PDA

View Full Version : why are british royals so shameless



raj
09 Nov 05,, 10:50
we see the bit(h queen still wearing the crown wearing the crown with kohinoor diamond which was stolen from INDIA, and not only her every mueseum in england has some stolen stuff from INDIA why do they shamelessly display that.
Is it in the blood of brithishers or is it just their nature
-raj

giggs88
09 Nov 05,, 12:43
Is it in the blood of brithishers or is it just their nature


Are you one of those morons who think all white people are evil or something?

Get over the petty ****. Move on.

The diamond has been in the hands of COUNTLESS foreign invaders. I don't see you complaining about them. Claims for the diamond have also been made by Pakistan and Iran. Don't believe me? Look it up. Idiot.

Lahori paa jee
09 Nov 05,, 14:55
Are you one of those morons who think all white people are evil or something?

Get over the petty ****. Move on.

The diamond has been in the hands of COUNTLESS foreign invaders. I don't see you complaining about them. Claims for the diamond have also been made by Pakistan and Iran. Don't believe me? Look it up. Idiot.


I fully agree with Raj.

Samudra
09 Nov 05,, 15:40
Hmmm the best way to get the diamond for India, if a lot of people in India do care about it in the first place, is to earn a hell lot of a money, make India very rich, steal all British jobs,stagnate their economy...beggar them to the point where they are willing to auction their crown jewels and some rich Indian picks it up from there to decorate his wives jewel case or something cinematic like that. :biggrin:

But then, I, and many a Indians like me, care a wee bit more about a lot of other things and the diamond and all that crap - the British can keep.

At the worst I'd like to crack a joke or two in the museums where these jewels are displayed about how the British robbers robbed my country blah blah blah... :tongue:

Karma is a strange thing.
For what they did, they shall recieve.
I'd leave it at that and keep working towards my other important and urgent things on hand.

Ray
09 Nov 05,, 18:48
Why so much about the diamond?

The British Museum has quite a few artefacts and national treasures of not only India, but from everywhere from their Empire, where the sun never set!

The only reason I am not grumbling is that they are being looked after better there in the Blighty than they would have been looked after in their original countries.

One has to observe the mess that is on with the jewels of the Nizam and the way other priceless stuff is maintained in the Indian Museums.

Let sleeping diamonds lie where they are, so to say!

sparten
09 Nov 05,, 19:13
Shahjahen's Peacock Throne is in ToupKapi museum in Turkey. And after seeing it this January, I can only say, "let them keep it."

raj
09 Nov 05,, 21:41
Are you one of those morons who think all white people are evil or something?

Get over the petty ****. Move on.

The diamond has been in the hands of COUNTLESS foreign invaders. I don't see you complaining about them. Claims for the diamond have also been made by Pakistan and Iran. Don't believe me? Look it up. Idiot.

BTW how different is this from white people in texas displaying thier slaves photos of their grandfathers just to show off.
If u donot know the history, the diamond was found in hyderabad mines,the city which i come from

giggs88
09 Nov 05,, 21:50
BTW how different is this from white people in texas displaying thier slaves photos of their grandfathers just to show off.
That was the dumbest post I have ever seen on WAB. Stop further embarassing yourself.


If u donot know the history, the diamond was found in hyderabad mines,the city which i come from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohinoor_diamond

I CTRL+F'ed and searched for that city on that page. It's not even on there. Stop making up myths. Do you know the history? No you don't, because the diamond doesn't really have a solid background.

Ray
09 Nov 05,, 22:35
The Kohinoor Diamond

According to some sources, the Koh-i-noor diamond was found in the Godavari river in central India 4,000 years ago. Tradition associated with it states that its owner will rule the world, but that to possess it is dangerous for any but a woman. This may have been a delicate piece of flattery to Queen Victoria, who once owned the gem.

The authentic history of this jewel begins in the 14 c. when it was reported to be in the possession of the rajas of Malwa. It later fell into the hands of Baber, who founded the Mogul dynasty in 1526. During the next two centuries the diamond was one of the most prized items in the treasure of the Mogul emperors.

In 1939, Nadir Shah of Persia invaded India and all of the treasures of the Moguls fell into his hands except the great diamond. Nadir Shah was told by one of the emperor's harem women that the stone was hidden in the emperor's turban. The conqueror then invited the conquered to a feast and offered to exchange turbans as a gesture of friendship. The emperor had no choice but to agree. Later, in the privacy of his tent, Nadir Shah unrolled the turban, the gem fell out, and Nadir is supposed to have exclaimed "Koh-i-noor", mountain of light.

The stone continued in the possession of the Persian dynasty, although many attempts were made to gain ownership of it. The Persian king was assassinated, and his son Shah Rukh, was deposed. In an effort to discover the whereabouts of the diamond Shah Rukh´s eyes were put out, and boiling pitch was poured on his head, but he refused steadfastly to reveal its hiding place. Later, a Persian king fled with it to the Sikh court, and Ranjit Singh, the Lion of the Punjab, took the stone and wore it as a decoration. It was later placed in the Lahore treasury. After the Sikh wars, it was taken by the East India Company as part of the indemnity levied in 1849, and was subsequently presented to Queen Victoria at a sparkling levee marking the company's 250th anniversary.

Koh Diamond
Weight: 108.93 carats
Cut: round brilliant cut diamond

The jewel was displayed at the Great Exhibition of 1851 where it was thought to display insufficient fire. It was decided to recut it from its original Indian form, and a member of the Amsterdam firm of Costar was called to London to cut the stone. A steam-driven cutting wheel was set up, and Prince Albert se the stone on the wheel, while the Duke of Wellington started it. The cutting took 38 days, but did not add much to the stone's brilliance. It was rather believed that the historical value of the diamond was diminished by the cutting. Queen Victoria continued to wear it as an ornament, then left it to Queen Alexandra, who wore it at Edward VII´s coronation. In 1911, the jewel was used in a crown made for Queen Mary, and in 1937, in another made to be worn by Queen Elizabeth at the coronation of her husband, King George VI in 1937. The Queen Mother's crown with the Koh-i-noor is in the Tower of London.

http://www.diamondtutorials.com/articles/diamonds.tutorials/71/The_Kohinoor_Diamond.html

Leader
09 Nov 05,, 22:36
"why are british royals so shameless"

Inbreeding

bull
10 Nov 05,, 06:53
When i saw the topic at first,i thought this is abt the conduct of Jr royals,but this turned out be abt a diamond.Well i dont know,if they give it back i will take it,but i amn't going to fight for it.Lets take their jobs and let them keep the diamonds.

Ray
10 Nov 05,, 07:02
Diamonds are forever!

The British Royalty may not be, with the way the chaps are getting feisty about it!

raj
10 Nov 05,, 07:21
That was the dumbest post I have ever seen on WAB. Stop further embarassing yourself.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohinoor_diamond

I CTRL+F'ed and searched for that city on that page. It's not even on there. Stop making up myths. Do you know the history? No you don't, because the diamond doesn't really have a solid background.

i am sure u must be one of those Idiot$ who think that britishers have done a good job ruling INDIA

ZFBoxcar
10 Nov 05,, 07:28
You must be one of those who thinks not caring about a diamond is the same thing as condoning imperialism or that putting that diamond in a crown makes the British people evil ("Is it in the blood of brithishers or is it just their nature")

raj
10 Nov 05,, 09:15
You must be one of those who thinks not caring about a diamond is the same thing as condoning imperialism or that putting that diamond in a crown makes the British people evil ("Is it in the blood of brithishers or is it just their nature")

can u please tell me what the queen represents and what does the crown represent. BTW do u think the crown is that equal to a bandana worn by a hippy on some road in london

ZFBoxcar
10 Nov 05,, 09:35
I don't think that the monarchy means anything at all. The crown is something that the meaningless monarchs wear. Obviously the crown is much more valuable than a bandana, and has a lot more historic and sentimental value, but its still just a piece of head gear. I don't think its worth harbouring a never ending hatred ("****** queen") and if it makes you racist towards British people (or white people I guess since British is not a race) then that is just sad.

667medic
10 Nov 05,, 10:03
we see the bit(h queen still wearing the crown wearing the crown with kohinoor diamond which was stolen from INDIA, and not only her every mueseum in england has some stolen stuff from INDIA why do they shamelessly display that.
Is it in the blood of brithishers or is it just their nature
-raj
The diamond was presented to Victoria by one of Raja Ranjit Singh's successors :confused: So why raise a stink over this non-issue. As Ray Sahab had said, the artifacts are being properly tended to by British Museums. Ofcourse I I don't condone British Imperialism or their colonozing under the pretext of the so called "White man's burden" . We are better off stealing thier jobs. Furthermore Raja Ranjit Singh's capital was Lahore and so pakistan might also have a valid claim over the diamond....

bull
10 Nov 05,, 10:52
The diamond was presented to Victoria by one of Raja Ranjit Singh's successors :confused: So why raise a stink over this non-issue. As Ray Sahab had said, the artifacts are being properly tended to by British Museums. Ofcourse I I don't condone British Imperialism or their colonozing under the pretext of the so called "White man's burden" . We are better off stealing thier jobs. Furthermore Raja Ranjit Singh's capital was Lahore and so pakistan might also have a valid claim over the diamond....

Yeah thats the way to go.
You stole our diamonds,now we shall steal your jobs. :biggrin:

raj
10 Nov 05,, 10:59
The diamond was presented to Victoria by one of Raja Ranjit Singh's successors :confused: So why raise a stink over this non-issue. As Ray Sahab had said, the artifacts are being properly tended to by British Museums. Ofcourse I I don't condone British Imperialism or their colonozing under the pretext of the so called "White man's burden" . We are better off stealing thier jobs. Furthermore Raja Ranjit Singh's capital was Lahore and so pakistan might also have a valid claim over the diamond....
I think the correct word would have been "made to present to that &^%$#@ victoria or what ever. i dont think so that pakistan deserves that diamond, it was ranjit sighs so its INDIA's bcos most of the sikhs preferred to stay with INDIA and so their property belongs to INDIA
-raj

raj
10 Nov 05,, 11:01
Obviously the crown is much more valuable than a bandana, and has a lot more historic and sentimental value, but its still just a piece of head gear.
as they say in INDIA, INDIANS are the most sentimental fools in the whole world.
P.S: I donot hate white men,being a technical person, i respect him for most of the technological improvements they have brought in human life

Ray
10 Nov 05,, 11:24
Ira,

I don't think that he is being a racist.

It is just that he is stating that since it is from India, it should be returned to India.

The logic is justified.

However, my contention is that there are greater bones to pick with the British.

In India, we club all who are from the UK as British.

And believe it or not, the majority of Indians are very tolerant with the the "whiteman" even if they do not subscribe to the policies of their governments. ;)

667medic
10 Nov 05,, 11:28
I think the correct word would have been "made to present to that &^%$#@ victoria or what ever. i dont think so that pakistan deserves that diamond, it was ranjit sighs so its INDIA's bcos most of the sikhs preferred to stay with INDIA and so their property belongs to INDIA
-raj
The Sikh's lost the 2nd Sikh war. They didn't suffer the same fate as Tipu Sultan's sons, who were imprisoned at Madras. On the contrary, Raja Ranjit Singh's successor were brought to London and educated there. He later married a caucasian and settled down in London. Kohinoor was Raja Ranjit Singh's personal possession and his successors had every right to dispose of it in whatever way he chose. On the contrary the Brits could have slapped a heavy war indemnity on them and could have driven them towards starvation. But fortunately the Brits recognized the toughness and bravery of the Sikh warriors and recruited them in the Company's army....

raj
10 Nov 05,, 11:59
The Sikh's lost the 2nd Sikh war. They didn't suffer the same fate as Tipu Sultan's sons, who were imprisoned at Madras. On the contrary, Raja Ranjit Singh's successor were brought to London and educated there. He later married a caucasian and settled down in London. Kohinoor was Raja Ranjit Singh's personal possession and his successors had every right to dispose of it in whatever way he chose. On the contrary the Brits could have slapped a heavy war indemnity on them and could have driven them towards starvation. But fortunately the Brits recognized the toughness and bravery of the Sikh warriors and recruited them in the Company's army....

beleive me man, the history that i have read was not this way. Its all british propoganda like the aryan invasion myth.
BTW even in ur version, why do u think preferrential treatement was given to rranjit singhs son and not to tippu sultans sons or bahadur shah zafars sons(they had their heads chopped and presented to bahadur shah zafar on a golden plate.)
-raj

667medic
10 Nov 05,, 12:15
beleive me man, the history that i have read was not this way. Its all british propoganda like the aryan invasion myth.
BTW even in ur version, why do u think preferrential treatement was given to rranjit singhs son and not to tippu sultans sons or bahadur shah zafars sons(they had their heads chopped and presented to bahadur shah zafar on a golden plate.)
-raj
FYI I studied in CBSE stream in India. Ofcourse it also helps to have a balanced view on history and international affairs. The Sikhs lost the 2nd Anglo Sikh war fair and square. Punjab could have been driven to starvation by war indemnity but it didn't happen. What happened to Bahadur Shah Zafar's sons were a result of the bloody 1857 revolt. Entire British settlements in many parts of N.India were massacred and the Brits wanted to teach a lesson. If we have to take revenge for all our past humiliations the we should have beef with many countries.
Afghaniatan- Ghori, Ghazni, Ahmed Shah Abdali
Uzbekistan- Timur
Iran- Nadir Shah
The only beef we Indian's should have with the Brits is for using our country as both a source of raw materials and as a market for their products. In the process thay destroyed the local industry and to add insult, failed to promote any industry in India. But we shall have our revenge, we will steal their jobs....

indianguy4u
10 Nov 05,, 12:21
U cannot change ur history, but brighten ur future.

Raj, what India needs are to protect the bio-diversity & get the patents for the same. Cribbing for the lost, we will also loose what is with us at present. This is the real treasure to of independent India.

bull
10 Nov 05,, 13:07
What diff does it make to our present world,whether we have it or not.

Major Dad
10 Nov 05,, 20:09
I think the correct word would have been "made to present to that &^%$#@ victoria or what ever. i dont think so that pakistan deserves that diamond, it was ranjit sighs so its INDIA's bcos most of the sikhs preferred to stay with INDIA and so their property belongs to INDIA
-raj

In the early 20th century (1908) Sir Aurel Stein stumbled across a HUGE collection of ancient manuscripts in a sealed chamber in the Mogao Caves in Dunhuang, China. Using somewhat less than ethical means, Stein talked the self-appointed "curator' of the site into letting him remove thousands of the scrolls. Half of these now reside in the British Museum in London. Guess where the other half are? The Indian National Museum in New Delhi. The Chinese have been trying to get them back for years. So can we expect their imminent return? If not, then SHUT THE FUUCK UP!

Ray
10 Nov 05,, 20:18
Major Dad,

A link will be helpful.

giggs88
10 Nov 05,, 21:06
In the early 20th century (1908) Sir Aurel Stein stumbled across a HUGE collection of ancient manuscripts in a sealed chamber in the Mogao Caves in Dunhuang, China. Using somewhat less than ethical means, Stein talked the self-appointed "curator' of the site into letting him remove thousands of the scrolls. Half of these now reside in the British Museum in London. Guess where the other half are? The Indian National Museum in New Delhi. The Chinese have been trying to get them back for years. So can we expect their imminent return? If not, then SHUT THE FUUCK UP!
OWNED.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v723/giggs88/lindomarowned.jpg

raj
10 Nov 05,, 21:20
In the early 20th century (1908) Sir Aurel Stein stumbled across a HUGE collection of ancient manuscripts in a sealed chamber in the Mogao Caves in Dunhuang, China. Using somewhat less than ethical means, Stein talked the self-appointed "curator' of the site into letting him remove thousands of the scrolls. Half of these now reside in the British Museum in London. Guess where the other half are? The Indian National Museum in New Delhi. The Chinese have been trying to get them back for years. So can we expect their imminent return? If not, then SHUT THE FUUCK UP!

if what ever u said is true, then i support giving them back

Major Dad
10 Nov 05,, 21:55
Major Dad,

A link will be helpful.

http://www.nationalmuseumindia.gov.in/collection.html

Scroll down to 'Central Asian Antiquity'

Info on Stein and the Mogao Caves is also available on Wikipedia.

Ray
10 Nov 05,, 22:17
Thanks.

Wilco.

Parihaka
10 Nov 05,, 22:18
as they say in INDIA, INDIANS are the most sentimental fools in the whole world.
P.S: I donot hate white men,being a technical person, i respect him for most of the technological improvements they have brought in human life
Phew. I'm sooooo relieved :biggrin:

Parihaka
10 Nov 05,, 22:24
A little bit of light relief about my soon to be if somewhat abstract 'King'

When Charles was still married to Diana, a phone conversation between him and Camilla was intercepted in which he stated a desire to be her Tampon. A few weeks later he came to NZ, presumably to escape the British press and what did he do? Toured a Sphagnum moss Tampon factory :biggrin:

bull
11 Nov 05,, 10:27
In the early 20th century (1908) Sir Aurel Stein stumbled across a HUGE collection of ancient manuscripts in a sealed chamber in the Mogao Caves in Dunhuang, China. Using somewhat less than ethical means, Stein talked the self-appointed "curator' of the site into letting him remove thousands of the scrolls. Half of these now reside in the British Museum in London. Guess where the other half are? The Indian National Museum in New Delhi. The Chinese have been trying to get them back for years. So can we expect their imminent return? If not, then SHUT THE FUUCK UP!

:rolleyes:

bull
11 Nov 05,, 10:29
if what ever u said is true, then i support giving them back

It will open a pandorras box,who knows who has taken what all during the past 1000 years.

