Pakistani Hindus | All Discussions

[KRAIT]

Go back and read where they went.
i dont have time to post again.
and if Hindus live in same conditions then i dont have any sympathy for day-dreaming asylum seekers

Yeah. You repeated without any proof or citation from trusted and neutral sources.

Well, leave it, you never do that.

 

[Sashan]

Hook or crook? For what purpose? Petty political gains? Maybe government formation? Must keep the context in view before drawing comparisons (even if I agree that the Khilafat movement was needless)




I have no interest in converting you to my opinion of Gandhi. There we can agree to disagree but facts are not things that can be ignored; Patel died in 1950 (was sick much before that), how would it have made a difference in Nehru's eventual rise? It wouldn't, just a red herring that people throw in every now & then.

Maybe Nehru would have resigned from the politics if Sardar had become the PM as Gandhi feared(the one reason he wanted Nehru to lead the nation) and in 1950 when Patel died - Shastri or some other leader might have succeeded him as opposed to you thinking that Nehru would have eventually risen.

@Spring Onion Well, Indian Hindus are also increasing. They live in same conditions, face same problems. 960 million Hindus in one nation.

Seriously, can you give some trusted sources rather than your old rhetoric.

I gave you proof of Hindus decrease in Pakistan. Come up with any journal article or a trusted statistics to refute my claim.

So where are Pakistani Hindus ? All migrated to India ? Or just vanished ?

Who said they are living in the same conditions - atleast since 1991 aren't we seeing an upward movement with many Indians and the poverty levels falling down?

 

[Bang Galore]

Maybe Nehru would have resigned from the politics if Sardar had become the PM as Gandhi feared(the one reason he wanted Nehru to lead the nation) and in 1950 when Patel died - Shastri or some other leader might have succeeded him as opposed to you thinking that Nehru would have eventually risen.

So you are relying on maybe? I don't share your abject dislike of Nehru even if I'm not blind to his faults. The Indian nation we see today exists primarily because Nehru was PM, Shastri was nowhere in the reckoning in 1950, Maulana Azad was still around. Would you have preferred him instead? Did you forget that it was Nehru putting his foot down that ended Mr. Jinnah's grandstanding & paved the way for the creation of a strong central state in India. That might not seem important now but immediately after independence, when the feeling of "Indianness" was not as remotely strong as it is now, that proved to be of immeasurable value to contain fissiparous tendencies.. If today you mock Nehru, it is because he built the state that gives you that freedom (discounting present citizenship status). Easy to mock someone after all the hard work is done, ask Pakistanis how they wish they had their leader staying in the picture longer than he did.

 

[haviZsultan]

Pakistani Hindus need to be protected. They should be made to feel welcome in Pakistan... I believe we need to take major steps in this regard and we must take action to provide equal rights for Pakistan's minorities.

 

[KRAIT]

@Sashan Giving examples of Hindus in worst conditions in India, so that they can't cry foul.

 

[acid rain]

Pakistani Hindus need to be protected. They should be made to feel welcome in Pakistan... I believe we need to take major steps in this regard and we must take action to provide equal rights for Pakistan's minorities.

I think the situation is irreparable now, there's hardly a percent or two of minorities left, its better to just keep converting them forcefully so at least the remaining few that cant flee would be alive.

 

[Spring Onion]

Why should I edit it? Gandhi screwed Hindu and other religious people in communalising politics and denying India a modern secular state by foistering the Nehru clan on India. There is a saying "Live by the sword, die by the sword" - I believe in that - does that mean I support violence or someone getting killed through violence? Indira Gandhi played with Akali politics introducing violence and payed the penalty. Does that mean I support her killing?

I think you need to have a better comprehension skills.

Communal violence was there much before 47. do you blame Gandhi and Nehru family for that ?

and by the way after Gandhi was shot dead what had stopped India from becoming modern secular state?

 

[Sashan]

So you are relying on maybe? I don't share your abject dislike of Nehru even if I'm not blind to his faults. The Indian nation we see today exists primarily because Nehru was PM, Shastri was nowhere in the reckoning in 1950, Maulana Azad was still around. Would you have preferred him instead? Did you forget that it was Nehru putting his foot down that ended Mr. Jinnah's grandstanding & paved the way for the creation of a strong central state in India. That might not seem important now but immediately after independence, when the feeling of "Indianness" was not as remotely strong as it is now, that proved to be of immeasurable value to contain fissiparous tendencies.. If today you mock Nehru, it is because he built the state that gives you that freedom (discounting present citizenship status). Easy to mock someone after all the hard work is done, ask Pakistanis how they wish they had their leader staying in the picture longer than he did.

Maybe I wanted something more than what you have settled for wrt what Post independence India is all about - You feel that the feeling of Indianness and "freedom" - I assume you mean freedom of speech is enough for you but not for many of us - Many of us feel cheated on the aspect that there is no proper delineation of the state and the religion - screwup wrt Kashmir and many more issues. And we can go on and on without our opinions getting changed. So why don't we agree to disagree as I feel this discussion will go no where especially when I remember you and me having the same conversation few months back?

Communal violence was there much before 47. do you blame Gandhi and Nehru family for that ?

and by the way after Gandhi was shot dead what had stopped India from becoming modern secular state?

I mentioned to you about the roots of the communal politics - going back to Khilafat movement and the effects we are seeing now in India. So I do not understand your point about the communal violence which persisted before 47. Maybe you are thinking about communal violence whereas I meant communal politics.

What part of my statement is lost on you - that foistering the Nehru clan on India was the biggest mistake Gandhi did and Nehru was the one who denied the modern secular state?

 

[acid rain]

What the Mullahs can do to save minority lives is offer them mass conversion plans and for those who do not want to be converted at least offer them safe passage out of Pakistan instead of them dying like in the refugee boats enroute to Australia.

All Pakistani minorities enjoy refugee status in other countries because of the atrocities commited on them, Global community should impose of Pakistan to at least make their departure safer.

 

[Spring Onion]

I mentioned to you about the roots of the communal politics - going back to Khilafat movement and the effects we are seeing now in India. So I do not understand your point about the communal violence which persisted before 47. Maybe you are thinking about communal violence whereas I meant communal politics.

What part of my statement is lost on you - that foistering the Nehru clan on India was the biggest mistake Gandhi did and Nehru was the one who denied the modern secular state?

Contradiction in your own post.

1. You said Gandhi's stand on Khilafat movement given rise to communal violence/politics. OK lets for a moment consider your point then who were against this decision of Gandhi?

the answer is obvioulsy Hindus were against this decision because they were NOT in favour of supporting a MUSLIM movement.

2. communal violence/hatered and politics go hand in hand in that part of the world even today. so lets not make excuses. as per your comments Nehru was responsible for communal politics so who were once again the other party?

Hindu majority who opposed any leverage to Muslims of subcontinent so howcome anti-Nehru, anti-Gandhi forces (may be today's anti-congress aka Hindu groups) could have made India a true secular country in the first place?

These Hindu groups are the one who are against Muslim/Christian growth in India

 

[INDIC]

Communal violence was there much before 47. do you blame Gandhi and Nehru family for that ?

and by the way after Gandhi was shot dead what had stopped India from becoming modern secular state?

I believe India had been more successful in maintaining peace with secular values. Bengalis, Muhajirs , Ahmediyyas and Shias who created Pakistan found themselves cornered in Pakistan.

 

[Spring Onion]

India is a Modern Secular Country , Otherwise We would have Kidnapped and raped One Muslims girl for One Hindu In Pakistan , And there would Refugee camps In border Pakistan for Muslims .

I think it's time to rethink for us non-Muslim about secularism offered to Muslims in India , we should revoke it due to treatment to non-Muslims in pak majority Muslim country.

bwahahahahahahahahahah what and idiotic explaination of sickular India dahhhh

 

[Spring Onion]

What kind of Shameless people You Pakistani are ?

a shameless Indian talking about shamelessness even shame the shamelessness of your shameless rant.

Pakistan is Theocracy , Even basic Rights Denied to non-muslins ! Regular kidnapping killing , raping of non-muslims is state sponsored People Hunting.

Title is about Hindu Refugee from Pakistan !! and you blaming India ?????



Well it's very Hard Fact ! but you Pakistani are delusional Everything in world is Idiotic for you.

Indians talking about rapes these days is infact sounds like raping themself.

bad idea.

 

[IND151]

they are welcome

 

[Spring Onion]

they are welcome

no they are not that is the issue.