Sunday, September 25, 2011

Should we support Palestine or Israel? We must first support ourselves!

India has supported the creation of Palestine. What has it got in return? Well, we are yet to see. Most probably, more aid by OPEC to Pakistan and more Islamic Terror in India.

This is so typical of India and its politicians, who have no leadership qualities. A detailed analysis of our follies is beyond the scope of this post, but the first and foremost point that we must be clear about is that we must first support ourselves. When we are strong, we can and be charitable and so on. Otherwise, India always looks like a five year old child mediating between two underworld dons. Such acts can at best be a source of entertainment, but never have any substance.

The Palestine-Israel conflict is quite a complicated issue. It has a long history. It is about Judaism and Jews as much as about Islam and Muslims. Who are the experts in history in India who can advise government on policies related to such issues? The sow Romila Thapar and her illegitimate academic children? No way. They only specialize in distorting Indian history. They have been instrumental in poisoning our school text books. With all her pomposity let her make one observation about the Palestine-Israel conflict in any scholarly circle. We challenge that she won't be able to do even as much as exhale her views, leave alone expressing and defending them intellectually.

The fact is that there is hardly any history expertise in our country. historians like Jadunath Sarkar, R. C. Majumdar, K. S. Lal, Sitaram Goel etc., have been few and far between. And they were hardly heeded by our Secular History-Distorter self proclaimed experts!

Our view is that when we do not know, we must keep away. There will be a need to urgently acquire necessary expertise, but to begin with we must keep away and assiduously protect our self interests. Unfortunately, however, what is the ground reality?

1. Our Secular government is surrendering to Islamic cause by supporting Palestine.

2. Our so called Hindu Acharya Sabha is capitulating while describing essentials of Hinduism.

For example, in their joint declaration they wrote (see here):

"... This does not mean that Hindus worship 'gods' and 'idols'. The Hindu relates to only the One Supreme Being when he/she prays to a particular manifestation. "

Now, Judaism is against idol-worship as furiously as Islam is. The conflict between Judaism and Christianity is also partly based on this issue. Hindus have never mandated idol-worship as compulsory, however they have never considered it as sinful or wrong. In fact it is both accepted as well as respected. We are absolutely comfortable with the Puranic story that Bhgwan Venkateshwara of Tirupati has taken loan and is repaying it.

A more correct explanation is that the Hindu sees the material-world too permeated with consciousness. Thus a Hindu easily perceives life in stone and can feel related to it. The Hindu is comfortable accepting it as not only a starting point, but also as a perpetual goal. Thus, often the devotees of Rama do not want "liberation". They want to be born again and again as devotees of Rama! Similarly with Krishna, Durga, Shiva or any other. That is the domain of love of the devotee for the devoted. Don't these "Acharyas" know that there are devotees of Krishna who love only the Krishna of Vrindavan? Why is there this insistence on imposing this One-Supreme-Being understanding, even if it is "true"? Sanatana Dharma is not like the straight-jacketed approach that the semitic religions profess.

Similarly, if there was a joint declaration on idol-worship, what about cow-slaughter? What has the Acharya Sabha got to say on that?

Thus on one hand our Secular political leadership chooses to surrender to Palestinians or on the other hand our Hindu religious leadership sucks up to the Jews. Why this surrender? Why this assumption that Judaism and Hinduism surely have a common ground or understanding? We need not criticize Judaism, and they need to honor the same protocol. However, this can never be at the expense of clarity about ourselves. If Hindus accommodate idol-worship and Jews consider it sinful, there is no meeting ground, period. There is no point in stretching concepts merely for accommodation.

This is why we emphasize that we Hindus need to understand ourselves, have confidence in ourselves and be strong. In addition to political leadership, we also need to create spiritual and religious leadership for ourselves.

Saturday, September 24, 2011

DogVijay about to be in the Docks?

This was expected, though we wonder why it took so long to happen. The scumbag, poisonous fecal matter between the ears, Digvijay Singh has been found to have visited a terror-accused. RSS has meekly demanded a probe. Investigations, even if they happen, will be manipulated by Manmohan (as he did in the 2-G case for tens of months) and the barker will manage to get a reprieve.

Thus, these steps are not enough. We must realize that when Digvijay Singh and Rahul Gandhi talk about Hindu-terror, they are referring to themselves and their partners in crime. Collusion and Connivance from the highest level of treacherous evil people masquerading as Secular Hindus with the real terror, Islamic terror.

If the moron Digvijay calls Abhinav Bharat and other Hindu organizations as propagators of saffron terror, then what are people of his ilk doing? The answer is obvious. They are propagating "tricolor-terror". Secular (fake-Hindus) combined with Muslims, Communists, and all the rest, working day in and night out against Hindus and India.

And now that this Muslims cleric of Bhopal has been caught, he must be given his favorite punishment, the Islamic punishment. Won't it be really a nice example of Secularism? A Digvijay Singh getting an Islamic punishment? He can hope to make it to the Islamic hall-of-fame of the Hadiths. More-over he can also hope to enjoy seventy-two pussy-cat dolls later.

Coming back to a deeper issue. Therefore it is important for we Hindus to realize and be aware that saffron terror may be bad, but tricolor-terror is much much worse. Saffron terror, if it exists, is a reaction to decades long tricolor terror.

As it is pointless to discuss Godhra-2002 without discussing the innocent women and children burnt alive in the two railway coaches at Godhra station; so it is pointless to discuss saffron-terror without discussing tricolor-terror.

Please also understand that Secular Hindus (Congress and Socialists), Muslims, and Naxalites (Maoists) are staging a fight amongst themselves, only with the aim of destroying Hindus and Sanatana Dharma. Each of them is a band in the tricolor, rather multicolor collage.

As Hindus, we must be absolutely clear and say NO to Secularism, Socialism, tricolor-terror and other such deceptions. Do not let the tricolor terrorists fool you in to believing the dangers of a non-existent saffron terror.

Friday, September 23, 2011

A Politician's Refusal to wear skull cap is an insult to Islam: So what?

Communists, Socialists and Muslims have this habit of pushing any civilized society on unnecessary defensive by their aggressive linguistic manipulations. The recent controversy on Narendra Modi's refusal to wear a skull cap offered by a Moslem cleric is a typical example. The Moslem cleric who offered the skull cap proclaimed that the refusal by Modi was an insult to Islam. Wow! That is great news. We are loving it! Islam deserves insults many more in number and much more in severity. After all it must get back what it has been giving until now to others.

