I do not have statistics;but I can say that Muslim men target Hindu women has been noticed by me .
They also seem to target the upper caste women(!?) especially in South India.
I had a discussion with a close firiend of mine for over 39 years,who is a Muslim,who, after initial denials ,informed me that they choose Hindu women, preferably from upper castes, for Muslims feel that Hindu women more cultured and they might help to improve upon their culture(does not mean that Muslim Culture is inferior) and Hindu women, in general, take good care of their family.
Another observation he made was that as Muslims are allowed to have four wives(despite protestations to the contrary by some Muslim Scholars,this is the ground reality and ordinary Muslim believes that to have four four wives is sanctioned by Islam), he might not be transgressing Islam as he shall have a Muslim wife as well,
In the process Hindu women are converted to Islam.
Muslim men do not convert to Hinduism when they marry a Hindu girl;even if the do, it is stastistically negligible.
Story:
A day after UKs’ former home secretary Jack Straw blamed some Pakistani Muslim men for targeting “vulnerable” White girls sexually, UK’s Hindu and Sikh organizations also publicly accused Muslim groups of the same offence.
Straw, in an interview to the BBC recently, had said, “…there is a specific problem which involves Pakistani heritage men…who target vulnerable young white girls…they see these young women, white girls who are vulnerable, some of them in care … who they think are easy meat.”
Feeling emboldened by Straw’s statement, UK’s Hindu and Sikh organizations have also come in open and accused some Pakistani men of specifically targeting Hindu and Sikh girls. “This has been a serious concern for the last decade,” said Hardeep Singh of Network of Sikh Organizations (NSO) while talking to TOI on Monday.
Sikhs and Hindus are annoyed that Straw had shown concern for White girls and not the Hindu and the Sikh teenage girls who have been coaxed by some Pakistani men for sex and religious conversion.
Welcome decision.But what if they go on strike?What can the court do,?utmost it will advise the Government to take action.The Government ,depending on vote bank politics, may decide to overlook the recommendation.Ultimately the passengers will suffer.Why this sham of a court injunction?
These court jokes are order of the day in India.
A strike by British Airways cabin crew planned for Christmas has been declared illegal in a High Court ruling.
The court agreed with BA that the cabin crew’s union, Unite, had not correctly balloted its members on the strike action.
The injunction means that the 12-day strike cannot now go ahead.
Unite called it “a disgraceful day for democracy” and vowed to hold a fresh ballot of cabin crew if the dispute with BA was not resolved.
British Airways said the decision would be welcomed by “hundreds of thousands of families in the UK and around the world”.
“There was never any need for a strike and we hope that Unite will take this opportunity to reflect before deciding its next steps,” a statement from the company said.
“In recent days, we believe Unite has formed a better understanding of our position and of the ways in which we could move forward.
“It has also become very clear that our customers do not believe that old-style trade union militancy is relevant to our efforts to move British Airways back toward profitability.”
Unite’s joint general secretaries, Derek Simpson and Tony Woodley said the dispute was “far from settled”.
“While we have never wanted this dispute, it is a disgraceful day for democracy when a court can overrule such an overwhelming decision by employees taken in a secret ballot,” they said.
“The fact remains that this dispute is not settled.
“BA must accept that there can be no resolution except through negotiation, failing which there will inevitably be a further ballot for industrial action.” http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8418805.stm
Abu Dhabi: Sad Island of Happiness-Time
More bad news from Abu Dhabi, the ultra oil-rich sheikhdom in the United Arab Emirates.
“Human Rights Watch released a scathing report yesterday accusing the government and authorities responsible for land development of exploiting and abusing migrant workers from South Asia in construction on the Island of Happiness–specifically in the building of imported prestigious institutions that Abu Dhabi intends to showcase there. These include branches of the Louvre and Guggenheim museums as well as a Middle East campus of New York University. HRW called on the museums and NYU “to show that they will not tolerate or benefit from the gross exploitation.” http://mideast.blogs.time.com/2009/05/20/abu-dhabi-sad-island-of-happiness/#add-your-comment
Comment:
Why AbuDhabi alone?Dubai and Sharjah is no better.”Open to constructive criticism”-you don’t allow free Speech-where is the question of constructive criticism?
Fact is immigrant workers are treated worse than animals.They can not even freely talk in public,let alone air their sufferings in public.Any complaint brought to the notice of the police draws a threat that you will be charged with’possessing narcotics”-which carries a heavy penalty.Two solutions-people should stop migrating there(those over there can not do any thing by themselves);the other to boycott their products.
You must be logged in to post a comment.