the second case was again an Indian outsourcer. Three of their ten or so workers at our site were Christian. One time, maybe by mistake, they mentioned that they were the only Christians in the company out of a couple hundred plus people.
Causation doesnt imply correlation.
And who knows even your company could have 'requested' the Indian outsourcer to send 'Christian' workers.
Two basic things are wrong in your logic:
1) Basing your conclusion on two isolated incidents.
2) Super-imposing your conclusion basedon this incident to the situation in Gulf.
FAIL.
Based on what? mythology? occasional empires that lasted fleeting moments in the span of history?
Either you accept that the IVC was "alien" to Hinduism, or you need to prove that the IVC was part of a "Bharati" empire. Not the lands of the IVC centuries later, but the actual, thriving IVC during its heydey.
Except that there was no consistent entity called "ancient Bharat". All you have is a circular definition based on mythology, or encompassing vast reaches of land that were united sporadically and fleetingly at best. Some Indian empires also went as far as Cambodia. Will you now claim that Cambodia is part of ancient Bharat?
Duh ! Its not upto Pakkistanis to decide what was Bharat and what was not.
QUOTE=Developereo;2289125]Sure, the nasty secularists are just making up tamashas against the poor, innocent Hindutva, government reports and all...