Seems evil, doen't he?
Posted on 12/29/2005 4:24:45 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
"Russia is and has been a CHRISTIAN country for 1000 years.
They do not have to give the Hindu Demon Worshippers any rights at all. At least THEY have the guts to stop pagans from dictating terms......"
Personally I dont really care if they are able to built for themselves a temple or not. If Russia doesn't not the keep the Hindus in their country they can always send them back to India. In fact that would be better that way. As long as they are not killed or send to the gulag I dont really care.
A great Hindu poet Rabindranath Tagore once said:
"Men can live through and die happy in spite of disparagement, if it comes from critics with whome they have no dealings."
India is 80% Hindu and most of those 80% have no personal dealings with either America or Russia. They dont give a sh*t about what Americans or Russians think about their religion.
Well in as much as "Jews, the Zoroastrians and the Sakas, fleeing the Portuguese, Dutch and Muslims" are not born into castes, they would be uninvolved in the caste system.
This is rather like saying that the folks in foreign embassies in communist Russia didn't get sent to lager camps, so it must mean everyone was safe right?
"You support Turks and Saudis over Russians."
I don't support Saudis over Russians.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/717775.stm
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=144840
http://www.stephen-knapp.com/christian_terrorism_in_northeast_india.htm
http://www.christianaggression.org/item_display.php?id=1060546733&type=news
http://www.christianaggression.org/features_nlft.php
http://www.christianaggression.org/item_display.php?id=1060546733&type=news
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=144840
http://www.hindunet.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=50359&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3042303.stm
http://www.hinduhumanrights.org/news/newsarticle011005.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/south_asia/899422.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/south_asia/758342.stm
http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/tripura/terrorist_outfits/NLFT.HTM
http://indpride.com/churchbacksterrorism.html
http://www.freeindiamedia.com/current_affairs/21_july_current_affairs.htm
http://www.stephen-knapp.com/thirteen_years_of_killings_in_tripura.htm
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/7027/htoday.html
Turkey. Member state of the Organization of the Islamic Conference since 1969.
You think the people who posted that article, or even you, for that matter, would acknowledge that the biggest sufferers in India are the Kashmiri Hindus? Believe you me, they have suffered far more than the people mentioned in that article. Yet 'Gospel for Asia' would never mention that.
Because it doesn't fit their agenda. But what the heck, let's all drive a deep wedge.
http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/mar/24guest.htm
Will the Pandits ever find a home?
March 27, 2003
They called Kashmir the 'Paradise on Earth' and compared it with Switzerland. The great Sufi saint Nur-ud-din refused to enter one of its royal gardens thousands of years ago, saying, 'If I visit this place now I shall not be allowed to visit paradise hereafter.' Persian poet Firdaus said, 'If there is heaven on earth, it is here, it is here, and it is here.'
Today the same Kashmir sends an icy knife stabbing through the heart. Today's Kashmir evokes the picture of gore and terror. Not a day passes without grenade attacks, brutal killings, kidnappings, arson, loot, rapes, bloodshed and mayhem. Now the souls of the people are scarred as insanity haunts the region. Firdaus' couplet has lost its relevance as Islamic fundamentalists turn it into virtual hell.
Nothing is the same anymore. Kids have lost their innocence, women their freedom and men their security. There was a time when the people of Kashmir, irrespective of diverse faiths, lived in harmony for centuries nurturing Kashmiriyat, the composite culture of Kashmir. But now Kashmiriyat has taken a severe beating; it is merely a word that is insignificant and meaningless.
Every Kashmiri has suffered immensely due to militancy. But not all of them have been rendered homeless and rootless like the Kashmiri Pandits. Considered to be the original inhabitants of Kashmir, Pandits have been the worst sufferers and lost everything in a flicker of a moment -- their roots, identity, homes, hearth, possessions, memories, childhood, cherished dreams, hopes for a better tomorrow, and their sense of belonging. They became refugees in their own land for believing in the Indian Constitution and saluting the Indian flag.
