Yeah...the definition of the Kirpan is not the most accurate on that page. The Kirpan is made up of two words, "Kirpa" and "Aan". Kirpa means mercy and Aan means honor and self-respect. Therefore, the Kirpan is that which bestows mercy on those who are being oppressed, harassed, subjugated, etc. and it protects the Sikhs' honor and self-respect when he/she is attacked in a physical manner. It is as much as a practical blade as it is a symbol, because it constantly reminds the Sikh of this duty, whether it be fulfilled with (always preferably) peaceful means or (last resort) more violent means. This was strictly detailed by the Last Human Guru of the Sikhs, who stated explicitly that the sword is only justifiable when all peaceful means have been exhausted. Therefore, the Kirpan is not, as the website states, a means to defend the fine line of "truth", but rather as a reminder to and a means of defending those who would be endangered, be it yourself or others. A Sikh's ideal life is to obtain liberation from the cycle of birth and death by connecting directly with the Almighty theough elimination of the self ego and rememberance of the Almighty until his/her soul becomes one with the One. However, a Sikh is acutely aware of the practical situation of the world, in which such an existence is not made possible without fighting for it, as there have been and will be those who cannot live and let live. Therefore, the Sikh was bestowed the life of a Saint-Soldier, where the object was rememberance of the Almighty, but yet, the soldier-discipline and martial arts were to be respected as the means to root out oppression and restore/maintain peace and harmony.
Now, as per the Khalistan point. The entire scenario really took off after 1984, when then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi launched a military assault on the Harimandir Sahib/Golden Temple (consider it the Sikh equivalent of the Vatican). Her excuse for the attack was to eliminate "terrorists" in the complex (allegations that never were proven). In the attack (which took place on a Sikh holiday, so the complex was even more full than before), thousands of innocent Sikhs were killed and the Sikh Reference Library was intentionally torched by the invading army and tremendous damage was done to the complex, as tank fire was used to decimate the building. Now, if a government wishes to eliminate or arrest a criminal or negative element, is would try to minimize the civilian casualties. However, in this case, the attack was launched with tens of thousands of innocents trapped in the Harimandir Sahib.
In response to this atrocity, Indira Gandhi was assissinated by her body guards, who were Sikhs. That very day, India erupted into mob violence across the country, in which Sikh businesses were torched, Sikhs were murdered, raped, tortured, burned alive and butchered in a brutal, organized and methodical manner, led in many cases by politicians of India. The death toll of this carnage was 10,000, the focal point of which was Delhi, where 3000+ were butchered. Combining the attack on the Golden Temple with this genocide, the Sikhs were deeply outraged and began a campaign to obtain justice, as the justice system failed and still failing to grant any punishment to those involved in these crimes against humanity. So from the period of 1984-1995, many Sikhs were activaly engaged in killing those who had perpetrated crimes against the Sikh community. And after suffering so much hatred and violence from the hands of those who were their own government and even thwir own neighbors, it is not unreasonable to conclude that the Sikhs would want their own homeland. As per the Air India case...nothing in the Sikh religion condones the killing of innocent individuals. Sikhs wear the Kirpan to defend innocents, not to perpetrate crimes against them. Therefore, if a Sikh was to engage in any act that targeted innocent people, that person has also forfitted the right to call himself/herself a Sikh. It is behavior that is contrary to the very tenets of Sikhism and not tolerated.
Now, given that these events have occured not more than 21 years ago, many Sikhs left India due to these atrocities and settled overseas in freedom-loving countries. The memories of those atrocities against Sikhs (which have so far claimed near 125,000 lives due to police killings...which were literally police going into villages, pulling Sikh youth from their homes, torturing and killing Sikhs, all under the blessing of the government) are still burning fresh. Therefore, some choose to express their seething anger in such displays as "Long live Khalistan, our Homeland". However, as the generations become more settled in their new homelands, they become much more integrated into that country and many of the youth of these immigrants are now working on helping Sikhs face discrimination and bias, rather than engaging in active struggle for a free homeland. They are Sikh Americans and Sikh Canadians. They have not forgotten what has happened to them in their former homeland, but they call their new countries their home.
Lastly, per Ad Astra's comment, the first hate murder in the U.S. was a Sikh in Arizona, one Balbir Singh. The murderer was indeed arrested and convicted. One very positive aspect of being in the U.S....the justice system does work, unlike India.
Any further questions and comments are more than welcome.
The Guru seems to preach tolerance while the religion seems to preach intolerance. I have the same problem with Christian and Muslim religions: They preach love for all neighbours and then act in violence and intolerance. I have some trepidation about Islam preaching love for all as well, but I have only just begun reading the Quran.
When in Appalachia...... 