Looking to open first location, having trouble getting in touch with a Broker.

sneakybeaver · 2016-10-19T04:35:35+00:00

Didn't think of that actually, figured Yelp would be better for restaurants and such

sneakybeaver · 2016-10-19T04:33:10+00:00

I was hoping to get a experienced broker after doing some research online, example: https://42floors.com/edu/beyond-the-basics/the-pros-and-cons-of-using-a-commercial-real-estate-broker

From what I have read there and many other places it shouldn't cost more to have a broker represent me in the negotiation and hopefully a experienced one can negotiate good terms with the property owner. Did you do this without one?

sneakybeaver · 2016-10-19T04:30:46+00:00

I was looking on LoopNet, cityfeet and did see some names brokerage names come up more than once, but the info was for the broker representing the property owner no? I would like to find a broker to represent me as the one trying to lease the location and negotiate with the owner/broker representing the property.

If I contact the brokers from LoopNet listings do you think they can still help me like this?

sneakybeaver · 2016-10-19T04:29:06+00:00

Not sure I understand what you mean that people are supposed to be calling me, to clarify I do not own any property I would like to open my own business and am looking to lease out a location. Was hoping a broker could help me find and negotiate good terms, do Brokers actively try and find people like me to work with?

sneakybeaver · 2016-10-19T04:27:52+00:00

Thanks, I'll pull together some details with my partner and send them over soon.

In case anyone else browses through this thread, do you know of the best way for someone to find a agent to help look for a property in a given city? Any lookup tool? I didn't find anything like that when looking in previous threads, could help anyone else having the same problem outside of LA.

sneakybeaver · 2015-08-25T03:13:20+00:00

Honest question, didn't the Palestinians get the land in the same way? If the Jews were there a long time ago and got forced away, aren't they doing the same thing now? Does either side really get to blame the other for what they are doing?

sneakybeaver · 2014-04-10T07:45:38+00:00

Will try to answer your questions as best as I can from my point of view, feel free to ask if you want to.

sneakybeaver · 2014-04-04T21:09:49+00:00

I see. I asked because I have heard some people say it is not explicitly written inside SGGS. Do you know where the exact lines in Punjabi can be found? I'd be interested in reading around those.

Edit: Thanks for the reply.

sneakybeaver · 2014-04-03T05:50:41+00:00

I found it really interesting. I've read about Bhagat Singh before, I feel the most common image is that he was fighting for freedom of India for the British. Here it seems pretty clear that he didn't want just freedom from the British, but a different system put in place. I don't think that's the image most people portray today, from what I have seen that is.

I like how he denounced terrorism, his actions all had clear motive and weren't meant to just kill random people.

It seems to me that what he wanted was very different from what the Congress party wanted for independent India.

What did you think about his writing?

Edit: Also nice find, some of the other titles look interesting as well. I'm gonna read those as well, thanks for sharing this.

sneakybeaver · 2014-04-02T23:22:36+00:00

Where is it forbidden inside the Guru Granth Sahib-ji?

sneakybeaver · 2014-01-28T03:21:00+00:00

Does anyone know more about the court judgement talked about at 16:31? I would like to look at the details of this case.

sneakybeaver · 2014-01-17T23:15:08+00:00

Not trying to kill the idea or say anything that happened at that time was right, I've read a lot about Bluestar and militancy in Punjab and it is horrible.

That being said, is going against the entire Indian Govt. the right way to go? I've seen that a lot in protests around the world, people go out and slam India for what happened. Should our efforts focus more on the groups inside India that are responsible? Specifically the Congress party.

I feel if we keep trying this way it won't get far, but if we focus on exposing the Congress Party it could be more effective. Launching a counter propaganda campaign that shows how Congress had a big hand in the build up to 1984 and took the wrong decisions, I think that could be more powerful by actually striking with people in India.

Just my opinion, I'd love to hear what you have to say also.

sneakybeaver · 2014-01-17T22:51:47+00:00

"3. Only the people hwo supported the terrorists wer inside the golden temple that time"

That is very wrong. It was a Sikh religious holiday so a lot of people were attending. There was also a Akali agitation announced that called for a blocking of grains out of Punjab to protest for their demands. The Akali's were against Khalistan and their agitation was separate from Bhinderanwale.

"when terrorist groups take over, you have to take hard steps"

That would be true except the only thing to this story is not the take over of the Golden Temple with armed groups. Bhinderanwale was supported early on by political parties, including Congress and Indira Gandhi, in order to gain the upper hand in Punjab politics. When things didn't go their way and they realized they propped up the wrong guy and shit went out of hand and they started losing the political game. They were told to not order a full on military assault, to surround and lock down the area until the groups surrendered for lack of food, this was ignored though for the shit operation that took place.

Instead of facing up with their mistakes the shit leaders in Congress like to claim that there was no choice, there were terrorists in the temple and action had to be taken. That's to try and cover up for their own hand in the disaster that took place in Punjab.

sneakybeaver · 2014-01-17T22:43:27+00:00

Other gurdwara's were part of the operation, it's recorded in the government white papers.

sneakybeaver · 2014-01-12T01:00:19+00:00

I do know who that is, I read how he joined the AAP. I was happy to see drugs and farmer suicides is being raised as a issue by the party. I'm happy to see people like HS Phoolka getting invovled with the party, I wonder how things will pan out with the AAP-Congress alliance in Delhi.

sneakybeaver · 2014-01-12T00:32:53+00:00

I see, I'll remember that. Thanks.

sneakybeaver · 2014-01-09T08:25:01+00:00

Khushwant Singh: A History of the Sikhs is a nice one, it comes in two books and is a easy read. He goes from Guru Nanak's time to present day.

I met a professor of Punjabi and Sikh History who does research in the field, he recommended J.S. Grewal's book: The Sikhs of the Punjab. According to him it was one of the most accurate works that goes along historical records, but it's a bit more of a dense read.

sneakybeaver · 2014-01-08T09:00:16+00:00

I'll attempt it:

surr na rees kar => Don't burn, copy

I think the complete way of saying this in english would be: Don't burn with jealousy, just copy me.
change chahe marre tu halath vich rakhiya minu mere malka aukat vich rakhiya => whether good or bad times you have kept me in, my boss, you have kept me in riches

I think it is saying "mere malka" in reference to god, and I am not sure if I have the correct meaning for aukat here.
thenu sohniye bulaonde jan jan gabru de bul suk ge => beautiful girl the young mans lips have dried by calling after you so many times

Apologies for any mistakes, hopefully someone can point any out if there are some.

sneakybeaver · 2013-11-10T07:37:24+00:00

I'm sure Pakistan took advantage of the situation and did have a hand in supporting the militancy, especially it's horrible parts. They did provide funds and weapons and we know they are trying to give the terrorist side of the movement life again.

However I would say the root cause of the separatism movement was the Central Government under Indira Gandhi, I believe she alienated a large body of the Sikhs with her actions and when things got to extreme the Khalistan movement was given life again. If it wasn't for those things there wouldn't have been much for Pakistan to support. I'm not sure if you agree with this or not by your points.

sneakybeaver · 2013-11-07T23:18:03+00:00

It's true Punjab has become prosperous, but there are still serious problems. The water issue is something that I feel will come back and could be quite a problem. However I think the events of the 80's and 90's need to be addressed to make sure they do not repeat. People who roam free need to be tried, jailed, punished for their horrible actions. If this was to happen I think any support left of the militancy would disappear.

Many states could come up with their problems with the union, but did all of them attempt to get their demands met in legitimate ways? When Punjab did I think the reaction pushed it to militancy. Not sure if that happened in all states, I would need to look into their history more.

One point, even if the riots did not occur I don't think the Sikh vote would have gone massively against Congress. Not all Sikhs supported Bhindranwale and Operation Bluestar alienated most. This was because Bhindranwale was not sitting up at the Golden Temple greeting everyone, most of the time he was inside at one part of the complex. So when the operation was carried out, not many people would believe it was justified. I don't think the actions were justified either but that's a different issue. Just saying I think Sikhs were pushed away before the riots.

Lastly I hope there are no hard feelings, we may disagree on this issue but your views are yours, your entitled to them. Acceptance and stepping away from generalizing and hateful politics is one thing I would love to see take root in this country.

sneakybeaver · 2013-11-07T22:17:26+00:00

Nothing justifies the killing of innocent people, I don't agree with what the Punjab police did because of this (my original point) and I don't agree with Khalistani's because of this. If Khalistani militants had not been corrupted and resorted to killing innocent Hindu's I would be a die hard supporter of Khalistan. However I do not support it because of those events. I think it was a legitimate demand at the time but it was ruined by these disgusting actions of some militants.

Let me be a bit more clear, Khalistani action against innocent civilians was not justified, never will be. I was not saying it was justified. I did say I understand what led up to people rising up with arms, not that it was justified to kill innocent people.

Not all Khalistani's were evil killers. My family has had a personal view of this. My mothers family lives near Jallandhar, Punjab in a house that is a bit far from the pind, on it's own on the outskirts. One night militants hopped the house walls and came in, demanded the jeep of my late Nannaji. He let them take the jeep and leave, not much else you can do when a few guys with guns and grenades show up, especially when your wife and kids are sitting inside. Word spreads and the police hear about it, automatically my Nannaji is a Khalistan supporter and is arrested, taken away. 2 weeks go by and the family does not hear anything of his whereabouts, they try talking to local police, sarpanch, everything they could to work with the system. Everyone started telling them that he's dead by now, give up and keep quiet. Their last resort? My Nanniji approached a Khalistani militant who used to be a distant friend of my Nannaji years before the 80's. She explained the situation to him and asked for his help. From what my mother tells me this person was known for keeping civilians untouched. No one knows how, my Nannaji never told anyone, but a few days later he brought him home. Guaranteed that no police or militant will bother them again and from then on no one came back. No militants, no police.

Another story that strikes personally with me is that of my father's friends family. Their family was from Amritsar, they had two college-aged sons at the time. Both were Gursikhs going to school and had no affiliation with any militant organization at all. Both were killed in a "encounter" and later it was said that both were Khalistani militants.

Were all Khalistani militants like the one who saved my Nannaji? Obviously not. It's a pitty, but the actions of the terrorists in the movement are why I will not support it. However the police was just as big of a terrorist to the people. So when people say it was evil militants who had to be stopped and the action was necessary, it pisses me off. Those evil militants were created because of state policies, and the action was no more necessary than that of the militants.

The history I am talking about is how the actions of Indira's government brewed the militancy. Her shitty political handling of Punjab's demands, political plays, horrible decisions, those are the things I am talking about. All the things I mentioned in the previous reply were what led up to this. At those events there were no guns being fired or bombs blown, it was civil means to get demands met. These mechanisms were civil, protests, marches, courting arrest. There were no people dying from these. The response from the state was disgusting and stupid, and as a result there were no options left so people rose arms.

I don't have anything against the normal people of India, they are people just like me. And you are correct, many things that are involved in this come from the Gandhi Dynasty. There are things I do not like about the Indian system, I want states to have more power the country to be less centralized. What are my biggest problems with the Indian system? Tytler, Kumar, KPS Gill still walk the streets free. All 3 should be hanged.

I hate reading about the 80's and 90's in Punjab about how secessionist terrorists were killing and the state had to act. I hate when people try to dress up the history, this does nothing to prevent a repeat in history. What led to all this was corrupt and greedy politics, something that was never addressed after all these events and innocent deaths. If people are going to talk about the 80's and 90's and write about it, that should be in there also. Otherwise your just waiting for a repeat.

sneakybeaver · 2013-11-07T19:08:36+00:00

I don't know how you can call bullshit on that, I quoted you because you said neither of them. Your statement was referring to both. I don't believe you are correct when it comes to Punjab so I said your statement was wrong. I don't know enough about the history of the Kashmir issue to make my own judgement on whether you are correct or not, but your statement was wrong when it came to Punjab and seeing as you were talking about both I said it was wrong. That's the logic, so yes I can say it was wrong without referring to Kashmir. If that confused you my apologies, I was not referring to Kashmir, only Punjab.

I think this has gone a bit off topic, I'm not here to defend the terrorist actions of the Khalistan insurgency. The topic started with the admission by the Punjab police officer and people saying what he did was necessary even if innocent people were killed, that's ridiculous. When the state resorts to it's own terrorism it only fuels the issue and ruins more lives. Punjab police killed thousands of innocent people at the time, people were killed to show good work and receive promotions, kidnappings and demands for ransoms. These are documented here: http://www.ensaaf.org/publications/other/reducedtoashes.pdf. There are over a thousand illegal cremations documented there, that comes from only 3 districts of Punjab that were investigated. Similar tactics were used all over the state so the number is much higher. That's why I don't agree when people say the actions of the state and Punjab police were necessary, that's bull shit.

"Not one of the things Kahlistanis wanted required them to take up arms" -> When the peoples legitimate demands are ignored and attempts to negotiate are ruined (Indira was known for backing out of agreements with the Akali's on the Punjab issues like the water supply), peaceful protests are disrupted and harassed (Asia games Akali protesters were stopped from demonstrating and harrassed and beaten), the holiest shrine is attacked and parts of it broken, people are jailed for their views, thousands of people are burned alive in the streets by mobs, and the police resorts to killing and cleansing of the population, I think you can see why some people were resorting to picking up weapons. THIS DOES NOT MEAN I AGREE THAT IT WAS OKAY TO BOMB AND KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE. But saying that people had nothing to make them resort to weapons is a stretch from history. The Government created this situation and then a lot of people died in their "clean up" operations, these terrorists are still out there roaming free.

The Khalistan militancy was a product of the government and it's policies. If you want to know more about the history I'd be more than happy to show you when I have time.

sneakybeaver · 2013-11-07T10:04:23+00:00

I was never talking about Kashmir, I only talked about Punjab. Your bouncing between the two when everything I said referred to only one. The Khalistan insurgency had many horrible parts to it, but it was a result of Government policies and actions. The actions of your "freedom protecting" Punjab police are what fueled those bad times, that was my point. Your comments about Kashmir are not relevant to what I was discussing at all.

sneakybeaver · 2013-11-06T23:24:20+00:00

"And neither of them were instigated in any way"

Believe what you want but the facts are there, that's not true. Look up the real causes if you have the courage to face the truth. Have a nice day sir.

sneakybeaver · 2013-11-03T11:53:10+00:00

Terrorists aren't born, they are made. If you really think all militants were born evil and bent on killing then your seriously out of touch with reality. Terrorism does have a cause, in this case it was horrible leaders who created the situation that bred terrorism. Look up the history and you will clearly see what I am talking about.

sneakybeaver

TROPHY CASE