• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Bollywood And Propaganda
Very succinct.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>how limey appeasing of mohammedans failed to produce any results; so they are trying plans b and c</b>
feb 27th, 2009


this was plan a. it didn't work.

hence plan b: get failed christist priest danny boyle to create a film that can be directly used as fodder in jihadi indoctrination camps because of its fiction about mohammedans being oppressed by hindus. this, limeys hope, will get mohammedans to concentrate on killing hindus, not their precious limey asses.

plan c: go on pakistani tv and beg pakistanis to not kill limeys. (hint, hint: kill hindus. miliband articulated this clearly).

in reverse, this is exactly why george bush did us all an enormous -- inadvertent -- favor. by attacking iraq and afghanistan, he diverted mohammedan jihadi attention towards the US (and its poodle britain) and away to some extent from india.
Posted by nizhal yoddha at 2/27/2009 08:46:00 PM <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Don't know why the general Dharmic populace refuses to see why christianism is a danger of genocidal proportions.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Movie Review: Delhi 6...On the footprints of
"Slumdog Millionaire" comes an anti-Hindu
movie that is made by Bollywood. If even
our own producers can get away with this
kind of movie, how can we blame Britishers.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

^ Important

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>SlumDog Effect</b>
<b>A surge in child sponsorship inquiries for Indian children is being reported in Britain, in the aftermath of the movie SlumDog Millionaire.</b> They're calling it the 'SlumDog Effect'.
Posted by san at 2/28/2009 02:13:00 PM 0 comments
Labels: gutter inspector, india shining, media <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hindus remain clueless about christianism (particularly the highly capable catholic variety - hey, it's had CENTURIES to perfect its skills and methods of suiciding inconvertible civilisations). Hindus see a christoterrorist movie and think it's just a movie. It's not. It's a very calculated piece. And it is now doing exactly all those things it was intended to do. (The movie IS part of what pope JPII proclaimed when he said - i.e. commanded to his adherents - that the 3rd millennium should be the conversion of Asia. But Hindus are deaf to declarations of war and death knells. Never mind that deafness does not provide immunity.)
Do Hindus have a response? A what? Of course not. They don't even see that something like this requires a response - because they continue to think it's merely entertainment. Another example of why Hindus can be made to believe anything. Best to get ready for the cannibal stew. Hindus are all invited - the guests of honour, in fact.

Let's hope - with any luck - only islamic children from India will be adopted by the christobritish. But don't avoid the oxygen-intake all too long now.
1. As if this couldn't have been predicted: Christoterrorist Boyle didn't know anything about India. He's just being a good little christoterrorist to satisfy the commandment to Go Forth And Convert Asia that his highly-revered Vatican Godfather (Mafioso) issued some years back.

From comment at http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2009/03/60-...by-jindal.html:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Blogger  bly243001 said...

    A worthy reading for all going ga-ga over Slumdog Millionnaire

    "at the Telluride film festival last autumn, <b>Boyle,</b> when asked why he had chosen a project so different from his usual material, <b>answered that he had never been to India and knew nothing about it,</b> so he thought this project was a great opportunity."

    3/02/2009 6:30 AM<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Typical christoterrorist.

The actual context has more:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->If the earlier films were raj tourism, maharajah-tourism, then we, today, have slum tourism instead. In an interview conducted at the Telluride film festival last autumn, Boyle, when asked why he had chosen a project so different from his usual material, answered that he had never been to India and knew nothing about it, so he thought this project was a great opportunity. Listening to him, I imagined an Indian film director making a movie about New York low-life and saying that he had done so because he knew nothing about New York and had indeed never been there. He would have been torn limb from limb by critical opinion. But for a first world director to say that about the third world is considered praiseworthy, an indication of his artistic daring. The double standards of post-colonial attitudes have not yet wholly faded away.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->"Post-colonial attitudes" - just a psecular way of saying: the imposition of christian patterned thinking.

Boyle is being dishonest. The film has nothing to do with a coincidental interest in doing a project about India. It is entirely motivated by christian evangelical pursuits.

