1
   

India or Pakistan

 
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Aug, 2005 06:40 pm
Quote:
Since the partition of India in 1947 into two nations -- the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the secular state of India -- the Hindu population in Pakistan (former West Pakistan) has declined from about 20 percent to less than 2 percent today.

from
http://www.hinduamericanfoundation.org/Content/Achievements/media_press_release_human_rights.html

more stuff on here - http://www.yahoodi.com/peace/india.html
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Aug, 2005 07:32 pm
mork wrote:
Quote:


Not true. Since independence, the Hindu population of West Pakistan (modern day Pakistan) has greatly flourished, so much so that the Hindu growth in modern Pakistan is one and a half times that of the Muslim growth rate.

As for partition, there was rioting on both sides and many Hindus and Muslims were killed. However, the figures suggest more Muslims were killed than Hindus during partition.



where do ya get yer canards from ??
0 Replies
 
mork
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Aug, 2005 08:03 am
brahmin wrote:
Quote:
Since the partition of India in 1947 into two nations -- the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the secular state of India -- the Hindu population in Pakistan (former West Pakistan) has declined from about 20 percent to less than 2 percent today.

from
http://www.hinduamericanfoundation.org/Content/Achievements/media_press_release_human_rights.html

more stuff on here - http://www.yahoodi.com/peace/india.html


That is an misleading and incorrect statement.

The Hindu population of West Pakistan (modern day Pakistan) was 20% before partition occurred (1947) from India.

During partition (1947), many Hindus left West Pakistan to move to India. Rioting killed many Muslims coming into West Pakistan and East Pakistan from India and also many Hindus going to India from West and East Pakistan. This meant that immediately following partition (1948) the Hindu population of West Pakistan was just under 2%.

This percentage number of Hindus in West Pakistan has stayed the same right from 1948 till the present (the number of Hindus has in fact been increasing slightly relative to Muslims in modern day Pakistan).

As an example, you post about the declining percentage Hindus in Bangladesh. This is due to lower Hindu fertility compared to the Muslim majority population amongst other things (such as net migration of Hindus is out of the country). Part of the reason for the emigration of Hindus from Bangladesh to India was the vested property act of the 70s.
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Aug, 2005 11:32 am
lmao.


i know about the hindu exodus from pakistan.

what the article says is not about the hindu population in pakistan before independence, but immediately after - say 1948. from 1948 to today its gone down exponantially. pakistan also has beautiful rules that make it very clear thjat no non muslim can hold any elected post in govt.


as for bangladesh, the genocide of hindus perpetrated by west pakistan and by the muslims of bangladesh was one of the cruellest mass murders in history, right up there with suharto's murders in borneo/java and armenia and such like.


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=bangladesh+genocide&spell=1



why try to argue against facts and history?
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Aug, 2005 11:43 am
from http://www.mukto-mona.com/new_site/mukto-mona/Articles/kasem/mathematics_genocide.htm


Quote:

The Mathematics of a Genocide

Abul Kasem





President Yahya said, "Kill three million of them and the rest will eat out of our hands". (Robert Payne, Massacre, The Tragedy of Bangladesh and the Phenomenon of Mass Slaughter Throughout History; P50; New York, Macmillan, 1973)

A few Neo-Razakars and some Pakistanis are in the devious game again. They are trying to sow the seed of doubt in the minds of new generation of Bangalees about the severity of 1971 Genocide. One of these Neo-Razakars even had the audacity to say that only about few hundred thousand (150 000 - 250 000) people were killed in Bangladesh. We know why these people are suddenly active again when the Bangladesh election is just a month away. One Pakistani even said that it is nearly impossible for the 90 000 Pakistani soldiers to kill 3 million Bangladeshis in just 9 months time. Let us do some calculations to refute their well design plan. Let us take our calculator and do some calculations based on international data. We shall do this calculation and compare that with those of Cambodia, another land of genocide.



Bangladesh

In 1981, UN's declaration of Universal Human Rights writes; "Among the genocides of human history, the highest number of people killed in lower span of time is in Bangladesh in 1971. An average of 6000 (six thousand) to 12 000 (twelve thousand) people were killed every single day..........This is the highest daily average in the history of genocide's." The occupation army of Pakistan committed this holy act for an approximate period of 260 days (from the night of 25 March,1971 to their surrender on the 16th. December, 1971). Using UN's figures multiply them with 260 days. What figures do we get? Please take a calculator and check this one out.

(1) Lower limit of Bangalee killed = 6 000 x 260 = 1 560 000 (1.56 million) Higher limit of Bangalee killed = 12 000 x 260 = 3 120 000 (3.12 million) We can take an average value of 2 340 000 (2.34 million)

(2) In 1971 there were around 75 million people in Bangladesh. The average size of a Bangalee family was around 5 (five) at that time. Divide 75 million by 5 which gives 15 million families in Bangladesh in 1971. Number killed per family = 0.16 (2.34 million divided by 15 million) Number of families affected with at least one family member killed = 6.4 (15 million divided by 2.34 million).

This is 42.7% (6.4 multiplied by 100 and divided by 15) of families. For simplicity, let us use a round figure of 40%. This means that 40% of Bangalee families were affected with the loss of at least one family member. Of course, there were thousands of families where the loss of family members was more than one. In many cases, the entire family excepting a lone survivor was wiped out. If these facts are taken in to consideration then the average percentage affected (40%) will change.

(3) Numbers killed by each Pakistani soldier = 26 persons (2.34 million divided by 90 000 soldiers) in 260 days. I have excluded the Razakars who joined the Pakistani soldiers later. An approximate number of Razakars will be around 50,000 to 60,000 or may be more. No one knows the real data). Do your own calculations if you want to include the Razakars.

(4) Numbers killed by each Pakistani soldier per day is 0.1 person. (26 divided by 260).

That is, one Pakistani soldier killed at least one Bangalee in every ten days. Is that an impossible job? Are these numbers unbelievable? The 3 million people killed by the Pakistani soldiers is not at all impossible. The above calculations clearly demonstrate this fact. That was exactly what happened in Bangladesh. In fact, the September 1972 issue of National Geographic clearly writes that more than 3 million people were killed in Bangladesh. This fact was revealed almost after a year of the carnage. Therefore, the records are surely more authentic and free from bias.



Cambodia

Let us now look in to another genocide, which has no match in human history. This is the genocide by Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. Official figure of genocide toll is 1.7 million (many sources quote a figure of around 2 million. But let us work with the 1.7 million figure). This was not done in 260 days (like Pakistani soldiers) but within a period of Khmer Rouge rule of 4 (four) years (from 1975 to 1979). Cambodia's population in 1970 was 6.94 million and its population in 1988 was 7.87 million. The average population growth in Cambodia can be taken as 2.3% (Source: Book of Vital World statistics; by The Economist Books (page 16). Published by Hutchinson Business books Ltd. London, 1990). Using this population growth rate we can calculate the following. The population of Cambodia in 1974 (genocide year) would have been around 7.6 million (1.023 raised to the power of 4 then multiplied by 6.94 million). Number of Cambodians killed = 1.74 million. Therefore, % of population killed = 22.8% (in Cambodia) % of population killed in Bangladesh = 4% (using the 3 million figure) I do not have the data for the average family size in Cambodia. So, using the same assumption as in Bangladesh (5 members per family). Numbers of families in Cambodia in 1974 = 1.52 million Numbers of people killed per family in Cambodia in 1974 = 1.14 Number of people killed per day (for 4 years) = 1192



Now, let us assume that the Khmer rouge squeezed the time of killing to 260 days instead of 4 years. Then the number of people killed per day (in 260 days) would have been around 7000 (seven thousand per day). This figure is not very far off from the daily killings in Bangladesh.

