Most TV channels and English media has ignored this news. We missed this news on the forum too.
Allahabad High Court has given a landmark judgement a couple of days back. Responding to a PIL moved by a priest of Varanasi, it stated that like lotus is national flower, and peacock national bird, Jana Gana Mana national anthem, like that Bhagawad Gita can be called the national dharma grantha. It said that Gita is not a sectarian document like the other granthas. It is not a theology. It is a value system of all humanity that India should be proud of. It said Gita inspired countless freedom fighters, and more than anything else, was the backbone of India's national spirit in various forms.
Court also admitted the government's excesses on temples of Hindus. It also said that excluding Parsi, Jew, Christian and Muslim - followers of all the other faiths that originated in India are known as HINDU. It also admitted and inquired how Hindus are becoming minority in parts of India and UP. It also directed Center and UP govts to set up separate task forces to safe guard the "Hindu" places of worship. Same bench (Justice Srivastava) that had earlier pronounced that Muslims are not to be treated as 'minority' by UP Govt.
<b>Justice Srivastava will soon face the music. Watch it.</b>
[right][snapback]73071[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As predicted, Nyaymurti Shambhunath Srivastava receives threats - security provided. He just retired too.
The Central government on Friday withdrew its two affidavits, including the controversial one filed by Archeological Survey of India, in the Supreme Court on the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project.
<span style='color:red'>Withdrawing the affidavits, the government said it was not its intention to cast aspersions on the religious faith of people or divide the society.
Promising to examine issues relating to the Sethusamudram project, the government sought three months' time from the court. </span>
In accordance with the government's request, the court has posted the matter for hearing in the first week of January, 2008.
The blasphemy of government two days back, in ASI affidavit, had a silverlining that it woke up the sleeping soceity and created a huge public outrage, forcing government on back foot.
Now. Let us pray the anti-hindu anti-national government is dissolved in the thin air before the 3 months are passed. Also let us pray, they do not do any tricks in the meanwhile.
<b>Denying Ram is denying India</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Sonia Gandhi again played a masterstroke by taking credit for withdrawing the offending Ram Sethu affidavit. But this has also raised the question whether she did it in deference to Hindu sentiments or was she afraid of its negative impact on her party's election prospects.<b> Since the United Progressive Alliance's ascendancy to power, a number of decisions have been taken by the government which hurt Hindu sentiments but none cared.
If suddenly her conscience took cognisance of Hindu sensitivities, then logically she should have also withdrawn the destruction of the Ram Sethu.</b> One can only hope that political leaders understand that this issue concerns national sentiments and should be dealt beyond party lines.
After all,<b> <span style='color:red'>the affidavit was filed quite confidently by the State apparatus because the entire atmosphere of governance has a distinct 'offend the Hindus, get the Muslim votes' hue. Bureaucrats, being the most durbari species, sensed it, otherwise none would have dared to file such nonsense on a stamp paper during A B Vajpayee's regime.
<span style='color:red'>It is this all-pervading air of 'bruising Hindus to get a pat' that the name that appears first on our lips since birth and lasts till the funeral pyre is lit was challenged so coolly by a government which is not run by aliens. </span></span></b>
<b>It has tried to delete all that stood for our identity and cultural traits that define us, our nationhood and soul. It shows utter disregard for the majority sentiment and the threads that weave a fabric called India, while distributing gifts of reservations and loans and opportunities for anyone declaring himself to be a non-Hindu. One Diwali our Shankaracharya was arrested and then Muslims were given reservations in jobs and educational institutions. No one ever, not even once, showed any concern for the Kashmiri Hindu refugees; rather illegal alien Muslim infiltrators were facilitated by enacting the Illegal Migrants Detention Act and when the Supreme Court struck it down, again brought it back through the back door.</b>
This attitude sets the tone of the State machinery. So what happened in this case was nothing surprising. If the affidavit was honestly withdrawn to respect Hindu sentiments, then why was it not accompanied with an announcement to withdraw the destruction of the Ram Sethu also? If the offending affidavit is bad, then the destruction of the bridge connected with the same great icon of Hindus is worse.
