What's new

[VIDEOS] Why anti Muslim bias is so profound among Hindutva supporters?

The Bald Eagle said:
@Josh, some more stats for you. And this is not Al Jazeera or TRT poll too

View attachment 146691
Click to expand...
For me? Why?

Not sure how these figures are calculated but targetting someone based on one's religion is a condemnable thing and India has had quite a few of these cases lately. With social media and uneducated masses, it's easy to give religious angle to any small dispute and then such crimes take place. India needs to introspect and do better. No two ways about this.

I am very hopeful for good future though. Eventually tolerance will rise and people will take religion less seriously.
 
They closed the pathway and Hindutva brigade came to life against those people but the Muslim brother and sister getting beaten meant nothing and the same Hindutva brigade went missing.
 
Sorry bro, mistaken you for Itachi because of same DP color. These stats are meant for him as he asked earlier.
Josh said:
For me? Why?

Not sure how these figures are calculated but targetting someone based on one's religion is a condemnable thing and India has had quite a few of these cases lately. With social media and uneducated masses, it's easy to give religious angle to any small dispute and then such crimes take place. India needs to introspect and do better. No two ways about this.

I am very hopeful for good future though. Eventually tolerance will rise and people will take religion less seriously.
Click to expand...
 

Insight: In Modi's Delhi, Indian Muslims segregate to seek security​

In February 2020, Nasreen and her husband Tofik were living in Shiv Vihar, an upcoming neighbourhood in northeast New Delhi. But that month, riots erupted targeting Muslims like them and Tofik was pushed by a mob from the second floor of the building where they lived, according to a police report he filed days later from hospital.

He survived, but has a permanent limp and was only able to return to work selling clothes on the street after spending nearly 3 years recuperatiom

Soon after the riots the couple moved to Loni, a more remote area with poorer infrastructure and job prospects - but with a sizable Muslim population.

"I will not go back to that area. I feel safer among Muslims," Tofik, who like his wife goes by one name, told Reuters.
Reuters interviewed about two dozen people, who described how Muslims in the Indian capital have been congregating in enclaves away from the nation's Hindu majority, seeking safety in numbers following the deadly 2020 riot and an increase in anti-Muslim hate speech. Details about this phenomenon, which has led a major Muslim neighbourhood in Delhi to effectively run out of space, have not previously been reported.

 

Owaisi lashes out at ultimatum to Muslims to leave Chamoli by December 31​


AIMIM President and Member of Parliament from Hyderabad, Asaduddin Owaisi has criticised the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) that the Uttarakhand government is set to implement. He claimed that Muslims in India have been turned into "untouchables."

Expressing concern for Muslims, the AIMIM President took to X and wrote, "Muslims have been made untouchable in India. 15 Muslim families are being boycotted in Chamoli, Uttarakhand. Traders of Chamoli have threatened that Muslims will have to leave Chamoli by 31 December. If house owners give houses to Muslims, they will have to pay a fine of Rs 10,000."

"Don't the Muslims of Chamoli have the right to live with equality and respect?" he further noted.

Earlier on October 19, former Uttarakhand Chief Minister and Congress leader Harish Rawat had also criticised Uttarakhand Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

He said that there is nothing substantial in the UCC and that it is merely a promotional step. Speaking exclusively to ANI, Harish Rawat said, "There is nothing in the UCC; it is only a promotional sequence. It has enhanced Uttarakhand CM Dhami's stature in national politics. The BJP also had to convey this to their voters. It has been ten years since they have been in power, so why did we not implement the UCC? Pushkar Singh Dhami came forward and made this announcement so that the BJP can claim they are implementing the UCC."

He added, "The UCC is nothing; it is only a step taken for political propaganda. They can implement it whenever they want. The Uttarakhand government has nothing solid to tell people about what they have done in the state. The Uttarakhand government set a deadline for filling potholes, which they could not complete. Atrocities against women are constantly rising. There is an imbalance in the state. When people consider what has been done by the BJP government for their welfare, voters won't give them a chance."

Meanwhile, on Friday UCC Rules and Implementation Committee chairman, the retired IAS officer Shatrughan Singh submitted the final report to chief minister Dhami at the state secretariat.