We can conclude the following

The figure 3 million is not a pie in the sky figure. It is quite an accurate estimate of the people killed in Bangladesh in 1971. 90,000 Pakistani soldiers can and did kill the 3 million Bangalees in approximately 9 months time. It was not an impossible task as suggested by some Pakistani. In terms of severity and the density of people killed per family, the Cambodian genocide is far worse than Bangladesh genocide. (1.14 per family in Cambodia vs.0.16 per family in Bangladesh). In reality, the density of killing in Cambodia was about 7 times more ferocious than in Bangladesh. Approximately 40% families in Bangladesh lost at least one family member. Every family in Cambodia lost more than one family member. In terms of speed of killing, Bangladesh genocide is the worst in history. An average of 9000 (mean of 6 000 and 12 000 of the U.N figure) people killed per day for 260 days versus approximately 1200 people killed per day (for 4 years) in Cambodia. The big difference between the Bangladesh genocide and the Cambodian genocide was this. Cambodia set up a People's Revolutionary Tribunal in August 1979 to try Pol Pot and Ieng Sary. They were tried in absentia (at least). This was the first genocide trial based on UN policy. No such trial ever took place in Bangladesh. Do our politicians have the guts to do what the humble Cambodians did for justice? To my mind, the answer is simply 'no'. All our politicians are impotent. They are still hooked on 'Islamic brotherhood.� The people must revolt and establish their own tribunal to bring justice. This tribunal should also try our impotent, gutless politicians for failing to deliver justice when they were in power. Is this possible in Bangladesh?



Some afterthoughts

The gratuitous and wanton killing of astronomical number of unarmed Bangalees by marauding soldiers of Pakistan should not go unpunished. We ask the International Tribune on Human Rights to look into this crime against humanity seriously and do the needful. Some of the officers are still in theirs sixties and seventies. Time is running out. Some of these killers are respectable citizens of Pakistan who are collecting their pension sitting in the comfort of their home. These killers should be apprehended and bring to International Court of Justice in The Hague, The Netherlands. If Awami League comes out victorious in this election of October 1, then there is a fair chance that a move could be made by the government of Bangladesh to bring the Bangladesh Genocide into the fore. However, if BNP and its Islamic allies win the race, then one can say good-bye to such move. BNP�s leader Mrs. Khaleda Zia still has high regards for Pakistan. All in all, the next election is very crucial for Bangladesh. The love for Pakistan is one issue that can differentiate Awami League from BNP and her allies. Please do your needful to spread the word that we demand a justice that had eluded the Bangalees for the last thirty years.

Thanks to Fatemolla for supplying the UN figure quoted above.



THE NUMBER-GAME OF 3 MILLION.

fatemolla

The number-game has popped up again in NFB about our martyrs of 1971. While there are killer Maolanas and corrupt politicians (almost al of ours) to play with this, I prefer not to take any NFB-writer as any of them. While trust on our writers is important, distortion or simply presentation of information has profound impact on the result. Far from being a musician I am trying to clarify this with basic music-math, to address an accredited musician-writer in his language of mind (mine too!).

One change of NISHAD from "KOMOL" to "SHUDDHO" changes Malkosh to Chondrokosh, an altogether different Raag with complete different taste. One change of "KOMOL GANDHAR" to "SHUDDHO GANDHAR" changes Bagesree to Ragesree, again a very different Raag with different taste. Small changes in Raag Mollar create Meghmollar, Surmollar, Notmollar, Mia-Ki-Mollar, Ramdashi-Mollar (there are others, don't remember now) etc, all with very different impressions and impacts. Inclusion of NISHAD to Raag Abhog transforms it to Bagesree, exclusion of KORhI-MA (MA as a whole) could not stop Bhupali from being included in the KOLLYAN-THAAT.

Without any note-change, if the SA of Bhupali is shifted to its own PA, then the Sargam changes from SA RE GA PA DHA SA to SA RE MA PA DHA SA, which is nothing but Raag Durga, again with a very different impact. EVEN WITHOUT ANY CHANGE OF NOTES (information), ONLY DIFFERENT MOVEMENT (presentation) OF THE TUNE CHANGES RAAG DARBARI TO JOUNOPURI, AND RAAG BHUPALI TO DESHKAAR. Please correct if this non-musician is wrong.