2. http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2009/03/sto...ow-slumdog.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>story in irish times: how slumdog insults india</b>
mar 1, 2009

Posted by nizhal yoddha at 3/01/2009 09:14:00 PM 1 comments <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The article in the Irishtimes, at the link referred to above:

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Saturday, February 28, 2009
<b>'Slumdog' sacrifices Indian pride</b>
In this section »

Myths of the good old days don't stand up to scrutinyCrisis sparks crucial debates about EU limitsBuilding consensus on raising taxes is next challengeSupplementary budget can begin urgent task of restoring depleted tax revenuesGovernment should test Opposition on co-operationDanny Boyle’s film wallows in tired cliches of abysmal poverty and mindless villainy, writes PRIYA RAJSEKAR .

IT WAS no movie for the little boy transported from the slums of Mumbai to the glamorous red carpet at the Oscars. On a platform that makes even veterans weak in the knees, this boy who on a normal day deems a borrowed tarpaulin sheet his home, stood unwavering in his designer dinner jacket, dignified smile in place, as he thanked the people who had made this journey possible.

Yet, in the movie that swept the Oscars, he and his poverty-ridden friends are seen devoid of any dignity and pride – as slum “dogs”, a different species inhabiting a different world.

The mood of the moment is one of exhilaration, not just for those involved in the making of the movie, but also for Indians, worldwide. This despite the fact that it has taken this cultural treasure trove with more than a billion people over 80 years to get this far, and that too with a great deal of hand-holding by a British filmmaker.

Going by the media frenzy in India this week, it would seem a Bollywood movie won the award. There is great pride, hope and a sense of having arrived on the global cinema scene, with three of the eight Oscars won by Indians. Yet, in many Indian minds, there is this nagging doubt that the journey to Oscar glory may have exacted too high a price for India’s international image. Keeping with the spirit of the moment, even the sceptics are calm, cheering the winners on, but will the adulation last?

Targeted at a western audience that has always loved fairytales with happy endings, Slumdog Millionair e is just what the doctor ordered for the recession. For a hardcore movie fan, the over-hyped squalor and violence, <b>the impeccable British accent of an unschooled teenager</b> and even the hero’s improbable feat is merely the suspension of disbelief. But, for the average Indian, and the average Indian emigrant, the liberal use of stereotypes rankles. It is difficult not to squirm when, seated with a western audience, one witnesses the graphic portrayals of abuse and poverty, as though India has little else to offer. Given that India now makes more movies than Hollywood and that every year it has religiously sent in its Oscar hopefuls, many brilliant, and I dare say far better than Slumdog Millionaire, it is rather ironic that a non-Indian’s depiction of life in India is more palatable to the world than an all-Indian creation.

There are many obvious reasons why the movie is regarded a masterpiece.

<b>However, if one has read the original novel, Q & A , by Indian diplomat Vikas Swarup, it is hard to ignore certain deliberate and strategic changes. Why has the name of the protagonist, a secular Ram Mohammed Thomas, been changed into an easily identifiable Muslim name, Jamal Malik?</b> Why not a Hindu name to go with the Hindu-dominated country? Were the repercussions of Hindu-Muslim tensions so relevant to the central theme of the movie? Then again, the novel itself is not so rooted in the slums and there is far less of an effort to draw attention to the sword-wielding Hindu fundamentalist.

In truth, about 65 million Indians live in slums around India and this includes migrants from neighbouring countries. It is a sad reality, and undoubtedly something to be moved by and ashamed of. But, taken in the context of a billion Indians, it is easy to see that India has a lot more to it than abysmal poverty and mindless villainy that the movie uses as a leitmotif.

Sudheer Mishra, a popular Indian director of the critically acclaimed movie Dharavi, named after Asia’s largest slum, had an interesting anecdote to narrate on the subject of stereotyping.

After an interview with him soon after the release of Dharavi, the foreign TV crew he’d been with went on to shoot the inside of a slumdweller’s hut. The rolling cameras were abruptly halted, however, the minute the crew realised the hut was equipped with a television set.

Sure, Slumdog Millionaire is a little better than the usual association with “turbaned”, wrinkly snake charmers and elephants lazing across the roads but doesn’t a country with leading space technology, nuclear power and IT excellence deserve more?

As an unsolicited exercise in defamation, even as it warms the heart and lifts the human spirit in true fairytale style, it wilfully discourages the average tourist to India, for whom the graphic, stark images of misery will easily overwhelm any painstakingly made holiday brochure. The boy covered in human waste epitomising the slumdweller’s spirit may attract the moviegoer but will without doubt keep at bay any kind of inward investment that will bail the slumdweller out.

