Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
6 hours ago, Yoda-esque said:

It's not 30..it's actually much lesser..there's actually a study on that

It's not 30, it's 16%

Quote

Islam demographic expert warns that once Muslims hit 16% of the population of your country, there is no way to stop it from becoming an Islamic nation.

The original article seems to have been removed from most platforms.

 

But, you can still read the article here https://eurasiantimes.com/how-viral-messages-ignites-hate-spreads-venom-against-the-muslim-community/

 

It gives examples of how Muslim behavior varies when they are 2%, 5%, 10-20%, 20-40%, 60% in any country.

 

As their % increases their behavior gradually evolves from playing the victim card to creating unrest to full on persecution of non-Muslims.

Posted
9 hours ago, Vilander said:

 Happens when its 30 % ? Scary generalisation 


Well, going by Kashmir, Bengal and Punjab model, it all starts with a simple show of strength, public display of hate and intimidation,  while the media projects it’s just fringe and the majority believes. We all know how it turned out there. Before it reaches direct action day, it needs to be exposed and nipped in the bud. 

Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Yoda-esque said:

 

That's the problem with most south indians,never had to fight the Mughals and islamists.Thry have no clue about what it takes to build and defend a nation and the sacrifices that went into it.

 


That’s not true and it is evident that you have studied NCERT history prepared by marxist historians. Starting with Khilji, the Islamists raided temples like Halebidu (name of the place itself came from the ruins of Khluji’s armies) and Madurai temples. In Madurai, a courtesan hid the deity and saved it from rampaging armies.  Bahamani kingdoms (pre moghul)  were thwarted by Vijayanagara kings for 100 years, until they united and raided and rampaged the empire in Talikota, was in the era of Akbar when he was trying to gain Delhi back. You go to Hanoi, it is hard to not shed a tear listening to the stories and the pillage that happened to the temples and people, it is in ruins now . Since then the nawabs of Hyderabad ruling Hindu majority taxed people to the helm and was the richest man in India in 1947. The Brits used to supply underage Hindu girls to the Nizam for pleasure. Kingdom of Arcot was an Islamic one too, joined hands with Brits to defeat Tipu.

 

Ah! Tipu and his dada Hyder Ali tried to create a Islamic kingdom with allegiance to the Turkish caliphate and plundered the area. Read his escapades in Coorg, Mangalore, Malabar and Goa to kill and convert ordinary citizens and not just armies. 
 

Even in the early 20th century , during Khilafat movement, riots that killed Hindus by 1000s in the Mooplah massacre (100 years ago exactly) are an evidence of how much strong the other side was. 
 

Culturally, Hindus didn’t assimilate as much with Muslims as much as North India. Dress-wise - purdah became ghunghat, music (Hindustani) and cuisine (Mughlai) etc have large scale influences of Islam in the north and very little in the south. Such influences and the presence of temples, have made an impression that south India was spared from Muslim invasions. We have had similar experiences in that dept. 

Edited by coffee_rules
Posted

That’s not true and it is evident that you have studied NCERT history prepared by marxist historians. Starting with Khilji, the Islamists raided temples like Halebidu (name of the place itself came from the ruins of Khluji’s armies) and Madurai temples. In Madurai, a courtesan hid the deity and saved it from rampaging armies.  Bahamani kingdoms (pre moghul)  were thwarted by Vijayanagara kings for 100 years, until they united and raided and rampaged the empire in Talikota, was in the era of Akbar when he was trying to gain Delhi back. You go to Hanoi, it is hard to not shed a tear listening to the stories and the pillage that happened to the temples and people, it is in ruins now . Since then the nawabs of Hyderabad ruling Hindu majority taxed people to the helm and was the richest man in India in 1947. The Brits used to supply underage Hindu girls to the Nizam for pleasure. Kingdom of Arcot was an Islamic one too, joined hands with Brits to defeat Tipu.
 
Ah! Tipu and his dada Hyder Ali tried to create a Islamic kingdom with allegiance to the Turkish caliphate and plundered the area. Read his escapades in Coorg, Mangalore, Malabar and Goa to kill and convert ordinary citizens and not just armies. 
 