The Uttarakhand UCC bill addresses laws relating to marriage, divorce, succession, live-in relationships, and related matters. Among its many proposals, the Uniform Civil Code Bill mandates the registration of live-in relationships under the law. The act also imposes a complete ban on child marriage and introduces a uniform process for divorce. The Code provides equal rights to women of all religions concerning their ancestral property. According to the UCC Bill, the marriage age will be 18 for women and 21 for men in all communities.

Marriage registration will be mandatory across all religions, and marriages without registration will be deemed invalid. No divorce petition will be allowed to be filed after one year of marriage.

 
The Bald Eagle said:

Insight: In Modi's Delhi, Indian Muslims segregate to seek security​

In February 2020, Nasreen and her husband Tofik were living in Shiv Vihar, an upcoming neighbourhood in northeast New Delhi. But that month, riots erupted targeting Muslims like them and Tofik was pushed by a mob from the second floor of the building where they lived, according to a police report he filed days later from hospital.

He survived, but has a permanent limp and was only able to return to work selling clothes on the street after spending nearly 3 years recuperatiom

Soon after the riots the couple moved to Loni, a more remote area with poorer infrastructure and job prospects - but with a sizable Muslim population.

"I will not go back to that area. I feel safer among Muslims," Tofik, who like his wife goes by one name, told Reuters.
Reuters interviewed about two dozen people, who described how Muslims in the Indian capital have been congregating in enclaves away from the nation's Hindu majority, seeking safety in numbers following the deadly 2020 riot and an increase in anti-Muslim hate speech. Details about this phenomenon, which has led a major Muslim neighbourhood in Delhi to effectively run out of space, have not previously been reported.

Click to expand...


Another day, another anti-Muslim riot. It seems to be the only thing which unites Hindus of India, the main problem would be that there is such a large Muslim population which must make ethnic cleansing more problematic in the short term.
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
Another day, another anti-Muslim riot. It seems to be the only thing which unites Hindus of India, the main problem would be that there is such a large Muslim population which must make ethnic cleansing more problematic in the short term.
Click to expand...

A 4 year old riot, suddenly Reuters needs to talk about it.

No one is doing ethnic cleansing, but no one is going to tolerate attempts by politically backed Muslims to dominate.
 

RSS endorses Yogi Adityanath's 'batengey toh katengey' remark, bats for Hindu unity​


RSS general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale virtually endorsed Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath's "batengey toh katengey (divided we fall)" remark emphasising the need for Hindu unity against forces that seek to divide in the name of religion, caste and ideology.

"If we discriminate/divide on the basis of language, state, upper and backward castes, then we will be decimated (Hum jaati, bhasha, prant agla-pitchda bhed se hum karengey toh hum katengey)," Hosabale said on the second and concluding day of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh's national meet in Mathura on Saturday.

The 'batengey toh katengey' slogan was given by Yogi Adityanath at an event in Agra in August this year. "Nothing can be above the nation. And the nation will be empowered only when we are united. Batenge to katenge. You are seeing what is happening in Bangladesh. Those mistakes should not be repeated here," he said.

The remark was subsequently used by Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his rally in Thane, Maharashtra on October 5.

Hosabale stressed that while the statement itself is not the focus, the spirit behind it is significant.

"The issue is of Hindu unity. In fact, we often say that those who forget the Hindu thought invite disaster, lose their family, land and places of worship. The spirit is the same. The issue is unity in society. (Samaj ekatmata se nahi rahega toh .. itihaas kehta hai.. hum to kehte hain jab jab Hindu bhaav ko bhoole aayi vipada mahaan bhai tootey dharti khoi mitey dharma sansthan .. yeh hamara geet hai ... toh usko aajkal ki bhasha main aisa aapne jo kaha ho sakta hai. Mudda kya hain. Samaj ki ekta)," the RSS leader said.

Asserting that unity is essential for any nation, he said mere speeches are insufficient and real efforts are required to foster it.

"We have to inculcate it in our behaviour. The good thing is that many religious and other organisations are now understanding this and supporting it. Hindu unity is the RSS' pledge," he said, adding Sangh reflects the voice of the society.

