India horror: Terrified dogs wait to be slaughtered for meat in wet markets

[Vikram1]

I thought Hindus were vegetarians... Why are they eating snakes, monkeys, dogs, bats and rats as shown in the video???

And then you get lynched for eating regular beef??

Place shown in video is Manipur from North East India.
Manipur has mix (Christian and Hindus) population.

 

[Nike]

Manipur, well those area seems contain much Asiatic Tribal races like Naga, Assamese and so on.

 

[Shantanu_Left]

I already blessed you in our previous interaction, I won't repeat myself too often, feel like a teenage girl if I get too sweet lolol

My intention was not to let out my personal information here on PDF, because people start judging you rather than your arguments and put you in a box, but I've truly enjoyed interacting with you. In one of your post in another thread, you mentioned your ethnic makeup, mine is almost exactly the same.

It is such a shame that African pride, European pride, Latin pride exists, the south-east Asian nations also have a sense of unity but we just getting further apart. Not in a historical nationhood sense, as I do not believe in that, but I strongly desire a cultural unity, I've heard some Bhajan instrumental music being played live (well live but on tv lol), it is truly peaceful. There is a need to find a new narrative or there is no end to this madness.

Brother, India and Pakistan (and Bangladesh etc.) are practically the same country when you meet someone from any of these places in any other part of the world. But the moment you talk about it, everyone's eyebrows are raised. The Pakistanis will accuse me of pushing an Akhand Bharat agenda, and the Indian Sanghis will accuse me of pandering to the enemy/Islamists (whatever is their chosen vocabulary of the day to describe Pakistanis).

Partition kay baad hum jaisay tou kaheee kay na rahay.

 

[PakFactor]

Why the French (and European) eat horse meat?. Famine? Sick people and sick country.

Why British eat cow meat? Famine? Sick people and sick country (from Indian's perspective)

Why the US eat pork? famine? Sick people and sick country (from 2 billions Muslim's perspective)

Grow up and do not judge the world by your frog-in-well, primitive view. What is the problem with dog meat? It is part of our culture, the most advanced and forward-thinking culture in the world. The UK is no longer the world's center and we do not need to revolve around your culture.

Mongolia was once the greatest empire on earth, but look at it now. Same fate is awaiting you if you cannot accept the truth.

Your mentally regarded if you consider eating dogs and shit normal.

 

[namefield_empty]

@namefield_empty this is your developed north east ?

For some reason, the mods found it convenient to delete my post on this thread. There can not be any discussion if the hacks are bent on stifling ground views.

Edit: And issued me a warning also..

 

[DalalErMaNodi]

@Bilal9 @Atlas @Michael Corleone @X-ray Papa and they claim we will pole vault to North East, a place with no rule of law, angry tribals, wet markets, low human development and half our per capita income.

For some reason, the mods found it convenient to delete my post on this thread. There can not be any discussion if the hacks are bent on stifling ground views.

Edit: And issued me a warning also..

Which mod is that ?


One mod in particular is after me, I am sure of it.

Everytime someone reports my posts and this mod is online, they will go on a crusade against me and my posts.

 

[namefield_empty]

Which mod is that ?

Old adversary, goes by the pseudonym of Paksword.

 

[Michael Corleone]

@Bilal9 @Atlas @Michael Corleone @X-ray Papa and they claim we will pole vault to North East, a place with no rule of law, angry tribals, wet markets, low human development and half our per capita income.




Which mod is that ?


One mod in particular is after me, I am sure of it.

Everytime someone reports my posts and this mod is online, they will go on a crusade against me and my posts.

What does north east have to offer to a average Bengali. These people overestimate themselves

 

[DalalErMaNodi]

What does north east have to offer to a average Bengali. These people overestimate themselves

Especially when they use our roads, ports, river ports, riverine waterways to get themselves the goods they need for sustenance.


https://www.thedailystar.net/frontp...starts-first-trial-run-using-ctg-port-1931617


In a few years they will be fully reliant on our infrastructure to keep their NE afloat, if Dhaka has any brains they will know that we now have the upper hand on India when it comes to NE.



It is as easy as turning off a tap and NE will be left to fend for themselves.

 

[peagle]

Brother, India and Pakistan (and Bangladesh etc.) are practically the same country when you meet someone from any of these places in any other part of the world. But the moment you talk about it, everyone's eyebrows are raised. The Pakistanis will accuse me of pushing an Akhand Bharat agenda, and the Indian Sanghis will accuse me of pandering to the enemy/Islamists (whatever is their chosen vocabulary of the day to describe Pakistanis).

Partition kay baad hum jaisay tou kaheee kay na rahay.

I agree there is a lot of brotherly comradery, but there is also a lot of animosity when people meet, I can give plenty of examples, those comments that are passed when you least expect it, people love to pass comments but have no time to actually discuss anything, so the story never changes. There is no need to shying away from that, I believe in total honest discussion.

I believe this partition narrative is what is driving the hate. For the Muslims in India, there is forever "you people murdered our Bharat Mata" and for Pakistan, you are nothing, worthless and so on, it all comes from the partition narrative, the narrative of independence has a peaceful future because it presents different imagery.

