I am an angry Sikh, a liberated soul, I will tell you my story
Sit down and listen to me.
Before you blame the victims.
I have the sweetness of Nanak.
I have the determination of Gobind
I wish SARBAT DA BHALA,
But you can’t trample over my rights, because I am an angry Sikh, a liberated soul.
I can sit on redhot iron,
I can be beheaded in CHANDNI CHOWK I can be bricked alive in SIRHIND
I will break but I will not bend
Because I am an angry Sikh, a liberated soul.
I am a Sikh woman, I give birth to KHALSA, I can see them cut to pieces,
tears won’t trickle from my eyes,
I can jump from THANDE BURwJ,
you can’t break my soul,
I can live on a cup of water
while grinding grains,
Because I am an angry Sikh woman,
a liberated Being.
You want to put me on CHARKHARIS here is my body,
You want to cut them joint by joint,
here are my limbs,
You want to saw it into two,
here is my trunk,
You want to boil me in hot water,
here is my flesh,
I won’t cry, because I am a liberated soul.
You can take my four sons, I will have millions They will come back as BANDAS,
NALWAS, BHAGATS & UDHAMS.
JASSAS And RANUJITS.
SATWANTS And BEANTS
to teach you a lesson!
Because I was created a Sikh a liberated man ‘
You want to pull my skin with red hot forks, you want to tie me before cannons and fire, you want to shoot main JALLIANWALA BAGH
You want to try your operation blue star
I will come back and “get you”
Because I am an angry Sikh
My anger can last for centuries,
Mughals know it,
I will rise like a phoenix
From the ruins of AKAL TAKHAT
to claim and capture
all that belongs to me but is denied to me. Because I am an indignant Sikh, and a liberated soul.
Just look into my eyes, they will frighten you, They have calmness of Arjun and anger of BANDA
They have ferocity of JAMROD
and vigor of NALWA
They have the disgust of Beant
and KARUNA of BIMLA
They have the fire of Truth,
that is why I am an angry Sikh.
Sikh Hijackers’ Trial Fifth Witness Gives Testimony
Lahore: Mr. Ashok Sharma, flight purser of the Indian airbus hijacked to Pakistan in July last year, told the Special Court here yesterday that one of the hijackers had fired a pistol shot on him from a distance of seven to eight feet but he escaped unhurt.
He was giving testimony as the fifth prosecution witness in the case against Permindher Singh and eight other Indians. After his evidence, the proceedings were adjourned till Saturday and the chief prosecutor told the court that his next witness would be some Pakistani national.
Asked if he knew which portion of the plane the bullet had hit after passing over him, Mr. Sharma said he could not say anything about it. He, however, denied that it was a blank shot. He also refuted the suggestion that the pistol shot story was a concoction.
Giving an account of the incident, the witness said he had been on duty in the rear galley of the aircraft when three hijackers came running from the tail and pushed him into a seat. Then, two of them forced him to go to the cockpit and request the pilot to open the cockpit door. The witnesses identified three accused that had attacked him. However, later, he said, that they were four in all. While one of them had a pistol, two others had kirpans, he added.
He, however, affirmed that the Sikh passengers were permitted to carry kirpans of a fixed specification during air travel, but he could not give the specification.
The witness conceded that he along with the Indian witnesses in this case had been lodging at the Hotel Intercontinental here for over a week and reading newspapers too. However, he denied that they had been discussing this case among themselves. He also denied that he had been reading the news of this case in the local papers.
He recited the suggestion that as a result of their discussion, it had been decided to drop the pilot, Mr. C. S. P. Singh, as a prosecution witness.
Mr. Sharma said that although another aircraft flying on the Srinagar Delhi route was hijacked four years ago prior to their own plane, yet he would not regard this route a ‘hijack. Prone route.’
When one of the defense counsels, Dr. Abdul Basit, showed the witness a diagram of the airbus, and asked him to mark his place of duty on it, the witness declined to do so on the ground that the diagram was not very clear.
He, however, conceded that there had been no special ant hijacking equipment onboard the plane nor were its crew members given any special training against hijacking.
There were no armed guards on the plane either, he added.
Mr. Sharma said in reply to a question that it was a general practice with the cabin crew of his airline to go into the cockpit personally to get the refreshment order from the pilots and this practice was going on even now. They had no instructions to open the cockpit door at the barest number of times he added.
The witness denied that any of the accused had delivered a speech about Khalistan during their period of confinement.
Article extracted from this publication >> July 5, 1985