667medic
11 Nov 05,, 10:37
It will open a pandorras box,who knows who has taken what all during the past 1000 years.
Peacock Throne, Akbar Namah etc....

bull
11 Nov 05,, 11:07
Peacock Throne, Akbar Namah etc....

:biggrin:

Samudra
11 Nov 05,, 17:14
I'd like to read a copy of Akbar Namah sometime...

Ray
11 Nov 05,, 17:16
All this returning and taking will give a new meaning to "Cultural Exchange". :biggrin:

lemontree
12 Nov 05,, 05:32
we see the bit(h queen still wearing the crown wearing the crown with kohinoor diamond which was stolen from INDIA, and not only her every mueseum in england has some stolen stuff from INDIA why do they shamelessly display that.
Is it in the blood of brithishers or is it just their nature
-raj
The benifits of being smater than the ertswhile ruling class of India (and the majority of the world). They deserve what they have.
You complain of them having the Kohinoor and not us. IMHO, it is much safer in their (Brit) hands and one can view at times of public display. If it had been in India it would have been in possession of some selfish and trecherous ex-royal house, and we would'nt even have seen or heard about it. Tell me - what do you know of the jewels/ gold currently held by the 565 ex-royals of India/Pakistan?...
It would have been of no benifit to the people of India. The combined wealth of the ex-royals would have made the gold reserves of India an envious treasure chest.

Officer of Engineers
12 Nov 05,, 05:37
Let's see. The Brits get your jewels. You get bag pipes.

Bad trade. Real bad trade.

lemontree
12 Nov 05,, 05:39
Shahjahen's Peacock Throne is in ToupKapi museum in Turkey. And after seeing it this January, I can only say, "let them keep it."Is it in poor condition?

lemontree
12 Nov 05,, 05:46
The Sikh's lost the 2nd Sikh war. They didn't suffer the same fate as Tipu Sultan's sons, who were imprisoned at Madras. On the contrary, Raja Ranjit Singh's successor were brought to London and educated there. He later married a caucasian and settled down in London. Kohinoor was Raja Ranjit Singh's personal possession and his successors had every right to dispose of it in whatever way he chose. On the contrary the Brits could have slapped a heavy war indemnity on them and could have driven them towards starvation. But fortunately the Brits recognized the toughness and bravery of the Sikh warriors and recruited them in the Company's army....
Now you are treading into my zone... ;). The Successor of Maharaja Ranjit Singh was Duleep Singh, and he was about 10 yrs old when the EEIC annexed Punjab. There were no gifts given. The Khalsa treasure was taken as war booty. Period.
http://famous.adoption.com/famous/india-princely-states.html

Maharaj Duleep Singh (1838?-1893) was the son of Ranjit Singh, the maharajah of Punjab. When he was five his father died, leaving him ruler of the Sikh kingdom of Punjab and fabulously wealthy. But in 1848 the invading British defeated the Punjabis, forcibly converted Duleep to Christianity and separated him from his mother, whom he did not see again until 1860. He was sent to England as a ward of Queen Victoria. Dr. John Login, a Scott, was appointed governor of the province and he took Duleep to Scotland, where he embraced British culture and became known as the Black Prince of Perthshire. Although the British confiscated most of the wealth of his kingdom, including the Koh-i-noor diamond, they left him enough money to maintain a lavish lifestyle for most of his life and he became highly poplar in British society. In 1860 he returned briefly to Punjab to be reunited with his mother, but the years of enforced separation had taken their toll and the reunification was not happy, although she did follow him back to Scotland where they lived apart

platinum786
12 Nov 05,, 11:57
u might want to buy them....nowadays the royal family is in decline, they live next to laxami mittel the worlds richest indian.....and 3rd richest man.

Samudra
12 Nov 05,, 12:47
I've heard that Mittal still keeps his Indian passport.
True ?

Arjuna
12 Nov 05,, 14:27
Mittal is the richest person in whole of Europe.

He keeps an Indian Passport.

He is famous for his 'Mittal' aka 'Midas' touch. Whatever he touches becomes steel. Don't go too near him.

He is a man with a vision, drive of a superhuman andnerves of steel.

He hires public sector emloyees from India and turns them in to steel dynamos.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-1059448,prtpage-1.cms

667medic
12 Nov 05,, 14:34
Now you are treading into my zone... . The Successor of Maharaja Ranjit Singh was Duleep Singh, and he was about 10 yrs old when the EEIC annexed Punjab. There were no gifts given. The Khalsa treasure was taken as war booty. Period.

:redface: I found that info at this link Sir http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/727231.stm
says that

The diamond was then given by Ranjit Singh's successor to Queen Victoria.

Samudra
12 Nov 05,, 14:36
the bee bee see! :tongue:


;)

667medic
12 Nov 05,, 14:38
I've heard that Mittal still keeps his Indian passport.
True ?
The guy is a typical capitalist. For all his wealth, he has scarcely invested in India. Only recently he signed a deal with Jharkhand or Chattisghar State Gov regarding a steel mill. He is interested in only making money period....

Arjuna
12 Nov 05,, 14:42
The guy is a typical capitalist. For all his wealth, he has scarcely invested in India. Only recently he signed a deal with Jharkhand or Chattisghar State Gov regarding a steel mill. He is interested in only making money period....


He never claims to be a saint. Having said that, he is waiting for the right moment to enter in to India.


As you said correctly, whenever and wherever he smells steel (read money) he arrives.

Samudra
12 Nov 05,, 14:42
....ONGC Mittal is also there...

Arjuna
12 Nov 05,, 14:44
:redface: I found that info at this link Sir http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/727231.stm
says that

The diamond was then given by Ranjit Singh's successor to Queen Victoria.

Says who??

BBC?

It says cleary that it is "British Broacasting Corporation", its business- broadcasting British Interests.

Arjuna
12 Nov 05,, 14:46
....ONGC Mittal is also there...

Correct!

They almost took over Kazakhstan's one of the biggest oil company, had Chinese not pulled a fast one on them.

