A Bollywood Hinduvta باجی راؤ مستانی وغیرہ وغیرہ

[Divergent]

Dangal has made about a 1000 crore in China which is just plain crazy in terms of numbers.

Yes I heard that did well, The Khans especially Amir Khan usually have unique ideas to offer

 

[Mian Babban]

Look at the post following yours - that explains the Lahore Syndrome.

Stop trolling

 

[Jackdaws]

Stop trolling

I am not. The post following yours reinforced the point I was making. Clearly, for that poster killing "lacs and crores" makes the killer praiseworthy.

 

[Hamzay]

Right. Which explains the conversion of girls in Sindh. The state-sanctioned persecution of the Ahmadiyas. The kidnap and killing of Daniel Pearl. The shooting at the Sri Lankan team.

We also heard of forced conversion of Hindu girls but it's not a norm. All such reports were circulated post 9/11 era, and the way they were projected makes them wrapped in an agenda.

We don't call it state-sanctioned persecution. They are not forced to convert to the majority faith. They are not killed by the state. They are believed to be a sect created by the British to attack Islam and so we decided to deal with them legally through the Constitution.

Daniel Pearl was not killed because he was Jew. He was killed because he was believed to be part of war on terror. He was killed by Al-Qaida which was created by the CIA.

Shooting of Sri Lankan team was perpetrated by Indian RAW trained and funded agents in a bid to isolate Pakistan. India was successful in this terrorist attempt because International cricket stopped happening in our country.

The friendly relation with the Taliban regime and not stopping them from taking down the Bamiyan Buddhas.

In this vandalism, Taliban are equal to Indians! Remember Babari Masjid? It was your Saffronian BJP which demolished it and you elected their leaders as representative of the whole India (Prime Minister) again and again...

Taliban wear black turbans, Hinduvta champs wear Saffron; yes?

One of such terrorists who was involved in the systematic killing of Gujrati Muslims was elected as your Prime Minister, shame; isn't it?

A Pakistani bowler who didn't get selected in IPL blamed "Hindu ki saazish"; Ahmed Shahzad asked a Sri Lankan cricketer to convert to Islam or burn in hell. Stop selling the "Pakistanis are broadminded" product - because no one is buying.

I'm sure you've heard of this crap from the Bollywood News Service called Indian media.

Nice of you randomly add a zero. The Maratha Army numbered 70,000 not 7 lac. You really wonder what rubbish they teach in the madrassas in Pakistan in the name of history.

So the Mother India was being defended by only this huge '70,000' band of Bollywood Idols? The rest of millions of Indians were out to play Holi?

Excellent analogy.

Movies such as 'Tubelight' will target Chinese audience as it has a 'Chinese' elements, therefore slowly changing the narrative through entertainment.

Chinese are bad too; they don't wear dhotis and they eat dogs, donkeys, and cows - everything.

 

[Mian Babban]

LOL - the education in a madrassa.

First of all 700000 is the same as 7 lac - clearly since they are known as Hindu numerals, it seems they are not taught in the madrassa.

This is not from a madrassa text-book. Read it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Battle_of_Panipat

Drink urine? Why? Is this a new Pakistani delicacy to prop up your nearly bankrupt economy?

Non-sense. Indians play down the trauma of the defeat that Marathas suffered in the battle of Panipat , they even claim that Maratha army was smaller in size than Afghan's which is not supported by any Primary source. Hindutva history is a big joke

"
Strength of the two armies

Muhammad Jafar Shamlu , who was present at Panipat , is the most reliable and accurate source. He was in the camp of Shah Pasand Khan who formed the vanguard division of the army and Ahmad Shah's paiks and harkaras (couriers and messengers) were under him . According to him , Ahmad Shah Abdali had with him a total force of 1,14,000 horse and foot and 185 guns while the Maratha force, in addition to 30,000 Gardi infantry, numbered 3,50,000 horse and foot when Bhau entered Delhi.

According to Kashi Raj Pandit, another eyewitness of the battle, the estimated strength of Afghan army was 80,000 with 40,000 horse and 40,000 foot and they had 40 pieces of artillery while the Marathas were estimated to be 94,000 troops (55,000 cavalry, 15000 infantry, 15,000 Pindaris ,3,000 horse under Vakils of Rathore and Kacchi Rajputs, and 6,000 under Bhowani Shunkar who was left in Delhi) . Both sides had immense numbers of camp followers.