"Hindu unity is for everyone's good, for global happiness and peace. Hindu unity is important to ensure our protection and for world harmony. That is why we back Hindu unity and there are no two views on this," he said.

www.indiatoday.in

RSS endorses Yogi Adityanath's 'batengey toh katengey' remark, bats for Hindu unity

The 'batengey toh katengey' slogan was given by Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath at an event in Agra in August this year.
www.indiatoday.in www.indiatoday.in
 
FearlessRoar said:

RSS endorses Yogi Adityanath's 'batengey toh katengey' remark, bats for Hindu unity​


RSS general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale virtually endorsed Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath's "batengey toh katengey (divided we fall)" remark emphasising the need for Hindu unity against forces that seek to divide in the name of religion, caste and ideology.

"If we discriminate/divide on the basis of language, state, upper and backward castes, then we will be decimated (Hum jaati, bhasha, prant agla-pitchda bhed se hum karengey toh hum katengey)," Hosabale said on the second and concluding day of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh's national meet in Mathura on Saturday.

The 'batengey toh katengey' slogan was given by Yogi Adityanath at an event in Agra in August this year. "Nothing can be above the nation. And the nation will be empowered only when we are united. Batenge to katenge. You are seeing what is happening in Bangladesh. Those mistakes should not be repeated here," he said.

The remark was subsequently used by Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his rally in Thane, Maharashtra on October 5.

Hosabale stressed that while the statement itself is not the focus, the spirit behind it is significant.

"The issue is of Hindu unity. In fact, we often say that those who forget the Hindu thought invite disaster, lose their family, land and places of worship. The spirit is the same. The issue is unity in society. (Samaj ekatmata se nahi rahega toh .. itihaas kehta hai.. hum to kehte hain jab jab Hindu bhaav ko bhoole aayi vipada mahaan bhai tootey dharti khoi mitey dharma sansthan .. yeh hamara geet hai ... toh usko aajkal ki bhasha main aisa aapne jo kaha ho sakta hai. Mudda kya hain. Samaj ki ekta)," the RSS leader said.

Asserting that unity is essential for any nation, he said mere speeches are insufficient and real efforts are required to foster it.

"We have to inculcate it in our behaviour. The good thing is that many religious and other organisations are now understanding this and supporting it. Hindu unity is the RSS' pledge," he said, adding Sangh reflects the voice of the society.

"Hindu unity is for everyone's good, for global happiness and peace. Hindu unity is important to ensure our protection and for world harmony. That is why we back Hindu unity and there are no two views on this," he said.

www.indiatoday.in

RSS endorses Yogi Adityanath's 'batengey toh katengey' remark, bats for Hindu unity

The 'batengey toh katengey' slogan was given by Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath at an event in Agra in August this year.
www.indiatoday.in www.indiatoday.in
Click to expand...


At least he's saying it openly. For India, the unity which matters must be built around Hindu unity. Unity on the basis on nationalism regardless of religion does not count.
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
At least he's saying it openly. For India, the unity which matters must be built around Hindu unity. Unity on the basis on nationalism regardless of religion does not count.
Click to expand...
So basically he is saying the same thing Pakistan did in 1947 i.e uniting and forming country based on religion.
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
Pakistan and Islam seems to be the role model I agree.
Click to expand...
This statement of your can be true or false but Pakistani's have a problem with Indian politicians asking for unity based on religion when their own country is formed based on that is ironical and why no one takes you guys seriously.
 
Rajdeep said:
This statement of your can be true or false but Pakistani's have a problem with Indian politicians asking for unity based on religion when their own country is formed based on that is ironical and why no one takes you guys seriously.
Click to expand...
So do you second Jinnah model?
 
Rajdeep said:
This statement of your can be true or false but Pakistani's have a problem with Indian politicians asking for unity based on religion when their own country is formed based on that is ironical and why no one takes you guys seriously.
Click to expand...

Well BJP and their acolytes clearly take Pakistan seriously, every ideological move seems to be based around the Pakistan model, and here you are referencing it again to underscore that point.
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
Well BJP and their acolytes clearly take Pakistan seriously, every ideological move seems to be based around the Pakistan model, and here you are referencing it again to underscore that point.
Click to expand...
If that what makes you sleep at night peacefully so be it :rabada2

The fact is, Yogi Adityanath has all the right to call for unity among Hindus. Asking people to get united is no crime, at least not in India. Don't you guys ask for muslim Ummah or something?

Tum karo to Ummar aur hum kare to 😗 ?


