• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Destruction Of Hindu Culture From India
The "we gave you your hindu identity, and it is that of a thief; there was no such thing as hindu before us" argument maybe an islamic version of the discovery of natives narrative so well known from the americas. Same thing we see again with secular dictum that British "invented" India.
<b>Shame of India Manmohan SIngh did it again.</b>

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Crescent and Cross replace Sun and Lotus in Kendriya Vidyalaya emblem</b>
By R. Balashankar
In a move that touches the pit's bottom, the UPA government has changed the emblem of the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan from Lotus and shining Sun to Cross and Crescent. And this has been done in the name of "broader reflection of national ethos."

The Board of Governors of KVS in its 79th meeting held on 26.6.2008 approved the new logo and a circular was sent to all the offices and schools of the Sangathan on July 17, 2008, to change the emblem in all the publications and communications. Though the chairman of <b>KVS, HRD Minister Arjun Singh </b>did not attend the meeting, the minutes of the meeting stated that the emblem has been approved by the chairman. His deputy <b>Shri Md Ali Ashraf Fatmi</b>, Minister of State, HRD & Deputy Chairman, was also not present at the meeting. The circular issued by the Asst. Commissioner (Acad I), KVS, said "in order to give a broader reflection of national ethos and ought (sic) to be inclusive of challenges, opportunities, rationalistic, scientific and global thinking, advances in science & technology and social changes taking place in the society" (sic) the new emblem has been created.

The picture shows a book with blank pages, and apparently two human forms emerging from globe. The crescent (an Islamic symbol) and two crosses and stars (Christian) are obvious.

A few months ago, the UPA government had released coins of Rs 2 denomination with cross on them. There was reportedly even a surreptitious move to change our national motto 'Satyameva Jayate' which was buried because the government felt that it would earn mud on the face over the issue. From a reading of the minutes of the KVS Board of Governors meeting, it is not clear where the idea of change in emblem originated and what was the inadequacies of the previous emblems. The new emblem is not explained either in the minutes.

Commenting on the move, Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi, former HRD Minister said, "There is nothing scientific or Indian in the emblem that has been newly created. The previous emblem in fact reflected the Indian ethos. Lotus is a symbol of 1857 War of Independence and we always associate the sun with progress, innovation, spiritual, endeavour and it is unfortunate that the Government of India is trying to create a sense of alienation in young minds by trying to promote imported concepts."
This is making me very angry. These congress are traitor, babus are traitors who had joined scums to promote Queen.
New logo -


Old logo -

These low lifes are busy destroying Indic Culture, these illiterates are beyond imagination. They are trying future generation to forget their own history and any connection to its ancestors.

Only shows Indian have slave menatilty. They are happy slaves. They can never be leader, one who forget history and its connection always dies.
Mudiji, The process of globalisation by the present Government can be held responsible for this development in our society, Please read on

Reuters | Monday, 15 September 2008

New breed prostitutes cater to India's rich
Zeba, a 23-year-old model and actress says she's found the perfect job. The money is great, she rubs shoulders with the super rich and her working hours are convenient.

Zeba is one of thousands of high-price call girls servicing India's nouveau riche and the throng of foreign businessmen drawn to a booming economy.

"If you have a modelling assignment, you have to work hard," Zeba, who declined to give her full name in order to protect her identity, said in American-accented English.

"But over here, it's just one hour. You talk to the person for half-an-hour and then the other half-an-hour in bed. You make a lot of money and it's easy," added Zeba, who charges 200,000 Indian rupees ($NZ7000) for an hour's encounter, of which the escort agency keeps half.

Prostitution is illegal in India. Yet voluntary groups estimate there to be two million sex workers, most of them forced into the trade by crushing poverty. Many suffer from HIV in a country with the world's third highest HIV caseload.

Call girls such as Zeba live in a world far removed from New Delhi's infamous G.B. Road, its main red-light district, and work as prostitutes as a matter of choice, plying their trade in five star hotels rather than on the streets or in brothels.

Many high-price escorts such as Zeba are educated women from middle-class families who see prostitution as a lucrative and even glamorous profession.

"Only two to three per cent of India's prostitutes enter the profession willingly. These are the high-class girls, and it is them exercising their democratic rights," said Ranjana Kumari, director of the Centre for Social Research in New Delhi.

"These high-class escorts are definitely an outcome of globalised India," added Kumari.

The growth of high-end prostitution in India underscores not only the affluence among the upper-classes who have the money to hire such prostitutes, but also the changing role of women in a deeply conservative society.

Even today, Indian women are expected to cover up in public and conform to strict societal norms. Premarital sex is taboo and Bollywood movies tease but generally stop short of kissing.

Yet the country's newfound economic affluence and expanding middle-class has also brought an insatiable appetite for the good things in life from designer clothes, to fast cars, to champagne dinners.

"With the changes in the economy and increased consumerism, the Indian woman is under pressure to conform to a highly capitalistic image which requires a lot of money to upkeep," said Anuja Agrawal, a sociologist at the University of Delhi.

"If Indian society were to really allow their women to be free, they won't be forced to conform to such a rigid behaviour."

Most high-end sex workers in India charge anywhere from 10,000 rupees to 50,000 rupees for an hour, but some charge many times more.

"I accommodate the rich, multi-millionaires and business entrepreneurs. Obviously it's a very big industry and in India it is especially fast-growing," said Sameer Chamadi, who runs an escort agency in India that has branches in Dubai and London.

"If the guys have money, they can have my escorts," added Chamadi. His business is one of many online escort agencies sprouting on the internet in India.

Police in India say they try to enforce anti-prostitution laws by checking classified advertisements and the internet for those soliciting sex. But they admit it is difficult to clamp down on high-class prostitutes and clients whose liaisons are usually arranged and conducted in private.

Chamadi and other escort agency owners insist their call girls are worth every cent and can do anything for their clients, from stimulating conversation to bondage fetishes.

"It's a major, major, class difference, and with us it's not just 'slam, bang, thank you Ma'am'. You can actually sit and have a proper conversation with us," said Zeba.

Starting out in Mumbai as a model, Zeba, a college graduate, got her break in movies through a client who was influential in Bollywood. She has no regrets about her chosen profession.

"I really hate people who put on an act about not liking something when they actually do. I mean sex is not just what men want, we women want it also," she said.


This is not in keeping with the traditional Hindu culture. One should be happy to be in bed with the Davedashi or the widow prostitute of Varanashi. However, the above is totally against Hindu culture.
Modyji may like to give his expert views on the subject.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->This is not in keeping with the traditional Hindu culture. One should be happy to be in bed with the Davedashi or the widow prostitute of Varanashi. However, the above is totally against Hindu culture.
Modyji may like to give his expert views on the subject. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ravish maybe u can enlighten us first with ur wisdom?

"widow prostitute", we are not cultured enuf to understand such great wisdom but maybe u can elaborate the same way u blessed us with ur wisdom in the army sexual misconduct case yesterday citing "harsh climate".
Yes Ravish-ji, I am also intrigued, and would like to know the meaning of your last post.
Well friends I will explain to you my reaction to this news item which has appeared in the NZ Press.

The fact of the matter is that there is absolutely sensational news value in the whole episode. It is a very crude way on the part of the NZ media to make a dig on us Indians. In the first place, the prostitutes and their standard are totally dependent upon the economic power of the country in which they operate. When India lacked resources, the average Indian sex worker used to operate from the designated locality of most of the major cities.
With the open up of the Indian economy and the upward swing in the resources of the upped middle class, naturally all the weakness of the wealthy West have also arrived in India. Just like the US, UK, Australia etc today you can see the Escort service Advertisement in the classified column of Hindustan times. This is a natural happening in any respectable economy and India is no exception. The NZ report under reference tries to give an impression that it is only in India that the citizens have become so immoral that there are high end prostitutes.
My message to these chaps is that the British Empire no longer exists and the Royal Navy no longer rules the sea East of Suez. Since the HMS markings have got replaced by INS on the major sea lanes of the Indian Ocean, it is no longer the exclusive privilege of the White chaps to have company of high priced sex workers.Those Indians who can afford are now even hiring imported stuff from Russia and other countries.There is no surprise in this otherwise stale item.

In respect of Maj Gen Lal’s case, my point of submission is that according to the Press Reports the incident occurred in the bedroom of the Divisional Commander’s residence. The very first question that arises is that no Lady junior Army officer will in the first place land up in the bed room of the GOC unknowingly. Therefore, the motive of the Lady Officer is questionable. I have a strong feeling that Gen Lal has been fixed by the Lady Officer perhaps for reason other than sexual. Let us see what the higher courts decide.
<!--QuoteBegin-Bharatvarsh+Sep 16 2008, 10:30 PM-->QUOTE(Bharatvarsh @ Sep 16 2008, 10:30 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->we are not cultured enuf to understand such great wisdom but maybe u can elaborate the same way u blessed us with ur wisdom in the army sexual misconduct case yesterday citing "harsh climate".[right][snapback]88096[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Bharatavarsha, I'm amazed how you all followed even that much when I was already lost on the second word of his very next post:
<!--QuoteBegin-ravish+Sep 17 2008, 12:50 AM-->QUOTE(ravish @ Sep 17 2008, 12:50 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Well friends[right][snapback]88104[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I naturally stopped reading after this distressing sign of mental instability exhibited by 'ravish'.
Which friends is he speaking of? He looks to be hallucinating.
IF, shouldn't this ravish entity be admitted to a psychiatric facility? One fears he may be posing a danger to public safety. Imaginary friends aren't supposed to be haunting people when they're adults - only jeebus-fans suffer from that fearsome malady.
<b>DU to check 'offending references' to Ramayana</b>

TimePublished on Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 17:40, Updated on Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 18:56 in Nation section

New Delhi: <b>The Supreme Court Friday asked Delhi University to set up an expert panel to examine if a chapter in a textbook for the history course should be removed for its "sacrilegious" references to Hindu god Hanuman and goddess Sita</b>.

Acting on a plea pointing out the inclusion of the allegedly offending references, a bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, Justice P. Sathasivam and Justice J.M. Panchal asked university's vice chancellor Deepak Pental to examine the desirability of having such potentially offending texts in the course.

It issued the direction on a joint plea by a group of eight people, including educationists, former diplomats, teachers and journalists besides political and socio-religious leaders.

Appearing for the petitioners, senior counsel M.N. Krishnamani told the court about the inclusion of "sacrilegious material" for the graduation degree course in history.

<b>He said the university teaches its second year History (Hons) students that "Lord Hanuman was a henchman of Lord Rama" and "the little monkey was a womaniser".

Krishnamani said that the compulsory course material describes Sita as "unfaithful to Rama" and as having been "seduced by Ravana and Laxman".</b>

These references are from "Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on Translation", written by late critic A.K. Ramanujan, an essay that appears as a chapter of the book, "Many Ramayanas: The Diversity of Narrative Tradition in South Asia", edited by <b>Paula Richman.</b>

<b>Krishnamani said the "offending" course material is being thrust upon the history students since 2005.</b> He told the court that earlier his clients had moved the Delhi High Court seeking removal of the "offensive" course material.

On their plea, erstwhile Justice Manmohan Sarin of the high court had asked the vice chancellor to examine the desirability of having the controversial material in the History course, said Krishnamani.

But later after Justice Sarin's transfer to the Jammu and Kashmir High Court, another bench of the Delhi High Court dismissed the plea saying it cannot be heard by the court.

The petitioners have come to the apex court in appeal against the high court ruling.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Hanuman statue triggers row in Kanyakumari</b>
29 Sep 2008, 0401 hrs IST,TNN
MADURAI: Caught in a communal row, a massive 24-foot Hanuman statue installed at Sunset Point in Kanyakumari has triggered tension between Hindu groups and fishermen in the town, a predominantly Christian pocket.

On Sunday, an attempt by district authorities to remove the statue invited stiff opposition as members of Hindu groups, including local BJP, Hindu Munani and Shiv Sena, formed a human cordon around it. Several policemen have been posted in the area to prevent violence.

Kanyakumari district collector Jyothi Nirmala told TOI<b>, "The trust which installed the statue had only obtained the permission of the panchayat and this was insufficient. The trust should have actually obtained the permission of the government through the district administration." </b>
^ Above post more important.

<!--QuoteBegin-ravish+Sep 16 2008, 09:28 PM-->QUOTE(ravish @ Sep 16 2008, 09:28 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Starting out in Mumbai as a model, Zeba, a college graduate, got her break in movies through a client who was influential in Bollywood. She has no regrets about her chosen profession.
"I really hate people who put on an act about not liking something when they actually do. I mean sex is not just what men want, we women want it also," she said.[right][snapback]88093[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Oh how cute! Zeba/Zebra thinks itself an original. But, except for christoislamaniac and psecular women (see below), no one else needs her tiresome sermons on sex. Feministaism afflicts christoislamics and the christoconditioned because they have been/have allowed themselves to be mentally (and in all ways) repressed. No one else was suffering and can be spared the Zebra-style sexual revolution/revelation lectures on "Me Feminista Jane, You Sub-human Un-liberated Hindoo XX".

Hindu and other natural traditionalist societies may not be publicly demonstrative nor encouraging of promiscuity (turns out, neither was much of Ancient Rome), but their marriages have tended to be very affectionate, caring and loving. Unlike the UltraScary married life of christos:

Not quite sure if IF's seen this before already. Pasting it anyway. (Some allusions to matters of a sexual nature - hope it's not in conflict with the age-groups of IF's membership & readership audience)

<b>Warning</b> - below must be the penultimate in Loveless Marriage. Jeebus really makes the greatest of miracles! No wonder christian men and women terrorise other peoples. And no wonder they attack little children and women all over the world. The following also explains why they look as if they're constipated all the time... (And even thinking about sex is forbidden them.)

I hope all christian women in India have received the following pamphlet from their church on how their gawd wants them to behave in and experience married life...

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Instruction and Advice
For the Young Bride

    <b>On the Conduct and Procedure of the Intimate and Personal Relationships of the Marriage State for the Greater Spiritual Sanctity of this Blessed Sacrament and the Glory of God</b>

  <b>By Ruth Smythers
    Beloved wife of The Reverend L.D. Smythers, Pastor of the Arcadian Methodist Church of the Eastern Regional Conference</b>

    Published in the year of our Lord 1894, <b>Spiritual Guidance Press</b>, New York City.

    To the sensitive young woman who has had the benefits of proper upbringing, the wedding day is, ironically, both the happiest and the most terrifying day of her life. On the positive side, there is the wedding itself, in which the bride is the central attraction in a beautiful and inspiring ceremony, symbolizing her triumph in securing a male to provide for all her needs for the rest of her life. On the negative side, there is the wedding night, during which the bride must pay the piper, so to speak, by facing for the first time the terrible experience of sex.

    At this point, dear reader, let me concede one shocking truth. Some young women actually anticipate the wedding night ordeal with curiosity and pleasure! Beware such an attitude! A selfish and sensual husband can easily take advantage of such a bride.

    One cardinal rule of marriage should never be forgotten: GIVE LITTLE, GIVE SELDOM, AND ABOVE ALL, GIVE GRUDGINGLY. Otherwise what could have been a proper marriage could become an orgy of sexual lust.

    On the other hand, the bride's terror need not be extreme. While sex is at best revolting and at worse rather painful, it has to be endured, and has been by women since the beginning of time, and is compensated for by the monogamous home and by the children produced through it.

    It is useless, in most cases, for the bride to prevail upon the groom to forego the sexual initiation. While the ideal husband would be one who would approach his bride only at her request and only for the purpose of begetting offspring, such nobility and unselfishness cannot be expected from the average man.

    Most men, if not denied, would demand sex almost every day. The wise bride will permit a maximum of two brief sexual experiences weekly during the first months of marriage. As time goes by she should make every effort to reduce this frequency.

    Feigned illness, sleepiness, and headaches are among the wife's best friends in this matter. Arguments, nagging, scolding, and bickering also prove very effective, if used in the late evening about an hour before the husband would normally commence his seduction.

    Clever wives are ever on the alert for new and better methods of denying and discouraging the amorous overtures of the husband. A good wife should expect to have reduced sexual contacts to once a week by the end of the first year of marriage and to once a month by the end of the fifth year of marriage.

    By their tenth anniversary many wives have managed to complete their child bearing and have achieved the ultimate goal of terminating all sexual contacts with the husband. By this time she can depend upon his love for the children and social pressures to hold the husband in the home.

    Just as she should be ever alert to keep the quantity of sex as low as possible, the wise bride will pay equal attention to limiting the kind and degree of sexual contacts. Most men are by nature rather perverted, and if given half a chance, would engage in quite a variety of the most revolting practices. These practices include among others performing the normal act in abnormal positions; mouthing the female body; and offering their own vile bodies to be mouthed in turn.

    Nudity, talking about sex, reading stories about sex, viewing photographs and drawings depicting or suggesting sex are other obnoxious habits the male is likely to acquire if permitted.

    A wise bride will make it her goal never to allow her husband to see her unclothed body, and never allow him to display his unclothed body to her. Sex, when it cannot be prevented, should be practiced only in total darkness. Many women have found it useful to have thick cotton nightgowns for themselves and pajamas for their husbands. These should be donned in separate rooms. They need not be removed during the sex act. Thus, a minimum of flesh is exposed.

    Once the bride has donned her gown and turned off all the lights, she should lie quietly upon the bed and await her groom. When he comes groping into the room she should make no sound to guide him in her direction, lest he take this as a sign of encouragement. She should let him grope in the dark. There is always the hope that he will stumble and incur some slight injury which she can use as an excuse to deny him sexual access.

    When he finds her, the wife should lie as still as possible. Bodily motion on her part could be interpreted as sexual excitement by the optimistic husband.

    If he attempts to kiss her on the lips she should turn her head slightly so that the kiss falls harmlessly on her cheek instead. If he attempts to kiss her hand, she should make a fist. If he lifts her gown and attempts to kiss her anyplace else she should quickly pull the gown back in place, spring from the bed, and announce that nature calls her to the toilet. This will generally dampen his desire to kiss in the forbidden territory.

    If the husband attempts to seduce her with lascivious talk, the wise wife will suddenly remember some trivial non-sexual question to ask him. Once he answers she should keep the conversation going, no matter how frivolous it may seem at the time.

    Eventually, the husband will learn that if he insists on having sexual contact, he must get on with it without amorous embellishment. The wise wife will allow him to pull the gown up no farther than the waist, and only permit him to open the front of his pajamas to thus make connection.

    She will be absolutely silent or babble about her housework while he is huffing and puffing away. Above all, she will lie perfectly still and never under any circumstances grunt or groan while the act is in progress.

    As soon as the husband has completed the act the wise wife will start nagging him about various minor tasks she wishes him to perform on the morrow. Many men obtain a major portion of their sexual satisfaction from the peaceful exhaustion immediately after the act is over. Thus the wife must insure that there is no peace in this period for him to enjoy. Otherwise, he might be encouraged to soon try for more.

    One heartening factor for which the wife can be grateful is the fact that the husband's home, school, church, and social environment have been working together all through his life to instill in him a deep sense of guilt in regards to his sexual feelings, so that he comes to the marriage couch apologetically and filled with shame, already half cowed and subdued. The wise wife seizes upon this advantage and relentlessly pursues her goal first to limit, later to annihilate completely her husband's desire for sexual expression.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yuck. Yuck yuck. <i>Yuck.</i> Confusedhudder

Although the above is <b>not fiction</b> at all (see also the many references to such things in books or dramas set in christo pre-Victorian, Victorian and Edwardian UK say), it reads like the christian inversion of a romance novel - even a "black comedy". Though not personally a fan of the IMO insipid genre called "romance novels", am sure even bad romance novels would be infinitely superior to this vapid fest of cold lovelessness.

Christianism breeds abnormality. Avoid. Next they'll be preaching that going to the bathroom, eating, drinking, sleeping or taking a shower is evil. Oh wait. Showering was already famously discouraged by christianism as being "an invitation for evil" during the ideology's much-loved dark ages and medieval period and was religiously avoided even in UK's Tudor and France's near-Revolutionary times.

When christowest and their feminista subversionists in India accuse Hindus of "prudery", it's just one more christo lie.
Christo societies swing from super-promiscuity and criminality (as in christoised Roman society, and also seen in so many popes throughout the ages) all while strictly disapproving of sex, to christo Victorian prudishness with an underbelly seething with sexual business transactions and sexual crimes/murders, to modern christo-psecular shallow frivolity again. One constant throughout's been christian paedophilia.
The Zebras can stop braying.
Husky, I believe that is a fake. Here is a website that thinks so: Media Desk
<!--QuoteBegin-vishwas+Sep 30 2008, 11:34 PM-->QUOTE(vishwas @ Sep 30 2008, 11:34 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Husky, I believe that is a fake. Here is a website that thinks so: Media Desk
[right][snapback]88606[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Well, then Media Desk better communicate their suspicions to Time Magazine and Amazon UK (see below). Although Time Ragazine is famous for lying about Hinduism and other non-christoislamic traditions, it tends to be favourable toward WASPy christianism (even if not always toward catholicism). I had so far thought they might report accurately concerning their own religion.
Regardless of whether TIME's journalism turns out to be inept in *every* area, one would expect more of UK's Amazon branch at least. It may even get sued for advertising a book as being authored by one "Ruth Smythers beloved wife of the Reverend L.D. Smythers, Pastor of the Arcadian Methodist Church of the Eastern Regional Conference". If her character and writings were penned by others or someone working under a pseudonym and/or in a later time, Amazon should state this clearly. In fact, whoever wrote Amazon UK's product description for the book states that "the methodist's wife did not intend to be amusing" even if her work appears today as hysterical (or troubling). See below.

1. Time Magazine. Presents as historical various quotations on the TIME article's topic, including:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Sex Talk Through the Ages</b>
Monday, Jan. 19, 2004

"At this point, dear reader, let me concede one shocking truth. Some young women actually anticipate the wedding night ordeal with curiosity and pleasure! Beware such an attitude! One cardinal rule of marriage should never be forgotten: give little, give seldom, and above all give grudgingly." -<b>-RUTH SMYTHERS, Instruction and Advice for the Young Bride (1894)</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

2. Amazon UK stocks a book on a related topic which it lists as being from 1894 and authored by Ruth Smythers
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Sex Tips for Husbands and Wives from 1894 (Hardcover)
by Ruth Smythers (Author)</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->(Note that the year "2008" in Amazon's cataloguing data merely indicates the year of reprint or date this was published by the current publishers.)

