Dhurandhar 2 - The meltdown has begun - Page 24

Originally posted by: Clochette

There is no such thing in the scriptures? Also, please read my post about that subject, it clearly brings reasons why - at a certain time - child marriages had been part of society (in many societies independent of their religious belief systems).

child marriage and sati pratha were complete superstitions. it was done by uneducated people or part of patriarchal system. not part of hindu religion.

dowry and kanyadan could be maybe mentioned in some religious textbooks. I don't know. but dowry was supposed to be a small gift presented by girl's family. people being greedy completely changed its meaning and made it to abuse the women.

Originally posted by: MsWhiskerson

OP is on targeting Hindu element in Hindi movie

Both sides are present there, why did you choose to see only one side of it?

https://x.com/samosemainaloo/status/2034269693352214657

I think you didn't get the purpose of posting the tweet... it is about the "meltdown" citing posts against Dhurandhar... it's mocking of those who had problems with the movie...

Originally posted by: Cynical1

Dhurandhar impact. All the propoganda messaging of urduwood movies coming out

No,old movies now are scrutinized to bring the new narrative across... no need to wonder why this member constantly uses the term "urduwood", right? How convenient for him to use the Dhurandhar movies as starting point... clever made instigation to further the divide - using the filmindustry, an inherent part of INDIAN life. (very well learned from what had been done in Germany, Austria, Italy and Spain last century)...

Originally posted by: Sultan.Mirza

Mujhe pata chal gaya hai ke Cynical kiska MID hai

Haider starring Aamir Khan

Originally posted by: iamrebelheart

child marriage and sati pratha were complete superstitions. it was done by uneducated people or part of patriarchal system. not part of hindu religion.

dowry and kanyadan could be maybe mentioned in some religious textbooks. I don't know. but dowry was supposed to be a small gift presented by girl's family. people being greedy completely changed its meaning and made it to abuse the women.

Actually, even in Islam it wasn't a 'religious thing' but also due to societal norms... the Quran is also embedded in it's cultural context in the 7th century... only because it (allegedly) didn't get changes, their still are changes though interpretations.

It's not that I want to defend a religion, I want to show that is was something done in former times for other than religious reasons. It's to counter the new narrative propagated here in combination with the Dhurandhar movies...

Originally posted by: NathuPaapi

What happened secretly in Epstein islands happens legally in Iran and many other muslim countries. That's the difference.

No, Nathu (how even can you write such a thing, knowing that the kids and youngsters on Epstein Island had only been for sexual pleasure of men of diverse ages... they didn't get m a r r i e d.)

However, indeed, in Iran and Southern Asia, marriages of under 18 still exist (although declining).

https://childmarriagedata.org/country-profiles/iran-islamic-republic-of/

Originally posted by: Cynical1

... Dhurandhar jaisa movie on this topic is really needed. Bachhey should be title which shows all the ugly stuff - radicalization to pedophelia by them. And Ranveer going after them to kill them one by one.

For what exactly Dhurandhar is needed? To educate people? About what? That India (already long before the current government came into power) sent spies into Pakistan to get to know about terrorist activities against India??? The story's content was set into another time as the real events that had inspired the movie ... no long thinking needed to guess why... and Ranveer, too, is a fictional character.

U s i n g the movie and its success to bring forward a hate for everything that has to do with Muslims/Islam... and further a divide in the forum... Yikes!

Originally posted by: Cynical1

https://x.com/Ayushihihaha/status/2035577814607593499

Clever choice of (random) tweets to post here...

"Aditya Dhar single handedly exposed the faces of Pakistan lovers in India who got rattled over a movie"... so, every person that voices discontent relative to the two movies or don't like the movies get labeled as "Pakistan lovers" now... what the fish!

Originally posted by: naaznin

N precious PM's name too

When educating oneself about Jeffrey Epstein, one would also learn that it isn't only about pedophilia with him...(that just gets pointed out the most as it has to do with sex)...the FBI didn't hold back/destroyed/blackened so many files only because of t h a t.

Originally posted by: Cynical1

The blatant brainwashing (not even subtle in this case) all goes 🔥 with just 1 movie.

Great neighbors that is ranked 1 in global sponsor of terror.

Gratitude to Dhurandhar team to open the eyes of Indians world over

bold: It didn't need the movie to "open the eyes of Indians"... and of course, at a time when even Pakistani actors were allowed to work in India you bring SRK (Muslim) in this thread because he thought that at least through sport one could try to show that - initially - Pakistan had been India. Damn to the British Empire and all the harm it did...

Yes, Pakistan got the rang 1... but who did sponsor terrorism forming in Pakistan first??? well...

Terrorism sponsorship in Pakistan originated around 1979, driven by the military’s support for Afghan Mujahideen during the Soviet-Afghan War, in collaboration with the U.S. CIA and other Western intelligence agencies. Later, the formed terrorism groups were used to support the Taliban and various militant groups, intended to control the region and influence neighbors.

The clashes between Pakistan and India first hadn't been on a terrorist level (afaIk).