Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Harditsingh

Jewish zionist influence in indian and punjabi media?

Recommended Posts

seems like a lot of indian serials and channels are under companies that are owned by jews and zionists like star plus etc if you research u see they are under courus and other major media corps owned by the them. It should be known that they  have hidden agenda and want to destroy every other culture to rule over them. is there something fishy here?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Harditsingh said:

seems like a lot of indian serials and channels are under companies that are owned by jews and zionists like star plus etc if you research u see they are under courus and other major media corps owned by the jews. It should be known that the jews have hidden agenda and want to destroy every other culture to rule over them.

 its Hindus Brahmans most Gujarati ....look at the Forbes India list and richest in UK,,,are Hindus. Mukesh Ambani worth over $70 billion

Sikhs don't have any financial power. Jews, Hindus Muslims have but not us which explains why we are in state today. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They been there since the very beginning, the silent era 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/7/2020 at 1:44 PM, puzzled said:

They been there since the very beginning, the silent era 

 

Watch this video

I too used to always because being surrounded by hardcore Muslims be all Palestine, Muslims are victims etc

Then once you start doing own research reading facts, you'll understand better...not saying they are perfect but kudos for them sealing their faith...

Their conflict goes back 1000's of years, regardless how many Islamic countries are there and how much did Islam and Arab colonize ......what about the Baihi, yazidis, kurds, persians pre islam..extinct....

Imagine if Sikhs got the Sikh empire back, The Pakistani side Kashmir under Sikh reign once was....they'd erase our history call us colonizers  etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Kau89r8 said:

Imagine if Sikhs got the Sikh empire back, The Pakistani side Kashmir under Sikh reign once was....they'd erase our history call us colonizers  etc...

Think logically brother. If we had our raj in 1947, it would have been overthrown easily by islamists. Muslim pop of Punjab (West+East) was way higher than Hindus + Sikhs. Kashmir is a hellhole right now, and even pak govt cant control it. Pakistani Punjab gives birth to the most radical islamists of South Asia. Master Tara Singh made the best decision of that time. If we had a larger army or higher pop, we could have a slight chance of getting raj 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Tamansingh123 said:

Think logically brother. If we had our raj in 1947, it would have been overthrown easily by islamists. Muslim pop of Punjab (West+East) was way higher than Hindus + Sikhs. Kashmir is a hellhole right now, and even pak govt cant control it. Pakistani Punjab gives birth to the most radical islamists of South Asia. Master Tara Singh made the best decision of that time. If we had a larger army or higher pop, we could have a slight chance of getting raj 

i hear most pakistanis are barelvi and that the orthodox salafis dont even consider barelvis as proper muslims. its these same barelvis that give sikhs a hard time and are probably the ones who r doing this grooming crap because almost every pakistani mosque even here in canada is a barelvi one. I have only met one orthodox muslim in my life and tbf the guy was very calm and respectable so maybe these barelvis use us as a scapegoat to feel better about themselves?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/7/2020 at 1:44 PM, puzzled said:

They been there since the very beginning, the silent era 

 

so was this before bollywood movies became sluttified?

 
So it was taboo for hindus and muslims to act in movies back then, and now the hindus and muslims actresses in the bollywood movies are mostly dressed in slutty ways, especially for musical numbers. Just irony!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/9/2020 at 1:20 PM, Tamansingh123 said:

Think logically brother. If we had our raj in 1947, it would have been overthrown easily by islamists. Muslim pop of Punjab (West+East) was way higher than Hindus + Sikhs. Kashmir is a hellhole right now, and even pak govt cant control it. Pakistani Punjab gives birth to the most radical islamists of South Asia. Master Tara Singh made the best decision of that time. If we had a larger army or higher pop, we could have a slight chance of getting raj 

Even during Misl era, there were many punjabi muslims. With the right control I don't think the islamists would take over!

Remember in 1947 we had well trained sikh soldiers to take care of such things!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ipledgeblue said:

so was this before bollywood movies became sluttified?

 
So it was taboo for hindus and muslims to act in movies back then, and now the hindus and muslims actresses in the bollywood movies are mostly dressed in slutty ways, especially for musical numbers. Just irony!

I think the definition of slutty has always been different depending on the era. In the old days a tight dress in a conservative country would of been considered slutty.