It should not be forgotten that in the beginning, Vasco da Gama and even Christopher Columbus had originally set out to find not “slum” India, but the El Dorado that India was.

Director Danny Boyle’s tributes to the Mumbai spirit and the Indian artists in the movie has been generous. His career and those of the lucky winners will be star-studded. And as the flavour of the season, Bollywood itself is living its own “Bollywood dream” at the moment – of making it big in Hollywood.

But for the little Indian “slumdogs” who have given the movie its soul, this is a fleeting moment. For when the clock strikes midnight, these people who have helped create many millionaires around the world will return to their tarpaulin-roof homes, to take their usual place beside their colleagues, too proud and too dignified to “ask for more”. City of Joy has done little for Kolkatta (Calcutta), and Slumdog Millionaire will do little for Dharavi.

As for the price for the prize, it is quite evident the underdogs have paid up.

Priya Rajsekar is a freelance journalist from Tamil Nadu state in southern India. She has been living in Ireland for 10 years.

Breda O’Brien is on leave
(And that explains how a non anti-Hindu got to get a word in edge-wise.)

This article appears in the print edition of the Irish Times<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
By François Gautier

Why, as a film Slumdog Millionaire, which conveys a negative image of India - slums, exploitation, poverty, corruption, anti Muslim pogroms - meeting he so successful in the West?

translated from French
tv panel discussion of the film

The moderator gets Beaufoy to admit that the scene of the amerikan tourist handing over dollar bills to the slumdog has a malicious intent. The Indian audience at the end is merciless against the film. One member even asks why Adiga and Slumdog are being given awards at same time. anti-hindu angle does not come up. The main person speaking against the film is Arindam Chaudhury
1. <!--QuoteBegin-dhu+Mar 4 2009, 10:52 AM-->QUOTE(dhu @ Mar 4 2009, 10:52 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->tv panel discussion of the film

The moderator gets Beaufoy to admit that the scene of the amerikan tourist handing over dollar bills to the slumdog has a malicious intent.  The Indian audience at the end is merciless against the film.  One member even asks why Adiga and Slumdog are being given awards at same time.  <b>anti-hindu angle does not come up.</b>  The main person speaking against the film is Arindam Chaudhury
[right][snapback]95166[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Well psecular christoconditioning ensures that they don't see the anti-Hindu angle at all but take it for granted. This is NDTV after all.

2. http://dailypioneer.com/160334/Congress-cl...-up-rights.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->FRONT PAGE | Wednesday, March 4, 2009 | Email | Print |

<b>Congress claims patent over Jai Ho, buys up rights</b>

Pioneer News Service | New Delhi

After the clean sweep of Danny Boyle's Slumdog Millionaire at the Oscars, the Congress wants to replicate its success in the forthcoming Lok Sabha elections. The party has bought the rights of AR Rahman's Oscar-winning song, Jai Ho, from T-Series for its election campaign jingle.

According to highly-placed Congress sources, the music company was approached after the film started sweeping international awards. The deal was struck for an undisclosed amount and the rights were bought exclusively for the campaign jingle.

The jingle would use the tune of the song and Jai Ho to sell the UPA’s achievements and the Congress as the only party for the future. The lyrics of the jingle would be written later. A senior Congress leader told The Pioneer: "The ad agencies that are working on our advertisement campaigns have been asked to work out the lyrics as soon as possible so that we can play it everywhere."

The political parties have always used tunes of popular songs and based their own lyrics on them to catch the voters' attention. For example, the last few Assembly elections saw popular tunes of Chak De! being used. However, <b>political parties are never known to officially buy rights of a particular song as the Congress has done for Jai Ho.</b>

One of the main objectives for buying the rights to the song officially was to discourage the Opposition BJP from using it. A senior leader said: “It is a catchy song and we didn't want the Opposition parties to use it. We wanted exclusive rights on it.” A beginning was made as the Congress claimed to have served a legal notice to Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi for "illegally" using the song in one of his rallies.

The film, which showcases life in Mumbai slums and how one of the dwellers becomes a millionaire, has Jai Ho as its theme song. Music composer AR Rahman got the first-ever Oscar for a Hindi number for the song. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->After the clean sweep of Danny Boyle's Slumdog Millionaire at the Oscars, the Congress wants to replicate its success in the forthcoming Lok Sabha elections.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Debt's over 80% of GDP, million jobs lost in latest quarter, Rupees at all time low against $, exports down 14%.........maybe jingle will do it in elections.
How long can these crooks keep hoodwinking the nation?
Jai Ho is apt ..means "victory to the prostitute"
It must be a variation to the "Hey ho" sig tune of the Seven Dwarfs from Disney's Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. I knew I'd heard the cheesy jingle somewhere. (Haven't heard it, no intention to....)

Indian Express via
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>It shouldn't have won</b>

Sandipan Deb
Tue, Feb 24 04:45 AM

Frankly, I don't think Slumdog Millionaire deserved the Oscar for best film. And even more frankly, I don't think Resul Pookutty should have invoked "my country and my civilisation" in his acceptance speech for best sound mixing. <b>India was not up there in the Kodak auditorium for approval. It was a British film financed by the indie subsidiary of an American studio which happened to be set in India and as a result they could not help but involve Indian actors (including Indian-origin Britishers) and shoot it in India. We crave too much for international recognition.</b> A bit too much than is seemly. Even as all of us go around strutting, pretending to be a superpower.

Other than Slumdog, I have seen only one film out of the other four nominated. But I've read about all of them. The one that I saw is The Reader. The subject is far more intellectually challenging, emotionally moving and morally disturbing than Slumdog can ever hope to be. Not since A Last Tango In Paris has nudity (both male and female) been so necessary to a film's narrative, and so non-titillating and so touching. A film which stretches over 30 years and with essentially only two characters, and yet a film that is as gripping as a thriller. It's a film that, as my friend told me, demands and requires to be seen in one sitting, with no interruption by commercials and visits to the loo.

But look at the themes of the other movies that were nominated this year. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, the love story of a man who is born as an extreme geriatric and keeps getting younger and dies as a newborn. Only for a brief period of time are the man and his beloved around the same compatible age. Of course it's an impossible concept and completely unbelievable, but it's a high concept. Milk is about the first openly gay man to be elected to public office in the United States; Frost/Nixon about the first interview disgraced US President Richard Nixon gave, to has-been TV journalist David Frost. For both of them, it is a chance for redemption, for a somewhat sane life. These are all big themes. I am not doubting Slumdog's quality as a film in any way. Danny Boyle is one of the most talented directors around. But comparing Slumdog to The Reader is almost impossible. It's like comparing A Christmas Carol to Great Expectations.

Scrooge won, little Pip lost. But that's the way it has been with the Oscars. Sometimes the nominations reflect the mood of America's liberals, sometimes the winners reflect political correctness. In 2006, the following five films were nominated: Good Night and Good Luck, Brokeback Mountain, Crash, Capote and Munich. Good Night and Good Luck is about a TV broadcaster who took on the McCarthyist witch hunt in the 1950s; essentially about freedom of the press. Brokeback Mountain deflated the entire mythology of uber-macho frontiersmen by portraying a deep homosexual relationship between two cowboys. Crash interlinked several stories to study racism in all its forms and in startling ways. Capote was about the gay writer Truman Capote who travels to the South of the US to write a book on two multiple murderers. Munich told the story of the Israeli agents who hunted down the Black September terrorists who killed Israeli athletes during the Munich Olympics, and asked the question: To take revenge, do we become as base as the men who are our targets?

There's a clear pattern: anger over the Iraq war, the stifling of the media, the stranglehold of neo-conservatism, the contempt for minorities. The denizens of Hollywood were simply reacting to their world as they saw it. The other major critically-acclaimed movies of that year were Transamerica, about one man's battle to change his gender, and Syriana, which told Americans that their nation's policies were largely responsible for Islamist terrorism.

Then there's political correctness. Gandhi won Best Picture over ET. The Academy decided that the biopic of a great and influential leader was more "important" than the woes of a cute alien stranded on our planet. (This incensed Steven Spielberg so much that he decided to give the Academy the "important" films they felt comfortable with, and made The Colour Purple - which didn't win any Oscars - and Schindler's List - which raked them in.) Tom Hanks won his first best acting Oscar for Philadelphia, as much for his acting as for being the first major star to portray a gay man suffering from AIDS. In Hollywood, that's called "courage".

So The Reader can't win. After all, its female protagonist is a former Auschwitz guard who let 300 Jews burn alive in a locked church. The film's position on morality is too nuanced for the general Academy member to grapple with with any success. But Kate Winslet can be given the award for best actress. By taking this controversial role and baring her body so naturally for the purposes of art, she has shown "courage". Milk is about homosexuality, so Sean Penn gets the statuette for "courage", but not the film. Benjamin Button, which was co-produced by its star Brad Pitt, is probably seen as too much the case of an actor showing off, while being aided by more-than-state-of-the art visual effects. Frost/Nixon? Who's interested?

So Slumdog has won, and we should really rejoice for the six children who acted in it, for they are the real stars of the film. We should rejoice for AR Rahman, though the music he has got his two Oscars for is not even of his average quality, forget his sublime and exhilarating stuff. But the Academy has decided. <b>But I really think it's a bit too much if we take this as a victory for Indian cinema. It's a non-Indian film which happened to have an all-Indian cast.</b> We shoot entire films abroad nowadays, especially in the US, remember?

The writer is the editor of the RPG Group's soon-to-be-launched current affairs and features magazine, 'Open'.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Psecular avoidance dance: writer pretends not to notice (or is really blind to?) the anti-Hinduness of the film.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Millionaires vs Slumdogs creates Economic Orientalism</b>
mar 10th, 2009

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Anuja Prashar

Dear All,

My article published today - Please distribute as you deem fit.


Best regards,

Posted by nizhal yoddha at 3/10/2009 10:56:00 PM 0 comments <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Am still in the process of reading it.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Firaaq the Hand behind the movie</b>

The film is produced by the Percept group, which had bagged the `Bharat Nirman' media campaign contract from the Government of India ahead of Lok Sabha polls. "Even though the film was ready for release over six months ago, it was being released now on poll eve to extract political mileage," a senior BJP leader alleged.

Incidentally, AICC(I) general secretary Rahul Gandhi attended a special screening of the movie in New Delhi on Tuesday. At the same time, the producers have rejected a request by the Gujarat government for a special screening for Chief Minister Narendra Modi.

Born to a Gujarati mother in Vadodara, Das is making debut as a director in the film, after making a mark as an actress. She has captured Ahmedabad in stock shots and filmed the movie mainly in Hyderabad. The producers are hoping the film would not suffer the same fate as `Parzania', another film based on Godhra riots, which has still not been screened publicly in Gujarat out of fear of protests.


Terrorists have no nationality - Nandita Das on rediff interview. She recently went to Pakistan to accept film awards from Jihadi sympathisers and Kashmiri separatists

Why is this woman not stripped of her citizenship. Why not file a PIL against the release of this movie under article 153(A)?

Saurav Basu
<b>Mystery surrounds Somali pirate's personal life</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->MOGADISHU, Somalia – At home in central Somalia, Abdiwali Abdiqadir Muse studied English, frequented a dusty, outdoor cinema after school where he watched Bollywood films dubbed into his native Somali and, his mother says, "was wise beyond his years."

Here you go Bollywood. <!--emo&:bcow--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/b_cowboy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='b_cowboy.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--emo&:bcow--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/b_cowboy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='b_cowboy.gif' /><!--endemo-->

20/04/2009 07:40:28  SLUM-DOG and her FATHER
(Title is: <b>I was ready to go to Saudi:Rubina</b>
20 Apr 2009, 1431 hrs IST, MUMBAI MIRROR)

Following a sting operation that showed the nine-year-old’s father demanding a whopping Rs 1.8 crore to give her up for adoption, relatives from Rubina breaks down as squabble continues all over turned up, seeking ‘a share of the pie’

Following a sting operation by a British tabloid, nine-year-old angel-faced Rubina Ali, who starred in Slumdog Millionaire, has been caught in the midst of a tug-of-war.

Since the news broke that Rubina’s father Rafique Qureshi was allegedly trying to sell his daughter to a Saudi Sheikh for a whopping Rs 1.8 crore, every relative, no matter how distant, entered the fray.

