Post 3 of 3
My opinion, based on the stuff in the 2 posts above:
I don't trust the christomedia of India, which
- posts Margaret 'Arundhati' Roy's lies (like on the murder or persecution of some Gujarati muslim who - it turned out - was out of the region when the Godhra riots happened),
- presents the islamo-apologists' monologue for releasing mohamed afzal while neglecting to cover the side of the families of the victims: the Indian defenders of Parliament,
- argues that terrorism has no religion and will no longer even venture "terrorists from the minority community" but <i>will</i> scream "Hindu terrorism" now it has jumped to the drastic conclusion that this must have been an instance of Hindus who planted bombs. Yeah, proof please.
Christowar is fought in many ways. In a country as big as India, the goal is to create the perception - both in India and on the international scale - that Hindus are not the victims of christoislamiterrorism (as we are), but that we are either the aggressors (like they made us out to be with Ayodhya, Godhra, and Orissa) - or if that can't be proved - that India is a quagmire of religious interfighting and that therefore the international community should support the christians who *couldn't possibly* be the criminals/instigators. The international sympathy is then meant to extend to the other terrorist minority. Christos achieve this sympathy-win through their lies in the media.
The secondary goal is to sway the secular Hindu into contemplating that the <i>other</i> Hindus *might perhaps* be capable of being ideological terrorists as well. That's 'cause the media terrorists know that the 'Secular Hindu' - already feeling alienated/'individual' from the whole Hindu community - can actually be brought to consider this and be made to judge other Hindus without evidence. After all, to the psecular Hindu, its secularism is more important than any other allegiances: it will sacrifice all else for this.
The secularists can be made to judge reacting Hindus on equal footing with the terrorist instigators, as happened recently with Orissa. The secular Hindu has been conditioned not to be able to distinguish between the two different kinds of motives, and hence will unabashedly pronounce its condemnatory sentences in presumed objectivity and blind uniformity over both situations: "It's all EQUALLY bad - all must be EQUALLY to blame". Yah. Psecularists never miss an opportunity to condescend. Including when it comes to unproven allegations: "alleged crimes attributed to Hindus are AS BAD AS factually proven crimes christoislamicommunazis committed."
Islamaniacs have their own goal. As someone described in one of those links to Offstumped at the top of this post, islamaniacs want to find a definition for terrorism that excludes them but includes Hindus. They want terrorist equated to kaffir, so they can play victim, even while they perpetrate terrorist crimes.
<b>Christian war is a war for future history (through the archive that media represents)</b> - and a favourable future history can only be ensured by media materials in the dominant language (so the future can understand it) which will present the christian spin on everything. For example - presenting the crisis in Orissa and Karnataka as "Hindu-instigated violence" as done by CNN and as done in wackypedia by Indian christos and apparently their American Baptist owners. The following is a comment at pseudosecularism.blogspot
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->At 10/03/2008 07:28:00 PM, Blogger R.Sajan said...
I request all netizens to go to Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia. Mallu priests in collaboration with some American Baptists are indulging in anti-India and anti-Hindu propaganda on that site.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Christian_violence_in_India
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Christian_violence_in_Karnataka
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Christian_violence_in_India
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_of_religious_freedom_in_India
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_violence_in_India
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orissa_communal_violence
Please go to the sites and edit away all anti-India stuff in there.
If we do not do so, all that faecal matter would remain there as history. Please, please help!!
Post a Comment
<< Home<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hijacking history is the same mechanism that christos adopted and through which they succeeded in making their christoterrorism in ancient Greece and Rome appear either equal-equal (when forced to admit to christian terrorism against natural traditionalists, see the Da Vinci Code where the protagonist declares that the pagans and christoterrorists were both to blame) or - as it was pretended for a long time - that the Ancient GrecoRomans were the persecutors of the poor innocent cannibal sheep.
http://pseudosecularism.blogspot.com/2008/...to-besiege.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->History is always written by the victors and whoever controls the writing of history books control the past. Without doubt, the most consistently powerful force in the western world over the last two thousand years has been the Roman Catholic Church and consequently history has often been what it wanted to be
â George Orwell in his novel '1984'.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>The questions I asked myself:</b>
- Do I trust the English language christo-owned and funded media when they pronounce their judgements before even getting evidence (especially when this was preceeded by the communist countercurrents site declaring 'Hindus did it' well before they could have known: before officials publicised any data - see link to Offstumped 2 posts back)? No.
