Jump to content

Saffron Terror


anush
 Share

Recommended Posts

Rahul Gandhi Khan is saying this for the first time on the Indian platform as the voice of Gandhi family - Evidences of this exist 1000 years back when Buddhists were massacred in India, 1984 massacre is not so old, when Rahul Gandhi Khan's pops Rajeev Gandhi Khan ordered the massacre of innocent Sikhs, and his grandmother Indira Gandhi Khan did no less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

those were the days when there was no 'hindu' dharam, it was empire against empire or kingdom against kingdom, this wasnt a organised war.

why i say this is , if the hindus who number 100 crore today, were also in good numbers then too, had they this capacity the mughals wouldnt have ruled hindustan for 1000 years nor would have the british dreamt to set foot on the indian soil .

The allegation that the hindus are planning to wipe out the panth cannot be agreed since if the hindus were that strong or wanting to do this they wouldnt have even allowed the panth to ever exist.

today we may blame some kings for wiping out buddhism, however if you read history you will understand that what happened was a boon in disguise.

those were the times when this entire country was like 80% buddhist, had this percentage not decreased you and me wouldnt have been what we are today, the reason being the islamic invasion took place and they not only finished buddhist kingdoms, they converted them to islam. Afghanistan is big example, similiarly south east asia too.

indira gandhi khan and rahul khan have been not only anti sikh they have been anti hindu too, the hindus too dont like them much.

there are apne in congress too, i dont know when will apne learn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

those were the times when this entire country was like 80% buddhist
Please provide reliable sources. This is something I've read/heard first time about India. I agree Buddhists were in huge numbers before the coming of Islam, but 80% is a number mentioned nowhere in history written even by non-Indians. Please elaborate and clarify where you got this information from.

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its true that after Asoka converted to Buddhism majority of hindus converted to Buddhism, But afterwards they were reconverted into hinduism forcibly saying that Buddhism preaches non violence and peace and lacks the warrior instinct.

Only nations to the northeast of India+Myanmaar+tibet+Sri Lanka were spared.

Those in North west were taken care by Mughals. You can still see the Buddhist style houses(like in Ladakh) in NWFP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.janataparty.org/soniainindia.html something i found about sohnia gandi on a hindu politician's website.

anush u are correct , his true religion is unknown, he has himself at times claimed to be a christian, i have heard that his academic records display that. shall send more link

mehtab singh veer ji, i shall get resources soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DesiKhaarkoo - You are correct there didn't used to exist a term "Hindu" 1000 years ago - Infact, this word means something very derogatory and shameful in Arabian/Persian. However, without going into details of all this, go through this link

http://superhindus.wordpress.com/how-brahmins-killed-buddhism-in-india/

More about the above history, you can find on http://www.ambedkar.org, who himself a Hindu got so embarrased after researching all this, that he finally deided to get converted to Buddhism as Mohandas Karamchand forced not to become a Sikh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Part of the problem is the hostilities between India and Pakistan. If the border were open, Amritsar would easily become a huge trading city. Secondly, the National Highways Authority of India is constructing a new 6-lane expressway from Kashmir, through Amritsar/Jalandhar/Ludhiana to Dehli which will be part of the Ludhiana-Delhi-Kolkatta Industrial Corridor.  Maps of the New Silk Road show Kolkata as a key part of the "road". The Punjab to Kolkata expressway and rail connections will fulfill the ability to hook up to the New Silk Road.  In addition, while crossing to Pakistan via AH1 (Asian Highway 1) is difficult, India does connect to AH1 on the other side, towards the East. Finally, Punjab can trade with the world via Mundra port in Gujurat. Rail to Mundra, then sea onwards. Dubai is very close with a free port. If you send products to Iran, there are ground links onward to Europe.
    • Yeah, that's one possibility. Another I initially thought is that it's a Muslim trying to gather info. But then, you might ask, how does he know about Sikh textual sources. Well, you'd be surprised at their resourcefulness. A final possibility is he's a weak Sikh who was asked a question by a non-Sikh and now he's suddenly feverishly wondering where it's "written" that you can't marry a young child. To the latter, I would say, you're looking in the wrong spot. Gurbani isn't a 1428 page rulebook, like Leviticus or the Vedas: ਸਿਮ੍ਰਿਤਿ ਸਾਸਤ੍ਰ ਪੁੰਨ ਪਾਪ ਬੀਚਾਰਦੇ ਤਤੈ ਸਾਰ ਨ ਜਾਣੀ ॥ ਤਤੈ ਸਾਰ ਨ ਜਾਣੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਬਾਝਹੁ ਤਤੈ ਸਾਰ ਨ ਜਾਣੀ ॥ The Simritis and Shastras discriminate between charity and sin, but know not the essence of the Real Thing. Without the Guru, they know not the essence of the Reality, know not the essence of the Reality. Anand Sahib.
    • You're confusing two different things: One is merely adding starch to a turban to get a certain feel to the fabric. The other is tying your turban once and taking it off like a hat. It is this that people have a problem with. What's wrong with it is that Rehit says to tie your turban afresh every time. If you ask, "Where is that written?", it's written in Bhai Nand Lal ji's Rehitnama. @ipledgeblue didn't just make it up. Umm, no, bro. We're not evangelical Christians like President George W Bush of the US claiming to "talk to God" who told him to invade Iraq. "Speaking to him directly" basically ends up being doing whatever you feel like with the excuse that Guru ji told you to do it. If you still want to take your turban off like a hat, feel free to do so, but don't claim that it's Rehit.
    • You don't need to wear either a pag or dumalla in the gym. You can simply wear a meter or 1.5m small turban (gol pagg or round turban). It doesn't come off.
    • The reason you don't see anything wrong with it is because like a fish in water, you grew up in Western culture and imbibed it fully. It's very difficult to for parents to inculcate traditional culture while in the West. The reason there is a problem is because a kiss between a man and wife is a sexual act (I didn't say it's coitus, but it's still sexual.) By contrast a kiss between a mother and a child, for example, is not sexual. And in our culture, sexual acts are not allowed in public. Goras do allow it. And that's also the reason they have gay pride parades now with people walking around naked with children in attendance and so forth.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use