Kerala Story - the controversial film

[raki05]

3 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

Not to be pedantic, but you misspelled Ganga Jamuni Tehzeeb!

That was intentional.

[coffee_rules]

2 minutes ago, raki05 said:

That was intentional.

And I was being satarical 

[someone]

On 5/21/2023 at 7:59 PM, Lone Wolf said:

 

 

 

Ganga Jamuni tehzeeb has always been BS but it is a facade India has to carry...  To be called a successful democratic modern country.  You got 20 cr Muslim population so simply alienation is not the solution.  It is what it is. 

China had only one province to deal with in Xinjiang...  They did it with sheer will & a iron fist...  Aided by communism & nationalism + a strong economy & a autocratic state + a homogenous society.  But even they can't do this to a 20 cr+ population.  

India has neither of those above advantages.  So hence secular state it is.   It will remain so till way deep in future we get a Civil war type situation. 

Or we try to Modernize Muslims by whatever way we can.  They still remain one of the poorest quom in India...  Except Kashmiris who are rich af. 

 

Change should start happening at Madarsa level...  That's how you make their next generation tolerant & modern. 

As of now India is no position to implement any of the changes it wishes to as we saw with Nupur Sharma case...  BJP had to sacrifice her coz of external pressure. 

So we have to bide our time to bring a meaningful change. 

 

 

 

Muslim radicalization is a millennium issue. So to expect BJP or any government to resolve it, is naivety and foolish. Thus, whoever government in India, only looks for temporary relative peace.

 

For the self-proclaimed secular parties, their approach is complete surrender, offering veto power to the Muslims population. Whereas BJP emphasis on strong law & order, about deterrence, where strength respect strength. This ought to debated in many levels.

 

And these so called secular parties are always stop-gap measures in past, present & future, so Muslim parties arises wherever they reach critical demographics.

[Lone Wolf]

1 hour ago, someone said:

 

Muslim radicalization is a millennium issue. So to expect BJP or any government to resolve it, is naivety and foolish. Thus, whoever government in India, only looks for temporary relative peace.

 

For the self-proclaimed secular parties, their approach is complete surrender, offering veto power to the Muslims population. Whereas BJP emphasis on strong law & order, about deterrence, where strength respect strength. This ought to debated in many levels.

 

And these so called secular parties are always stop-gap measures in past, present & future, so Muslim parties arises wherever they reach critical demographics.

BJP has fallen to similar ways...  As we saw in Karnataka...  They probably went two steps ahead in appeasement. 

Only one leader in India who is currently following some sorta extreme measures & deterrence is Assam CM Hemanta Biswa Sarma coz he has to as state is critical for security purposes in entire NE & there were genuine concerns of illegal immigrants in critical Siliguri Corridor region.  He enjoys flying under the radar too thanks to alienation of Assam from Indian media. 

 

Other than that the sheer numbers of Muslims in India is so huge that we have no choice but to de radicalize them tactfully.  It may take decades but it is a cross we have to bear. 

Subcontinent probably is most radicalized among Muslim world for a reason.   The number of Modernized Muslims in India is quite smaller but there is presence... . I feel North Indian Muslims are more radicalized thanks to poverty & poor living standards.   Partition was brutal as well here. 

Kashmiris are extreme rare case they are rich & educated but as long as Paxtan exists there is no hope for them.  Being a critical security state it will always remain under Armed control.  So we got that covered. 

Demographics is necessarily a overhyped issue...  Hindus are overwhelmingly dominant in 99% regions of India bar JK I assume or in some parts of UP or Kerala. 

 

De radicalization is a long long procedure for a country like India that has so many internal faults aided by a hostile neighbourhood...  Plus not a big sized economy or either a global power. 

Democracy is sort of a experiment in this country which fails from time to time. 

We have come this far by some sheer f***ing will & damn good luck I'd say. 

For a nation that has never been united in its history it is a big achievement. 

[someone]

27 minutes ago, Lone Wolf said:

BJP has fallen to similar ways...  As we saw in Karnataka...  They probably went two steps ahead in appeasement. 

Only one leader in India who is currently following some sorta extreme measures & deterrence is Assam CM Hemanta Biswa Sarma coz he has to as state is critical for security purposes in entire NE & there were genuine concerns of illegal immigrants in critical Siliguri Corridor region.  He enjoys flying under the radar too thanks to alienation of Assam from Indian media. 

 

Other than that the sheer numbers of Muslims in India is so huge that we have no choice but to de radicalize them tactfully.  It may take decades but it is a cross we have to bear. 

Subcontinent probably is most radicalized among Muslim world for a reason.   The number of Modernized Muslims in India is quite smaller but there is presence... . I feel North Indian Muslims are more radicalized thanks to poverty & poor living standards.   Partition was brutal as well here. 

Kashmiris are extreme rare case they are rich & educated but as long as Paxtan exists there is no hope for them.  Being a critical security state it will always remain under Armed control.  So we got that covered. 

Demographics is necessarily a overhyped issue...  Hindus are overwhelmingly dominant in 99% regions of India bar JK I assume or in some parts of UP or Kerala. 

 

De radicalization is a long long procedure for a country like India that has so many internal faults aided by a hostile neighbourhood...  Plus not a big sized economy or either a global power. 

Democracy is sort of a experiment in this country which fails from time to time. 

We have come this far by some sheer f***ing will & damn good luck I'd say. 

For a nation that has never been united in its history it is a big achievement. 

 

Have you even read my post? The radicalization is thousands year old problem, so any government will not be able to solve it. It's can only be a temporary lull and peace. And deterrence is the the first solution through strong law & order. That is precisely what Modi has done with resolving century old problems.

 

For BJP, they obviously facing issues at their mid level leadership, with weak, inefficient people around. However, the top and low level leaders are all from grassroots, workaholic, passionate, and with a strong vision for the country. Whereas, that cannot be said about many other parties particular their top level leadership.

 

Pakistan is a convenient excuse, to distract ourselves. Reality is there is enough traitors both Hindus and Muslims in our own land.

 

[Lone Wolf]

17 minutes ago, someone said:

 

Have you even read my post? The radicalization is thousands year old problem, so any government will not be able to solve it. It's can only be a temporary lull and peace. And deterrence is the the first solution through strong law & order. That is precisely what Modi has done with resolving century old problems.

 

For BJP, they obviously facing issues at their mid level leadership, with weak, inefficient people around. However, the top and low level leaders are all from grassroots, workaholic, passionate, and with a strong vision for the country. Whereas, that cannot be said about many other parties particular their top level leadership.

 

Pakistan is a convenient excuse, to distract ourselves. Reality is there is enough traitors both Hindus and Muslims in our own land.

 

Wdym?  Islam itself is around 1300 years old & around 800 year old in India considering sizeable presence.  So de radicalization has barely ever happened or even begin to happen in sub continent. 

In any case BJP top brass vision means ja*k  when at the Grassroot there is nothing to show.   Top bra** couldn't do sh*t during Nupur Sharm fiasco & gave up on her thanks to Middle eastern pressure..  and that wasn't even a bigger issue. All in all That showed vision alone can't do anything.. when practically you got your hands tied. 

 

Traitors exist in both India Pakistan,  heck even in China,  US & the West.  It's a historical & cultural phenomenon.   You can't eradicate it completely. 

Pakistan is our civilizational enemy. It is a product of hundreds of years of hatred & cultural beef.  Denying won't change it.  As long as it exists our problems will never go away.  Balkanize it or fundamentally breaking it down is in our best interests. 

Edited May 22 by Lone Wolf

[bharathh]

1 hour ago, Lone Wolf said:

Wdym?  Islam itself is around 1300 years old & around 800 year old in India considering sizeable presence.  So de radicalization has barely ever happened or even begin to happen in sub continent. 

In any case BJP top brass vision means ja*k  when at the Grassroot there is nothing to show.   Top bra** couldn't do sh*t during Nupur Sharm fiasco & gave up on her thanks to Middle eastern pressure..  and that wasn't even a bigger issue. All in all That showed vision alone can't do anything.. when practically you got your hands tied. 

 

Traitors exist in both India Pakistan,  heck even in China,  US & the West.  It's a historical & cultural phenomenon.   You can't eradicate it completely. 

Pakistan is our civilizational enemy. It is a product of hundreds of years of hatred & cultural beef.  Denying won't change it.  As long as it exists our problems will never go away.  Balkanize it or fundamentally breaking it down is in our best interests. 

You really lack any knowledge of Indian history. I guess you are a ncert product. Pls do read a little more about history

[someone]

2 hours ago, Lone Wolf said:

Wdym?  Islam itself is around 1300 years old & around 800 year old in India considering sizeable presence.  So de radicalization has barely ever happened or even begin to happen in sub continent. 

In any case BJP top brass vision means ja*k  when at the Grassroot there is nothing to show.   Top bra** couldn't do sh*t during Nupur Sharm fiasco & gave up on her thanks to Middle eastern pressure..  and that wasn't even a bigger issue. All in all That showed vision alone can't do anything.. when practically you got your hands tied. 

 

Traitors exist in both India Pakistan,  heck even in China,  US & the West.  It's a historical & cultural phenomenon.   You can't eradicate it completely. 

Pakistan is our civilizational enemy. It is a product of hundreds of years of hatred & cultural beef.  Denying won't change it.  As long as it exists our problems will never go away.  Balkanize it or fundamentally breaking it down is in our best interests. 

 

It's stupid to argue in purity, as nothing is so simple. There are oxymoron everywhere, and unholy alliances. Purity only leads to infighting, arrogance.

 

So it is up for BJP or even its supporters to learn and adapt. It can't fight all on its own might, and has to work around. And that is what is being rightly by the government done, even with Nupur Sham case.

 

And the onus should be why Hindu abusers get away freely? The onus should be to analyze the world from the dhamic lense.

[Lone Wolf]

1 hour ago, bharathh said:

You really lack any knowledge of Indian history. I guess you are a ncert product. Pls do read a little more about history

lol care to enlighten please...  I haven't seen anything remotely close to a knowledgeable post from you,  like ever...  You probably have WhatsApp sources for your knowledge considering you only show undying fealty towards a party lmao.

Funny dude Rich coming from you 

[bharathh]

4 hours ago, Lone Wolf said:

lol care to enlighten please...  I haven't seen anything remotely close to a knowledgeable post from you,  like ever...  You probably have WhatsApp sources for your knowledge considering you only show undying fealty towards a party lmao.

Funny dude Rich coming from you 

 

You are welcome to read about the history of India during the middle ages from books by Vikram Sampath, J Sai Deepak, Meenakshi Lekhi etc. on the effects of Islamisation on India through the last millennium.

 

 

[bharathh]

8 hours ago, Lone Wolf said:

lol care to enlighten please...  I haven't seen anything remotely close to a knowledgeable post from you,  like ever...  You probably have WhatsApp sources for your knowledge considering you only show undying fealty towards a party lmao.

Funny dude Rich coming from you 

You are welcome to use Bard/Chatgpt to see what the official books on the various muslim rulers have to say about what they did to convert the local populations as well. But learning is upto you. Happy to engage on any actual data and not vacuous statements made from ignorance. For example you can produce something like this really quickly if you really wanted to learn

 

The Islamic conquest of India began in the 8th century and lasted for over a thousand years. During this time, Muslim rulers made a number of efforts to impose Islam on the local population. These efforts included:

• Conversion by force: Muslim rulers often used force to convert Hindus and other non-Muslims to Islam. This could involve anything from destroying temples and other religious sites to killing or enslaving those who refused to convert.
• Conversion through education: Muslim rulers also established schools and mosques where non-Muslims could learn about Islam. They also sponsored the translation of Islamic texts into local languages.
• Conversion through marriage: Muslim rulers often married Hindu women, which could lead to their husbands converting to Islam.
• Conversion through economic incentives: Muslim rulers sometimes offered economic incentives to non-Muslims who converted to Islam. This could include tax breaks, land grants, or government jobs.