Didn't the political masters who cleared the affidavit know that Ram doesn't need any birth certificate from occupants of the paan-stained dirty corridors of State? Faith of any hue and region has to be respected unquestioningly. It is faith that makes people live and die for a cause, and not political jugglery.
<b>Ram defines our nation, our ancestry, our civilisation. Denying Ram is denying India. Gandhi stood firmly for Ram Rajya. He died with Ram's name on his lips. His samadhi in Delhi has only one inscription etched on it, He Ram. But Hindus are asked to provide proof of Rama's birthplace and the data of his bridge's construction plans</b>.
Now they asked for proof of his existence. Next they may ask -- with this kind of Parliament it is quite possible -- to provide proof of who gave Bharat her name. Where are the records? And the ASI's poor director will file an affidavit: We do not have any 'scientifically' ascertainable records, only mythologies say this land's name is Bharat. Hence the name can be changed to any Nehru-Gandhi Clanistan, which will have proof authenticated by the New Delhi Municipal Corporation!
<b>Mythology. The whole construct is a British anthropological revenge on us. We had a different tradition of recording events and writing history. The British and their cohorts taught that all that was mythology, a myth, and only the Western Christian world's methods are 'scientific'.</b> Hence we adopted their standards, their calendar, their ways to greet the guests, their worldview became ours, and we discarded everything that we cherished, adopted their attire and weird uniforms (see our learned advocates sweating in black but still not complaining) to look modern and progressive.
Hence questioning Ram and Sita, humiliating ochre-robed sanyasins, converting ancient people and ridiculing their faith becomes part of cleansing the 'heathens and pagans' of their dark practices and emancipating them to the 'higher' levels of 'modernity'.
.........................
...................<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you see how MEA babus did wonder with 'Q' in Brazil, just to make Queen happy and no action on any Hindu cause or terrorist.
Some babus are traitors of lowest level. They can beat any Jaichand hands down.
The way they are promoting 123 deal, after deal, just watch how these traitors join different study circles. Just follow money you will get answer loud and clear. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Perversity as secularism </b>
Pioneer.com
KPS Gill
It is, indeed, amazing how polarising the political discourse has become in this country, and how entirely unnecessary and extraneous controversies are being generated by an intellectually bankrupt national leadership. It is incomprehensible how such perverse nonsense relating to the controversy on Ram Setu could have entered a supposedly secular Government's representation before the Supreme Court of India.
<b>The Government has, of course, recanted and has sought to distance itself from the contents of the affidavit, but this is far from enough. Someone must have drafted this document; someone would have approved and signed it. This is not something that can simply be pinned on to some minion in the Archaeological Survey of India. The Ram Setu issue has been a prominent political and public controversy for several months now, and it is impossible that a critical affidavit in this regard would not have the explicit assent of the political executive at the highest level; and, in the remote possibility that this is actually the case, the dereliction at senior levels of Government is unforgivable.
The individuals concerned at every level of the drafting and approval of this pernicious affidavit need to be clearly and publicly identified and penalised for causing unnecessary offence to Hindus - the majority community in this country, and one that is evidently not regarded as a vote-bank by the so-called 'secular' parties - and, indeed, to many non-Hindus who share in the vibrant collective and cultural consciousness of India's variegated civilisation.</b>
There is a new and escalating insensitivity in Indian secular thought, which not only insistently neglects the sensibilities of the majority community, but, worse, appears eager to cause injury to such sentiments. India's opportunistic political secularists - as distinct from those who are, in fact and practice, actually wedded to the secular ideology - feel that they cannot sufficiently proclaim their secularism without displaying at least a measure of contempt for Hindu beliefs and practices.
