Active Knifer (London stand up) on Ohio State Campus

[GetInTheTruck]

Indians are some of the biggest lapdogs of white supremacy - look at @GetInTheTruck thinking he's one of the good ones; you're disgusting breh. Just know white people that voted trump are laughing at you.

What? India is still 80% Hindu, that's after 1000 years of Muslim aggression and another 200 years of european aggeession. Compare that to other parts of the world that let their native traditions succumb entirely to barbaric middle eastern ideologies, and that includes persia and europe. So who's really the lapdog? Indians by and large worship their own gods and adhere to their own customs, they arent running around like you pretending to be arabs or others praying to some jewish guy whos supposed to be gods son. If indians are wary of muslims its because they know their history.

 

[Black Nate Grey]

Shut your dumb ass up - should you as an American apologise for the actions of Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Why the fukk should a Somali apologise for the actions of another Somali?

Absolutely retarded argument

I'm Canadian.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Wait, wait, hold on a minute, you claim that Indians know their history...

What? India is still 80% Hindu, that's after 1000 years of Muslim aggression and another 200 years of european aggeession. Compare that to other parts of the world that let their native traditions succumb entirely to barbaric middle eastern ideologies, and that includes persia and europe. So who's really the lapdog? Indians by and large worship their own gods and adhere to their own customs, they arent running around like you pretending to be arabs or others praying to some jewish guy whos supposed to be gods son. If indians are wary of muslims its because they know their history.

And that Islam is violent by its very nature...

Islamic scholars are the ones who have labeled non Muslim lands as abodes of war, the religion by it's very nature commands violence and bloodshed. The rest of the world has a right to take appropriate measures of defense.

And then say that you were a freaking Muslim...

A lot of people here are aware that I was a practicing Muslim for quite a while, one of the reasons I had to let it go is because too many so called moderate Muslims have extremist views which I just couldn't get with. Sorry, but it is what it is. You can dress it up as much as you want.

So you were one of the ignorant ones?

Is your family Muslim or not? Are they the kind of violent people you are railing against here, or just idiots who are ignorant of their own religious teachings?

Or were you a Muslim convert? Is this some sort of thing where you starting practicing Islam to simp for some Muslim chick or chicks, and when it didn’t work out you flipped back to the traditional hate with a vengeance?



Which one was it? We deserve the truth.

What? India is still 80% Hindu, that's after 1000 years of Muslim aggression and another 200 years of european aggeession. Compare that to other parts of the world that let their native traditions succumb entirely to barbaric middle eastern ideologies, and that includes persia and europe. So who's really the lapdog? Indians by and large worship their own gods and adhere to their own customs, they arent running around like you pretending to be arabs or others praying to some jewish guy whos supposed to be gods son. If indians are wary of muslims its because they know their history.

Better not go mocking other people's religious beliefs around here. That ain't going nowhere good.

Do the religious beliefs you choose have anything to do with the nature of reality at all? Do you really choose your religious beliefs based on community solidarity, or "I didn't like some of the things that some of those 'moderates' believed", and not, you know, on the basis of the actual truth of reality?

@The Dankster India was under Islamic attack for over a millennium, but you want to cape for Muslims. Hilarious. Thank God India has a leader who doesn't give a fukk about what people like you think...it's about time.

I mean, it couldn't have been all that bad if after all that you were still willing to turn to Islam for a girl.

India has a 2,000+ year old history of constant warfare between different kings, with only the briefest respites. This “1000 year history of being attacked by Muslims” claim is a bunch of bs – all that means is that for one period, some of the various kings involved in the constant warfare happened to be Muslim, while before, after, and during that period they had all sorts of Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Christian, secular, and other kings trying to attack, conquer, and dominate various portions of the subcontinent.

The current fad of attacking the “evil Muslim rulers” as if they were significantly different than the Hindu rulers or the corporate rulers just comes from the agenda of trying to treat any religion other than Brahmin-sponsored Hinduism as something “foreign” and thus belonging to people who don’t belong in India. It’s an attempt to create division between India’s citizens, for the benefit of those who can control the majority. It’s the exact same thing that powered the maniac who killed Gandhi.