Gul-i-Rahmat of Sad Yar Khan (grandson of Hafiz Rahmat Khan) give the number of the Maratha forces at three lacs. According to Gulistan-i-Rahmat of Muhammad Mustajab Khan (son of Hafiz Rahmat Khan) , the Afghan army exceeded one hundred thousand fighting men consisting of thirty thousands Durrani horse, thirty thousands Rohilla horse and foot under Hafiz Rahmat Khan, fifteen thousands troops under Najib-ud-daula, seven thousands troops under Shuja-ud-Daula, five thousands troops under Ahmad Khan Bangash ; besides other of less note."

In local tales common among the people of Panipat the number of Maratha troops is raised to nine lacs, which seems an exaggeration."

 

[Kabira]

I am not. The post following yours reinforced the point I was making. Clearly, for that poster killing "lacs and crores" makes the killer praiseworthy.

I don't know if missile named after Taimur exist but there should be for making hindu population bit less in in this world. He clearly didn't solve your overpopulation problem.

 

[Hamzay]

Desperation of Hinduvta; Shooting in the foot to save Maratha-Idols
Bollywood Bed Time Films at stake

Some Indian friends have been claiming that Marathas at the 3rd Battle of Panipat were only 70,000 in number. They are doing it to prove that Marathas were a kind of American Seals and that's why they deserve to be subjects of top films like Bajirao Mastani to make Indian audience 'believe' that they belong to a fierce and valiant people so they need not be scared by Pakistanis and Chinese

However, Bollywood Fans fail to explain why Marathas managed to form only a small group of 70,000 warriors. What about the millions of sons of Mother India? Were they all there as spectators watching the '3rd Battle of Panipat' while sitting on tree branches? <<<---- this is the best explanation of the number '70,000' as those days they didn't have Bollywood

Let me add some more 'garam masala' to this by the fact that Muslim invaders like Mahmud of Ghazni, and Babur fought with a very small force and defeated the Indians. Keeping in view of this undeniable fact, you should believe that Ahmed Shah Abdali also came with a smaller force to crush the Maratha might which was a few times stronger. Muslims had already set examples of courage and bravery centuries ago for Ahmad Shah's forces.



Aurangzeb is bad for the following reason:

 

[Mian Babban]

Bajirao the great Hindu nationalist — That’s only in the movies

By Aakar Patel

I think I’ll write about Bajirao Mastani today. I have not seen the movie, nor do I intend to (only one Gujarati makes the cut as director of watchable pap and that is neither Sanjay Leela Bhansali nor Sajid Nadiadwala, but Manmohan Desai, a true master). However, I have read Bajirao Mastani’s reviews and one of them said to my alarm, that the film “explores the romantic side of 18th-century Maratha general Bajirao Ballal Bhat, who fought and won 40 battles against the Mughals with an aim to create a unified Hindu kingdom or Akhand Bharatvarsha”.

Whoa, hold it right there. First, the Marathas only ever wanted a Marathi kingdom for themselves. It was not unified, hardly akhand and never Hindu. The Marathas were despised by other Hindu rulers, and disliked by non-Marathi Hindus as well, as history shows us.

Bajirao and the Marathas campaigned for one thing alone, and it was called chauth. It meant a fourth of all revenue from other kingdoms, no matter what the faith of king and subject, and at collecting this Bajirao and the rest were efficient.

Maratha extortion caused Jaipur’s Ishwari Singh to commit suicide in December 1750. Sir Jadunath Sarkar (the Manmohan Desai of our historians) writes of what followed in his four-volume classic, Fall of the Mughal Empire: “On 10 January, some 4,000 Marathas entered Jaipur… (and) despising the helpless condition of a king propped up by their arms, seemed to have behaved towards Jaipur as a city taken by storm. Suddenly the pent-up hatred of the Rajputs burst forth; a riot broke out at noon, and the citizens attacked the unsuspecting Marathas. For nine hours slaughter and pillage raged.”

