Letter to India’s anti-Vedic Media

From: Mohan Natarajan < >

 

To: All the anti-Vedic Media and TOI

 

Dear Sir:

 

            YOU (still) CONTINUE YOUR ANTI-RSS, ANTI-BJP AND ANTI-HINDU STANCE

I am surprised, you are making a mountain out of a mole hill.  Bhagvat said that Teresa did social service with an eye on conversion.  CAN YOU OR CHRISTIANS SAY HONESTLY THAT THEY ARE DOING SOCIAL SERVICE WITHOUT DOING CONVERSION?

 

Rev. Couto himself has not said in the interview THAT CHRISTIANS ARE NOT DOING CONVERSION.  How Peter Wagner, the Christian expert can say that the present Christian population is around 25%.  The real figure is NOT REVEALED because the converts retain their Hindu names to enjoy the benefit of reservation.

 

Your paper must conduct a similar interview with Bhagvat to know his side of the story.  WILL YOU DO IT?

 

See how the media hates Modi and Hindus.  The Christian and Muslim NGOs prostrated before US to deny visa to Modi. The same media made fun of Modi’s suit – 10 lacs, 10 lacs.  The same media made fun of Modi’s 56 inches chest. But the same media is very reverential towards Mother, without telling the other side of the story. You can publish extracts from Hitches book so that Rev. Couto may know the true picture.

 

See Modi’s magnanimity:

 

He invited Obama twice.  He broke protocol to receive and see off BARRACK HUSSAIN OBAMA.  How Obama responded? He BACKSTABBED AND FRON-STABBED MODI.

 

For a change, I am appending a posting from another group – a post that is refreshing to Modi followers/lovers:

 

Q UOTE

 

Two events happened to me recently about which I want to share my experiences. My dad passed away about 5 months ago at the ripe old age of 94.  He had retired in 1975 as Supdt. Engr in CPWD in Delhi and was getting the central gov’t pension from 1975 to 2014 (about 40,000/-per month). In the year 2010 he wrote to the ministry of pensions asking to include my mother’s name Sharadha, now 89 yrs, as the family pensioner

 

In the year 2012, due to his failing eyesight I reminded them by email as well as by phone to Delhi. I was told they are processing it and will send the revised papers “soon”.2014 came and my dad had still not rec’d confirmation of my mom’s name as family pensioner. He passed away assuming his wife will not be the recipient of around 25,000/-PM as her pension.

 

When I went to the bank after my dad’s death with all papers they said what I was expecting them to say that my mom’s name was not in the pension payment order. Frustrated, I sent a copy of the earlier correspondence of 2010 to the pension ministry.

 

Within 4 days I got an email from some clerk saying the papers will be ready within a week (not a vague “soon.”) On the 5th day I got a phone call from a person who introduced himself as Dr. Jitendra Singh, and he said the papers with my mom’s details have been sent to the bank that very day.

 

I hung up thanking him. When I checked their web site Dr. Jitendra Singh was the minister of state for pensions and personnel grievances, reporting to the cabinet minister who was Modi himself. When I called back to thank the  minister himself again, he modestly said it was the PM’s directive that no woman who has lost her husband recently should be further traumatized by delayed paperwork on pensions.

(What Manmohan did not do in 4 years, Modi did in 4 days.)

And last month when my mom had to give her life certificate to the bank a bank officer came home to get her signature due to her old age. (Last year I took my 93 years old dad to the bank with great difficulty).  The bank also confirmed it was Finance ministry directive to treat Sr. Citizens with extra sensitivity!!

 

UNQUOTE

 

WHEN TOI IS GOING TO BE IMPARTIAL?  

(Skanda’s answer:

When TOI’s owner/controller is pro-Vedic and pro-raashtra; or when the Vedics stop buying/supporting TOI.)

 

THAT IS A MILLION DOLLAR QUESTION.

 

Thanking you,

 

Yours sincerely

 

N Mohan

 

The West’s Duplicity and Their Christian Oath

From: Deva Samaroo < >

 

West Duplicity and Their Christian Oath

And How They Support Mother Teresa

You may not believe it, but the Jesuit Oath is genuine. I did not make it up. However, you do not have to take my word for. Just visit any Catholic church and ask yourself. Let me give a few web sites on the Oath for your enlightenment. There are tons of material available.

Thanks, Tilak

  1. Secret Jesuit Oath

www.youtube.com/watch?v=-f1X1hI-_pg

  1. Jesuit Extreme Oath of Induction

www.reformation.org/jesuit-oath.html

  1. The Jesuit Oath Exposed

www.ianpaisley.org/article.asp?ArtKey=jesuit

  1. Jesuit Extreme Oath of Induction

www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/jesuit_extreme_oath_of_induction.htm

Teresa’s Hidden Mission in India: Conversion to Christianity

 IndiaStar: A Literary-Art magazine

Mother Teresa’s Hidden Mission in India:

Conversion to Christianity

By Dhiru Shah

[Editor’s intro: Dhiru Shah is an Atlanta-based writer.]

We must praise and respect any person involved in selfless humanitarian work irrespective of his or her religious belief. But as soon as that work is done with ulterior motive, it no longer remains a saintly deed. Mother Teresa’s work falls into the second category. Unfortunately, glowing tributes were paid to her by the pseudo-secularist leaders of India, Indian newspapers, and several Westernized Indians, without examining her mission in India.

Mother Teresa was wedded to the Catholic Church, particularly the Vatican establishment, whose main mission is to convert people in developing countries into Christianity by any means, now that Europeans are abandoning church membership and Christianity in increasing numbers. (But for imported Indian priests and nuns many European churches would have to close doors because Europeans seminaries are unable to fill their vacancies with Europeans.) In the early days of Christianity, those who refused to believe in Jesus were first branded as heretics and witches and then killed or burnt at the stake. In the name of the holy wars, military missions were sent which resulted in millions of people being massacred in South America. To perpetuate the forces of imperialism in Asia and Africa, the Western powers fit like a hand in glove with the

===========================

Gandhi: “If I had the power and could legislate, I should certainly stop all proselytising.” (Collected Works, Vol 61, page 46-47)

============================

Christian Church and used their military might to convert the natives into Christianity. Following the dictum ‘the end justifies the means,’ the Christian Church had to devise new means to convert Asians and Africans into Christianity after the demise of the Western Imperialism. Along with this came a breed of Christian evangelists guided and financed by the Vatican and the Western powers to carry on the crusade by using the label of “poverty and disease” as their weapons. That is exactly what Mother Teresa was doing in India.

Mother Teresa portrayed India as a poor, starving, and a diseased land to her Western donors who responded by filling her coffers so that she could continue her mission of converting the poor and illiterate of India. She effectively used the converted Indian nuns for this purpose and thereby achieved her major mission of the Church. Mother Teresa, the founder of the “Missionaries of Charity “was “a crafty user of public relations” as pointed out by Christopher Hitchens in his recent book, The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice.

The Western media played a big role in projecting her as a saint and savior of the poor. This powerful media at the same time told the world that Indians, particularly the Hindus, don’t care for their helpless people and hence a foreign Christian saint has to perform that job.

The Christian Church and the Western media succeeded in convincing many of the Indian leaders and the westernized Indians that Mother Teresa was a great saint and therefore should be given a state funeral, an honor reserved only for great leaders of India. She was equated by one of the Indian leaders with Mahatma Gandhi. In doing so, then Indian Prime Minister, Mr. Gujaral, and leaders of other political parties excepting the BJP confirmed to the world that the Indians are incapable of taking care of their own poor and sick people. Indian leaders like Gujaral have insulted Gandhi by equating Mother Teresa with him.

Gandhi was extremely articulate in opposing the conversion activities of Christian missionaries in India and questioned their motives in establishing educational institutions and other services in India. The following are cited from Arun Shourie’s 302-page book, Missionaries in India New Delhi, ASA Publications, 1994):

“There was a deeper problem with these services, and Gandhiji drew attention to it again and again. The services were incidental. They were the means. The objective was to convert the natives to Christianity. “The Collected Works of Gandhi” contain several accounts as do Mahadev Desai’s “Diaries” in which missionaries acknowledged to Gandhiji that the institutions and services are incidental that the aim is to gather a fuller harvest of converts for the Church.

“To gain access to non-Christian households, counsels the ‘Catholic Dharma ka Pracharak,’ [How to Preach the Catholic Religion] the preacher should know something of medicine. He will then be sought after whenever there is some illness in the house. Once there, he should try to prevail upon the parents that he should be allowed to baptize the child as the baptism would aid the child’s recovery. If they do not agree, says the guide: ‘If it is clear to you that the father is not going to agree to the child being baptized, and, as far as you can see, the child is close to death, then, on the pretext of administering some medicine, sprinkle water on his head in some secret way and pronounce the words of baptism. O, preacher, should the child die, you would have opened the gates of heaven for this child. Is this not a good deed? Now, if every preacher were to devote himself to his work, then how many children would they send to heaven in a year?’ “(Shourie, page 7-8)

Shourie goes on to question the motives of Mother Teresa.

Just how strongly Gandhi felt about Christian missionaries in India can be gauged from his recorded comments:

  1. Gandhi’s writing: “The cultured Hindu society has admitted its grievous sin against the untouchables. But the effect of Christianity upon India in general…has been disastrous.” (Shourie, p.6)
  2. Gandhi to Krezenski, a visiting professor of Philosophy from Poland, who had told him that Catholicism was the only true religion: “The idea of conversion, I assure you is the deadliest poison that ever sapped the fountain of truth.” (Shourie, p.11)
  3. Gandhi to a visiting missionary nurse: “The other day a missionary descended on a famine area with money in his pocket, distributed it among the famine-stricken, converted them to his fold, took charge of their temple and demolished it. This is outrageous. This friend goes and gets it demolished at the hands of the very men who only a little while ago believed that God was there.” (Shourie, p. 17)
  4. Gandhiji: “If I had the power and could legislate, I should certainly stop all proselytizing.” (Collected Works, Vol 61, page 46-47; Shourie, p. 38).
  5. Several missionaries tried to convert Gandhi. When they failed, one of the reverend gentlemen, writes Mahadev Desai, “retired with the imprecation…’Mr. Gandhi, soon there will come a day when you will be judged, not in your righteousness, but in the righteousness of Jesus.’ “(Collected Works, Vol 60, p.323; Shourie, p. 240)

Gandhi worked for the poor and the diseased without any selfish motive. He was a great philosopher, teacher, intellectual, and above all a great world leader. None of this can be said of Mother Teresa. Her helping of poor and downtrodden was only a facade behind which she carried out her real assigned mission of converting the miserable lot. Hitchens calls her as a “Christian Fundamentalist” who described the suffering of the poor as a gift from God. She called abortion as the single greatest threat to the world peace in her Nobel Prize speech. She was against attempts to resist injustice and inequality and though she called herself as “non-political,” she expressed sympathy for conservative Catholic forces in Latin America and Southern Europe.

Was Mother Teresa truly a holy, selfless person and completely dedicated to the service of the poor and the wretched as she has been projected by her mission and the world press? No, says Hitchens. She befriended the rich and powerful and was a defender of Western big business. Though she proclaimed her devotion to the poor and downtrodden, she urged the Indians to forgive Union Carbide for the gas leak in Bhopal which had killed more than 2000 people. She visited Haiti in 1981 to accept that nation’s highest award from the Duvalier family and made a glowing speech in which she said that the dictator ‘Baby Doc’ and his wife, Michele, not only loved the poor but were also loved by the poor!

