Post 276:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Pierre Prakash: the paedophilia is common in India, where 45.000 children disappear each year.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->- Did he take into account the number of children from North-Central and North-East (esp. W Bengal) stolen by Dar-ul-Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia to become underfed camel jockeys?
I watched a documentary on this. The children get fed nothing to keep them light. They are 'disciplined' and many of them don't last too long. Parents languish in misery back home in India, and also Bangladesh where they also suffer from this.
- Did he also subtract the number of children that unsuspecting Hindu parents send to christo schools (because they think christian schools are better) only to find their children have been sent off to western countries for adoption - by christian foster parents?
- Which ones are proven to be paedophilia cases?
And of all the paedophilia cases there might be in India (regardless of whether any kids were kidnapped for this), did he subtract the number that were perpetrated by christo priests? How many unfortunate children remain then?
With references to 'India', they cover up exactly who did what to whom. They should list them by nationality and religious persuasion. That way, when they later choose to equate the initially non-sectarian-sounding India with 'Hinduism', as they inevitably will, we will at least know the data is more sensible.
Until they do a break-down by community and nationality, average Joe can't make out heads or tails from this vague reference. Just 'cause Indian kids get kidnapped doesn't mean the kidnappers are from India. And just 'cause they get kidnapped it doesn't mean they all end up with paedophilic vermin.
Pierre Prakash has no brains if he can't think of this for himself. But obviously he doesn't need brains, after all, he's got a <i>motive</i> for not collecting the relevant stats.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Pierre Prakash: the paedophilia is common in India, where 45.000 children disappear each year.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->- Did he take into account the number of children from North-Central and North-East (esp. W Bengal) stolen by Dar-ul-Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia to become underfed camel jockeys?
I watched a documentary on this. The children get fed nothing to keep them light. They are 'disciplined' and many of them don't last too long. Parents languish in misery back home in India, and also Bangladesh where they also suffer from this.
- Did he also subtract the number of children that unsuspecting Hindu parents send to christo schools (because they think christian schools are better) only to find their children have been sent off to western countries for adoption - by christian foster parents?
- Which ones are proven to be paedophilia cases?
And of all the paedophilia cases there might be in India (regardless of whether any kids were kidnapped for this), did he subtract the number that were perpetrated by christo priests? How many unfortunate children remain then?
With references to 'India', they cover up exactly who did what to whom. They should list them by nationality and religious persuasion. That way, when they later choose to equate the initially non-sectarian-sounding India with 'Hinduism', as they inevitably will, we will at least know the data is more sensible.
Until they do a break-down by community and nationality, average Joe can't make out heads or tails from this vague reference. Just 'cause Indian kids get kidnapped doesn't mean the kidnappers are from India. And just 'cause they get kidnapped it doesn't mean they all end up with paedophilic vermin.
Pierre Prakash has no brains if he can't think of this for himself. But obviously he doesn't need brains, after all, he's got a <i>motive</i> for not collecting the relevant stats.