- Do I think them capable of lying and willing to do so? Oh Yes. They do it with clockwork regularity.
- Do I think the terrorist ideologies would commit terrorist acts and then/just in order to blame Hindus? Yes, as they already have.
- Do I think them capable of finding cryptos or bribing actual Hindus in order to insinuate that Hindus are to blame? Yes, as they already have.
- Do I think the media, congress and christoislamics in India and outside are willing to stoop to forgery, libel and worse in order to keep BJP out of power? Yes, as they already have.
- Do I think Hindus would retaliate in *such* a manner as terrorist bomb attacks? Going by past behaviour, No. It certainly is not a Hindu thing to do, so can't blame it on Hinduism if Hindus get desperate (just like one can't blame Buddhists in Japan for historical Japanese interfighting).
I think Hindus capable of retaliating - possibly even with violence in some situations, but they are not the kind to resort to terrorist tactics. Hindus tend to be provoked by christoislamaniacs into riots; they don't do random terrorist attacks. But Islamics use this indiscriminate method because their *Koran* allows/tells them to kill kaffirs and make dar-ul-harbs into dar-ul-islams; they also do it to destabilise the kaffiri nation of Hindoostan by scare tactics.
Rioting is instant, unreasonable revenge that provoked Hindus sometimes enter into. Terrorism and militancy requires a long-term goal, planning (it's not spontaneous, you need the gear, etcetera) - things christoislamaniacs do and which Hindus don't have. And if Hindus were finally to acquire long-term goals, resorting to terrorism won't serve them at all: Bharatam is already a Hindu country. It is only when the christoBritish tyrants ruled that Hindus did mutinies/uprisings, planned attacks. It is minorities that need to resort to terrorism to blackmail a majority, not the other way around.
There is no gain for Hindus in this, but there is a gain for Those Seeking Equal-Equalism. Mere provoked Hindu rioting is not providing the Opposition enough ammo for their allegations of 'Hindoo terrorism/Hindoo fascism/Down with the BJP'. Instead, they must somehow ban the Hindu Mahasabha - what am I saying, I mean the BJP - and taint Hindu Dharma. And I note that planting situations like this one are their only means.
This entire thing looks so manufactured. Elst wrote how communists in India were predicting "Hindoo fascism, Hindoo fascism" under BJP rule, but were thwarted by reality not producing any instances (and so they jumped onto the Ayodhya situation and incited that until it exploded into a fest of communal violence surrounding the babri masjid, and played a lame game of I Told You So). Because we won't *give* them the predicted instances of "Hindoo fascism", the next best thing for christoislamicommunazism in India is to plant the situation so they can refer to it as "Hindoo fascism". These tactics are not past them at all - after all, they have done it before.
Also, just as in the Elst quote in point 4 of the previous post (and also noted by "Nizhal Yoddha" in that earlier link to Rajeev2004.blogspot), it looks like the christos and christomedia are once again trying to influence both
- the elections in India and
- international opinion about Hindu Dharma and BJP,
by precipitating events like in Orissa, selectively reporting on it and then creating allegations like these. And oh yeah, by spreading their christolies in wackypedia
So, until irrefutable evidence (the kind that could not have been tampered with or manufactured) presents itself, I will continue to presume Hindu innocence and suspect christoislamism. Since I know the christomedia is hyper-unreliable, I'll have to use my own judgement to make up my own mind. It is the logical thing to do, when taking the various factors and past instances into account. It is also the Hindu thing to do: who, if not we, will give our own Dharma (and Hindus) the benefit of the doubt? Everyone else always indulges in christoislami apologetics when the Terrorism's guilt is so obvious; why must I assume Hindus' guilt when it is not even proven? (Trial by media or by Bannerjees and Sachar committee reports do not count as proof.)
My opinion, based on the stuff in the 2 posts above:
I don't trust the christomedia of India, which
- posts Margaret 'Arundhati' Roy's lies (like on the murder or persecution of some Gujarati muslim who - it turned out - was out of the region when the Godhra riots happened),
- presents the islamo-apologists' monologue for releasing mohamed afzal while neglecting to cover the side of the families of the victims: the Indian defenders of Parliament,
- argues that terrorism has no religion and will no longer even venture "terrorists from the minority community" but <i>will</i> scream "Hindu terrorism" now it has jumped to the drastic conclusion that this must have been an instance of Hindus who planted bombs. Yeah, proof please.
Christowar is fought in many ways. In a country as big as India, the goal is to create the perception - both in India and on the international scale - that Hindus are not the victims of christoislamiterrorism (as we are), but that we are either the aggressors (like they made us out to be with Ayodhya, Godhra, and Orissa) - or if that can't be proved - that India is a quagmire of religious interfighting and that therefore the international community should support the christians who *couldn't possibly* be the criminals/instigators. The international sympathy is then meant to extend to the other terrorist minority. Christos achieve this sympathy-win through their lies in the media.
The secondary goal is to sway the secular Hindu into contemplating that the <i>other</i> Hindus *might perhaps* be capable of being ideological terrorists as well. That's 'cause the media terrorists know that the 'Secular Hindu' - already feeling alienated/'individual' from the whole Hindu community - can actually be brought to consider this and be made to judge other Hindus without evidence. After all, to the psecular Hindu, its secularism is more important than any other allegiances: it will sacrifice all else for this.
The secularists can be made to judge reacting Hindus on equal footing with the terrorist instigators, as happened recently with Orissa. The secular Hindu has been conditioned not to be able to distinguish between the two different kinds of motives, and hence will unabashedly pronounce its condemnatory sentences in presumed objectivity and blind uniformity over both situations: "It's all EQUALLY bad - all must be EQUALLY to blame". Yah. Psecularists never miss an opportunity to condescend. Including when it comes to unproven allegations: "alleged crimes attributed to Hindus are AS BAD AS factually proven crimes christoislamicommunazis committed."
Islamaniacs have their own goal. As someone described in one of those links to Offstumped at the top of this post, islamaniacs want to find a definition for terrorism that excludes them but includes Hindus. They want terrorist equated to kaffir, so they can play victim, even while they perpetrate terrorist crimes.
<b>Christian war is a war for future history (through the archive that media represents)</b> - and a favourable future history can only be ensured by media materials in the dominant language (so the future can understand it) which will present the christian spin on everything. For example - presenting the crisis in Orissa and Karnataka as "Hindu-instigated violence" as done by CNN and as done in wackypedia by Indian christos and apparently their American Baptist owners. The following is a comment at pseudosecularism.blogspot
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->At 10/03/2008 07:28:00 PM, Blogger R.Sajan said...
I request all netizens to go to Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia. Mallu priests in collaboration with some American Baptists are indulging in anti-India and anti-Hindu propaganda on that site.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Christian_violence_in_India
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Christian_violence_in_Karnataka
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Christian_violence_in_India
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_of_religious_freedom_in_India
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_violence_in_India
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orissa_communal_violence
Please go to the sites and edit away all anti-India stuff in there.
If we do not do so, all that faecal matter would remain there as history. Please, please help!!
Post a Comment
<< Home<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hijacking history is the same mechanism that christos adopted and through which they succeeded in making their christoterrorism in ancient Greece and Rome appear either equal-equal (when forced to admit to christian terrorism against natural traditionalists, see the Da Vinci Code where the protagonist declares that the pagans and christoterrorists were both to blame) or - as it was pretended for a long time - that the Ancient GrecoRomans were the persecutors of the poor innocent cannibal sheep.
http://pseudosecularism.blogspot.com/2008/...to-besiege.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->History is always written by the victors and whoever controls the writing of history books control the past. Without doubt, the most consistently powerful force in the western world over the last two thousand years has been the Roman Catholic Church and consequently history has often been what it wanted to be
â George Orwell in his novel '1984'.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>The questions I asked myself:</b>
- Do I trust the English language christo-owned and funded media when they pronounce their judgements before even getting evidence (especially when this was preceeded by the communist countercurrents site declaring 'Hindus did it' well before they could have known: before officials publicised any data - see link to Offstumped 2 posts back)? No.