Even in the early 20th century , during Khilafat movement, riots that killed Hindus by 1000s in the Mooplah massacre (100 years ago exactly) are an evidence of how much strong the other side was. 
 
Culturally, Hindus didn’t assimilate as much with Muslims as much as North India. Dress-wise - purdah became ghunghat, music (Hindustani) and cuisine (Mughlai) etc have large scale influences of Islam in the north and very little in the south. Such influences and the presence of temples, have made an impression that south India was spared from Muslim invasions. We have had similar experiences in that dept. 
To be honest, over centuries it's not much compared to the north.Look, I am not comparing here..but there's really no other explanation.

The Hindus haven't fought back much in the south .
Posted
The original article seems to have been removed from most platforms.
 
But, you can still read the article here https://eurasiantimes.com/how-viral-messages-ignites-hate-spreads-venom-against-the-muslim-community/
 
It gives examples of how Muslim behavior varies when they are 2%, 5%, 10-20%, 20-40%, 60% in any country.
 
As their % increases their behavior gradually evolves from playing the victim card to creating unrest to full on persecution of non-Muslims.
Thanks for sharing that..I was trying to find the same one.

Posted
did your daddy tell you that, learn how to respect your countrymen first else don't expect them to stand by you when your arse is under fire. 

 

sub dividing the country on multiple identities, stupid right wing nuts. Let me ask you how many people have you lost from your extended family on war ? rhetorical i think i know the answer, go school someone else on sacrifice.

Ah that classic comeback of right wing nuts when confronted with truth..

 

Anyways, as I said,lemurians will have no clue what hit them until it's too late.

 

Oh and btw , the PFIs repeated the March again,such is their arrogance.

They can do it because they know what a bunch of effetes there are down south.

 

 

Posted
1 minute ago, Yoda-esque said:



The Hindus haven't fought back much in the south .


On what basis do you say with assertion? PFI/SDPI or in general? I don’t think so. It is as much as any where else. I’d say, Bhadraloks have been more docile than everybody else

Posted

On what basis do you say with assertion? PFI/SDPI or in general? I don’t think so. It is as much as any where else. I’d say, Bhadraloks have been more docile than everybody else
Number of temples in state are always inversely proportional to islamic presence
Lack of martial culture
Number of wars fought ( Mughals,Adil,nizam, british)
Lack of hindus empires post mughal entry( vijaynagara being the last)
Lack of rebellions




Posted
3 minutes ago, Yoda-esque said:

Number of temples in state are always inversely proportional to islamic presence
Lack of martial culture
Number of wars fought ( Mughals,Adil,nizam, british)
Lack of hindus empires post mughal entry( vijaynagara being the last)
Lack of rebellions



 

You are basing it on one era of Peshwa/ Marathas in the 17th century? Shivaji was inspired by Vijayanagar Hindu empire. After Vijayanagar, it was all distributed. Wodeyars were fighting with Marathas before Tipu and after Tipu English took over. Marathas fizzled out past 18th century. Temples survived mainly because of compromises. Up north Moghuls just erased all of them. Anyway, forget armies, culture wise North Indians are more phattu to follow Islamic culture than South Indians. There’s the resistance. 

Posted
You are basing it on one era of Peshwa/ Marathas in the 17th century? Shivaji was inspired by Vijayanagar Hindu empire. After Vijayanagar, it was all distributed. Wodeyars were fighting with Marathas before Tipu and after Tipu English took over. Marathas fizzled out past 18th century. Temples survived mainly because of compromises. Up north Moghuls just erased all of them. Anyway, forget armies, culture wise North Indians are more phattu to follow Islamic culture than South Indians. There’s the resistance. 

You are right about Vijaynagara but wrong about everything else.The Deccan was occupied by the shahs before the Mughals and there was hardly any resistance and they had a relatively stable reign since late 15th century. they were careful not to convert their subjects unlike the Mughals who arrived much later,hence there are relatively fewer converts.

 

Had it been Aurangzeb down south,things would have been different

 

 

Posted
20 minutes ago, Yoda-esque said:

The Hindus haven't fought back much in the south .

 

I usually agree with you but you are wrong here. Muslims in Andhra don't dare to go against Hindus. There are 2 dominant castes in Andhra i.e Reddy and Kamma. These 2 are so dominant that Muslims never ever go against them. It's more or less the same in Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and even in Telangana outside Hyderabad city.

 

Kerala is the only state out of 5 where Muslims are an issue, the other 4 states have dealt with Muslims a lot better than any Northern state.

 

Being from Andhra, I never understood the fuss about Muslims as I always thought they were extremely weak.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Yoda-esque said:
5 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:
You are basing it on one era of Peshwa/ Marathas in the 17th century? Shivaji was inspired by Vijayanagar Hindu empire. After Vijayanagar, it was all distributed. Wodeyars were fighting with Marathas before Tipu and after Tipu English took over. Marathas fizzled out past 18th century. Temples survived mainly because of compromises. Up north Moghuls just erased all of them. Anyway, forget armies, culture wise North Indians are more phattu to follow Islamic culture than South Indians. There’s the resistance. 

You are right about Vijaynagara but wrong about everything else.


Well, you should read more about Sanghi version of history than NCERT. Anyhow, this is all moot, you should be glad that at least some part of our civilization was saved and nurtured in the south

Posted

Well, you should read more about Sanghi version of history than NCERT. Anyhow, this is all moot, you should be glad that at least some part of our civilization was saved and nurtured in the south
I have read a lot of history.I am glad that some culture was preserved but I fear that the culture will not last for long because there's no appreciation for it.
Posted
 
I usually agree with you but you are wrong here. Muslims in Andhra don't dare to go against Hindus. There are 2 dominant castes in Andhra i.e Reddy and Kamma. These 2 are so dominant that Muslims never ever go against them. It's more or less the same in Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and even in Telangana outside Hyderabad city.
 
Kerala is the only state out of 5 where Muslims are an issue, the other 4 states have dealt with Muslims a lot better than any Northern state.
 
Being from Andhra, I never understood the fuss about Muslims as I always thought they were extremely weak.
If that was the case, how the nizamshahi rule there for so long?
Posted
Just now, Yoda-esque said:

If that was the case, how the nizamshahi rule there for so long?

 

Nizam rule falls under modern day Telangana. Also, historic rule matters much less compared to how things are on the ground today. You should read what was done to Muslims during operation Polo. Also, Hindus erected a temple for a female deity adjacent to Charminar i.e the most Muslim dominant place in Hyderabad. Telangana Hindus don't give a ****. You should see how Hindu leaders threaten the likes of Owaisi. Look up "Raja Singh" and some of his speeches about Owaisi.

 

Andhra was always under local kings.

 

Karnataka had Tippu but current day Karnataka is as virat as they come. Their movie stars openly come out and talk about Ram temple donations etc

Posted
2 minutes ago, PunterLog said:

 

Nizam rule falls under modern day Telangana. Also, historic rule matters much less compared to how things are on the ground today. You should read what was done to Muslims during operation Polo. Also, Hindus erected a temple for a female deity adjacent to Charminar i.e the most Muslim dominant place in Hyderabad. Telangana Hindus don't give a ****. You should see how Hindu leaders threaten the likes of Owaisi. Look up "Raja Singh" and some of his speeches about Owaisi.

 

Andhra was always under local kings.

 

Karnataka had Tippu but current day Karnataka is as virat as they come. Their movie stars openly come out and talk about Ram temple donations etc

 

 

Posted
7 minutes ago, PunterLog said:

 

Nizam rule falls under modern day Telangana. Also, historic rule matters much less compared to how things are on the ground today. You should read what was done to Muslims during operation Polo. Also, Hindus erected a temple for a female deity adjacent to Charminar i.e the most Muslim dominant place in Hyderabad. Telangana Hindus don't give a ****. You should see how Hindu leaders threaten the likes of Owaisi. Look up "Raja Singh" and some of his speeches about Owaisi.

 

Andhra was always under local kings.

 

Karnataka had Tippu but current day Karnataka is as virat as they come. Their movie stars openly come out and talk about Ram temple donations etc

Okay

Posted
6 hours ago, Vilander said:

what is needed is exemplary punishment for any Islamic extremism and control on madrasas not some us vs them sectarian violence. 

who will punish them? the pinarayi govt thats hand in glove with them? lol

 

×
×
  • Create New...