Originally posted by Ashok Mash:
Your post is still quite incomprehensible, however, I think I vaguely have an idea of your point � please correct me if I understood it wrong.
[qb]These uppercast's brutaly and cruely suppressed indians.
Well, now that�s Indians brutally and cruelly suppressing Indians. I don�t see an external involved there. The upper cast / lower cast problems that�s been on for centuries are something that us Indians devised, and us Indians have the collective responsibility for running it and for putting up with it. And thankfully, cast-system is a history in certain parts of India, and less so significant in most of the parts. There are certain black spots in the country, where poverty and illiteracy keeps them away from the developments around the country. We will get there, sooner or later.
sangh parivar riots now is mughal suppression and christian suppression.
No one here would vouch for Sangh Parivar, or their actions. And technically, Sangh Parivar is a �all upper cast� set up. And, most importantly, I don�t see how that is connected to this thread, as we are discussing technicality (and sentiments) of an individual (not a invading force, cast, religious group � just an single woman) with foreign origin holding the top office in India.
Who were actually invaders of our country.
Something tells me you are talking about the arya invasions to a dravida land. Not only that its far from what this tread is about, its so ancient, its absolutely insignificant to any discussion, except for the cheap politicians of south who uses �language sentiments� among cast/group card to win votes.[/QB]
Originally posted by Thomas Paul:
Couple of thoughts:
Rudyard Kipling was born in India. Do you think that would have made him more qualified to be PM of India?
Originally posted by Ashok Mash:
Something tells me you are talking about the arya invasions to a dravida land. Not only that its far from what this tread is about, its so ancient, its absolutely insignificant to any discussion,
Originally posted by Paul McKenna:
With the history in perspective, it is only appropriate that Indians be extremely cautious about any foreigner/naturalized citizen vying for the top spot. You have to keep in mind that India has been free for only the last 50 odd years, prior to which it has been under foreign rule for 800 years.
Originally posted by Murasoli Maran:
Where is the provocation?.There is no provocation on my doubt.If there is any provocation,it can be pointed.
I am asking the reason of the riots happened in india.A very lot of people suffering in india by this.A lot of people supressed for centuries.i am asking the reason of that.i am asking the logic.and i am also asking the logic of complaint about about suppression by the people who done the most brutal suppression in the world.
Originally posted by Ashok Mash:
Your post is still quite incomprehensible, however, I think I vaguely have an idea of your point � please correct me if I understood it wrong.
Originally posted by Paul McKenna:
Actually, it would make little or no difference. GWB, Tony Blair and Sonia are all foreigners and not Indians. So the point of conflict would remain the same. Actually, it might be a little better with the other two because you know what each of them stand for. No one has any idea what Sonia plans to do or what she is capable of.
Originally posted by Paul McKenna:
With the history in perspective, it is only appropriate that Indians be extremely cautious about any foreigner/naturalized citizen vying for the top spot. You have to keep in mind that India has been free for only the last 50 odd years, prior to which it has been under foreign rule for 800 years.
Originally posted by Manish Hatwalne:
Ashok,
Just wanted to compliment you for taking time to read incomprehensible posts and moreover still posting perfectly sensible and rational answers in a most civilized manner.
- Manish
Originally posted by Murasoli Maran:
I am asking the reason of the riots happened in india. A lot of people supressed for centuries.i am asking the reason of that i am asking the logic i am also asking the logic of complaint about about suppression by the people who done the most brutal suppression in the world.
"Thanks to Indian media who has over the period of time swiped out intellectual taste from mass Indian population." - Chetan Parekh
Originally posted by R K Singh:
It has nothing to do with Italian being PM of India.
I will suggest you to start a new thread.
I think this is the most straight forward answer anyone can give right now.
Originally posted by Murasoli Maran:
I just wanna point out that maker of this post is that brahmins are the real invaders of our country and their brutality towards indians.
Originally posted by Pradeep Bhat:
Rediff says Sonia does not want to be PM
http://in.rediff.com/news/2004/may/18sb.htm
not sure whether it is true. :roll:
Originally posted by Manish Hatwalne:
This statement can also be interpreted as spreading hatred against one community, and that's provoking. (Ashok has done a very good job explaining this, so I am not even going to try). Any online community would prohibit that.
MH
Originally posted by Ram Abdullah D'Souza:
Sonia Gandhi seems to be reluctant on accepting the offer as PM.If its true,then Manmohan Singh is the better option than anybody.[I would prefer Singh over any political leader in any party including Gandhi.]
[ flickr ]
Sensex is falling again..
Originally posted by Pradeep Bhat:
Good news for Mr. Maran
MH
Originally posted by Murasoli Maran:
This is where the thread twisted.
"Thanks to Indian media who has over the period of time swiped out intellectual taste from mass Indian population." - Chetan Parekh
Originally posted by R K Singh:
I am not able to see anything wrong in the statement of Paul.
He said what is truth and we should be concious about that.
Originally posted by Murasoli Maran:
And because of lack of conciouseness of indians,the uppercaste invaders with brahmin ideology treated indians like animals.
Commentary From the Sidelines of history
Originally posted by Paul McKenna:
Ok! I think its about enough that I ignored the senseless trolling..
Originally posted by Paul McKenna:
I cited the recent 800 years because, in the last 800 years all Indians, regardless of whether upper caste or lower caste have been the subjects of foreign rule. For anyone to bring up a 5000 year old aryan invasion theory and to cite that as evidence against my post is absolutely baseless. Simply because in 5000 years the majority of India is Brahmins / upper caste.
Originally posted by Thomas Paul:
I think Paul was talking about the European occupation of India over the last 800 years although I believe that India was only controlled by Europeans starting in the late 1700's.
I'll ask my earlier question again. For those who oppose Sonia because she wasn't born in India, would you prefer someone like Rudyard Kipling since he was born in India? (And before you bring up the situation in the US, the requirement to be born in the USA to be president is in our Constitution which makes it very difficult to change. But I would be happy to toss it out as I believe that it serves no useful purpose.)[/QB]
Commentary From the Sidelines of history
Originally posted by Murasoli Maran:
Why cant you answer it?.
Commentary From the Sidelines of history
Originally posted by Pradeep Bhat:
Maran
Please create a separate thread and ask the question.
Originally posted by Paul McKenna:
Answer: I will henceforth ignore your posts.
Originally posted by Pradeep Bhat: