I am with Comrade Stalin when it comes to dealing with the Indians: the bastards cannot be trusted. Precisely for this reason I am vehemently opposed to the inclusion of India in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. The Chinese are our friends, even our brothers, and the same could never be said of the deceitful Indian. You liveleakers should count yourselves fortunate that you have someone of Comrade Alois Philby's immense learning to educate you on the intricacies of geopolitics. Without me you are nothing; you should look upon me as your dutiful father. And why are you nothing in comparison with yours truly? Behold my noble lineage: we fought during the great wars, we were enlisted by the secret service, and we murdered those who have no right to live.Be that as it may, let us talk now about our subject matter: India. And we shall speak of things of which have never before heard. One of the most common myths about India is that they have four castes: the Brahmins, the Kshatriyas, the Vaishas, and the Shudras. Wrong! This is purely a North Indian phenomenon. In South India and Bengal they have two castes only: the priests and the rest, or the clergy and the laity, as in the rest of the world. Furthermore, in Bengal a rather intriguing caste has come into being: the Kayashtas. These people were not Brahmins and it is my hypothesis that they were derived from all castes, viz., we are are dealing with a caste based on meritocracy. The Kayashtas served as scribes amongst the royal families and they were chosen on the basis of their intellectual merits. India's most famous Kayashta was Subhas Chandra Bose. If this illustrious Kayashta had survived the Second World War, India would have been in a much better state today, and there would be no Pakistan. I am tired of you ignorant fools already; let is therefore turn this session into a catechism instead: you ask and Mr Philby answers: (i) Does colour of your skin matter in India? ANSWER: Yes, very much so. There are three modalities to the colour lines in India: (i) Based on caste, (ii) based on religion, and (iii) based on region. (i) The two upper castes of Hindus, Brahmins and Kshatriyas, tend to have lighter skin than the rest. (ii) The Muslims typically have lighter skin than the Hindus, and likewise, (iii) the North Indians have lighter skin than the South Indians. (ii) Who is worse: North Indian or South Indian? ANSWER: Although the South Indian is not of an Indo-European stock, there are two things that I can assure you of: the South Indian cuisine is much better than that of North India and the South Indian is far less likely to slit your throat. My view has always been that you should never trust the North Indian, regardless of his religion. The South Indian has his aboriginal consciousness well intact, and this may well account for his honesty. (iii) How does the caste system make a difference? ANSWER: As I have already pointed out, the caste system has been in force in India for more than 3000 years and it cuts through the religious distinctions. This is to say that caste is more powerful than religion. I have interacted with many Indian Christians, and their caste affiliations always shone through. The low caste Indians have been treated like animals for than 3000 years, with the consequence that they have indeed become animals. The Indian Christians are odious creatures and I have personally punched the faces of two of these bastards. The low caste Pakistanis are no better, and the same applies to the Indian Banias. (iv) Do Hindus hate Muslims? ANSWER: Absolutely not! The upper caste Hindus such as Nehru and Bose were always abhorred by communal hooliganism. The Hindus at the forefront of anti-Muslim rioting were typically the shop-keepers; they wanted to get rid of the Muslims so as to limit the competition. If you carry out a social analysis of the communal riots, two factors cannot fail to escape your attention: (i) Shop-keepers dominate rioting and (ii) they resort to religious oratory. (v) Do Muslims hate Hindus? ANSWER: Absolutely not! The founder of Pakistan, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, was a champion of Hindu-Muslim unity. He hated being reminded of his Muslim background, and the one responsible for making Jinnah's Muslim background a political factor was Gandhi. Jinnah always admonished Gandhi for mixing religion with politics, and it is my view that Gandhi is the man responsible f"ur Jinnah's tilt towards Islam. Gandhi communalised Indian politics, and Jinnah was left with no choice but to play the same dirty game. (vi) Why do Indians have such a poor reputation? ANSWER: This has to do with immigration. Most of the prominent Indians in the West belong to the Bania (trader) caste (or lower). This trader caste is well known to be devoid of scruples. People to whom money is all, honour is nothing. (vii) Why do Pakistanis have such a poor reputation? ANSWER: This has to do with immigration. Most of the prominent Pakistanis in the West belong to the trader caste (or lower). This trader caste is well known to be devoid of scruples. People to whom money is all, honour is nothing. (viii) Was partition good for India? ANSWER: No, it was disaster. (ix) Was partition was good for Pakistan? ANSWER: No, it was disaster. With a united India, there would have been at least 500 million Muslims in India of today. The Arab world would be in your pocket and the world as such would not be able to lift a finger without your nod. (x) Are Indians and Pakistanis bastards? ANSWER: Yes. (xi) Do you hate Indians and Pakistanis? ANSWER: Yes and no. But I am too drunk to elaborate. Fck you all; whereever you are from. All I can say is this: the Indians and the Pakistanis deserve better. (xii) Is peace in the world possible? ANSWER: Yes! Everyone should drink Siberian vodka and keep his mouth shut. Read more at http://ift.tt/1z0oaMr



from Liveleak.com Rss Feed - Search results for 'fail' http://ift.tt/1k3hBhS

v

Understanding India-Pakistan with Mr Philby

Uploaded by: jironde

Views:

Category: Liveleak.com Rss Feed - Search results for fail

Share

Tweet