another 60 year old genius???
is it my fault that your dumbass is using obscure British English idioms when speaking to non-native English speakers? maybe I should start speaking Polish to you instead???now,as the last on this idiocy you are trying to fool people with(alongside the fag British government and its BBC)ā¦the British were not the only colonial power in India, British used the āBengalā as a base to fight other colonial powers and locals to gain the control of the lucrative Southern region, the colonial dominance and control of the regions resources lasted 300 hundred years(making sure the region DOES NOT undergo industrial revolution)ā¦nowā¦am I calling you a mixed lackey puppet for no reason???noā¦you are trying to underplay what happened to(partly) your own people because you are what you areā¦its like if I was a Pole whos mother got banged by a German Nazi soldier and moved to West Germany during the occupation(already a disgusting lackey traitor behaviour) and then, from West Germany, I would be telling the Poles who got their country run down and extorted, that it ACTUALLY DID NOT HAPPENā¦you really dont realise how ridiculous you are, do you???
Lol!
I repeatā¦
[b][i][The EIC arrives in 1600, and sets-up shop off coastal Bengal (now Bangladesh, West Bengal, and Tripura) a decade later
The EIC begins to attempt to war and bribe its way into power up until 1854
The British Crown (The Raj) takes over India in 1854 due to gross corruption of the EIC, so over 2.5 centuries later
India and Pakistan become self-governing in 1947, so 93 years of British rule later.][/i][/b]
ā¦nowā¦am I calling you a mixed lackey puppet for no reason???noā¦you are trying to underplay what happened to(partly) your own people because you are what you areā¦its like if I was a Pole whos mother got banged by a German Nazi soldier and moved to West Germany during the occupation(already a disgusting lackey traitor behaviour) and then, from West Germany, I would be telling the Poles who got their country run down and extorted, that it ACTUALLY DID NOT HAPPENā¦you really dont realise how ridiculous you are, do you???
Lol @ you thinking you know my family history or about what really went down between India and the EICā¦ go and discuss something else with someone elseā¦ you are clueless, but donāt need to be filled-inā¦ by I, on the pertinent facts that matter that only the well-educated would know.
Do you know what a civil discussion isā¦?
[The EIC arrives in 1600, and sets-up shop off coastal Bengal (now Bangladesh, West Bengal, and Tripura) a decade later
The EIC begins to attempt to war and bribe its way into power up until 1854
The British Crown (The Raj) takes over India in 1854 due to gross corruption of the EIC, so over 2.5 centuries later
India and Pakistan become self-governing in 1947, so 93 years of British rule later.]
I will re-write this as it actually happenedā¦EIC, a right hand of British colonialism and national vested interests arrives in Western India, they beat the locals in a war for power(something the Dutch failed, for example)and set up a domination system through the EIC as a proxy of the British colonialism in 1700s, the EIC is then replaced by a formal and direct British domination after some years and lasts until the Brits loose their empire after the First and Second World War, giving us at least 200(and more like 250) years of direct control and economic and social domination.
Lol @ you thinking you know my family history or about what really went down between India and the EICā¦ go and discuss something else with someone elseā¦ you are clueless, but donāt need to be filled-inā¦ by I, on the pertinent facts that matter that only the well-educated would know.
Did you get educated reading the BBC articles written by paid charlatans?
I will re-write this as it actually happenedā¦EIC, a right hand of British colonialism and national vested interests arrives in Western India, they beat the locals in a war for power(something the Dutch failed, for example)and set up a domination system through the EIC as a proxy of the British colonialism in 1700s, the EIC is then replaced by a formal and direct British domination after some years and lasts until the Brits loose their empire after the First and Second World War, giving us at least 200(and more like 250) years of direct control and economic and social domination.
Youāre a bit right, but not quiteā¦ britannica.com/place/India/ ā¦ -1600-1740
Did you get educated reading the BBC articles written by paid charlatans?
Nope.
Did you read that article? It clearly confirms what I am saying is true, unless I am the bat shit crazy one here and nobody ever told me.
The East India Company was initially created in 1600 to serve as a trading body for English merchants, specifically to participate in the East Indian spice trade. It later added such items as cotton, silk, indigo, saltpeter, tea, and opium to its wares and also participated in the slave trade. The company eventually became involved in politics and acted as an agent of British imperialism in India from the early 1700s to the mid-1800s.
The original company faced opposition to its monopoly, which led to the establishment of a rival company and the fusion (1708) of the two as the United Company of Merchants of England trading to the East Indies. The United Company was organized into a court of 24 directors who worked through committees. They were elected annually by the Court of Proprietors, or shareholders. When the company acquired control of Bengal in 1757, Indian policy was until 1773 influenced by shareholdersā meetings, where votes could be bought by the purchase of shares. That arrangement led to government intervention. The Regulating Act (1773) and William Pitt the Youngerās India Act (1784) established government control of political policy through a regulatory board responsible to Parliament. Thereafter the company gradually lost both commercial and political control. Its commercial monopoly was broken in 1813, and from 1834 it was merely a managing agency for the British government of India. It was deprived of that role after the Indian Mutiny (1857), and it ceased to exist as a legal entity in 1873.
Also, have a read here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnatic_Wars
Are you telling me that corrupt English tea traders, who set up A SHOP on a Bengali coast, completely independent of the British imperial power kicked the French army and its empire out of the most lucrative region in the world during that time? and that such corrupt English tea-traders could secure the sea passage and the passage through the Suarez canal into Europe(both owned by the British navy), without being heavily sabotaged and subdued to the governmental power??? you do realise that if the British wanted, they could simply refuse any of the EIC ships through the Suarez canal and they would have to sail all the way around Africa and enter Europe from the side of the sea which was dominated by the Portuguese and the pirates?
Did you read that article? It clearly confirms what I am saying is true,
There are 2 links (ā¦separated by a forward slash) ā¦you do not have the full facts, and was spouting unfounded claims.
I am not disputing the wars, or the takeovers, or the massacres of the competition, or the starving to death of over a million of the poverty-stricken demographic, that was engineered through the bribing of Rulers and Government Officials.
unless I am the bat shit crazy one hereā¦
I thought that was a given.
What are you even talking about now???
which unsupported facts am I spouting???give me oneā¦or else this discussion is over since i wont be sperging out on an internet forum, arguing with 60 year old goonies talking nonsense indefinitelyā¦I understand I cant change your views because this is not even about the truth for you but its personal and you just dont give a shit anywayā¦waste of fucking time as per usualā¦but you have a chance at redemption anywayā¦
which unsupported facts am I spouting???give me oneā¦or else this discussion is over
This
I understand I cant change your views because this is not even about the truth for you but its personal and you just dont give a shit anywayā¦waste of fucking time as per usualā¦but you have a chance at redemption anywayā¦
I donāt think you fully read the 2 articles I linked to, otherwise you would have something new to bring to the argumentā¦ but that you do not, implies that you didnāt.
You won lol
is it my fault that your dumbass is using obscure British English idioms when speaking to non-native English speakers?
Mags is not a dumbass.
Also you should not be going around flinging insults like this.
Anybody can talk tough to a girl, thatās the problem.
You can be as genius a writer as is possible, and get sunk by that single cowardice.
You know what I mean?
Lol you guys are funny
Anybody can talk tough to a girl, thatās the problem.
You can be as genius a writer as is possible, and get sunk by that single cowardice.
You know what I mean?
Anybody can talk tough to anybody on the internet and those who can speak tough to those in the real live arent anything special just because of it because human beings are not one dimensional. There are females which deserve no respect and females are no better than men and deserve no special treatment.
Yeahā¦
what yeah? do you sometimes dream of getting on your knees and sucking clits and being told you are a good boy???
Sometimes.
Just donāt insult girls you stupid fuck, how difficult can that be?
Iād be lying to myself if I said I wouldnāt keep reading all the shit your write though, youāse a goddamn genius.
But my sincere recommendation is that you stop that particular thing. It only takes the slightest of self-disciplines and will preserve some small part of your honor.
Everytime you feel like insulting a girl, pray a Hail Mary first.
Holy Marry can muster enough to defend herself from savages and definitely does not need me you prick, read about the Black Madonna of CzÄstochowa .
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Mad ā¦ 99stochowa
The legend concerning the two scars on the Black Madonnaās right cheek is that the Hussites stormed the Pauline monastery in 1430, plundering the sanctuary. Among the items stolen was the icon. After putting it in their wagon, the Hussites tried to get away, but their horses refused to move. They threw the portrait down to the ground, and one of the plunderers drew his sword upon the image and inflicted two deep strikes. When the robber tried to inflict a third strike, he fell to the ground and writhed in agony until his death. Despite past attempts to repair these scars, they had difficulty covering up those slashes as the painting was done with tempera infused with diluted wax