:uak
 
Rajdeep said:
If that what makes you sleep at night peacefully so be it :rabada2

The fact is, Yogi Adityanath has all the right to call for unity among Hindus. Asking people to get united is no crime, at least not in India. Don't you guys ask for muslim Ummah or something?

Tum karo to Ummar aur hum kare to 😗 ?


:uak
Click to expand...


Lol. It's like you are going out of your way to prove my points.
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
Another day, another anti-Muslim riot. It seems to be the only thing which unites Hindus of India, the main problem would be that there is such a large Muslim population which must make ethnic cleansing more problematic in the short term.
Click to expand...

As expected, no BJP poster condemned it. They expect others to condemn things but they themselves don't condemn.
 
rpant_gabba said:
Why not? What is that you find so wrong with the Jinnah model?

I for one am a big fan of the great service provided Jinnah to Hindus and India.
Click to expand...
Thanks for acknowledging Jinnah, Now why don't you accept Pakistan the same way and gave IOK to Pakistan as the people there wanted Islamic republic too. Correct me if I am wrong. Even recent result from Kashmir Valley before you
 
Wh
The Bald Eagle said:
Thanks for acknowledging Jinnah, Now why don't you accept Pakistan the same way and gave IOK to Pakistan as the people there wanted Islamic republic too. Correct me if I am wrong. Even recent result from Kashmir Valley before you
Click to expand...
why? India should follow the Jinnah model and continue fight for separation of muslims from India
 
rpant_gabba said:
Why? Islam and muslims are native to subcontinent. they were given a land. they can move
Click to expand...
Lol do you think Pakistan alone can take up people more than its current population. Never mind but being an atheist doesn't this inconsistent with your own ideology. I guess a secular country need not to be religiously biased
 
Hitman said:
Watch this.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1843829329488425404
Click to expand...
It seems both sides are alleging the other other started it and they are lying and that they themselves are aggrieved.

And the funny or sad thing is they all look the same, talk the same, behave the same, don't live too far from each other and apart from their beliefs share a lot of cultural commonalities. I hope better sense prevails and they all learn to live peacefully with each other. Found it funny because a cat fight was about to break out between desi women and aunties. A burqa clad ninja middle aged muslim aunty is not to be trifled with. lol

p.s I do believe at the very least, the Azaans on loudspeaker are not a good idea anymore. Everybody has mobile phones and apps and they should be utilized for announcing prayer time rather than spreading noise pollution.
 
The Bald Eagle said:
Thanks for acknowledging Jinnah, Now why don't you accept Pakistan the same way and gave IOK to Pakistan as the people there wanted Islamic republic too. Correct me if I am wrong. Even recent result from Kashmir Valley before you
Click to expand...

Accept Pakistan? Who hasn't accepted? Is this a new drama now?

Why should J and K with 40 per cent non muslim population go to Pakistan?

FYI Kashmir was ruled by a King and the India Independence Act that created India and Pakistan gave right to the Maharaja and every other princely state to merge with either country. Only condition was that they should share a boundary with that country.

They also had the option to remain independent.

So what's this give Kashmir to Pakistan?

You got your land in 1947. But it seems you still need to poke your nose in India.
 
The Bald Eagle said:
Lol do you think Pakistan alone can take up people more than its current population. Never mind but being an atheist doesn't this inconsistent with your own ideology. I guess a secular country need not to be religiously biased
Click to expand...

Correct me if i am Muslim population was 35 per cent in 1946. Pakistan got nearly the same amount of territory.

Majority of Hindus left Pakistan and were accomodated in India.

One third of Muslims didn't leave for Pakistan.

Now they should be given more land?
 
cricketjoshila said:
Correct me if i am Muslim population was 35 per cent in 1946. Pakistan got nearly the same amount of territory.

Majority of Hindus left Pakistan and were accomodated in India.

One third of Muslims didn't leave for Pakistan.

Now they should be given more land?
Click to expand...
Remind me again of some of the great hindu nationalist freedom fighters who helped get india independence
I cant think of any
 
cricketjoshila said:
Why should J and K with 40 per cent non muslim population go to Pakistan?

FYI Kashmir was ruled by a King and the India Independence Act that created India and Pakistan gave right to the Maharaja and every other princely state to merge with either country. Only condition was that they should share a boundary with that country.

