What is more likely to happen: A Muslim becoming the Indian Prime Minister or a Dalit claiming the same post?

[The Bald Eagle]

The likelihood of either a Muslim or a Dalit becoming India's Prime Minister in future will be no less than a miracle. As in 77 years so far we haven't seen even an inkling of this happening. So bearing in mind the current political landscape and the strangle hold of saffron movement on India for more than a decade now, which of the two options as mentioned above are more likely to happen.

Whether it's more feasible that a Muslim will ever become the PM of India given the majority of Hindutva supporters in India or is it more likely that a member from Dalit community would get this seat before a Muslim as member of such a community may be more plausible or acceptable to the Hindutva supporters than a Muslim.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Poll added Guys!

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Tbh both can go to hell

 

[Champ_Pal]

My money is on a Dalit PM first.

Regarding Muslim becoming PM, it does not matter as that Muslim man or woman will be called a sell out or a RSS stooge.

Majority of Indian population is OBC. Mr. Modi is from that category.

We already had a Sikh PM.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

My money is on a Dalit PM first.

Regarding Muslim becoming PM, it does not matter as that Muslim man or woman will be called a sell out or a RSS stooge.

Majority of Indian population is OBC. Mr. Modi is from that category.

We already had a Sikh PM.

Yep only an Irfan Pathan type Muslim can ever be a PM in India.

Even Salman Khan won't be accepted as PM

 

[Champ_Pal]

Yep only an Irfan Pathan type Muslim can ever be a PM in India.

Even Salman Khan won't be accepted as PM

Salman is an idol worshipper. He is A-Okay for Sanghis

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Salman is an idol worshipper. He is A-Okay for Sanghis

Wasn't that Shah Rukh, but you could be right as for some people money is more important than religion

 

[Champ_Pal]

Wasn't that Shah Rukh, but you could be right as for some people money is more important than religion

Salman never claimed he is a practicing Muslim. He always said he is both Hindu and Muslim.

 

[FearlessRoar]

It is more likely for snow to fall in Lahore than for a Muslim or Dalit to become the Prime Minister of India.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

It is more likely for snow to fall in Lahore than for a Muslim or Dalit to become the Prime Minister of India.

True, even I can bet that Hindus right wingers would THROW out modi from power if he ever becomes Muslim which infact is next to impossible.

 

[sweep_shot]

It is more likely for snow to fall in Lahore than for a Muslim or Dalit to become the Prime Minister of India.

I have a higher chance of going to Mars than a Muslim or a Dalit becoming Indian PM.

Modern day India has become radical under Modi and BJP.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

What a hypocrisy, Ambedkar was the architect of Indian constitution and was from untouchables and he changed his religion from Hinduism to Buddhism just because of injustice in India. And now these PR exercises just to play with the gallery in ever divisive and unjust Indian society

================

"Beacon of social justice": PM Modi pays tribute to Dr BR Ambedkar

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday, December 6 paid tributes to B.R. Ambedkar on his 69th death anniversary.

Taking to X, the Prime Minister wrote, “On Mahaparinirvan Diwas, we bow to Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, the architect of our Constitution and a beacon of social justice. Dr. Ambedkar’s tireless fight for equality and human dignity continues to inspire generations. Today, as we remember his contributions, we also reiterate our commitment to fulfilling his vision. Also sharing a picture from my visit to Chaitya Bhoomi in Mumbai earlier this year. Jai Bhim!"

Observed every year on December 6, Mahaparinirvan Diwas marks the death anniversary of Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (BR Ambedkar), the chief architect of the Indian Constitution.

Mahaparinirvan Diwas serves as an opportunity to recognise Ambedkar's relentless efforts toward social justice, equality, and human rights.

On Ambedkar's death anniversary, thousands of people every year from all over Maharashtra come to Mumbai to pay homage to the tall leader, who was cremated at Chaityabhoomi located at Dadar's Shivaji Park.

Significance of Mahaparinirvan Diwas

Mahaparinirvan Diwas holds profound significance as a tribute to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s transformative legacy. According to Buddhist texts, Lord Buddha's death is considered to be Mahaparinirvan, the Sanskrit term for 'nirvana after death'. Parinirvan is considered liberation from Samara, karma, and the cycle of death and birth. It is the most sacrosanct day in the Buddhist calendar.

To Babasaheb Ambedkar, the social reformer, Buddha lay very close in terms of his ideology and thoughts. Babasaheb was regarded as a Buddhist guru because of his great influence in India to eradicate the social scourge of untouchability. Ambedkar's admirers and followers believe he was as influential as Lord Buddha, which is why his death anniversary is celebrated as Mahaparinirvan Divas. This day transcends mourning, serving as a day of reflection and inspiration, urging us to carry forward his vision of a just and inclusive world.


Source: Live Mint

 

[Champ_Pal]

It is more likely for snow to fall in Lahore than for a Muslim or Dalit to become the Prime Minister of India.

The books are open to anyone becoming a PM of India irrespective of Religion, Race, Caste, color etc.

Can a Hindu or a Dalit in Pakistan become PM pr Prez?

At least India had 3 Dalit Presidents. Mr. KR Narayanan, Mr.Ramnath Kovind and currently Miss.Draupadi Murmu.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

The books are open to anyone becoming a PM of India irrespective of Religion, Race, Caste, color etc.

Can a Hindu or a Dalit in Pakistan become PM pr Prez?

At least India had 3 Dalit Presidents. Mr. KR Narayanan, Mr.Ramnath Kovind and currently Miss.Draupadi Murmu.

Why not PM?

And yep Pakistan is an Islamic republic so they can't until they change their constitution

 

[Champ_Pal]

What a hypocrisy, Ambedkar was the architect of Indian constitution and was from untouchables and he changed his religion from Hinduism to Buddhism just because of injustice in India. And now these PR exercises just to play with the gallery in ever divisive and unjust Indian society

================

"Beacon of social justice": PM Modi pays tribute to Dr BR Ambedkar

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday, December 6 paid tributes to B.R. Ambedkar on his 69th death anniversary.

Taking to X, the Prime Minister wrote, “On Mahaparinirvan Diwas, we bow to Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, the architect of our Constitution and a beacon of social justice. Dr. Ambedkar’s tireless fight for equality and human dignity continues to inspire generations. Today, as we remember his contributions, we also reiterate our commitment to fulfilling his vision. Also sharing a picture from my visit to Chaitya Bhoomi in Mumbai earlier this year. Jai Bhim!"