The efforts of Muslim rulers to impose Islam on the local population had a mixed success. In some areas, such as Sindh and modern-day Afghanistan, Islam became the dominant religion. In other areas, such as Bengal and Bijapur, Islam remained a minority religion. In still other areas, such as Kashmir and south India, Islam coexisted with Hinduism and other religions.

The following table provides a more detailed look at the efforts of Muslim rulers to impose Islam on the local population in different regions of India.

Region	Muslim Ruler	Efforts to Impose Islam	Success
Sindh	Muhammad bin Qasim (712-715)	Destruction of temples, forced conversions	Islam became the dominant religion
Afghanistan	Mahmud of Ghazni (997-1030)	Destruction of temples, forced conversions	Islam became the dominant religion
Bengal	Bakhtiyar Khalji (1203-1206)	Destruction of temples, forced conversions	Islam became the dominant religion

It is important to note that the efforts of Muslim rulers to impose Islam on the local population were not always successful. In many cases, Hindus and other non-Muslims resisted conversion and continued to practice their own religions. In addition, the efforts of Muslim rulers to impose Islam often led to conflict and violence.

The Islamic conquest of India had a profound impact on the religious landscape of the subcontinent. Islam became a major religion in India, and it continues to be a major religion today. However, the efforts of Muslim rulers to impose Islam on the local population also led to conflict and violence. This conflict continues to this day, and it is a major challenge facing India as a nation.

Citations

• Minhaj-i-Siraj, Tabaqat-i-Nasiri. Translated by H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson. London: Trubner, 1871.
• Firishta, Muhammad Qasim. Tarikh-i-Firishta. Translated by John Briggs. London: Oriental Translation Fund of Great Britain and Ireland, 1829.
• Abul Fazl, Ain-i-Akbari. Translated by H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson. London: Trubner, 1869-1877.
• Babur, Baburnama. Translated by Annette Beveridge. London: Luzac, 1922.
• Jahangir, Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri. Translated by Alexander Rogers and Henry Beveridge. London: Oriental Translation Fund of Great Britain and Ireland, 1909-1914.
• Ghulam Husain Tabatabai, Riyaz-us-Salatin. Translated by H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson. London: Trubner, 1873.

Edited May 23 by bharathh

[Lone Wolf]

4 hours ago, bharathh said:

You are welcome to use Bard/Chatgpt to see what the official books on the various muslim rulers have to say about what they did to convert the local populations as well. But learning is upto you. Happy to engage on any actual data and not vacuous statements made from ignorance. For example you can produce something like this really quickly if you really wanted to learn

 

The Islamic conquest of India began in the 8th century and lasted for over a thousand years. During this time, Muslim rulers made a number of efforts to impose Islam on the local population. These efforts included:

• Conversion by force: Muslim rulers often used force to convert Hindus and other non-Muslims to Islam. This could involve anything from destroying temples and other religious sites to killing or enslaving those who refused to convert.
• Conversion through education: Muslim rulers also established schools and mosques where non-Muslims could learn about Islam. They also sponsored the translation of Islamic texts into local languages.
• Conversion through marriage: Muslim rulers often married Hindu women, which could lead to their husbands converting to Islam.
• Conversion through economic incentives: Muslim rulers sometimes offered economic incentives to non-Muslims who converted to Islam. This could include tax breaks, land grants, or government jobs.

The efforts of Muslim rulers to impose Islam on the local population had a mixed success. In some areas, such as Sindh and modern-day Afghanistan, Islam became the dominant religion. In other areas, such as Bengal and Bijapur, Islam remained a minority religion. In still other areas, such as Kashmir and south India, Islam coexisted with Hinduism and other religions.

The following table provides a more detailed look at the efforts of Muslim rulers to impose Islam on the local population in different regions of India.

Region	Muslim Ruler	Efforts to Impose Islam	Success
Sindh	Muhammad bin Qasim (712-715)	Destruction of temples, forced conversions	Islam became the dominant religion
Afghanistan	Mahmud of Ghazni (997-1030)	Destruction of temples, forced conversions	Islam became the dominant religion
Bengal	Bakhtiyar Khalji (1203-1206)	Destruction of temples, forced conversions	Islam became the dominant religion

It is important to note that the efforts of Muslim rulers to impose Islam on the local population were not always successful. In many cases, Hindus and other non-Muslims resisted conversion and continued to practice their own religions. In addition, the efforts of Muslim rulers to impose Islam often led to conflict and violence.

The Islamic conquest of India had a profound impact on the religious landscape of the subcontinent. Islam became a major religion in India, and it continues to be a major religion today. However, the efforts of Muslim rulers to impose Islam on the local population also led to conflict and violence. This conflict continues to this day, and it is a major challenge facing India as a nation.

Citations

• Minhaj-i-Siraj, Tabaqat-i-Nasiri. Translated by H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson. London: Trubner, 1871.
• Firishta, Muhammad Qasim. Tarikh-i-Firishta. Translated by John Briggs. London: Oriental Translation Fund of Great Britain and Ireland, 1829.
• Abul Fazl, Ain-i-Akbari. Translated by H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson. London: Trubner, 1869-1877.
• Babur, Baburnama. Translated by Annette Beveridge. London: Luzac, 1922.
• Jahangir, Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri. Translated by Alexander Rogers and Henry Beveridge. London: Oriental Translation Fund of Great Britain and Ireland, 1909-1914.
• Ghulam Husain Tabatabai, Riyaz-us-Salatin. Translated by H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson. London: Trubner, 1873.

Another poor post...  If u do decent research...  You will find that after the conquest of Sindh by Qasim...  After defeating Inept rule of Raja Dahir...  Arab armies Marched forward to what we call is Modern day India. 

Now that's what your modern NCERT books don't mention...  As that period is called dark ages. 

Arabs under Ummayad Caliphate had designs on India & they planned a three pronged invasion via North,  West & Central India. 

Now that time North & North West India was under Kashmir King Lalitaditya Muktapida (do read about him)  probably last great Indian King in Medieval India. 

And Modern Day Rajasthan was controlled by Bappa Rawal (Rawal Pindi is named after him Ig) 

Chalukyans in Deccan under Nagabhatta... 

Now all three kingdoms came together to probably stop one of the greatest invasions in Indian history. 

J Sai Deepak has mentioned Lalitaditya & others in his book. 

Lalitaditya probably had multiple skirmishes with Arabs or their generals later as well...  And various Arab accounts describe him as a Nightmare for them. 

Chinese Tang dynasty records mention him as well. 

 

Now This stopped Islamic conquest of India by about 300-350 years. 

Ghazni was more of a looter than a empire builder  although he carried Turkish regiments along with him...  Making him a unstoppable foe who basically terrorized entire North & North west bar Kashmir where he failed multiple times. 

 

Islamic rule ideally came after the defeat of weaker kings after Battle of Tarain also  when superior tech of Turkish forces and Horse archers made a key difference to outsmart slow moving Indian armies. 

So technically modern Day India fell to Islamic rule after 1192... Even then Ghori had to fight numerous battles to secure North India till 1206.  Bhaktiyar Khilji comes into the picture during this period. 

So the claim that India fell to Muslim rule by a small a** contingent of Qasim back in 712 AD is laughable.  All he did was aware other powerful Indian kings for what's to come. 