Most of the subcontinent was conquered by the Maurya Empire during the 4th and 3rd centuries BCE. From the 3rd century BC onwards Prakrit and Pali literature in the north and the Sangam literature in southern India started to flourish. Wootz steel originated in south India in the 3rd century BC and was exported to foreign countries. Various parts of India were ruled by numerous dynasties for the next 1,500 years, among which the Gupta Empire stands out. This period, witnessing a Hindu religious and intellectual resurgence, is known as the classical or "Golden Age of India". During this period, aspects of Indian civilisation, administration, culture, and religion (Hinduism and Buddhism) spread to much of Asia, while kingdoms in southern India had maritime business links with the Middle East and the Mediterranean. Indian cultural influence spread over many parts of Southeast Asia which led to the establishment of Indianised kingdoms in Southeast Asia (Greater India). The most significant event between the 7th and 11th century was the Tripartite struggle centred on Kannauj that lasted for more than two centuries between the Pala Empire, Rashtrakuta Empire, and Gurjara Pratihara Empire. Southern India saw the rise of multiple imperial powers from the middle of the fifth century, most notable being the Chalukya, Chola, Pallava, Chera, Pandyan, and Western Chalukya Empires. The Chola dynasty conquered southern India and successfully invaded parts of Southeast Asia, Sri Lanka, Maldives and Bengal[18] in the 11th century. The early medieval period Indian mathematics influenced the development of mathematics and astronomy in the Arab world and the Hindu numerals were introduced. Muslim rule started in parts of north India in the 13th century when the Delhi Sultanate was founded in 1206 CE by nomadic Central Asian Turks; though earlier Muslim conquests made limited inroads into modern Afghanistan and Pakistan as early as the 8th century. The Delhi Sultanate ruled the major part of northern India in the early 14th century, but declined in the late 14th century when several powerful Hindu states such as the Vijayanagara Empire, Gajapati Kingdom, Ahom Kingdom, as well as Rajput dynasties and states, such as Mewar dynasty, emerged. The 15th century saw the emergence of Sikhism. In the 16th century, Mughals came from Central Asia and gradually covered most of India. The Mughal Empire suffered a gradual decline in the early 18th century, which provided opportunities for the Maratha Empire, Sikh Empire and Mysore Kingdom to exercise control over large areas of the subcontinent. From the late 18th century to the mid-19th century, large areas of India were annexed by the British East India Company of the British Empire. Dissatisfaction with Company rule led to the Indian Rebellion of 1857, after which the British provinces of India were directly administered by the British Crown and witnessed a period of both rapid development of infrastructure and economic stagnation. During the first half of the 20th century, a nationwide struggle for independence was launched with the leading party involved being the Indian National Congress which was later joined by other organisations. The subcontinent gained independence from the United Kingdom in 1947, after the British provinces were partitioned into the dominions of India and Pakistan and the princely states all acceded to one of the new states.

I mean, that's a long ass history of various empires, dynasties, and imperial powers ruling India, and the ones highlighted green were a pretty small % of the whole.




But I guess for a certain type of high-caste/high-class Hinduvat, they just tell themselves that all those lower-down people loved being rules by those dynasties, it was only the "evil foreign Muslims" who made their life hard, right?


Muslims have been a significant part of the Indian population since independence, and yet the 200,000,000 Muslims in India have almost never been responsible for any sort of large-scale violence or terrorist attacks. When there have been terrorist attacks or mob violence in India, it’s more often directed against the Muslim community than by it. When there is an attack by Muslims, it’s invariably been foreigners working as agents of outside governments involved in land disputes with the Indian government. Only 18 Indians have joined Isis, and some of those were Hindus who converted. 99.9999% of the 200,000,000 Muslims in India don’t want to have anything to do with that.

As far as I know, there is only ONE religious movement with a major following in India which declares that the entire country and all its citizens, no matter what they personally believe, should be under the authority of the standards of a certain religious group. And it sure as hell ain’t Islam

 

[BunchePark]

nikkas in here mad again? lol

Take it from a miami boy fukk these nikkas and fukk who dont like it

I am atvmy cubicle with my shoes off no socks baby

If you got cut yesterday is the campus cutting the price on them loans???

Shiettttttttttt shoutout to my nikka clay d

 

[BunchePark]

Hindu this and muslim that shut yo religious hating on the next religion ass up

 

[BunchePark]

7.99 for 1 lb of publix tenders n yall mad lol why bruh

Wake up in the morning happy lol let these Hindus and Muslims live and enjoy they life you evil fukks

 

[Swagnificent]

Now somali brehs gon get that work by xenophobes and racists

black + muslim is the ultimate combo for stupid low-iq racist cacs and their allies, remember

+ immigrant.

They're like the triple threat of a cac's worst nightmare.

 

[GetInTheTruck]

Wait, wait, hold on a minute, you claim that Indians know their history...