The spirit of 1971 has been victimized form all the angles of the examples given above, by our own people. So the spirit did the very right thing, it just evaporated. The recent number-game of 3-million resulted in confusion in people's mind. We do have figures from World Bank, foreign Universities, Newspapers and other establishments like National Geographic, even from the UN-Human Rights Department, ranging from 0.25 to 3 million, thanks to Mukto-Mona, (NOT so called "Murkho-Mona", Sir! Let us break the nasty prison of name-calling and get out of it, all of us.) That is a huge span, never academically addressed. These figures, though from accredited institutions, do not enjoy the support of any documented research in our vast villages.

Without any backing of formal research and survey, "3-million" always remained vulnerable though it went unchallenged for many years and got its wide acceptability. Nobody, except a character of Humayun Ahmed's TV-Drama, took the initiative of such an important follow up of number-count of our genocide. Now as the wind has changed its direction, there are innocent academic / ill-motivated efforts to verify / challenge it. We must realize that it is only natural, unless our Govt. gives the job to an International Institution (Uuuups! His Excellency The Mottya-Razakar & Co. is right there sitting in our Parliament!). Now we can only speculate, "debate" endlessly, and get more confused about the seriousness of the genocide. Keeping in mind that the criminals of 1971 and their supporters want that, the only healthy way left for us now is to take "3 Million" as not an absolute but as an arbitrary number, because we need a number to address the issue of genocide. ALL NUMBERS ARE NOT ABSOLUTE, WE DO USE ARBITRARY NUMBERS EXTENSIVELY ALL THE TIME IN OUR LIVES.

In the Qura'an when God changes his oneness to plurality, uses "WE" or "US" for Himself, the expression is only "SHOMMANARTH-E BOHUBOCHON", He is still one. When the young Prince criss-crosses Seven Seas and Thirteen Rivers in search of the life-bird of the demon, he only travels from horizon to horizon. When we pardon "SHAAT KHOON" of our dear ones, we never mean seven killings. "PONCHO BYANJON" may not be exactly five dishes; "PONCHOBOTI" may have fifty "Bot"-trees. "SHOPTODINGA" is only one huge boat. "DOSH NEKI" or "SOTTOR SAWAB" is far from real numbers. "SHOPTO ASMAN" does not exist at all. There are not seven but twelve different notes in each "SHOPTOK" of a harmonium or keyboard, "CHALSHE" also may happen before or after 40 years of age. You could buy "ASHEE" mangoes in fifties in the mango market, which was really a hundred, and during the "NEEL"-time of British Bengal the ignorant peasants actually had to pay 25 bundles of their produce to meet the "KURhI" of the system. "3 million" today is like the existence of god. If one does not believe in it, there are "proofs". If one believes in it, there are stronger "proofs". While it is so, in the absence of a Judge why must we be lost in this endless debate where none but only the killers win?

I repeat, we need a number to address the issue of 71's genocide. We may get an all-acceptable number if and when the criminals will be dragged to the court and a formal investigation will be done. Until then our best option is to regard "3 million" as not an absolute but an arbitrary number.
/
Quote:
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Aug, 2005 11:53 am
http://members.tripod.com/~INDIA_RESOURCE/pakistan.html
0 Replies
 
mork
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Aug, 2005 08:38 am
brahmin wrote:
lmao.


i know about the hindu exodus from pakistan.

what the article says is not about the hindu population in pakistan before independence, but immediately after - say 1948. from 1948 to today its gone down exponantially. pakistan also has beautiful rules that make it very clear thjat no non muslim can hold any elected post in govt.


as for bangladesh, the genocide of hindus perpetrated by west pakistan and by the muslims of bangladesh was one of the cruellest mass murders in history, right up there with suharto's murders in borneo/java and armenia and such like.


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=bangladesh+genocide&spell=1



why try to argue against facts and history?