[bharathh]

1 hour ago, Lone Wolf said:

Another poor post...  If u do decent research...  You will find that after the conquest of Sindh by Qasim...  After defeating Inept rule of Raja Dahir...  Arab armies Marched forward to what we call is Modern day India. 

Now that's what your modern NCERT books don't mention...  As that period is called dark ages. 

Arabs under Ummayad Caliphate had designs on India & they planned a three pronged invasion via North,  West & Central India. 

Now that time North & North West India was under Kashmir King Lalitaditya Muktapida (do read about him)  probably last great Indian King in Medieval India. 

And Modern Day Rajasthan was controlled by Bappa Rawal (Rawal Pindi is named after him Ig) 

Chalukyans in Deccan under Nagabhatta... 

Now all three kingdoms came together to probably stop one of the greatest invasions in Indian history. 

J Sai Deepak has mentioned Lalitaditya & others in his book. 

Lalitaditya probably had multiple skirmishes with Arabs or their generals later as well...  And various Arab accounts describe him as a Nightmare for them. 

Chinese Tang dynasty records mention him as well. 

 

Now This stopped Islamic conquest of India by about 300-350 years. 

Ghazni was more of a looter than a empire builder  although he carried Turkish regiments along with him...  Making him a unstoppable foe who basically terrorized entire North & North west bar Kashmir where he failed multiple times. 

 

Islamic rule ideally came after the defeat of weaker kings after Battle of Tarain also  when superior tech of Turkish forces and Horse archers made a key difference to outsmart slow moving Indian armies. 

So technically modern Day India fell to Islamic rule after 1192... Even then Ghori had to fight numerous battles to secure North India till 1206.  Bhaktiyar Khilji comes into the picture during this period. 

So the claim that India fell to Muslim rule by a small a** contingent of Qasim back in 712 AD is laughable.  All he did was aware other powerful Indian kings for what's to come. 

?? Poor post in what sense? We were talking earlier about the process of conversion starting in India a millenia ago.

 

Sindh fell to Qasim and was ravaged to a point where almost all traces of Hinduism/Buddhism/Zoroastrianism was removed from the area. The area of Sindh is part of Pak which came under British India. So the process of Islamic conversions started then. Sindh was firmly under the caliphs for a long time in which time all existing religions before Islam vanished. 

[coffee_rules]

11 hours ago, bharathh said:

 

You are welcome to read about the history of India during the middle ages from books by Vikram Sampath, J Sai Deepak, Meenakshi Lekhi etc. on the effects of Islamisation on India through the last millennium.

 

 

You certainly meant Meenakshi Jain! Lekhi is that Dilli BJP advocate politician

[bharathh]

15 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

You certainly meant Meenakshi Jain! Lekhi is that Dilli BJP advocate politician

Yes Jain

[diga]

Quote

But Hindu men also commit crimes against Hindu women.”  This is the argument many women put forward when the issue of Love Jihad comes up.

Of course, Hindu men commit crimes against Hindu women, just like Muslim men commit crimes against Muslim women, Sikh men against Sikh women, Christian men against Christian women and so on. These crimes are of various nature, some very very serious. (For that matter women also commit crimes against men, but it is out of scope of this write up). As a society we have acknowledged these crimes and made laws, often strict, to prevent them. As these crimes are often social in nature, only law is not sufficient to deal with them, so we also teach our young and try to mold the society in the desired manner.

Having acknowledged these crimes exist, lets now see why these crimes are different from what is popularly called “Love Jihad”.

1 Hate crime : A crime is considered a hate crime if the victim was targeted based on their identity. For example, muggings happen in New York subway, but if someone mugs only Jewish people, then it is not just a mugging, it is a hate crime and the criminal is charged with stricter laws. The same applies to Love Jihad cases where Hindu women are specifically targeted. In Ajmer sex scandal, out of the 250 victims, how many were Muslim? It was hate crime, not a social crime. Clubbing them with regular crimes is deliberate obfuscation to lower the seriousness of these crimes.