They also had the option to remain independent.
Click to expand...
Keep the Hindu majority Jammu, but Kashmir is a overwhelming Muslim majority area whose people always wanted to be part of Pakistan. Secondly, the Indian independence was mocked by Patel himself why the prince of Junagadh decision was reversed by brute force. Like always you guys like to quote law when it fits your purpose not otherwise.
 
cricketjoshila said:
Correct me if i am Muslim population was 35 per cent in 1946. Pakistan got nearly the same amount of territory.

Majority of Hindus left Pakistan and were accomodated in India.

One third of Muslims didn't leave for Pakistan.

Now they should be given more land?
Click to expand...
Well according to the India Muslims who stayed there, they did so with choice. Now if India government not constitution can't guarantee them the same liberties as pledged at time of independence and is bent to unite against them despite being part of a same country then why should they go to Pakistan ie the country they ignored at first instance. So if your government wants to kick them out then they should stick to the condition as I mentioned above.
 
The Bald Eagle said:
Well according to the India Muslims who stayed there, they did so with choice. Now if India government not constitution can't guarantee them the same liberties as pledged at time of independence and is bent to unite against them despite being part of a same country then why should they go to Pakistan ie the country they ignored at first instance. So if your government wants to kick them out then they should stick to the condition as I mentioned above.
Click to expand...

No one asked them to stay. No one pledged them anything at the time of partition.

Muslims were given land in 1947. If they didn't go to their muslim nation its their fault. Same applies to Hindus who stayed back in Pakistan.


Now they will not get the opportunity to have another partition.
 
The Bald Eagle said:
Keep the Hindu majority Jammu, but Kashmir is a overwhelming Muslim majority area whose people always wanted to be part of Pakistan. Secondly, the Indian independence was mocked by Patel himself why the prince of Junagadh decision was reversed by brute force. Like always you guys like to quote law when it fits your purpose not otherwise.
Click to expand...

Junagadh shares which boundary with Pakistan?

When Junagadh signed agreed to merge in Pakistan, all that India did was to close its borders with Junagadh.

Did Pakistan start supplies to Junagadh? No.

Ultimately the people of Junagadh, started protests because of the lack of supplies. Nawab abdicated and flew to Pakistan. He handed over the throne to his Diwan.

The Diwan then agreed to merge with India as Pakistan despite repeated requests couldn't supply Junagadh anything.

Law is law. Read it and understand it. Then read the context.
 
cricketjoshila said:
Junagadh shares which boundary with Pakistan?

When Junagadh signed agreed to merge in Pakistan, all that India did was to close its borders with Junagadh.

Did Pakistan start supplies to Junagadh? No.

Ultimately the people of Junagadh, started protests because of the lack of supplies. Nawab abdicated and flew to Pakistan. He handed over the throne to his Diwan.

The Diwan then agreed to merge with India as Pakistan despite repeated requests couldn't supply Junagadh anything.

Law is law. Read it and understand it. Then read the context.
Click to expand...
As you know Junagadh is at Indian borders next to Arabian sea so there was no bar on it on joining Pakistan and about the protest things you mentioned how can you ignore protests against Indian government to this day. And for your information Kashmiri Muslims had been defying Fogra raj since 1930. Don't try to justify Dogra's duplicity if that had been the genuine case, Indian government would never have run away from plebiscite under one or another context
 
cricketjoshila said:
No one asked them to stay. No one pledged them anything at the time of partition.

Muslims were given land in 1947. If they didn't go to their muslim nation its their fault. Same applies to Hindus who stayed back in Pakistan.


Now they will not get the opportunity to have another partition.
Click to expand...
Why not Indians can divide and give land to indian Muslims again. Infact India sowed the seed of division of Pakistan in 1971
 
The Bald Eagle said:
As you know Junagadh is at Indian borders next to Arabian sea so there was no bar on it on joining Pakistan and about the protest things you mentioned how can you ignore protests against Indian government to this day. And for your information Kashmiri Muslims had been defying Fogra raj since 1930. Don't try to justify Dogra's duplicity if that had been the genuine case, Indian government would never have run away from plebiscite under one or another context
Click to expand...

Does Junagadh share a border with Pakistan? If yes which one?

