My thoughts about Queen Elizabeth

G

Guynextdoor

Senior member
Dec 19, 2017
4,279
1,297
India
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Haha
Reactions: Lolwa, Amal, Paro and 1 other person
Guynextdoor said:
b****h be dead.....

And I hope the husband who wondered were we lying about the number of people you killed in Jaliianwala....hope you share a suite in hotel hell with him....

www.firstpost.com

When Queen Elizabeth II stopped short of apologising for Jallianwala massacre, husband Phillip questioned number of dead

The Jallianwala Bagh massacre saw British troops fire on thousands of unarmed people in Amritsar on 13 April, 1919. Even 100 years on, Britain has still made no official apology.
www.firstpost.com www.firstpost.com
Click to expand...
Full support.

May their bad karma bring sorrow to their kids too.
 
Ankit Kumar said:
Full support.

May their bad karma bring sorrow to their kids too.
Click to expand...

And the worst part is, it costs them NOTHING. She's not colonial power and it's been a century since the event happened. Out of decency she could have said 'we're sorry'. Instead the old fart declined it and the fart husband loudly wondered 'was it really that bad though'

I hope the old man had piles and suffered extensively with hemeroids for decades before he died.
 
Guynextdoor said:
And the worst part is, it costs them NOTHING. She's not colonial power and it's been a century since the event happened. Out of decency she could have said 'we're sorry'. Instead the old fart declined it and the fart husband loudly wondered 'was it really that bad though'

I hope the old man had piles and suffered extensively with hemeroids for decades before he died.
Click to expand...
Famines saw Indian kids go without milk while British officers in India arranged the same for thier dogs.

The barbarians shall suffer for the same. The will face the same thing which they did to us.
 
Guynextdoor said:
b****h be dead.....

And I hope the husband who wondered were we lying about the number of people you killed in Jaliianwala....hope you share a suite in hotel hell with him....

www.firstpost.com

When Queen Elizabeth II stopped short of apologising for Jallianwala massacre, husband Phillip questioned number of dead

The Jallianwala Bagh massacre saw British troops fire on thousands of unarmed people in Amritsar on 13 April, 1919. Even 100 years on, Britain has still made no official apology.
www.firstpost.com www.firstpost.com
Click to expand...
Her ancestors gave you this country, be thankful for that.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Lolwa, Amal and Ashwin
vstol Jockey said:
Wow. This is the most gross statement I have ever read about the so called contribution of British to India
Click to expand...
If they didn't come here, many of the member of this forum would be a foreigner to each other. Think about it, peole are now indians. Or else we all could be a citzen from maratha or mughal empires or mysore or Thirivithamkur or kashmir... All different countries.
 
Hydra said:
Her ancestors gave you this country, be thankful for that.
Click to expand...

her ancestors spent 200 years trying to convince us that India was not one country and could never be one country. It's called 'divide and rule'. You should look it up.
Hydra said:
If they didn't come here, many of the member of this forum would be a foreigner to each other. Think about it, peole are now indians. Or else we all could be a citzen from maratha or mughal empires or mysore or Thirivithamkur or kashmir... All different countries.
Click to expand...

yeah...their intention was to convice us that we ae foreigners to each other. Greatest briton to have ever lived' churchill said 'India is as much a country as the equator'

You should read your history better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amal
Guynextdoor said:
her ancestors spent 200 years trying to convince us that India was not one country and could never be one country. It's called 'divide and rule'. You should look it up.


yeah...their intention was to convice us that we ae foreigners to each other. Greatest briton to have ever lived' churchill said 'India is as much a country as the equator'

You should read your history better.
Click to expand...
If you are denying the facts like princely states, i cannot help. No one can teach an ignorant.
Ankit Kumar said:
This country was here before her ancestor's ansectors were stored as sperms in the testes of our ancestors.
Click to expand...
Geographically, yeas. Politically, never as you are seeing now.
 
Hydra said:
Geographically, yeas. Politically, never as you are seeing now.
Click to expand...
Even without the Britishers we would have had a nation by then. A bigger and more prosperous one, without our ancestors dieing like insects.

May the pain our elders faced seeing their own kids die of hunger be the fate of the every last Britisher in existence who inherited our wealth.

Death be upon all the 5000 or so members listed in the line of succession.
 
Ankit Kumar said:
Even without the Britishers we would have had a nation by then. A bigger and more prosperous one, without our ancestors dieing like insects.
Click to expand...
No, i have my own reason to beleive that it will never happen.
1) they all are princely states, in order to integrate it to one mation either these kings needs to submit his power to onr fellow, who will give up their power willingly?
2)integration by force, for a brief period one kingdom may get upperhand. But it will not sustain. The uprising & fall of maraths & mugha kingdom shows that .
3) A mass people movement like what we saw in early 20th century could integrate these states. But do you think that, like British rulers these kings will allow a man from society to come up & lead people against king? His body will hang upside down without head the very next morning.

We were integrated to nation, because british rule gave limited freedom to peoples to gather & move against british ruling. They cannot kill peope at their will. So basically a European nation came here and integrate us as nation first with common rule, this inturn united people living those areas.
Ankit Kumar said:
May the pain our elders faced seeing their own kids die of hunger be the fate of the every last Britisher in existence who inherited our wealth.
Click to expand...
Current generation has nothing to do with the atrocities happed during british rule. By that logic entire Iranians must dies with pain, because Nadirsha had done more atrocities to Indians than 190 years of British rule did to us.
 