Hitchens further reveals that Mother Teresa went to Albania in 1990, at that time the most oppressive of the Balkan Stalinist states, and laid a wreath on the grave of the dictator, Enver Hoxha, and embraced Hoxha’s widow while remaining silent on human rights. In 1992, Mother Teresa gave many lucrative endorsements, including a character reference to the court for Charles Keating, the biggest fraud and embezzler in the American history who stole a total $252 million from mainly small and poor depositors. Hitchens claims that Keating gave $1.25 million in cash to Mother Teresa and allowed her to use his private jet. The court had asked her to return the donation given by Keating but she never replied to the request.

Hitchens describes how Mother Teresa urged the faithful in the Republic of Ireland to vote against the referendum on the divorce issue but when asked in an interview in “The Ladies Home Journal” about Princess Diana’s impending divorce, she said, “It is good thing that it is over. Nobody was happy anyhow.” Thus she preached morality and obedience to the poor but forgiveness and indulgence for the princesses.

Hitchens doubts her celebrated concern for the poor and the weak. Hitchens cites testimony from the leading American and British physicians about the extremely low standard of medicine practiced in her small Calcutta clinics. There are no pain killers and the syringes are washed in cold water. He goes on to claim that no public accounts are made available for her Missionaries of Charity, but enormous sums are known to have been raised.

Mother Teresa had spoken with pride of having opened more than 500 convents in 125 countries, “not counting India.” It is obvious that the money donated by well-wishers (or guilty-conscience Westerners?) for the relief of poor was being used for the purpose of religious proselytizing by the “Missionary Multinational.”

India still remains poor after 50 years of independence. This does not speak highly of the Congress party. The only objective of Congress politicians has been to remain in power. Most Congress leaders have been naive and shallow who have never bothered to read and analyze the Christian and Islamic histories and understand their present and future strategies of conversion of poor and helpless people of India.

India has already been divided into three countries thanks to the pseudo-secularism of Nehru and his dynasty. The Congress under Sonia Gandhi and their leftist supporters want the government to follow the same policies which will eventually divide India further. The current problems in Kashmir, Nagaland, and Assam are the results of the failure on the part of the Indian leaders to recognize the threat of the Christian and Islamic conversion factor. In any country, such leaders would have been branded as traitors for selling their country to foreigners.

Unfortunately, many westernized Indians in India and abroad have shown the same ignorance, indifference, and insensitivity on the above subject as their leaders. Their minds are so Anglo-Americanized that they read and believe only in the Western media which always wants to propagate the Western religion, culture, and history in the developing world. Most of the leading Indian newspapers and magazines have also followed this trend. They have joined hands since independence with the Indian politicians in criticizing the Hindus and ignoring the real danger of the Christian and Islamic conversion jihad which is being carried out currently in India, supported and financed by the Vatican Establishment, Western powers, and Islamic countries. Millions of dollars are pouring into India every day from these sources to convert and subvert India.

By glorifying Mother Teresa, the world has been made to believe that there are no other persons in India, excepting her who are engaged in caring for the poor and helpless folks. This is a lie perpetuated by the Christian church and the Western media slavishly supported by some section of the Indian press and the dishonest politicians.

There are many Indians involved in similar noble humanitarian works like Mother Teresa but without her ulterior motives. Pandurang Shashtri Athavale had dedicated himself in selfless ‘Lok Seva’ for many years. He and his followers have made a tremendous impact on the lives of poor and helpless fishermen on the West Coast of India. Until he won the Templeton Award, he was not recognized by the Anglo-Americanized Indians or the Indian government.

Acharya Shri Chandananji, a Jain nun, has been carrying on a crusade of uplifting the illiterate and poor section of the society in Bihar since 1973. She founded an institution called “Veeraytan” at Rajgir, Bihar with the clear objective of ‘providing unflinching service in the field of community health, education, and employment’ which has created a total social transformation of that locality. It teaches ‘the practicality of religion to the modern scientific world, a religion totally honest to mankind and entirely free from the sectarian prejudices.’ The institution has set up a hundred bed charitable eye hospital along with other medical facilities which is basically managed by the nuns supported by a medical team of surgeons, doctors, nurses, and medical students. Veerayatan is also involved in uplifting the lives of thousands of deprived local children by providing free meals and education. It also provides training facilities in vocational courses like carpentry, pottery, and medical staff attendants. Acharya Shri Chandanaji has been able to prove in spite of several problems and challenges that it is possible to serve the poor and needy without any sectarian bias.

The list of such dedicated humanitarians is inexhaustible. In every nook and corner of India one can find such workers who devote their lives to the caring and service of the poor and weak sections of the society. Some of them are so humble that they don’t want their names to be brought into limelight. Unfortunately, westernized Indians have the tendency to recognize our great people only when there is a stamp of approval of the Western world. We did not give the state funerals to such great humanitarians like Vinoba Bhave or Jayprakash Narain, but our leaders thought it fit to give that rare honor to Mother Teresa in order to please the Western powers, the Vatican, and the minority at home.

Instead of creating a true secular state where all citizens are governed by the same laws and wherein all people irrespective of their faith are treated equally, our self-serving politicians in India have not only enacted separate laws for minorities but also have given special preferential treatment to them, solely for the purpose of getting their votes. Any person from the majority community objecting to this type of pseudo-secularism is branded as a “Hindu Chauvinist” or “Hindu Fundamentalist.”

It is unfortunate that neither the Indian leaders nor the educated people from the majority community have learnt any lessons from the last 800 years of India’s bloody slavery. Today India is being subverted from within as well as abroad by the Christian and Islamic forces who are bent on disintegrating India with the active help of some greedy and selfish politicians and the indifferent majority. Those who do not heed the truth of history must perish.

===================================================

Dhiru Shah

Why can’t Indian Americans be more Indian?

From: Harish Sharma < >

Why can’t Indian Americans be more Indian?

By Francois Gautier Source : SIFY

 

(Skanda987’s answer: Dharma glaani; not knowing the Vedic dharma as it is, and not living per the dharma. However, I think that all the Indian Americans are not as this article describes.)

 

It’s lunchtime at the home of the Consul General of India in New York, Dnyaneshwar M. Mulay.

A young Hindu American arrives. Her name is Suchitra Vijayan and she teaches part time in Columbia University, one of the most prestigious in the USA & plans to start there a course on South Asian Human Rights.

 

She says that she is first going to travel to India to interview Kashmiri Muslims and Christian Nagas – obviously an anti-Indian agenda – while her Indian consular mentor smiles proudly…

Welcome to America, the home of millions of Indians, some of whom make a living out of bashing India in American universities and in US publications.

 

Let’s face it: Indians who immigrate to America most of the time merge totally into the American way of life and their children never come back to their homeland.

 

The culprit, of course, is Indian education that mass produces brilliant Indians, who are only good for export, because students are not taught to be proud of their own culture, the way French are proud to be French or the Americans proud to be Americans.

 

As a result, Indian Americans know nothing about Kalidasa, probably one of the greatest poets ever, or Shivaji Maharaj, who is on par with Napoleon, or Sri Aurobindo, India’s greatest contemporary philosopher- but all about Shakespeare, the latest Dan Brown novel, or the best Italian restaurant in New York.

 

This is the greatest brain drain in the world, which allowed the Silicon Valley to flourish (80% Indian engineers), or the American medical system to expand (60% Indians).

 

Compare this to the American Chinese: Not only do they unabashedly stand out as Chinese, but they repatriate many of their funds to China and even go back to the mainland, to be part of the great Chinese economic boom.

 

American Indians rave about the American way of life, but it burns out a human being in 30 or 40 years. They start early for work – by 7 am, America’s millions of highways are already clogged with traffic.

 

There is fierce competitiveness in the work place – you can be fired in a minute for no reason. Imagine the late hours and heartburn produced over the years by food too quickly swallowed on the run or in the car, the immense stress at airports where security – thanks to continuing terrorism – has reached inhuman proportions…

 

If only American Indians did retain a bit of their Indian-ness…

 

Today’s Hollywood stars all do yoga, India’s gift to the world. Yet not only it is not taught in Indian schools and universities as it should, but our Hindu Americans do not practice it.

What else? Pranayama is the ancient Indian science of breathing. Through it you can not only gain more energy, but also de-stress naturally and balance your mind.

 

It is also a perfectly secular science: Respiration has no religion and a Muslim, a Hindu or a Christian breathe the same air.

In fact, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, who has revived and modernized pranayama, has many Muslims and Christians teachers and disciples. Yet, neither is it taught in India, nor do our Indian Americans seem to practice it much.

 

What about meditation, this most ancient technique that has again no religion, and can be practiced by anybody, with wonderful effects on the mind and the body?

 

In fact, American companies have begun introducing meditation in their seminars and it is becoming mainstream in the US. Does that mean that meditation is taught in Indian schools, as it should be, or that our Indian Americans practice it? Not at all.

 

What about Ayurveda, the oldest medical science still in practice that understood 3000 years before western medicine, that many diseases have a psychosomatic origin? Do our Hindu Americans use Ayurveda? Unlikely.

 

Yet, what would happen if Indian Americans practiced a little bit of that Indian-ness? They would shine, be an example to their fellow Americans, and make India proud.

 

Instead they want to become more American than the Americans. In this process, they drop their unique identity and are a loss not only to India, but also to America, as they bring nothing new to American culture.

 

And because they do not stand out, they allow these multiple South Asian groups that sprout everywhere, to be dominated by hostile Indian Americans, who, for instance, convinced the US Government for ten years to deny Narendra Modi a visa.

 

At the same time, it is true that America, whatever its faults, has always stood up for freedom and democracy. It did so during World War II, when it saved Europe from Nazi domination. It is doing so today, by being the only country in the world willing to take on terrorism head on.

Americans are friendly, hardworking, and it should soon dawn upon them that India is their natural political ally, in an Asia confronted with terrorism born out of Pakistan, Afghanistan or Indonesia. It is also the obvious democratic, pro-western and liberal economic destination to counterbalance China’s aggressive hegemony in Asia.

 

Meanwhile, it is very unfortunate that the second highest Indian official in the USA, endorses and promotes anti-Indian agendas, whereas he should be the first one to hunt them out. This Nehruvian mind-set in diplomats has got to stop.

 

The author is the editor in chief of the Paris based La Revue de l ’Inde.

China Gov’t Forces Imams To Dance In The Street In Xianjang

From: Narain Kataria < >

CHINA  GOVERNMENT  FORCES IMAMS  TO DANCE IN THE STREET IN XIANJANG

http://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2015/02/151682/imams-forced-dance-street-religiously-repressed-xianjang/

By Kristina Fried

In order to curb the diabolical activities of radical Islamists  who have brutally and mercilessly  murdered hundreds of  innocent Chinese in the name of Allah, Chinese Government  made  imams to dance and swear on oath that they would not teach religion [Islam]  to children …..  Teachers in the district were forced to take a similar oath, also swearing to teach their students to stay away from mosques.

(The Muslims in kafir countries need also to be forced to not force Islam on their children and their women. -Skanda987)

 Hundreds of Indian Muslims have been radicalized by social media and recruited by IS (Islamic State).  However, it is a matter of great regret and concern  that so far Government of India has not yet formulated a clear cut and solid strategy to nip in bud the traitorous  designs  of  Jihadists  whose sole aim is to destabilize, balkanize and consequently Islamize India. 

