Amritsar Massacre

[bainbrig]

Watching the C4 documentary on the 1919 massacre at Amritsar . Shocking, appalling - and the typical reactions from the descendants of the British officer who ordered his men to open fire on the unarmed crowd, and those of his defenders, was “It wasn’t a massacre, it was riot-containment.”

You can imagine similar comments from descendants of the Nazis - it wasn’t genocide, just over-zealous prison guards - sickening.

How little we British know of our own bloody history.

B

[Baldric]

You single out the Brits, then say "Sod the Gurkhas" which is why myself and others refer to you as Anti British.

[tamborine]

India was originally islamic ruled by Babur

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babur

Hindu & sikhism came after islam in India.

The continual Indian infighting brought Britain into the fray by invitation of babur, moghul emperor. The rest is history!

Thereby original inherents of India are muslim.

[bainbrig]

“Thereby original inherents of India are muslim.”

Odd use of ‘inherents’.

Odd logic, too. Who (under your ‘thinking’) are the original Britons? Celts? Picts? Irish? Doggerland people?

And again, it’s all just diversionary tactics!

All I’m asking is that ALL nations acknowledge their pasts. Nations that deny (or attempt to rewrite) their own history are doomed to flounder and die.

[naomi24]

//Hindu & sikhism came after islam in India. //

Sikhism came later because it was invented later, but India is the birthplace of Buddhism and Hinduism - both of which emerged long before Islam was ever conceived. It is not true to say that India was originally Islamic. It wasn’t.

[bainbrig]

But again, the point is being missed ("It is not true to say that India was originally Islamic. It wasn’t.)...

It doesn't MATTER what/who came first. What matters is an accurate appreciation of history.

BB

[tamborine]

Nazis non comparable as nazis were intent on genocide. Amritsa shooting was due to protesters refusing to obey law & move away. Death numbers are dispute; soldiers counted spent shells as less than 200. It was a protest against 2 being deported.

[tamborine]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jallianwala_Bagh_massacre

[vetuste_ennemi]

//Hindu & sikhism came after islam in India. //

Funny, I could have sworn the Buddha was born in the 6th century BC.

[bainbrig]

a) tamborine. WHOSE law? WHOSE order?

So were French resistance fighters breaking THE law (i.e. Nazi law) and thus deserved to be shot?

b) vetuste_ennemi

"//Hindu & sikhism came after islam in India. //

Funny, I could have sworn the Buddha was born in the 6th century BC."

Vetuste, you are Questioning the Wisdom of She Who Must Be Agreed with. If she says the Buddha was born first, that's it, I'm afraid.

BB

[tamborine]

I gave the islam Babur link. Brits were in India due to infighting.

[bainbrig]

Stop making excuses, tamborine.

Unless you think that the German presence in the Spanish Civil War was also justified by Franco's gang inviting them in? (Which they did).

I'm questioning the legitimacy of historical actions; you're just listing them.

B

[Baldric]

// It doesn't MATTER what/who came first. What matters is an accurate appreciation of history //

If that's the case then surely it does matter what or who came first.

[naomi24]

Bainbrig, //It doesn't MATTER what/who came first. What matters is an accurate appreciation of history.//

Yes, an accurate appreciation of history does matter which is why I said Buddhism and Hinduism came long before Islam, and which is why v_e agreed with me.

[bainbrig]

I'm off. This has degenerated into an Angels on Pinheads debate, in which I have no interest. Play happily.

B

[Baldric]

Can't take it, eh?

[naomi24]

Hmmm... not interested in an accurate appreciation of history then. :o)

[tamborine]

Until you prove a massacre at Amritsa via linkss, your opinion is worthless.

orders were given by occupying army (Brit) to move or else! Sikhism is about warring, hence their knives but it aint no defence against bullets.

[Alonelywriter]

thanks for sharing