My comment in purple.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Product Description</b>
<b>In 1894, Ruth Smythers, 'Beloved wife of The Reverend L. D. Smythers', wrote:'</b>While sex is at best revolting and at worse rather painful, it has to be endured...One cardinal rule of marriage should never be forgotten: give little, give seldom and, above all, give grudgingly...Most men are by nature rather perverted, and if given half a chance, would engage in quite a variety of the most revolting practices.' <b>The Methodist wife didn't intend to be amusing, but this brief treatise written for young brides is side-splitting today and an eye-opener to how mores have changed in just over a century.</b>It includes essential advice on: how to discourage your spouse's amorous advances; appropriate night-wear for the wedded couple; and, the acceptable length and frequency of unavoidable sexual encounters.
(The bold statement seems to explain why Amazon UK placed the book in its humour section.)

<b>About the Author
Ruth Smythers was beloved wife of the Reverend L.D. Smythers, Pastor of the Arcadian Methodist Church of the Eastern Regional Conference.</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->It's not impossible that MediaDesk may be right and Amazon and Time may have (been) misled. Still, having read MediaDesk's page, I did not find that it offered any tangible evidence other than their say-so. For instance, no complete listing of all pastors or reverends in the area of the time is provided to disprove the existence of reverend whoever smythers, so that we may verify for ourselves what they say they have verified for us. Nor does MediaDesk's wording encourage complete confidence:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Desk <b>believes</b> the work to be
- no more than about thirty to forty years old (putting it smack dab into the middle of the sexual revolution),
- <b>or</b> that the original piece <b>may indeed be of antique origin, but</b> it has been extensively re-written and modified to increase its "oh my" factor (such as the overuse of the word 'sex').
Also there are some historical facts that bring the article under serious <b>suspicion.</b> <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Other christian sites (such as the christian <i>blog</i> "bookstoysgames") that repeat the same arguments/suspicions as MediaDesk, also offer no further verifiable information for disproving it other than saying it's a hoax. Am still waiting for their evidence.

Anyway, be all that as it may, I'd read a number of books by people who actually lived at around the turn of the 19th-to-20th century UK and whose fictional-but-historically-accurate novels were set at that time too. And the angst about sex/fear of intimacy is rather a recurring pattern, regardless of whether the authors themselves suffered from such a complex or were merely making observations about the overriding situation and views of their time and place. Only the working class women in the UK seemed to have taken things in stride.
Also, in the intro to film course that I did, it was drilled into us how wives in Victorian England often experienced the first night of marriage as 'rape' (because of the way in which they were raised where they were conditioned to think most of life was 'base', unchristian). Not kidding you, 'rape' was the word they used in the course.
Other strange things: why women of that time would never utter the word "womb" I think it was (the word used in NL was "schoot" - I read these English books translated into Dutch, knew little English back then) when singing some hymns or psalms about maria mother of jeebus. Only the men would sing that word in church while the women would stay silent for just that bit. There was all kinds of weirdness - things that seem like comical satire now but which were part of the pathetic reality back then. Sexual repression and apprehension was the order of the day back then, however alien such mindsets may appear to the rest of the world, or however alien these things may seem to any christians today. Christians' lives back then *were* a comedy. Tragicomedy.
<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Sep 30 2008, 06:46 PM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Sep 30 2008, 06:46 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->the penultimate in Loveless Marriage. Jeebus really makes the greatest of miracles! <b>No wonder christian men and women terrorise other peoples. And no wonder they attack little children and women all over the world.</b>
[right][snapback]88603[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Example: christians' attacks on native American women, in the christianism thread
1. Why didn't I read this sooner. Balbir K Punj says it so much better:

<b>India's Intellectual Zombies</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In India, the anti-Hindu mafia has become the "gate keepers" of Indian minds. The anti-Hindu intellectual zombies have entrapped the members in a servitude and set in motion a malignant process by creating powerlessness in the majority communities. They join together with our enemies from within and without to demean and discredit the culture, and its perennial philosophy that sustains the social bonds for centuries. Our intellectual zombies are competing with our enemies to make Hindus more powerless and prevent them from acquiring skills and self-esteem to regain lost strength and acclaim. Indeed, the greatest threat to India and Hindus today is the political opportunism of the phony secular intellectuals who are inclined to promote Islamo fascism and dismissing or understating internal and external threats. If we ask our moral relativists, agnostics, secularists, liberals and media pundits--they will come up with sticky puddle of stale syrup of tolerance, love, global programs, universalism, and coexistence with Jihadi terrorists, Marxist murderers and crusaders. India's intellectual zombies had become apologists for the Islamo fascists, Marxists and underground Maoists. They want to replace Hindu tradition, and its eclectic philosophy with the reductionist dogmas of Islam, Marxism and deconstruction. They have sold our nation for a price and joined with our adversaries and engage in "the socialization of the anti-social, or acculturation of the anti-cultural, or the legitimization of the subversive" under the influence of modernism. Intellectual discourse is corrupted by moral relativism, leftist cultural criticism and subversive modernism. By blurring the lines between good and evil, right and wrong, spirituality and fanaticism, these intellectual zombies have rendered our society more vulnerable to evil influences. The general public are increasingly ill equipped to recognize, much less respond to, the evil forces that threatens India from within and without.

<b>One of the tragic errors of India is that too many of its best minds believe as they did in the past-that the solution is to rely on more tolerance, inaction and passivity. They are neither humanist or nationalists. Their goal is to demolish Hindu values</b> and to put barriers on Hindu spirituality and place as many obstacles as possible in the way of Hindutva. Their response against Islamic terrorism goes against the commonest of commonsense and only serve to protect anti nationalists. They are significantly out of touch with reality. Like most psychotic people they avoid complex social problems, afraid of decision making and promote policies that recommends tolerance of intolerant dogmas and their bizarre behavior. The exact opposite is true. <b>What we need most urgently is to recognize that our tolerant culture cannot exist without a philosophy of confrontation of intolerant ideas.</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Actually, read the whole thing at the link.

2. Quite old, from 2.5 years ago:
Friday, April 07, 2006
<b>Indian Governments Hard on Hindus, Their Temples, Soft on All Others</b>
<i>Includes</i> such things as:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The new arbitrary development is about one of the most famous Hindu temples in Mumbai – Siddhivinayak. The Maharashtra government of Congress and its junior partner, Sharad Pawar’s Nationalist Congress Party (NCP), have conveniently managed to take over Siddhivinayak Temple Trust that gets huge amount of money from Hindu devotees. These devotees include top movie stars such as Amitabh Bachchan and Aishwarya Rai who regularly visit Siddhivinayak and offer big money and jewelry.

Siddhivinayak is a temple of Ganesh, the most popular deity in Maharashtra, and also many other parts of India. No traditional religious function is complete without first praying to Ganesh, the son of Shiva and Parvati.

My friend Devendra Singh has complained that the Congress and NCP have divided the Shirdi Sai Baba Sansthan and Siddhivinayak Temple Trust amongst themselves as if these Trusts are commodities to be used and exploited by the Government for its anti-Hindu and anti-national policies of minority appeasement.

He adds: “Hindu Janjagruti Samiti (hindujagruti.org) appeals to all devotees of Lord Ganesh to avoid making donations to the Siddhivinayak Temple. Instead donations may be made in any local Ganesh Temple after paying obeisance to the Siddhivinayak idol.”

This is only one way to protest the government action. But its doubtful if this will be effective as Hindus are, by and large, naïve, indifferent, and oblivious to the far-reaching consequences of government policies. They have to be really jolted to awaken them.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Intellectual Subversion Video By Mrs. Radha Rajan</b>
oct 24th, 2008

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Raghav


Posted by nizhal yoddha at 10/24/2008 09:49:00 AM 1 comments<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Summary of video from comment:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->blogger said...

    Very interesting lecture by Mrs. Radha Rajan of Editor Vigil Online. <b>She talks about the Intellectual Subversion by Politics, Media, Educationists, etc. to suppress and destroy Sanatan Dharm (Hindus).</b> I had goose bumps listening to her. Thanks for sharing.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
All the pro bono work I intend to do for an entire year:
<b>Transcript of the video of Mrs Radha Rajan above</b>, in case someone else finds 85 Mb (40min video) a pain to download.

Red is stuff I'm not sure what exactly was said or how to spell it.
Blue and bold is highlighting.
My clarifications in purple. Not to worry, I've moved my comments until after the end.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>17-12-2006, Calicut (Kozhikode)</b>

<she thanks people>

I've been asked to speak upon intellectual terrorism.
I will modify it slightly and speak on intellectual subversion, of which intellectual terrorism one important dimension. When we say intellectual subversion, who are we holding guilty of intellectual subversion in this country? I for one hold <b>Academia, the Media, and the Intellectual Elite</b> - those that have been educated in the English medium schools and institutions of higher learning. These are the 3 broad categories of people who I hold guilty of intellectual subversion in this country.

<b>What have they been subverting?</b> They have been subverting the very idea of Nation that the Hindu community holds. When I say <b>Hindu</b> - let me make a few things clear here, I'm going to be extremely blunt in my exposition: I do not speak to please anybody, neither do I speak to offend anybody, I speak what I perceive to be the truth. And when I say Hindu, I use it as the widely accepted term for those who practise Sanatana Dharma. Sanatana Dharma I say is Hinduism, people who practise Sanatana Dharma are Hindus. It is a part of the intellectual subversion exercise that they have discredited the word Hindu, so that we are a nameless group of people, to which I will come to a little later in my talk. So when I say Hinduism and when I say Hindus, I mean Sanatana Dharma and the Dharmis.

So what have these Intellectual Terrorists perpetrated? They have subverted the <b>idea of Nation</b>. What is a nation? Nation, according our Hindu Indian classical texts, is Rashtra. Rashtra is both territory and the people. There is a historical sense of belonging of the people to that territory. It is territory with well-defined borders. Rashtra has well-defined borders, and Rashtra means the people with a historical and an ancient sense of belonging to that territory. Indian classical texts speak of Hindu Rashtra as being one of the seven components of Rajya. Hindus constitute 85% of the population of this country. We are a nation of Hindus. But we are neither a Hindu Rashtra, nor are we a Hindu Rajya. And this is the success of the intellectual subversion: that we have neither Hindu Rashtra, nor do we have a Hindu Rajya. What are the 7 components of a Rajya that our classical texts speak of? They speak of the Swami, Amadhya (?), Durga, Kosha, Danda, Bala, and one more ... there are 7 components. Swami or the King would be the State - the head of the govt, the Amathya or minister would be the council of ministers, Durga is the capital, Kosha is the territory, you have Danda and you have Bala. Of all this, it is very important that you have the Hindu ethos truly reflected in at least some of these components.
It is the success of intellectual subversion in this country that a person who attempts to be the Swami is a Roman Catholic European who has neither a historical sense of belonging to this territory, nor an understanding of what this Rashtra is all about.
It is to the success of intellectual subversion in this country that you have a council of ministers who actively propagate and perpetuate the politics of minorityism in various spheres of national public life.
If Danda can be construed in modern terms to be the law and the judiciary, you have a constitution and you have a judiciary which is actively hostile to the Hindu community.

Let me take this step by step. When I say nation, I have an understanding of who belongs and who does not belong. It is to the success of this intellectual subversion that Hindus constantly speak of <b>Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam</b> and think Sonia Gandhi and mother Teresa are a part of this Kutumbakam inside this country.
When we have a distinct sense of us and them, we must have a sense of Who is a Hindu. The Them is who is a non-Hindu. If we have a sense of us and them, there is a sense of Indian Hindus, there is a sense of non-Indian people who profess the Hindu religion. Kautilya's Arthashastra did not deny the Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam principle at all, but Kautilya knew who was a National and who was a Non-National. Kautilya encouraged the Hindu way of welcoming refugees, but Kautilya also said Keep the refugees out of your national borders - Provide for them, take care of them, see to it that they feel secure and comfortable, but do not bring them into national borders until their loyalties have been tested and found to be true. Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam does not mean opening up all your doors and allowing everybody to come inside, particularly when you're in a state of weakness.

Let us take <b>Academia</b> first. What are the falsehoods that they have propagated, to subvert the very idea of a nation? They have I think done 2 things:
They have fragmented the Hindu consciousness so that a very large section - or shall I say a very significant section of the Hindu community has been placed outside of national borders and other sections of the Hindu community have been outside the Hindu community itself. By propagating the theory of the <b>Aryan Invasion</b>, Indian academia dominated by the marxists has successfully placed a significant section of the Hindu community outside national borders. And this is not something peculiar to India. This Aryan Invasion Theory was a colonial construct. It is a white christian construct. And they have played this game in North America, where they have had this ridiculous <b>Bering Strait Theory</b> which said that the native Americans, whom they almost exterminated through genocide and christian colonialism, were themselves migrants from elsewhere. That is to say, they propagated the Aryan Invasion Theory here because, the intellectuals among the Hindu elite who were in the forefront of resisting colonial invasion - the colonial administrators the argument back at them saying "You yourselves have come from outside. We have come a little more recently". To justify the genocide of the native Americans, the white colonial research which came out of Harvard and Smithsonian placed the native American population outside of the North American continent, and they said "You people came here several centuries ago, maybe, but you are as much migrants as we are. There is no such thing as the native American population: You are a migrant we are a latter day migrant."

Udayan Namboothiriji in the previous session said, how could EMS Namboothiripad have gone running to the Soviet ambassador when his homeland or motherland or the Mathruboomi was being attacked? You must understand: islam, christianity and communism - which was a virulent reaction to christian capitalism - none of the 3 ideologies or philosophies subscribe to the concept of <b>homeland, motherland or Mathruboomi</b>. These are aggressive conquering ideologies, they believe all territories are open for conquest. It is only the Hindus and Jews - who are born into their faiths on a territory which they call their home - who have the concept of Mathruboomi, who have a concept of homeland.
The other 3 ideologies or philosophies do not subscribe to homeland.

So by placing a significant section of the Hindu community outside national borders and by declaring that Dalits and Tribals are not part of the Hindu community, the academia - the Indian marxist academia has fragmented the Hindu consciousness. <b>This was success number 1.</b>

They have propagated the untruth that the Indian civilisation has always been <b>pluralist</b>. This concept of pluralism, please understand, is a western colonial christian concept. Christianity also spread by the sword. Today, the developed western nations may have succeeded in branding islam a terrorist religion, and the western christian christian.white christian nations as the defenders against terrorism, but let's not forget: Christianity also spread by the sword. It was also intolerant.

With the advent of democracy, which is also a christian construct, when political christianity had to accommodate people of other ways of life, and when christianity devised other weapons of conquest  - like evangelisation - they made pluralism a virtue in their nation states.
Hindu Dharma has always believed or has always subscribed to diversity. We don't need this christian colonial concept of pluralism inside India. We have always been diverse. Pluralism, please understand, is multiculturalism, which is the new term for pluralism in western democracies. This <b>pluralism or multiculturalism</b> is accommodating the indigestible elements of your society who refuse to become a part of the mainstream:
- Those elements which do not consider this territory to be their Mathruboomi,
- Those elements which do not subscribe to Sanatana Dharma or Hinduism,
- Those that insist that they will live as indigestible elements (?) but they seek accommodation within the broader diverse parameters of Hindu Dharma.
*These* are the pluralist elements. And when white christian colonial western democracies promote the concept of pluralism, this is for the non-white, non-christian democracies like India, whereas they are rejecting multiculturalism in their own countries. The Australian prime minister is saying: Subscribe to the Australian culture, the British PM is saying: Subscribe to the British culture. Australian culture, American culture, British culture, please understand, is white christian culture - whether catholic or protestant. And immigrants and migrants who seek citizenship or residency in their countries are demanded...it is demanded of them that they have proficiency in the English language and that they subscribe the broad cultural values which are rooted in white christianity.
And this pluralism they want India to accept as an integral part of Indian polity. And this subversion - it is *this* intellectual subversion which has launched Sonia Gandhi into the forefront of Indian polity. I personally consider the presence of Sonia Gandhi in Indian polity as much an affront to my sensibilities as the mosque in Ayodhya, Kashi and Mathura. It is an affront to my sensibilities, to my Hindu sensibilities. <b>This is success number 2.</b>

The third idea that they are propagating is the concept of <b>South Asia</b>. This concept of South Asia, which has *no* legitimacy, is political construct with its origins in American think-tanks, where they seek to subsume - please understand one thing: If there is one thing that both islam and christianity are afraid of it is Hindu nationalism. Hindu nationalism poses the biggest conceptual threat to both islam and evangelical church. The third idea they are propagating is the concept of South Asia where they hope that India's territorial borders and her Hindu identity will be subsumed in the larger muslim-dominated region of Pakistan and Bangladesh. When they say South Asia I don't think they have Bhutan and Sri Lanka in mind. When they say South Asia, they primarily mean India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

<b>The most subversive act undertaken by Indian academia is the kind of history they have written for us:</b> It is a defeatist history. It is a history which says that the Indian nation was invaded upon hordes and hordes of people, and that they emasculated Indian society; that Hindu society was weakened because of them - putting us in a defeatist frame of mind. But is this true? This is not true.
I have one of the most brilliant papers - compiled by Dr MD (?) Srinivas of the Centre for Policy Studies in Chennai. And look at what he's saying. It was the Hindu community ... Islam had already overridden Europe, Africa and large parts of Asia. But Hindu community kept off the islamic invaders who could not get hold of a foothold even in India between 600 and 1200 ce ('ad'). Islam could not get a foothold here. And which were the samrajyas and rajyas which held them off? The Chalukyas, the Rashtrakutas, the Karkotas of Kashmir, the Rajputs. They kept islam away from getting even a foothold in India uptil the 12th century.

(~20 min markSmile
Once islam got its foothold here, there were still large parts of India which were never under their control. Large parts of South India, Assam, Orissa - they were never under the muslim rule for any great significant period of time. The Madurai sultanate was thrown out within 30 years. You had Marathas, you had the Vijayanagara Kingdom - the Samrayjas. You had the Bundhelas (?), you had the Sikhs, you had the Jats, who raised powerful military organisations to combat islam. And the islam that came to India was jihadi islam. Jihadi islam is not a phenomenon of the 20th or the 21st century. When islam came to India it came as jihadi islam. It is only jihad that the Hindu community has faced from 600 ad. We never allowed them to set up any kind of government 'til 1200. But even after we lost militarily to islam (islam was a world-conquering force, let's not forget) - and when we lost militarily, see what we threw up. Sanatana Dharma in the form of Acharyas, Bhakti movements, Shaastras, the commentaries, the Bhaashyas - the abundance of Sanatana Dharma religious literature, which came through after we lost militarily. Sanatana Dharma has been the core of Hindu Rajya. It was the core of Hindu Rajya in southeast Asia for close to 1000 years between 300 ce and 1500 ce ('ad'). The Rajyas and Samrajyas of southeast Asia had Sanatana Dharma as their core. And Sanatana Dharma influenced west Asia, central, east Asia, southeast Asia.

And we have <b>an external affairs ministry today</b>, which has made sure that India is surrounded, in every state adjoining her, by ideologies and religions actively hostile and inimical to Sanatana Dharma and the Dharmi here:
Nepal has fallen victim. Bhutan is well on its way to falling victim. Bangladesh, Pakistan. We have lost Sri Lanka also. India failed to step into Sri Lanka. Musharraf has stepped into Sri Lanka. India failed to step into Nepal, China, America and the maoists have overrun Nepal.

Hindu Rajya means: Territory under my control and territory under my influence. It is the subversion of Intellectual India that we believe in the Gujaral (?) doctrine, which says: Give in, surrender, overrun, welcome and decapitate us.
What is destroying India today is intellectual subversion in polity, which gives them the ideology upon which the UPA government - and even the NDA government to a certain extent - function. How else can you explain the fact that the NDA government handed over Rajgat (?) to Nirmala Deshpande? It was our government which did that. How else can you explain the fact that it was the NDA which made MK Narayanan a member of the National Security Advisory Board? It is intellectual subversion - We are so afraid of people calling us intolerant. When are going to say Yes, there is an Us and there is a Them, There are those who belong and those who do not belong. But you are welcome, you will be provided with all comforts, respect, the freedom to practise your religion - but you cannot be part of the Hindu Rashtra, you cannot participate in power. Do we have the courage? We had the courage, and that is why we remained a Hindu Rashtra and a Hindu Rajya.
The day we opened all doors indiscriminately and the day we used Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam as our defining characteristic - without the strength, but from weakness - we have allowed intellectual subversion to weaken us to such an extent that 50 years after independence, the power returned to Hindus - but what kind of Hindus? Hindus who are ashamed to be Hindus, regressive Hindus, deracinated Hindus, Hindus who had no faith in their own civilisation. It is Hindus who speak badly of the caste system. It is Hindus who speak badly about our Hindu acharyas and gurus. It is Hindus like CP Ramaswami Aiyar who advocated government control of temples. <b>Intellectual subversion.</b>

The media has played no less a destructive role. Please understand. The money for media...
How many times has the Sangha Parivar bemoaned the fact that we are unable to bring out a national newspaper which will give the leading English dailies a run for their money. Because we think we do not have the resources.
Then think of the kind of money that is going into The Hindu, The Times of India, NDTV, CNN-IBN - please understand that this is money coming from outside. When these channels function, they do not have national interests in mind. They do care about national interest. They have to answer to the hands that is pumping money into their channels and papers. Is it any wonder they are anti-Hindu?
A very subtle, a <b>very very subtle, intellectual subversive</b> activity is taking place and I'm afraid there is a large section of even intelligent Hindus who have bought into this argument. That we need to partner the <b>US and the developed western nations</b> to fight islam. Not realising that jihadi islam was first pacified and used by the western nations in Afghanistan and in Kashmir. The west has pacified and used islam to serve western colonial interests in non-white, non-christian nations.
If we understand this clearly, we will not make the mistake of thinking that we have to partner western nations in our war against jihad. Also understand that the western nations are the most bitter critics of Hindu nationalism. You only have to read the annual reports which the US state dept churns out on religious freedom, human rights and patterns of global terrorism. The language it uses against the ?cists, the language it uses against Hindu nationalism.
Why did they refuse Visa to Narendra Modi? It was to send a strong signal to NRIs, and would-be NRIs in India, that if you want accommodation in the US, you have to distance yourself from Hindutva and Hindu nationalism. No meaningful partnership or cooperation is possible with communism, islam or christianity. We must allow them to wage their cosmic wars - and if they are warring with each other, sit back and enjoy the fun. Don't think you are going to participate with one of them - none of the three is going to accept Hindu nationalists, Hindu nationalism, Sanatana Dharma or the Dharmi as their equal partners. If anything, they will try to use the gullible sections of the intellectual elite to serve their purpose.

<b>The last segment which practises intellectual subversion:</b>
I particularly hold a very significant section of the <b>IIT</b> pass-outs who have relocated in the United States for this intellectual subversion. When I did some research on anti-Hindu, non-government organisations (NGOs), I found that most of these NGOs - like AID, Asha, Akhila Raman, Angana Chatterjee and the others - are all well-entrenched in American universities. These are communists, who are function from American universities, who openly write in support in naxalism, who have participated in the CPI-ML congress: Mahashweta Devi, Arundhati Roy, Praful Bidwai - you name them - they have links with naxals and they are well-entrenched either in American universities or encouraged by Indians/Indian communists from American universities. And a very large section, significant number are IIT-ites.
Raju Rajagopal is an IIT, Ram Puniani is IIT, Sandeep Pandey is IIT, Balaji Sampat is IIT. There is a significant IIT component: The intellectual elite moving into intellectual subversion.

<b>What is the remedy?</b> I'm afraid this is going to stick in the craw of most of us who think tolerance is our defining virtue. I'm afraid Hindu society forgot the valour of the Hindu Rajyas, Samrajyas and Hindu society, which staved off islamic rule, which fought the colonialists, which is even today fighting the communists at the level of the society.
Hindu intellectual elite has a self-imposed image of tolerance which is not real. We have forgotten the Kshatriya blood which is intrinsic to both our intellectual activity and to our public life. There is no Kshatriya blood in the Hindu leadership today. There is no Kshatriya blood.
Sabarimalai happened, Pujya Kanchi acharya episode happened, there is an EVR statue right in front of the Srirangam temple. What is the response of Hindu organisations, the Hindu intellectuals and Hindu society? Has there been a response? Has there been an intellectual response? Has there been a physical response?

There are very, very highly respected voices from amongst the Hindu community, which is actually saying "We have no objection to the EVR statue anywhere in Srirangam, just not in front of the temple." We have forgotten the concept of Temple Town: the whole town is a temple! One of Vigil's members when I said Hindu Rashtra, I mentioned territory. The territory also comprises the character and content of public spaces. Let me tell you <b>the politics of public spaces and the intellectual subversion associated with it.</b> In nineteen-hundred-... The Pope came to India 2 days before Deepavali I think in 1999. And he declared his intention of planting the cross in Asia in the 3rd millennium. The first victim of the church planting mission in Asia is South Korea. In 1900 South Korea was less than 1% christian. In the 1970s it was around 18.5% christian. In 1990 it is 40% christian. Just as what is happening to Kerala. I think in Kerala, according to somebody with whom I travelled by train, slightly over 50% is Hindus - the rest is all gone. Seoul city, from the heart of Seoul city to Seoul airport is a 20km stretch. On either side of this 20km stretch, at every 3 feet, there is a towering church at every 3 feet. And these are not the small christian prayer houses with the asbestos sheet or a thatched roof - these are towering churches in the heart of Seoul to the Seoul airport. Scores of churches completely disproportionate to the christian population or the numbers of those who come to congregate in these churches. Then why are they standing there? Public Spaces. The churches are standing there as a symbol of subjugation, as a symbol of dominance, as a symbol of money power that "I will occupy your public space". The presence of EV Ramasamy Naicker, I am 100% sure, it is christian money which has going into the Dravida Kazhagam which has instigated them to plant EVR statue in front of the Rajagopuram. The land was allotted to them in (19)72. From '72 'til this date they did not dare to plant the statue there. There was continued Hindu resistance. All of a sudden how did they get the courage or the money to go and plant it? They did it in 2007. Soon after the Kanchi acharya issue, soon after the Sabarimalai issue, soon after we showed them "You can keep on rubbing our noses in the dirt, the Hindu community is incapable of any kind of Kshatriya response".
Towering churches in Seoul. You enter the Tambaram railway station by train, there is this huge cement pillar, on this huge pillar, there is a huge jesus christ standing like this (open arms). When you enter from a train, this is the first thing that you see. Yesterday I was horrified when I came to the Madras Central Station - I think this must have come up a month ago - I am entering the Madras Central Station, right beneath the bridge: a huge cement pillar, a huge jesus christ, outside the Central Station, standing like this (open arms).
Occupation of public spaces. This is a political intent. This is not a religious intent. "I am dominating you. I am subjugating you." Do we have the sense to see this? I am told that the EVR statue in front of the Srirangam temple is not the only perversion. I believe on the Thiruvananthapuram beach is a Devi temple. And right in front of the Devi temple there is a 50 foot sculpture of a naked woman. Not far from the temple there is a church and the mosque, but this naked woman is standing not in front of the church or the mosque, but only in front of the temple. So when the communists speak of atheism, when the 'dravidians' speak of atheism, they don't speak of anti-muslim god or anti-christian god - it is only anti-Hindu.
I disagree with Udayan Namboothiriji when he talks about islam. Islam is a threat which you see as a sword, against which we still do not yet have weapons. Christianity is Cancer. It invades your body, with sweet words it tells you I am part of you and then eats you away. Communism of course is a blight on humanity. I cannot have partnership with any of the three. And all the three inside India have intellectual backing. If Arundhati Roy can write a book for Afzal Guru, if Nirmal Deshpande and Mahashweta Devi - they have all been awarded the Padmavibhushan by the Congress government - they partcipate in a naxalite congress. If christian conversion can be legitimised by India's academia, the subversion of Indian nation - the Hindu Rajya and the Hindu Rashtra - is backed only by intellectual subversion. If they are terrorists, blame us. We are happy victims of terrorism. What stops us from becoming Kshatriyas? What stops us from writing good books? What stops us from producing monographs which will threaten them? What stops us from physically removing these jesus christ statues and the EVR statue? Ask yourself that question and you will understand why intellectual subversion has worked in this country. The victims of intellectual subversion unfortunately is the Hindu Rajya and the Hindu Rashtra and only Hindus have themselves to blame. Namaskaram.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
My own comments/disagreements:
1. She said: "It is only the Hindus and Jews - who are born into their faiths on a territory which they call their home - who have the concept of Mathruboomi, who have a concept of homeland."
Concept of homeland is not limited to Hindus and Jews, it is there among all other natural traditionalists. See also comment 6 below.

2. Radha Rajan says: "With the advent of democracy, which is also a christian construct..."
Democracy is not christian. In the western sphere it is a product of Hellenismos (Greek religion). Christianism worked on the feudal casta system (aristocracy, priesthood, merchant class, peasant and serfs) created and upheld by the christian church and christianism/faith.
It was only thanks to enlightenment (rediscovery of ancient Greece and Rome) that democratic ideas came to be recirculated in Europe.
But the modern sham 'democracies' the west keeps imposing everywhere (most notably the US with the last 2 memorable elections and this one) are christian corruptions of the GrecoRoman notion of democracy and republic.

3. She keeps talking about "white christian (culture)". Christianism is the threat to us - no matter what the perceived colour of the professing zombie is. Christians in India are just as much a threat to our personal health and nation as foreign christians. Any nation that is christian or islamic sooner or later becomes a threat to its neighbouring countries and eventually to all humanity. History proved that as it continues to prove today.

Fortunately, she also said that "christianity is a cancer" - a statement which appropriately refers to all christianism, and not merely some 'white' kind of christianism (since there is only one kind: the terrorist kind).

4. She says: "Occupation of public spaces. This is a political intent. This is not a religious intent. 'I am dominating you. I am subjugating you.' Do we have the sense to see this?"
I disagree. That is exactly what christoislamism is: it is both religious and political, intertwined into one thing. You bet ya those recent statues of jeebus defacing TN's public areas are entirely religious in nature; they are also entirely political in nature *because* of the christian objective behind them. They want to spiritually dominate us, spiritually conquer us and our country. Radha Rajan should not downplay christianism's (and its converts') religious goal, because it is the *primary* goal they have.

5. Not entirely sure what exactly the Rajan was saying about Margaret 'Arundhati' Roy, but in case Rajan was describing her as a 'Hindu' intellectual: no she's not - she's a christoterrorist.

6. Related to comment 1. Radha Rajan says: "There are those who belong and those who do not belong. But you are welcome, you will be provided with all comforts, respect, the freedom to practise your religion - but you cannot be part of the Hindu Rashtra, you cannot participate in power."