 

Narain Kataria

Religious Freedom: Whose freedom is it?

From: Mohan Natarajan < >
Religious Freedom: Whose freedom is it?
by Virendra Parekh < >
Thanks, but no thanks. That would be the reaction of discerning missionaries to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s much awaited intervention in the ongoing discourse on tolerance and religious freedom. He has obliged them at last, but with a twist which negates much of the favor.
On the face of it, it would be a matter of immense satisfaction to the church that the political head of a non-Christian secular country attended a purely religious function (organized by the Catholic Church to celebrate the sainthood of Kuriakose Elias Chavara and Mother Euphrasia) and spoke of ‘tolerance’, ‘freedom of faith’ and ‘the individual’s right to adopt the religion of his choice’.
The satisfaction was heightened by the context. Having availed of India’s hospitality for two days, the US President Barack Obama thought it fit and necessary to harangue us heathens on the virtues of tolerance and religious freedom. “India will succeed so long as it is not splintered on religious lines,” he intoned.
The hypocrisy of this moral grandstanding was astounding. Mr. Obama’s remarks were made shortly before he flew to Saudi Arabia, a country which openly denies religious freedom in theory and practice. Pakistan routinely and systematically persecutes its Hindu and Christian minorities, but remains America’s frontline ally in the so-called war on terror and receives guns and dollars in large quantities. Yet, “Nowhere is it more important to uphold religious freedom than in India.” Back home in Washington he bemoaned the “acts of intolerance that would have shocked Gandhiji.”
The hand of the missionary network behind the remark was too obvious to be ignored. It was no coincidence that the US Commission for International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), which was instrumental in the blacklisting of Mr. Narendra Modi after the 2002 Gujarat violence, and believes that religious freedom in India is comparable to that in Afghanistan and Turkey, welcomed the President’s remarks. In fact, Mr Obama, like Mr Bill Clinton before him, is connected to Southern Baptist groups who have global missionary networks, but they would not mention this in public or condemn the bigotry of Southern Baptists, who would not accept the Hindu, Buddhist or Sikh paths as valid.
An editorial in the New York Times asked the Prime Minister to break his deafening silence on religious intolerance.
And now, Mr. Modi has spoken what was expected of him, but with important improvisation. For the missionaries, it is bad enough that he wants every Indian (and not just Hindus) to have equal respect for all religions. He appealed to ‘ALL’ religious groups (and not just Hindus) to act with restraint, mutual respect, and tolerance, in the true spirit of this ancient nation.
He went on to say, “My government will ensure that there is complete freedom of faith and that everyone has the undeniable right to retain or adopt the religion of his or her choice without coercion or undue influence.” This reference to the right to adopt a religion of one’s choice is no doubt a big (and reckless) concession to the Abrahamic creeds. But there is a double qualification here. The right to retain one’s ancestral faith precedes the one to choose anotherSecondly, the change of religion has to be made ‘without coercion or undue influence’, if at all. The standard Hindu position is that we should stick to the tradition we are born into, while respecting and learning from other traditions. Mr. Modi went as close to that as possible under the Constitution.
But Hindu intellectuals and organizations need to go further.
For Abrahamic religions, religious tolerance and freedom of religion is a one-way street. According to The World Christian Encyclopedia, tolerance means that Christians should “show genuine religious tolerance to other expressions of faith in Christ.” But so far as other, non-Christian religions are concerned, religious toleration “does not deny their convictions about Christ and his church or abandon proclamation, evangelism or conversion”. The Christians retain their right to “believe other religions false and inadequate” and to “attempt to win (adherents) to faith and Jesus Christ.” (The World Christian Encyclopedia, David B Barrett, OUP: 1982, reviewed by Ram Swarup in The Times of India, July 14, 1985)
This view of religious tolerance and freedom of religion is implicitly accepted by the modern West in its dealings with other, especially eastern traditions. But they run into a big problem: How to sound liberal without ceasing to be diehard. You scratch them a little and the old theology of Christian superiority shines forth undiminished.
In the last hundred years, western scholars have developed a new intellectual apparatus to attack non-Christian religions and gods. The language of this attack is not theological but psychological. Brazen attempts to subvert and destroy other traditions are paraded as right of the individual to practice a religion of his choice.
This touching concern for individual rights is a cloak for theological arrogance. In Christian theology, a pagan is more than just a nasty physical fact; essentially, he is a lost soul needing to be saved by Jesus and his church missionaries. Thanks to the powerful missionary lobby in the UN, its universal declaration of human rights 1948 states that every individual has a right to embrace the religion or belief of his choice. This has been interpreted as the right of the church to seek converts among the world’s peoples without hindrance by whatever means and regardless of the consequences to the man and society. It has opened the doors for questionable proselytization and conversion tactics with lethal consequences to native traditions across the world. The missionary apparatus is a real threat to the genuine freedom of faith.
The church claims the right to freedom of religion, by which it means its own right to convert others, and never the other way round (recall its strong condemnation of ghar wapsi). Christian evangelical efforts in the world today constitute nothing less than an open declaration of war on the other religions. What it forgets is that if missionaries have a right to preach the gospel, ancient societies professing pacifist non-proselytizing religions have a right to defend themselves.
Hindu organizations should work for a new and equitable definition of freedom of religion to end this theological warfare and bring peace among religions. The UN must recognize explicitly that countries, cultures and peoples of tolerant philosophies and religions who believe in live and let live too have a right of protection against aggressive, systematic proselytizing. The new charter will assert that an individual’s right to religious freedom includes the right to practice his faith in peace free from uninvited attacks upon his faith and family, and not to be forced to compromise his faith as price of accepting help in times of societal or personal upheaval.
This is the view that Mr. Narendra Modi should articulate next time he holds forth on freedom of religion. Most of the non-Christian world, targeted by the church, will endorse this view. He could also share with his buddy Barack a few things Gandhiji said about the missionary activity and conversions.
In a note to a missionary, Dr. Thornton, Gandhiji wrote, “if the missionary friends will forget their mission viz. of proselytizing Indians and of bringing Christ to them, they will do wonderfully good work. Your duty is done with the ulterior motive of proselytizing. When I go to your institutions, I do not feel I am going to an Indian institution. This is what worries me.”
Gandhiji’s advice to the missionaries was five-fold. First, stop conversions altogether as “it is the deadliest poison that ever sapped the fountain of truth.” Second, if you must convert, direct your efforts to those who are in a position to assess these matters properly. Do not target the poor, the illiterate or the destitute. Third, even for that effort, it would be better for non-Indian missionaries to return to their countries and attend to problems there. Those problems are large enough to engage all the missionaries that can be made available there. Fourth, in doing any kind of work among people, compliment the faith of the people, do not undermine it. Do not de-nationalize them. Finally, instead of living the life of the Church, live the life of Jesus, of piety, of the Sermon on the Mount. Let that life, that example, persuade people to embrace Christianity if they will, not this salesmanship.
Like the Mahatma, many modern Hindus have wondered why the Church cannot emulate the example of the Ramakrishna Mission and make the tribal understand his own religion better. What is the need for introducing him to Christ, the Bible and Christianity when his own objects of devotion, veneration and spirituality can serve him equally well?
Like communists, the church too has contributed a lot to the corruption of language, loading innocuous phrases with self-serving but sinister meanings and connotations. It is time to undo the damage not just to the language but also to the thought. That will be the beginning of real tolerance and freedom.

Five Defects of Democratic Constitutions

Five Defects of Democratic Constitutions

By Suresh Vyas

Democracy means a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives. It is a government for the people and by the people of a country. The people draft a constriction, and then agree to live by it.

The defects in most constitutions of the current democratic countries are:

  1. Protection of minorities
  2. Freedom of religion
  3. Separate laws for different groups of people
  4. Majority (even if unrighteous) rules
  5. Human Rights

Each of the above is discussed below.

  • The constriction says to protect the minority, but a minority can be righteous or unrighteous, tolerant or intolerant, divine, or demoniac, etc. There is no need to protect unrighteous, intolerant, or demoniac group whether a minority or majority. In a healthy body, a cancer cell is a minority. To protect it (let it live in the body) is suicidal. Same for a nation.
  • The constitution assumes that all religions are equally good. This is not correct. Some religions are not tolerant of any other faiths, and constantly act to wipe out other religions and cultures from the world. Islam and Christianity are such religions. In contrast, the Vedic dharma is universal religion for mankind. Any two religions can be objectively compared to see which religion has higher potential to cause peace at personal to national and global level. Universal criteria for comparing religions is stated at below site:

https://hinduunation.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/religions-and-religious-freedom_paper.pdf

The constitution needs to say that all tolerant religions will be legal, and intolerant (I mean respectful to religion of the nation) will be illegal.

  • In one country there cannot be separate laws for separate groups. The Muslims always have asked for separate law—Sharia—for them, separate prayer rooms, etc. This cannot be allowed in non-Muslim countries.

On a related point, the government should not favor—give benefits—to any group over other group. This is discrimination. E.g. in Hindustan the gov’t has special quotas and benefits for so called “dalits” or oppressed group of people. Such favors backfire, because the dalits (the shudras) want to remain dalits for ever to rip the free benefits even when no one is oppressing them. Instead of favoring dalits, the gov’t should punish those who oppress others. The Hindus need to understand this:

The Vedic society is made of four varNas: Brahmins (the spiritually intellectual class), Kshatriyas (the protectors of the society), the vaishyas (the traders), and the shudras (so called dalits now for mean political purpose) who provide labor and service to society. Now according to Bhagavad Gita and the Vedas, this varNa I defined by one’s guNa (qualities) and karma (one’s actions and aptitudes). It is not defined by one’s birth. Additionally, dharma does not tell that a varNa should oppress or hate any other varNa. So, the gov’t needs to force the Hindus to live per the Vedic dharma, and stop providing quotas and benefits to dalits.

  • Majority Rules. If the majority people are less intelligent, or barbaric, or greedy, or criminals, or violent, they will rule. Such governments, e.g. that of Pakistan, cause suffering for themselves and for other countries. The majority need to have wisdom to elect those who are really intelligent, capable, and righteous leaders.
  • Human Rights: The democracies (their constitutions) assume that anyone with a human body is human. Accordingly, the demoniac people, e.g. Hitler, Idi Amin, Mafias, terrorists, Human Traffickers, etc. are all humans. The Veda, however, does not agree to such a definition of a human. The Vedic scripture says:

aahaara in.ndraa bhaya maithunam cha

saamaanyam etad pashubirnaraaNaam

It says eating, sleeping, self-protecting, and mating are common between men and animals.  Animals do not do anything more than that.  So, if a person being does that only, then he/she is an animal.

Below is an evidence from Rig Veda that at birth one is not a human.

तन्तुं तन्वन् रजसो भानुमन् विहि ज्योतिष्मतः पथो रक्ष धिया कृतान् ।

अनुल्अणं वयत जोगु वामपो मनुर्भव जनया दैव्यम् जनम् ॥ Rig. 10.53.6॥

“May you spinning the thread of divine knowledge, follow the splendid light of illumination, and protect the pathways well, which have been constructed by sacred acts and divine wisdom; may you render the pious works of the worshiper free from defect; may you first strive to become MAN, and then rise to the status of an enlightened one – the DIVINE.” – Rig Veda 10.53.6

So, to make a new born a human, the child has to undergo yagnopavit (holy thread) samskaar at the age around eight. After this samskaar one is called a dwiija (born again as a human.)

Then he goes to live at a Vedic guru’s ashram to study the Veda and other subjects till the age of 25 while remaining a brahmachaari. While the non-Hindu world talks about Human Rights, the Veda talks about Human Responsibilities. The constitution of Bhaarat needs to be made pro-Vedic and define a human per the Veda.  That way the criminals and demoniacs will not have human rights and can be treated according to what they did.

jaya sri krishna!

 

 

The Hindus Must Abandoned Gandhism

From Amit Bhadhuri < >

 The Hindus Must Abandoned Gandhism

 Attack 0n Hinduism & Growing Radicalization of Muslims

Hindus are a punching back. Anybody can smash Hindus, Hinduism, etc.  Why?  Hindus are by nature peaceful. This goodness is taken advantage of by the minorities to bully Hindus, Hinduism, and Modi, BJP RSS VHP and our Hindu traditions and Values etc.

If Hindus fail to defend India the 2nd partition is not far off and the media is helping towards this end especially NDTV, IBN TV18.

 

From: Dr. M C. Gupta – < >

Saturday, February 14, 2015

 

I am 73. I retired as a professor of medicine in 2001 and then joined the bar and have been practicing law since then. I live in Delhi. I had seen Mahatma Gandhi once during his prayer meetings.

 

I have been a great Gandhi follower. Gandhi was a follower of Gita. A true follower of Gita would have remembered that Krishna did not teach non-violence to Arjun. It is OK to be violent when duty demands it. Gandhi would have known that Krishna even asked Arjun to slay Karn when the latter’s chariot got stuck in mud / some obstacle. Killing a soldier when he was incapacitated was adharma. Yet Krishna asked Arjun to attack Karn. So much for Gandhi’s following the Gita.

 

Vinoba was a follower of Gandhi. He was a great scholar of Sanskrit and wrote treatises on Gita. It would be of interest to know his views about Gandhi. I have not come across the same.

 

I am tempted to give below a long quote about the Moplah massacre of Hindus and Gandhi’s turning a blind eye to it–

 

“Gandhi, The Moulana Of Muslim Appeasement

http://www.ivarta.com/columns/OL_070120.htm

By: V Sundaram, IAS, Retd.

January 20, 2007

 

It is a well-known fact of history that although personally Mahatma Gandhi was a devout Hindu, yet he turned more and more anti-Hindu after 1920 as his public life progressed. The driving passion of his political life was to throw the British out of India. In order to achieve this objective, he was obsessed in his conviction that Hindu – Muslim unity was absolutely necessary and indispensable. There can be two views or more on whether he was right or justified in holding these convictions. However, the irrefutable fact is that again and again he demonstrated his combat readiness to sacrifice or sell out vital Hindu interests, Hindu honor and Hindu blood all the time in deference to the feelings of minorities in general and Muslims in particular. To quote the appropriate words of Prafull Goradia in this context: “For Mahatma Gandhi, no price was too great for appeasing Muslims, so that they did not oppose Hindus. That he did not understand the Muslims was proved by the conduct of the Muslim League and by the vivisection of the country.”

 

After the Mutiny of 1857, the incidence of Hindu-Muslim riots in India had come down sharply. By lending support to the Khilafat Movement of Ali Brothers in 1920, Mahatma Gandhi inaugurated a new era of a fresh wave of Hindu-Muslim riots. Mahatma Gandhi was a confused man. How could his Satyagraha which was to be effective for attaining our Swaraj could be equally effective for saving the Caliph on his Turkish throne. Gandhi did not understand that restoration of the Caliph would only result in making him again a shining symbol of Pan-Islamism or the Supra-nationalism of Islam as a world religion with its people forming the Ummah. This inherent impending danger was clearly foreseen by Sir Sankaran Nair, a Member of the Viceroy’s Executive Council in 1922. In his book prophetically titled as “Gandhi and Anarchy” published by Tagore and Company, Madras in 1922 he wrote: “It is impossible to believe that Gandhi and his adherents are not aware that this claim of the Mahomedans to be judged only by the Law of the Koran, is a claim which is the fons et origo of all Khilafat claims of whatever kind. It is well to be clear about this, for not only does the acceptance of the claim mean the death knell of the British Empire or Indo-British Commonwealth, whatever name we may care to give to the great fraternity of nations to which we belong, but specifically as regards India it means a real denial of swaraj. For it involves Mahomedan rule and Hindu subjection.”

 

Thus Sir Sankaran Nair clearly saw the danger signal when Mahatma Gandhi was leading the Muslims of India to convert the Hindus into permanent Serfs. Dr. Manmohan Singh’s recent declaration on Muslim hegemony is only a logical culmination of the process initiated by Mahatma Gandhi and clearly foreseen by Sir Sankaran Nair in 1922.

 

During the Moplah rebellion in Kerala in 1921, thousands of Hindu men, women and children were killed by the Muslims. Hundreds of women were raped. And yet Gandhi supported the Moplahs and not the Hindu victims of Moplah violence and oppression. In fact Gandhi had no sympathy for the Hindus. Mahatma Gandhi wrote in his “Young India”, “It is wrong to say that Islam has employed force. No religion in this world has spread through the use of force. No Musalman, to my knowledge, has ever approved of compulsion.” Does this not show that Gandhi practiced political deception? According to Gandhi, the Moplah Muslims were guilty of no crime.

 

But the politically spurious and culturally disastrous view of Mahatma Gandhi on the Moplah rebellion was not shared by Lord Reading, the then Viceroy of India and Sir Sankaran Nair, a member of his Council. Sir Sankaran Nair wrote: “For sheer brutality on women, I do not remember anything in history to match the Malabar rebellion. It broke out on 20 August, 1921. Even by the 6 September, the results were dreadful. There was complete breakdown of Civil Government resulting in widespread disorder, in political chaos, in anarchy and in ruin.

 

” Let us contrast this with Mahatma Gandhi’s conclusion:

 

“The Moplahs are among the bravest in the land. They are god-fearing.” How did Gandhi overlook the brutal fact that Moplah Muslims were men-slaughtering, children-strangling and women-raping? I am asking this question in the light of the speech of Lord Reading, viceroy of India, on 20th of August 1921: “A few Europeans and many Hindus have been murdered, communications have been obstructed. Hindu temples sacked, houses of Europeans and Hindus burnt. According to reports Hindus were forcibly converted to Islam… The result has been the temporary collapse of the Civil Government and offices and courts have ceased to function and ordinary business has been brought to a standstill. European and Hindu refugees of all classes are concentrated at Calicut and it is satisfactory to note that they are safe there. One trembles to think of the consequences if the forces of order had not prevailed for the protection of Calicut. Those who are responsible for causing this grave outbreak of violence and crime must be brought to justice and made to suffer the punishment of the guilty.”

 

Gandhi was a lawyer. He was capable of drawing objective conclusions. No sane mind could have refused to see the brutality of Moplahs. Gandhi had said at that time–A true Hindu should not mind dying at the hands of a Muslim brother. This is not what a lawyer or layman should say.

As regards Godse, the government may not think it prudent to take drastic steps. But the minimum it should do is as follows:

 

1–It should remove the ban on “Nine hours to Ram” and the film made on this book.

 

2–It should allow people to write in praise of Godse and to make memorials to him. After all, these are part of free speech.

 

I end my note by exhorting all to read Godse’s speech in the court in his defense. It is attached herewith.

 

–M C Gupta,   15-2-2015

————————

WHY ARE WE AFRAID OF NATHU RAM GODSE?

From: Narayanaswamy Subramanian < >

Sunday, February 08, 2015

An excellent collation of genuine sentiments, information, detailed data about National Supreme Patriot Nathuram Vinayak Godse and his opposite — National Traitor Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, who was expelled from his Baniya caste and became a true pariah.

           In New Delhi the existing monuments to Gandhi and to his apostate-atheist disciple Jawarhar Lal Nehru should be destroyed.  They should be replaced by towering monuments to Nathuram Godse and Naranjan Apte, plus to Maharana Pratap, Chhatrapathi Shivaji, Vinayak D Sarvakar, Bhagat Singh and Subhas Chandra Bose. 

          This should happen in every State capital in India, and where Indians have settled abroad in substantial numbers, for example London (United Kingdom), Perth (Australia), San Francisco, New York, Austin (Texas) (United States of America), Pretoria, Cape Town, Bloemfontein, Johannesburg (South Africa), Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia), Singapore.

S Narayanaswamy Iyer

——————–

 

From: Ganji Shobhan < >

Monday, February 09, 2015

Gandhi is a rascal. Nobody with right mind will praise Gandhi.  One who has some basic common sense will throw this fraudster saint out of the home. One must carefully read this paragraph to understand the Pyscho Gandhi. It is time we call a spade a spade. There is no need to protect this Pyscho Gandhi.

Those were terrible days. Hindu and Sikh refugees from Pakistan were struggling to keep body and soul together. Many of them had lost their loved ones in the partition riots — women were raped in front of their husbands and children; young girls were abducted; men were disemboweled; trains arrived laden with dead bodies; people fleeing marauders were set upon with ferocious brutality. Madanlal Pahwa, a young refugee, Malgonkar writes, “reached a place called Fazilka, in Indian territory, and discovered that another refugee column in which his father and other relatives had set out, had fared much worse. They had been attacked by Muslim mobs: ‘Only 40 or 50 had survived out of 400 or 500…’.” Delhi was flooded by nearly one million refugees, all of them desperately looking for food and shelter. They were distraught and traumatized, unable to figure out why their lives had been turned upside down in so gruesome a manner. Nor could they understand the rationale behind protecting Delhi’s Muslims. What left them aghast was Gandhi’s insistence that Hindu and Sikh refugees should be sent back to Pakistan and Muslims who had left India be brought back. It didn’t make sense. Nor did the vicious blood-letting that followed. Meanwhile, Pakistan had launched its mission to smash and grab Jammu & Kashmir and was demanding that India hand over Rs. 55 crore, its share of the cash reserve inherited from the departing British colonial Government.

——————-

INDIA MUST ABANDONED GANDH-ISM

Posted by: “J. G. Arora” < > Sunday, February 01, 2015

 

  1. The killing of colonels and policemen like Colonel Munindra  Nath Rai and Policeman Sanjeevan Singh by pro-Pakistan elements  in Jammu & Kashmir from time to time are disgraceful tragedies for the nation Such tragedies are very frequent, and are happening due to Gandhian policies followed by successive Indian governments including the present BJP-led government.

 

  1. Since Gandhi-ism means appeasement, self-negation, unconditional surrender and pathway to slavery, such tragedies will continue to happen so long as Mahatma Gandhi remains the role model of the nation. For its very survival as a nation, India must be liberated from Gandhi-ism. Moreover, India must have warriors like Maharana Pratap and Chhatrapati Shivaji as its role-models instead of Mahatma Gandhi who brought India’s worst defeat in history while conceding Muslim League’s demand for the creation of Pakistan for Muslims whereby Bharat lost vital parts of its territory.

 

Gandhi was publicly doing untouchability, temple entry, khadi and clean toilets and as gullible Hindus came to the streets trotting faithfully behind Gandhi thinking he was leading them to freedom thru clean toilets, khadi and temple entry, Gandhi was undermining Tilak, decimating Ambedkar, evicting Subhash Bose, silencing KM Munshi, Patel and Rajaji, inking deals with Lord Irwin, negotiating with the Cabinet Mission and hobnobbing with Mountbatten behind the scenes, away from public scrutiny.

——————————————