And that Islam is violent by its very nature...




And then say that you were a freaking Muslim...





So you were one of the ignorant ones?

Is your family Muslim or not? Are they the kind of violent people you are railing against here, or just idiots who are ignorant of their own religious teachings?

Or were you a Muslim convert? Is this some sort of thing where you starting practicing Islam to simp for some Muslim chick or chicks, and when it didn’t work out you flipped back to the traditional hate with a vengeance?



Which one was it? We deserve the truth.








Better not go mocking other people's religious beliefs around here. That ain't going nowhere good.

Do the religious beliefs you choose have anything to do with the nature of reality at all? Do you really choose your religious beliefs based on community solidarity, or "I didn't like some of the things that some of those 'moderates' believed", and not, you know, on the basis of the actual truth of reality?






I mean, it couldn't have been all that bad if after all that you were still willing to turn to Islam for a girl.

India has a 2,000+ year old history of constant warfare between different kings, with only the briefest respites. This “1000 year history of being attacked by Muslims” claim is a bunch of bs – all that means is that for one period, some of the various kings involved in the constant warfare happened to be Muslim, while before, after, and during that period they had all sorts of Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Christian, secular, and other kings trying to attack, conquer, and dominate various portions of the subcontinent.

The current fad of attacking the “evil Muslim rulers” as if they were significantly different than the Hindu rulers or the corporate rulers just comes from the agenda of trying to treat any religion other than Brahmin-sponsored Hinduism as something “foreign” and thus belonging to people who don’t belong in India. It’s an attempt to create division between India’s citizens, for the benefit of those who can control the majority. It’s the exact same thing that powered the maniac who killed Gandhi.



I mean, that's a long ass history of various empires, dynasties, and imperial powers ruling India, and the ones highlighted green were a pretty small % of the whole.




But I guess for a certain type of high-caste/high-class Hinduvat, they just tell themselves that all those lower-down people loved being rules by those dynasties, it was only the "evil foreign Muslims" who made their life hard, right?


Muslims have been a significant part of the Indian population since independence, and yet the 200,000,000 Muslims in India have almost never been responsible for any sort of large-scale violence or terrorist attacks. When there have been terrorist attacks or mob violence in India, it’s more often directed against the Muslim community than by it. When there is an attack by Muslims, it’s invariably been foreigners working as agents of outside governments involved in land disputes with the Indian government. Only 18 Indians have joined Isis, and some of those were Hindus who converted. 99.9999% of the 200,000,000 Muslims in India don’t want to have anything to do with that.

As far as I know, there is only ONE religious movement with a major following in India which declares that the entire country and all its citizens, no matter what they personally believe, should be under the authority of the standards of a certain religious group. And it sure as hell ain’t Islam

You are new around here, a lot of higher learning posters and know the ledge posters from back on sohh are familiar with me being Muslim, and na it wasn't over no girl. There you go assuming shyt again, but it's all good.

The fact that you are in here caping for Muslims and trying to portray Hindus as the real aggressors tells me all I need to know about you. Every country that has ever existed has had internal skirmish and warfare, that doesnt equate to an outside foreign force coming in and attempting to usurp the entire populations cultural landscape and replace it with their own by force. Hindus never had campaigns to destroy other religious places of worship. Hindus don't go to other countries and blow shyt up while making demands on their host populations like extortionists. Zoroastrianism as a world religion still exists today only because of Hindus who gave parsis refuge from Muslim aggressors. Jews are in India today for the same reason. The problem with hindus over the years has been that they have been a little TOO tolerant, some are starting to wake up now and fakkits like you dont like it. Oh well, you don't have their best interests at heart anyway. You are a snake fam, you in india right now with your egyptian wife enjoying freedoms in India that you wouldn't even be able to sniff in some of these islamic shytholes. Why don't you go next door to Pakistan and try to practice a religion other than Islam, see what happens. Eat a dikk.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

You are new around here, a lot of higher learning posters and know the ledge posters from back on sohh are familiar with me being Muslim, and na it wasn't over no girl. There you go assuming shyt again, but it's all good.

So you aren't able to answer any of the questions, I see.

If Muslims are so obviously terrible, all the time, even the moderates, and this has been obvious through all of history, especially to Indians, and Indians know their history....

Then why were you a Muslim???
I mean, for a guy to say "Islam is violent by its very nature", and then say that he chose to be a practicing Muslim...

The fact that you are in here caping for Muslims and trying to portray Hindus as the real aggressors tells me all I need to know about you. Every country that has ever existed has had internal skirmish and warfare, that doesnt equate to an outside foreign force coming in and attempting to usurp the entire populations cultural landscape and replace it with their own by force. Hindus never had campaigns to destroy other religious places of worship.

Never? How old were you when this happened? Gujarat's Muslim heritage smashed in riots
And you were probably just a kid when this happened, but I'm sure you've heard about it. Demolition of the Babri Masjid - Wikipedia

Oh, wait, according to your party that doesn't count because mosques aren't religious places. Mosque is not a religious place, can be demolished any time: Subramanian Swamy

Hindus don't go to other countries and blow shyt up while making demands on their host populations like extortionists. Zoroastrianism as a world religion still exists today only because of Hindus who gave parsis refuge from Muslim aggressors. Jews are in India today for the same reason. The problem with hindus over the years has been that they have been a little TOO tolerant, some are starting to wake up now and fakkits like you dont like it. Oh well, you don't have their best interests at heart anyway.

Breh, Parsis are 0.005% of the Indian population and Jews are 0.0001%. No one is gonna care about them.

You are right that different religions have different strengths and weaknesses in terms of stated beliefs, and different populations of people have different strengths and weaknesses in terms of the actual practices of the people, which may or may not align with religious belief.

There could be a long-ass thread about horrific things that have been done in the name of Hinduism. I ain't going to list them because I don't go around hating on other people's religions like that, and because I don't equate everything that some person does in the name of religion with everyone else who practices a faith with that same name.

 

[JLova]

It's gonna be a tough road for the muslim brehs out there.

 

[ALonelyDad]

It's gonna be a tough road for the muslim brehs out there.

exactly what isis wants

 

[the cac mamba]

check this out

The Lantern - 8-25-16

go to page 5. theres an article the school paper did on this exact dude a while ago. he didnt want to pray in public because it reinforced muslim stereotypes. apparently a mass stabbing doesnt

 

[GetInTheTruck]

So you aren't able to answer any of the questions, I see.

If Muslims are so obviously terrible, all the time, even the moderates, and this has been obvious through all of history, especially to Indians, and Indians know their history....

Then why were you a Muslim???
I mean, for a guy to say "Islam is violent by its very nature", and then say that he chose to be a practicing Muslim...





Never? How old were you when this happened? Gujarat's Muslim heritage smashed in riots
And you were probably just a kid when this happened, but I'm sure you've heard about it. Demolition of the Babri Masjid - Wikipedia

Oh, wait, according to your party that doesn't count because mosques aren't religious places. http://www.dnaindia.com/india/repor...-destroyed-any-time-subramanian-swamy-2068922





Breh, Parsis are 0.005% of the Indian population and Jews are 0.0001%. No one is gonna care about them.

You are right that different religions have different strengths and weaknesses in terms of stated beliefs, and different populations of people have different strengths and weaknesses in terms of the actual practices of the people, which may or may not align with religious belief.

There could be a long-ass thread about horrific things that have been done in the name of Hinduism. I ain't going to list them because I don't go around hating on other people's religions like that, and because I don't equate everything that some person does in the name of religion with everyone else who practices a faith with that same name. You already KNOW that Indian Hindus have done certain kinds of reprehensible behavior to a greater degree than just about any other major population in modern history....and have avoided other kinds of reprehensible behavior. Bragging about the stuff your kinsmen have avoided just to shyt on other groups, while either denying or ignoring all the other unique ways that your own kinsmen could be critiqued as bad or worse...

That's some crap right there.

And I would never, ever do the work that I do and put up with the things I have to put up with there if I didn't have their best interests at heart. And you KNOW what kinds of things I have to put up with. Yet I've also had front-page newspaper features done on my work there, been profiled on television, and was given an award that to that point had never been given to a non-Indian before. I have plenty of Indian friends I would step in front of a bullet for, and ones who would do the same for me.

But I'm sure you know more about my life, my work, and my heart than any of them do because you read my posts on a messageboard.






Why the hell do you keep bringing up the ethnicity of my wife?

The last time you tried to make a racist attack on my wife and called her an "arab" who therefore was racially prohibited to "lecture an Indian on anything regarding morality", I pointed out to your ignorant butt that she was a Coptic Christian whose family has been African going back to the pyramids and had never had the slightest thing to do with any sort of violence or other public immorality, so now you're just dropping her parents' nationality to prove...what, exactly?