Shocked
You're not quoting facts and you dont know about the Hindu exodus from Pakistan obviously. I can prove it to you if you like. Alright, i will. Simple mathematics.

First of all, some proper facts need to be made clear. Pakistan was formed from two parts of India in 1947. There was a Western part, known as West Pakistan (land area of modern day Pakistan), and an Eastern part known as East Pakistan (lands area of modern day Bangladesh). East Pakistan has always had a greater amount of Hindus in it than West Pakistan. In 1971, East Pakistan gained independence from West Pakistan and became known as Bangladesh. West Pakistan then became known as Pakistan.

Your article as you claim is not referring to the Hindu population of West Pakistan immediately after independence from India as you claim. Here is why

1)It says the Hindu population percentage of West Pakistan goes down from 20% in 1947 to 2% today. Today there is only one Pakistan (not two as in 1948). Those figures are not including Bangladesh (10% Hindu today). Iin other words you are claiming that modern day Pakistan had a Hindu population of 20% after partition in 1947 (incorrect) which has decreased to 2% today (correct). This is factually incorrect and misleading. It's easy to prove.

Population of Pakistan (1951) = 34 million (modern day Pakistan)
(Source: http://www.prcdc.org/summaries/pakistan/pakistan.html )

Hindu population of modern day Pakistan (1951) = 528,000 people
(Source : Table A2, West Pakistan province/state (modern day Pakistan) http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/ISSUE6-2/sridhar.html . Note, this is a Hindu propaganda website, some of the figures are also wrong and the methodologies are wrong, but even the figure of 528,000 Hindus in Pakistan immediately after partition is accepted by them)

Percentage Hindu population in modern day Pakistan (1951) = 528,000/32 million = 1.6%.
This figure of 1.6% is immediately following partition in 1947, and has stayed the same (in fact slightly increased) up till modern times in Pakistan. You are incorrect in stating that the population of Pakistan immediately following partition was 20%.

Modern day Pakistan (2005), population of 150,000,000 has 2% Hindus. So total Hindus in Pakistan (2005) = 2% of 150,000,000 = 3 million.

I think you will agree that an increase from post partition of 528,000 HIndus (1951) to 3,000,000 (2005) is a huge increase in the number of Hindus in Pakistan (a 6 fold increase, whilst the Pakistani Muslim population has increased only 5 fold (30 million in 1951 till 150 million in 2005).

Do you not agree that the Hindu population of modern day Pakistan has greatly increased from 1947 to date, and if not, why not?

And all your articles on an alleged Hindu genoccide in Bangladesh are all nonsensical since they're all from propaganda sites, which likewise can easily be disproved using the official governmental censuses.
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Aug, 2005 05:17 am
its a waste of time talking to a person who says 6thats the greatest genocide of the 20th century since the holocaust is nonsensical. you are right up there with holocaust deniers. next you will say pakistan doesnt produce half the terrorists of the world and doesn not have rules to bar non mulims from holding posts.

here are some sites which arn't propaganda sites.

from the horse's mouth -
http://www.globalwebpost.com/genocide1971/

http://www.gendercide.org/case_bangladesh.html

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP8.HTM


http://www.hinduamericanfoundation.org/Content/PolicyBriefs/policy_briefs/policy_bangladesh.pdf
(see the references)
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Aug, 2005 05:36 am
mork wrote:

you dont know about the Hindu exodus from Pakistan obviously.



i know all about it...

mork wrote:

I can prove it to you if you like. Alright, i will. Simple mathematics.

