Sikhs threaten agitation if security not provided

[Donatello]

not a beacon of peace but i must say we are miles ahead of you guys in treating our minorities .

Thousands of muslims and sikh people killed in India and this guy is measuring how many miles one is ahead of the other.

Nice.

 

[Indrani]

@Indrani You are getting into futile discussion. My two cents, baki tussi mere toh sayane ho...

Aare, I was just time passing with oye_natta. More distressing is the Indians' arguments where they call India hell and what not.

 

[qamar1990]

May be in rich houses, but do you really think that the Pakistani economy has been fair to all those people who lost their jobs because the factories closed down? How is employment situation in Pakistan for Pakistani's life to revolve around food?

pakistan economy might be bad… but food wise we are ok…. we don't let one another starve. most of our population is in punjab which couldmake enough food to feed india… so just do the math.

 

[Indrani]

pakistan economy might be bad… but food wise we are ok…. we don't let one another starve. most of our population is in punjab which couldmake enough food to feed india… so just do the math.

Okay, if you feel and believe your people are healthier and wealthier good for you.

 

[qamar1990]

Okay, if you feel and believe your people are healthier and wealthier good for you.

they is no doubt about it

 

[blood]

Thousands of muslims and sikh people killed in India and this guy is measuring how many miles one is ahead of the other.

Nice.

first of all i care only about 1984 , the other riots with muslims had muslims responsible to , so no one is going to apologize for what happened with muslims bcz they were partly responsible for it .

secondly in there is a difference between riots and systematic cleansing , go figure .

thirdly , population of minorities in india has never gone down , while with pakistan we all know .

fourthly , pakistan is an islamic republic , its obvious non muslims become a second class citizens with less constitutional rights . In india thats not the case since its defined as a secular state .
now that the mullahs in your country are done with hindus , sikhs & christians they have shifted their focus to shia & ahmedi , when they are done with them aswell they will create more minorities from the majority to continue their savage practices .

 

[Arjunsingh]

Sikhs in general are tall people, but I see many others too very tall given the number of 6 and 6+ feet tall guys one sees nowadays. I just gave Jains as an example. Hindus who traditionally do not eat meat do not eat meat even if they grow rich just like the Jains. For eg. Lakshmi Mittal is one of the richest guy in UK, he is still a vegetarian. So being rich has nothing to do with meat eating in India. Yes, a case can be made that those who are traditionally meat eaters can up their consumption of meat when their income levels increase.

Vegetarianism is one of the major causes of the poor Indian physique. Even Laksmi Mittal is a very poor specimen of manhood.

 

[dil_dil]

All the examples given by me can be considered as case studies of the general behavior of Indian people and vegetarians in general. That is how studies are done. No one can go and ask all the 1.2 billion people about their food habits. Also from what I know of Pakistanis, majority cannot afford meat and so most often only eat daal and aloo and more daal and aloo. So even the higher average consumption of meat in Pakistanis is only because the wealthier sections of Pakistani population are more carnivorous.

Pakistanis on average consume 6-7 times more meat then Indians. Considiring India have 7 times more population, it means both countries eat same amount of meat. Poor people can't afford meat, as is the case with average Indian. Because in west i have seen Indians not even sparing dog meat.

UN and world bank reports do not lie.

 

[Arjunsingh]

Aare, I was just time passing with oye_natta. More distressing is the Indians' arguments where they call India hell and what not.

You obviously have no idea about the rural countryside of India, especially of the Eastern states. The nutritional profile there is not any better than sub Saharan Africa.

 

[Indrani]

Vegetarianism is one of the major causes of the poor Indian physique. Even Laksmi Mittal is a very poor specimen of manhood.

I do not think Indian physique is poor. Even if all Indians eat up all the animals in the world they are not going to be as tall as the Danes or Africans on average, only they will end up being extremely obese medium height people. You need to understand people are not built the same everywhere. A southern European will always be shorter than a Northern European even though they may eat the same amount of meat. Lakshmi Mittal will be preferable over many many Mr. Universes to most women in this world. There is nothing he needs to prove anymore.

Pakistanis on average consume 6-7 times more meat then Indians. Considiring India have 7 times more population, it means both countries eat same amount of meat. Poor people can't afford meat, as is the case with average Indian. Because in west i have seen Indians not even sparing dog meat.

UN and world bank reports do not lie.

Okay.

 

[Arjunsingh]

I do not think Indian physique is poor. Even if all Indians eat up all the animals in the world they are not going to be as tall as the Danes or Africans on average, only they will end up being extremely obese medium height people. You need to understand people are not built the same everywhere. A southern European will always be shorter than a Northern European even though they may eat the same amount of meat. Lakshmi Mittal will be preferable over many many Mr. Universes to most women in this world. There is nothing he needs to prove anymore.

Not true... consider the following facts

1. Average height of Europeans in the 16-17 century was only about 152 cms. For his time, Napolean was an average heighted man.
2. The Indians were of far better physique than the British in the early colonial periods. Look up the battle paintings made by the British themselves - the Indians are heavier and taller.
3. the Japanese were so puny in the earlier part of 20th Century - now the number of 6 footers is very common.
4. See how tall children in the well off families of Delhi are - more than 6 feet is extremely common.

Racial height is mostly bull.... physique is correlated to food and physical activity. Indians, due to faulty food habits, have one of the poorest musculatures, especially in the South and the East.

 

[dil_dil]

I do not think Indian physique is poor. Even if all Indians eat up all the animals in the world they are not going to be as tall as the Danes or Africans on average, only they will end up being extremely obese medium height people. You need to understand people are not built the same everywhere. A southern European will always be shorter than a Northern European even though they may eat the same amount of meat. Lakshmi Mittal will be preferable over many many Mr. Universes to most women in this world. There is nothing he needs to prove anymore.

This is horse shit, if Indians started eating meat regularly then i can guarantee you that in 200-300 years they will be taller then today. Cow meat helps people get taller.

And read about Europeans height, Northen ones got taller in last 200-300 years.

 

[Indrani]

You obviously have no idea about the rural countryside of India, especially of the Eastern states. The nutritional profile there is not any better than sub Saharan Africa.

I doubt if you can compute data properly. The latest I read was around 300 million very poor people in India. If we were to account for malnutrition of children only in this segment, then they will not account for 40% of Indian children population. Then there are children even in well off sections of the society who could be malnourished but it has nothing to do with nonavailability of food.

 

[Arjunsingh]

I doubt if you can compute data properly. The latest I read was around 300 million very poor people in India. If we were to account for malnutrition of children only in this segment, then they will not account for 40% of Indian children population. Then there are children even in well off sections of the society who could be malnourished but it has nothing to do with nonavailability of food.

Poor food habits also. Eating polished rice with little or no dal is guaranteed to make you malnourished, which is why it is mostly in East and South. In the not so poor sections, deficiency is of protein, not calories.

 

[dil_dil]

I doubt if you can compute data properly. The latest I read was around 300 million very poor people in India. If we were to account for malnutrition of children only in this segment, then they will not account for 40% of Indian children population. Then there are children even in well off sections of the society who could be malnourished but it has nothing to do with nonavailability of food.

Do you think there is anything wrong with India a part from muslims?