From what I understand of her statements, that reminds me somewhat of what the ancient Greek and Roman religion/society held on who was a citizen vs who a foreigner:
Some excerpts, but read the rest too at the link:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>The role of Citizen and Foreigner in Antiquity</b>
from the book «The Hellenic Polis» by Gustav De Foulance

In Ancient Hellas the citizen was the one participating in the religious life of the Polis and, based on this participation, was obtaining the civic and civil rights. Whoever was denying the worship was in fact denying his/her rights.
If we want to give an accurate meaning to the term citizen, we would say that it was the one who embraced the religion of the city. In contrast, a foreigner was the one who was not allowed to participate in the ceremony, was not protected by the Gods of the Polis and didn't have the right to invoke Gods' blessings. Thus, the Gods of the city sought prayers and offerings only from the citizens, didn't receive the foreigners, they were not allowed to enter the temples and their presence in the ceremony of sacrifices was considered sacrilege. The same tactic was also followed by the Romans in one of their basic ritual of their worship.
Thus the religion divided determinatively and indelibly the citizen from the stranger. For as long as religion was governing the mind of people no stranger could obtain the citizenship right.
Demosthenes reveals to us the real motivations and thoughts of Athenians: "They had to preserve the purity of the sacrifices" and by excluding the foreigner "they were guarding the sacred ceremony".
No one could become an Athenian citizen if he/she was already a citizen of another city because it was impossible, based on religious principles, for someone to be simultaneously member of two cities, like it was impossible for someone to belong in two families at the same time. No one could adopt two religious at the same time.
(Cf. the terrorists' allegiance to the Vatican or to the ummah *over* the allegiance to the heathen nations they live in.)

As already mentioned above, when the foreigner participated in the festivals citizen rights were granted automatically.
Reversely, the foreigner that did not participate in the spiritual life could not participate in the legislation.
At first sight it seems that the goal was the institutionalization of a system that could create problems to foreigners. However that's not true. Conversely in Athens and Rome all foreigners were welcomed with hearty receptions for commercial and political reasons. But neither their good intentions nor their interests could overrule ancient laws that had established the religion. The religion did not allow a foreigner to own land because it was not possible for him to own part of the city's sacred ground. The foreigner could not inherit neither bequeath a citizen because every transfer of fortune included the transfer of the cult and it was impossible for the citizen to perform the foreigner's cult or for the foreigner to perform the citizen's cult.
(Meanwhile christoterrorism owns most of the land in India after the government - see http://hamsa.org/interview.htm)

The citizens were allowed to welcome a foreigner, to offer shelter, even to appreciate him in case he was rich and honourable, but in no way he could participate in religion and legislation. Even slaves in some cases were treated better because the slave, as member of the family that was participating in the religious ceremonies, was connected with the city via his master and the Gods protected him. Roman religion tutored that the grave of the slave was sacred while the grave of the foreigner was not.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->And people here already know that religion was a key defining factor in what it meant to be Roman. What was seen as anti-Roman were exactly those things that went against Roman religion: that the christians would not participate in the ceremonies to the Roman Gods (also their other treachery against Rome by conspiring with Rome's enemies).

Note: don't mind me. Have a tendency to disagree (with something or other anyone says). Am disagreeable.

<b>Husky Ji :</b>

Whilst I do agree and join you in the alarming and serious concern at the spread of Islamic and Christian Proselytizing as also the Terrorism being perpetrated by the former which is now slowly being emulated by the latter I do find that you are full of rhetoric and empty of content.

This seems to be the general trend of the so called “Real Hindus” not only in this Topic but Generally on this Esteemed Forum.

You are always shouting from the rooftops about the Effect but refuse to address the Cause.

The Effect today is not only the Acts over the last ~Eighty Years - or more - of the Hindus Secular Leaders commencing with Gandhi Ji and Jawaharlal Nehru but continuing with the Hindu Secular Leaders, the Liberals-Leftist along with the Press and other like minded of the Ilk.

It is time that the Hindus dedicated themselves to the Saving and Improvement of Hinduism with the same Fervour of the Muslims and Christians in Proselytizing as well as Terrorism without resorting to Proselytizing and Terrorism.

<b>Suffice to say that Lal Kishen Advani has stooped so low as to accept the Secular (sic) credential of the <span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>“Qaid-E-Pædophilia “.</span></b>

As such it is time that we Hindus start from the Grass Roots and work towards the saving of Hinduism rather than exhibit the powerful abusive, colourful, derogatory and un-parliamentary rhetoric content of our individual vocabularies.

Please do not give me your immediate rhetorical reply but think of my sentiments as a Concerned Hindu indeed all the Hindus whether they are members of this Esteem Forum or not and then put down an Intelligent reply rather than “Shoot from the Hip through your Mouth”

I take no pleasure to bring in some Home Truths and hope to have a continuous and intelligent as well as a mutually beneficial dialogue with you and the other Sagacious Members of this Esteemed Forum.

I End With All Respect.

Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Naresh+Nov 2 2008, 04:52 PM-->QUOTE(Naresh @ Nov 2 2008, 04:52 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->I do find that you are full of rhetoric and empty of content.[right][snapback]89709[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Didn't you notice that for months now (8 or 9 months?) I've had nothing to contribute - IIRC, mine's all been opinionated posts zapping IF bandwidth. I actually don't remember what I wrote before that period - possibly more of the same... (Amnesia serves me well now.)

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->You are always shouting from the rooftops about the Effect but refuse to address the Cause.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->The cause is christoislamism, communism, psecularism, foreign meddling... Do you mean I refuse to offer solutions? That's because I don't know of any. I'm not Brain. I'm not even as clever as the <i>other</i> labrat. I try to avoid thinking most of the time - was never good at it, not my thing. Hence, not your man for a plan.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->exhibit the powerful content of abusive, colourful, derogatory and un-parliamentary rhetoric content of our individual vocabularies.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I've been taking personal revenge for every single instance of anti-Hindu rhetoric I've come across on the web and in books. I'm not there yet. I will go on until I've cleared it. <i>Then</i> I may return to using 'christianism' and 'islamism' instead. Although 'christoislamiterrorism' is actually appropriately descriptive (number of humans it has murdered: beyond our capabilities to contemplate).

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->It is time that the Hindus dedicated themselves to the Saving and Improvement of Hinduism with the same Fervour of the Muslims and Christians in Proselytizing as well as Terrorism without resorting to Proselytizing and Terrorism.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I agree with you about the terrorism. But why are we not allowed to do reconversions in our lands - in case that is what you mean with 'proselytizing'?

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Please do not give me your immediate rhetorical reply ... I take no pleasure to bring in some Home Truths and hope to have a continuous and intelligent as well as a mutually beneficial dialogue with you and the other Sagacious Members of this Esteemed Forum.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Hey, I don't actually attack people unless I dislike their character or one or more of their primary qualities.
I didn't do that to you, because as I recall, there's been nothing that you've said (that I've read) that offended me.

Arrogance (sense of superiority), cowardice, psecularism/equal-equalism/anti-Hindu 'Hindus', a meanness/pettyness of character and certain other things offend me. Deeply. I despise these qualities, and I hate to see them in those professing Hindu Dharma. No greater turn-off. Though I may not always say what I dislike about someone, one can obviously tell I dislike them - for whatever undeclared reason - if I start flaming in my usual manner. I don't usually bother telling such characters why I can't stand them (are they worth it? <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> ) There. You know more about me now than before I blabbed it - though I always thought I was ultra-transparent, but apparently I'm not?

But can I ask what your post has to do with the transcript of Rajan's video, since that seems to be the last post I made on this thread? Am seriously at a loss...

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)