Protests made the Nawab abdicate the throne in favour of the diwan. He ran away. Pakistan failed to give supplies to Junagadh.

Finally the Diwan who was made the head of the government aceded to India.

Did Maharaja of Kashmir run away?NO.

Why did Pakistanis invade Kashmir?

Did India fail to provide Kashmir with supplies and security after its accession to India?

The Maharaja was the recognised ruler of Kashmir. That's the bottom line. He didn't run away.

Plebiscite? Please vacate PoK. That's the first condition of plebiscite.
 
The Bald Eagle said:
Why not Indians can divide and give land to indian Muslims again. Infact India sowed the seed of division of Pakistan in 1971
Click to expand...

They got land once in proportion to their population.

They cannot keep taking land while the others communities keep losing.

Yes, India imprisoned Sheikh Mujib and refused to make him PM despite winning the elections.
 
cricketjoshila said:
Does Junagadh share a border with Pakistan? If yes which one?

Protests made the Nawab abdicate the throne in favour of the diwan. He ran away. Pakistan failed to give supplies to Junagadh.

Finally the Diwan who was made the head of the government aceded to India.

Did Maharaja of Kashmir run away?NO.

Why did Pakistanis invade Kashmir?

Did India fail to provide Kashmir with supplies and security after its accession to India?

The Maharaja was the recognised ruler of Kashmir. That's the bottom line. He didn't run away.

Plebiscite? Please vacate PoK. That's the first condition of plebiscite.
Click to expand...
Yep he ran away and sought help of India because he knew Mujahedeens were going to take over it and what about nawab of Hyderabad and please enlighten me was it officially chalked out that rulers must align to countries with whom they share border?

If India had no problem with plebiscite then why did they make Simla Agreement?
 
The Bald Eagle said:
Yep he ran away and sought help of India because he knew Mujahedeens were going to take over it and what about nawab of Hyderabad and please enlighten me was it officially chalked out that rulers must align to countries with whom they share border?

If India had no problem with plebiscite then why did they make Simla Agreement?
Click to expand...

He didn't run away. He was in Srinagar all the time. He aceded to India like any other princely state.

Nizam? What about him? He was land locked on all sides by India. So no question of joining Pakistan.

Which part of Simla agreement are you talking about?
 
cricketjoshila said:
He didn't run away. He was in Srinagar all the time. He aceded to India like any other princely state.

Nizam? What about him? He was land locked on all sides by India. So no question of joining Pakistan.

Which part of Simla agreement are you talking about?
Click to expand...
The part suggesting that Kashmir would just be a bilateral issue. And please add to my information, was there any specific stipulation regarding land contiguousness in Indian independence act as what we read in most books seems to be general view and suggestion.
 
The Bald Eagle said:
The part suggesting that Kashmir would just be a bilateral issue. And please add to my information, was there any specific stipulation regarding land contiguousness in Indian independence act as what we read in most books seems to be general view and suggestion.
Click to expand...

Where did this general view come from?
 
The Bald Eagle said:
It appears that your claim was false otherwise you would have tendered some notes or official document.
Click to expand...

I would. If the transfer of power agreement was a Fully public document.

It has been stated again and again by different historians that sharing geographical boundaries was essential for a princely state to join.

This was also the reason why pakistan was carved the way it was. When muslim league had actually asked for areas in Kerala, UP, Bihar to be included.

You need to read up a few books.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
The differences behind the creation of Pakistan and Israel and why those cannot be compared
Replies
76
Views
2K
Bhaijaan
Bhaijaan
daytrader
‘The word Hindu is Arabic. Why don’t they throw it out?’ - Prominent historian Irfan Habib
Replies
50
Views
2K
guard
G
SpiritOf1903
Bollywood is obsessed with Pakistan. We’d be flattered if it weren’t so nasty Fatima Bhutto
2
Replies
81
Views
5K
Bhaijaan
Bhaijaan
MenInG
Why Indian Hindutva supporters back Israel on Gaza bombing
13 14 15
Replies
1K
Views
21K
FearlessRoar
FearlessRoar
IAJ
Why Does Hindu Diaspora In Developed Multicultural Countries Hate Minorities Back Home In India?
Replies
15
Views
1K
Cpt. Rishwat
Cpt. Rishwat
Back
Top