First of all, some proper facts need to be made clear. Pakistan was formed from two parts of India in 1947. There was a Western part, known as West Pakistan (land area of modern day Pakistan), and an Eastern part known as East Pakistan (lands area of modern day Bangladesh). East Pakistan has always had a greater amount of Hindus in it than West Pakistan. In 1971, East Pakistan gained independence from West Pakistan and became known as Bangladesh. West Pakistan then became known as Pakistan.



damn i know this to the last frigging detail. as for how east pakistan "gained independence" read this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_Liberation_War



as for your numerical juggling.... when they say pakistan they mean pakistan not combined pakistan. the hindu population in pakistan has gone down exponentially between 1948 to now (the muslim population in india has similarly increased exponentially, cos thats what muslims see india as - as unfinished business... the Lashkar e Toiba - one of the best home grown terrorist groups from pakistan, has made it clear that they want muslims to overtake hindu pupulation, move into north india in the region betwen pakistan and bangladesh, and then plunge india into a rag headed islamic cess pool once more).


here's anopther "propaganda site" -


http://www.globalwebpost.com/genocide1971/witness/rounaq.htm
0 Replies
 
mork
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Aug, 2005 06:42 am
brahmin wrote:
its a waste of time talking to a person who says 6thats the greatest genocide of the 20th century since the holocaust is nonsensical. you are right up there with holocaust deniers. next you will say pakistan doesnt produce half the terrorists of the world and doesn not have rules to bar non mulims from holding posts.

here are some sites which arn't propaganda sites.

from the horse's mouth -
http://www.globalwebpost.com/genocide1971/

http://www.gendercide.org/case_bangladesh.html

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP8.HTM


http://www.hinduamericanfoundation.org/Content/PolicyBriefs/policy_briefs/policy_bangladesh.pdf
(see the references)


I do not know how many terrorists Pakistan or India produces. But i do know that you cannot dispute my calculation and hence you are trying to squirm and wiggle your way out of debating it. My calculation stands. The number of Hindus in modern day Pakistan has greatly increased from 1947 - date.

As for the sites you have quoted on the 1971 war with Bangladesh, none of them provide any evidence of genocide, just reiterate unbalanced media reports. The site by Rummel (Hawaii.edu) is just an armchair enthusiasts opinion using questionable methodologies. His conclusions are highly suspect in almost all the genocides he claims occurred (see quote below). He uses newspaper reports (the majority of them Indian, Chaudrai especially, to derive a figure for the number killed during the war. That is why his estimate varies from 300,000 to 3 million. Then he takes an average of these reported figures that are propaganda!! In other words he's not using any evidence, as other people have remarked about him in the following quote -

Quote:

Other people point out that his methods of calculation of the death toll are highly controversial. He compares the statistical data before and after a certain date and derives an estimate about the number of killings that occurred between. However, he fails to establish evidence of actual killing. Moreover, his results are based on an absolute trust in statistical data and statistics are prone to errors.

However, he himself uses the wider sense of "killed by", including all kinds of "reason-result" relationships between acts of government and actual deaths. Moreover, in calculating the number of victims, he doesn't feel he needs evidence of a death; the result of statistical calculation is, for Rummel, effective proof that death occurred.

For an example of alleged manipulation: Rummel estimates the death toll in the Rheinwiesenlager as between 4,500 and 56,000. Official US figures were just over 3,000 and a German commission found 4,532. The high figure of 56,000 also merited the notation "probably much lower" in Rummel's extracts.

Another flaw in Rummel's statistical calculations is that he doesn't use error margins


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._J._Rummel

As for the hinduamericanfoundation. That is definitely a propaganda site -straight from the horses mouth Cool

In fact all the sites you have quoted are trying to sell books on the subject. But this site doesnt have such a vested interested in selling books.

http://www.engr.uconn.edu/~faisal/Genocide.html

Quote:

The GB refused to recognize the War of Independence as constituting a record of the highest rate of deaths (per day) since 1945.


It's quite easy to prove as well, but since you're not interested
0 Replies
 
mork
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Aug, 2005 07:00 am
brahmin wrote:
mork wrote:

you dont know about the Hindu exodus from Pakistan obviously.



i know all about it...

mork wrote:

I can prove it to you if you like. Alright, i will. Simple mathematics.