2 Based in Islamic doctrine : Islam treats Kafir and Muslim women differently in every aspect. For example, Kafir women can be kept as slaves but can not be married. On the other hand, you can not enslave a Muslim woman. These attitudes are extremely misogynistic and kafir-phobic which lead to many of these crimes. When your ideology dehumanizes an entire group of people, your ideology is encouraging crimes against that group. Hence Abduls feel no shame in hiding their identity or forcing Hindu women to convert and worse. This is not a regular crime, this is religious.

3 Backed by the wider society : As seen in the recent case in Pune, when a Hindu underage girl is abducted the entire Muslim society seems to hush it up. The mother of the accused, the Maulvi who converts and marries the girl knowing fully well she is underage, the family, even the first wife or wives fully support these criminal acts. Ever heard a Muslim whistle-blower saving a Hindu girl? This points to a very unhealthy mindset that is different from regular crimes. This makes saving these girls far far more difficult.

4 Repeating patterns : Many patterns repeat in these cases. It may appear simplistic, but faking identity, use of force and intimidation, targeting underage girls, conversion, involvement of more than just one person, violence etc repeat in many cases. Not to deny other complexities, but this obvious presence of recurring patterns itself makes these crimes different from other crimes. The reason we are discussing crime is to prevent it right? Then failing to identify patterns will only lead to failure to prevent such crimes.

5 Organized apologia : A tell tale clue is the existence of organized intellectual class that keeps denying love jihad exists. No such gangs exist to deny regular crimes. On the other hand popular media keeps glorifying relations between Hindu girls and Muslim men, but not the other way around. How many Feminism and Youth forums on Instagram have covered the 100s of attacks on Hindu men for talking to Muslim women? None. The very existence of such people in media, academia, entertainment etc reveals that the nature of these crimes is indeed different.

6 : Disturbing no of underage cases : A truly disgusting aspect that is common is the shocking no of underage girls being groomed by older men. If you look at the recent cases from Delhi, Uttarakhand, Pune etc, ALL of them involve underage girls incapable of consent. This phenomenon is the clearest evidence of organised grooming. Islamic doctrine permits relations with underage girls as long as they have hit puberty, but very young girls are also easy to brainwash and turn against their families and society. Anyone calling this organized pedophilia as “just interfaith love” is part of this pedophilia grooming gang, nothing less.

So next time anyone says “But Hindu men also commit crimes against Hindu women”, tell them they may or may not know it, but they are part of a grooming gang and they should be ashamed of themselves.
 

long read but an essential read for many.. 

[bharathh]

19 hours ago, diga said:

long read but an essential read for many.. 

Sad but true.

[Nikhil_cric]

On 5/23/2023 at 5:13 AM, bharathh said:

 

You are welcome to read about the history of India during the middle ages from books by Vikram Sampath, J Sai Deepak, Meenakshi Lekhi etc. on the effects of Islamisation on India through the last millennium.

 

 

Very credible historians considering their ideological bent and their academic qualifications.

[diga]

17 minutes ago, Nikhil_cric said:

Very credible historians considering their ideological bent and their academic qualifications.

he is asking you to read both versions, before you decide either way ... you dont want to be in an echo chamber

[coffee_rules]

19 hours ago, Nikhil_cric said:

Very credible historians considering their ideological bent and their academic qualifications.

Meenakshi Jain is a History professor in DU . Dr Vikram Sampath is a fellow of Royal Historical Society and Sai Deepak is a Supreme Court lawyer. All books are with meticulous rigorous research with sources cited from authentic historical literature. The ideology you insinuate is a scientific way of recording history and not with leftist Marxist peer reviewed bias.  You need men of science in the field of social sciences to remove all leftist liberal  bias. 

Edited June 20 by coffee_rules