User contributions for 96.87.73.241

For 96.87.73.241 talk block log logs filter log
Search for contributionsshowhide
⧼contribs-top⧽
⧼contribs-date⧽
(newest | oldest) View (newer 50 | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

19 October 2021

2 October 2021

26 September 2021

22 July 2021

21 July 2021

  • 05:0705:07, 21 July 2021 diff hist −184 Michel AflaqNo evidence he was ever influenced by Hitler, Rosenberg, Spengler or Sorel. Removing unsourced claims linking him to fascism. See Gilbert Achcar and Hanna Batatu, which both note his non-fascist outlook

20 July 2021

29 June 2021

25 June 2021

21 June 2021

17 June 2021

10 June 2021

  • 13:3613:36, 10 June 2021 diff hist −51 Edward SassoonBaghdadi Arab Jews generally did not identify as Indian, barring some exceptions (JFR Jacob, Nadira). The Sassoons certainly did not identify as Indian but as Baghdadi.

6 June 2021

27 February 2021

5 February 2021

4 February 2021

21 January 2021

19 January 2021

13 January 2021

  • 13:5913:59, 13 January 2021 diff hist −127 Edward SassoonHe was not Indian, he was an Iraqi Arab Jew. They were mostly there as an expatriate business community and did not see themselves as Indians. Except for some who spent enough generations in India to identify as Indian (such as JFR Jacob and Bollywood actress Nadira, to name two examples) Baghdadi Jews in India generally identified as Baghdadi, not Indian and that too an Anglicized Baghdadi identity. Many of them left India after a while too.

6 January 2021

20 December 2020

15 November 2020

27 October 2020

15 October 2020

6 October 2020

5 October 2020

2 October 2020

  • 17:0617:06, 2 October 2020 diff hist −38 Tariq AliRemoving baseless category. He never said Srebrenica wasn't a genocide. He did say it was used to paint a simplistic portrayal of the civil war in Yugoslavia, a point made by many others like David Gibbs, Susan Woodward, etc, none of whom defend the Serb actions.

30 September 2020

  • 00:0800:08, 30 September 2020 diff hist −40 The Indian IdeologyThis is a POV statement that reflects the ideological bias of the previous editor. In reality the reception has been very positive in some quarters and very negative in others, reflecting the polarizing and controversial nature of its subject matter. If you want, you can say polarized. But it is patently false to say critical reception is objectively poor.

29 September 2020

19 September 2020

(newest | oldest) View (newer 50 | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)