What's new

A shaky, trembling dragon

Status
Not open for further replies.
As far as WC was concerned, he was deeply racist against Indians - look it up. Infact, he was deeply racist against pretty much all races that were not white. Read his comments about Arabs too.

really?? well we didnt see him going around gassing people because of their color

i dont think he hated people because of their color, however cutural differences and his opinion on peoples cultures, and line of thought etc might of given you the impression he was racist

for example

i think philippinos are stupid, they go to uni in their country and i know for a fact i was smarter then them after i completed high school lol

they might know the field they study in, but htey have no originality, they think differently, they are oblivious at times to common sense

i think lateral thinking is best, hence why western countrys are economically in good stead

now.. u could see this as racist... but it is in no way racist, just because i think that about philippino doesnt mean im racist... my gf is filipina, so its impossible. lol its just my opinion

god im tired i should go to sleep lol
 
.
hmm saw September 2, 2010 as post datee..btw are the data sources ame for both????

@@ ur secdond jibe, ur org req was 200 list not mine is better....

Post date is 2010 but data is 2009. Mine is post date 2010 and data 2010.

Mine was only talking about overall from the first list.
 
.
Post date is 2010 but data is 2009. Mine is post date 2010 and data 2010.

Mine was only talking about overall from the first list.

dude i said the POST date was 2010 which implied I DID NOT SEE THE SOURCE DATA 4m 2009

I Asked if the DATA SOURCES were same fro both surveys?? ie the survey bodies....
 
.
really?? well we didnt see him going around gassing people because of their color

i dont think he hated people because of their color, however cutural differences and his opinion on peoples cultures, and line of thought etc might of given you the impression he was racist

for example

i think philippinos are stupid, they go to uni in their country and i know for a fact i was smarter then them after i completed high school lol

they might know the field they study in, but htey have no originality, they think differently, they are oblivious at times to common sense

i think lateral thinking is best, hence why western countrys are economically in good stead

now.. u could see this as racist... but it is in no way racist, just because i think that about philippino doesnt mean im racist... my gf is filipina, so its impossible. lol its just my opinion

god im tired i should go to sleep lol

Not gas but he did manage to starve 3 million Bengalis to death.
 
.
dude i said the POST date was 2010 which implied I DID NOT SEE THE SOURCE DATA 4m 2009

I Asked if the DATA SOURCES were same fro both surveys?? ie the survey bodies....

Its a honest mistake.

And yes all three are from the same source.
 
.
He was the leader of Britain, the country which created yours.

Thats like saying Qing dynasty created China

The British transferred the sovereignty of the territories they held,it was our leaders who had to work on integrating the tributary states.

Political_integration_of_India


@Ontopic,

We give idiots a voice by posting such silly articles,there far better quality analysis out there.
 
. . . . .
Gandhi was a hardcore racist. The nation of India was founded by racists and is ruled by Italian fascists. A fitting successor to the 3rd Reich.

trinicenter.com - GANDHI & RACISM



Addressing a public meeting in Bombay on Sept. 26 1896 (CW II p. 74), Gandhi said:

Ours is one continued struggle against degradation sought to be inflicted upon us by the European, who desire to degrade us to the level of the raw Kaffir, whose occupation is hunting and whose sole ambition is to collect a certain number of cattle to buy a wife with, and then pass his life in indolence and nakedness.

In 1904, he wrote (CW. IV p. 193):

---------------



It is one thing to register natives who would not work, and whom it is very difficult to find out if they absent themselves, but it is another thing -and most insulting -to expect decent, hard-working, and respectable Indians, whose only fault is that they work too much, to have themselves registered and carry with them registration badges.

--------------


Now let us turn our attention to another and entirely unrepresented community-the Indian. He is in striking contrast with the native. While the native has been of little benefit to the State, it owes its prosperity largely to the Indians. While native loafers abound on every side, that species of humanity is almost unknown among Indians here.

Nothing could be further from the truth, that Gandhi fought against Apartheid, which many propagandists in later years wanted people to believe. He was all in favour of continuation of white domination and oppression of the blacks in South Africa.

-----------------

In this instance of the fire-arms, the Asiatic has been most improperly bracketed with the natives. The British Indian does not need any such restrictions as are imposed by the Bill on the natives regarding the carrying of fire-arms. The prominent race can remain so by preventing the native from arming himself. Is there a slightest vestige of justification for so preventing the British Indian?

-------------

The British Indian Association has always admitted the principle of white domination and has, therefore, no desire, on behalf of the community it represents, for any political rights just for the sake of them.
 
.
well whatever good as happened with your country is 90% your government and 10% people because people who cannot gather courage to raise voice against Communism can never do things on their own.While in India its 90% people..the common man and 10% government.Infrastructure is something that can be build in few years but trust,courage,pride and ambition requires generations of mind nurturing.I am not saying that we are very high spirited but still higher than you guys who are living in a make believe world with a very deep sadness for freedom inside.

Well we are mature enough to bring back the flamed thread so we should co-operate rather than fighting.

Justify your stand by replying to my post on No 20, please provide concrete fact while your at it. It help convince the rest that we are "missing"our so called freedom.
 
.
Gandhi was a hardcore racist. The nation of India was founded by racists and is ruled by Italian fascists. A fitting successor to the 3rd Reich.

trinicenter.com - GANDHI & RACISM



Addressing a public meeting in Bombay on Sept. 26 1896 (CW II p. 74), Gandhi said:

Ours is one continued struggle against degradation sought to be inflicted upon us by the European, who desire to degrade us to the level of the raw Kaffir, whose occupation is hunting and whose sole ambition is to collect a certain number of cattle to buy a wife with, and then pass his life in indolence and nakedness.

In 1904, he wrote (CW. IV p. 193):

---------------



It is one thing to register natives who would not work, and whom it is very difficult to find out if they absent themselves, but it is another thing -and most insulting -to expect decent, hard-working, and respectable Indians, whose only fault is that they work too much, to have themselves registered and carry with them registration badges.

--------------


Now let us turn our attention to another and entirely unrepresented community-the Indian. He is in striking contrast with the native. While the native has been of little benefit to the State, it owes its prosperity largely to the Indians. While native loafers abound on every side, that species of humanity is almost unknown among Indians here.

Nothing could be further from the truth, that Gandhi fought against Apartheid, which many propagandists in later years wanted people to believe. He was all in favour of continuation of white domination and oppression of the blacks in South Africa.

-----------------

In this instance of the fire-arms, the Asiatic has been most improperly bracketed with the natives. The British Indian does not need any such restrictions as are imposed by the Bill on the natives regarding the carrying of fire-arms. The prominent race can remain so by preventing the native from arming himself. Is there a slightest vestige of justification for so preventing the British Indian?

-------------

The British Indian Association has always admitted the principle of white domination and has, therefore, no desire, on behalf of the community it represents, for any political rights just for the sake of them.

He was a racist and people like Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther king were fools to take their inspiration of non violent movements from him?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
haters-gonna-hate-cat.jpg
 
. .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom