As many of you would have encountered this article filled with lies & bigotry, which is financed by leftist-islamist media blocs including Scroll, wire, Aljazeera etc. The fake exaggeration in numbers of Jammu massacre is deliberately done to dwarf Hindu massacres in J&K in 1947.
OMG BATTA CAUGHT LYING flat. You cowards would never put your neck on line for Muslims ! Never Ever ! Nehru in PMs seat was aware of HariSingh, RSS and Master Tara Singh colluding to execute the #JammuMassacre. If he wished he could have stopped it ! (1/n)https://t.co/RioRxr8APa
— I am Kashmir ! (@KaeshurCraftsmn) January 4, 2021
These Hindu haters deliberately try to confuse this point, so as to support their filthy lies & Bigotry.
So the count should be less than 17k . Although a tragedy but nothing infront of Hindus who suffered complete annihilation in Mirpur, Rajauri etc.
Islamist misquote Snedden who just mention about the rumours of 237k and even mentions it as exaggeration. He literally writes that research is needed on Jammu massacre.
Although Like Jammu massacre, here he also doesn't give a concrete opinion but he doesn't mention it as exaggeration like in case of "Jammu massacre".
30k number is mentioned in Indian Ministry of Defense Record.
Next time they start vomiting lies, show them this thread and then ignore them.
Its worthless to argue with Zombies.
More from India
In his letters describing the India Mission, Carey has given us an insight into how the society functioned then, of how the minds of the people worked and what methods the missionaries used to approach and brainwash the common people.
It is entirely possible that,Carey in his arrogance of being the white man and hence more civilized,his inability to under the Hindu scriptures and his natural disdain for the learned community coupled with his inherent hatred for the idolaters may have exaggerated the incidents.
In fact, considering the venom with which he has spoken about Hinduism and it's practices, it's likely that he has exaggerated these incidents. But it cannot be denied that these incidents did happen even if they may not have been on scale at which Carey has described.
One of his journal entry mentions a debate which happened in a temple in front of around 200 people. Carey describes having debated with two learned men and goes on to say when both learned men failed to answer his questions, he went on to preach the gospel to the assembled crowd
In a letter dated 30th June,1795 he goes on to gleefully narate how Hindus were unaware of their own scriptures and how an supposed expert named a grammar book when he was questioned as which scripture said that the Murti is God.
William Carey landed on the Indian soil in the year 1793. He spent the remaining years of his life in India. He was a British missionary, a translator and a social reformer who is best known for having the practice of Sati abolished in India. https://t.co/kRiPwgjwcP pic.twitter.com/JqO3A7cCsX
— Tanvangi (@Tanvangi17) December 18, 2020
It is entirely possible that,Carey in his arrogance of being the white man and hence more civilized,his inability to under the Hindu scriptures and his natural disdain for the learned community coupled with his inherent hatred for the idolaters may have exaggerated the incidents.
In fact, considering the venom with which he has spoken about Hinduism and it's practices, it's likely that he has exaggerated these incidents. But it cannot be denied that these incidents did happen even if they may not have been on scale at which Carey has described.
One of his journal entry mentions a debate which happened in a temple in front of around 200 people. Carey describes having debated with two learned men and goes on to say when both learned men failed to answer his questions, he went on to preach the gospel to the assembled crowd
In a letter dated 30th June,1795 he goes on to gleefully narate how Hindus were unaware of their own scriptures and how an supposed expert named a grammar book when he was questioned as which scripture said that the Murti is God.
You May Also Like
The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
The story doesn\u2019t say you were told not to... it says you did so without approval and they tried to obfuscate what you found. Is that true?
— Sarah Frier (@sarahfrier) November 15, 2018
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