Not that my wife has ever cared to lecture you or any other Indian on anything...which was another reason your random grasping for racism was lame.

And I've spent plenty of time in Muslim, Buddhist, Communist, and Christian nations right next to India (Bangladesh, Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, Philippines) and my foreign visa'd behind had just as much freedom in all those places as it did in India. I have Muslim, atheist, and Hindu friends in Bangladesh who all get along great with each other and who all are treated with respect and freedom by their government as well. I do know, of course, that in different countries with different political situations, there are certain groups who are treated with massive injustice and whose members are quite persecuted. That's true in India as well, and for various Buddhist and atheist nations in Asia as well.

There's no false moral equivalency there. If you want to have an abstract ranking of religious freedom, India is nowhere near the top, and nowhere near the bottom.

But you really set yourself up for a lot of easy hatred when you try to spin all this hatred you have against practically every other group in the world.

As you tried to use against Black people earlier, there's a certain saying about glass houses and all.

I talk to you the way I do because I don't like you. In the other thread you made a lot of assumptions about me and attempted to talk down to me based on nothing more than pure hubris, and I didn't appreciate it. Here again you're assuming that I was a Muslim because of a girl, which isn't true at all. I was a Muslim because I have always been interested in religion and spirituality since a teenager and Islam attracted me. I fell out of favor with it because of personal experiences and my own study of the faith, it's doctrine, social aims, end goal, eschatology, etc....so I share that sometimes here. But even today, although I have reverted back to my own cultural roots a bit, I wouldn't consider myself a Hindu - if you want to get technical. I study Vedanta as a philosophy, when it comes to religious practices as far as ritualism and all that stuff is concerned that could vary day to day.

You keep bringing up the gujurat riots as if that wasnt preceeded by an attack on hindu pilgrims in the first place, where something like 60 people were burned to death. It was unfortunate but we have to be honest with ourselves and make sure we have the whole story. Muslim history in india is a long and bloody one, just as it is everywhere else, so of course everything isnt going to be all peaches and cream. Islam has always been expansionist in nature, so if that is the case, once the formally subverted populations get a little room to breathe there will be some blowback. It is what it is. India has accomodated Muslims more than any other nation on the planet. What more is needed?

Im glad you agree that India is no where near the bottom when it comes to religious tolerance.... now can you please tell me which Muslim countries are more tolerant? I used to work with a pakistani Christian named Solomon, his whole family had to flee to guess where...India, after partition because otherwise their heads would have probably rolled...but Indians are supposed to take you seriously when you make excuse after excuse for these clowns in the name of "tolerance."

 

[Professor Emeritus]

I talk to you the way I do because I don't like you. In the other thread you made a lot of assumptions about me and attempted to talk down to me based on nothing more than pure hubris, and I didn't appreciate it.

Wait, who was making assumptions about who in that thread?

You assumed I'd only been to India "a few times" and then you called me a "fakkit" before I had said one word about you. Then you ripped on my wife for supposedly being Arab (she's not) and claimed I was a "foreigner with feigned concern for the lowly native" and lied saying that I'd sent you PM's "about women brushed up on in crowded Indian markets" before I had made ONE assumption about your insecure American self. Not to mention all the other mocking you engaged in about the things that I actually did say about myself.

You were already ripping on me and talking down to me like crazy long before I put you in your place.

And of the few and very clearly stated assumptions I made, the ONLY one which you claimed I was wrong about was that your parents were wealthier than the average Indian....and if you really want me to believe that your parents were English speakers from Delhi and Bengaluru who immigrated to America and had you there in the 1980s or whatever while being poorer than the average Indian.

Here again you're assuming that I was a Muslim because of a girl, which isn't true at all.

No, I actually asked you a series of questions with various possibilities of quite a wide range:

"Is your family Muslim or not? Are they the kind of violent people you are railing against here, or just idiots who are ignorant of their own religious teachings? Or were you a Muslim convert? Is this some sort of thing where you starting practicing Islam to simp for some Muslim chick or chicks, and when it didn’t work out you flipped back to the traditional hate with a vengeance? Which one was it? We deserve the truth."

Later on in the same comment I made a joke about you going to Islam for a girl, but that was pretty obviously a joke and you had the whole series of questions to show that I was leaving the door open.

II was a Muslim because I have always been interested in religion and spirituality since a teenager and Islam attracted me. I fell out of favor with it because of personal experiences and my own study of the faith, it's doctrine, social aims, end goal, eschatology, etc....so I share that sometimes here. But even today, although I have reverted back to my own cultural roots a bit, I wouldn't consider myself a Hindu - if you want to get technical. I study Vedanta as a philosophy, when it comes to religious practices as far as ritualism and all that stuff is concerned that could vary day to day.