The Marathas first invaded Bengal in 1742. Of their behaviour, the New Cambridge History of India tells us that “all authorities, both Indian and European are agreed”. A contemporary writer calls them “slayers of pregnant women and infants” and Sarkar has recorded their gang-rape of Hindu women, inexplicably stuffing the mouths of their victims with dust and breaking their arms and tying them behind their backs. The only Indian to try and protect his subjects against the Marathas incidentally, was the Mughal governor Ali Vardi Khan. So much for Akhand Bharat. But I must say that the Marathas did not behave differently from any other ruler or warrior community, and the idea of a unified Hindu sentiment exists only in the imagination of those who get their history from the movies.

What the Marathas did striking north from the south, the Sikhs did in the opposite direction (they called their extortion ‘rakhi’, or protection, and it was 10% for all Indians). It is undeniably true on the other hand that the Marathas were originals.

It is important for this romance between Bajirao and Mastani that she knew how to ride well because there were no palanquins and howdahs travelling with the Marathas as there were with the Mughals.

The Marathas were the Mongols of South Asia, always on horseback, and with no infantry and no giant camp behind. Even the scavengers who followed them around, the bargis, rode. When the monsoons ended, the Maratha army, about 40,000 men, rode across the Narmada and Tapi, the border that marked off the Deccan, and attacked ‘Hindustan’.

Shivaji always organised this on a particular day: Dussehra (Bal Thackeray continued this tradition of declaring war on other Indians with his fiery Dussehra speeches). After the death of the peasant king, power passed to the Brahmin peshwas of whom the best was Bajirao. As the Mughal fighting ability and finances (the two being interchangeable) declined after Aurangzeb, the Marathas began penetrating increasingly into hitherto unknown territory in the north. It was the young Bajirao, then only in his teens, who determined, rightly, in one of these raids that the Mughals had gone soft and could no longer defend the realm.

From this point on, the Marathas began holding ground instead of just taking their horses back. It is why we see Marathi names like Holkar and Scindia and Gaekwad in parts of India they do not naturally belong. Everyone grabbed what they could and held onto it, there was no Hindu or Bharat angle to any of it.

Bajirao had one good battlefield victory, against Chin Qilich Khan, first Nizam of Hyderabad. It was a positional win, meaning the arrangement of Bajirao’s force gave no space for Khan and he gave up without much fighting. Like chess. A similar situation came in Panipat, when Abdali positioned the Marathas out. Bravely, the Marathas chose to fight and were slaughtered. Scindia (Jyotiraditya’s ancestor) and Holkar, it may interest the reader, fled the field, and the man who helped Abdali with supplies ensuring his win was Ala Singh. Abdali rewarded him by making him Maharaja of Patiala, Captain Amarinder Singh’s ancestor.

Can you spot any Hindu or nationalist angle to any of it? No, because it exists only in the movies.

http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/…/bajirao-the-gre…/

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

They had the whole of India at their control at one point of time. They installed the Mughal emperor on the throne of Delhi. They let him rule inside Delhi gate.
Nizam of Hyderabad surrendered to them, and he paid taxes for his rule.

Tipu Sultan was more than good to Hindus under his kingdom. But he wasnt to the areas he conquered. Especially the Malabar region. Thats a well documented fact written by Tipu himself.

Anyway most of the Rajputs themselves hated Marathas cos of their act of extracting harsh tribute. The Marathas were unforgiving that they tried to supress them along with the Mughal army. Its not as if Marathas are the representatives of entire Hindu empire. At many point of times, they were at war with lots of Hindu kingdoms too. Its just they used the bogey Hindu empire for political reasons. Much like the exiled Nawab of Oudh to appealed to Abdali to invade Marathas to save Muslims. And Abdali invaded cos Marathas took the food basket Punjab from them and they were facing food shortages and not for "Muslim Unity" BS. And then after war, he sent the peace emissionary stating that he dont want a war and he wont extend his border beyond some point in Punjab.

Marathas were invited to Panjab by Adina Baig, a panjabi peasant who through his deceitful nature became the most powerful ruler of Panjab.

That man had ties with all Mughals,Sikh misl and Marathas...

He actually used all of them against each other as his pawns to stay in power.

 

[Mugwop]

Yep . Those People are called ISPR .

Wow! That's a new one for me, ISPR movies being played in india

 

[Kabira]

Marathas were religious hindus but not necessarily like current day hindutvas who try to unite hindus irrespective of castes and ethnicity. They did well by uniting under their leaders and conquering lands. Bajirao was brahmin.

Maratha leaders were brahmins who make up minuscule population of Maharashtra but we know they tend to be very religious.

 

[Jackdaws]

We also heard of forced conversion of Hindu girls but it's not a norm. All such reports were circulated post 9/11 era, and the way they were projected makes them wrapped in an agenda.

We don't call it state-sanctioned persecution. They are not forced to convert to the majority faith. They are not killed by the state. They are believed to be a sect created by the British to attack Islam and so we decided to deal with them legally through the Constitution.

Daniel Pearl was not killed because he was Jew. He was killed because he was believed to be part of war on terror. He was killed by Al-Qaida which was created by the CIA.

Shooting of Sri Lankan team was perpetrated by Indian RAW trained and funded agents in a bid to isolate Pakistan. India was successful in this terrorist attempt because International cricket stopped happening in our country.



In this vandalism, Taliban are equal to Indians! Remember Babari Masjid? It was your Saffronian BJP which demolished it and you elected their leaders as representative of the whole India (Prime Minister) again and again...

Taliban wear black turbans, Hinduvta champs wear Saffron; yes?

One of such terrorists who was involved in the systematic killing of Gujrati Muslims was elected as your Prime Minister, shame; isn't it?



I'm sure you've heard of this crap from the Bollywood News Service called Indian media.



So the Mother India was being defended by only this huge '70,000' band of Bollywood Idols? The rest of millions of Indians were out to play Holi?



Chinese are bad too; they don't wear dhotis and they eat dogs, donkeys, and cows - everything.

LOL. Looks like a madrassa reunion on this thread when facts were pointed out -

Hindu ki Zaniyaat - I am sure that warms the hearts of the Hindu citizens of Pakistan.

State sanctioned persecution of Ahmadiyas - http://nation.com.pk/blogs/10-May-2...port-the-state-sanctioned-apartheid-continues

RAW was behind the Sri Lankan cricket team attack? LOL - where do you guys pull such stuff from? Was Sohail Tanvir heading the investigation?

Last words of Daniel Pearl before he was executed by Pakistanis -

"I am an American Jew. My mother is a Jew. My father in a Jew. I am a Jew." - yet, of course he wasn't killed because he was a Jew.

Bajirao the great Hindu nationalist — That’s only in the movies

By Aakar Patel

I think I’ll write about Bajirao Mastani today. I have not seen the movie, nor do I intend to (only one Gujarati makes the cut as director of watchable pap and that is neither Sanjay Leela Bhansali nor Sajid Nadiadwala, but Manmohan Desai, a true master). However, I have read Bajirao Mastani’s reviews and one of them said to my alarm, that the film “explores the romantic side of 18th-century Maratha general Bajirao Ballal Bhat, who fought and won 40 battles against the Mughals with an aim to create a unified Hindu kingdom or Akhand Bharatvarsha”.

Whoa, hold it right there. First, the Marathas only ever wanted a Marathi kingdom for themselves. It was not unified, hardly akhand and never Hindu. The Marathas were despised by other Hindu rulers, and disliked by non-Marathi Hindus as well, as history shows us.

Bajirao and the Marathas campaigned for one thing alone, and it was called chauth. It meant a fourth of all revenue from other kingdoms, no matter what the faith of king and subject, and at collecting this Bajirao and the rest were efficient.

Maratha extortion caused Jaipur’s Ishwari Singh to commit suicide in December 1750. Sir Jadunath Sarkar (the Manmohan Desai of our historians) writes of what followed in his four-volume classic, Fall of the Mughal Empire: “On 10 January, some 4,000 Marathas entered Jaipur… (and) despising the helpless condition of a king propped up by their arms, seemed to have behaved towards Jaipur as a city taken by storm. Suddenly the pent-up hatred of the Rajputs burst forth; a riot broke out at noon, and the citizens attacked the unsuspecting Marathas. For nine hours slaughter and pillage raged.”

The Marathas first invaded Bengal in 1742. Of their behaviour, the New Cambridge History of India tells us that “all authorities, both Indian and European are agreed”. A contemporary writer calls them “slayers of pregnant women and infants” and Sarkar has recorded their gang-rape of Hindu women, inexplicably stuffing the mouths of their victims with dust and breaking their arms and tying them behind their backs. The only Indian to try and protect his subjects against the Marathas incidentally, was the Mughal governor Ali Vardi Khan. So much for Akhand Bharat. But I must say that the Marathas did not behave differently from any other ruler or warrior community, and the idea of a unified Hindu sentiment exists only in the imagination of those who get their history from the movies.

What the Marathas did striking north from the south, the Sikhs did in the opposite direction (they called their extortion ‘rakhi’, or protection, and it was 10% for all Indians). It is undeniably true on the other hand that the Marathas were originals.

It is important for this romance between Bajirao and Mastani that she knew how to ride well because there were no palanquins and howdahs travelling with the Marathas as there were with the Mughals.

The Marathas were the Mongols of South Asia, always on horseback, and with no infantry and no giant camp behind. Even the scavengers who followed them around, the bargis, rode. When the monsoons ended, the Maratha army, about 40,000 men, rode across the Narmada and Tapi, the border that marked off the Deccan, and attacked ‘Hindustan’.

Shivaji always organised this on a particular day: Dussehra (Bal Thackeray continued this tradition of declaring war on other Indians with his fiery Dussehra speeches). After the death of the peasant king, power passed to the Brahmin peshwas of whom the best was Bajirao. As the Mughal fighting ability and finances (the two being interchangeable) declined after Aurangzeb, the Marathas began penetrating increasingly into hitherto unknown territory in the north. It was the young Bajirao, then only in his teens, who determined, rightly, in one of these raids that the Mughals had gone soft and could no longer defend the realm.

From this point on, the Marathas began holding ground instead of just taking their horses back. It is why we see Marathi names like Holkar and Scindia and Gaekwad in parts of India they do not naturally belong. Everyone grabbed what they could and held onto it, there was no Hindu or Bharat angle to any of it.

Bajirao had one good battlefield victory, against Chin Qilich Khan, first Nizam of Hyderabad. It was a positional win, meaning the arrangement of Bajirao’s force gave no space for Khan and he gave up without much fighting. Like chess. A similar situation came in Panipat, when Abdali positioned the Marathas out. Bravely, the Marathas chose to fight and were slaughtered. Scindia (Jyotiraditya’s ancestor) and Holkar, it may interest the reader, fled the field, and the man who helped Abdali with supplies ensuring his win was Ala Singh. Abdali rewarded him by making him Maharaja of Patiala, Captain Amarinder Singh’s ancestor.

Can you spot any Hindu or nationalist angle to any of it? No, because it exists only in the movies.

http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/…/bajirao-the-gre…/

Of course they were not fighting for Hindutva - the concept itself did not exist. No dispute there.

 

[Mian Babban]

I love how committed they are to their fitness though

https://twitter.com/x/status/877377004256899072

 

[Hamzay]

LOL. Looks like a madrassa reunion on this thread when facts were pointed out -

Non-responsiveness to Taliban and Hinduvta vandalism implies you agree that Taliban and Bharat both are heavy weight champions of intolerance, and violence.

Bamiyan and Ayodhiya both have become symbols of fanatic regimes.

Hindu ki Zaniyaat - I am sure that warms the hearts of the Hindu citizens of Pakistan.

Well, I only presented my view above that I did not hate Hindus, Jews, Christians or the rest because of what they believed. I am not responsible for other people's actions. It was a bit shocking though to see how a race/religion (Hindu) was maligned using generalisation by Farah Hussain (host) and the two men. Any responsible Pakistani citizen including me would condemn such acts on public forums at least. We have a small minority of Hindu brothers and sisters in Pakistan who are as dear to us as Muslim Pakistanis are.

State sanctioned persecution of Ahmadiyas - http://nation.com.pk/blogs/10-May-2...port-the-state-sanctioned-apartheid-continues

This article shows Pakistan does have good freedom of speech; however, I do not agree with its content over all. I've already said that the Ahmadi issue had been dealt with in the Parliament in 1974 to avoid social unrest and violence, and I think it was a wise decision as we have not had any significant anti-Ahmadi riots in Pakistan afterward.

According to Pakistan's Constitution, Ahmadis, Hindus, Christians, Jews, Buddhists etc are considered Non-Muslim minorities and they are not entitled to be elected as head of government or head of state or any such key positions. Though, we lately had a Hindu Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan causing minor controversy.

RAW was behind the Sri Lankan cricket team attack? LOL - where do you guys pull such stuff from? Was Sohail Tanvir heading the investigation?

We learnt many things from the BajiRAW alias Kalbhushan Jhadav that one of our Abdali agents captured in Balochistan and the party finally began at ICJ. I've heard next year, there will be a Mujra at ICJ by some Indian Mastani and Pakistani spectators will watch the show showering loads of Kalbhushan 'rose petals' at her.

Last words of Daniel Pearl before he was executed by Pakistanis "I am an American Jew. My mother is a Jew. My father in a Jew. I am a Jew." - yet, of course he wasn't killed because he was a Jew.

I didn't know Al-Qaida terrorists were stupid enough to tell the world what his last words were. By releasing such a 'video' Al-Qaida terrorists ensured that Daniel Pearl became a hero.

I think you should borrow some common sense from me and next time get some 'elders' to watch your rebuttal videos for 'better comprehension' before posting them online.

And if you like you may ask some BajiRAW to contact their Al-Qaida Mastanas for further details of Daniel Pearl's execution.

 

[Jackdaws]

Non-responsiveness to Taliban and Hinduvta vandalism implies you agree that Taliban and Bharat both are heavy weight champions of intolerance, and violence.

Bamiyan and Ayodhiya both have become symbols of fanatic regimes.



Well, I only presented my view above that I did not hate Hindus, Jews, Christians or the rest because of what they believed. I am not responsible for other people's actions. It was a bit shocking though to see how a race/religion (Hindu) was maligned using generalisation by Farah Hussain (host) and the two men. Any responsible Pakistani citizen including me would condemn such acts on public forums at least. We have a small minority of Hindu brothers and sisters in Pakistan who are as dear to us as Muslim Pakistanis are.



This article shows Pakistan does have good freedom of speech; however, I do not agree with its content over all. I've already said that the Ahmadi issue had been dealt with in the Parliament in 1974 to avoid social unrest and violence, and I think it was a wise decision as we have not had any significant anti-Ahmadi riots in Pakistan afterward.

According to Pakistan's Constitution, Ahmadis, Hindus, Christians, Jews, Buddhists etc are considered Non-Muslim minorities and they are not entitled to be elected as head of government or head of state or any such key positions. Though, we lately had a Hindu Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan causing minor controversy.



We learnt many things from the BajiRAW alias Kalbhushan Jhadav that one of our Abdali agents captured in Balochistan and the party finally began at ICJ. I've heard next year, there will be a Mujra at ICJ by some Indian Mastani and Pakistani spectators will watch the show showering loads of Kalbhushan 'rose petals' at her.



I didn't know Al-Qaida terrorists were stupid enough to tell the world what his last words were. By releasing such a 'video' Al-Qaida terrorists ensured that Daniel Pearl became a hero.

I think you should borrow some common sense from me and next time get some 'elders' to watch your rebuttal videos for 'better comprehension' before posting them online.

And if you like you may ask some BajiRAW to contact their Al-Qaida Mastanas for further details of Daniel Pearl's execution.

LOL - what a rant.

1. Equating the work of a regime to the work of a number of mislead citizens can only happen in Pakistan - because there really is no writ of the State. In Bamiyan, the Buddhas were destroyed by the State. In Ayodhya the mosque was destroyed by a mob and immediately the State Govt was fired. But I can equate what happened in Bamiyan with what happened at the Jagannath Hall of Dacca University during Operation Searchlight.

2. And yet the "Hindu ki Zaniyat" reflects the mindset of the common Pakistani.

3. Your Constitution is irrelevant - it is seldom in force and often suspended.

4. Make it public instead of your whole cloak and dagger routine. Pak lawyer with the funny wig can do more mujra at the ICJ - we will enjoy the show. Meanwhile, keep begging India for more medical visas.

5. LOL - yes, Al-Qaida is not exactly known for its intelligence.