Observed every year on December 6, Mahaparinirvan Diwas marks the death anniversary of Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (BR Ambedkar), the chief architect of the Indian Constitution.

Mahaparinirvan Diwas serves as an opportunity to recognise Ambedkar's relentless efforts toward social justice, equality, and human rights.

On Ambedkar's death anniversary, thousands of people every year from all over Maharashtra come to Mumbai to pay homage to the tall leader, who was cremated at Chaityabhoomi located at Dadar's Shivaji Park.

Significance of Mahaparinirvan Diwas

Mahaparinirvan Diwas holds profound significance as a tribute to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s transformative legacy. According to Buddhist texts, Lord Buddha's death is considered to be Mahaparinirvan, the Sanskrit term for 'nirvana after death'. Parinirvan is considered liberation from Samara, karma, and the cycle of death and birth. It is the most sacrosanct day in the Buddhist calendar.

To Babasaheb Ambedkar, the social reformer, Buddha lay very close in terms of his ideology and thoughts. Babasaheb was regarded as a Buddhist guru because of his great influence in India to eradicate the social scourge of untouchability. Ambedkar's admirers and followers believe he was as influential as Lord Buddha, which is why his death anniversary is celebrated as Mahaparinirvan Divas. This day transcends mourning, serving as a day of reflection and inspiration, urging us to carry forward his vision of a just and inclusive world.


Source: Live Mint

Buddhism has Caste system too. It was his wish to convert. No one put a sword on his neck for converting and no death for apostasy. Indians are still proud of Mr.Ambedkar and his achievements.

Also, Ambedkar was a supporter of Savarkar as both believed in the annihilation of Caste system. However Ambedkar was critical of Savarkar for not being radical enough to eliminate caste system from Hindu society. He did not completely agree with Savarkar's views on Hindutva.

What hypocrisy are you talking about. If a Brahmin association is celebrating Ambedkar and hijacking his achievements, then you can call it hypocrisy. Majority of Hindus are Dalits and OBC's. BJP is lead by an OBC and there are many senior OBC members in BJP.

In fact it is Congress that has the most upper class and upper caste leaders and historically had Upper Caste Prime Ministers. You are as usual ignoring all the facts and simply posting your agenda.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Why not PM?

And yep Pakistan is an Islamic republic so they can't until they change their constitution

So this is clear apartheid. One rule for some and another rule for others

There will be PM eventually. Leaders need to come through the ranks. The next BJP would be PM's after Modi has some promising leaders from all sections of the society. In the near future, it could be either Amit Shah(Jain) or Yogi(Follower of Guru Gorakhnath) is Casteless.

I know this does not jive well with your theory that only Brahmins or Rajputs or Baniyas can be PM's of India.

 

[Devadwal]

Does it matter for pakistani or any others Country's people's that who is become PM of India.

Stop thinking everytime about relegion or castism . Its really getting annoyed.

Indian people's will chose INDIA PM so stop caring too much about india.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Buddhism has Caste system too. It was his wish to convert. No one put a sword on his neck for converting and no death for apostasy. Indians are still proud of Mr.Ambedkar and his achievements.

Also, Ambedkar was a supporter of Savarkar as both believed in the annihilation of Caste system. However Ambedkar was critical of Savarkar for not being radical enough to eliminate caste system from Hindu society. He did not completely agree with Savarkar's views on Hindutva.

What hypocrisy are you talking about. If a Brahmin association is celebrating Ambedkar and hijacking his achievements, then you can call it hypocrisy. Majority of Hindus are Dalits and OBC's. BJP is lead by an OBC and there are many senior OBC members in BJP.

In fact it is Congress that has the most upper class and upper caste leaders and historically had Upper Caste Prime Ministers. You are as usual ignoring all the facts and simply posting your agenda.

Ok has caste system ended in India and there is a difference between OBC and Dalits or untouchables.

OBC simply represents backward classes and the Indian government is yet to recognize new OBCs

Ok If I am on agenda then what I said must be wrong. Please share the facts then

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Amit Shah was born in Mumbai on 22 October 1964. He is from a Gujarati Hindu family of the Bania caste. His great grandfather was the Nagarseth (Capital city chief) of the small state of Mansa.

Are you sure? The above info is from Wikipedia

Amit Shah - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

So this is clear apartheid. One rule for some and another rule for others

There will be PM eventually. Leaders need to come through the ranks. The next BJP would be PM's after Modi has some promising leaders from all sections of the society. In the near future, it could be either Amit Shah(Jain) or Yogi(Follower of Guru Gorakhnath) is Casteless.

I know this does not jive well with your theory that only Brahmins or Rajputs or Baniyas can be PM's of India.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Ok has caste system ended in India and there is a difference between OBC and Dalits or untouchables.

OBC simply represents backward classes and the Indian government is yet to recognize new OBCs

Ok If I am on agenda then what I said must be wrong. Please share the facts then

Caste system did not end. It has taken a different route now.

Backward Castes and OBC's are the rivals of Dalits now. Power from Upper Caste has been completely taken away in South India. Its all OBC's and Shudra Castes.

In North India, Upper Caste still holds its sway in politics. But the effect has drastically decreased since 1947.

What do you mean Indian government is yet to recognize new OBC's? Any caste flagged as OBC or BC will get instant reservation in all Government organizations and machinery. The reservation can range anywhere between 10% all the way to 70%. What facts do you need? Be specific.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Amit Shah was born in Mumbai on 22 October 1964. He is from a Gujarati Hindu family of the Bania caste. His great grandfather was the Nagarseth (Capital city chief) of the small state of Mansa.

Are you sure? The above info is from Wikipedia

Amit Shah - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Okay. Usually Shah's from Gujarat are Jains. I assumed he is a Jain. My mistake. Amit Shah has made many statements praising Jainism before. So I assumed he is a Jain.

Are you okay with Yogi then? He is casteless and his Guru is a strong opponent of Brahmins and Caste system in general.

Do you think it is apartheid for not allowing non-muslims to be PM of Pakistan?

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Okay. Usually Shah's from Gujarat are Jains. I assumed he is a Jain. My mistake. Amit Shah has made many statements praising Jainism before. So I assumed he is a Jain.

Are you okay with Yogi then? He is casteless and his Guru is a strong opponent of Brahmins and Caste system in general.

