Texy Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 good for him. But i wonder why people feel the need to do this. God is one and we just know Him by different names. :hatsoff: Conversions are encouraged and appreciated. You convert someone and the whole community applauds you. You trap someone in love and make them convert and marry you and the whole community once again appreciates and believes that you are taking the right 'path' and will go to heaven. You can commit rape, murder, abuse...the minute you convert, you're ONE of them and they will watch out for you. They believe in their beliefs to be superior than others and everyone else is just secondary citizens and does not deserve rights like they do (i.e.: treatment of minorities in Middle east, Pakistan & elsewhere), They believe in numbers hence they believe in spreading the "word" & conversion. When you convert someone and marry...the ulterior motive is to produce offspring who will hence carry on the "word" ....They believe in power by the number....more converts, more babies, more individual to carry on the "true faith" and dominate the world by numbers
1983-2011 Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 Conversions are encouraged and appreciated. You convert someone and the whole community applauds you. You trap someone in love and make them convert and marry you and the whole community once again appreciates and believes that you are taking the right 'path' and will go to heaven. You can commit rape' date=' murder, abuse...the minute you convert, you're ONE of them and they will watch out for you. They believe in their beliefs to be superior than others and everyone else is just secondary citizens and does not deserve rights like they do (i.e.: treatment of minorities in Middle east, Pakistan & elsewhere), They believe in numbers hence they believe in spreading the "word" & conversion. When you convert someone and marry...the ulterior motive is to produce offspring who will hence carry on the "word" ....They believe in power by the number....more converts, more babies, more individual to carry on the "true faith" and dominate the world by numbers[/quote'] who are these lot ur referring to???
meloveindia Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 dont know whats SO big deal abt religion? why people make fuss abt it convert to hindu ism, islam, christianity etc who cares
Mariyam Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 Conversions are encouraged and appreciated. You convert someone and the whole community applauds you. You trap someone in love and make them convert and marry you and the whole community once again appreciates and believes that you are taking the right 'path' and will go to heaven. You can commit rape' date=' murder, abuse...the minute you convert, you're ONE of them and they will watch out for you. They believe in their beliefs to be superior than others and everyone else is just secondary citizens and does not deserve rights like they do (i.e.: treatment of minorities in Middle east, Pakistan & elsewhere), They believe in numbers hence they believe in spreading the "word" & conversion. When you convert someone and marry...the ulterior motive is to produce offspring who will hence carry on the "word" ....[b']They believe in power by the number....more converts, more babies, more individual to carry on the "true faith" and dominate the world by numbers Overreaction? No one has 'encouraged' or 'conspired' or 'applauded' Liam Neeson's (whoever he is) conversion. In fact, he hasn't even converted. He's considering it. 'The Sun' , which is a British tabloid of ill repute chose to print this story. One might consider many things, like going to buy vegetables or going for a hair cut or whatever and not end up doing them. Direct your angst against the tabloid for sensationalizing and making an issue out of a non issue. As for the part in bold, I don't know about the rest of the world, but Muslims never needed any kind of numerical superiority to dominate India. A handful ruled for centuries. Its all there in the history books :winky:
Pioneer Posted January 27, 2012 Author Posted January 27, 2012 This is ISI sazish. Time for another Secret Pakistan :hehe: One of the most bias documentaries I have ever seen
Number Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 There are 4,000 mosques in the city. Some are just stunning and it really makes me think about becoming a Muslim. :phehehe:
seedhi Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 As for the part in bold' date=' I don't know about the rest of the world, but Muslims never needed any kind of numerical superiority to dominate India. A handful ruled for centuries. Its all there in the history books :winky:[/quote']So why ask for pakistan?? A cowardly act purely for safety in numbers .. remember around 90% of the muslim electorate in undivided India voted for Jinnah and his pakistan ideology. Additionally, a glance at the fertility rates for different religions in the subcontinent after partition may also enlighten you somewhat. Juxtapose it with similar numbers from Europe and we get a more complete picture.
Lurker Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 So why ask for pakistan?? A cowardly act purely for safety in numbers .. remember around 90% of the muslim electorate in undivided India voted for Jinnah and his pakistan ideology. Additionally' date= a glance at the fertility rates for different religions in the subcontinent after partition may also enlighten you somewhat. Juxtapose it with similar numbers from Europe and we get a more complete picture. First up why are you barking up the wrong tree? You are asking a person who is staying in India, along with her forefathers who CHOSE to stay back to answer for those who came up with that nonsense of "seperate countries for seperate people". Shouldnt you get your recording tape and cross over Wagah border to conduct some interviews regarding this? Why antagonise the people who are on your side, literally and figuratively. Mariyam - the numerical superiority thingy is not about dominating India but it is definitely about showing the path of enlightment to the misguided. You can not dispute the fact that Islam beleives all folks are born Muslims and some become non-Muslims thanks to their misguided parents. Hence anytime a person converts to Islam it is considered doing the right thing, some call it reverting. And those that help do so are supposed to do a pious job. You may not agree with this but surely you know about this. xxx
seedhi Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 First up why are you barking up the wrong tree? You are asking a person who is staying in India' date=' along with her forefathers who CHOSE to stay back to answer for those who came up with that nonsense of "[i']seperate countries for seperate people". Shouldnt you get your recording tape and cross over Wagah border to conduct some interviews regarding this? Why antagonise the people who are on your side, literally and figuratively. Read her post first. She gives the example of a bunch of invaders who ruled over India 500 years ago, as evidence for her argument. Who does the Indian Muslim have more in common - the Mughals of 500 years ago or the 75% of Muslims who formed pakistan 60 years ago. Is it not true that only 2 generations ago an overwhelming majority of the Muslim electorate voted for pakistan? Are the population growth and fertility rates for different religions irrelevant? She discounts all of this and gives an example of a bunch of invaders 500 years ago - a self serving, disingenuous and deliberately misleading argument.
Stuge Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 "There are 4,000 mosques in the city. Some are just stunning and it really makes me think about becoming a Muslim." Really ,this is reason hahhahaha
Lurker Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 Read her post first. She gives the example of a bunch of invaders who ruled over India 500 years ago' date=' as evidence for her argument. Who does the Indian Muslim have more in common - the Mughals of 500 years ago or the 75% of Muslims who formed pakistan 60 years ago. Is it not true that only 2 generations ago an overwhelming majority of the Muslim electorate voted for pakistan? Are the population growth and fertility rates for different religions irrelevant? She discounts all of this and gives an example of a bunch of invaders 500 years ago - a self serving, disingenuous and deliberately misleading argument.[/quote'] I re-read her post. It is a single line that has made you write 50 times that number in response, and for some weird reason link it to Pakistan creation. Maybe you can simply ask her what was meant there?
Yoda-esque Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 Overreaction? No one has 'encouraged' or 'conspired' or 'applauded' Liam Neeson's (whoever he is) conversion. In fact, he hasn't even converted. He's considering it. 'The Sun' , which is a British tabloid of ill repute chose to print this story. One might consider many things, like going to buy vegetables or going for a hair cut or whatever and not end up doing them. Direct your angst against the tabloid for sensationalizing and making an issue out of a non issue. As for the part in bold, I don't know about the rest of the world, but Muslims never needed any kind of numerical superiority to dominate India. A handful ruled for centuries. Its all there in the history books :winky: True ,Numbers were very less. But how did they manage to rule India with such few numbers?? By force..and not with love.If the other side is peaceful,its easy to rule them no?
seedhi Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 I re-read her post. It is a single line that has made you write 50 times that number in response' date=' and for some weird reason link it to Pakistan creation. Maybe you can simply ask her what was meant there?[/quote']She meant exactly what she wrote - that some dynasties of foreign invaders dominated India 700-500 years ago, therefore the Indian Muslims of today do not believe in safety (and possible dominance) by numbers - an absurd argument which flies in the face of what happened 65 years ago, what has happened in Kashmir and of course the hard population/fertility data.
Mariyam Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 @seedhi That last part of my previous post was a tongue in cheek response/joke to some random, and unrelated to the topic stuff that 'Texy' posted on the thread. Notice the smiley? There wasn't any intent at a self serving, disingenuous and deliberately misleading argument, because I wasn't arguing anything at all. Don't let it bother you, it was a mere joke. Hope that settles this, and we can continue talking about Liam Neeson's fascination with Istanbul and its skyline.
Alchemist Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 Why are people geting so worked up. Nothing would matter after Dec. 2012 anyways. :winky:
Zelch Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 Overreaction? No one has 'encouraged' or 'conspired' or 'applauded' Liam Neeson's (whoever he is) conversion. In fact, he hasn't even converted. As for the part in bold, I don't know about the rest of the world, but Muslims never needed any kind of numerical superiority to dominate India. A handful ruled for centuries. Its all there in the history books :winky: Mariyam, You Too Totally disappointed that a well read person like yourself is batting for barbaric invaders who committed unimaginable atrocities that no one can even imagine. Whats with making Muslim Supremacist statements like the above. Like many others do you also believe that you are descendent of some 8 foot tall Arbi/Cental Asian warrior and have no relation to "ugly, meek Hindus". Just look at the number of people supporting you and giving benefit of doubt in your favor. And these will be treated/talked like door mats whenever bunch of Muslim intellectuals get together. A sample of "Its all there in the history books :winky:" The Great Banda Singh Bahadurs Death IThe cavalcade to the imperial capital was a grisly sight. Besides 740 prisoners in heavy chains, it comprised seven hundred cartloads of Sikh heads with another 200 stuck upon pikes. On February 26, 1716, the procession neared Delhi, and Farukh Siyar ordered his Minister, Mohammed Amin Khan, to go out to receive them and to prepare them for a suitable display in the city. On February 29, the citizens of Delhi lined the streets, to get a good sight of the procession.. First came two-thousand soldiers, each holding a Sikh head impaled on his upright spear. Next followed the elephant carrying Banda in his iron cage, still with two Muslim guards guarding him, with their swords unsheathed. A gold-laced red turban was placed on his head, and to add further mockery to his plight, a brightly printed scarlet robe was slipped on his body. Then came 740 prisoners (500 had been collected on the way). These men were chained in pairs and thrown across the backs of camels. Their faces were blackened, and pointed sheepskin or paper caps were clapped on their heads. Behind this line came the Mughal Commanders, Abdus Samad Khan, his son Qamar-ud-Din Khan, and his son-in-law Zakaria Khan. Their men lined both sides of the streets. For seven days, executions were carried out, until all the ordinary captives had been disposed off. Their bodies were loaded on wagons and taken out of town to be thrown to the vultures. The heads were hung up on trees or on poles near the market-place to be a lesson to all rebels. The jailors next turned their attention to the 20 major leaders, including Baj Singh, Fateh Singh, Ali Singh and Gulab Singh. These men were tortured to the extreme and were asked to divulge the place where they had buried all the treasures that had been looted from Sirhind, Batala and other towns during their better days. Failing to get any clues after three months, they prepared to put an end to their lives on Sunday, June 9, 1716. Banda's cage was again hoisted on top of an elephant, and he was dressed in the mock attire of an emperor, with a colourful red pointed turban on his head. His four-year old son, Ajai Singh was placed in his lap. The twenty chiefs marched behind the elephant and this procession then passed through the streets of Delhi, and headed for the mausoleum of Bahadur Shah, near the Qutub Minar. On reaching the graveyard, the captives were again offered a choice of two alternatives: conversion to Islam or death. All chose death. They were tortured again before being executed. Their heads were then impaled on spears and arranged in a circle around Banda who was now squatting on the ground. There were hundreds of spectators standing around watching this scene. Banda Singh Bahadur was then given a short sword and ordered to kill his own son Ajai Singh. As Banda Bahadur sat unperturbed, the Muslim executioner cut the child with his sword. Then pieces of th dead child's flesh were cut and thrown in Banda's face. His liver was removed and with force thrust into Banda Singh's mouth. Banda Singh did not show any emotions. Mohammed Amin Khan, who was standing near, spoke as follows: "From your manner so far you appear to be a man of virtue, who believes in God, and in doing good deeds. You are also very intelligent. Can you tell me why you are having to suffer all this here?" Banda is said to have replied, "When the tyrants oppress their subjects to the limit, then God sends men like me on this earth to mete out punishment to them. But being human, we sometimes overstep the laws of justice, and for that we are made to pay whilst we are still here. God is not being unjust to me in any way." The executioner then pulled out Banda's eyeballs with his dagger. While Banda sat still, the executioner took his sword and slashed off his left foot, then both his arms. Finally, they tore off his flesh with red-hot pincers and cut his body up into pieces. These details of the torture are given in full, by the following writers: Mohammed Harisi, Khafi Khan, Thornton, Elphinstone, Daneshwar and others.
Lurker Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 She meant exactly what she wrote - that some dynasties of foreign invaders dominated India 700-500 years ago' date=' therefore the Indian Muslims of today do not believe in safety (and possible dominance) by numbers - an absurd argument which flies in the face of what happened 65 years ago, what has happened in Kashmir and of course the hard population/fertility data.[/quote'] She explained herself so you can perhaps get off your soap-box now
Zelch Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 And dont tell me that they dont celebrate when a celebrity converts. Most of the Jihadi Online world goes into collective orgasm for days on end. Sometimes they even make up stories that someone converted like the Michael Jackson Case to whip up religious frenzy. And yes there is no extreme inferiority complex :winky: attached to this behavior needing authentication of their own belief in the form of celebrity conversions.
maniac Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 He can do his khatna using a lightsaber .. :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:
Recommended Posts