Social Reform Leaders OR Socially Engineered Products themselves?

[Guest]

The Peasants in Punjab were suffering in the hands of the moneylenders. The Land Alienation Act 1900 had failed in its objective of saving the agriculturist from the clutches of the moneylenders. At the top of it Plague had taken a toll of nearly four million people in Punjab which was followed by famine and earthquake in 1905.

http://www.punjabilok.com/misc/freedom/fre...gle_punjab1.htm

At the turn of the century there was a net population decline in Punjab due to the famine

Having a famine had nothing to do with Islamization, infact more Muslims died in the Bengal famine (natural considering that they were a slight majority) during the world war..

nothng to do with islamisation, but a lot to do with artificially induced poverty and desperation and creation of refugees. and yes muslims also died in the famines, when did i say they didnt??

punjab's "famines"/deaths were not entirely created by the british, just like the farmer suicides of andhra pradesh and vidharba are not british creations. money lenders had a role too. also it was not of the same proportion, and repeatedly neither.

all over the world the most prosperous countries have the humblest population growth. the biggest conclusion that can be drawn from low population growth, is that the female education is high (proven many many times over, high female education at least till primary level reduces population growth).

Progress does not mean being prosperous alone, progress also includes the capability to save your culture from Islamic inroads, many of the European countries lack the will and will be islamisised.

It's no use having money if you get screwed over by others.

And you don't know what you are talking about, higher female education does not necessarily reduce population growth as witnessed by Kerala where Muslims have the same education levels as xtians and Hindus but have double the birth rate of the state.

all over the world the biggest factor that arrested population growth is female education. that females in kerela breed twice as much as educated hindu females do, shows a lot about islam's ulterior designs and policies yes, but does not disprove what i said (female literracy corelates very highly to decreasing population).

european countries will be islamised because of their "pleasure based societies' and cos they are insourcing workers instead of outsourcing jobs (a better option).

you missed the point. i meant to say uttaranchal's population density would suddenly grow many fold if all u.p. hindus are shoved into uttaranchal. Almost all BD muslims moved into west bengal, during partition of bengal and then during 1947 and again during 1971. hence the artificially caused high population density of west bengal, and thus the need to arrest the growth.

There is no need to arrest anything and you are talking nonsense. BD Muslims never moved to WB in 1947, many moved out as witnessed by fall in Muslim % in WB in the 1951 census. They moved in during 1971 and have been moving in ever since.

i clarified my typo in that part of my post, and so you answer is rendered meaningless/un-necessary.


Simply export the excess Bengali Hindus to other states while continuing to maintain a high birth rate so that Muslim % will not grow and the very fact that BD Muslims are pouring in indicates that Bengal still has space left which the Muslims are filling in, if the Hindus kept their birth rate constant the Muslims would have no space left to fill and wouldn't enter.

the "exporting" occurs thanks to the commie holocaust that has run the manufacturing sector to the ground and has caused jobs to vanish from west bengal in general. with BB the trend has been arrested and in future loks likely to be reversed. (on a larger scale the same happened in india when all qualified indians headed for silicon valley and now the trend is arrested and in future more and more nri's will return).

the fact that BD muslims are pouring in shows that the bsf dont patrol eastern boundaries as much as they do on the north west (and its a lot easy to patrol the plains of bengal than the hills of kashmir).

as for space left - well then every country has space left including a holland and a japan, given that the entire population of the earth can be squeezed into the Island of Man.



Read the book before you start spouting nonsense, here are some statistics:

Geographical distribution of dowry deaths, 1994
Source: National Crimes Bureau, Home Ministry
Andhra Pradesh - 396
Arunachal Pradesh - 0
Assam - 13
Bihar - 296
Goa - 0
Gujarat - 105
Haryana - 191
Himachal Pradesh - 4
Jammu & Kashmir - 1
Karnataka - 170
Kerala - 9
Madhya Pradesh - 354
<span style='color:red'>Maharashtra - 519
Manipur - 0
Meghalaya - 0
Mizoram - 0
Nagaland - 2
Orissa - 169
Punjab - 117
Rajasthan - 298
Sikkim - 0
Tamilnadu - 83
Tripura - 6
Uttar Pradesh - 1977
West Bengal - 349 </span>

so why does the media have us believe that it takes place in the northern states alone?? infact often the media reports are straight from governt research papers and there too they never highlight a bangal or a maharashtra or a tamil nadu, but always a bihar or a haryana.


http://www.indiatogether.org/wehost/nodowri/stats.htm

Does it look like WB has no dowry at all?

it certainly doesnt. only that i have almost never read in any news paper or seen in any news channel about any deaths outside the "bimaru belt". maharashtra, andhra and bengal are all surprises to me.


Also Maharashtra was independent of Muslims for 150 years before the British came so why does it have a high rate of dowry deaths?

first can we establish that it does have a lot of dowry deaths?? somehow your one reference is not convincing enough. farmer suicides yes, but dowry??



It's the fault of Bengalis that Bengal had Muslim rule continuously

agreed. same applies to all parts of india.

not others fault and it was our fault that we had British rule,
no. the british found us as a nation in comatose, thanks to the muslim hammering.


since you don't seem to know your history Hindus were ruling most of India when the British entered the scene, so Muslims were nowhere in the picture except in some states like Bengal and Mysore.

really?? nabab of oudh, nabab of bengal, bahadur shah zafar, tipu sultan, ahmedabad kings and nabab of pataudi and nizam all hindus??

bengal will not be lost. and we dont want to catch up with muslims at breeding. i'll leave that to others.

I think they used to say the same thing about partition "partition will not happen" but they found out the reality too late and you will find it out too.
[right][snapback]59626[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

during partition we had no say. we have the 4th biggest standing army now. BIG difference in india's ability to control her destiny and boundaries between then and now. what you can say is that a civil war is inevitable and yes if such a thing occurs then bengal together with assam, kerela and the gangetic plain states of up and bihar are likely to be the scene of action.