<!--QuoteBegin-Shambhu+Feb 3 2009, 09:58 PM-->QUOTE(Shambhu @ Feb 3 2009, 09:58 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->From rajeevblogspot..no url but its from outlook, in case.
..Gautier puts it succintly.
<!--emo&:bcow--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/b_cowboy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='b_cowboy.gif' /><!--endemo--> Cut paste, pass on, spread. Good one, meets standards for public dissemination: Good English (so that commies etc cant get a handle on it to make fun), concise, and..[..whats that thing that is never ever a criterion on the mlechcha school of journalism..ah, yes:]...true.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<b>Pale Fires Don't Scorch </b>
Deviants of Mangalore and Malegaon are demonised fallaciously
FRANCOIS GAUTIER
Outlook India
February 09, 2009
When blast after blast wrecks Indian markets, when trains are bombed, hotels attacked by men worse than animals, intellectuals blame it on Babri Masjid (where nobody was killed) or Gujarat (triggered by the burning of 59 innocent Hindus).But when a few Hindus plan to establish a Hindu rashtra and plot a clumsy, small-scale revenge, they are equated with deadly fundamentalists. A universal theorem is made of their single act, which should stand out as isolated, because Hindus have been for thousands of years tolerant to the point of cowardice. Our intellectuals never theorised when, in Kashmir, militants used to throw acid on women who did not cover up, but now devote reams to the goons of Mangalore.
[right][snapback]94211[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I disagree with Gautier. He presumes the Hindus' guilt in the "Hindu Terror" case when <i>none</i> of this has been proven; so far there's only been torture of the accused Hindus and of course the manufacture of evidence. For example, earlier news on Purohit's laptop admitted the ATS had found nothing in there (
Daily Pioneer: ATS finds no clue in Purohit laptop). A few days later however, Stavan Desai & Presley Thomas for the christo HindustanTimes write how evidence that wasn't there before, had now miraculously appeared as if jeebus <i>himself</i> had manufactured it:
<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Nov 29 2008, 10:58 AM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Nov 29 2008, 10:58 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Suspects were trained to lie</b>
<b>Stavan Desai & Presley Thomas</b>
Mumbai, November 26, 2008
[...]
<b>Investigators found details of these training sessions in Purohitâs laptop, which was recovered after his arrest on November 5. Hindustan Times had access to the armymanâs detailed lecture notes. Officials said at least 30 senior Abhinav Bharat members attended these sessions, referred to in the laptop as personality development workshops.</b>
(Previously the ATS said they found nothing on his laptop. Now that they have had it for a while they have installed all kinds of christian inquisitional 'evidence' in there.)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[right][snapback]91074[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I do not accept guilt being attributed to those who are not yet proven guilty and where there is moreover definite evidence of malicious intent in the groups *framing* the accused.
Shambhu, why would you <i>endorse</i> the above article, unless you agree that the Hindus in the "Hindu Terror" case are guilty? Can you really think they are? Will you totally ignore the <i>repeated protestations of innocence</i> (including their continued defiance - born of their insistence upon the truth - against the christo torture which the ATS has been using to obtain confessions) of the victimised Hindus Sadhvi Pragya (and here), Swami Amritanand, Purohit, Upadhyay?
Shambhu, when you <i>know</i> better, why do you do it?
Why do Hindus roll over and immediately accept every accusation thrown their way without first ascertaining whether there is any truth in the matter? I see this same dhimmi reaction to christoislami accusations/frame-ups all the time: "Yes our people must have been to blame in that <i>because you say so</i>, but... but... we're not <i>all</i> bad."
Another example: "Yes yes, Dara Singh burnt Staines but ... blablabla".
When the fact is, Dara Singh said he wasn't even present but that he was innocent, and the court couldn't prove he did it either.
But Hindus feel nothing about sacrificing other Hindus' reputation at the drop of a hat. Maybe only their own individual reputation is important. But I can't imagine who they think will then want to defend <i>them</i> against false charges when it is their turn? I am convinced that one such good turn deserves another, and that in a fair world, such merryweather friends ought to get their just desserts: when their time comes, they should get treated with the same auto-suspicion and auto-condemnation <i>from their own kind</i> that they rendered other Hindus who were falsely accused and who repeatedly said they were innocent instead.
The <i>Hindu</i> reaction should be to demand the ever-untrustworthy christoislamicommunist accusers to <i>PROVE IT</i> beyond all doubt (that is, without manufacturing evidence or through the use of torture to obtain confession) that Hindus did whatever they're accused of. *Then* Hindus can go on the defensive.
Also, until then, Gautier has wasted his words. In fact, he has taken serious liberties.
Hindus should learn to think for themselves. They owe it to their people to trust them when these say they are innocent, and to give the benefit of any doubt to Hindus first. If any Hindus cannot do even that, they can at least drop the pretence of being anything more than a chronic Dhimmi - the kind who cannot help but betray their own kind at every turn, even if such an offence against others may be committed out of unwillingness or ignorance or 'well-meaning' on the part of the Dhimmi.
And on that other matter. Shambhu, do you not find the christian NDTV media's impeccably timed presence in the Mangalore drama remotely suspicious? Gautier also ought to deliberate a bit more on the recent Mangalore pub case when it turns out that an interviewed eye-witness-cum-victim remarked how the Media had magically arrived <i>even before</i> the attackers had.
..Gautier puts it succintly.
<!--emo&:bcow--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/b_cowboy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='b_cowboy.gif' /><!--endemo--> Cut paste, pass on, spread. Good one, meets standards for public dissemination: Good English (so that commies etc cant get a handle on it to make fun), concise, and..[..whats that thing that is never ever a criterion on the mlechcha school of journalism..ah, yes:]...true.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<b>Pale Fires Don't Scorch </b>
Deviants of Mangalore and Malegaon are demonised fallaciously
FRANCOIS GAUTIER
Outlook India
February 09, 2009
When blast after blast wrecks Indian markets, when trains are bombed, hotels attacked by men worse than animals, intellectuals blame it on Babri Masjid (where nobody was killed) or Gujarat (triggered by the burning of 59 innocent Hindus).But when a few Hindus plan to establish a Hindu rashtra and plot a clumsy, small-scale revenge, they are equated with deadly fundamentalists. A universal theorem is made of their single act, which should stand out as isolated, because Hindus have been for thousands of years tolerant to the point of cowardice. Our intellectuals never theorised when, in Kashmir, militants used to throw acid on women who did not cover up, but now devote reams to the goons of Mangalore.
[right][snapback]94211[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I disagree with Gautier. He presumes the Hindus' guilt in the "Hindu Terror" case when <i>none</i> of this has been proven; so far there's only been torture of the accused Hindus and of course the manufacture of evidence. For example, earlier news on Purohit's laptop admitted the ATS had found nothing in there (
Daily Pioneer: ATS finds no clue in Purohit laptop). A few days later however, Stavan Desai & Presley Thomas for the christo HindustanTimes write how evidence that wasn't there before, had now miraculously appeared as if jeebus <i>himself</i> had manufactured it:
<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Nov 29 2008, 10:58 AM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Nov 29 2008, 10:58 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Suspects were trained to lie</b>
<b>Stavan Desai & Presley Thomas</b>
Mumbai, November 26, 2008
[...]
<b>Investigators found details of these training sessions in Purohitâs laptop, which was recovered after his arrest on November 5. Hindustan Times had access to the armymanâs detailed lecture notes. Officials said at least 30 senior Abhinav Bharat members attended these sessions, referred to in the laptop as personality development workshops.</b>
(Previously the ATS said they found nothing on his laptop. Now that they have had it for a while they have installed all kinds of christian inquisitional 'evidence' in there.)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[right][snapback]91074[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I do not accept guilt being attributed to those who are not yet proven guilty and where there is moreover definite evidence of malicious intent in the groups *framing* the accused.
Shambhu, why would you <i>endorse</i> the above article, unless you agree that the Hindus in the "Hindu Terror" case are guilty? Can you really think they are? Will you totally ignore the <i>repeated protestations of innocence</i> (including their continued defiance - born of their insistence upon the truth - against the christo torture which the ATS has been using to obtain confessions) of the victimised Hindus Sadhvi Pragya (and here), Swami Amritanand, Purohit, Upadhyay?
Shambhu, when you <i>know</i> better, why do you do it?
Why do Hindus roll over and immediately accept every accusation thrown their way without first ascertaining whether there is any truth in the matter? I see this same dhimmi reaction to christoislami accusations/frame-ups all the time: "Yes our people must have been to blame in that <i>because you say so</i>, but... but... we're not <i>all</i> bad."
Another example: "Yes yes, Dara Singh burnt Staines but ... blablabla".
When the fact is, Dara Singh said he wasn't even present but that he was innocent, and the court couldn't prove he did it either.
But Hindus feel nothing about sacrificing other Hindus' reputation at the drop of a hat. Maybe only their own individual reputation is important. But I can't imagine who they think will then want to defend <i>them</i> against false charges when it is their turn? I am convinced that one such good turn deserves another, and that in a fair world, such merryweather friends ought to get their just desserts: when their time comes, they should get treated with the same auto-suspicion and auto-condemnation <i>from their own kind</i> that they rendered other Hindus who were falsely accused and who repeatedly said they were innocent instead.
The <i>Hindu</i> reaction should be to demand the ever-untrustworthy christoislamicommunist accusers to <i>PROVE IT</i> beyond all doubt (that is, without manufacturing evidence or through the use of torture to obtain confession) that Hindus did whatever they're accused of. *Then* Hindus can go on the defensive.
Also, until then, Gautier has wasted his words. In fact, he has taken serious liberties.
Hindus should learn to think for themselves. They owe it to their people to trust them when these say they are innocent, and to give the benefit of any doubt to Hindus first. If any Hindus cannot do even that, they can at least drop the pretence of being anything more than a chronic Dhimmi - the kind who cannot help but betray their own kind at every turn, even if such an offence against others may be committed out of unwillingness or ignorance or 'well-meaning' on the part of the Dhimmi.
And on that other matter. Shambhu, do you not find the christian NDTV media's impeccably timed presence in the Mangalore drama remotely suspicious? Gautier also ought to deliberate a bit more on the recent Mangalore pub case when it turns out that an interviewed eye-witness-cum-victim remarked how the Media had magically arrived <i>even before</i> the attackers had.