Samudra
12 Nov 05,, 16:19
Yep.
Thankfully they bagged the Nigerian deal.
But a loss in CAR region can be costly....

bull
13 Nov 05,, 07:08
The guy is a typical capitalist. For all his wealth, he has scarcely invested in India. Only recently he signed a deal with Jharkhand or Chattisghar State Gov regarding a steel mill. He is interested in only making money period....


What do u mean by typical capitalist.Its his hardwork,let him decide.

At least he had the conscience of keeping the Indian passport still,unlike the other Uk immigrants who just snatches the british passport at the slightest chance.

If u had money woud u put it in bag,from which u wont get anything back?
Its good that he didnt invest anything in india in the last many years,as he wud not have been in the current postion as he is.We have TATA as a major steel player on the steel sector,who is now the cheapest manufacturer of a particular type ofsteel .Asking,mittal to take on the TATAs wudhave been foolish.

Now mittal is in a much better position as he has bulti up his empire all around the world.His capability of turning virtual dumpyards of steel factories to steel powerhouses can be max utilised.

Parihaka
13 Nov 05,, 21:58
Let's see. The Brits get your jewels. You get bag pipes.

Bad trade. Real bad trade.
Just watch it, I'm sure I could arrange with my kith & kin for a pipe band to give you a wake up call one morning :biggrin:

Ray
13 Nov 05,, 22:15
I believe Mittals were scrap dealers in Kolkata (Calcutta),

That is why be bought up old steel mills around the world and turned them around for a profit! :biggrin:

Arjuna
14 Nov 05,, 04:47
I believe Mittals were scrap dealers in Kolkata (Calcutta),

That is why be bought up old steel mills around the world and turned them around for a profit! :biggrin:



That was his father, originally from Rajasthan. LNMittal started in Indonesia under Suharto regime and then went on to conquer steel world.

Sheer hardwork and astute commercial sense with ability to take on big risks; he went to places where MNCs wouldn't tread; risk pays in business.

Most of the commodity industry in the world will go through same shift.

lemontree
14 Nov 05,, 05:50
:redface: I found that info at this link Sir http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/727231.stm
says that

The diamond was then given by Ranjit Singh's successor to Queen Victoria.
The pre-Sepoy Mutiny English East India Comany (EEIC) Army was not the army of 1860 (after the British crown took over). The regiments were "owned" by colonels/Dukes/Earls, something like the 'private military companies' of today. The EEIC gave the 'colonels' a nominal amount to pay salaries to the sepoys and they had the freedom of keeping the war booty captured from palaces and forts after a battle (of course the Generals use to keep a keen eye for things of value).
War booty also included the semi-precious stones taken out (with bayonets) from the Taj by greeding european troops, such was the desperation and greed after battles.
The BBC will never portray the English as "looters and plunderers" that title is reserved for the sub-continentals.
The Kohinoor is the Queens property now, just as there are many "artifacts" (from a nearby northern country) dating over 2000 yrs that are held by my regiment as "war booty". We will not part with them.

667medic
14 Nov 05,, 07:15
The Kohinoor is the Queens property now, just as there are many "artifacts" (from a nearby northern country) dating over 2000 yrs that are held by my regiment as "war booty". We will not part with them.
:biggrin: Is it too much if I ask what are they. Can you please PM me. If you are reluctant to disclose, then no issues. I am happy to know that we too have some war booty :biggrin:

bull
14 Nov 05,, 09:34
:biggrin: Is it too much if I ask what are they. Can you please PM me. If you are reluctant to disclose, then no issues. I am happy to know that we too have some war booty :biggrin:
yeah thats some achievement. :biggrin:

lemontree
14 Nov 05,, 13:49
It is not some secret, and these items are not gold or diamonds, but art and and brass statues of Buddha (also in the female form 'Tara') that are over 2000 years old. The Chinese got to know about it when some paintings were sent to Delhi for renovation and a Chinese researcher saw them and informed their embassy. They created quite a storm for their return, but they were firmly told that it is 'regimental' property and cannot be returned by the Govt of India.
These artifacts were captured during the Lt. Young Husband expiditions in late 19th century.
The British took all the gold and stuff and left these since they were too heavy to cart off. If you visit the officers messes of our first 3 battalions you will see them.

The same is the case with the Kohinoor or other articles like Shivaji's sword. If they (the British) give use articles like the sword it would be better - they can keep the diamond. :)

Ray
14 Nov 05,, 14:01
Lemontree,

How come your units have Lt. Young Husband 's "treasures"?

What is the history?

Samudra
14 Nov 05,, 14:02
PICTURES PLEASE!
Especially of Tara.

lemontree
15 Nov 05,, 05:57
Lemontree,

How come your units have Lt. Young Husband 's "treasures"?

What is the history?

Sir,
One of the Sikh Pioneer units was raised by him, and the Sikh Pioneers were have been making the roads on which campaigns progressed. The two China expiditions was where my regiment got of the stuff they were part of the Battle of Taku Fort in 1860 and the occupation of Peking/Beijing.
http://www.regiments.org/regiments/southasia/inf/1922-p3.htm

Combined battle honours of 23rd Sikh Pioneers, 32nd Sikh Pioneers, and 34th Sikh Pioneers

Delhi 1857, Lucknow, Taku Forts, Pekin 1860, Peiwar Kotal, Charasiah, Kabul 1879, Kandahar 1880, Afghanistan 1878-80, Chitral, Punjab Frontier, China 1900, Abyssinia

The Great War:1 La Bassée, Armentières, Festubert 1914, Givenchy 1914, Neuve Chapelle, Ypres 1915, St. Julien, France and Flanders 1914-15, Egypt 1916-17, Gaza, Megiddo, Sharon, Nablus, Palestine 1917-18, Tigris 1916, Baghdad, Sharqat, Mesopotamia 1916-18, Aden

Afghanistan 1919
http://www.regiments.org/regiments/southasia/inf/1903-023.htm
Because our regiment was good in infantry role too apart from pioneer work, we were re-raised in 1941 as pure infantry (disbanded in 1933 as the Engineers Regiments were formed and our troops were amalgamated with the Bombay Sappers).
Picture circa 1858(?)

lemontree
15 Nov 05,, 05:59
PICTURES PLEASE!
Especially of Tara.
I'll try and dig out some pictures, I had visited the 1 Sikh Li Officers Mess way back in 1998.

lemontree
15 Nov 05,, 06:01
Lemontree,

How come your units have Lt. Young Husband 's "treasures"?

What is the history?

Sir,
Besides, you know what we (the Sikh LI) is made of, our guys must have wacked those things off the main treasure chest of Lt. Young Husband. :biggrin:

Ray
15 Nov 05,, 08:47
:biggrin:

I also somehow forgot you are SIKH LI.

I wouldn't be surprised if your Regiment have some of the treasures even from the Taj Mahal! ;)

I was (I don't know why) at that moment thought you were MARATHA LI, possibly being confused with the fact that you like in Mumbai.

Any news where Tarzan Kapoor is?

lemontree
15 Nov 05,, 09:55
Any news where Tarzan Kapoor is?
Sir,
He should still be C-in-C Southern Command. I don't know if he has moved out.

Ray
15 Nov 05,, 15:18
That should be great.

It will make my trip to Pune, when I make it, more pleasant!

Officer of Engineers
15 Nov 05,, 15:25
Sir,
Besides, you know what we (the Sikh LI) is made of, our guys must have wacked those things off the main treasure chest of Lt. Young Husband. :biggrin:
Captain,

I cannot believe I'm telling this to an officer. Guard duty is not a licence to steal.

Parihaka
15 Nov 05,, 21:18
Sir, the entire Beijing campaign was, among other things, one long exercise in looting ;)

Ray
15 Nov 05,, 21:49
Captain,

I cannot believe I'm telling this to an officer. Guard duty is not a licence to steal.


Actually, Lemontree was cracking a joke.

War booty maybe since they were ancient times and the British never cared much about protocals.

The British Museums are full of stolen goods from the Empire.

lemontree
16 Nov 05,, 05:48
Captain,

I cannot believe I'm telling this to an officer. Guard duty is not a licence to steal.
Sir,
I don't believe our boys were guarding those treasures, it would have been under some English battalion. Besides we had Brit officers in 1860 and it was all official gifts to the battalions. I just cracked a joke because our troops are very "resourcefull".
Believe me if you had my troops under command, you would never be found wanting in resources.
Our boys are known to brew tea on a move during a route march. When we have breaks during patrols the officer has a choice between lemonade, tea and water. ;) The only time I ever carried my water bottle was during the 5km BPET endurance runs.

lemontree
16 Nov 05,, 05:51
That should be great.

It will make my trip to Pune, when I make it, more pleasant!
Sir,
Do buzz me, I'll try and join you. Another coursemate of yours, Lt.Col. RAK' Manek (ex-Sikh LI, Brigade of Guards, and SSF) had met him sometime back.
In July he had a Sikh LI get-together (in Mumbai), but I could not make it as I was in Chennai for some official work.

Officer of Engineers
16 Nov 05,, 05:55
I just cracked a joke because our troops are very "resourcefull".
Believe me if you had my troops under command, you would never be found wanting in resources.

Gentlemen, it seems we have a cultural divide. The point, gentlemen, is that "us officers" are not supposed to know.

lemontree
16 Nov 05,, 14:19
The point, gentlemen, is that "us officers" are not supposed to know.
You are right sir, when ever I needed crucial defence stores that were denied to me. I would put up the matter to my senior JCO (equvalent to warrent officers) and the CHM (CSM), they would just ask me how much I required. I never asked them where they got it from. ;)

Ray
16 Nov 05,, 16:30
Colonel,

What Lemontree is conveying is that while the Indian Army micromanages, in the SIKH LI it is not done.

In fact, in resourcefulness or getting a job done without supervision, SIKH LI takes the cake.

Ray
16 Nov 05,, 16:49
Colonel,

Read this and you will understand the cultural difference.

THE QUARTERMASTER AND THE BONDAS (Indian Savoury)

This story was told to me when I joined the unit that I commanded.

The unit was located in Naushera in J&K and was deployed on the hill sector along the Line of Control.

The Corps Commander was visiting the unit. This was not a normal event since Corps Commanders are very senior officers and three levels above the unit level.

Army, being over-reactive about their hierarchical pecking order, such events ‘traumatised’ the protocol infrastructure and each level of command took hyperactive personal interest in ensuring that the visit went off flawless. None wanted their heads to roll. Each level of the hierarchy ensured so by checking, re-checking and re-rechecking ad inifitum right down to the ground level that all contingencies had been catered for and nothing was overlooked. In short, such visits were a torment to those being visited. Interestingly, Parkinson’s Law always, without fail, did not fail to apply itself during such visits!

On the momentous day, every aspect of the visit of the Corps Commander to the unit was picture perfect. However, Parkinson’s Law, right as rain, applied itself. The Corps Commander, who was to arrive at the unit Tactical HQ by helicopter, could not do so as the weather was foul. Hence, he landed at the Divisional HQ and was driving down to the unit. The drive would take about two hours and so there was ample time to react.

Everything had been catered for. However, what supposing the Corps Commander wanted to ‘wash his hands’, after the two hour journey, at the unit Base before commencing the ride up the hill to the Tactical HQ?

The Commanding Officer {CO} was a man of details and this aspect was bothering him intensely. He was a person who liked preciseness. He wasn’t at all comfortable or happy about the departure from the set-piece programme of the Corps Commander with this driving down instead of landing by helicopter at the unit Tactical HQ.

The Quartermaster {QM} was at the Base. He was a pleasant, happy go lucky, rotund young officer with a bagful of initiative and a ‘never say die’ attitude. The CO rang him up and told him to ensure that the Officers’ Mess, at the Base, was shipshape, the toilet spankingly clean and to keep a safaiwala [janitor] ready at a moment’s notice in the vicinity. And of course, some light refreshments were to be at hand that could be served so that the Corps Commander knew that the unit was ‘on the ball’. Having ordered so, the CO went back to the practising of his Briefing for the 189th time!