In return, what they have received is indifference from the government, both in the state and at the Centre. No community in modern times has suffered so much for so long and yet evoked so little concern at their plight as the minuscule population of Kashmiri Pandits.
Hundreds of them have been brutally killed by terrorists; many more have died prematurely due to inhuman conditions, in tattered and unhygienic makeshift camps. This has not happened in the last few months but has been their destiny for the last 13 years.
Pandits were driven out of their comfortable homes at gunpoint. Such conditions were created which made it impossible for the community to live there. First came the threats from mosques through loud speakers, and then the selective killing of officials, intellectuals and prominent community members. This was followed by the harassment of women and young girls. Later, even the local media contained announcements saying: 'Kashmiri Pandits responsible for duress against Muslims should leave the valley within two days or face the consequences.'
Not many Pandits were willing to leave their homes, but such threats made them rethink their decision. When they left they entrusted their homes, lands and shops to their Muslim neighbours. They didn't realise they were biding a final adieu to their homes and homeland. Eventually, an estimated 400,000 Pandits -- some 95 per cent of the original population in the valley -- became part of the neglected statistic of 'internal refugees,' pushed out of their homes as a result of this campaign of terror.
Not only did the Indian State fail to protect them in their homes, successive governments have provided little more than minimal humanitarian relief. This exiled community seldom figures in the discourse on the 'Kashmir issue' and its resolution.
The government let them languish in 10x12 sq feet camps with no privacy, no proper sanitation and no provision for extreme weather conditions. People died of extreme temperatures, snakebite, heat strokes, stress, insomnia, trauma, depression and hypertension. But who cares?
Not only this, the mass migration has also resulted in high death and low birth rates. A recent study based on inquiries at various migrant camps in Jammu and Delhi revealed there had been only 16 births compared to 49 deaths in about 300 families between 1990 and 1995, a period over which militancy was at its peak. Family life is under great strain; the divorce rate in the prime fertility age group has increased. For a community where divorce was unheard of, it is a serious development. Couples voluntarily chose not to bear children for if they cannot fend for themselves, how can they take care of children.
Diabetes is said to be rampant, psychosomatic diseases, biophysical effects of stress and strain, cases of cancer are noticeably evident. Dr K L Choudhary, who has been treating various Kashmiri Pandit patients, asserts they had aged physically and mentally by 10 to 15 years beyond their natural age, and if the current situation persists, their extinction could not be ruled out.
Many Kashmiris, in search of a better future, have moved to different states, cities and towns. Those who could not, or have not in the ever waning hope of returning to their homes are rotting in camps on minimum government doles. About 200,000 Pandits still live in abysmal conditions in Jammu with families of five to six people, huddled into a small room. Their cries for better facilities have fallen on deaf ears. So what are they to do?
Perhaps this is the way to save and protect a peaceful community whose only misfortune is they are in a abject minority in their homeland, too small in numbers to enthuse the vote bank. The silence on the plight of Kashmiri Pandits is deafening. Their relatively small numbers, coupled with a tradition of non-violent protest, has made them largely irrelevant in the political discourse -- both within the country and internationally -- on Kashmir. 'Peace processes' and 'political solutions' that are initiated from time to time have little meaning until these include steps to correct the grave injustices done to this unfortunate community.
One wonders if we still live in the same country amidst the same leaders, intellectuals and human rights activists whose hearts bleed if illegal Bangladeshi immigrants are sought to be repatriated, and who welcome and shelter Afghan refugees and militants alike. They talk loudly about human right violations and forget about the Pandits in their backyard. Even in exile, the community has been subjected to apartheid.
In addition to this, the agriculture, horticulture and other commercial properties of the Pandits in Kashmir is under unauthorised occupation of the local population. The passing of an Act by the J&K legislature regarding immovable property of displaced Pandits in Kashmir could not provide any relief to the Pandit community. Why haven't vested parties espoused their [Pandits'] cause in the mercenaries' court? Are they not human or is it that they don't have rights?
To silence their voices from time to time, the government has come up with various rehabilitation proposals that envision provision of jobs if the displaced people returned to the valley. Perhaps the government doesn't realise that return could be more difficult than the experience of exile itself. They cannot force Kashmiri Pandits to return on any pretext without knowing what conditions await them. If they cannot guarantee their security, they can again become soft targets for militants in Kashmir where the rule of law hardly exists, where violence still continues, where guns are still prevalent.
Evidently, such a hostile environment do not satisfy even the basic security needs of these uprooted people.
There has been a lot of rhetoric about the return and rehabilitation of the Pandits 'with honour and dignity.' Chief Minister Mufti Mohammed Sayeed plans to resettle some Pandits around two shrines, namely Mattan and Tulamula. How is that going to solve anything or save them from the same enemies who have grabbed their property and ensured their exit?
Proposals for the setting up of camps is unacceptable because that would mean isolating the community and making them more vulnerable. The primary aim should be the restoration of peace in Kashmir. As long as there is support of men and material from across the border, militancy will continue to thrive. Kashmir cannot have peace as long as there is no negotiation between Pakistan and India.
The other option can only come from face-to-face dialogue with the majority people of Kashmir. One has to be sure if they are prepared to return to the old ethos of tolerance and brotherhood. After all, there is nothing wrong in a dialogue with the majority community of Kashmir, on a people's level. If they show some signs of goodwill and think about the good old days when they lived and shared everything peacefully with Kashmiri Pandits, half the problem will be solved. They can bring them back to their neighbourhood and make them feel safe again.
It is the duty of every member of the community to prove to the world that Kashmiriyat cannot be wiped away from Kashmir no matter how hard militants or politicians try. A Kashmiri is a Kashmiri first, and only after that is he or she a person of any other faith.
Seema Kachru is a freelance writer and PR consultant in Houston, Texas
Doesn't change the caste system, doesn't change the acts done to Christian converts.
BTW proud to be a "pagan" "Hindu Demon Worshippers".
The Sakas are Hindus. Got you on that one.
This is rather like saying that the folks in foreign embassies in communist Russia didn't get sent to lager camps, so it must mean everyone was safe right?
So, you believe that these people didn't integrate with India?
The Jewish General Who Led India
By SHELDON KIRSHNER
In the annals of modern warfare, the 1971 war between India and Pakistan is regarded as a template of brilliance. Within 13 days, the Indian army routed Pakistan in one of the swiftest campaigns of the 20th century.
Occasionally compared to Israel's victory in the 1967 Six Day War, and studied at military academies as a textbook example of efficient planning, the Indo-Pakistan war gave rise to a new state, Bangladesh, and established India as a regional superpower.
The major general who masterminded and spearheaded India's offensive, and who accepted Pakistan's surrender, was Jack Frederick Ralph Jacob, the scion of an old Jewish family from Calcutta. A spry bachelor of 81 who retired in 1978 as the commander of India's eastern army, he considers that war the highlight of a long and distinguished career as a soldier. Having written a book about it, Surrender at Dacca, published in 2001 by Manohar, he claims that the war was "surely the greatest military feat in our history."
Although historians are acquainted with his resumé, Jacob is not exactly a household name outside India. As I prepared for my trip to India late last year, I ran across his name in my research. Intrigued by the possibility of interviewing a Jewish warrior from an exotic country whose Jewish community is rooted in antiquity, I asked to meet him.
When I arrived in New Delhi on my last day in India, following relatively brief flights from Cochin and Mumbai, B.B. Mukherjee, a helpful contact from the ministry of tourism, was at the terminal to greet me with the news that Jacob had consented to an interview. I was pleased, but the timing was hardly fortuitous. I was tired, coming down with a cold and a hoarse voice, and my flight back to Toronto was just hours away. Nevertheless, I told Mukherjee I would be ready to talk to Jacob at his home in New Delhi at around five o'clock.
After a shower and change of clothes, I met Mukherjee in my hotel lobby, and off we drove to Jacob's flat in a non-descript gray apartment building in the centre of this sprawling city and capital of India. When we arrived, one of his Nepalese houseboys opened the door and ushered us into a dimly lit room filled with French furniture and crowded with original Mogul art on the walls.
Jacob, a surprisingly small man with a café au lait complexion and a formal manner, was smartly decked out in a blue blazer, creased pants, shirt and tie. He motioned me to sit down next to him on a narrow couch.
I began by asking him about his role in the war the 33rd anniversary of which was marked shortly before my trip to India and his decision to become a soldier. Jacob, whose Baghdadi family settled in Calcutta more than 200 years ago and whose father Elias Emanuel was a businessman, was quite effusive, enunciating his words in a posh upper-class Indian accent.
A brigadier-general by 1963 and a major-general by 1967, he was appointed chief of the Eastern Command in 1969 by Gen. Sam Maneckshaw, the Parsi chief of staff. Jacob's immediate superior was Lt. Gen. J.S. Aurora, a Sikh.
Jacob joined the British army in the summer of 1941 while at university and when India was still a British colony. He did so, he said, "to fight the Nazis." After graduating from officers training school in 1942, he was posted to northern Iraq in anticipation of a possible German thrust to seize the Kirkuk oil fields. He trained with Glubb Pasha's Arab Legion, which would be the backbone of Jordan's army. In the wake of Japan's defeat, he was assigned to Sumatra. Returning to an independent India after taking a gunnery course in Britain, Jacob commanded a mountain battery and served in an armoured division. Then, in short order, he took artillery and missile courses in the United States and was a general staff officer at Western Command headquarters.
"I didn't plan to be a career officer," he said. "I liked the army and stayed on. I did everything I was supposed to do."
During the mid-1960s, when India fought a war with Pakistan, he was the commandant of the School of Artillery. Subsequently, he was in charge of an infantry division in Rajasthan, where he wrote a much-praised manual on desert warfare. Promoted to chief of staff of the Eastern Command, based in Calcutta, Jacob was soon grappling with insurgencies in Nagaland, Manipur and Mizoram.
The Eastern Command was a sensitive one. The partition of the Indian sub-continent in 1947 had led to the emergence of India and Pakistan, which was made up of two distinct and geographically disconnected areas. Although East Pakistan was more populous than West Pakistan, political power rested with the western elite, causing resentment, unrest and calls for autonomy in the other half.
By 1971, East Pakistan was in revolt, and Pakistan's ruler, Yahya Khan, cracked down. As the violence escalated, with a massive loss of life and an exodus of millions of Hindu refugees into Indian territory, Indo-Pakistani tensions rose.
When India's prime minister, Indira Gandhi, extended assistance to Bengali rebels who sought to break away from Pakistan and form their own country, Pakistan responded first by attacking rebel camps in India and then, on Dec. 3, by bombing nine northern Indian airfields. In a dramatic broadcast to the nation, Gandhi declared war on Pakistan.
Having watched these developments with mounting concern, Jacob realized that conflict was imminent. "We knew we would have to intervene, but we hardly had any infrastructure and had to build it up," he recalled.
In consultation with his superiors, he refined his plan to engage Pakistan in a "war of movement" in difficult terrain with few bridges and roads, crisscrossed by rivers and broken up by swamps, mangroves and paddy fields. Jacob's strategy was clear. Dacca the heart of East Pakistan would be captured and Pakistani forces bypassed. Pakistan's communication centres would be secured and its command and control capabilities destroyed, while its forces would be drawn to the border. Some Indian commanders raised objections to the unorthodox plan, but it was finally approved.
"I planned for a three-week campaign, but it went faster than I expected," said Jacob, who instinctively understood that speed was essential and that a protracted war would not be in India's interests: The United Nations would apply pressure on India to halt its offensive, and the Soviet Union India's ally might not be able to fend off calls for a ceasefire.
As fighting raged, Jacob flew to Dacca and wrested unconditional surrender terms from his opposite number, Gen. Amir Niazi, who would later accuse Jacob of having blackmailed him into submission.
"It was a total victory over a formidable, well-trained army," he observed. "Had Pakistan fought on, it would have been difficult for us." Indian casualties were 1,421 killed and 4,058 wounded. "We expected higher casualties," he admitted. The Pakistani figures were much higher, in India's estimation: 6,761 killed and 8,000 wounded.
Jacob, who calls Surrender at Dacca the most authoritative and objective account of the war to date, ascribed his victory to a few factors imaginative planning, flexibility of approach, the capacity to react to shifting and perhaps unforeseen events and, of course, luck. But for Jacob, a keen student of warfare, historical context was always of crucial importance. As he put it, "I've learned from every campaign since Alexander the Great and Napoleon."
Looking back, he described his 37-year career in the army as "the happiest and most enjoyable period of my life." Never once did he feel the sting of anti-Semitism in the Indian army. "But I had some problems with the British," he said, declining to elaborate. "I don't like to talk about it."
Interestingly enough, Jacob whose Hebrew name is Yaacov Rafael and who serves as president of New Delhi's one and only synagogue was not the only high-ranking Jewish officer in the armed forces. "There was another Jewish general, a chap named Samson, and he was in research and development and ordnance. And there was also a Jewish vice-admiral."
Upon leaving the army, Jacob went into business. But in 1998, he was called out of retirement to be governor of Goa, a former Portuguese colony popular with Israeli tourists. He remained there until 1999, when he assumed the governorship of Punjab, a job he held until 2003.
A three-time visitor to Israel who was once invited there by Yitzhak Rabin when he was the prime minister, Jacob was also on friendly terms with Mordechai Gur, a former Israeli chief of staff. Jacob played an indirect role in India's decision to establish diplomatic relations with Israel in 1992, but he refused to talk about his role in that diplomatic rapprochement.
Referring to himself as "a very private person," he was likewise reluctant to speak about his family, apart from saying that his brothers and sisters are deceased.
Today, in his twilight years, Jacob is a writer and lecturer on military and political affairs. But he wryly described his current status as "unemployed."
http://www.cjnews.com/viewarticle.asp?id=5574&s=1
That doesn't change the opressive caste system, I can find plenty of places where Muslims are opressed, it doesn't change the fact that the Muslim messiah is described the same way the Christian anti-Christ is. The ArchBishop not only has the right to call krishna an evil demon, as a practicing Christian clergy he has the obligation and responsibility to do so.
Further, if the government doesn't feel like allocating land for a temple to an evil pagan demon, they need not do so.
Sure it doesn't. And the same goes for the others too.
Where in the article are they joining the untouchables caste?
In India much much more Hindus have been killed at the hands of Christian (British & Portuguese) inquisition plus the Baptist terrorists in NE, then the number of Christians killed by Hindus.
Seems evil, doen't he?
Historically? That's hilarious.
http://www.dalitchristians.com/Html/history.htm
http://www.dalitstan.org/journal/genocide/dalits/d_1990s.html
http://www.ambedkar.org/crime.htm
http://www.flonnet.com/fl1605/16050300.htm
http://www.dalits.org/Blackpaper.html
"Daily Victims of Rape: Whenever upper-castes mete out violence upon Dalits, the women are often the ones who bear the brunt of their violence and brutality, including rape, mutilation, molestation and disrobing. An average of two Dalit women are raped per day. This number is only the tip of the iceberg as many cases of rape go unreported either due to fear, intimidation by police, ignorance of legal procedure, or loss of faith in the law enforcement establishment.
"
Yeah there's a religion of peace for you.
The Hindu notion of Dalits is sick, period.
What would Krishna do to a Dalit? What would seem right in the eyes of Krishna to be done to a dalit?
Pfooy! Krishna WAS "low caste" ! Haar! Haar!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.