^ K.Ram's #623 important. (2-up)
Romani,
Such a dialogue as they offer is always on *their* terms. On matters *they* wish discussed. They will use double-speak, e.g.:
- they will talk of 'religious freedom' as a fundamental right. What they mean is the right to mow us over, the right of christianism to stake heathens with its cross.
- they will talk of 'Hindu fundamentalists'. What they mean is Hindus who resist christian terrorism.
- They will lecture how we must "share" the "Indian" culture since it is "Indian". What they mean is "how will you stop us from stealing your HINDU religious and religio-cultural elements from right under your nose?"
- They will lecture us about how *christians* are being victimised for their faith. What they mean is to taunt us with "How are you going to prove that we are killing you and destroying your religion?"
- They will lecture how we - the Hindus- must not persecute <i>them</i>. What they mean is that heathens may not justly respond to their eternal terrorism against and murder of our kind, that secular Hindus must condemn and contain those of our own kind who are bereaved of family and rights by christian terrorism from redressing wrongs which neither the government nor media will render justice on. The christian government instead tries to invite over the christist USCIRF ready to judge the victimised Hindus as the offenders and offers money and rehabilitation to the christian instigators in Orissa, while the christian media ignores the Hindu victims and the christian instigation, painting the christians as the innocent persecuted martyrs of Hindu "fascists" in all this.
It is a loaded, leading dialogue.
We've heard all these claims before. The traditional GrecoRomans suffered the same and complained of it (but they didn't know that later christians would make up further lies about them, and invent further persecution sobstories). And we are experiencing first-hand the truth of traditional GrecoRomans' experience which christian 'history' tried to cover up and more secular (more honest) history-writing has substantiated. Similarly, Jews were libelled with the most ridiculous accusations (murdering the non-existent jeebus, the "protocols of zion" fiction, eating christian babies, plotting against christians) when in reality they were the victims of christian pogroms.
1. Do you truly think that christianism via church + faithful believes in a fundamental equality between heathens and christians to allow us to speak on an equal footing? No, it does *not*. They are convinced theirs is the true religion. It is a monologue. One that, as I said, is full of leading statements and questions.
For goodness sake, your background is Orthodox christianism. Do you really think any overtures that the catholic church makes for dialogue with the Orthodox church would be done to pursue a path of equality and acceptance, or would it be to implement their own superiority (or for other hidden motives). They will dialogue only when in a position of weakness and to secure a position of greater strength, or to distract their opponents and the onlooking "objective" ignorant world from what they are doing.
They only hold this sort of farcical session because it *is* a farce - meant for PR, for the world, the "at least we tried to dialogue with the stubborn heathens, look how wonderful we are for giving them a sporting chance". Behind the scenes they murder and torture our Hindus including Swamis.
One does not dialogue with murderers. Why should we dialogue with genocidal manias? Who cares if the dissembling christian terrorists play the role of the 'civilised, reasonable' side to the outside world. We know better what they truly are.
<b>Their mock-parley is for the christoarchive</b>, which will record that "in Anno Domini 2009, the christians engaged in an interfaith dialogue with the Hindus who refused to see reason and rejected their valid points." The christo-archive will not record how the christians have murdered and murdered and murdered the Hindus and our religioculture, while simultaneously stealing from it (inculturation). That is the story not a single historian will recount, but the future Hellenes may perhaps look on us with a kind, understanding and insightful eye and perceive the true history that befell us.