By contrast, the most extraordinary sensitivity -<b> often transgressing not only the limits of good sense, but even considerations of national interest - is prominently displayed towards the Muslim minority vote-bank</b> <b>(though other minorities - with their smaller shares in electoral contests - are ironically treated with the same contempt that is directed against the majority community).</b> These tendencies appear to be getting worse with the passage of time, and a precipitous decline in the quality of political debate and intelligence is manifest.
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>These tendencies are, nevertheless, deep rooted in Indian - and particularly Congress - politics, and the tallest of our leaders have not escaped susceptibility to this perversity of perspective. When the Khilafat movement collapsed in 1924, the Moplah rebellion, in which Muslim mobs inflicted untold savagery and rapine on Hindus, broke out in Kerala.
<b>Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, the Mahatma, who wore his Hindu identity very much on his sleeve, first denied these atrocities. As evidence of Muslim excesses mounted, he described the Moplahs as "god-fearing" people who were "fighting for what they consider as religion, and in a manner they consider as religious". Even during the Khilafat movement, Gandhi chose to ally with the infamous Ali brothers, silently sharing a platform with them, and refusing to criticise or comment when they declared: "If the Afghans invaded India to wage holy war, the Indian Muhammadans are not only bound to join them but also to fight the Hindus if they refuse to cooperate with them."</b>.</span>
<b>The problem with the current controversy goes beyond this, to the way in which we view science itself. The Archaeological Survey of India, in its affidavit to the Supreme Court, has asserted that there "was no historical and scientific evidence to establish the existence of Lord Ram or the other characters in Ramayan". But to conclude from this lack of evidence that Lord Ram did not exist, and that the whole of Ramayan is no more than a religious myth, exceeds the scope of the evidence (or lack thereof).</b>
The inability to prove, on scientific criteria, the existence of a particular individual or entity does not amount to a proof of the non-existence of such an individual or entity. Falsification has entirely different criteria - and the dearth of archaeological and historical evidence is not sufficient basis for such falsification. Regrettably, many have jumped into this controversy with sweeping assertions regarding the existence or otherwise of Lord Ram and of Ram Setu, reflecting the poorest possible understanding of scientific methodology or of evidence.
Unfortunately, science, with rare exception, is taught in India much like religion: As an authoritarian, faith-based system, to be internalised by rote on the mandate of a teacher whose assertions are to be accepted without question; and, not as the tentative, continuously expanding enterprise of discovery rooted in human freedom and imagination.
The Ram Setu issue, moreover, goes beyond science, to the very heart of faith and of the collective consciousness of a nation - and these considerations cannot be irrelevant to a legal determination of the issue. If, indeed, they were to be treated as extraneous and immaterial, then there could be no objection to razing every religious structure in the country to the ground, on considerations, purely, of expediency. The greatest caution must be exercised when intervening in these issues, and the clumsiness, the political chicanery and the opportunism - across party lines - that characterised the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid issue should be avoided at all costs.
<b>The legend of Ram and Ramayan - archaeological evidence or no archaeological evidence - has primal resonances in the civilisation, culture and multiple identities, not only of India and among Hindus, but among the people of the entire South and South-East Asian region, and occasionally well beyond. I recall watching films and theatrical performances - Ram Lilas - based on Ramayan from earliest childhood, and one of the most exciting scenes was the vaanar sena building the bridge to Lanka with rocks inscribed with the name of their Lord. These are images embedded in the consciousness of millions across India and beyond, and to trivialise this is to misunderstand the very nature of governance. </b>
There is an increasing fraud and dishonesty at the core of the Indian secular establishment. Secularism means, at once, a distancing of the institutions of governance from communal influence, but also sensitivity towards all religious communities and faiths - not just a particular minority vote-bank. The current, contentious and prejudiced orientation of so-called 'secular' forces in national politics reflects a complete collapse of political intellect.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Affidavit was based on Govt's 'instructions' </b>
Pioneer.com
Abraham Thomas | New Delhi
Says ASG while withdrawing Culture Ministry's rejoinder
In a bid to bury the ghost of the controversial affidavit that questioned the existence of Lord Ram, the Government on Friday withdrew i<b>t after facing spontaneous public outrage and fear of electoral setbacks in the event of mid-term polls.</b>
The possible polarisation of Hindu votes in favour of the BJP in the forthcoming Gujarat Assembly poll was also believed to be one of the important reasons for the Government undertaking a quick damage control exercise.
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Gopal Subramanium, entrusted with the task of damage control by the Centre, offered to withdraw the affidavit filed by the Ministry of Culture on September 12, maintaining at the same time that the affidavit was not a careless comment but one based on instructions received and documents made available till then. He added<b>, "The said affidavit (by the Ministry of Culture) was based upon the instructions provided and material made available till then." </b>
Creating an escape route, his note submitted to the court stated, "Having regard to public sentiment, and having regard to the fact that representations, including additional material, are being brought to the attention of the Government since the filing of this affidavit, the Central Government withdraws the present affidavit."
The controversial affidavit stated, "The petitioners have primarily relied upon the contents of the Valmiki Ramayan, the Ramacharitmanas by Tulsidas, and other mythological texts, which cannot be said to be historical records to incontrovertibly prove the existence of the characters, or the occurrence of the events, depicted therein."
This affidavit by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) had followed a previous one filed by the Ministry of Road and Surface Transport on September 10 that too stood withdrawn following the submissions by the Centre.
"The Central Government without any reservation, in a spirit of inclusiveness and high democratic tradition, to consider a different point of view, withdraws the present affidavit, to re-examine the entire matter," Subramanium said.
Seeking three months' time for preparing a fresh response, he said, "All materials will be re-scrutinised with care and circumspection, including any alterative suggestions."
The Bench of Chief Justice KG Balakrishnan and Justice RV Raveendran accepted the ASG's assurance and posted the matter for hearing in January.
Till such time the court continued its August 31 order restraining the Centre from carrying out any construction activity linked with the Setusamudram Ship Canal Project that may harm or destroy the Ram Setu.
....
<b>Not a careless comment:</b>
ASG says affidavit not a careless comment
Was based on material made available
Possible polarisation of Hindu votes in Gujarat poll was believed to be one of the reasons for withdrawal of affidavit
Govt seeks three months for preparing fresh response
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Damage control: PM not Sonia took initiative </b>
Pioneer News Service | New Delh
The Congress spin doctors had gone to town on Thursday claiming that it was party president Sonia Gandhi's intervention that had prompted the Government to decide on withdrawing its controversial affidavit denying the existence of Lord Ram. Â
<b>But highly placed sources said that the adverse political fallout of the affidavit was discussed at the highest level in the Government and in the Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs (CCPA) on Thursday. The meeting was presided over by Prime Minister Mannmohan Singh and attended by senior Cabinet Ministers.</b>
<b>Sources said that the overwhelming opinion in the CCPA was that in view of the possibility of mid-term polls, the Government must withdraw the affidavit to pre-empt the BJP from cashing in on the controversy. Incidentally, after the meeting, RJD chief Lalu Prasad had gone on record expressing his reservation over the controversial affidavit and acknowledging the existence of Lord Ram.</b>
But in the Congress scheme of things, the Government has always been made the scapegoat for unpopular decisions and Sonia Gandhi the rescuer. So, by afternoon Congress sources were claiming that 10 Janpath was highly upset with the Culture Ministry's affidavit and had asked the Government to withdraw it immediately. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Interestingly, the CCPA was done with its deliberations before the first news of Sonia Gandhi's unhappiness over the affidavit began to trickle in from the Congress headquarters. In fact, Law Minister HR Bhardwaj's press conference where he announced the Government's decision to withdraw the affidavit also followed the CCPA meeting. Bhardwaj came straight from the CCPA meet and informed the media about the decision to withdraw the affidavit.