A direct fallout is that the girl’s biological mother, Khurshid, who separated from her husband eight years ago, laid fresh claim to the girl on Sunday and even approached the police.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->20/04/2009 23:01:21  Reply to Ramesh
Ramesh, you say -

"Following a sting operation that showed the nine-year-old’s father demanding a whopping Rs 1.8 crore to give her up for adoption,"

He was not giving her up for adoption, he was selling her as a bride. Prophet Muhammad "married" a 6 year old girl, Ayesha, and "consummated" that marriage when she was 9 (raped her). This is why in Saudi Arabia and Iran the legal age of marriage is under 10 years old. I am not making this up to make Islam look bad, and one can verify everything that I have said.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I've seen statements of confirmation of the Iranian case in several places. Whether that was the case in this instance I don't know. The sheikh has a wife according to the next news item (but many an Arabian islamic has a harem also, so his having a wife isn't necessarily a guarantee, I suppose).

But poor child.
Indian muslims are kidnapped Hindus held hostage by a terrorist ideology. Their children are the progeny of Hindus' ancestors, hence the kids' welfare - such as protecting them from being preyed upon by repugnant christoislamic practices (by christoislamism itself) and getting them back into their natural Dharmic state - is Hindus' responsibility. Their ancestors want them all back.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Did Slumdog star’s dad try to sell her?</b>
20 Apr 2009, 0420 hrs IST, Bharti Dubey & Vijay V Singh, TNN

MUMBAI: 'Slumdog wants to be a millionaire in a hurry' could well be the title of the latest episode in the Oscar winner's saga.

<b>Allegations flew thick and fast on Sunday as an international news website publicised the sting operation it had conducted on Slumdog child star Rubina's father, Rafiq Qureshi, in which he allegedly tried to sell his daughter to an Arab couple for Rs 1.80 crore.</b>

However, both Rubina and Qureshi, who live in the Garib Nagar shanty in Bandra (east), have denied such a development.

<b>"My father loves me and will not sell me," insisted nine-year-old Rubina when asked if her father had tried to sell her off.

"I did go with my father to the hotel to meet the couple who wanted to see me and adopt me, but my father refused their offer."</b> Rafiq added, "Why will I want to sell my daughter? I have brought her up despite my financial problems. I also want to clarify that I did not ask for any money - they kept bringing up the topic of money every now and then."
(The daughter said that Yes, her dad took her to meet the couple who wanted to adopt her. And then the dad says he never wanted to sell her. Then why would he take her there? <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> To dangle her in front of them and then retract her back, like bait on a fishing line?)

Rafiq also alleged that a certain Yunis, who claimed to be the secretary of the Arab sheikh who wanted to adopt Rubina, had been calling him up even before the film won the Oscars.

"Yunis called me last Friday and told me that the sheikh's wife had flown down from Dubai and wanted to meet Rubina. She was completely taken up with my daughter's story on television, so we decided to go and meet them."

While Rubina and her father were clarifying their side to the media, the child star's biological mother, Khushi, got into a scuffle with Rubina's stepmother Munni. <span style='color:red'>Khushi even kicked the pregnant Munni in the stomach.</span>
(The events that never happened during the Godhra riots really happened here: islamic terrorises pregnant islamic. Sick.)

<b>Khushi too alleged that her husband and his family had tried to sell his daughter to a sheikh. She said, "They have been wanting to do this for some time, their intentions are not right."</b>

Rafiq and Rubina's other relatives denied the charges, saying Khushi was trying to malign the family's name. She had left the child about seven years ago and she wants her back now only because of her success, they claimed.
Khushi has filed a complaint with the Nirmal Nagar police station alleging that her husband tried to sell her child. The police has recorded the statements of all concerned. "We will take action after inquiring into the case," said Prakash Salunke of the Nirmal Nagar police station who is handling the investigations. He also said that the police had sought the CD of the sting operation.

Meanwhile, Parvez, the model coordinator who was instrumental in getting Rubina her role in Slumdog Millionaire, does not know what to make of the entire incident. "I really don't know what the truth is since the parents of both Rubina and Azhar (her co-star in the film) don't tell me about the deals they have been doing with people from the industry or otherwise." <b>Another source living near Rubina's house said, "A political activist close to Rubina's father may have tried to broker the deal of adoption. I guess they asked for more, that's probably why the deal fell through."</b>

There are several other Rafiq Qureshis living in Garib Nagar wanting their children to follow in Rubina's footsteps. "At least 30 parents have approached me asking me to get their kids a job in a film or TV serial at any cost," said Parvez. Another co-ordinator said, "These parents treat their kids as commodities and don't really want to know the realities - they just want money from them. I recall a lady from the slums coming with her two-day child for a shoot so that she could take home some money."

<b>Assistant director of Salaam Bombay, Udayshankar Pani, is not surprised to hear about the charge that the slum kid was being sold to an Arab.</b> He said, "Today, everything is commercial and kids are cash cows for the parents. Talking about Salaam Bombay, he said, "Our efforts to help the kids who acted in the film did not really work out since most of them were not comfortable with the good life we offered them. They all eventually went back to the footpath."<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And the reality is once again in stark contrast to the christian lies of the christian slummovie: It's not Hindus that are forcing islamics into slums. It's islam.

Meanwhile the faithful catholic director Boyle is in a publicity pickle too:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Slumdog money being used to help Mumbai slum children: Boyle</b>
2 Mar 2009, 1645 hrs IST, PTI

LONDON: The Oscar-winning director Danny Boyle has said that the money earned from Slumdog Millionaire was being channelled back to Mumbai to help the slum children.

His comments come shortly after child actor Azharuddin Ismail's father demanded more money from the director, the Daily Mail reported.

"They have received some money, which has disappeared, so we have put in place an educational plan. They will receive further payments when they have finished their education and we have also given them money to buy a house," said the director, who returned to his native place on Sunday.
(Do I detect a hint of islamic blackmail being exercised on the catholic director? "Give us more moolah or we'll tell the media you shortchanged us."
The catholic terrorist meeting real islam, as opposed to the christofictional allegations in his film...)

Boyle and the producers had come under sharp criticism after some reports said that the child actors were still living in the slums despite film being a smash hit internationally.

The producers denied such allegations by arranging a Los Angeles trip for the children to attend the Oscar ceremony. They have also promised to buy houses to the child actors.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->There you go: christos use islamic children for fame, money and missionary purposes and then leave them in slums. Christian charity is only for appearances/film. People should make a film about that: western christian directors exploiting Indian kids and their families. The REAL untold story.
from a diferent forum about slumdog:
westcoastrider:when i wach Slumdog millionaire i was amaized how similar in bad behavior are people from India whit our gipsy,not just phisicaly.
zippo68:they came from there.
dupper:dont look at movies that doesnt reflect the reality;they are poor and try to make a living.
AMDG:you didnt put the question of why they live like this-the high natality comparative whit their living conditions.
dupper:you belive in in this?muslims condemned to live in slums because they are persecuted by hindus ?the movie have stereotypes,the westernise young,the rich americans sukers and naives.
Is this a bollywood movie?

anyway excelent music <!--emo&Smile--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-HareKrishna+May 4 2009, 05:00 PM-->QUOTE(HareKrishna @ May 4 2009, 05:00 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Is this a bollywood movie?

anyway excelent music <!--emo&Smile--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->

HareKrishna, Where are you from. Which country are you from
<!--QuoteBegin-acharya+May 5 2009, 11:49 AM-->QUOTE(acharya @ May 5 2009, 11:49 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-HareKrishna+May 4 2009, 05:00 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(HareKrishna @ May 4 2009, 05:00 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Is this a bollywood movie?

anyway excelent music <!--emo&Smile--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->

HareKrishna, Where are you from. Which country are you from
from romania.I hope there is no problem if im not an indian.
If there is a problem im gona try to show that me and indian culture have alot in common.
Kind regards.
Not exactly, Bollywood movies are supposed to be in Hindi (but nowadays there are English words used every 2 seconds, so the language is some kind of mix).

This movie, the dialogue is mostly in English with some Telugu (South Indian language in the state of Andhra Pradesh) sentences thrown in, so it's some kind of cross over or Indian English film I guess.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Ravan Episode March 16 - ATN Channel Midnight 1:00 AM
Hey anybody noted what wrongs is this producer showing..I respect Ravan as he was a Dharmatma but they are showing that our Sages used to give Cow's sacrifice (sic), eat meat (sic) and have Ashram Kanya (sic) who would serve everybody in Ashram means who is for all the sages..What the hell is this? Can we stop this nonsense. I never have seen this..and don't beleive this...


Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)