RE:Hindu babes
by BS on Feb 17, 2008 01:22 PM
Brush up your History basics dear. Most of the marriages of Hindu princess with Muslim invaders were forced marriages. Like snatching a medal from the loser.
RE:Akbar-Jodha
by Asamdi Haiderali on Feb 17, 2008 01:27 PM
Even they have not shown everything real as marathas were never loyal to their husband nor their husband were loyal to their kingdom.
RE:Akbar-Jodha
by sadaChiddi on Feb 17, 2008 01:10 PM
Used them and threw them away? Is this desscription expalins why Shah Jahan's mother is Pricess Manmiti?? Is a princess who is thrown away give a King?? Is this what throwaway means, then you are speaking a different language
RE:when will the islamist madness stop
by bawlachintu on Feb 17, 2008 01:02 PM
Singha is a hinjda who has sex with his own mother but in vain. he has acknowledged it himself.
The fact remains the hindu-muslim divide is a new invention. The Moguls or the Rajputs and Marathas were secular people who cared 2 hoots for the hindu-muslim nonsense. The fact is that educated and rich hindus are the ones that spread hatred and incite hindu-muslim debate to fuel their medival and evil thinking against majority of muslims for action of a few rotten apples that call themselves muslims. Poor hindus and muslims are the ones that are more secular than the rich ones.
RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by cynic on Feb 17, 2008 12:50 PM
history is more complex my dear boy, the resentment of marathas, sikhs against Mughals was genuine, have you heard of Jizya, have you heard of torture of Sikh Gurus, do you know how Guru Arjan was tortured and killed by Jehangir, about how Aurangzeb terrorizing sikhs and hindus. Get real my boy and do not indulge in some silly fantasy. Of course RSS/VHP is cynically manipulating 'real' events of the past to justify their actions.
RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by bawlachintu on Feb 17, 2008 12:54 PM
the resetment was based on territorial issues and not religious you moron. Stop your prpoganda, do you know the Golden temple was built on land donated by a Muslim king.
RE:RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by cynic on Feb 17, 2008 12:59 PM
torturing Sikh Gurus to force them to convert to Islam is part of territorial conquests is it ?
RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by bawlachintu on Feb 17, 2008 01:05 PM
Cynic...your knowledge about history could make Singha the hinjda appear an Einstein
RE:RE:RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by bawlachintu on Feb 17, 2008 01:12 PM
more sikhs were killed by hindus after Indira gandhi was assistaned...so shut up your moron
RE:RE:RE:RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by apurva singh on Feb 17, 2008 01:15 PM
hindus did not kill sikhs. congress did. is jagdish tytler a sikh? hindu fundies like bjp actually were the ones responsible for giving protection to sikhs in 84.
RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by nitin on Feb 17, 2008 01:28 PM
The same BJP is having hoeny moon with AKALIDAL in punjab. Akalis has never condemned the Militancy in Punjab. they have not objected the Photo of Militant Bhandranwale in Golden temple. The Militant's like Masood Azhar were released in during the term of BJP and the shameful thing is that our foreign Minister himself escorted the Militants. He also gave them the extortion of 20 crore US dollors. The same Masood is now killing innocent hinuds in India and Kashmir.
RE:RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by cynic on Feb 17, 2008 01:02 PM
I have already agreed Akbar was tolerant and he donated the land, it sort of proves my point. Why was Akbar so tolerant and secular and Aurangzeb such a religious beast.
RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by cynic on Feb 17, 2008 12:58 PM
you are closing your eyes dear boy, so partition also is a figment of imagination, so jinnah exhorting Muslims to kill Hindus and other non-muslims is also a figment of imagination, as I said dont try to fit world-view into your cozy little assumptions.
RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by sadaChiddi on Feb 17, 2008 12:55 PM
You are speaking half truths..what about the tax called zakat imposed on Muslim subjects? Zakat tax was heavy as you have to pay for every god you earn unlike jizya.Mor eover once you pay jizya who dont have to particpate in the battles as you become protected citizen.
RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by apurva singh on Feb 17, 2008 01:01 PM
there is something seriously wrong with this bawla sadda pair. the sort of nonsense they are spewing is v well coated with fake realism. mughals were constantly embroiled in conflicts in central india. where islamic invaders went, they converted 100% people, or killed them. we hindus shoudl be proud that we could protect our honor, except for indian muslims who are hindus who could not protect their honor. rana pratap fought for honor. there was no territorial issue. sikhs fought for honor. bawla-sadda pair need mental treatment. best thing is to ignore them since we dont know where they live and cant slapppp them.
RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by BS on Feb 17, 2008 01:32 PM
Fully agree with your observation on bawla sadda pair. The cruelty of Muslim invades is well documented in History. They came to India with a sole objective of imposing Islam and in the meantime also resorted to looting, forced marriages etc. Some intelligents like Akbar decided to stayput and carryon with their agenda.
RE:RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by sadaChiddi on Feb 17, 2008 01:07 PM
Educate Romila Taparr and Ramachandra Guha on your enlightened History MR.Apurva Singh By the way award winning william darlymple's book on Mugals is a farce and fiction.. what else..Taj Mahal is Tejo mahalaya temple.. right??
RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by sadaChiddi on Feb 17, 2008 01:05 PM
So 1000 yrs of different Muslim rules..Muslims are just 10% in India..So mucccch for the force of Muslim rulers...??? The truth is if Mugals used forced they possibly would have been not able to rule this long.. They neither encouraged nor discouraged. Tell me which Muslim king entered Indonesia or Malaysia..? why the hell they are millions of Muslims in these lands??
RE:RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by apurva singh on Feb 17, 2008 01:10 PM
no point going into it. read history. it is full of hindu resistance. look a the bitter resistence show by rajputs, sikhs, jats and marathas. delhi is surrounded by jats. but none is a muslim. even today you can encounter the stubborn nature of a jat cultivate through centuries of struggle with muslims. it is a great credit to hindu warriors who resisted, and today thank god, i can hold my head high and i am not some a khan or so. malaysia example does not hold. there was no force used there. but as per you there was no force used in india!! so going by malasia example, all of us should have been muslims! hindu culture is v deep and ancient and we made sacrifices. in chittorgarh, one by one, all hindus were killed since each refused to convert.
RE:RE:RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by cynic on Feb 17, 2008 01:13 PM
guru Arjan's torture by Mughals was the turning point. Seeds of the failure of the Mughal rule was sown then.
RE:RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by bawlachintu on Feb 17, 2008 01:07 PM
apurva...the one that desrves a slap and a kick is you. History shows that Moguls were simply invaders and most of them drank alcohol and ept harem, both against the virtues of Islam. The problem is morons like you cannot live without bringing the hindu-muslim nonsense angle. I know where you are so get ready for a slap.
RE:RE:RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by apurva singh on Feb 17, 2008 01:13 PM
in saudi also, in the colonies, cocaine is freely available and women are used as sex slaves. in a fascist religion, double standards are normal part of life.
RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by sadaChiddi on Feb 17, 2008 01:20 PM
The only place where u may see (that too not open) is places like american colonies which are made up of european employees of aramco) and a big gift.. In saudi you are free to use drugs and when they find they will give you 20,0000 dhirhams why dont u try Mr.Apurva singh.
RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by sadaChiddi on Feb 17, 2008 01:11 PM
Mughals were anything but Islamic and history testifies it. They had some virtues of Islam, but in many areas especially on moral grounds they were as good as anyother king..thats all
RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by apurva singh on Feb 17, 2008 01:06 PM
and who is going to show massacre of 30000 hindus of chittorgarh just because mewar resisted akbar. and akbar killing unconscious hemu on the suggestion of bairam khan. and 300 wives of akbar and various other pastimes. i guess the the movie would be authentic. it owuld have better if a movie was made on real indian heroes like rana pratap.
RE:RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by bawlachintu on Feb 17, 2008 01:09 PM
Rana pratap was the motivation behond BJP and its bigots to commit a genocide in Gujarat. I am not surprsied that a bird brain like you would come with this example.