<b>Sources said the Prime Minister was greatly upset by the content of the controversial affidavit and had taken personal interest in the matter. The Government's submission on Friday in the Supreme Court, seeking withdrawal of the controversial affidavit is understood to have been cleared by the PMO.</b>
After denying Manmohan Singh his due, the Congress leaders have now begun talking about a deep conspiracy behind the insertion of the disputed observation about Lord Ram, in the affidavit. On Friday, Congress leaders were claiming that the paragraph could have been deliberately included by someone to vilify the Congress.
Even though the Government had withdrawn the affidavit, senior Congress leaders admitted that damage has been done. "It is easy to rouse passions saying that the Congress had said that Ram does not exist. It will be difficult to convince the layman that it was a mistake which was rectified," a Congress leader remarked.
Meanwhile, the Congress rejected the BJP's demand for an apology from the Prime Minister and Sonia Gandhi. Faced with a barrage of questions on the "mistake" at a briefing here, Congress spokesman Abhishek Singhvi said a process was on to find out
Damage control: <b>PM not Sonia took initiative how the "erroneous" affidavit was filed and to "fix the responsibility" for it.</b>Â
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So it was a Christian hand.
Still no apology and firing from Moron Singh.
Yesterday night there was news on Karuna (DMK) death warning etc on IBN live. I think comments on that news item forced IBN to remove news altogether.
Some comments I can recall -
Why on 15th, not before?
Thanks in advance.
Waiting for that great day.
....
Karuna is most unpopular politician in rest of India. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<b>'Affidavit on Ram, part of Muslim appeasement policy'</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->"In order to win over the Muslim votes the UPA government went to the extent of hurting the religious sentiments of Hindus," Lok Sabha MP from Hamirpur Dhumal said.
Dhumal demanded an apology from the Prime Minister and an action against those responsible for the filing of the affidavit undermining the sanctity of Lord Rama.
<b>However Dhumal disapproved the announcement of reward made by some fundamentalist Hindu organisations to behead the official responsible for affidavit saying that the protests should be carried out in the constitutional manner only</b>.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>UPA âatonementâ: Affidavits withdrawn, review promised, 2 ASI officials suspended </b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Earlier, in the court, acknowledging âthe wide-ranging public sentimentâ to the âdecision of the Central Government to proceed with the construction of the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal,â Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramanium told the bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan: âThe Central Government, without any reservations, in a spirit of inclusiveness and high democratic tradition, to consider a different point of view, withdraws the present affidavit, to re-examine the entire matter.â
................
Meanwhile,<b> officials claimed that the objectionable lines in the affidavit had been deleted by the Culture Ministry and the ASI was instructed to carry out the necessary corrections before filing it in the court. While some of the corrections were carried out, the controversial lines remained: </b>âcontents of the Valmiki Ramayana, the Ramcharitmanas by Tulsidas and other mythological texts, which admittedly form an important part of ancient Indian literature...cannot be said to be historical record to incontrovertibly prove the existence of the characters, or the occurrence of the events, depicted therein.â
<b>Bakshi is said to be the officer responsible for carrying out the corrections while Chandrasekhar was coordinating with the Ministry of Culture and office of the Additional Solicitor General in the exercise of filing this affidavit.</b> The Director General, ASI was yesterday asked to conduct an inquiry to find out how and where the lapse had occurred.
<b>The DG herself has not been spared either with Culture Secretary Badal K Das asking her to furnish a âpersonal explanationâ in the matter. Vaishya has been asked to explain her role and what she had done to ensure that the corrections were carried out, </b>the sources said. Culture Minister Ambika Soni, who returned from Japan this evening, was briefed on the issue by Ministry officials. She was unavailable for comment
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now Ambika Soni ministry is making story. Who wrote this junk in first place, how dare it even reached to minister? Why Soni took no action against people who came up with first draft.
Think if any Babu comeup with line like Mohamad was womanizer or Jesus mother was messing around, do you think minster will just cancel those line. Ofcourse not.