Hydra said:
Current generation has nothing to do with the atrocities happed during british rule. By that logic entire Iranians must dies with pain, because Nadirsha had done more atrocities to Indians than 190 years of British rule did to us.
Click to expand...
I don't know what you follow in your personal life. But we have a concept of Kul Dev.

Kul Dev for us represents the collective good of our elders. Our village thrives and we survive because of the good karma of our ancestors.

I believe this and have personally seen this. Therefore I believe that however delayed it might be, the bad karma of the ancestors do catch up too.
 
Hydra said:
If you are denying the facts like princely states, i cannot help. No one can teach an ignorant.

Geographically, yeas. Politically, never as you are seeing now.
Click to expand...

princely states were PRESERVED by the British crown. They had no intentions of removing them. In fact Mountbatten had a 'third option' of princely states being independet until Nehru confronted him in Simla and asked him to stuff himself.

And fun fact - a VERY VERY big role in removing princely states was played by Gandhi. As he started growing older he started getting scared that he would die and the country will remain in pieces so, well before independence was achieved he started forcing princeley states to appoint congress loyalists as political agents. These guys wrecked the polity from inside even as congress workers did other damage through demonstrations and law and order collapse.

So:
Gandhi's political agents forced many princely states to capitulate politically before indepence day
Nehru prevented Mountbatten from offering a three way solution to states and restricted them to two- join India or Pak
The powerful states that resisted the above steps, patel integrated by either convincing them to join or invading them after indepence

The British had ZERO role in any of this. They wanted the princely states to continue if they had the chance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lolwa and Paro
Ankit Kumar said:
I don't know what you follow in your personal life. But we have a concept of Kul Dev.

Kul Dev for us represents the collective good of our elders. Our village thrives and we survive because of the good karma of our ancestors.

I believe this and have personally seen this. Therefore I believe that however delayed it might be, the bad karma of the ancestors do catch up too.
Click to expand...
Thats a lie feed in to our mind. You do good or bad, ot doesnt matters. Have you heard anything about Yazidis(hope i spell it correctly ), they brutally suffered in hand of ISIS, you think that their forefathers had done bad things in past & current generations suffering because of that by his/her fore father? If yeas, then i will call god or kul dev or what ever as the most sadistic thing existing in this universe along with North korean premiere. Hear that in NK, if you did mistake like conspiring to flee in to another country, you will be put in to jail & your upcoming three to four generations Will be send to labour camps. I am damn sure that god is not be like that.

My point is clear, of you did a bad thing then only you are responsible for the deeds , not your younger generations.
 
Guynextdoor said:
princely states were PRESERVED by the British crown. They had no intentions of removing them. In fact Mountbatten had a 'third option' of princely states being independet until Nehru confronted him in Simla and asked him to stuff himself.

And fun fact - a VERY VERY big role in removing princely states was played by Gandhi. As he started growing older he started getting scared that he would die and the country will remain in pieces so, well before independence was achieved he started forcing princeley states to appoint congress loyalists as political agents. These guys wrecked the polity from inside even as congress workers did other damage through demonstrations and law and order collapse.

So:
Gandhi's political agents forced many princely states to capitulate politically before indepence day
Nehru prevented Mountbatten from offering a three way solution to states and restricted them to two- join India or Pak
The powerful states that resisted the above steps, patel integrated by either convincing them to join or invading them after indepence

The British had ZERO role in any of this. They wanted the princely states to continue if they had the chance.
Click to expand...
There is a saying when comes to history, thete is no room for "if" in history. Still i wanna ask A simple query, if britishers didn't come here, what would have been the state of this geographical areas coming under present day india?
 
Hydra said:
There is a saying when comes to history, thete is no room for "if" in history. Still i wanna ask A simple query, if britishers didn't come here, what would have been the state of this geographical areas coming under present day india?
Click to expand...

There is a saying....don't dish out quotations just for the sake of quotations.

'If British had not come'...considering British actively tried to prevent integration of India to make their power perpetual, whatever the outcome would have been without their presence, their own role was never going to be conducive to such integration.

A 100 years of our nationalists trying to create a national ideantity AGAINST the british is what brought us here.

'See with the arrival of the bubonic plague we were forced to make so many medical innovations'...sure but millions died...try to be innovative even without the plague knocking at your door is the solution. no longlingly look back at the time when people fell dead like flies on the ground.
 
Guynextdoor said:
There is a saying....don't dish out quotations just for the sake of quotations.

'If British had not come'...considering British actively tried to prevent integration of India to make their power perpetual, whatever the outcome would have been without their presence, their own role was never going to be conducive to such integration.

A 100 years of our nationalists trying to create a national ideantity AGAINST the british is what brought us here.

'See with the arrival of the bubonic plague we were forced to make so many medical innovations'...sure but millions died...try to be innovative even without the plague knocking at your door is the solution. no longlingly look back at the time when people fell dead like flies on the ground.
Click to expand...
Post#12
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom