Jump to content


Members L2
  • Content count

  • Runs

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Time Online

    66d 15h 19m 7s

Everything posted by Muloghonto

  1. Modi’s snub of Justin Trudeau

    Ofcourse to me, 350 dead Canadians are a bigger issue than 3000 in India. Should be to you too: you live here. Your family is here. So is mine. This happened here, the victims resided here, the bereaved live here. And the terrorists who are free, are also here. The only reason you feel it is a 'seperate issue' and not an inferior issue, like any other massacre, in any other country, is because of your clannish mentality- similar to muslims for eg (and some Hindus)- where you somehow care more for people in your 'religious community affiliations' than the citizens of your own nation. Btw, Sikhs are doing better in India compared to the average Indian than Sikhs are doing in Canada compared to the average Canadian. So yes, because Canada is 10 times richer than India, the average Sikh here is richer than his/her counterpart in India. But where-as Sikhs make up the bottom half of the Canadian income pyramid as far as wealthy demographics go, they sit in the top half in India. So its a bit funny to hear how minorities wont thrive in India but will in Canada, when compared to the mean of the land, your demographics are doing better in INdia than in Canada.
  2. Modi’s snub of Justin Trudeau

    I dont hate Sikhs. I hate Khalistanis and prejudiced idiots who justify criminality because 'others are criminals too'. This is the sort of mentality that Canadians are genuinely concerned about when they say 'leave your old world mentality back in the old world'. Not just towards us brown people for eg, this applies to a lot of the former Yugoslavs as well. Why would it be torture for me ? My countrymen are doing well in my new country. That makes literally no sense, especially given that though i am an atheist, i have said less against Sikhism than I have against even hinduism- doesn't change the fact that your faith too, like all faiths, are BS, but i see you guys don't go around converting like crazy and lining street corners with 'Wahe-guruji ki khalsa' chants like the other religions do. Its ironic that those who are pointing out that there are powerful Sikhs in Canada who consider killing a terrorist as 'genocide', justify murders and terrorism because 'other terrorists in other nations are roaming scot free', with evidence i may add, is being 'butt-hurt'. You simply cannot bring yourself to admit that Sikh community in Canada has a problem with terrorism sympathizers, atleast from the past. Because its bad for your business (its the dreaded T-word in the west) and it makes you guys look bad. Show me one anti-Sikh statement I've made before you accuse me of hating Sikhs.
  3. Modi’s snub of Justin Trudeau

    Um. this is Canada. Practically all the urban whites are falling over themselves agreeing with practically anything a minority person says/does to prove that they are not racist. The Indian diaspora doesn't have to give two flying *s about India. The victims of Air India bombing were mostly Canadian citizens. IIRC, there were like 25 Indians, 24 of whom were the flight crew, 2-3 british citizens and 230 or so Canadian citizens. Indo-Canadians. Plenty of Indo-Canadians still give a damn about that. In my experience, there is a 'punjabi Indo-Canadians and rest of indo-canadians' divide...especially amongst the older gen due to the Air India bombing. Younger gen doesnt care as much.
  4. Modi’s snub of Justin Trudeau

    http://www.jagmeetsingh.ca/1984_sikh_genocide ^^ This is the leader of NDP, Justin 'barbie' Trudeau's main opposition. I hope in the next election Indo-Canadians expose this guy as a tacit supporter of a terrorist.
  5. Modi’s snub of Justin Trudeau

    forget condemning Air India bomber, he has his own website, where he SPECIFICALLY says that Operation Blue Star was a genocide of Sikhs. So moral of the story is, the most powerful Canadian Sikh politician thinks that when the government sends in the military against a terrorist who's taken over a building for MONTHS and refuses to lay down arms, fortifies it with his supporters, its 'genocide', because this terrorist happens to be Sikh.
  6. I think of all of the tennis records, #1 at 36 in mens tennis is going to be almost as impossible to break as Bradman's 99 average...
  7. Modi’s snub of Justin Trudeau

    unfortunately not. Barbie has no competition as of now : the conservatives are fractured and have no clear leader or agenda. The NDP- the only legit challenger- has put a Sikh Khalistani on the top leadership, which has already ruffled many Canadians. So Barbie wins next election practically by default.
  8. Modi’s snub of Justin Trudeau

    And by that token, as long as Sikh terrorists are roaming free in Canada for the Air India bombing, there will be a section of people in India who will see Canada as aiding and abetting terrorism in India and questioning the intention of the Canadian-Sikhs. Show displeasure all you want and it is all justified. But when a prominent Sikh like Jagmeet Singh calls elimination of a terrorist, in an operation where Indian army took specific care not to touch the golden temple as genocide, it comes across as severely biassed pro-Khalistani brainwashing.
  9. Modi’s snub of Justin Trudeau

    Not all, but most Canadian gurdwaras are Khalistani supporters and we even have the leader of NDP openly stating, in a statement on his own website, that Operation Blue Star was a genocide. (specifically, operation blue star). So as a Canadian, i have no problems stating that India is fully within its rights to question Canadian stance on Khalistanis, given the absolute distortion of the Punjab-Khalistan etc issue in Canada.
  10. Yes, there is. Broadly speaking, the world is divided into british law and french law. In British legal system, innocence is presumed, guilt has to be demonstrated, in French legal system, both innocence and guilt have to be demonstrated. Either way, its the British who gave us rule of law. Prior to the British, there was no concept of 'law is absolute' in India - whether Hindu or muslim, the legal apparatus never applied itself to the monarch. This is where the British system is superior to Indian system and that is why we follow the British system, not the Indian system.
  11. India is not a nation-state. India is a historical geographical region. Evidenced as reference to India for 2300 years as ALL LANDS from Kabul to Burma. Himalaya to Kanyakumari. Republic of India is the nation-state. I disagree. Before the British, India had no concept of rule of law, no concept of civic structure. British law is what seperates India from rest of the third world.
  12. I have already proven your desert-barbarism religious ideology false by citation. You are just salty because i exposed you as a fake psychiatrist, by quoting university research papers that show women also rape men- something you categorically denied and now cannot run away from, faker !
  13. Hashim Amla’s House in Southafrica

    Show us evidence of this claim. Its the alpha males that have oppressed women for long. https://melmagazine.com/why-are-alpha-males-such-sad-sacks-2b0b9852f09e https://newrepublic.com/article/118036/sexist-pseudoscience-alpha-male-pick-artists So it makes no sense that beta males are beta, because they defer to women, yet they are the ones who beat up women. Punjab's sex ratio is 895. West Bengal's is 950. Kindly keep your nonsense propaganda to yourself. Violent chuha nature does not make sense. We are far more peaceful as a people than Punjabis or the Pakistanis. Partition is proof of that- far less deaths on the Bengal side than Punjab side. You are now flat out lying. The general i directly quoted said that the test was unfair to women because most men from ELITE divisions fail it. No it does not, Show us where it says so. Climbing walls dont cause stress fractures. Jumping down from them does. This is basic anatomy. Clearly you dont know much of that topic. Nonsense. Show us evidence of your claim. My claim is simple- if women can snatch 100 kilos, they can carry 100 pounds. Basic conversion math says so. Now show us your claim that women cannot carry 100 pounds. And less than 10% men who apply for military training qualify....so all it shows, is that military training is beyond most men and most women. there is no study that says that. No, i am educated enough to know that modern warfare has no reason to be sexist towards women. Only followers of illiterate desert idiots from illiterate times, that propagate sexism think so. They have won the highest awards of gallantry for IDF. Ie, they are just as capable as men. I am sorry you are too insecure to see that a woman is just as physically capable as you are. You gave nothing. News article from a random site does not qualify as scholarly article. Random sampling is used in pharmacology. Random sampling in opinions mean nothing. This is self-evident to someone competent in statistics. All species of ANIMALS. FYI plants are androgynous mostly. They have both male and female buds, hence the term CROSS POLLINATION. Clearly, you are not educated enough in biology. No, i said most animal species have homosexual tendencies. I have presented evidence and you have run away like a lying idiot as usual. You are running away from the fact that homosexuality is natural in kingdom animalia. Hence you are trying to twist words about plants. Your Allah is fake, your religion is fake, because it bans homosexuality, despite the fact that most animal species have homosexuality. So your Allah is either a lying idiot or fake. Take your pick. These are not personal anecdotes, these are university accredited studies that shows females are capable of raping males and have raped males. Game, set, match, idiot. You are no psychiatrist. I have provided university accredited links that debunks your claim that women are incapable of raping men. So far, you have nothing more than empty words of a faker, i have provided proof. So, you lose. A psychiatrist who doesnt know that women also rape men is a faker. You have been exposed. Stop running away from the fact that you claimed women cant rape men and i provided you university backed research to show you are wrong. Not admitting mistakes is 'namard' behaviour- which i am not surprised by for followers of a faith that treats women like scum.
  14. No, they were a lesser empire in every shape and form of the word. Mughals atleast got central authority down-pat. Atleast till Aurangzeb's time, when he died at 90 and left like 3 dozen claimants with zero experience ( because of Aurangzeb's paranoia that his sons would do to him, what he did to his father). Marathas on the other hand, couldn't put together central power if their life depended on it.
  15. No big difference. Perhaps, at most, push back colonization by 30-40 years but thats it. The Marathas were no match for the Europeans. Just like Qing China was brought to its knees, so too would've been the case for India. And if by some miracle the Europeans left us alone, Maratha empire would've collapsed on itself just like it was in the process of doing so. The Marathas were feudal & clannish entities and the 1700s onwards world sees the rise of nationalism, with feudalism and clan-behaviour becoming obsolete in major countries. The only reason Marathas get attention, is because Shivaji was a visionary guerilla fighter and the marathas were hindus. But beyond that, they were pretty incompetent at pretty much everything - modernizing their warfare and above all, were pathetic at diplomacy & politics. Panipat III is a clinical demonstration of maratha stupidity : brings along over 1 lakh civillians to follow them around on 'tirth yatra', fights on soil they do not control but pisses off every single ruler - from Rajputs to Awadhi to everyone. And then gets owned by Abdali. In my years of reading history, its rare i've come across a battle that has worse strategic and tactical awareness as Panipat III.
  16. If you can't state why my logic is flawed, then you are basically passing off a value judgement without reason, akin to ' its dumb coz I say so/I don't like it' mentality.
  17. North Indians making Goa another Haryana, says minister

    If Goa is drowning in garbage and roads are more clogged than Donald Trump's arteries, well genius minister, USE YOUR TOURISM MONEY to improve infrastructure and maybe have better garbage removal and processing systems!!.
  18. Nothing is fool proof. And the entire point of science is NOT to be like holy scripture, but be open to refutation, change and critique. I don't think you understand peer review format or have much access to peer reviewed journals, which is why you speak the way you do. Besides, why are you bringing a far, far superior methodology of science over the far, far inferior methodology of religion ?? Religion has ALWAYS resisted question, investigation, skepticism and has singularly failed to cite ANYTHING in it that would constitute advanced knowledge or proof of divinity or ANYTHING that would make you think its not just clever word-play by snake-oil charmers. Muslims go around claiming the Koran is divine. Or from God. Or any such. Yet, for a God who really cared for us to follow the Koran, it doesn't contain ONE decisive, categoric, irrefutable scientific fact that is way, way advanced for its age. Heck, a simple fourier transform would've done. Or a simple explanation of H20 molecule. So when you contrast this kind of snake-oil type mubo-jumbo that fails to provide any evidence, versus legions of scientific claims pinned on verifiable evidence, its a no-contest which one is more credible. PS: Still waiting for an explanation on why Paneer planet is hard to believe but God isn't, when both are illogical as demonstrated and have 0 proof of existence.
  19. If you are ACTUALLY educated in science ( ie, a science graduate), its pretty easy to verify the data-set if one chooses to do so. Are you a scientist ? If not, it explains why you think peer-review is riddled with holes and is 'take it on faith'. But it really isn't so.
  20. So anything unexplainable to you is God. There will always be a point of unknown knowledge about something. I guess to you right now, dark matter is God, quantum tunneling is God, etc etc. You may want to explore the notion that the universe may not have been created but might actually be eternally uncreated. If you can accept that, then the universe itself is God ? so then we are all in our way, Gods too as we are part of the universe...
  21. No. If you are member of sites like Jstor, you can check for peer reviewed papers on practically anything.
  22. So what you are saying then, is paneer planet is possible, because stone-age man couldn't even conceive of hydrogen atom and thought it was irrational. So therefore, paneer planet 'could be' ?! See, this is a case study on why 'could be' has no place in human consideration without logic or proof. If something turns out to be logical in the future- sure. Atleast we can say that our ancestors (if they previously dismissed it) acted rationally based on their info, than be an irrational fool considering every possibility, so like a blind squirrel can find a nut every now and then, they can guess a truth through all types of irrational guess-work. This is the same methodology of fortune-telling, astrology etc : make innane pronouncements at random until you strike a home run and hook the customer by one success, nevermind the millions of failures. My point is, such mentality (irrational guesswork to simply be lucky) serves no good practical purpose but has far more negative practical consequences. As for herd mentality- I can easily check the proof of something/evidence of something science claims, if I wished it. Herd mentality is about taking things to be true, just because someone said so, with no assurances that there is proof if desired. Deferring to authority pronouncement when proof is available, is a convenience short-hand, not intellectual dishonesty like believing something is true with zero evidence.
  23. Because most go by convention. Not logic. Paneer planet has pretty much the exact same credibility as God - illogical and unevidenced. Its called herd/group mentality.
  24. Reasonable is simply a fancy way of saying 'no I think its too improbable but have nothing to base it on, except my feelings'. Belief from humans is not required for something to exist. but for us to consider the possibility of it existing, it must make some sort of sense or it must have some sort of evidence. Otherwise, we are back to considering the most absurd ideas as existing possibly (which make no sense and have no evidence - like my paneer planet).
  25. You have not explained, why anything is not possible in the unbounded universe. If we can have the God argument- which violated logic and evidence, then why are all other illogical and non-evidenced arguments re: 'it can exist' invalid.

Guest, sign in to access all features.