I read about the first few indian movies made and the directors found it hard finding a woman that agreed to wear red lipstick because in those days even wearing lipstick was controversial, so they ended up going to the red light district of bombay and got a few girls from there. But then the pimps started complaining that they were out of  business so the prostitutes quit the movie, so the director ended up using teenage boys instead to play the females role! 

A lot of the actresses in the early movies were daughters of prostitutes and dancing girls because the whole kotha/tawaif business collapsed and they needed jobs. 

The Jewish women on the other hand I guess had no problem with acting/dancing.

But yes, how times have changed! Now women are stripping on screen for fame and to get popular while in the old days they had to look for actresses in the red light areas! 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, puzzled said:

I think the definition of slutty has always been different depending on the era. In the old days a tight dress in a conservative country would of been considered slutty.

I read about the first few indian movies made and the directors found it hard finding a woman that agreed to wear red lipstick because in those days even wearing lipstick was controversial, so they ended up going to the red light district of bombay and got a few girls from there. But then the pimps started complaining that they were out of  business so the prostitutes quit the movie, so the director ended up using teenage boys instead to play the females role! 

A lot of the actresses in the early movies were daughters of prostitutes and dancing girls because the whole kotha/tawaif business collapsed and they needed jobs. 

The Jewish women on the other hand I guess had no problem with acting/dancing.

But yes, how times have changed! Now women are stripping on screen for fame and to get popular while in the old days they had to look for actresses in the red light areas! 

Quite ironic as the Jews in Hollywood never allowed their women to act. They preferred the "Shiksa " (Yiddish term for non-Jewish women)

But they allowed Jewish women to act in Bollywood. 

I wonder if it has to do with the type of Jew they are.

Hollywood Jews were Ashkenazi but Bollywood Jews were not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Ranjeet01 said:

Quite ironic as the Jews in Hollywood never allowed their women to act. They preferred the "Shiksa " (Yiddish term for non-Jewish women)

But they allowed Jewish women to act in Bollywood. 

I wonder if it has to do with the type of Jew they are.

Hollywood Jews were Ashkenazi but Bollywood Jews were not.

I think I read that the jewish women of bollywood were the Baghdadi jews. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read that the first lady to win miss india contest in 1947 was a jewish lady called Esther Victoria Abraham

 

You can definitely see the Jew in the nose. 

Pramila_(Esther_Victoria_Abraham).jpg.e070b087943406aa622733da135e45fa.jpg

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

90% of Islam is same as Judaism...they pray, worship, halal/kosher among many others exact mirrorred to each other yet they'd biggest enemy's .......

If funny when Muslims say Sikhi is influenced/copied by Islam..Whereas Islam It all comes from Judaism and Shia islam is influenced by Persian culture

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, MuslimNeighbour said:

This is another example of why you don't open your mouth in public and get caught on camera saying such silly things, safer for Sikhs to show their stupidity anonymously online than to be schooled in public I guess.

Whether Islam be 90% or even 99.99% similar to Judaism is irrelevant since the latter claims to be from the same lineage of Abraham hence the similarities whether it being circumcision, slaughter of animals, the way they pray, having the same Prophets and so on.

Sikhi DOES NOT claim to have a shared lineage with Hinduism or Islam yet it is pretty much 87% Hinduism, 3% Islam and 10% of additional things. Sikhi in fact affirms Hindu deities, Guru's usage of Hindu Gods/Goddesses on their swords and flags etc... believe in both reincarnation and hell apparently oh and call God Allah, Raheem, Kareem and so on...

What can I expect though when one of the most famous Sikh Parcharik's in the World, most certainly the most famous one in the UK at the time claimed Muslims slaughter animals in the way they do because it maximises pain (Jagraj Singh)...

I'd minus the 3% aswell, words like allah, Kareem etc had very much become a part of the everyday Punjabi language and North Indian culture by then. Like the word "rubb" is very much part of the Punjabi language and Northern Indian culture.  It's common to even hear a Pubjabi Hindu to use words like Rabb for God as its basically a part of the Language and culture. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MuslimNeighbour said:

This is another example of why you don't open your mouth in public and get caught on camera saying such silly things, safer for Sikhs to show their stupidity anonymously online than to be schooled in public I guess.

Whether Islam be 90% or even 99.99% similar to Judaism is irrelevant since the latter claims to be from the same lineage of Abraham hence the similarities whether it being circumcision, slaughter of animals, the way they pray, having the same Prophets and so on.

Sikhi DOES NOT claim to have a shared lineage with Hinduism or Islam yet it is pretty much 87% Hinduism, 3% Islam and 10% of additional things. Sikhi in fact affirms Hindu deities, Guru's usage of Hindu Gods/Goddesses on their swords and flags etc... believe in both reincarnation and hell apparently oh and call God Allah, Raheem, Kareem and so on...

What can I expect though when one of the most famous Sikh Parcharik's in the World, most certainly the most famous one in the UK at the time claimed Muslims slaughter animals in the way they do because it maximises pain (Jagraj Singh)...

I don't see what's so silly about that post. It's actually a correct observation. Must have hit a raw nerve...

Ideologies are never 100% new, whether you talk about language, culture, food, philosophy etc., there's always an element of similarities everywhere. You actually haven't made a valid argument here.

The Abrahamic religions believe in progressive revelations. So you still have to believe in the previous prophets (assuming they actually existed). However, with Sikhi, the connection to Hinduism is more cultural and geographical, rather than ideological. I'm not denying that there aren't similarities (there are similarities in all), but it's not connected in the same way as the Abrahamic religions are.

In the words of everyone's favourite Muslim apologist, Dr. Zakir Naik: "I hope that answers your question." 😊

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
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...
Sign in to follow this  



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8785039/amp/Female-prison-guard-32-sexual-relationship-depraved-double-murderer-court-hears.html?__twitter_impression=true   Maybe it's a good idea not to have female guards in men's prison and vica-versa 
    • Guest Singh
      In effect, by doing so, are you categorically agreeing with Professor Piara Singh Padam's viewpoint? http://www..org/articles/Anoop%20Kaur%20-%20Girlfriend%20of%20GGS.htm Furthermore, are you also asserting that our Guru Sahibaan were Hindu Kings in their previous lives who divided up the actual GurGaddi of the future in a business deal (when they were Hindu Kings previously) as stated in Bachitar Natak (as opposed to Bibek Buddhi)? http://www.globalsikhstudies.net/articles/Baldev%20Singh-Bachittar%20Natak%20A%20Strange%20Drama.doc Bachitar Natak states that Guru Sahib had a caste that they were proud of. 1699 destroyed the very concept of caste via Kul Naash. So which exactly is it? As Vaisakhi 1699 and Bachitar Natak are mutually exclusive. One cannot be both pro-caste and anti-caste.  
    • It's the covert types that hit you the most. Once you know and see the signs, you can never go back. It's the body language, tone of voice, micro-expressions you have to notice. They give off a certain energy.  The overt/grandiose ones are there for all to see.
    • It needs to be kept in check, away from the mainstream who have no interest in it. It doesn't need to be lauded, celebrated, and highlighted. It certainly doesn't need narratives constructed around it by society's myth-makers in order to mythologise it as a legitimate "cause."  I'll accept it's somewhat of a biological diversion if you accept it is not a comparable equivalent to heterosexuality.
    • I agree. Many will literally go bonkers through this. But I do believe that the flipside to the negative aspects of Panjabi character and it's often sociopathic nature, is the inheritance of an abnormally strong mental constitution which can combat this. Some of us have this, I'm guessing you're one of them?  I don't think it's a modern phenomena at all. Most social structures seem to be designed to kill the conscience and turn us into unquestioning drones. Caste system in India is a perfect example of this from outside of the modern world. I hear that. The realising that close ones have these 'mental health issues' like under discussion, is nothing short of traumatic. And I'm talking about someone who studied psychology previously. It's a shock with covert sociopaths who've been under the radar, under your nose, in power positions (like olders) for all your life wreaking havoc. It makes you look at everything gone by in a new light. It's not a nice experience. But if you've inherited that Panjabi 'protective factor' instead of the sociopathy, you're lucky as f**k! You'll feel deep pain, but you'll survive it, and be more clued up than the average bod. I've always leaned on dukh daru sukh rog paiyaa to deal with this myself. Resistance often leads to strength. I don't think people in the past who had to deal with dysfunctional, suppressive systems like caste or the Moghuls had it any different - maybe much more worse?  Yep. Then you go through the solitary journey that either makes or breaks you. Just to give you another insight. I've got a fair few sociopath types in the family. What I've learned recently is that if you stick to your guns, a few of the younger ones clock onto what is going on and become allies. Even when it's their own parent whose acting dysfunctionally. These kids are sometimes very well armed in disarming the antics of their olders, providing they have support and other trustable family to turn to. If you're in a position of just looking after yourself - that has positives and negatives - focus on the former. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use