2. Do you think christians will dialogue when they make us a minority? Did they dialogue with the GrecoRomans?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->From Forgery in Christianity, by Joseph Wheless:
Â
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->
When the Christians were weak and powerless and subjected to occasional persecutions as "enemies of the human race," (the Pagan Romans had very descriptive terms for the zombies of the christian meme) they were vocal and insistent advocates of liberty of conscience and freedom to worship whatever God one chose; the Christian "Apologies" to the Emperors abound in eloquent pleas for religious tolerance; and this was granted to them and to all by the Edict of Milan and other imperial Decrees. But when by the favor of Constantine they got into the saddle of the State, they at once grasped the sword and began to murder and despoil all who would not pretend to believe as the Catholic priest commanded them to believe. When today the Church screams "Persecution!" and "Bigotry!" at every criticism and every attempt to restrict it in some of its presumptuous usurpations, let it recall a few of the laws of intolerance, plunder and death which it procured and enforced from the moment it got the prostituted power, so long as that power lasted. Beginning with Constantine, and under succeeding "Christian" emperors, there is a series of scores of laws which the Christians procured to be enacted for the suppression and persecution to death of Pagans, heretics and Jews. These laws and edicts are to be found in the Codes of Theodosius and of Justinian, the two famous codifleations of Roman Law.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
3. I regard all mental contact with them and their false words ('dialogue') as mental pollution.
- I don't want monopolytheistic dialogue from western anthropologists.
- I don't want the west to tell me what Hindu Dharma is via their self-appointed experts on "Hinduism" like Doniger.
- And as a Hindu I certainly don't want christians 'talking' to Hindus as part of the christian sham - with, behind their grin, a most murderous intent.
Hindus have dialogued enough with them (see Sita Ram Goel's "History of Hindu-Christian encounters" http://bharatvani.org/books/hhce/ ).
I would never dialogue with terrorists who kill my family and vandalise my home and foulmouth those things that I cherish (my Gods). And Swami Lakshmanananda, the Orissans, the Nagas of the NE, etcetera, *are* my family. Throw in the Native Americans, Julian and all likeminded GrecoRomans, and the rest, who are also by extension grouped in "family" as per the original sense in which sentiments like "Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam" were meant: those who are normal and peaceful and live in harmony with us are to be treated in a harmonious manner, accepted and respected for being part of the extended human<i>e</i> family.
But <i>never</i> intolerant terrorists. Christianism has betrayed everyone with its falseness, it has destroyed every traditional community it came into contact with. Now why hold conversation with a mass-murderer of other people? There is no dialoguing with a serial killer who has also promised repeatedly that Hindus are its next intended victim.
Romani,
Such a dialogue as they offer is always on *their* terms. On matters *they* wish discussed. They will use double-speak, e.g.:
- they will talk of 'religious freedom' as a fundamental right. What they mean is the right to mow us over, the right of christianism to stake heathens with its cross.
- they will talk of 'Hindu fundamentalists'. What they mean is Hindus who resist christian terrorism.
- They will lecture how we must "share" the "Indian" culture since it is "Indian". What they mean is "how will you stop us from stealing your HINDU religious and religio-cultural elements from right under your nose?"
- They will lecture us about how *christians* are being victimised for their faith. What they mean is to taunt us with "How are you going to prove that we are killing you and destroying your religion?"
- They will lecture how we - the Hindus- must not persecute <i>them</i>. What they mean is that heathens may not justly respond to their eternal terrorism against and murder of our kind, that secular Hindus must condemn and contain those of our own kind who are bereaved of family and rights by christian terrorism from redressing wrongs which neither the government nor media will render justice on. The christian government instead tries to invite over the christist USCIRF ready to judge the victimised Hindus as the offenders and offers money and rehabilitation to the christian instigators in Orissa, while the christian media ignores the Hindu victims and the christian instigation, painting the christians as the innocent persecuted martyrs of Hindu "fascists" in all this.
It is a loaded, leading dialogue.
We've heard all these claims before. The traditional GrecoRomans suffered the same and complained of it (but they didn't know that later christians would make up further lies about them, and invent further persecution sobstories). And we are experiencing first-hand the truth of traditional GrecoRomans' experience which christian 'history' tried to cover up and more secular (more honest) history-writing has substantiated. Similarly, Jews were libelled with the most ridiculous accusations (murdering the non-existent jeebus, the "protocols of zion" fiction, eating christian babies, plotting against christians) when in reality they were the victims of christian pogroms.
1. Do you truly think that christianism via church + faithful believes in a fundamental equality between heathens and christians to allow us to speak on an equal footing? No, it does *not*. They are convinced theirs is the true religion. It is a monologue. One that, as I said, is full of leading statements and questions.
For goodness sake, your background is Orthodox christianism. Do you really think any overtures that the catholic church makes for dialogue with the Orthodox church would be done to pursue a path of equality and acceptance, or would it be to implement their own superiority (or for other hidden motives). They will dialogue only when in a position of weakness and to secure a position of greater strength, or to distract their opponents and the onlooking "objective" ignorant world from what they are doing.
They only hold this sort of farcical session because it *is* a farce - meant for PR, for the world, the "at least we tried to dialogue with the stubborn heathens, look how wonderful we are for giving them a sporting chance". Behind the scenes they murder and torture our Hindus including Swamis.
One does not dialogue with murderers. Why should we dialogue with genocidal manias? Who cares if the dissembling christian terrorists play the role of the 'civilised, reasonable' side to the outside world. We know better what they truly are.
<b>Their mock-parley is for the christoarchive</b>, which will record that "in Anno Domini 2009, the christians engaged in an interfaith dialogue with the Hindus who refused to see reason and rejected their valid points." The christo-archive will not record how the christians have murdered and murdered and murdered the Hindus and our religioculture, while simultaneously stealing from it (inculturation). That is the story not a single historian will recount, but the future Hellenes may perhaps look on us with a kind, understanding and insightful eye and perceive the true history that befell us.
2. Do you think christians will dialogue when they make us a minority? Did they dialogue with the GrecoRomans?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->From Forgery in Christianity, by Joseph Wheless:
Â
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->
When the Christians were weak and powerless and subjected to occasional persecutions as "enemies of the human race," (the Pagan Romans had very descriptive terms for the zombies of the christian meme) they were vocal and insistent advocates of liberty of conscience and freedom to worship whatever God one chose; the Christian "Apologies" to the Emperors abound in eloquent pleas for religious tolerance; and this was granted to them and to all by the Edict of Milan and other imperial Decrees. But when by the favor of Constantine they got into the saddle of the State, they at once grasped the sword and began to murder and despoil all who would not pretend to believe as the Catholic priest commanded them to believe. When today the Church screams "Persecution!" and "Bigotry!" at every criticism and every attempt to restrict it in some of its presumptuous usurpations, let it recall a few of the laws of intolerance, plunder and death which it procured and enforced from the moment it got the prostituted power, so long as that power lasted. Beginning with Constantine, and under succeeding "Christian" emperors, there is a series of scores of laws which the Christians procured to be enacted for the suppression and persecution to death of Pagans, heretics and Jews. These laws and edicts are to be found in the Codes of Theodosius and of Justinian, the two famous codifleations of Roman Law.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
3. I regard all mental contact with them and their false words ('dialogue') as mental pollution.
- I don't want monopolytheistic dialogue from western anthropologists.
- I don't want the west to tell me what Hindu Dharma is via their self-appointed experts on "Hinduism" like Doniger.
- And as a Hindu I certainly don't want christians 'talking' to Hindus as part of the christian sham - with, behind their grin, a most murderous intent.
Hindus have dialogued enough with them (see Sita Ram Goel's "History of Hindu-Christian encounters" http://bharatvani.org/books/hhce/ ).
I would never dialogue with terrorists who kill my family and vandalise my home and foulmouth those things that I cherish (my Gods). And Swami Lakshmanananda, the Orissans, the Nagas of the NE, etcetera, *are* my family. Throw in the Native Americans, Julian and all likeminded GrecoRomans, and the rest, who are also by extension grouped in "family" as per the original sense in which sentiments like "Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam" were meant: those who are normal and peaceful and live in harmony with us are to be treated in a harmonious manner, accepted and respected for being part of the extended human<i>e</i> family.
But <i>never</i> intolerant terrorists. Christianism has betrayed everyone with its falseness, it has destroyed every traditional community it came into contact with. Now why hold conversation with a mass-murderer of other people? There is no dialoguing with a serial killer who has also promised repeatedly that Hindus are its next intended victim.