British India or South Asia obviously was never a single country, it was a British colony and before that, there were many kingdoms like in Europe with different religions and ethnicities. A Punjabi is as different from a Tamil as he/she is from a Russian, that is a fact. And, like the Europeans there are a lot of shared identities, it does not make them or us one nation, once this is recognized, only then we can look forward to a peaceful future.

India, Pakistan and Bangladesh are modern nation-states, a modern construct, not a historical nation. Recognising ourselves as a single cultural grouping rather then a historical nation is factual, when we start with that, then we can move forward. Otherwise, nothing will change.

Please feel free to add anything if you believe I have represented anything wrongly.

I would request, please no one gets involved in this, this a discussion between two brothers, not an argument. Thank you.

 

[namefield_empty]

I don't eat dog meat, none of my relatives nor friends eat dog meat.
99% Chinese never eat dog meat.
99.9% young Chinese never eat dog meat.
99.99% young urban Chinese never eat dog meat.

But I think all animals are equal, black lives matter,

Valid point, i can assure you that roughly the same amount of people in the said places don't consume it either. Some do, but those woke individuals and organisations undertaking this crusade don't have any rights to selectively impose their self righteousness on others.

 

[Shantanu_Left]

I agree there is a lot of brotherly comradery, but there is also a lot of animosity when people meet, I can give plenty of examples, those comments that are passed when you least expect it, people love to pass comments but have no time to actually discuss anything, so the story never changes. There is no harm in shying away from that, I believe in total honest discussion.

I believe this partition narrative is what is driving the hate. For the Muslims in India, there is forever "you people murdered our Bharat Mata" and for Pakistan, you are nothing, worthless and so on, it all comes from the partition narrative, the narrative of independence has a peaceful future because it presents different imagery.

British India or South Asia obviously was never a single country, it was a British colony and before that, there were many kingdoms like in Europe with different religions and ethnicities. A Punjabi is as different from a Tamil as he/she is from a Russian, that is a fact. And, like the Europeans there are a lot of shared identities, it does not make them or us one nation, once this is recognized, only then we can look forward to a peaceful future.

India, Pakistan and Bangladesh are modern nation-states, a modern construct, not a historical nation. Recognising ourselves as a single cultural grouping rather then a historical nation is factual, when we start with that, then we can move forward. Otherwise, nothing will change.

Please feel free to add anything if you believe I have represented anything wrongly.

I would request, please no one gets involved in this, this a discussion between two brothers, not an argument. Thank you.

Very nicely put, Bhai. No I don't differ from you. The Indian subcontinent/South Asia is not one country, it never was throughout history. It's more similar to European Union though and there are far too many similarities to ignore. The subcontinent is a distinct culture from the rest of the world. Just because we focus on similarities does not mean we should reunite (I'm not a fan of the Berlin Wall parallels).

We Indians don't agree with the two nation theory based on religion alone but I understand the Pakistani perspective very well. Your Quaid e Azam wanted to separate from Congress-ruled India, and it is proper as 100% of Pakistanis agree with that view.

 

[peagle]

Very nicely put, Bhai. No I don't differ from you. The Indian subcontinent/South Asia is not one country, it never was throughout history. It's more similar to European Union though and there are far too many similarities to ignore. The subcontinent is a distinct culture from the rest of the world. Just because we focus on similarities does not mean we should reunite (I'm not a fan of the Berlin Wall parallels).

We Indians don't agree with the two nation theory based on religion alone but I understand the Pakistani perspective very well. Your Quaid e Azam wanted to separate from Congress-ruled India, and it is proper as 100% of Pakistanis agree with that view.

As I mentioned before we are a single cultural grouping, there are a lot of similarities, that no one is ignoring, nor should be ignored, but in this partition, we are "one" narrative everything else gets ignored.

Europe lives peacefully with itself now, they have lot more similarities then we do, many royal families have the same bloodlines to this day, British royal family had German name till world war 1 after which it was changed.
Arabs are a far more a singular nation then South Asians can ever be, but live peacefully in as different countries, without this hurt about an imagined past.

I honestly want someone to disprove me, or show me what the problem is, I just don't see it, it all looks manufactured, basic on a false idea of single historical nationhood. but I have to say you are among the rare Indians who see history as it was. But having said that, Punjabi and the Bengali are the only ones who know what partition is because they are the ones who were partitioned. And no one else.

The paramount recognition of identity is that it is self identifiable,
religious belief is always a part of that identification, how much a part can depend on how different groups choose to identify themselves. It is a fact that Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs and Christians have distinct identities, so why has it become a problem if Muslims identify themselves as a single group, it is not a problem for others.

Jews after thousands of years of living as different ethnicities, white, black, and brown but can identify as a single nation, Sikhism has been recognised by the UN as an ethnic marker so if a white or black person becomes a Sikh they can identify to a singular Sikh identity.

