Deepika shows up at JNU to support students protesting against govt - Page 39

In Chapaak, Deepika retains the victim's name, "Lakshmi". But the attacker name is changed from Naeem Khan to Rajesh.

Originally posted by: flipfl0p

In Chapaak, Deepika retains the victim's name, "Lakshmi". But the attacker name is changed from Naeem Khan to Rajesh.

No she doesn't. She plays a woman named Malti.

Originally posted by: rkisnothot

No she doesn't. She plays a woman named Malti.

Well. Naeem Khan's name could have been changed to Abdul too.

Originally posted by: flipfl0p

https://www.hudson.org/research/9781-cleansing-pakistan-of-minorities

I only shared the statistics of "collective" minorities contained between 3-5% in Pakistan some previous thread here....Infact I would say let's believe that is what happened.

Even then the containment within such low figure shows that minorities could never flourish in Pakistan, that's the truth. Minorities are threatened, forcely converted there.

In comparison to India where you can check in official statistics which mentions the sole Muslim population has increased from 9.8% in 1951 to 14.3% in 2011(last official census).

Originally posted by: ponymo

There are many fact-checks available rebutting this claim.

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/pakistan-bangladesh-non-muslim-population-citizenship-amendment-bill-bjp-1627678-2019-12-12

First he does not quotes1941 census (conveniently).

His story only starts by 1951 census of Pakistan. He says (by then) Pakistani side had only 3.44% of minorities. Why?

According to Wikipedia, 5.9 million non Muslims were staying in current provinces of Pakistan in 1941. 3.9 million "migrated" in 1947. (Out of will?). Even that 3.44% is now reduced to 1.5% (or 1). Why?

What is the take? Pakistan did not take 70 years to cleanse its minorities. It did it in first three years itself.

Originally posted by: flipfl0p

In Chapaak, Deepika retains the victim's name, "Lakshmi". But the attacker name is changed from Naeem Khan to Rajesh.

Her name is Malti in the film. Stop falling prey to propaganda again and again and do some research of your own.

Originally posted by: ponymo

Her name is Malti in the film. Stop falling prey to propaganda again and again and do some research of your own.

Yes. One part was wrong. Second was not.

I have already answered. Boy could have been Anvar, Abdul. Why changed his religion? I am neither here to fall for right propaganda nor to left's hypocrisy.

Originally posted by: Zeal17

I only shared the statistics of "collective" minorities contained between 3-5% in Pakistan some previous thread here....Infact I would say let's believe that is what happened.

Even then the containment within such low figure shows that minorities could never flourish in Pakistan, that's the truth. Minorities are threatened, forcely converted there.

In comparison to India where you can check in official statistics which mentions the sole Muslim population has increased from 9.8% in 1951 to 14.3% in 2011(last official census).

Population of Hindus in Pakistan actually increased slightly over the years from 1951 census onwards.

Also, can't compare Pakistan and India with respect to minorities because India is a secular country and Pakistan is an Islamic state. India isn't governed by religion (not until 2014 anyway).

Originally posted by: flipfl0p

Yes. One part was wrong. Second was not.

I have already answered. Boy could have been Anvar, Abdul. Why changed his religion? I am neither here to fall for right propaganda nor to left's hypocrisy.

Fact is you just copy pasted something which you could've fact-checked in one click (like go to the IMDb or Wiki page). So yes you fell prey to RW propaganda. No two ways about it.

ETA: And you posted it as it is your own opinion, without source, without quotes, nothing. So you were spreading misinformation. Own up for your mistakes.

Originally posted by: ponymo

Fact is you just copy pasted something which you could've fact-checked in one click (like go to the IMDb or Wiki page). So yes you fell prey to RW propaganda. No two ways about it.

Well. Could be. I fell for a second for that one line Twitter news. I will take it back (Only first part). My second question still remains (which you evaded).

But my long post in the previous page on CAA/NRC is not based on any propaganda.

Could you care to answer that, instead of waging left propaganda war?