Tbh, his political career, behavior and speeches show that he is even worse than a bigoted Brahmin

Situation of UP before everyone

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

My money is on a Dalit PM first.

Regarding Muslim becoming PM, it does not matter as that Muslim man or woman will be called a sell out or a RSS stooge.

Majority of Indian population is OBC. Mr. Modi is from that category.

We already had a Sikh PM.

That's because he would be a stooge. He still wouldn't get voted regardless just in case.

 

[Itachi]

So this is clear apartheid. One rule for some and another rule for others

There will be PM eventually. Leaders need to come through the ranks. The next BJP would be PM's after Modi has some promising leaders from all sections of the society. In the near future, it could be either Amit Shah(Jain) or Yogi(Follower of Guru Gorakhnath) is Casteless.

I know this does not jive well with your theory that only Brahmins or Rajputs or Baniyas can be PM's of India.

When a discussion starts with an agenda and different events are represented in a biased skewed manner, it's futile to continue.

Because all people want is validation as it needs to be constantly fed by others. And people will interpret words in the way that they want to read.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Pakistan is more unlikely to become an actual functioning nation rather than an Islamist Military dictatorship before a Muslim or a Dalit claims the PM position in Bharat.

 

[Technics 1210]

Muslim PM given 100 Millions of Hindutva cultists are desperate to flee India.

Who knows in a few decades, Islam will return as the sheriff of India.

 

[Vikram1989]

Yep only an Irfan Pathan type Muslim can ever be a PM in India.

Even Salman Khan won't be accepted as PM

Why does a drug,alcohol addict who is facing the charges for killing people and about to extinct listed deer's ?
It's better to have a kalam type of pm than any other nutcase.

Congress will make a gandhi dynasty as pm no one else.Manmohan was made as rahul was not ready and Sonia was not eligible.

Bjp will encourage meritocracy and definitely either one should come from the only. Mostly probability is for dalit and later on a Muslim.

 

[Vikram1989]

Tbh, his political career, behavior and speeches show that he is even worse than a bigoted Brahmin

Situation of UP before everyone

What does u know about Brahmin and bigoted Brahmin ? Have u read any Vedas, puranas or scriptures. Do u know Sanskrit to read and interact with scholars ?do u know how many sakhas in brahmins and what does they do ?

 

[Justcrazy]

A dalit can become PM , this is more likely.

 

[Hikaru]

I would prefer a Dalit PM.

 

[Romali_rotti]

Hope the viewer ship from India is coming through..

Keep it going guys, doing a great job..

 

[Major]

To be fair, atleast legally they are allowed to stand up for it.

In Pakistan, we have a law that says one has to be a Muslim to be head of state

 

[Pakpak]

What about our own country? Where legally you can't be a PM unless you're Muslim? India is heading our way as well but atleast it pretends to not legally stop people for top posts and in the past a Muslim held the President post. Ceremonial I know but still, which can never happen in Pakistan, legally and otherwise.

India can be bashed in a million ways, but they don't take the award for abusing minorities as we are in the same boat. One of my best friends was Pakistani Christian, the stuff he told me.....I was still surprised to hear he loved Pakistan. In his position I'd despised the country.

Our minorities are as worse in every metric (if not more) than India's minorities.

 

[guard]

Salman never claimed he is a practicing Muslim. He always said he is both Hindu and Muslim.

How is it possible to be both..?

 

[DeadlyVenom]

What about our own country? Where legally you can't be a PM unless you're Muslim? India is heading our way as well but atleast it pretends to not legally stop people for top posts and in the past a Muslim held the President post. Ceremonial I know but still, which can never happen in Pakistan, legally and otherwise.

I agree with this. India's political system is infinitely better than ours

 

[Vikram1989]

How is it possible to be both..?

His mother is a hindu

 

[guard]

His mother is a hindu

Oh, thanks..didnt know that.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

What does u know about Brahmin and bigoted Brahmin ? Have u read any Vedas, puranas or scriptures. Do u know Sanskrit to read and interact with scholars ?do u know how many sakhas in brahmins and what does they do ?

I used the word "bigoted" before for clarification. Don't know whether you think Brahmins can done no wrong. Please enlighten us wasn't Ravan from a Brahmin Sakhas lineage.

Anyway you didn't shared any thoughts on thread question

 

[Vikram1989]

I used the word "bigoted" before for clarification. Don't know whether you think Brahmins can done no wrong. Please enlighten us wasn't Ravan from a Brahmin Sakhas lineage.

Anyway you didn't shared any thoughts on thread question

Any one can do wrong and lots of gangsters are there in every community.am saying just don't bigoted before a community/group in general. U can use for a person if he is .I have already expressed my opinion. I firmly believes in meritocracy. Who ever it is i wish he/she should be good.

Mostly dalit will become a pm before muslim.why because congress can't make outside a gandhi dynasty to be a pm.Bjp have to give opportunity .so definitely both will be PM's. A dalit pm in 15 or 20 years .Again a Muslim pm in another 10 or 15 years.

U may think bjp don't have many Muslim candidates. But they will have only few from top tier(eg MJ Akbar in last term.he got in to metoo issue).So definitely at some point of time(in 25 to 30 years) , I can expect from their side.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Any one can do wrong and lots of gangsters are there in every community.am saying just don't bigoted before a community/group in general. U can use for a person if he is .I have already expressed my opinion. I firmly believes in meritocracy. Who ever it is i wish he/she should be good.

Mostly dalit will become a pm before muslim.why because congress can't make outside a gandhi dynasty to be a pm.Bjp have to give opportunity .so definitely both will be PM's. A dalit pm in 15 or 20 years .Again a Muslim pm in another 10 or 15 years.

U may think bjp don't have many Muslim candidates. But they will have only few from top tier(eg MJ Akbar in last term.he got in to metoo issue).So definitely at some point of time(in 25 to 30 years) , I can expect from their side.

It may sound funny but I have a gut feeling that one day some prominent politican from Gandhi dynasty is going to convert to Islam but still his chances of being the PM would be slim and everybody knows why

 

[Champ_Pal]

How is it possible to be both..?

Religion is make believe stuff anyways. So he made his own make believe stuff in his head. He seems to be happy with it.

 

[Vikram1989]

It may sound funny but I have a gut feeling that one day some prominent politican from Gandhi dynasty is going to convert to Islam but still his chances of being the PM would be slim and everybody knows why

It doesn't work like that.If u get a right candidate as good as kalam , No body will ever object it.All one has to do is rise above his peers and religion to stick for country and gives the confidence to the country.country will definitely reward him.It applies to any one from.any religion or caste.U can take prime examples of Ratan ,Kalam ,Ambedkar

 

[The Bald Eagle]

It doesn't work like that.If u get a right candidate as good as kalam , No body will ever object it.All one has to do is rise above his peers and religion to stick for country and gives the confidence to the country.country will definitely reward him.It applies to any one from.any religion or caste.U can take prime examples of Ratan ,Kalam ,Ambedkar

I appreciate your thoughts but unfortunately your country has betrayed both Ambedkar and Kalam. Kalam book that got published posthumously contains the story how he was snubbed in his attempt of a unified India and Ambedkar ( The father of Indian constitution) converted to Buddhism from Hinduism in protest. This is actual history

 

[Vikram1989]

I appreciate your thoughts but unfortunately your country has betrayed both Ambedkar and Kalam. Kalam book that got published posthumously contains the story how he was snubbed in his attempt of a unified India and Ambedkar ( The father of Indian constitution) converted to Buddhism from Hinduism in protest. This is actual history

Can u explain kalam snubbing ?

Ambedkar was a different story as it happened 75 years back and he experienced an entire different era. Wasn't he was awarded the highest civilian award which will be inspirational for any one.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Can u explain kalam snubbing ?

Ambedkar was a different story as it happened 75 years back and he experienced an entire different era. Wasn't he was awarded the highest civilian award which will be inspirational for any one.

Oh I see you may be are talking about AJP Abdul Kalam the former Indian PM, I was referring to this Abdul Kalam

Maulana Azad - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Even he (the former one) is demeaned by your fellow Indian brethren here.

 

[Vikram1989]

Oh I see you may be are talking about AJP Abdul Kalam the former Indian PM, I was referring to this Abdul Kalam

Maulana Azad - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Even he (the former one) is demeaned by your fellow Indian brethren here.

Congress is never a co ordinated unit / one man unit until indira.lot of other leaders also got snubbed even after support by gandhi and all their accounts were recorded

 

[guard]

Religion is make believe stuff anyways. So he made his own make believe stuff in his head. He seems to be happy with it.

If that gives you peace , SK is happy , its a personal choice.

 

[uppercut]

What a hypocrisy, Ambedkar was the architect of Indian constitution and was from untouchables and he changed his religion from Hinduism to Buddhism just because of injustice in India. And now these PR exercises just to play with the gallery in ever divisive and unjust Indian society

================

"Beacon of social justice": PM Modi pays tribute to Dr BR Ambedkar

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday, December 6 paid tributes to B.R. Ambedkar on his 69th death anniversary.

Taking to X, the Prime Minister wrote, “On Mahaparinirvan Diwas, we bow to Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, the architect of our Constitution and a beacon of social justice. Dr. Ambedkar’s tireless fight for equality and human dignity continues to inspire generations. Today, as we remember his contributions, we also reiterate our commitment to fulfilling his vision. Also sharing a picture from my visit to Chaitya Bhoomi in Mumbai earlier this year. Jai Bhim!"

Observed every year on December 6, Mahaparinirvan Diwas marks the death anniversary of Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (BR Ambedkar), the chief architect of the Indian Constitution.

Mahaparinirvan Diwas serves as an opportunity to recognise Ambedkar's relentless efforts toward social justice, equality, and human rights.

On Ambedkar's death anniversary, thousands of people every year from all over Maharashtra come to Mumbai to pay homage to the tall leader, who was cremated at Chaityabhoomi located at Dadar's Shivaji Park.

Significance of Mahaparinirvan Diwas

Mahaparinirvan Diwas holds profound significance as a tribute to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s transformative legacy. According to Buddhist texts, Lord Buddha's death is considered to be Mahaparinirvan, the Sanskrit term for 'nirvana after death'. Parinirvan is considered liberation from Samara, karma, and the cycle of death and birth. It is the most sacrosanct day in the Buddhist calendar.

To Babasaheb Ambedkar, the social reformer, Buddha lay very close in terms of his ideology and thoughts. Babasaheb was regarded as a Buddhist guru because of his great influence in India to eradicate the social scourge of untouchability. Ambedkar's admirers and followers believe he was as influential as Lord Buddha, which is why his death anniversary is celebrated as Mahaparinirvan Divas. This day transcends mourning, serving as a day of reflection and inspiration, urging us to carry forward his vision of a just and inclusive world.


Source: Live Mint

Here is a fun experiment to try .... google this : "Ambedkars views on Islam"

PS: You will not like the outcome.

 

[Justcrazy]

Here is a fun experiment to try .... google this : "Ambedkars views on Islam"

PS: You will not like the outcome.

A Muslim can refute the points made by Ambedkar , can a hindu do the same about his views and action about Hinduism?

 

[uppercut]

A Muslim can refute the points made by Ambedkar ,

no you cant and I will tell you this upfront .... you will quietly slip away from the thread if you want to refute Ambedkar's views. I mean its been nearly 100 yrs since he made those views and since then the horrific atrocities committed by Muslims just categorically proves him right. But if you are so certain then let me know we can open a thread to discuss that. However to make it a meaningful conversation both of us will have to agree to a much higher standard of debate than is normally practiced here. Let me know if you are interested.

can a hindu do the same about his views and action about Hinduism?

But Hinduism has never been accused of being a violent religion. So our track record speaks for itself. I don't need to prove anything to anyone. But yeah go ahead ask your question.

 

[Hitman]

But Hinduism has never been accused of being a violent religion. So our track record speaks for itself. I don't need to prove anything to anyone. But yeah go ahead ask your question.

You're kidding? Haven't you till date read the views of the Pakistani 'intellectuals' about Hinduism and Hindutva? Those opinion far outweighs the opinion of the rest of the world.

 

[Justcrazy]

no you cant and I will tell you this upfront .... you will quietly slip away from the thread if you want to refute Ambedkar's views. I mean its been nearly 100 yrs since he made those views and since then the horrific atrocities committed by Muslims just categorically proves him right. But if you are so certain then let me know we can open a thread to discuss that. However to make it a meaningful conversation both of us will have to agree to a much higher standard of debate than is normally practiced here. Let me know if you are interested.




But Hinduism has never been accused of being a violent religion. So our track record speaks for itself. I don't need to prove anything to anyone. But yeah go ahead ask your question.

Yes , sure I would respond to allegations against Islam , not against Muslims. At least it is worth trying , that is the purpose of this medium.

What I meant about hinduism is that the reasons which led to Ambedkar leaving Hinduism.

 

[uppercut]

Yes , sure I would respond to allegations against Islam , not against Muslims. At least it is worth trying , that is the purpose of this medium.

Well Muslims are people acting in the name of Islam. So why are there so MANY terror orgs operating openly with the sole cause of furthering Islamic causes ? For instance why is Jaish-e-Mohammad still active ? The only logical deduction that one can draw is that the vast majority of Muslims do not see them as doing anything wrong and not tarnishing your prophets name.

What I meant about hinduism is that the reasons which led to Ambedkar leaving Hinduism.

It doesnt matter at all whether he left Hinduism or not. Hinduism considers Buddhism as one of its sister religions, infact Buddha himself was a Hindu and is a revered figure in Hinduism. We dont operate like Islam ( Either you are with us or not with us kind of binary logic )

 

[cricketjoshila]

Here is a fun experiment to try .... google this : "Ambedkars views on Islam"

PS: You will not like the outcome.

Ambedkar was a staunch supporter of complete exchange of population and sending all Muslims to Pakistan.

 

[cricketjoshila]

When will a Hindu become chief of any arm of the pakistan armed forces?

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Here is a fun experiment to try .... google this : "Ambedkars views on Islam"

PS: You will not like the outcome.

Yeah I read it he praised some egalitarian principles of Islam but criticized Muslims for not practicing them but still much milder response than leaving a religion because of some issues with the followers.

 

[JaDed]

Both have more chance of happening before Pakistan gets a true elected leader not backed by their Establishment.

 

[Justcrazy]

Well Muslims are people acting in the name of Islam. So why are there so MANY terror orgs operating openly with the sole cause of furthering Islamic causes ? For instance why is Jaish-e-Mohammad still active ? The only logical deduction that one can draw is that the vast majority of Muslims do not see them as doing anything wrong and not tarnishing your prophets name.





It doesnt matter at all whether he left Hinduism or not. Hinduism considers Buddhism as one of its sister religions, infact Buddha himself was a Hindu and is a revered figure in Hinduism. We dont operate like Islam ( Either you are with us or not with us kind of binary logic )

Firstly I do not think Ambedkar said these things about Islam.

But still let me answer that.

You are right there are many terrorist organisations in the world , Muslims as well. There are Non Muslims also. It all depends on how you define the term terrorists.

I do not understand how you can further cause of Islam by killing innocent people. Islam no where encourages to go out and kill in Islam . Jihad has to be for bringing about justice in the society.

Bhuddha did not believe in any God , he was an atheist , so are other Buddhists.

Hindus revering someone is not something significant , they in different parts of India revere and worship a lot of humans and things.

 

[uppercut]

Firstly I do not think Ambedkar said these things about Islam.

He most certainly did. Quoted below is just one of the evidence taken from his book "Pakistan or Partition of India " that is available freely. You can search that site or you can get a summary from here : https://www.opindia.com/2021/10/dr-...s-india-hindu-majority-jihad-dalits-buddhism/

Original website that lists Ambedkars work: https://franpritchett.com/00ambedkar/ambedkar_partition/412d.html

Here is just one of his many observations about how Islam treats non-muslims :

"There are other defects in Hinduism and in Islam which are responsible for keeping the sore between Hindus and Muslims open and running. Hinduism is said to divide people and in contrast Islam is said to bind people together. This is only a half truth. For Islam divides as inexorably as it binds. Islam is a close corporation and the distinction that it makes between Muslims and non-Muslims is a very real, very positive and very alienating distinction. The brotherhood of Islam is not the universal brotherhood of man. It is brotherhood of Muslims for Muslims only. There is a fraternity, but its benefit is confined to those within that corporation. For those who are outside the corporation, there is nothing but contempt and enmity. The second defect of Islam is that it is a system of social self-government and is incompatible with local self-government,because the allegiance of a Muslim does not rest on his domicile in the country which is his but on the faith to which he belongs. To the Muslim ibibene ibi patria is unthinkable. Wherever there is the rule of Islam,there is his own country. In other words, Islam can never allow a true Muslim to adopt India as his motherland and regard a Hindu as his kith and kin. That is probably the reason why Maulana Mahomed Ali, a great Indian but a true Muslim, preferred to be buried in Jerusalem rather than in India."​

But still let me answer that.

You are right there are many terrorist organisations in the world , Muslims as well. There are Non Muslims also. It all depends on how you define the term terrorists.

What is your definition ? And does Jaish-e-Mohammad qualify as a terror outfit per your definition ?

I do not understand how you can further cause of Islam by killing innocent people. Islam no where encourages to go out and kill in Islam . Jihad has to be for bringing about justice in the society.

Well sadly the track record going back 1400 years very very clearly and absolutely refutes that. You may be right in theory but the reality as it stands is just the opposite.

Bhuddha did not believe in any God , he was an atheist , so are other Buddhists.

Hindus revering someone is not something significant , they in different parts of India revere and worship a lot of humans and things.

The original context of this point here is that of violence ( see my post# 50) . So Ambedkar did not chose to leave Hinduism because of violence.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

He most certainly did. Quoted below is just one of the evidence taken from his book "Pakistan or Partition of India " that is available freely. You can search that site or you can get a summary from here : https://www.opindia.com/2021/10/dr-...s-india-hindu-majority-jihad-dalits-buddhism/

Original website that lists Ambedkars work: https://franpritchett.com/00ambedkar/ambedkar_partition/412d.html

Here is just one of his many observations about how Islam treats non-muslims :







What is your definition ? And does Jaish-e-Mohammad qualify as a terror outfit per your definition ?



Well sadly the track record going back 1400 years very very clearly and absolutely refutes that. You may be right in theory but the reality as it stands is just the opposite.



The original context of this point here is that of violence ( see my post# 50) . So Ambedkar did not chose to leave Hinduism because of violence.

The Ambedkar quote is just how the whole of humanity works in reality.

As for definition of a terrorist, once again you answered a question with a question.

 

[Justcrazy]

He most certainly did. Quoted below is just one of the evidence taken from his book "Pakistan or Partition of India " that is available freely. You can search that site or you can get a summary from here : https://www.opindia.com/2021/10/dr-...s-india-hindu-majority-jihad-dalits-buddhism/

Original website that lists Ambedkars work: https://franpritchett.com/00ambedkar/ambedkar_partition/412d.html

Here is just one of his many observations about how Islam treats non-muslims :







What is your definition ? And does Jaish-e-Mohammad qualify as a terror outfit per your definition ?



Well sadly the track record going back 1400 years very very clearly and absolutely refutes that. You may be right in theory but the reality as it stands is just the opposite.



The original context of this point here is that of violence ( see my post# 50) . So Ambedkar did not chose to leave Hinduism because of violence.

He most certainly did. Quoted below is just one of the evidence taken from his book "Pakistan or Partition of India " that is available freely. You can search that site or you can get a summary from here : https://www.opindia.com/2021/10/dr-...s-india-hindu-majority-jihad-dalits-buddhism/

Original website that lists Ambedkars work: https://franpritchett.com/00ambedkar/ambedkar_partition/412d.html

Here is just one of his many observations about how Islam treats non-muslims :







What is your definition ? And does Jaish-e-Mohammad qualify as a terror outfit per your definition ?



Well sadly the track record going back 1400 years very very clearly and absolutely refutes that. You may be right in theory but the reality as it stands is just the opposite.



The original context of this point here is that of violence ( see my post# 50) . So Ambedkar did not chose to leave Hinduism because of violence.

I have not done any research about Jaish E Muhammad so I am not in a position to brand them with any name.

When I meant the definition of a terrorist , I meant that it depends upon which side you are. For example, the sinhalese LTTE was a terrorist organization , whereas for Tamils they were freedom fighters. No one is born as a terrorist , there are certain factors which lead to it.

1400 years or 14000 years , it does not matter , when you are talking about Islam , you need to show me where Islam encourages killing of innocent people .
If you show , then your point is valid.

For 1400 years there have been several Muslims who are having alcohol , cheating , doing various crimes etc . That does not mean Islam is promoting that.
In fact Islam is the only religion which has alive jurisprudence , which clearly mentions rights and wrong. None of its principles is against Humanity .

No, Abedkar did not leave Hinduism for violence , he left for discrimination.

Now coming to the comments made by Mr Ambedkar.

Islam distinguishes between humans on belief because in islamic jurisprudence there are certain things which only Muslims are required to follow , those who do not believe need not do those or get involved with that.

The Quran is the final message for the entire mankind , not only for Muslims.
Muhammad was send for the whole world , not restricted to nations like previous prophets before him.

The ummah is divided into two parts , one Ummah e Ijabat ( those who accepted the message ) , the second Ummat e dawat ( those to whom message will be shared or given)

In Islam distinction is not made because of birth but by faith.

Muslims worship Creator not Creation. Thus India or any other country is a piece of Land , it is the creation of God. A Muslim even does not worship Mecca as a land , so why should a Muslim worship India ? The question should be whether a Muslim respects His homeland , which he does .

 

[uppercut]

The Ambedkar quote is just how the whole of humanity works in reality.

Absolutely not. If you disagree go ahead and show me which major religions ( other than Islam ) are in perpetual RELIGIOUS CONFLICT as of today.

As for definition of a terrorist, once again you answered a question with a question.

there is a reason ... wait and you will get to know why I ask such questions.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Absolutely not. If you disagree go ahead and show me which major religions ( other than Islam ) are in perpetual RELIGIOUS CONFLICT as of today.





there is a reason ... wait and you will get to know why I ask such questions.

What does religious conflict have to do with what I said? Ambedkar basically said Muslims believe in their systems and the superiority of their own beliefs, and for others they have nothing but contempt. Whilst I don't agree with that description, basically that holds true for just about all civilisations today.

 

[uppercut]

What does religious conflict have to do with what I said?

almost nearly EVERYTHING. Why ? Because as a society we cannot co-exist peacefully unless and until there is mutual respect and harmony and the bedrock of this harmony has to be mutual respect for each others religious beliefs.


I can assure you that this very very simple concept is just simply non-existent amongst most Muslims and we can see that on a near daily basis right here on this forum and in India.

My own personal experiences in real life that involve very well educated and affluent muslims are even more shocking to say the least. And this is not just me. I have checked with many friends and family members and the consensus is without a shadow of doubt exactly the same and absolutely nothing to do with Hindutva or BJP. Just a direct result of pure in-your-face intolerance from Muslims.​

Ambedkar basically said Muslims believe in their systems and the superiority of their own beliefs, and for others they have nothing but contempt. Whilst I don't agree with that description, basically that holds true for just about all civilisations today.

Prove that with facts.

For example its been 1000+ years since the Parsis fled current day Iran seeking shelter from ( guess who !! ) and they are a thriving super minority in India as of today!! Their numbers are so small that it beggars belief that they have survived for 1000+ years keeping their culture intact.

That is my yardstick to measure religious harmony and I can assure you that there is very little in common between Parsis and Hindus from a religious standpoint. Yet there is not one single riot or atrocity between Hindus and Parsis. Just wont happen. Infact you will not even find a case of forced religious conversion.

So if you want to argue that point ( quoted above in bold red ) you will have to be really pedantic and your only hope is to pretend that since Islam is in conflict with most major religions in the world .... therefore your statement is true. Doesn't work like that.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

almost nearly EVERYTHING. Why ? Because as a society we cannot co-exist peacefully unless and until there is mutual respect and harmony and the bedrock of this harmony has to be mutual respect for each others religious beliefs.


I can assure you that this very very simple concept is just simply non-existent amongst most Muslims and we can see that on a near daily basis right here on this forum and in India.

My own personal experiences in real life that involve very well educated and affluent muslims are even more shocking to say the least. And this is not just me. I have checked with many friends and family members and the consensus is without a shadow of doubt exactly the same and absolutely nothing to do with Hindutva or BJP. Just a direct result of pure in-your-face intolerance from Muslims.​

Prove that with facts.

For example its been 1000+ years since the Parsis fled current day Iran seeking shelter from ( guess who !! ) and they are a thriving super minority in India as of today!! Their numbers are so small that it beggars belief that they have survived for 1000+ years keeping their culture intact.

That is my yardstick to measure religious harmony and I can assure you that there is very little in common between Parsis and Hindus from a religious standpoint. Yet there is not one single riot or atrocity between Hindus and Parsis. Just wont happen. Infact you will not even find a case of forced religious conversion.

So if you want to argue that point ( quoted above in bold red ) you will have to be really pedantic and your only hope is to pretend that since Islam is in conflict with most major religions in the world .... therefore your statement is true. Doesn't work like that.

I love how you ask me to prove with facts while you yourself give me your own personal experiences and your friends and families to make your own case.

Islam is not in conflict with most major religions in the world, it is the world that is in conflict with them. Not for religious reasons either. It is as I said, Muslims believe their way to be superior, but all other nations and ideologies are the same. Where is the big difference? Just like Parsis live in peace in India, so Hindus live in peace in many middle eastern countries.

 

[uppercut]

I love how you ask me to prove with facts while you yourself give me your own personal experiences and your friends and families to make your own case.

YOU made a claim in post# 63 that Enmity exists across the board in all civilizations here is your exact quote below so. It IS YOU that needs to prove that.

Actually I have proved you wrong because there is no enmity between Hindus and Christians,Jews, Buddists, Jains and Parsis and this is true all over the world. Notice the absentee in that list of world religions.

What does religious conflict have to do with what I said? Ambedkar basically said Muslims believe in their systems and the superiority of their own beliefs, and for others they have nothing but contempt. Whilst I don't agree with that description, basically that holds true for just about all civilisations today.

Islam is not in conflict with most major religions in the world, it is the world that is in conflict with them.

This is simply not true because if the entire non-muslim world was truly intolerant there would be so many religious conflicts between all non-muslims across the world which is just not the case. This is common knowledge.

But not surprising that you just do not see any issues with Muslim intolerance and infact you blame others for each and every conflict that muslims find themselves in. This is just a plain lie.

Here is a list of conflicts across the world involving Muslims ( and this is from Modern times not medieval period !! ) :

1. vs Christians ( So many countries across the world )
2. vs Jews ( Middle east )
3. vs Buddhists ( Myanmar and Srilanka )
4. vs Hindus ( in Ind, Pak, BD )
5. vs Communists ( in China )


So yeah Ambedkar was spot on when he said that there is only contempt and enmity for Non-Muslims per Islam.

 

[uppercut]

I have not done any research about Jaish E Muhammad so I am not in a position to brand them with any name.

When I meant the definition of a terrorist , I meant that it depends upon which side you are. For example, the sinhalese LTTE was a terrorist organization , whereas for Tamils they were freedom fighters. No one is born as a terrorist , there are certain factors which lead to it.

1400 years or 14000 years , it does not matter , when you are talking about Islam , you need to show me where Islam encourages killing of innocent people .
If you show , then your point is valid.

For 1400 years there have been several Muslims who are having alcohol , cheating , doing various crimes etc . That does not mean Islam is promoting that.
In fact Islam is the only religion which has alive jurisprudence , which clearly mentions rights and wrong. None of its principles is against Humanity .

here is the evidence:

List of designated terrorist groups - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Thats the list of ALL designated terrorists groups operating across the world and designated as such by various countries and the UN. As you can see the list is overwhelmingly dominated by Islamic terror groups operating OPENLY under the banner of Islam. That is as definitive evidence as it can get and most importantly this has been the case throughout the history of Islam. You can say all great things about your religion but the track record just simply and categorically does not support that at all!

Conversely a truly peaceful religion ( like say Jainism ) has the EXACT opposite track record and that too for well over 2000 years !! So when I talk about peace thats the sort of benchmark that I am referring to which just simply does exist at all for Islam.​

I will get to the rest of your post after we settle the above discussion about Islam and peace.

 

[Champ_Pal]

here is the evidence:

List of designated terrorist groups - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Thats the list of ALL designated terrorists groups operating across the world and designated as such by various countries and the UN. As you can see the list is overwhelmingly dominated by Islamic terror groups operating OPENLY under the banner of Islam. That is as definitive evidence as it can get and most importantly this has been the case throughout the history of Islam. You can say all great things about your religion but the track record just simply and categorically does not support that at all!

Conversely a truly peaceful religion ( like say Jainism ) has the EXACT opposite track record and that too for well over 2000 years !! So when I talk about peace thats the sort of benchmark that I am referring to which just simply does exist at all for Islam.​

I will get to the rest of your post after we settle the above discussion about Islam and peace.

Now he will say that the list you posted in the link are not true followers of his religion. No true Scotsman fallacy.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Here is a list of conflicts across the world involving Muslims ( and this is from Modern times not medieval period !! ) :

1. vs Christians ( So many countries across the world )
2. vs Jews ( Middle east )
3. vs Buddhists ( Myanmar and Srilanka )
4. vs Hindus ( in Ind, Pak, BD )
5. vs Communists ( in China )


So yeah Ambedkar was spot on when he said that there is only contempt and enmity for Non-Muslims per Islam.

In all those conflicts it is the non-Muslims either invading or persecuting the Muslims. I think this is a good example of hindutva hatred rather than Muslims creating issues. Ambedkar being a hindutva no surprise his views reflect this.

 

[uppercut]

In all those conflicts it is the non-Muslims either invading or persecuting the Muslims.

I see.... so.lets start with Christians in Europe .... Why are other non-muslim communities not experiencing the same problem with Christians in modern times in Europe? For example Why has Poland banned muslim immigrants ? Why has the Netherlands elected Geert Wilders who is openly anti-Muslim ? Why is nobody other than muslims complaining about Christian persecution in France and indulging in riots and violence. Ditto In many other European countries.

I think this is a good example of hindutva hatred rather than Muslims creating issues. Ambedkar being a hindutva no surprise his views reflect this.

Except Ambedkar was not a Hindutva and infact converted to Buddhism.You need to come to terms with this simple reality that not all people With Hindu names are Hindutva sympathizers ...

infact India has been ruled by vehemently Anti-Hindutva political parties for almost 60 years out of the 77 yrs since Independence and ALL the horrific attrocities by Muslims happened under their watch despite blatant Muslim appeasement policies like the Wakf act , separate Muslim Personal law, exemption of mosques from government control, religious structures act etc etc.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I see.... so.lets start with Christians in Europe .... Why are other non-muslim communities not experiencing the same problem with Christians in modern times in Europe? For example Why has Poland banned muslim immigrants ? Why has the Netherlands elected Geert Wilders who is openly anti-Muslim ? Why is nobody other than muslims complaining about Christian persecution in France and indulging in riots and violence. Ditto In many other European countries.