Christian Europe went to Jerusalem making a claim to holy land they had never set foot on before. They came from different countries with different ethnicities but identified as a Christian nation. Religious marker is a nation if that is how you choose to define yourself because identity is self-defined, that is exactly what the Hindutva project is, a Hindu nation. The two-nation theory was just that, protection of Muslim rights as grouping, I don't see whats to agree or disagree. The two-nation theory has been oversimplified because no one challenged the established interpretation.

I honestly would have loved to see a European union type arrangement in South Asia, I think it would have been acceptable to all sides, but it is becoming an increasingly unlikely future, with the Hindutva agenda at play right now. But let's see.

Please do offer a different interpretation of what I said if there is one, maybe I am not seeing it. Thank you.

 

[faithfulguy]

Very nicely put, Bhai. No I don't differ from you. The Indian subcontinent/South Asia is not one country, it never was throughout history. It's more similar to European Union though and there are far too many similarities to ignore. The subcontinent is a distinct culture from the rest of the world. Just because we focus on similarities does not mean we should reunite (I'm not a fan of the Berlin Wall parallels).

We Indians don't agree with the two nation theory based on religion alone but I understand the Pakistani perspective very well. Your Quaid e Azam wanted to separate from Congress-ruled India, and it is proper as 100% of Pakistanis agree with that view.

Indian subcontinent was “one country” under British rule. Prior, to that, most of Indian state were independent states. Sometime independent and sometimes rule as part of a bigger empire. However each part of India had its own language, culture and religion.

The one event that unified India is actually the 7 year war, where the British expelled French and Dutch presence in India. If France had been able to keep possess a big portion of India, than there would be a British India and a French India. And India would surely be further divided by a British and Francophone India. certainly, this India would not be one country as English is the one element that binds together India today.

As I mentioned before we are a single cultural grouping, there are a lot of similarities, that no one is ignoring, nor should be ignored, but in this partition, we are "one" narrative everything else gets ignored.

Europe lives peacefully with itself now, they have lot more similarities then we do, many royal families have the same bloodlines to this day, British royal family had German name till world war 1 after which it was changed.
Arabs are a far more a singular nation then South Asians can ever be, but live peacefully in as different countries, without this hurt about an imagined past.

I honestly want someone to disprove me, or show me what the problem is, I just don't see it, it all looks manufactured, basic on a false idea of single historical nationhood. but I have to say you are among the rare Indians who see history as it was. But having said that, Punjabi and the Bengali are the only ones who know what partition is because they are the ones who were partitioned. And no one else.

The paramount recognition of identity is that it is self identifiable,
religious belief is always a part of that identification, how much a part can depend on how different groups choose to identify themselves. It is a fact that Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs and Christians have distinct identities, so why has it become a problem if Muslims identify themselves as a single group, it is not a problem for others.

Jews after thousands of years of living as different ethnicities, white, black, and brown but can identify as a single nation, Sikhism has been recognised by the UN as an ethnic marker so if a white or black person becomes a Sikh they can identify to a singular Sikh identity.

Christian Europe went to Jerusalem making a claim to holy land they had never set foot on before. They came from different countries with different ethnicities but identified as a Christian nation. Religious marker is a nation if that is how you choose to define yourself because identity is self-defined, that is exactly what the Hindutva project is, a Hindu nation. The two-nation theory was just that, protection of Muslim rights as grouping, I don't see whats to agree or disagree. The two-nation theory has been oversimplified because no one challenged the established interpretation.

I honestly would have loved to see a European union type arrangement in South Asia, I think it would have been acceptable to all sides, but it is becoming an increasingly unlikely future, with the Hindutva agenda at play right now. But let's see.

Please do offer a different interpretation of what I said if there is one, maybe I am not seeing it. Thank you.

On your last remark, a European Union type organization in South Asia will be tremendous in bring in prosperity for South Asians. But it would require the dissolution of the existing Indian state. The question is if Indians today would do the right thing and revert to the states before the British arrival for the benefit of their children. I don’t see that happening as India today continue to serve as the neocolonial pawn of its western masters. Sad.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

As long as they are not pets, they cannot be treated as "companions." If you raise a cow as a pet, I'm pretty sure you can also call it a companion. Dogs bred for the purpose of slaughter should be treated as edible foods, not as a pet. There is no such thing as classifying an entire animal specie as a pet. I've always wondered about the taboo towards dog eating ... as long as they are not pets and are specifically bred for consumption, what is wrong with that? Eating a dog is just the same as eating a cow or a chicken.


No he's right. The dogs being slaughtered for consumption are not pets ... they're food just like cows. Horses are also domesticated animals and yet they are still eaten. Why is there no outrage towards that?

Like I said, if bred purposely as livestock, and reared humanely then nobody can complain about it, dog, horse or anything. Humans need to eat. I think the only issue is about humane conditions really.

My point about domesticated livestock (cows, pigs, sheep, chickens) is that these animals can be industrially farmed in a humane manner with minimal space because they're not wild animals. If wild animals are to be consumed, additional considerations are needed for their welfare.

But, as @Shantanu_Left has explained, I am probably in the wrong here anyway because the individuals consuming these animals appear to be of some tribal community. Usually, tribal communities get to do what they want in any country and hunt with spears or whatever as a special dispensation, which I have no problem with if that's the case.