The proper theory, and the theory that has much more evidence for it is AMT. Aryan Migration Theory, occurred well over 5000+ years ago and speaks of the Aryan tribes that slowly and peacefully migrated into the SubContinent and intermingled with the inhabitants there; the first of which being the Indus Valley.

The British Raj of course so grossly screwed up the details. They tried to make it seem like there was an invasion when in reality there was none. The Aryan Invasion Theory they called it [AIT], and instead of 5000+ years ago, they only fathomed their theory to have taken place 3500 years ago.

What I want to know is was this gross fabricationon the part of the British accidental or intentional?

I'm leaning towards it being intentional. The Brits couldn't fathom a such a beautiful heritage that Eastern traditions shared. They made similar historical mistakes for the people of China, Japan, Tibet, Mongolia, Korea, etc., so it is natural that the SubContinent is no exception. I want to know if it was their plan all along to twist 'migration' into 'invasion' just so that they would have another leverage against the Indian people: so that they might continue to demean the subjugated people of the SubContinent.

Was this their purpose? Was it their intent to try and make the SubContinent look bad, thereby facilitating an easier means of conversion into Christianity?