How many Muslim countries have bombed Christian nations in the last 50 years? Can you imagine the outrage if Turkey or Iran were building military bases in USA or Great Britain? Or their jets were bombing the holy crap out of them? You live in the USA, how would you like a few missiles raining down in your neighbourhood?

 

[uppercut]

How many Muslim countries have bombed Christian nations in the last 50 years? Can you imagine the outrage if Turkey or Iran were building military bases in USA or Great Britain? Or their jets were bombing the holy crap out of them? You live in the USA, how would you like a few missiles raining down in your neighbourhood?

I am talking about Muslim immigrants and citizens living in Europe today. And if the Christians are so evil why go live in the devils neighborhood In the first place? Also don't forget your past posts elsewhere on this forum where you gloat about how great the western culture is and superior it is and word's to that effect.

 

[HalBass9]

Why do Hindutva move to non-Hindutva countries when non-Hindutva slaughter a cow for a steak and some side of garlic potatoes. That is like almost rest of the world.

 

[Justcrazy]

here is the evidence:

List of designated terrorist groups - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Thats the list of ALL designated terrorists groups operating across the world and designated as such by various countries and the UN. As you can see the list is overwhelmingly dominated by Islamic terror groups operating OPENLY under the banner of Islam. That is as definitive evidence as it can get and most importantly this has been the case throughout the history of Islam. You can say all great things about your religion but the track record just simply and categorically does not support that at all!

Conversely a truly peaceful religion ( like say Jainism ) has the EXACT opposite track record and that too for well over 2000 years !! So when I talk about peace thats the sort of benchmark that I am referring to which just simply does exist at all for Islam.​

I will get to the rest of your post after we settle the above discussion about Islam and peace.

I just want to know one thing before responding to this comment that you made. You previously commented a regarding what Mr Ambedkar said, is that point resolved ?

 

[Justcrazy]

Now he will say that the list you posted in the link are not true followers of his religion. No true Scotsman fallacy.

Why you do not respond directly to me ? Every time need others shoulders to fire ? Just like you hide your faith behind mask of atheist?

 

[Justcrazy]

here is the evidence:

List of designated terrorist groups - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Thats the list of ALL designated terrorists groups operating across the world and designated as such by various countries and the UN. As you can see the list is overwhelmingly dominated by Islamic terror groups operating OPENLY under the banner of Islam. That is as definitive evidence as it can get and most importantly this has been the case throughout the history of Islam. You can say all great things about your religion but the track record just simply and categorically does not support that at all!

Conversely a truly peaceful religion ( like say Jainism ) has the EXACT opposite track record and that too for well over 2000 years !! So when I talk about peace thats the sort of benchmark that I am referring to which just simply does exist at all for Islam.​

I will get to the rest of your post after we settle the above discussion about Islam and peace.

If you had read my comments before properly you would not have answered it the way you did.

My question was How do you define terrorist ?

The list you gave no where says , how they came to conclusion that those were terrorist organisation , or how we can determine different organisations.

Secondly , as I said if they act the way they are acting is something that is part of Islam , then your point would have been correct. but , that is not the case.

If a hindu shouts Jai shri Raam , and kills a Muslim , i would not say that hinduism is responsible for that or Raam is responsible that . It is certain party and certain ideology that is behind that.

 

[Justcrazy]

Why do Hindutva move to non-Hindutva countries when non-Hindutva slaughter a cow for a steak and some side of garlic potatoes. That is like almost rest of the world.

For better opportunities.

 

[uppercut]

If you had read my comments before properly you would not have answered it the way you did.

My question was How do you define terrorist ?

The list you gave no where says , how they came to conclusion that those were terrorist organisation , or how we can determine different organisations.

Its very surprising that you are even asking this question in the age of internet. The answer is very simple. Organizations that resort to using violence against civilians to further their objectives. In the case of Islamic terror groups they openly associate themselves to Islamic teachings and claim to be fighting for protecting Islamic interests.

Examples: AQ, Taliban, ISIS, JeM, LET etc etc. why ? They resort to everything from suicide bombings to beheading, to taking hostages etc.​

Secondly , as I said if they act the way they are acting is something that is part of Islam , then your point would have been correct. but , that is not the case.

Except that if you claim your religion to be extremely peaceful the expectation is that the outcome of such teachings should reflect in the actions of the followers over many many centuries. I gave you the perfect example of Jainism. You cannot claim that your religion is extremely peaceful when there are literally dozens of Islamic terror groups operating openly and also claim to be pious followers of Islam.​

If a hindu shouts Jai shri Raam , and kills a Muslim , i would not say that hinduism is responsible for that or Raam is responsible that . It is certain party and certain ideology that is behind that.

I am not talking about acts of random individuals. I am talking about well known Organizations who are openly about violence as a means to further their objective and have been officially designated as such by prominent countries around the world and ofcourse the UN and other world organizations.

 

[HalBass9]

Now he will say that the list you posted in the link are not true followers of his religion. No true Scotsman fallacy.

Your boy justifies the idea of slaughter of over 200,000 Indians under the guise of religious beliefs, disguising it as a societal norm accepted by educated and internet-savvy Indians. Essentially, he aims to redefine the concepts of ‘terrorism’ and ‘extremism’ to align with his belief in Hindutva supremacy.

It’s time to recognize that many Indians who defend Hindutva politicians are seemingly indifferent to the mass killing of their fellow citizens.

Horrible extremist cult.

 

[uppercut]

Your boy justifies the idea of slaughter of over 200,000 Indians under the guise of religious beliefs, disguising it as a societal norm accepted by educated and internet-savvy Indians. Essentially, he aims to redefine the concepts of ‘terrorism’ and ‘extremism’ to align with his belief in Hindutva supremacy.

It’s time to recognize that many Indians who defend Hindutva politicians are seemingly indifferent to the mass killing of their fellow citizens.

Horrible extremist cult.

Talk to me directly instead of this indirect ranting and rambling.

Have you answered why your fellow animals are not amenable to simple concepts like respect for others belief when it has been conveyed in no uncertain terms that such behavior is not acceptable ?

provide a direct answer as to why you claim to be on the right side of this discussion when the fact is that you are batting for rogue animals who have absolutely no moral or ethical considerations towards Hindu beliefs.

Go on lets see how you justify that.