Parkinson’s Law didn’t apply this time. The Corps Commander stopped at the Base to ‘wash his hands’. There was the usual hustle and bustle of his personal staff, the Divisional and Brigade HQs staff who were accompanying and the Mess staff including the QM. They followed the Corps Commander towards the Mess as if being pulled by the vacuum created in his wake! It is only in the Army that a VIP relieving himself by answering nature’s call is given the reverence normally associated with an event of national importance!

The Corps Commander entered the Mess. He looked at the QM and gave a shake of the leg as if shaking a boisterous housefly off the trouser. Bending at 80 degrees to the perpendicular, the Corps Commander wiggled his little finger of the left hand as if seized by an involuntary twitch and said “Which a-way to the Loo, old boy?”

The QM had never ever had the good fortune of a Corps Commander speaking to him. He was awe struck! He thought that he too had to answer in a fancy way and so he said, “That a-way sir’ and before he could copy the Corps Commander’s leg shake which he thought would be appropriate, the Corps Commander, fortunately for all, was on his way.

The Divisional Commander [next in the hierarchy] was taken aback by what he thought was the cheek of this junior officer to copy the Corps Commander’s syntax. He would have been hopping wild had he realised that the QM had attempted the Corps Commander’s leg shake. To him it appeared as if the QM had slipped on the water that had by then settled on the linoleum from the clothes of the various personalities [who were wet from the light drizzle] crowding the alley leading to the ‘Men’s’.

The Corps Commander had moved into the ‘Men’s’. The Divisional Commander decided to have another ‘dekko’ at the arrangements. He stood aghast as his eyes laid on the savouries to be offered to the Corps Commander.

“Bondas?” he asked querulously and fixed a horribly immobile stare on the QM, who was beaming with delight that the Divisional Commander had observed the savoury that he had had prepared for them.

“Bondas?” echoed the Brigade Commander peevishly on cue as did any other officer worth his salt. All were aghast and all spoke in unison, so much so, the statement resounded like the Onida Bass Surround TV. It was a different matter that they did not understand why the Divisional Commander was horrified and grouchy at the sight of Bondas.

“Are you aware that the Corps Commander is an Armoured Corps chap? ……and you have the temerity to offer Indian savouries and that too the type that would be found in a cheap halwai’s [sweetmeat vendor] shop?”, bellowed the Divisional Commander, a decibel lower that what would reach the ‘Men’s’ where the Corps Commander apparently had nestled.

“Yes sir. I know that the Corps Commander is an Armoured Corps officer and they are reputed to prefer crumpets and strawberry in cream with their tea. However, sir, I don’t know how to make them and also, sir, what could be better than hot hot bondas on a rainy day like today?” the QM said with a radiant smile that annoyed the Divisional Commander no end and even more, the Brigade Commander.

“Bakwaas [Tommy rot]. You village bumkin. You are the biggest idiot I have seen. A rum ball with a hot rum punch would have fitted the occasion and the weather; not these stupid, smelly, oily [he was spluttering in anger and had apparently run out of adjectives] bondas. Have you seen the size of the bondas? They are as fat and big as you are. How can he put them ever so gently in the mouth? You have no sophistication. You are a real rustic!” the Divisional Commander thundered. He, it appeared, was by now immensely inflamed and frothing at the mouth.

The QM cringed. However, Divine intervention saved him from a further berating. The Corps Commander had emerged from the ‘Loo’ and was looking definitely much relieved. He seemed to be in the best of moods and was genially smiling as he emerged.

His eyes fell on the Bondas. The Divisional Commander and his ‘faithful echoes’ froze!

The Corps Commander took two steps towards the Bondas and stopped abruptly, practically screeching to a halt! A cold shiver went down the spine of the Divisional Commander.

“Ah, sir…….” and whatever the Divisional Commander wanted to say was drowned in the shriek that emanated from the Corps Commander. All froze with fear – waiting anxiously for the Corps Commander’s inevitable indignation that was expected at this spread.

The Corps Commander pounced towards the table in what appeared a leap…. swiped the largest Bonda……. bit a massive chunk….. and literally gloated, more like a cat which had filched a platter of milk.

“What a capital idea! Hot hot Bondas on a rainy day. Well done and well thought of, old boy”, the Corps Commander was definitely rapturous as his gaze twinkled towards the QM.

The Divisional Commander and his gang emulated the Corps Commander’s leap, swiped the Bondas, and echoed, “A wonderful idea indeed, sir”. They too beamed but definitely not towards the QM.

The broadest smile was on the QM’s face.

He had had the last laugh and damn the strawberries, cream, and crumpets!

Samudra
16 Nov 05,, 17:00
Oh Sir, looks like you'll post half your book here!

We wont have much to read when the book comes out then.... :-(

667medic
16 Nov 05,, 17:08
BG Sir, is it Parkinson's Law or Murphy's Law :redface:

Julie
16 Nov 05,, 17:11
There is now evidence that King Edward IV was illegitimate. You know what that means. :biggrin: Britain Royals shameless? I believe it has become a way of life for them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_IV_of_England

Ray
16 Nov 05,, 17:36
BG Sir, is it Parkinson's Law or Murphy's Law :redface:


Should be Murphy's?! ;)

Thanks for the info.

Officer of Engineers
16 Nov 05,, 18:03
Colonel,

Read this and you will understand the cultural difference.

THE QUARTERMASTER AND THE BONDAS (Indian Savoury)

I see, Sir, that the Pentagon disease (Colonels serving coffee) has also afflicted your army.

Good read, Sir. Good read.

Ray
16 Nov 05,, 21:09
No, we don't personally serve coffee.

We order the Officers' Mess which has the Mess Committee.

We keep an eye on the organisation and the waiters serve the same!

Parihaka
16 Nov 05,, 21:14
Oh Sir, looks like you'll post half your book here!

We wont have much to read when the book comes out then.... :-(
yes you will :)

lemontree
17 Nov 05,, 05:30
THE QUARTERMASTER AND THE BONDAS (Indian Savoury)
Excellent piece sir. I have saved it on my desk top. :)

Monk
18 Nov 05,, 18:11
Shahjahen's Peacock Throne is in ToupKapi museum in Turkey. And after seeing it this January, I can only say, "let them keep it."

Bullsh!t. Shah Jehan's Peacock throne was destroyed circa 1757 during the uprising in Iran and the murder of Nadir Shah (If I am not wrong about the Nadir Shah part). The one in turkey is not the same.

Monk
18 Nov 05,, 18:17
The diamond was presented to Victoria by one of Raja Ranjit Singh's successors :confused: So why raise a stink over this non-issue. As Ray Sahab had said, the artifacts are being properly tended to by British Museums. Ofcourse I I don't condone British Imperialism or their colonozing under the pretext of the so called "White man's burden" . We are better off stealing thier jobs. Furthermore Raja Ranjit Singh's capital was Lahore and so pakistan might also have a valid claim over the diamond....

Another Historical Misstatement. The traitor Gulab Singh went to England in 1849 to hand over the Diamond because it was part of the terms of the surrender treaty. Raja Ranjit singh was the ruler from Indian punjab to Eastern Afghan, that means at that point in History it was India, so the only one to have claim is India. Raja Ranjit singh is an Icon of India, period. All other statements are meaningless.

Monk
18 Nov 05,, 18:22
The Sikh's lost the 2nd Sikh war. They didn't suffer the same fate as Tipu Sultan's sons, who were imprisoned at Madras. On the contrary, Raja Ranjit Singh's successor were brought to London and educated there. He later married a caucasian and settled down in London. Kohinoor was Raja Ranjit Singh's personal possession and his successors had every right to dispose of it in whatever way he chose. On the contrary the Brits could have slapped a heavy war indemnity on them and could have driven them towards starvation. But fortunately the Brits recognized the toughness and bravery of the Sikh warriors and recruited them in the Company's army....

Is something wrong with you? Raja Ranjit Singh did NOT handover the Kohinoor, the traitor Gulab Singh DID. Everything else is just a historical exclamation.

lemontree
21 Nov 05,, 05:43
Another Historical Misstatement. The traitor Gulab Singh went to England in 1849 to hand over the Diamond because it was part of the terms of the surrender treaty. Raja Ranjit singh was the ruler from Indian punjab to Eastern Afghan, that means at that point in History it was India, so the only one to have claim is India. Raja Ranjit singh is an Icon of India, period. All other statements are meaningless.
Monk Gulab Singh had nothing to do with the Kohinoor since it was in the Khalsa treasury at Lahore. The diamond and all other Khalsa treasures were looted from Lahore.
Dulip Singh was Ranjit Singh's heir who was 10 years old at that time.

Monk
21 Nov 05,, 14:24
Monk Gulab Singh had nothing to do with the Kohinoor since it was in the Khalsa treasury at Lahore. The diamond and all other Khalsa treasures were looted from Lahore.
Dulip Singh was Ranjit Singh's heir who was 10 years old at that time.

What I have read about most often is the involvement of Gulab Singh in the whole sordid affair, is that incorrect? Can you possibly give me the correct picture, then? Thank you Captain.

lemontree
22 Nov 05,, 05:39
What I have read about most often is the involvement of Gulab Singh in the whole sordid affair, is that incorrect? Can you possibly give me the correct picture, then? Thank you Captain.
Gulab Singh's aspirations were more towards his survival and creation of a kingdom. After the demise of Ranjit Singh the Khalsa court became a quagmire of deciet and assasinations due to the greed of Ranjit Singhs relatives (read Khuswant Singh's book "Rise and fall of the Sikh Empire"). Gulab Singh saw an oppertunity to become an independent ruler and assisted the British during the 2nd Anglo-Sikh war. His betrayal was what helped the british to conquer Punjab. The British suffered max casulties in the 2 Anglo-Sikh wars than the combined total of all the previous wars fought (in India) before that.
The fall of Punjab was just a matter of time, Gulab Singh's trechery speeded it up.

sparten
22 Nov 05,, 06:21
Bullsh!t. Shah Jehan's Peacock throne was destroyed circa 1757 during the uprising in Iran and the murder of Nadir Shah (If I am not wrong about the Nadir Shah part). The one in turkey is not the same.
Well they claimed it was the one and the same (I asked), but if what you are saying........

Still no great loss. It is butt ugly

Boltonian
23 Apr 06,, 13:46
Only 13% of the British people want to get rid of the Monarchy.

Boltonian
23 Apr 06,, 13:48
The Queen is Britain's favourite Royal. 57% believe that she should reign until the end of her life. Of the 1500 British people surveyed, only 13% want Britain to become a Republic.


Queen still top of the pops


By PETE BELL
Sun Online


THE QUEEN received an early birthday present today when a poll named her Britain's favourite Royal.

Her Majesty, who celebrates her eightieth birthday on Friday will also be pleased to learn more than half the public want her to reign for the rest of her life.

About 57 per cent of those asked believed the Queen should be on the throne until she dies, while 16 per cent thought she should retire to make way for her grandson, Prince William (who would become King William V).

Only 12 per cent called for the Queen to step down in favour of the Prince of Wales.

Of the 1,500 questioned in the ITV News survey, 13 per cent were opposed to having a successor and want the country to become a republic.

The Duchess of Cornwall came bottom in a list of most popular royals with one per cent of the votes.

William was second with 21 per cent and the Princess Royal third with 11 per cent.

Charles and Prince Harry came joint fourth with 4 per cent each.

More than half felt Camilla should definitely not become Queen when Charles becomes King, while 29 per cent believed she should.

thesun.co.uk

Ray
23 Apr 06,, 22:57
The British would be fools to close down the Monarchy.

Look at this to understand what the monarcy is all about:

http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/showthread.php?p=206390#post206390

They are no wimps.

They lead from the front!

Nitin Mehta
24 Apr 06,, 13:56
The British would be fools to close down the Monarchy.

Look at this to understand what the monarcy is all about:

http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/showthread.php?p=206390#post206390

They are no wimps.

They lead from the front!


Great example for a saying which goas as

BEGANI SHADI MAIN ABDULLA DIWANA