<b>Sethu: DMK irked by Govtâs rollback move</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->CHENNAI, SEPTEMBER 14: The ruling DMK in Tamil Nadu is quietly seething over the Centreâs decision to withdraw its affidavits on the Sethusamudram project and seek three months to examine the issue of dredging near the controversial Adamâs Bridge.
....
Union Shipping Minister T R Baalu, the protagonist of the Rs 2,427-crore SSCP, who pushed the project through and ensured its formal launch on July 1, 2005, sounded upset when contacted. âI do not wish to comment on the project when it is before the court,â he said. On whether the project was likely to be shelved, he said: âThat is up to the court now.â
....
âObviously, the election fever has started and the Congress has thought it best to convince those advocating Ram Sethu on the feasibility of the project rather than provoke them. But all this is only going to delay the project and push the deadline for its completion further,â pointed out a peeved Union Minister from the DMK, who did not wish to be named.
.....
âThis is the time the CM has to be careful. No one can prevent Sethusamudram project from happening. So it is better that our leader treads cautiously,â said a senior DMK leader in Tamil Nadu.
Her ally and MDMK chief Vaiko has been rather quiet on the issue. Vaiko has been a strong proponent of the project and had criticised the DMK strongly during the Assembly election campaign for taking sole credit for getting it implemented<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>Hurriyat backs Ram Sethu, says faith needs no proof</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Leader of the Hurriyatâs moderate faction, <b>Mirwaiz Umar Farooq,</b> said his party condemns the âblasphemous statementsâ of the Centre about Lord Rama and said âfaith needs no proofâ. âWe extend our support to all those who are fighting for saving religious heritage, be it of any community... The Government has no right to interfere in the religious affairs of any community or question their faith,â said the Mirwaiz.
<b>Moulvi Abbas Ansari</b>, who heads the Itihadul Muslimeen, said the Government has no right to question the religious sentiments of people and put deities to scientific tests and proofs. â... No one should be given the right to question or cast aspersions on the religious beliefs or shrines of millions of devout. When the Babri Masjid was demolished, we were deeply hurt. This incident has again brought into focus the fact that the Government should not do anything that hurts the sentiments of people,â he said.
<b>Separatist leader Shabir Shah</b>, who heads the J-K Democratic Freedom Party, said he found it shocking that the Government told the Supreme Court that there is no scientific evidence to prove that Ram Sethu is manmade. âWe condemn the Centreâs attitude on this issue,â he said.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
09-15-2007, 06:23 AM (This post was last modified: 09-15-2007, 09:59 AM by Husky.)
Post 47:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Congress rejects BJP`s demand for apology </b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->(As stated in posts above, they've 'withdrawn' the affidavit without apologising, and plan to come out with a fresh response in 3 months time.)
I say it is a good thing, Congress not apologising. Good good. (Besides, we want no insincere apologies by people who only feel it incumbent upon them to rattle out "we're sorry" when they feel the effects of their nastiness pinching their wallet or fear they won't be re-elected. Once they have secured those things again, they will be back to singing the same old tune.)
But this whole event gives Hindus a great opportunity. It is not just any babble thumper or islamic or communist/dmk loser who has denied the existence of Rama. Because we're used to that. No no. It is the so-called 'secular' Indian govt that's put its foot in the banta poodoo.
So much the better. Because, now that they have torn up their end of the nasty psecular contract, that means we are no longer - EVER - bound by it again. (And remember - they did it first, so we are allowed to retaliate in stronger terms and means.)
They want to make the debate public, taking it even to political levels? Excellent! If Hindus had <b>any sense</b> they should take this chance with both hands and start making their move. Even though Sonia has predictably exhonerated herself from her input in the crime (realised she jumped the gun a bit early, huh? Was a bit tooooo secure that she got those Hindooooos already under her christoterrorist foot and could do what she wished), it's our chance to find out how she likes it in return. <b>Hindus ought to start publicing the facts of jeebus' non-existence all over India.</b> Start quoting those franciscan monks and archaeologists who excavated in 'nazareth' in a desperate bid to prove jeebus' existence only to find it proved the opposite. Publicise the facts concerning the alleged 'eye-witness' accounts of jeebus: all forged, strained or - as the church puts it in its disingenous way - 'interpolated'. Tell everyone how the stories of jeebus' resurrection and miraculous birth were added in later - as notable bible scholars have shown. Tell all Indians how the Sermon on the Mount could never have been said by jeebus of christianism because it is known to have been added in later. And there's infinitely more.