First of all, some proper facts need to be made clear. Pakistan was formed from two parts of India in 1947. There was a Western part, known as West Pakistan (land area of modern day Pakistan), and an Eastern part known as East Pakistan (lands area of modern day Bangladesh). East Pakistan has always had a greater amount of Hindus in it than West Pakistan. In 1971, East Pakistan gained independence from West Pakistan and became known as Bangladesh. West Pakistan then became known as Pakistan.



damn i know this to the last frigging detail. as for how east pakistan "gained independence" read this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_Liberation_War



as for your numerical juggling.... when they say pakistan they mean pakistan not combined pakistan. the hindu population in pakistan has gone down exponentially between 1948 to now (the muslim population in india has similarly increased exponentially, cos thats what muslims see india as - as unfinished business... the Lashkar e Toiba - one of the best home grown terrorist groups from pakistan, has made it clear that they want muslims to overtake hindu pupulation, move into north india in the region betwen pakistan and bangladesh, and then plunge india into a rag headed islamic cess pool once more).


here's anopther "propaganda site" -


http://www.globalwebpost.com/genocide1971/witness/rounaq.htm


The history of Pakistan's formation was not for you, genius, it was for anyone else reading this.

As for my "numerical juggling", you cannot dispute it, and that is why it is "juggled". Anyone with a basic knowledge of Math can follow it, and i dont intend you to accept the reality of the figures. If you could follow what i wrote (which you clearly could not), you would see i was calculating the amazingly high growth of Hindus in West Pakistan ONLY (modern day Pakistan ie Not the combined Pakistan in your language). The percentages you quoted were also for modern day Pakistan (ie Not the combined Pakistan in your language), so there's no mistake in my calculation, only the figure you had quoted of 20% in 1948.

Your racist categorizing of ragheads (i could easily call all Indians dotheads, but dont see the point), speaks volumes about your mindset, and your equally fundamentalist viewpoint that the Indian Muslim population will exceed that of the Indian Hindu population is comical. Here is just one article that can easily be proved -


Quote:

Let us look at the data on marriages- called nuptiality rates. The incidence of polygynous marriages (i.e. one wherein a man has more than one wife) is 5.80% among Hindus. The percentage incidence among Muslims is, in fact, slightly lower at 5.73 per cent. These figures are from the office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India and are to be found in the publication Polygynous Marriages in India - A Survey. What the data clearly reveals is that there is absolutely no truth to the commonly propagated assertion that bigamy or polygamy is commoner among Muslims. Indeed the Census Commissioner and Registrar General state "In India as a whole the incidence of polygynous marriage is highest among the persons returning their religion as tribal religion (15.25 per cent), next come the Buddhists (7.97 per cent) followed by Jains (6.72 per cent)". What the data clearly reveals is that of all these religious groups, Muslims have the lowest incidence of polygynous marriages.

Yet another myth that has been propagated is that given the higher growth rate among Muslims in India, they will soon outnumber Hindus. A study looks into this issue. The study projects the prevailing growth rates among Hindus and Muslims into the next century. The Hindu population increased by 23.71 percent between 1961-71 and by 24.71 per cent between 1971-81. This is an increase of 0.71 per cent points. The Muslim population increased by 30.85 and 30.20 during the corresponding periods. This constitutes an increase of 0.05 per cent points, which is much less than that of Hindus.

Assuming the same rate of increase into the future, Bhatia found that in a hundred years from 1981, ie; year 2081, Hindus and Muslims would record a decade growth rate of 30.71 and 30.55 per cent, respectively. In other words, the growth rates of Hindus will be higher than that of Muslims. It is simply not true then, that Muslims will outnumber Hindus in India.



http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/grhf/SAsia/repro3/mohanrao.html#author
0 Replies
 
mork
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Aug, 2005 07:08 am
Dispute the calculation of the large increase in Hindus in modern day Pakistan between 1948 to date, if you can.
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Aug, 2005 12:10 pm
you first.. try to disprove the genocide of hindus in bangladesh and then i'll do what yo asked me to do.