RE:RE:RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by cynic on Feb 17, 2008 01:15 PM
do you know what is the meaning of the term 'genocide' apart from english even your english skills are poor. Hype the mistakes committed by BJP and ignore mughals stupidities seems to be your motto
RE:RE:RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by apurva singh on Feb 17, 2008 01:17 PM
genocide!! joker, 750 muslims and 250 hindus died in gujarat, pseudo secular congress govt's min for home affairs statement in parliament. the muslims went for it aggressively, but paid the price. since then there have been no riots in gujarat. because muslims have been show their place: in their ghetto hellholes.
RE:RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by sadaChiddi on Feb 17, 2008 01:08 PM
rana pratap and his Muslim General Hakim Khan suri would have been a best film too? Want to deny that history too?
RE:RE:RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by apurva singh on Feb 17, 2008 01:11 PM
more propaganda. hakim khan was not pratap's general. he was one of his allies. pratap did not need muslim generals. hakiim was with pratap since he was descendant of sher shah suri and wanted revenge from akbar. his role was not critical in pratap's glorious struggle. come with some more convertee propaganda.
RE:RE:RE:RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by sadaChiddi on Feb 17, 2008 01:14 PM
yes,revenege ,avenge and all these nonsense only drove these kings.. Dont put a Muslim color to this. In reality if it is not for these Mughals ,Islam would have spread the whole continent.They were actually a thorn in this issue!!
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by cynic on Feb 17, 2008 01:16 PM
it did not spread because of Akbar who was tolerant, Sikh warriors, maratha warriors, british empire etc etc
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by apurva singh on Feb 17, 2008 01:19 PM
islamic hell did not spread because of rajput warriors who fought them continously since arabic invasion in 644 AD. indian history is full of struggle and resistance by rajputs, and later by marathas and sikhs. there was not a single year when there wasn't a rebellion.
RE:Stop this hindu - muslim nonsese
by Rohit kumar on Feb 17, 2008 01:21 PM
Yes, this is not the time to raise the issue of mughal actions. Though it was mostly for emperorship and they could judge weakness of existing rulers, they wanted to control the world. In this process they did conversions. But, it is the hindu base, which is eternal and which has proven time and again the invasion of mughal, british etc. and none could change the great culture of country which is based on the great Indian philosphy known as vedic/ sanatan philosphy. Everybody came and went as small wind. Now, gain your strength again, dont indulge in hindu-muslim-christan activities and prove as a true Indian. Because, when we have sustained many invaders, we can touch sky with the same potential without doing silly forceful conversion activities like others. Win the world with your great openness a true Indian culture. Don't tarnish this image. Yes, give a fit reply to miscreants also.
RE:Mughals Married their women to Rajputs?
by RANJAY KUMAR on Feb 17, 2008 01:39 PM
Do you really need an answer? Keep distance, it will be good for your physical being, intelligent man.
Shaj jahan is the son of a Rajput princess.Is this a shame to Rajput ethinicty?? The greatest patron of arts of india and the once powerful kingdom on earth was a Son of Rajput..? Is this shameful??
RE:The Rajput Princess Manmati who gave birth to Shah Jahan is a Hindu
by RANJAY KUMAR on Feb 17, 2008 12:44 PM
Shahjahan was a son of a Muslim invader, his mother was converted forcibly (under the circumstances)to islam. Yes it is a shame for us.
RE:The Rajput Princess Manmati who gave birth to Shah Jahan is a Hindu
by sadaChiddi on Feb 17, 2008 12:46 PM
So so people forced will eventually become princesss in it?? And her son will become emperoror (also by force??)
RE:The Rajput Princess Manmati who gave birth to Shah Jahan is a Hindu
by bawlachintu on Feb 17, 2008 12:48 PM
why were you there to see the forceful conversion. you moron the moguls ruled for centuries and if they had done forced conversions there would not be a single hindu in India including you moron. It is no shame for hindus but something of pride as it depicts the true naure of good spirit of real hindusim that most hindus seem to have forgotten.
RE:The Rajput Princess Manmati who gave birth to Shah Jahan is a Hindu
by RANJAY KUMAR on Feb 17, 2008 01:41 PM
You freaking clown SOB, where ever Islam ruled they converted people and wiped out other faiths from their kingdoms. You AH, read history before you talk.
Let me clarify the medieval history which Mr SADA CHIDDI is portraying here. Akbar was responsible for slaughtering 30,000 unarmed common man of Chittor fort, which Rana never forgot and never forgave him, and kept on fighting the Mughal despite eating roti of grass from Aravali hills. Rajput women often had to perform jauhar to protect their pride. Shahjahan or any body who were born in Rajputs sometimes had to kill their own women to save them from invaders. Women were the prize possession or war booty for the invaders. Mughals or even Akbar him self never allowed his women kins to marry hindu/royals.
This kind of arrangement was shameful history of kacchwaha rajputs. We hate Man Singh. This movie opens an old wound which only a rajput can understand.
RE:Politically Correct Indian History
by sadaChiddi on Feb 17, 2008 12:42 PM
which King never fought any batteles and which country never fought any war?? Dont brush it using ethinic and religios color. Religion played a role but a very subtle one. Expalin me why all big commanders of Aurangazeb were Rajputs...? Do people trust an enemey so much to give them the highest authority in military??
RE:Politically Correct Indian History
by RANJAY KUMAR on Feb 17, 2008 12:49 PM
Do not give us a pseudo secular and politically correct history here. How many temples were destroyed by mughals if the wars were not religious? Above all how many temples Aurangzeb destroyed.
Aurangzeb, used rajputs for a while, other than that he was was hater, a muslim fanatic who killed brutally his own brother Dara Shikoh. I am simply asking you, if it was not communal then tell me when did mughals got their women married to rajput royals?
If the mughal period was so beautiful then why is so much hatred between hindus and muslims?
RE:Politically Correct Indian History
by sadaChiddi on Feb 17, 2008 12:52 PM
Read Last Mugahl by william Darlymple.. In 1857 both hindus and Muslims fought to restore the lgeality of Mughal rule,It is the pyscho hindutuav elements which wants to thrive on hate conceals it
William Darlymple laments this is his book saying it was considered an anamthema for nationalist forces to say Hindus and Muslims lived amicably.
How the hell some one can rule for thousand years if they are as brutal as some pyscho's allege??
RE:RE:Politically Correct Indian History
by RANJAY KUMAR on Feb 17, 2008 01:04 PM
1857, had a common enemy for a while. The unity was temporary and frickle. If the relationship between hindus and muslims during that period of time was so beautiful then tell me why so much hatred, I ll give you the answer, which is not politically correct, IT IS DEEP ROOTED. Islam and Christianity wiped out pagans from from the map of europe and middle east, you are here just talking about 1000 years, some people fought for their faith, and pride.
RE:Politically Correct Indian History
by sadaChiddi on Feb 17, 2008 01:22 PM
Why this hate??look at you and me. I am talking about Hindus and Muslims lived together,sharing a mixed legacy You are here bent on pursuing divisie tactics who is evil??You need this hate to sustain, what else BJP have except this hate investment???
RE:Politically Correct Indian History
by sadaChiddi on Feb 17, 2008 12:54 PM
Check her interview on rediff (i got this from rediff forum ) by eminent historian Romila Thapar.
rediff.com/news/1999/feb/04thapar.htm
when you ignore historians and want people like Francis Goutier(a moronic authior whoc was sacked from his journalist job because of his low IQ) to tell history this is what you will get.
RE:RE:Politically Correct Indian History
by RANJAY KUMAR on Feb 17, 2008 01:01 PM
Aurangzeb need rajputs but later those rajputs started abandoning him, once they saw his crude fanatic communal muslim sides.
RE:Politically Correct Indian History
by sadaChiddi on Feb 17, 2008 01:02 PM
Are you saying Aurangazeb shouldnt have had Rajput as his grand mother?? how can that be possible..?
RE:RE:Politically Correct Indian History
by RANJAY KUMAR on Feb 17, 2008 01:07 PM
What the f...k you talking about his grand mother, he never claimed any rajput ancestory, you idiot, he killed hindus in thousands. Women in mughals were not muslims after marriage. Get your facts together.
RE:RE:RE:Politically Correct Indian History
by sadaChiddi on Feb 17, 2008 01:23 PM
Bulk of his army was made up of Rajputs.The question should be asked to them not me..
