SarthakGanguly
BANNED
It means little to you, I agree. Most Indians know only one Sikander - Alexander the Great. Never mind.It would mean little whether Sikander himself was a sufi or not.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
It means little to you, I agree. Most Indians know only one Sikander - Alexander the Great. Never mind.It would mean little whether Sikander himself was a sufi or not.
Never expected this from you..Yes Butshikan was responsible for the islamization of kashmir...I think I've posted the same earlier on this thread.
And I do believe that atleast half the population of muslims that exists in India today are muslims because they were forcibly converted at some point of time.
I luv surprising ppl or shock as in this caseNever expected this from you..![]()



And I do believe that atleast half the population of muslims that exists in India today are muslims because they were forcibly converted at some point of time.
I hate you for giving me 10 pages to read...

posting a leftist sicular version ain't gonna change the truth...
The reason I gave you the link was because not many people here have the patience to read a 10 page article; You, in the other thread in seniors cafe proved otherwise.I hate you for giving me 10 pages to read
Ok. There are thesis and counter thesis. Richard Eaton is considered to be the blue eyed boy of Indian secular liberals; however it does not make him necessarily correct. I suggest, not to believe him blindly but to appreciate the methodical way he has endeavored to analyze the conversion issue in medieval India.Thanks for posting that link.It did bust many myths.
I agree, Superman.posting a leftist sicular version ain't gonna change the truth...
There was no such thing as 'India' before the British.
Winston Churchill created 'India'.
Ask your school to return all the money.There was no such thing as 'India' before the British.
Winston Churchill created 'India'.
but there was "BHARAT".
Nope.
Just made up on falsified maps by delusional Indians.
India is not a country, its a forced union which only came into existence by British colonisation.
Do you have any proof to back up you BS claim?
Bharat is not a country, it's a civilization which was ruled by various kings.
When the British left, there were 100's of independent kingdoms, which joined the union at the will of their people. and Indians are not forced, they choose. Unlike you guys.

There was no such thing as 'India'.
British colonised those little kingdoms and called it 'India".
Calling 'India' a country is like calling Africa a country![]()