1942 volunteer draft. Mostly, I've been reading about them on the battle of Monte Casino
gtrplyr4ever 1 year ago
@willheavenCK
@willheavenCK
What can you tell me about the Indian veterens in world war 2? I have been doing lots of research on the 1942 volunteer draft. Mostly, I've been reading about them on the battle of Monte Casino
gtrplyr4ever 1 year ago
@willheavenCK
what do you know about the Indians in ww2?
gtrplyr4ever 1 year ago
@willheavenCK
You have been in India 2 yrs, i have been in the Indian Army 12 years...Jallianwala Bagh is massive and would have been jam packed during the festive occasion of Baisakhi...Hunter committee was english, so was Irwing and this tivraj was a boot-licking bug under their thumb...I'd be damned if the death toll was anything below a few thousands at least!!
And i'm not even counting the infants, still in their mothers' arms and children, who were singled out and systematically executed.
SuperdiptoC 1 year ago
Try to challenge any of my facts with historical information:
1. Most Sikhs were loyal to the British during the "Raj" era.
2. General Dyer was made an "honorary Sikh" shortly after the Jallianwallah Bagh massacre.
3. "Thousands" were not killed in the massacre.
4. The British General commanded Indian and Nepalese troops to fire - and they did.
Show me a British "lie" about the Amritsar massacre.
Let's not be scared by history or make up "facts". We should be brave enough to confront it.
willheavenCK 2 years ago
with all due respect, the number of dead has never been finalized and confirmed. Yes some indians have claimed a thousand died; and I was even reading that even a british parliament member in those days said the british intentionally supressed how many people died to avoid a panic attack. Please be honest the british have lied about the atrocities commited in india and even an idiot can see that.
mechysonu2987 2 years ago
the bengal famine was a terrible incident caused by the british intentionally shipping food from the food rich bay of bengal to war. winston churchill literally sat in bengal sipping his tea while watching thousands of bengalies starve without rice and wheat. I was not taught how much a tyrant winston churchill was in my canadian history system and yet you expect we indians to believe that only a few hundred died in bagh when the british are too ashamed to paint its history in right perspective
mechysonu2987 2 years ago
all this anglo saxon supremacy comes from the father of white elite cecil rhodes i guess?
chetansingh2006 2 years ago
Comment removed
indcric1 2 years ago
1. there were many race of people in india who were hired by british raj, including sikhs specially during war against afghanistan.
2. general dyer was not honoured by group of sikhs instead was honoured by sell out british appointed arur singh who requested additional security after sikhs threatened to kill him for that action.
indcric1 2 years ago
WillheavenCK, I agree with you that there are "so many lies about the Amritsar massacre", but I believe they are coming from Britain and British people who are not being taught about the 'holocaust' they committed on India in their about 200 years of forced occupation there. Perhaps, you have not heard of Bhagat Singh who is arguably one of the most revered heroes from the colonial slavery era. Or about Udham Singh, who had to go to England to kill Michal Dwyer to revenge the massacre.
Vishy7 2 years ago
u forgot Chandrasekhar Azad
GabhrooShakeen09 2 years ago
Re: mechysonu2987
I would never try to defend the British occupation of India or the Amritsar massacre.
My point about the Sikhs is this: many wish to claim that Jallianwallah Bagh was the site of a huge Sikh martyrdom.
This isn't true - out of loyalty to the British, most Sikhs stayed away from the protests. It was in fact a shocking murder of mostly Hindus and Muslims.
There are so many lies about the Amritsar massacre. And I'm sorry to say, most of them are coming from India.
willheavenCK 2 years ago
I also think it is absolutely disgusting that Vishy7 continues to claim that "thousands" of people were killed in the Amritsar massacre.
Not one historian believes this: the official death toll is 379. Although this exact count is disputed, there is not one reputable academic who believes the death toll to be more than more than 500.
I can only guess that Vishy7 harbours anti-British feelings and wishes to provoke prejudice with his lies.
willheavenCK 2 years ago
@willheavenCK
The idea of the sikhs being even slightly loyal to the british is a fabrication...It is impossible for a singular community of a widely diverse nation to be chummy with an oppressor.
And Udham Singh himself was a member of the sikh community...So there!!
SuperdiptoC 1 year ago
A message to Sikh viewers of this video:
1. Out of the 291 killed in the massacre whose jat was indentified, only 22 were certified Sikhs.
2. The Sikhs were very loyal to the British colonial forces, even General Dyer whom, according to historian NIgel Collet "they shamelessly flattered and humoured".
3. Dyer was invited just a few weeks after the massacre to the Golden Temple to be made an honorary Sikh, being presented with a kirpan, turban and siropa.
I am truly sorry to disappoint you.
willheavenCK 2 years ago
willheaven you seem to want to convey at the time the british were trying to avoid killling sikhs. maybe sikhs had it a little easier than the hindus muslims and christian but so what what are you trying to prove. I find it very bigoted that you would single out sikhs and care less about the other indians. Any sikh would tell you all humans are equal and therefore would not appreciate your flattery of them over the other hindus.
mechysonu2987 2 years ago
second of all the sikhs as well as other indians who served in the british forces did so because of promises of full autonomy and commonwealth status and finally independance all of which were cruelly broken even after ww2. The oh so honourable british was not even willing honour the wishes of the dead indians soliders whom fought in ww that had no relevance to them. Part of the biggest reason british left was because the sikhs lost faith in britis after ww2. sikhs were loyal but british wre not
mechysonu2987 2 years ago
shut up ok with ur fabricated facts and statistics. so are you saying the 20 odd million people of punjab arew lieng NO U FUDU you guys also hung people for no reason all they were doing on vaisakhi was protesting peacefully. and if one was to shout inquilab zindabad they were hung. u british cant accept ur a bunch of racist morons! you complain about indians in england well screw u we arent wrecklessly hanging people by their necks or stealing shit. without these rif raf as u say england=shit!
GabhrooShakeen09 2 years ago
Comment removed
indcric1 2 years ago
@willheavenCK I think you're right here.. I think that's why most of my friends hate Sikhs... Oops, sorry!!
91Sheetal 1 year ago
@willheavenCK
It is impossible that the number of sikhs in a garden in Amritsar on the day of Baisakhi would be so low. What is your source for this data..? NAME THE EXACT WEBSITE!!
SuperdiptoC 1 year ago
Vishy7, your treatment of historical facts is truly worrying. O'Dwyer was knighted before the Amritsar massacre, not because of it (and he was assassinated by Udham Singh in 1940).
Furthermore, both General Dyer and O'Dwyer were forced to resign after the massacre and officially censured by the Hunter Committee as early as November 1919.
Not one Indian or British historian claims that "thousands" were killed in the massacre, as you suggest.
willheavenCK 2 years ago
@willheavenCK
NAME THE EXACT SOURCE PLEASE...Unlike us it won't be your grandpa or some one, so please state the name of the website you're getting this knowledge from.
SuperdiptoC 1 year ago
My friend, you have a name like 'martyr', yet your comments are filled with hate and ignorance. Hindus and Sikhs are one people, and any differences between them (brothers) can not be a basis for supporting a massacre of old, sick, women, and chidren.
Vishy7 2 years ago
I am glad you hate what the British government is foing in Iraq and Afghanistan now, but lets face the truth- The country of England has never apologized for millions killed during its imperialism, it has never offered any compensation, nor returned anything that it had stolen from India or elsewhere. It also continues to partner with the US in the latest round of imperialism in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Gaza.
Vishy7 2 years ago
Dear WillheavenCK, we can debate endlessly the exact death toll of this horrible massacre, but we are unlikely to reach a figure that we both will agree on.
Gen. Dyer was a close associate of Michael Dwyer who was knighted by the British queen, and though both of them died in infamy, neither one was officially condemned by the British government. In fact, to this day the British government has not apologized for its complicity in the massacre or its colonial occupation of India.
Vishy7 2 years ago
Let's get a few facts straight, Vishy7.
1. General Dyer was not "knighted by the British queen".
2. The official death toll for the Amritsar massacre was 379 - there were not "thousands" killed.
3. The crowd was not "celebrating a festival" - they were peacefully protesting against British rule.
I am a 21 year-old British student. I have visited Jallianwallah Bagh. But I believe we do not need to distort history to understand the grave nature of this barbaric massacre of innocent people.
willheavenCK 2 years ago
@willheavenCK
If you have visited the bagh then you will also know the exact number of bullet-holes on the walls of the bagh...Do tell me this..please do!!
I am asking you this because all tour guides for urge us to ourselves count them and give us a whole fifteen minute break to do so...
And please don't say your tour guide did not do the aforementioned...It is almost a tradition for them...
I give you a week to come up with the answer.
SuperdiptoC 1 year ago
I as a hindu enjoy reading history especially indian history. the brits very much resented the indians especially hindus during their rule. we were treated less than dogs and when we finally demanded more self rule they responded by sending this asshole o dyer to disperse the crowd and they used the justification that a horny indian man had raped and beaten a white nun; whom ironically was saved by an indian. england never treated us fairly infact winston churchill hated indians with a passion
mechysonu2987 2 years ago
recently the bagh massacre was included into british textbooks but even today coward historians try to remove it because they think its anti british. Sometimes i wonder whether the brits actually secretly are proud of the deceit atrocities that they committed in india. If germany has the guts to admit it then why not uk. Its time for UK to come to terms with its past because the UK has caused just as much death if not more than germany and still not come clean on everything.
mechysonu2987 2 years ago
sad fact is during those times, most brits actually supported this asshole dyer. Infact they gave him 10 000 pounds which only god knows what that is equivalent to today. a few people in the british government condemned this mans actions but the sinister part was that they never tried him as a war criminal or killer; they called him a hero and man who stood for honor and shit like that. That is what really hurt the indians the most even more than the 100's of death.
mechysonu2987 2 years ago
This is the british (brutish) for ya!! For king/queer and country anything goes...
percivallll 2 years ago
this is embarresing. how many sikhs were there? and all they did was run. if i was alive at that time i would be ashamed to call myself a sikh
khalsaman23 2 years ago
My friend, I salute the martial spirit of the Sikhs, but when people gather to peacefully celebrate a festival, they are unlikely to be psychologically or physically equipped to fight against bullets and tanks.
Vishy7 2 years ago
The important thing is to be nice to the British today. As on date, they are the most pathetic country in the world.
Watching England go down the drain is such a wonderful feeling. The worst insult is to offer their pathetic, spineless, loser nation some help as they are stretched between being America's poodle, a member of the EU, and a sovereign nation even as savage Islam rips their insides apart.
abhish1313 2 years ago 2
Fuck white people, they all have calcified pineal glands, no melonin in their mind or skin!!! brown and black ppl have everything stolen from these reptilians...
speedyindian 2 years ago
Back in his headquarters, Brigadier-General Reginald Dyer reported to his superiors that he had been "confronted by a revolutionary army"
In a telegram sent to Dyer, British Lieutenant-Governor of Punjab, Sir Michael O'Dwyer wrote: "Your action is correct. Lieutenant Governor approves.Some senior British officers applauded his suppression of "another Indian Mutiny".
CreatorTheGod 2 years ago
For those who don't know! Dyer was who commanded the soldiers to open fire
CreatorTheGod 2 years ago
Dyer said he would have used his machine guns if he could have got them into the enclosure, but these were mounted on armoured cars. He said he did not stop firing when the crowd began to disperse because he thought it was his duty to keep firing until the crowd dispersed, and that a little firing would do no good.
He confessed that he did not take any steps to tend to the wounded after the firing."Certainly not. It was not my job. Hospitals were open and they could have gone there"his response
CreatorTheGod 2 years ago
Dyer admitted before the commission that he came to know about the meeting at the Jallianwala Bagh at 12:40 hours that day but took no steps to prevent it. He stated that he had gone to the Bagh with the deliberate intention of opening fire if he found a crowd assembled there.
"I think it quite possible that I could have dispersed the crowd without firing but they would have come back again and laughed, and I would have made, what I consider, a fool of myself." — Dyer's response