i was wondering if you guys noticed any patterns to these.
1. australia, every one of the murdered indians has been a north indian hindu or sikh. no mohammedans.
2. australia. the police are finding it very hard to nab the killers. this suggests it is not an ordinary hit-and-run type of thing, but pre-planned by criminal gangs (my first hypothesis is that these are the lebanese gangs we have talked about before)
3. usa. in 2008-09, more than a dozen andhra students (all hindus) were murdered usually by blacks
4. usa. after samuel reddy died, the murders stopped. was that just a coincidence, or were these people's folks back in andhra being 'encouraged' by samuel to convert? he was a dangerous thug who believed in violence, after all
any theories on these welcome.
a. are there no indian mohammedans in australia? of course there are. there was the bangalore doctor, whose brother was a suicide jeep driver in the UK, and who fled to india on a one-way ticket, and over whom manmohan spent sleepless nights. how come these guys are never targeted by the australians? one answer is that lebanese mohammedans do not want to kill indian mohammedans
b. is it true that the majority of indian students working in restaurants etc in australia are north indian hindus/sikhs? are south indian students more affluent and therefore do not need to work for a living? (this is not a north-south better-worse question, i am just seeking some data)
c. anybody who has lived in australia, have the white natives been particularly nasty to you? i know from experiences in the us that the whites there are in general not particularly anti-indian
d. anybody know more about the andhra students killed in the us? were they from a particular area? were they from families that had had financial dealings with samuel reddy's goons? any common thread that links them?