So you admit that despite having an Indian background, your personal and family's experience of Islam in reality was benign enough that you chose yourself to follow Islam for a significant time in your life.

I'm trying to understand the world where young GetInTheTruck can have such a positive experience of Islam that he actually became a Muslim, yet anyone else is an idiot for saying things as simple as "you shouldn't paint all Muslims with the same brush."

You keep bringing up the gujurat riots as if that wasnt preceeded by an attack on hindu pilgrims in the first place, where something like 60 people were burned to death. It was unfortunate but we have to be honest with ourselves and make sure we have the whole story.

So going on a rampage across the state and murdering thousands of innocent people and destroying hundreds of places of worship, at times under the orchestration of actual political figures in power, is justifiable because someone else committed a terrorist attack first?



It must have been shocking as hell when 9/11 happened in the States, and only 2-3 "Muslim-looking" people got murked by random racists and we didn't burn all their mosques down.

Muslim history in india is a long and bloody one, just as it is everywhere else, so of course everything isnt going to be all peaches and cream. Islam has always been expansionist in nature, so if that is the case, once the formally subverted populations get a little room to breathe there will be some blowback.

There isn't a single person alive whose grandparents, or great-grandparents, or great-great-great-great-great grandparents were a "subverted population" to Muslim rulers of India. Hell, there was oppression and massacres under the British in living memory and for a couple hundred years before that, but you don't see mobs of Indians killing White people and burning down all the churches. (Okay, maybe that happens from time to time, but not nearly on the same scale.)

It is what it is. India has accomodated Muslims more than any other nation on the planet. What more is needed?

When did this become a referendum on India's treatment of Muslims?

You claimed that Hindus never did a certain action, I proved rather easily that you were wrong. I ain't here to debate the institutional policies of India, I'm pointing out that your stereotypes and generalizations can come back to haunt you.

It's obvious that Muslims in India have had to go through some trials, and it's obvious that things could be worse. There are people in India, even politicians from the ruling party, who have advocated destroying more mosques, voiced support for mobs who killed Muslims on the mere rumor that they had eaten beef, stated that only Hindu-background Muslims should be allowed the vote, claimed that Muslims were all trying to lure their Hindu girls away, etc.

I think it's really great that the Father of India, Gandhi, the drafter of India's constitution, Ambedkar, and the first prime minister of India, Nehru, were all unified in the belief that people from all religious should be equal in India. But you also have to acknowledge that not everyone in India, including not all of the political parties, have agreed on that note. Do you even agree with the views of any of those three guys who set that standard?

Im glad you agree that India is no where near the bottom when it comes to religious tolerance.... now can you please tell me which Muslim countries are more tolerant? I used to work with a pakistani Christian named Solomon, his whole family had to flee to guess where...India, after partition because otherwise their heads would have probably rolled...but Indians are supposed to take you seriously when you make excuse after excuse for these clowns in the name of "tolerance."

Wait, what? You're talking about knowing someone who fled Pakistan after partition like that's some sort of evidence when millions of people fled India at the same time for the same reason?



I mean, you can compare yourself to Pakistan and all like being better than Pakistan is some sort of accomplishment, but that don't get you far.

India's ranking in this religious freedom index (5.0) is barely different than Bangladesh's (5.2) and pales in comparison to every Western nation on the list. And it says that in 2007 Bangladesh was at a 4.0, significantly better than India...as is Nigeria.

And the USCIRF report has India as a "Tier 2" religious oppression nation, "where governments engage in or tolerate violations that are serious but not CPC-level," while Bangladesh, Bahrain, and Kyrgyzstan are only Tier 3, "religious freedom concerns in six countries that do not meet CPC or Tier 2 thresholds." Of course, there are a lot of social, historical, AND religious reasons for the current political realities, so it would be ridiculous to simply list the nations by religion as if that explains the whole thrust. You can't name a Hindu country with better religious freedom than the USA, does that allow random Coli posters to dump on Hinduism?

 

[Biscayne]

For those endorsing the extreme vetting of Muslims entering the country, take note that this dude was only 18, and entered the country at an even younger age. What would have vetting done to prevent this attack?

He was radicalized via the CPU, and was pissed off at Govt interference in Somalia. It's not like he entered the US with as a full-fledged terrorist with an agenda.