Non-Muslims must keep in mind that Islam is universally contemptuous of anything other than Islam, Allah, Mahomet and Muslims. And it has been extremely severe in thought, word, as well as deeds. For the Hindus - the idolators - Islam has the choicest disdain. The Muslims do not even ever notice it! And Communists, Socialists, etc., are their partners in crime. In their hypocritical, nay deceptive tradition, all preachings whether of Secularism or Social Justice, are only for the Hindus. Their fingers point only at Sanatana Dharma and Hindus. Thus they will cry Secularism to subvert Secularism, cry Democracy to subvert Democracy, cry Class-inequality only to create a new Privileged-Class, and so on.

We must look at Moslems, Moslem clerics, Mayawati, Prakash and Brinda Karats, Laloo and Sharad Yadavs, Yechuries, with a very keen perception. And their bluff will atonce be obvious. If Islam, Communism, Social-Justice are feeling insulted more and more, they are merely beginning to get what they deserve!

We, as Hindus, must not fall prey to their linguistic manipulations; must have no default respect for terms like Secularism, Socialism, Social Justice and so on. We must boldly and openly declare and discuss the truth about all of these. Know and understand Islam for what it is, know and understand Secularism for what it is, and so on.

Refusing to wear skull cap is NOT that significant, however refusing to understand Islam IS significant. A Truth Modi will do well to know.

During his Sadbhavana fast Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi ruffled not a few feathers when he refused to wear the skull cap offered to him by a Moslem cleric. However encouraging the act may appear, we must not read much into it for Modi has some Secular (read Muslim Appeasement) inclinations. While we congratulate Modi for his refusal, we are not overly impressed by it. Rather we are disturbed by the following item.

In a recent interview to Society Magazine, Narendra Modi had this to say about terrorism:

One of the major achievements of the Modi government is its success at keeping terror at bay even though the state shares a boundary with Pakistan. Even as the Al Qaeda has administered a threat letter to Modi, he refuses to lend terrorism any religious association. He explains, "It is not in good taste to associate terrorism with any religion. Terrorism has no religion and you cannot associate it with humanity. Someone who is human can't be a terrorist. Only the one who ceases to be a human being becomes a terrorist."

This is the typical "No Religion is Bad" platitude. Modi is ignoring the possibility, which is the fact, that Islam teaches that Muslims alone are humans and therefore Muslims need not treat non-Muslims on par with humans.

So when he is projected as the "Hindutva" supporting "right-wing" candidate for the post of PM, it does not mean much. Further, he was also being compared to Sardar Patel in the same article as if Sardar Patel was some solid red-blooded Hindu. Let us look at Sardar Patel as well.

Sardar Patel in his speech had once said (quoted from wikipedia):

I fully appreciate the fears of our brothers from [the Muslim-majority areas]. Nobody likes the division of India and my heart is heavy. But the choice is between one division and many divisions. We must face facts. We cannot give way to emotionalism and sentimentality. The Working Committee has not acted out of fear. But I am afraid of one thing, that all our toil and hard work of these many years might go waste or prove unfruitful. My nine months in office has completely disillusioned me regarding the supposed merits of the Cabinet Mission Plan. Except for a few honourable exceptions, Muslim officials from the top down to the chaprasis (peons or servants) are working for the League. The communal veto given to the League in the Mission Plan would have blocked India's progress at every stage. Whether we like it or not, de facto Pakistan already exists in the Punjab and Bengal. Under the circumstances I would prefer a de jure Pakistan, which may make the League more responsible. Freedom is coming. We have 75 to 80 percent of India, which we can make strong with our own genius. The League can develop the rest of the country.

Here Sardar Patel seems to catch a glimpse of the "Nation of Islam" mentality of Muslims. However, he soon followed it up with a lame speech (quoted from the same wikipedia article):

Here, in this same city, the blood of Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims mingled in the bloodbath of Jallianwala Bagh. I am grieved to think that things have come to such a pass that no Muslim can go about in Amritsar and no Hindu or Sikh can even think of living in Lahore. The butchery of innocent and defenceless men, women and children does not behove brave men... I am quite certain that India's interest lies in getting all her men and women across the border and sending out all Muslims from East Punjab. I have come to you with a specific appeal. {boldface} Pledge the safety of Muslim refugees crossing the city. Any obstacles or hindrances will only worsen the plight of our refugees who are already performing prodigious feats of endurance. If we have to fight, we must fight clean. {boldface} Such a fight must await an appropriate time and conditions and you must be watchful in choosing your ground. To fight against the refugees is no fight at all. No laws of humanity or war among honourable men permit the murder of people who have sought shelter and protection. Let there be truce for three months in which both sides can exchange their refugees. This sort of truce is permitted even by laws of war. Let us take the initiative in breaking this vicious circle of attacks and counter-attacks. Hold your hands for a week and see what happens. Make way for the refugees with your own force of volunteers and let them deliver the refugees safely at our frontier.

Here the "Iron Man" is in the role of a soft appeaser masquerading as a reasonable man! What is the reputation of Islam in terms of "Laws of War"? Patel is completely ignorant about that. The Sardar is blissfully unaware what the founder and role-model of Islam did to Jewish tribes like Banu Qurayza. No reasonable dealings can ever happen with Islam! It is really really a pity that as far as Islam is concerned, Hindus have had only "Cotton-Men". There has been not a single "Iron Man". In the case of Sardar Patel as well, it looks as if he did not understand Islam for what it is. We are afraid that Modi will repeat the same mistake.

We need leaders who understand Islam for what it is. The text, the founder, its history and its role models. Without such an understanding the dangerous confusions will prevail and we Hindus will have to face their horrible consequences.

Refusing to wear skull cap is encouraging but NOT that significant. However, refusing to understand Islam for what it is, IS greatly significant. A greatly significant suicidal blunder!

As Hindus we must keep a very close watch on such matters, for it is a matter of survival. This is why we keep repeating that if there are not sufficiently Hindu leaders, don't despair, become ones!

O Hindus, realize that no politician is representing you! So you need to choose and send newer politicians from among yourselves. Make new politicians, make new political parties. Encourage people with spine to become your representatives. Otherwise you will be led by a bunch of Mohandas and Jawahar clones. And surely they will lead you to your doom!

Sardar Patel may have been much better than Jawahar, and yet he was NOT good enough. He did not understand Islam for what it is. Modi will do well to learn the truth.

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Three Don'ts for Modi

The BJP viciously betrayed its voters in three ways when it came to power at the center.

1. First, it compromised on the Ram Janmabhoomi issue:

With coalition-constraints as the excuse, BJP under the sissy leadership of AB Vajpeyi (also called Hajpeyi) dragged its feet on the Ram Temple issue. Completely forgetting that its hundred-fold gain in parliamentary strength in 1999 (to about 200) from its 1980 strength (of about 2) was mainly due to the desire among the Hindus to give a self-proclaimed Hindu-favoring party some chance. Even if the BJP compromised for the sake of coalition, it must have fought the 2004 election on its owm manifesto, however ...

2. Second, it jumped onto the Development plank prefering it over its "Hindu plank":

After enjoying power for about five years on the support of Hindus (Ram-Bhaktas), it jumped into the election fray prematurely (at the behest of the "genius" Pramod Mahajan) with India Shining as its symbol for campaign. Its leadership thought that Hindu-votes were in its pockets while others had to be attracted! Its leaders started proclaiming that the structure demolition at Ayodhya was a "sad" incident, and so on.

3. Third, it surrendered on Terror and indulged in Minority Appeasement for "broadening vote base":

Kandahar episode was the lowest point in the test of spine of the BJP which always prioded itself as the hardliner party against Islamic terror. Its capitulation during this episode completely exposed the lack of conviction in its high leadership with Jaswant escorting hardcore terrorists in exchange for hostages. Further, instead of initiating a debate on Secularism and discrediting Secularism, it started to woo minorities by proclaiming itself to be truly-secular while accusing others of pseudo-secularism.

We are not dwelling on other important issues like sacrificing Kalyan Singh for Hajpeyi's fondness for Mayawati the megalomaniac; victimising Govindacharya, and Uma Bharati at the altar of BJP high-command. It is no wonder that the party fared very very badly. And it continues to fare badly except in pockets. And beware, its improved performance anywahere is more owing to rejection of the alternative (Congress) rather than any positive feeling towards the BJP. We hope that there are some heads in the BJP who understand this and will strive towards a change.

Fortunately Mr. Modi has been somewhat different on these issues. Even though he has focused on the development of Gujarat, he has maintained a pro-Hindu image. Even though he has always been villified as "merchant of death"; he has braved it all, and has never even once apologised for it. Gujarat 2002 was a subdued reaction by non-Muslims who were provoked by the true-Muslims. True-Muslims follow the exhortation of Islam to commit atrocities against non-Muslims; this they did by burning alive hundreds of passengers including women and children in coaches of Sabarmati Express at Godhra station. what followed was a understandable reaction. Modi could have hardly prevented it. Further preventing it would be like preventing spontaneous celebration by fans after India winning the cricket-world-cup! Recently Modi refused to wear the skull cap, drawing ire from the cleric who claimed the refusal to be an insult of Islam. Further, until now, Modi is unfazed by the criticism by some of the members of the NDA (like the DF Nitish Kumar)

In our opinion, any sensible leader must guard against the follwing three follies, and Hindus must assiduously watch on these things:

1. Obfuscating truth about Islam, 2. and 3. Emphasizing Secularism and Socialism respectively. Each of this is a subversion of Hindu India. Please note that the terms "Secular" and "Socialist" were introduced by Mrs. Gandhi via the 42nd amendment and were not enshrined in the original constitution. Thus, the original constitution, which was bad enough, was worsened by Mrs. Gandhi, and then later coverted to garbage (well almost) by Rajiv Gandhi.

Coming to Modi, he MUST guard against making the following mistakes (each of which can be potentially politically suicidal)

1. Apologizing for Gujarat 2002:

The whole media, the adversaries of the BJP as well as some of BJP's DF-allies like (Nitish Kumar JD) are all hell bent upon making him apologise for Gujarat 2002. Modi must realize that even if he is viewed as someone who was responsible for Gujarat 2002, he must be proud of it and not ashamed of it. Modi must never ever apologize for Gujarat 2002. If at all he does, he must apologize to the Hindus for having thwarted their legitimate reaction.

2. Islam and Minority Appeasement:

Notwithstanding anything Modi must avoid any appeasement postures with Muslims and Islam. He must clealy understand that there may be and are moderate Muslims but there is no moderate Islam. And usually the best Muslims are the Least Muslims. Modi must be clear in his understanding of Islam for what it is, rather than what Secularists want everyone to believe. Appeasement of Muslims must also be avoided. Anyone who offers him a skull cap must be asked to first bow to an idol of a Hindu god as a mark of respect to one of the accepted ways of spiritual progress in Hinduism. Modi must diligently steer clear of Islam and Minority Appeasement.

3. Dilution in his pro-Hindu image:

We do not find Modi a strong pro-Hindu politician. He has been better than many, however, he has also exhibited perilous vulnerabilities (for example see here). However, at whatever level is he known to be pro-Hindu, Modi must tenaciously guard against diluting his pro-Hindu stance.

Most people now realize and believe that Modi can deliver Development and Governance-Efficiency; however Hindus want to know if he can deliver a pro-Hindu government at the center. If he strives for this end, he would not only serve his own political ambitions, he will also serve the need of the hour of our nation. With such fervent hope we wish him all the very best. We also exhort Hindus to reject secular politicians like Nitish Kumar et al. Hindus must elect pro-Hindu politicians who can also deliver development and efficiency. Politicians like Nitish Kumar who are avowedly development-centric but Secular, are poisonous for our society. Islam is much more dangerous compared to under-development! Though we need development as well to protect ourselves against Islam's military misadventures.

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Anna Reverts to His Dumb-Fuckery

In his latest burst Anna Hazare stated "Advani's rath yatra for votes, not for people".

We have the following question for Mr. Hazare:

What is wrong in pursuing votes?

India, currently has electoral democracy. And in ED "votes" are the thing! What is Anna's problem?

We think that Anna is fundamentally confused. He is unhappy with the system but he has no ideas about what changes to make in the system for a truly effective reform.

He keeps shouting that politicians are running behind votes, but he never proposes a solution to this. He proclaims that he believes in Democracy, himself practices autocracy, and dislikes votes. This is a typical example of a dumb-fuck. The inability to perceive, rather the intransigent unwillingness to perceive, the obvious. And then he will keep blabbering on Mohandasism and such non-sense. We hate to say this, and we are aware that we may be erring heavily, but he appears to be a cuckoo brained person.

Such Mohandasians are very very dangerous. The way the British used Gandhi to thwart national interests, Brown-British (Congress et al.) will use Hazare to thwart national interests.

Mere reveling in holier than thou attitude won't help much. Let him make explicit criticisms. If Anna is against politicians vying for votes, then he must have an alternative solution. Our apprehension is that if this Anna turns out to be second Mohandas, Kejriwal will be the second Jawahar and then ... Man we are doomed! So we need to keep a close watch on Annaesque DF-ery, and guard against getting swayed by his puerile rhetoric.

Thursday, September 8, 2011

What Christians in India need to Know About Islam

In an article author Raymond Ibrahim (wikipedia entry here) informs how Christians are being massacred by the Muslims in various countries.

He mentions two points in his article:

1) To document that which the mainstream media does not: habitual, if not chronic, Muslim persecution of Christians.

2) To show that such persecution is not "random," but systematic, interrelated, and ultimately rooted in a worldview inspired by Sharia Law.

As we have been emphasizing all along, one can replace the word Christians by any non-Muslim faith. What happened to Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh is much much worse. We could easily paraphrase the above as:

1) To document that which the mainstream media does not: habitual, if not chronic, Muslim persecution of Hindus.

2) To show that such persecution is not "random," but systematic, interrelated, and ultimately rooted in a worldview inspired by Sharia Law.

Thus there is no Moderate Islam. Anyone who ignores this fact risks his own existence. Christians in India should beware that they should not hobnob with or collaborate with Islam. If they do so, they do so at their own peril!

However, as we have mentioned earlier, Christians have been exhibiting Dumb-Fuckery of the highest order. Christians too persecuted the Hindus for quite long. The Goa inquisitions by the Portuguese was a horrible affair. Even during the British rule, Christian atrocities were not infrequent. Even now the Christian Churches are the biggest owners of real estate in India.

However, instead of atoning for their sins, they continue to deride Sanatana Dharma. Christians will do well to realize that Islam is never their friend. It has never been, it will never be. It is high time that their religious and political leaders realize this truth.

Sunday, September 4, 2011

A Joke Called Breach of Parliament

A vile moron called M Karunanidhi rhetorically asked "Which college did Rama complete his Bachelor of Engineering?". He was commenting on the controversy on Ram-Setu. Another perverted Muslim masquerading as an artist painted nude pictures of Hindu goddesses, while he never had the slightest guts to paint cartoons on Muhammad. The living pestilential buffoon Shahi Imam of Jama Masjid refuses and issues statements forbidding Muslims to sing Vande Mataram for it being against Islam.

None of these have breached any authority and have not been called upon to explain their positions. But if someone as much as surmises, based on the alleged video on cash-for-votes, that parliamentarians take bribes, they are served breach notices.

Members of Team Anna, namely Arvind Kejriwal, Prashant Bhushan, and Kiran Bedi have been served breach notices. We do not hold any of these in any high esteem. But they must have their freedom of expression. Bhushan has reacted strongly:

If speaking the truth or expressing our opinion in public interest is treated to be a breach of privilege by parliament or its members, then I think the time has come to re-examine as to what constitutes parliamentary privilege,' Bhushan told Times Now channel.

But he too stops well short of demanding a new constitution. We strongly recommend the making of a new constitution. The current constitution has failed. Our parliamentary system has failed. Team Anna members who are self proclaimed Mohandasians - we give a damn to Gandhism, Ishwara save us from Mohandasisms - are saying nothing on the failure of this constitution.

Since ancient times, Hindus have had freedom to air their views. After all even while Bhagwan Rama was alive, a washerman commented unfavorably on him. The washerman was not punished for his views. Now we continue to have the freedom to mock Bhagwan Rama, but we have lost the freedom to mock buffoons who are not even insignificant compared to Rama. We need to change that. When Bhagwan Rama is kind enough to grant us the freedom to express our views, none should restrict us in that freedom. We must be free to mock anyone, be that Muhammad, the parliament, Mohandas, Jawahar or anyone.

If Anna has a forceful drive for a change, he must also lead a movement for this freedom. And he can lead it by flouting the restrictions. That will be an even worthier fight. If team Anna mocks parliamentarians, Anna must mock the parliamentary system, Mohandas, Mohammad and so on. And Mr. Anna, you won't have to fast for this, you merely have to open your mouth and let go! Otherwise, we will continue to face this joke called breach of parliament!

Killers Must Get at least Capital Punishment

There is a hue and cry about clemency for the killers of Rajiv Gandhi. A similar hullabaloo was created while Indira Gandhi's killers were to be hanged.

There are mainly two ways to understand a killing or killings in general:

1. The killing(s) was justified.

2. The killing was a crime.

Some readers might look askance at point number 1. However, if we consider what happens in a war, the point becomes evident. Are soldiers tried for killing enemy soldiers? There may be war-crimes, but killing is seen as justified there.

When it is crime, there are many possibilities. Either it happened by mistake, or happened in a fit of anger, or it was a premeditated killing and so on.

Our constitution recommends capital punishment only in the rarest of the rare cases. We disagree. Whether by mistake or in a fit of anger, killing is a very very serious thing, and people must know that even if it happens by mistake or in a fit of rage, it will never be taken lightly. Thus life-sentence must be given only in the rarest of the rare cases and usually capital punishment must be given. When the crime is more serious, including gory premeditated killings, child-rape and so on; the punishment must be exemplary. Despite facing the risk of being branded as barbaric, we would go to the extent, that exemplary punishment could be worse than mere death by hanging. For example, being dropped into a cage of hungry carnivores. This might sound barbaric, but often there is no better way to discourage crime than meting out exemplary punishments. The details could however be a matter of more serious discussion by better informed people. However, all the sissy theories of being humane to criminals must be shunned at least in some deserving cases.

More often than not, all discussions on jail reforms, whether by the likes of the dumb-fuck Sanjiv Bhatt (Gujarat cop) or Kiran Bedi; are immature at the least and dangerous at worst. All those who recommend humane treatment of criminals must remember that those against who the crimes were committed would view it very differently. And these imbeciles themselves would have very different views if one of their near and dear one suffered any such thing. For example, Kiran Bedi mocked parliamentarians when Anna was not being given importance. Why did she not contemplate parliamentarian reforms, like what she designed for Tihar inmates? Why could she not remain humane to parliamentarians for just two weeks? We are not defending the action of parliamentarians, and we have expressed our views on the matter elsewhere. We are in favor of a new constitution. However the point that those who are blabbering on jail-reforms have double standards must be understood very clearly. Also, lawyers like Ram Jethmalani, who thrive counseling criminals, are often very eloquent about the rights and suffering of the jailed and the convicts. We wonder why any political party entertains him and tolerates his whims. We wish that he is at the receiving end of a serious crime and afterwards a clone of Ram Jethmalani argues for the perpetrator. It will be quite an entertainment to watch the show then.

Broaching Rajiv Gandhi case now, those seeking clemency (even though it is commuting death penalty to life imprisonment) must be forthright whether they consider this particular killing a crime or not? Are they thinking that killing Rajiv Gandhi was justified? They are free to use freedom of speech but then they must express their opinions frankly and directly. And if they do consider it to be a crime then killers must get at least death, if not worse punishment.

We are very clear and forthright that there should be capital punishment and even harsher ones in the case of heinous crimes. As mentioned earlier guilty of rape in general, and especially rape of minors, the convicts must be given very serious and exemplary punishments. On a side note, we are in the favor of life imprisonment being for the whole life, and not some 16 or 20 years as presently is the case. Also, since incarceration (keeping a person in jail) involves expenses, we are in favor of recovering the expenses by the one who has been jailed. Taxpayer should not be forced to subsidize the cool-life of the criminals! In fact even police expenses must be recovered from the convicted.

We need to remember that if as a society we are humane to criminals without any regards to other non-criminal citizens who face the brunt of crime, we are being inhumane to those innocents. And that, in our opinion, is a serious blunder. If we want to survive as a civilization, we must understand justice and then enforce it. Killing is damn serious crime, and it should never be treated lightly as it is being attempted in this country. Remember, if we do not strongly discourage crime, then in effect, we are encouraging crime. And a society which encourages crime, is on a suicidal path. We should shun such paths.

Thursday, September 1, 2011

Strive for Survival: Some Crucial Aspects

That Sanatana Dharma is under attack from all quarters is not hard to see. If you have doubts, please search "hindu genocide" "violence against hindus" and any search engine will answer your questions. Of course, a detractor could ask, searching phrases like "Jew genocide" too will give results, so what of it?

So our questions are: Are you a Jew? Are you a Muslim? Are you a Christian? And so on ... Who are you? And if you don't know the answer, then it is most probably the case that you are a Hindu.

Of course you can read any number of sites about what Hinduism is or who Hindus are. We do not claim to better them. However, we too have our broad view on the subject and you are welcome to give it a reading here.

Further, we want to ask you another question. Do you want to survive or not? If you want your children, grand children and so on, not to be smothered by Enslaving religions who talk about "truth" but indulge in "delusions", you better wake up now.

You have a right to survive, and surely your children and grandchildren too should have the same.

However, this survival will come at a price: You need to become aware, understand the threats, and act.

Understand that Sanatana Dharma tells you about Freedom and Responsibility and you need to protect your liberties by discharging your responsibilities.

Are there no ills in Hindu Society? There may be, and there are. But will we be able to correct them if we do not survive?

There are Secularists, they believe that Hindus need not survive. If Islam wins, they will raise their behinds and pray to Allah. If Christianity wins, they will seek the Pope's intervention for obtaining heaven. They think that whatever good there is in Hinduism, it owes to Buddhism or Jainism.

Then there are Socialists, and Social Justice Activists, they believe that Hinduism should not survive. They think that the only thing worth saving about Hinduism is some dance forms, dress styles and so on.

Then there are Mohandasians, they believe that their extreme and distorted version of non-violence will save us.

Then there are those who recommend inaction, they believe that nothing needs to be done.

Then there are many more such hypocrites.

We Hindus, those belonging to Sanatana Dharma, must be beware of such deceptions.

We have our follies, but despite our follies we deserve to and we want to survive. We don't need others to tell us what we should do, whether we should reform us or whether we deserve to survive.

Yes, Ishwara surely help us, Ishwara will surely protect us, and yet out of our love for Ishwara, let us do our bit.

So don't be fooled by secular, socialists, pro social justice, or gandhian forces. Don't be fooled by Congress, BJP or the third front. Don't be fooled by Digvijay Singhs, Kapil Sibals, Mayawatis or Laloo Yadavs. Don't let concepts of freedom of religion be used to subvert your freedoms. Muslims love sharia, so let them go to their beloved place Arabia. Christians love the cross, let them cross the oceans and go over to Rome. If they love this land, then they need to love the source, Sanatana Dharma. We, Hindus, do not need to be told to accommodate Muslims or the like. They must realize that the roots of the problems are in their own scriptures and practices; and they need to choose between living amongst us, or their evil ideologies and practices.

Sanatana Dharma does not mandate idol worship but it surely accepts idol worship as a means to Ishwara. So anyone who considers idol worship as evil and wrong is incompatible with us.

So on this day when we are worshiping Ganesha residing in his beautiful idol, let us resolve that:

We are Hindus, Sanatana Dharma is our way, and we love our temples and our fellows who idol worship, and we will strive for our survival. We are, as a general practice peace-loving and non-violent, but nobody can fool us by these terms, and if necessary we will not shirk from a bloody fight. We know Krishna of Vrindavana, and we also know Krishna of Kurukshetra. We worship Parvati and we also worship Durga and Kali.

We love our Shudras, but we won't let Mayawati hoodwink us. We love our Yadavas, but we won't let Laloos and Sharads fool us.

We have Freedom of pursuit of Truth, but we won't let Secularism and Seculars cheat us.

We love the poor and those who may be suffering, and we love to be charitable to them; but we won't let Socialism, Social Justice and Affirmative Action plans, Wealth Redistribution policies deceive us.

We are people with a great heart, and we have equally capable heads. We feel but we are not fools.

May Ganesha give us love as well as wisdom, clarity and strength.

The Truth about Bangladesh

In a talk to Telugu Association of North America (tana), Dr. Richard Benkin exposed the plight of Hindus in Bangladesh. The article is an eyeopener. How many eyeopeners have we had? How many eye openers will we need before we open our eyes?

The article is reproduced from here.

Hindus Decide: Save your Brethren or let them Die

By Dr. Richard L. Benkin

Address to Telugu Association of North America (TANA)

Santa Clara, CA

July 2, 2011

Namaskar. Shphodim.

Last month, I was in conversation about a book I wrote on Bangladesh’s ethnic cleansing of its Hindu population. The person with whom I spoke was very taken by the material; so taken that she wanted to help make sure people got word of this atrocity. She knows the American publishing and book buying world very well and said that all the elements were there for a successful project; all the elements except one. And remember this person is a friend, an ally, one of the “good guys,” someone who does care and wants to help. She said, ‘I just don’t see people getting real excited over a bunch of Hindus being killed.’ Think about that for a moment. It should make everyone in this room furious; and if it does not make you furious, you better ask yourself why because three things hit me—a non-Hindu—immediately.

My first thought was, ‘Shame on us if that’s who we are.’ Is this another example in which the so-called civilized world would prefer to wring its hands over body bags piled too high to ignore—as it did in Nazi Europe, Rwanda, and countless other places—rather than prevent the atrocity? The second was that those of us who do understand what is happening have a moral obligation to take effective action to stop it, whatever that means; or we are as complicit in the crime as anyone else. And the third was this: Hindus better not count on anyone else helping them, no matter how much they prattle on about things like “justice” or “human rights.” Those supposed arbiters of right and wrong might apply these concepts to Egyptian and Libyan protesters or warp them beyond recognition so they can prop up those Arab terrorists they call “Palestinian”; but they will not apply them to Hindus in Bangladesh—or for that matter, Hindus in Pakistan, Hindus in Kashmir, Hindus in Malaysia, or Hindus anywhere else, including if it comes to it, Hindus in Andhra Pradesh.

So when considering this weekend’s events, I asked myself if it was going to be another one of those gatherings where the attendees shake their fists and complain about how unfair things are—or one where we actually accomplish something. Despite the preponderance of the former over the latter, we are on the cusp of a new dawn where real accomplishment is possible. It will start here in the United States, and it must begin with us; or else we will have frittered away a golden opportunity to change the trajectory of history and in the process sit by while a lot of innocent people die.

We have a great tradition here in which groups of Americans can petition our government and take concerted action, and I want to give you an example of that from my own Jewish community. Those of you who were around in the 1980s will remember that back then, you could not pass a synagogue that did not have a large banner proclaiming, “Save Soviet Jewry.” Our people were being persecuted horribly in the Soviet Union as part of the Communists’ attempt to eradicate their Jewish religion and Jewish identity. A few, like Natan Sharansky who later became an Israeli Cabinet Minister, garnered some attention, but most suffered without fanfare. The American Jewish community saw their persecuted brothers and sisters and recognized the obligation to save them. Moreover, it acted on that obligation.

We lobbied Washington and our local officials; prevailed upon other religious bodies to recognize the atrocity and let Washington know their position. Average Jews who you might see at the office or in the supermarket—people just like you—went to Russia at their own expense to smuggle religious books and other Jewish artifacts at considerable peril to themselves. After all, this was the mighty Soviet Union.

Jewish children reaching their Bar and Bat Mitzvah rite of passage were “twinned” with children in the Soviet Union who did not have the freedom to celebrate their own; so we did it for them. Younger children in religious schools corresponded with pen pals their own age from the USSR and gave them hope. And before it was over, we helped get 1.2 million Jews out of that communist hell. It strengthened our own identity, and every Jewish child who was part of that effort never forgot it or their own sense of Jewishness; and it helped us realize that we could in fact stand strong for our people, that the only thing stopping us was ourselves.

The Bangladeshi Hindus can be your Soviet Jewry. It is an issue of human decency; an issue that transcends partisan politics and speaks to those values that are basic for all Americans. It can galvanize American Hindus to take pride in their Hinduism and help support a resurgent Hindu youth. Will we act?

Two years ago, I stood before you to talk about the Bangladeshi Hindus. Let me list for you everything that Sheikh Hasina and the Bangladeshi government has done to protect their Hindu citizens since then:

[about 10 seconds of silence]

That’s right, nothing, zip, bupkis. That same “list,” moreover, contains everything the United Nations has done for them, everything Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have done; every word of protest uttered by the governments of India and the United States. It seems my friend is right: Nobody gets excited over the killing of Hindus.

The facts warrant a different reaction. In fact, the numbers are so compelling they cry out for an explanation. At the time of India’s partition in 1947, Hindus made up a little less than a third of East Pakistan’s population. When East Pakistan became Bangladesh in 1971, they were less than a fifth; thirty years later, less than one in ten; and reliable estimates put the Hindu population at less than eight percent today. Professor Sachi Dastidar of the State University of New York estimates that over 49 million Hindus are missing from Bangladesh. Still having trouble wondering where this is going? Take a look at Pakistan where Hindus are down to one percent or Kashmir where they are almost gone. Take a look at the future of Bangladesh’s Hindus if we do not act.

This is not opinion or “Islamaphobia.” These are facts! Want another? For years, we have received report after report documenting anti-Hindu incidents there; incidents including murder, gang rape, assault, forced conversion to Islam, child abduction, land grabs, and religious desecration. And while Bangladeshi officials might object that the perpetrators were non-state actors, government culpability rests, at the very least, on the fact that it pursues very few of these cases and punishes even fewer perpetrators. And that’s our key. Unfortunately, minorities are attacked pretty much everywhere. The critical question is when it happens, does the majority population have a problem with it; and the best measure of that is what the government does in reaction. When Hindu students were attacked in Australia, the government went after the perpetrators with a vengeance. In the United States, crimes against any minority are considered just that, crimes; and the state will punish you to the fullest extent of the law; but not in Bangladesh.

Here’s another irrefutable fact. While this information pours out of Bangladesh with numbing ferocity, it does not do so through the mainstream media—here, India, or anywhere else. Thus, people are often shocked and sometimes dubious when I present the facts to them. Many wonder out loud how something so horrible could be kept hidden; how our own CIA or India’s RAW could not know about it—were it actually true. They often ask me why, if this is so dire have we read nothing about it in our major papers or watched it on CNN or Fox. ‘Why,’ they ask, ‘hasn’t Amnesty International taken it up,’ or most damning, ‘Why have Hindus themselves said nothing?’

This means that anything we present has to be verified with certainty; if we present information that turns out to be untrue or exaggerated it will sink our efforts. We can expect the Bangladeshi government and even the US State Department to challenge it; and expect the recognized human rights industry to dismiss it. Both parties have an interest to do so, for if we are correct, Amnesty International and the others will be asked why they missed or ignored the situation. The Obama Administration and the rest of the international talking heads have maintained as an article of faith that the December 2008 election of Sheikh Hasina and the Awami League ushered in a new era for Bangladesh. They will point out that it ended almost two years of military-backed rule; and the government before that, , included the Islamist Jamaat in its coalition. Moreover, they will say, the left-center Awami League has always claimed to be Bangladesh’s “pro-minority” party, and these outside groups with no real knowledge of Bangladesh swallow that line. So, it is in their interest to maintain that fiction.

And they are not the only ones. In January 2009, I was asked to address a coalition of Bangladeshi Hindu organizations about how they might respond to the Awami League victory. My advice was to press their advantage since Hindus helped Awami to victory. The last thing they should do, I said, was to “fall asleep. That would be a critical mistake.” Some agreed, but the prevailing sentiment among the organization leaders was fear of angering the new government. “Give them time,” they said, to which I replied, “This attitude of passivity and ‘let's give them a chance’; how well has that worked for the minorities in the past? Not well. We are sitting by while people are being killed and tortured! So, yes, we must give them some time—but not much or we will see that their words are nothing more than words.” And that is exactly all they turned out to be.

During the first year of the Awami League’s rule, there were major anti-Hindu attacks at the rate of at least one per week. I say “at least” because you will recall that our allegations will be held to a higher standard than most. Out of the flood of reported incidents, those were the ones I personally verified—either through my own missions to South Asia or through Indian and Bangladeshi Hindus who investigated and verified the allegations for me. All of these attacks were serious, involved Hindu victims and Muslim victimizers; and in every case, the government refused to take action against known perpetrators. Police and government officials actually took part in some and led a cover up of others. And in none of them, did the police help recover Hindu women or children who were abducted, likely raped, and forcibly converted to Islam. And I re-confirmed the facts as recently as this spring, so the government’s support for anti-Hindu action lasts long after the crimes themselves. Here are three examples.

• For three days in March and April, 2009, an anti-Hindu pogrom raged in the Sutrapur section of the Bangladeshi capital. It occurred right behind a police station and involved arson, beatings, and the deliberate destruction of a Hindu Temple. Many were hospitalized, and dozens still remain homeless. Not only are the perpetrators free of prosecution, but they actually were awarded some of the land they invaded. Officials including the Dhaka Chief of Police and an Awami League Member of Parliament warned local human rights groups to stop inquiring about it.

• On June 13, 2009, 20-year-old Hindu college student Koli Goswami was abducted from her bed in the middle of the night. Muslim men broke into the family home and brandished firearms when confronted by family members. Police refuse to pursue a case, calling it a “love affair,” despite admitted evidence of violence and a struggle. They claim that Koli has “voluntarily” converted to Islam and threaten family members and human rights groups while keeping them from interviewing the young woman. Koli Goswami has not been seen since the night she was taken.

• At 10am on February 26, 2009, two men abducted 14 year old Tanusree Roy and raped her multiple times. Although the distraught father has filed official reports of the incident, authorities have refused to help recover his child or prosecute the known perpetrators. The latter continue to threaten Tanusree’s father if he does not drop the matter. Human rights activists report that the girl has been forcibly converted to Islam and kept incommunicado for the past two years.

There was no let-up during the Awami League’s second year in office. In one 25 day period between March 12 and April 6, 2010, for instance, there were seven major, confirmed attacks.

All we get from the Bangladeshis are words. Like actors reading from a script, they repeat the same hollow denials—the same party line I got when I raised the issue with a Bangladeshi Cabinet Minister in Dhaka earlier this year. He might have parroted the usual denials, but his nervous ticks, obvious discomfort, and averted glance told quite a different story. (I also recall how several years ago, a Bangladeshi general tried to convince me that their Vested Property Act was actually instituted as a device to protect Hindus, although when I pressed him he could not explain how that could work.) And how many times are we going to hear their empty promises to repeal “anti-minority laws.” Sheikh Hasina made that very promise to visiting NATO commander Gerard Valin on May 1, 2009, thereby admitting that her country in fact has anti-minority laws on the books. In the long standing tradition of Bangladeshi leaders, she went no further than those words and the discriminatory laws remain. Yet, no nation or international body seems to have a problem with that.

What message does that send to anyone who covets a Hindu family’s small farm—or their daughter? And what message are we sending them—and our own children—if we look the other way while it happens?

There is something else. Some of you might be thinking, ‘Perhaps that is all true, but my family is from Andhra Pradesh where we have our own problems. This is about Bengalis.’ And that plays right into the hands of those who wish to destroy us. Were the bombs that went off on 26/11 harmful only to some? Did they discriminate between Telugu and Bengali? Did the killers ask people if they were from Kashmir or Gujurat before firing? And if they destroy the Hindus in Bangladesh and Kashmir, will they then say, ‘it is enough’ and urge their fellow jihadis to leave Andhra Pradesh in peace? iNo, no, no, and no again. If we fail to unite, we will be easy pickings for our enemies—who have put aside their own ancient divisions for the sake of jihad.

So, instead of treating you to a litany of more atrocities, I want to identify one simple thing we all can do from our secure positions in the United States. Everyone can decide today whether to do something simple and save lives or watch another rerun of House or Law and Order while the murders and rapes continue.

To get things started, we have to make people aware of the problem. Despite the flood of emails and consistent documentation successive in Hindu American Foundation reports, few people here are aware of this atrocity or how it threatens them, and we have to fix that. Human rights atrocities generally proceed when governments believe they can commit them without anyone noticing—or caring—which is what we have here. For Bangladesh, that means that it incurs no cost if it allows its Hindus to be eradicated; that is, their leaders have pointed out the domestic political concerns if they take action, but they have none if they let things remain as they are. We have to make it cost more for them not to change.

The US is Bangladesh’s third largest trading partner, and we have given Bangladesh over $5.5 billion in aid. For years, Bangladeshi governments—regardless of party—have wanted a free trade agreement with the United States or at least a reduction in tariffs on their goods. You might call it their holy grail. That is a tremendous amount of leverage we can exercise if we have the will to do so, and it will take a concerted and relentless effort to get our elected officials to use it.

I am currently working with a Member of Congress on a letter that addresses this issue. It will ask the US to re-consider its policies and use all of that leverage to save the 15 million Bangladeshi Hindus. Because at this point, the actual letter is unfinished and needs final approval, I cannot divulge the Member’s name or the specific contents; but the initiative is real and his support genuine. Once it is complete—hopefully during the summer—we will look for other Members of Congress to sign it before sending it to Secretary of State Clinton. Do we expect that this letter will lead the US government to all of a sudden revamp its entire foreign policy? No, but remember the intent: to shine light on an atrocity that is allowed to proceed because it does so in the dark.

Hopefully, the administration will take a serious look at the issue; but whether it does so or not, the letter will provide the basis for further action: Congressional hearings, which are already in the works; confronting the Bangladeshis; and from there action on trade and tariffs. It will take this issue to a new level, and everyone in this room can and should have a role in making it happen because success is premised on getting a range of Congressmen and Congresswomen to sign it. When you came in, you were given a piece of paper to fill out with contact information and questions to determine who your Congressional Representative is. Everyone here who votes can help get that elected official’s signature on the letter and support for the actions we take subsequently to stop this carnage. Please pass in the papers. Now, can each of you do that one small thing? Is there anyone here who can’t?

That’s good, because Congressman Mike Pence (R-IN) once said that any Member of Congress who gets ten phone calls on an issue will sit up and take notice, call staff meetings about it, and probably support their constituents’ position; but whether it is ten, two, or a hundred, the principle is the same. Using these papers, I will identify Members of Congress whom you can call and we can go to for support. When we are ready to circulate the letter, I will contact each of you and ask you to make that call. Moreover, each of you knows other citizens who can make the same call. Urge them to do it—even if they live in the same house as you; so long as they are eligible to vote in the next election. My associate, Prasad Yalamanchi will help with that, but today he and I will be getting information from people and groups that can get things done.

There is something else we can do, and it refers to something that is happening now. Last month, Bangladesh’s Supreme Court ruled against some constitutional amendments instituted during two military dictatorships in the 1970s and 1980s, and it asked the government to submit replacements for ratification in the Awami-dominated parliament. So what did this oh-so-progressive and freedom-loving Awami League do? It submitted new laws that outlawed military governments and religiously-based parties; but it left intact one of the most significant amendments that came under the Court’s scrutiny: the Eighth, which made Islam the official state religion and essential to the character of all that flows from Bangladeshi law. It is an amendment that Hindus and others say makes them second-class citizens in their own country. Every law they have to follow begins with “in the name of Allah the beneficent.” Madrassas (Islamic schools) are given a favored position by their government and often receive public support, even those preaching radical Islam. This is not the action of a government that really wants to protect its minority citizens, but rather one closer to Iran. It is certainly not the action of a “moderate Muslim nation,” which is how Bangladesh tries to portray itself.

Has there been even one phone call from President Obama or Secretary of State Clinton to Bangladesh, challenging the government on this or other anti-minority actions? Has anyone reminded Sheikh Hasina of her still unfulfilled promises to end official minority discrimination in Bangladesh—and how she has an opportunity with this constitutional change to prove that she and her party are not shams? The answer to all those questions is the same: “No.” I ask my esteemed colleagues at the Hindu American Foundation to work with me now to prevail upon Congress and the Administration to address this matter with Bangladesh while there is still time to fix things. It will also tell us if these people deserve our votes next year.

Let me put it to you this way. If there was a similar situation involving Muslims somewhere in the world, what do you think the American Muslim community would do? How vocal would organizations like Council on American-Islamic Relations be? What about Jewish organizations or Evangelical Christians for their co-religionists? Do Hindus have fewer rights than they do? Does the American Constitution say ‘everyone except Hindus’? No; the only thing stopping us is ourselves. For this effort to succeed, we do not need the entire 2.5 million Hindus in the United States to act. But we do need a core group of individuals who care more about the lives of their oppressed brethren than being thought impolite. And it starts here; it starts today. From this effort, we can make the issue of anti-Hindu oppression a US concern. Each of you can do this one thing, and possibly save the lives of millions of people.

Once we find success in this quarter, we can expand in any direction we wish; tackle any anti-Hindu human rights issues we want—those in Pakistan, Kashmir, Malaysia, Fiji, or anywhere else. In the lead up to the November 2010 vote, some of us in the Chicago area helped organize community members in support of certain candidates who will support us. As a result, some people are beginning to see the Hindu community as a constituency that cannot be ignored; whose concerns cannot be dismissed. And it will stay that way only so long as we continue to exert whatever advantage we have and deny our support to those lawmakers who do not care about those issues important to us, who do not care if Hindus are being killed and raped in Bangladesh. We have a critical election coming up in 16 months, and the papers you filled out today will be added to others to help elect lawmakers who will stand with us and not let our brothers and sisters in Bangladesh or anywhere else be persecuted with impunity.

Whatever we do, however, it all ultimately depends on you. Some of us who are dedicated to saving the Bangladeshi Hindus can lead, can organize, can take on a certain amount of the burden; but our efforts will come to little if people see that the rest of the community does not care enough to stand up and say so. The Congressional letter will be our first test.

And just in case you are wondering whether why you should take this tiny step, please allow me this one last piece of motivation. In 2009, I interviewed a Bangladeshi Hindu family that crossed into India only 22 days earlier. They told me about an uncle being killed, the father beaten, and their tiny farm invaded by a large number of Muslims. I also looked into the eyes of their 14-year-old daughter as she talked about being gang raped. Who did it? Not al Qaeda or Jammat; but simply Muslims who lived in the area and knew they could have their way with the family, seize their land, and get away with it.

Joseph Stalin is said to have remarked, “One death is a tragedy, a million deaths a statistic.” That 14-year-old rape victim—that child—I met was no statistic, and God help us if we make her one.

Thank you.