- Do I think them capable of lying and willing to do so? Oh Yes. They do it with clockwork regularity.
- Do I think the terrorist ideologies would commit terrorist acts and then/just in order to blame Hindus? Yes, as they already have.
- Do I think them capable of finding cryptos or bribing actual Hindus in order to insinuate that Hindus are to blame? Yes, as they already have.
- Do I think the media, congress and christoislamics in India and outside are willing to stoop to forgery, libel and worse in order to keep BJP out of power? Yes, as they already have.
- Do I think Hindus would retaliate in *such* a manner as terrorist bomb attacks? Going by past behaviour, No. It certainly is not a Hindu thing to do, so can't blame it on Hinduism if Hindus get desperate (just like one can't blame Buddhists in Japan for historical Japanese interfighting).
I think Hindus capable of retaliating - possibly even with violence in some situations, but they are not the kind to resort to terrorist tactics. Hindus tend to be provoked by christoislamaniacs into riots; they don't do random terrorist attacks. But Islamics use this indiscriminate method because their *Koran* allows/tells them to kill kaffirs and make dar-ul-harbs into dar-ul-islams; they also do it to destabilise the kaffiri nation of Hindoostan by scare tactics.
Rioting is instant, unreasonable revenge that provoked Hindus sometimes enter into. Terrorism and militancy requires a long-term goal, planning (it's not spontaneous, you need the gear, etcetera) - things christoislamaniacs do and which Hindus don't have. And if Hindus were finally to acquire long-term goals, resorting to terrorism won't serve them at all: Bharatam is already a Hindu country. It is only when the christoBritish tyrants ruled that Hindus did mutinies/uprisings, planned attacks. It is minorities that need to resort to terrorism to blackmail a majority, not the other way around.
There is no gain for Hindus in this, but there is a gain for Those Seeking Equal-Equalism. Mere provoked Hindu rioting is not providing the Opposition enough ammo for their allegations of 'Hindoo terrorism/Hindoo fascism/Down with the BJP'. Instead, they must somehow ban the Hindu Mahasabha - what am I saying, I mean the BJP - and taint Hindu Dharma. And I note that planting situations like this one are their only means.
This entire thing looks so manufactured. Elst wrote how communists in India were predicting "Hindoo fascism, Hindoo fascism" under BJP rule, but were thwarted by reality not producing any instances (and so they jumped onto the Ayodhya situation and incited that until it exploded into a fest of communal violence surrounding the babri masjid, and played a lame game of I Told You So). Because we won't *give* them the predicted instances of "Hindoo fascism", the next best thing for christoislamicommunazism in India is to plant the situation so they can refer to it as "Hindoo fascism". These tactics are not past them at all - after all, they have done it before.
Also, just as in the Elst quote in point 4 of the previous post (and also noted by "Nizhal Yoddha" in that earlier link to Rajeev2004.blogspot), it looks like the christos and christomedia are once again trying to influence both
- the elections in India and
- international opinion about Hindu Dharma and BJP,
by precipitating events like in Orissa, selectively reporting on it and then creating allegations like these. And oh yeah, by spreading their christolies in wackypedia
So, until irrefutable evidence (the kind that could not have been tampered with or manufactured) presents itself, I will continue to presume Hindu innocence and suspect christoislamism. Since I know the christomedia is hyper-unreliable, I'll have to use my own judgement to make up my own mind. It is the logical thing to do, when taking the various factors and past instances into account. It is also the Hindu thing to do: who, if not we, will give our own Dharma (and Hindus) the benefit of the doubt? Everyone else always indulges in christoislami apologetics when the Terrorism's guilt is so obvious; why must I assume Hindus' guilt when it is not even proven? (Trial by media or by Bannerjees and Sachar committee reports do not count as proof.)