as for ragheads... whatever heads they are... their contributions to society... any society they go to speak for themselves.. they are the lowest earning community where ever in the world they go to uk or india or anywhere and are a burden to every nation thats unlucky en6ough to have them. all they ever do is send their children to madrassas so that the children can grow up to become able jihadis and/or dominate the local under world.
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Aug, 2005 12:20 pm
here... under "objectives"


http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/jandk/terrorist_outfits/lashkar_e_toiba.htm


they want ALL indian muslims to move into the indian states that fall in the pakistan-bangladesh line (where they will thus become the majority population), so that a "islamic strip" can be carved out of india.
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Aug, 2005 12:21 pm
and here - http://www.tkb.org/Group.jsp?groupID=66
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Aug, 2005 12:29 pm
another one, slightly unrelated, which also makes for very interesting reading about the designs of pakistan and pakistanis -

http://www.hvk.org/articles/0403/245.html
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Aug, 2005 12:44 pm
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/GC11Df07.html

this one is from time-asia
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Aug, 2005 12:46 pm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/lt.htm
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Aug, 2005 12:51 pm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4416771.stm
0 Replies
 
mork
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Aug, 2005 04:43 pm
brahmin wrote:
you first.. try to disprove the genocide of hindus in bangladesh and then i'll do what yo asked me to do.


as for ragheads... whatever heads they are... their contributions to society... any society they go to speak for themselves.. they are the lowest earning community where ever in the world they go to uk or india or anywhere and are a burden to every nation thats unlucky en6ough to have them. all they ever do is send their children to madrassas so that the children can grow up to become able jihadis and/or dominate the local under world.


That's alright by me, since you cannot disprove my calculation as it is factual and yours is just invented out of thin air. Why doesnt that surprise me? Laughing

As for contributions to society, the Arabs, the Turks have made invaluable contributions to society right up till the decline of the Ottoman Empire a hundred years ago. Here's a brief list with just a few Arab and Ottoman inventions http://www.krysstal.com/inventions_08.html . http://www.krysstal.com/inventions_07.html . Pakistani Nobel Prize scientist Abdus Salam won the much coveted prize when Pakistan was a state in it's infancy (and still is). A few more inventions are described here http://www.geocities.com/mutmainaa/history/muslim_inventors.html Here's a few more:

Scientists, Philosophers, and Mathematicians
Abdus Salam, physics
Abraham bar Hiyya Ha-Nasi
Abu'l-Hasan al-Uqlidisi
Abu Al-Qasim, medicine
Abu Musa Jabir Ibn_Hayyan, (Geber) chemistry
Abu Nasr Mansur, mathematics
Ahmed H. Zewail, chemistry
Ahmad ibn Yusuf, mathematics
Al Battani, astronomer
Al-Jazari, engineering
Al-Jawhari, mathematics
Al-Khwarizmi, mathematics
Al-Kindi, mathematics
Alhazen, mathematics
Averroes, medicine
Avicenna, medicine
Bacharuddin Jusuf Habibie
Biruni, mathematics
Farabi, chemist and philosopher
Lotfi Askar Zadeh, father of fuzzy logic
Rashad Khalifa, biochemist
Mahmoud Hessaby, engineering
Muhammad al-Idrisi, geography and cartography.
Nasir_al-Din_Tusi, scientist, philosopher
Omar Khayyam, poet, mathematician, and astronomer
Rhazes, medicine, chemist and physicist
Thabit ibn Qurra, Astronomy, mathematics and Medicine
Ulugh Beg, astronomer, mathematician

http://www.byegm.gov.tr/YAYINLARIMIZ/newspot/2003/july-aug/n7.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sakip_Sabanci
http://www.forbes.com/finance/lists/10/2003/LIR.jhtml?passListId=10&passYear=2003&passListType=Person&uniqueId=HDKF&datatype=Person

I could go on all night long but even you must be able to get the idea. However, talking to you is like talking to a zit squeezing, belching, giggly little fart generating schoolkid going through all the hormonally-instigated tantrums of puberty, causing you at first to "lyao" and then getting frustrated because you cant dispute a calculation - a bit like the fat kid that everyone beats up on at school.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » India or Pakistan
  3. » Page 4
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 01/16/2025 at 10:25:20