We can do serious damage to the objective of christianising India without requiring any more effort than typing or translating or republishing existing news/other material. Sending Sonia's beloved terrorist beliefs crumbling to the dust and dousing all the hope of the missionaries to make some more sheep. They will never recover. And it will make christoconvert terrorists feel the brunt of insults for a change - though christos may find these to be insults, in reality these are no more than well-known facts that were carefully hidden from them (unlike the christoterrorist lies against Shiva, Rama, Kali).
Put it on the news, on TV channels. <b>It should no longer be deemed unsecular when our own 'secular' Indian govt has set the example here.</b> They broke their end of that hateful psecular bargain once, now all agreements of supposed 'mutual silence' are off (thus far it had only ever been one way in practise, what with Sonia-sanctioned missionaries howling disgusting untruths in Hindus' ears). Never be tricked into the psecular sham deal again.
Make them sorry they ever made the mistake of trying to mess with us from this angle. When the enemy makes a fatal move, it is foolish to not call them out on it and take full advantage. The losers shouldn't have chosen this pathetic strategy, but now it's our move. Do not be carried away with feelings of pity for 'their feelings' - remember, they have none for us. Besides, they are better off without [<- corrected error: previously mistyped 'without' as 'with' instead] the ideology of christoterrorism ruling their lives. (Sparing feelings in this case is not compassion but just pity; if one were compassionate one would have told them the truth a long time ago and spared them the deception, the debilitating fears of hell, and the nurturing of christoislami intolerance that's poisoned them.)
It is only out of consideration for how christoislamic terrorists might feel upon discovery of their religions' lies that Hindus had collectively held off from attacking the same religions. But now all bets are off, why should we remain on the bench when it's our turn to bat? All the damage they can do by stating 'Rama was not real' can only amount to hurting Hindu sentiments (and really, what has been said here that the christocolonials had not said already: "myths, myths, myths"). <b>The damage we can do by disseminating knowledge on jeebus' non-existence will send them into a tailspin they won't ever recover from. We could crush the hopes/pretensions of christianism in India - completely, if we play our cards well.</b>
And if ever we feel like apologising - only as a sign of PR goodwill in return for KKKongress' inevitable, if delayed, PR apology - then do it as follows: "We are sorry to have circulated the facts so widely. It was unsecular of us to do so, even though it was ALL TRUE what we said. Jeebus never existed. Sorry. Again: it was unsecular to tell the painful truth to your faces."
Not all energy should be expended on protesting, expecting apologies from those who would never mean it if they did apologise anyway. Now's the time to make up for lost ground. If Hindus do not take this opportunity, but stick to just protesting, they would have been further gone into psecularism than I feared and beyond hope of curing.
I think it was HH who once said we should learn be like the Varaha: that when others toss mud onto us, we shouldn't waste time getting rid of the mud, but toss more back their way (Varahas being better at the game than them, we can be more effective!) Once they're fully covered and beyond all hope of getting out from the slime, we can at our leisure clean ourselves up nicely again.
About post 48 - statement in red below:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Sri Sri raps government for Ram affidavit</b>
The founder of the Art of Living Foundation said it would be wrong to assume Lord Ram was a mythological character and not real because there was no scientific evidence to prove his existence.
"There were unproven miracles in the lives of religious figures of other faiths. If we dismiss Lord Ram as a fictitious character, then we have to dismiss all miracles in the lives of Jesus, Moses and Mohammed as myths," he said.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I have an addition to make to Sri Sri's statement (in red) above: However, if jeebus et al were dismissed as myths, the matter says nothing about Rama. Rama's history is independent of jeebus and the others.
Without jeebus, though, mohammed can have no claims to prophethood (as one of the key 'other prophets' listed would be crossed off; as it is, wasn't Alexander the Great listed as one of the prophets as well...? If so, the case for mohammed's prophethood is even more ridiculous.)
Post 58 - this is stupid - why do christoislamics always need to resort to "faith":
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Hurriyat backs Ram Sethu, says faith needs no proof</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->(They're just afraid this declaration of the KKKongress could one day be used on them.)
They've got the issue all wrong. It is not a matter of blind faith. We do not require proof to be inspired by our Gods and heroes, we're not christoislamis. To us Rama existed; even just the very <i>Idea</i> of Him is worth all the world over. (Whose inspiration happens to be the best antidote against the genocidal memes of christoislamicommunazism.)
Besides, we do not suffer from the kind of unreasonable selective trust they display:
- trusting the Greek version of history (including their records on the outcomes of their wars with Persia) whilst not trusting the Persians - all while the latter were known for not lying;
- trusting fudged European history but not China's;
- saying that anyone who didn't write down "I was there" in stone did not exist (so that includes ancestors of Australian Aboriginals, many African peoples, many Asian communities, many S and N American communities... None of them existed apparently, because not only did they not leave behind any literature about themselves, their ancestors didn't leave a sworn statement of their presence in stone either! These ridiculous demands on 'proof' have now placed them on a worse footing than Hindus! This is something Mudy already remarked about in a post hereabouts.)
- blindly trusting the babble and demanding proof of jeebus non-existence (when the burden of proof should actually be on the jeebusites' end, because jeebus of the gospels is only 'testified' to in the gospels). And even when overwhelming proof is given that jeebus could not have existed - proof sourced from the impossibly contradictory gospels themselves, no less - these are ignored and hidden from the public.
- giving credence to mohammed's 'miraculous' experiences and to his delusions of some monstrous 'deity' communicating with him.
- Islamic historic records are afforded all trust. And this is solely because western historians and western-minded historians can recognise only one form of 'history-writing': their own kind, the one they're familiar with, written in the style and manner they understand. That's why Francis Xavier really could speak in all the languages of Babel (yeah right) and why Eusebius is still marshalled as evidence for church history - despite all the things he wrote that are known to be blatant falsification and outright invention.
<b>PM Manmohan Singh undergoes surgery at AIIMS</b> <!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->"The procedure was performed to treat benign prostatic hypertrophy of the prostate (benign enlargement of the prostate gland)," Prime Minister`s Media Adviser Sanjaya Baru said.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It will provide couple of escape route
1) Now he can run away without any apology
2) May not visit ranch
3) He is seeing midterm poll, Only legacy , insult Hindu or anti Hindu spineless PM
4) Queen can iron her new saree for crown.
5) Her son may start shopping for Suit, if he is not busy in his usual side ....
6) Counting his pension money. Should start distribution among his son-in-law.
Basu hits out at UPA over Sethusamudram project
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Veteran CPM leader Jyoti Basu on Friday said the UPA government's withdrawal of affidavits filed by Archeological Survey of India in the Supreme Court on the Sethusamudram project was prompted by electoral consideration.
"They did one thing in the court one day and just the opposite the next day. All these are being done with an eye on the elections," Basu told reporters after attending a meeting of the CPM state secretariat here. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No historical proof for existence of Lord Ram: DMK
When Hurriyats and commies have come out in support against this affidavit, Karunanidhi is still being stuck in time wrap. Might not be a bad thing.
As Husky rightly says, we don't need apologies from these crooks who'll say anything one wants to hear. Hope electorate is watching and listening and will remember.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->No historical proof for existence of Lord Ram: DMK<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Can he say for Allah, mohmad or jesus or moses or his own father. He must have been cremated, Is there any proof he was his father?
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->