Obama's envoy to OIC admits he defended jihad terror leader

O.T., but important: The Dutch government has fallen, with the present ruling coalition coming apart over the issue of continuing the presence of Dutch troops in Afghanistan. New elections will likely take place in March.
Go, Geert!

Hussain called on Friday to "affirm the commments were his" once he realized that a tape of his remarks had been found, and the contents were about to be released. That, and only that, is what made him, after trying to cover his mental tracks, and thinking, back in 2007 or 2008 or 2009, he had done so successfully when he called the Washington Report and asked them to delete his remarks, and then -- for all I know -- possibly coaching them once the investigation into the strange disappearance of those remarks had started, to say that they had been misattributed to him by the reporter, and were actually by Al-Arian's daughter (who, no doubt, would have been willing to testify as to the truthfulness of Rashad Hussain's desperately concocted story -- he may even have asked her if she would)-- turned out not to have had them deleted everywhere.

And worst of all, Rashad Hussain discovered just the other day about the tape of his remarks, and so he quickly "admitted" that they were his.

I cannot believe he will not resign, or that, in the alternative, and far better, he will not now be let go by the Obama administration. Do they think this will not be made much of, this coverup and what was being covered-up? Do they not understand how in everything having to do with Islam they have made mistake after mistake after mistake, and that this alone will prevent them from getting other legislation, having nothing to do with the meaning, and menace of Islam, passed? Are they really quite so stupid?

Here are excerpts from the excellent article on the cover-up, and what was covered up, and more generally on Rashad Hussain and his defenders, by Josh Gerstein and up at Politico, with quotes from the recording that are as damning in their way as were the Nixon Tapes, or should be:

"It was [Rashad] Hussain himself, he said Friday, who contacted the publication to complain about the story.

“When I saw the article that attributed comments to me without context, leaving a misimpression, I contacted the publication to raise concerns about it. Eventually, of their own accord, they modified the article,” Hussain said of the article in the Washington Report on Middle Eastern Affairs.

During the panel discussion on civil rights at a Muslim Students Association conference in Chicago, Hussain asserted that Al-Arian’s prosecution involved significant abuses.

“The case that Laila just reminded us of is truly a sad commentary on our legal system. It is a travesty of justice, not just from the perspective of the allegations that are made against Dr. Al-Arian. Without passing any comment on those specific allegations or the statements [that] have been made against him, the process that has been used has been atrocious,” Hussain said, according to the recording.

In his presentation, Hussain, then a student at Yale Law School, was careful to insist that he was not offering a view on Al-Arian’s innocence or guilt on charges that he served as a top leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad in the U.S. But, Hussain said, the treatment of Al-Arian fit a “common pattern ... of politically-motivated prosecutions where you have huge Justice Department press conferences announcing that a certain person is a grave threat to American security.”

In the recording, Hussain’s indictment of the government’s legal practices toward Muslims goes further than Al-Arian’s case, leveling a detailed critique of more than a half-dozen prominent anti-terrorism cases and several key provisions of the Patriot Act.

Hussain refers to some provisions of the Patriot Act as “horrible” and called “dangerous” an aspect of that law that allows intelligence-related surveillance to be used in criminal cases. Most lawmakers, including many Democrats critical of the Patriot Act, have said the provision has proved valuable, because it removed a wall that made it difficult for those pursuing investigations of international terror or spying operations to share information with criminal investigators. Hussain did express support for other aspects of the law, including a provision permitting so-called roving wiretaps.

An Indian-American Muslim raised in Texas, Hussain is a deputy associate White House counsel who was also closely involved in shaping the major address the president delivered in Cairo last June, explaining Obama’s views to the Muslim world. In announcing Hussain’s appointment last week as the U.S. envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the president called Hussain “an accomplished lawyer and a close and trusted member of my White House staff.” Hussain traveled to Saudi Arabia and Qatar earlier this week with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Hussain’s allies have defended him against claims that he is soft on terror by pointing to a think tank study he co-wrote arguing that U.S. policy should emphasize that terrorism is antithetical to the teachings of Islam.

At the time Hussain spoke in 2004, the government's treatment of Sami Al-Arian was a cause celebre among Arab-American and Muslim activists, as well as many civil libertarians generally. Al-Arian was accused of raising funds for Palestinian Islamic Jihad, but his trial in 2005 ended with some acquittals and a hung jury on other counts. The former University of South Florida computer science professor later pleaded guilty to one count of aiding a terrorist group and was sentenced to 57 months in prison.

Adding to the controversy about Hussain’s comments on “political motivated persecutions” is that they were deleted from a report on the conference that first appeared in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, a magazine on the region with articles from the Arab and Muslim perspectives.

In the current version of the story on the Washington Report’s website, there is no reference to Hussain’s comments, or even that he appeared at the 2004 conference. But earlier, cached versions of the same story do include the comments — initially adding to the mystery of why they were taken out and at whose request. The discrepancy was first noted in a story last Sunday in the Web-based Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report.

A Washington Report editor initially said the author of its article requested the change because Laila Al-Arian’s comments had been misattributed to Hussain. However, in an e-mail to POLITICO, the author, Shereen Kandil, stood by her reporting and denied she ever made such a request.

In addition, both Laila Al-Arian and Kandil, who now works in the Obama administration at the Environmental Protection Agency, said they were never consulted before the passages referring to Hussain were deleted. The deletion took place sometime between October 2007 and this year, according to the Internet Archive, though the version available in Nexis was never modified.

The changes made some three years or more after his speech have led to speculation that Hussain was sanitizing his record to smooth his path to a White House legal post. However, the strident criticism he offered of the Justice Department’s handling of various alleged terrorism cases raises the possibility that his remarks could have posed a problem when he was applying for work at Justice in 2008. He joined the agency in the last year of the Bush administration as a trial attorney handling civil cases against the government, a Justice spokeswoman said.

While the audio shows that Hussain did utter the phrase “politically motivated persecutions” in the midst of his discussion about Sami Al-Arian, another comment Kandil attributed to Hussain, describing Al-Arian as being “used politically to squash dissent,” is not audible in the recording POLITICO obtained, which cuts off before any question-and-answer period.

Hussain’s remarks about Al-Arian appear to have been extemporaneous, but he seemed to have prepared in advance his denunciation of the Bush administration’s handling of other terrorism-related detentions and prosecutions.

Hussain cited:

— The court martial of Capt. James Yee, a Guantanamo chaplain initially suspected of treason and later charged with adultery. All charges were eventually dropped.

— The case of Jose Padilla, who was held without charge for more than three years as an enemy combatant on suspicions of trying to detonate a radiation-laced “dirty bomb” in the U.S. In 2006, more than a year after Hussain spoke, Padilla was charged in a terrorist plot unrelated to the dirty bomb allegations. He was convicted by a jury in 2007 and sentenced to 17 years in prison.

— The imprisonment of Yaser Hamdi, who was captured in Afghanistan, held as an enemy combatant and released to Saudi Arabia weeks after Hussain spoke.

— The prosecution of an imam and a pizzeria owner in Albany, N.Y., for conspiring with an informant in a fictitious plot to use a missile launcher to attack a Pakistani diplomat. The men were convicted in 2006 and sentenced to 15 years in prison, though their lawyers claimed the pair were entrapped.

— The prosecution of a Somali man, Nuradin Abdi, in 2004 for plotting to blow up a shopping mall in Columbus, Ohio. He pled guilty in 2007 to conspiring to support terrorism and was sentenced to 10 years in prison.

— The imprisonment of an Oregon lawyer, Brandon Mayfield, who was jailed for more than two weeks in 2004 as a material witness on suspicion of involvement in the Madrid train bombings that year. He was never charged with a crime, received an apology from the FBI, which said it misidentified his fingerprints, and brought a lawsuit that led to a reported $2 million settlement from the government in 2006.

— The prosecution of four men as alleged members of a Detroit-based Al Qaeda “sleeper cell” plotting an attack. Two of the men were convicted on terror charges in 2003 but the convictions were thrown out at the government’s request after evidence emerged of prosecutorial misconduct and an unreliable informant. The prosecutor was charged criminally with concealing exculpatory evidence but later acquitted.

Hussain went on to tell the audience at the event, held roughly two months before the 2004 election, that electing Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) as president could stem the tide of such cases.

“The attorney general and the president have the complete discretion to bring these cases. If they decide that these cases shouldn’t be brought, these cases will not be brought,” Hussain said.

“When people ask me what is the difference between George Bush and John Kerry, John Kerry may not be the most popular candidate amongst Muslims but there’s a fairly strong possibility that the politically motivated prosecutions that are brought forth by the Justice Department” would cease, Hussain said.

While some evidence of Al-Arian's connections to Palestinian Islamic Jihad has been public since 1995, the strongest proof of Al-Arian's ties to PIJ emerged from surveillance that first became public during the trial that took place in 2005, after Hussain spoke.

At the end of that six-month trial, Al-Arian’s backers celebrated after jurors acquitted him on eight counts and could not reach a unanimous verdict on nine others. As the government geared up for a possible retrial, Al-Arian pleaded guilty to a single count of providing support to a terrorist group. The judge in the case branded Al-Arian as a "liar" and a "master manipulator" who had tricked many in his Florida community.

Al-Arian later undertook a hunger strike over demands that he testify before a grand jury in Virginia. He was eventually indicted again in a federal court there for his refusal to testify. He is now in home detention awaiting trial on contempt-of-court charges.

In his speech, Hussain revealed another link that may have left him sympathetic to Al-Arian. Hussain indicated he was acquainted with Al-Arian’s son Abdullah while both were college students in North Carolina.

Hussain told the audience that he was on hand when Abdullah Al-Arian was abruptly removed by the Secret Service from a White House meeting in June 2001, prompting a walkout by Muslim leaders. President George W. Bush later apologized for the incident, which a spokesman called “wrong and inappropriate.”


©

From Wikipedia --

"A limited hangout is a form of deception, misdirection, or coverup often associated with intelligence agencies involving a release or "mea culpa" type of confession of only part of a set of previously hidden sensitive information, that establishes credibility for the one releasing the information who by the very act of confession appears to be "coming clean" and acting with integrity; but in actuality by withholding key facts is protecting a deeper crime and those who could be exposed if the whole truth came out.

In effect, if an array of offenses or misdeeds is suspected, this confession admits to a lesser offense while covering up the greater ones.

A limited hangout typically is a response to lower the pressure felt from inquisitive investigators pursuing clues that threaten to expose everything, and the disclosure is often combined with red herrings or propaganda elements that lead to false trails, distractions, or ideological disinformation; thus allowing covert or criminal elements to continue in their improper activities."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_hangout

Would he care to explain in what way it was "Ill conceived"?
He is excusing his obvious support for the terrorist .The evidence shows that his statement and support was "ill conceived" only because it divulged publicly an allegiance to an enemy of the country. Whether it's an army psychiatrist or an Obama appointee, I hope people are seeing first hand evidence that some people feel a greater allegiance to a Theo-political ideology than the country they live in.
OT. I just submited this comment under the Fox article, I had to be vague about the islam link, even Fox censors truthful non PC expression.

Hugh, good job! And thank you for your extensive treatment of this issue, which was not totally clear to me before I read your posting.

Hussein did indeed have a right to act as Al Arian's attorney. The question is, though: Do we want him representing the United States?

I voted for Obama, an act which I am already deeply regretting. Why does our president feel the need to appoint so many people with a questionable past in this area?

I'm surprised Politico was able to come up with a recording of Hussein so quickly. I wonder who leaked it to them. I wondered when Hussein said that he did not "recall" making statements in support of Al-Arian if he was concerned that a tape of him at this meeting would surface. Why hasn't the Obama administration distanced themselves from the tainted appointee.

Why does our president feel the need to appoint so many people with a questionable past in this area?"

The current POTUS is a man who attended a racist church for 20 years, had his career launched at the home of an unrepentent domestic terrorist and was a lawyer for ACORN. His appointment of a man like Rashad Hussain is totally in keeping with his character.

Obama and his minions lie and get away with it so regularly that they must have thought that this one would slip by along with the multitude of others. Obama is a serial liar. The list of his lies grows with every day that passes.

Both of Obamas parent were Communists. He spent his formative years in foreign lands. He has no connection with America other than the skewed views he got from those lands and the radicals he himself said he hung out with in college.
He attended a madrassa for some years and one can bet that the concept of muslim supremacism was pounded in to his young brain during that time, thus his irrational and emotionally charged affection for islam and himself.
Wright was a muslim before he "became a Christian" and started his racist, anti-American "Church". Wright traveled with Farrakhan to visit brother Kaddafi to show solidarity with their muslim brother. Obama sat listening to the hatred flow from Wright for 22 years...and never heard a thing...slept the whole time apparently. Others had to point out what the man was saying before he stopped attending. BS.
Sorry. I get a little agitated when the guy in the WH is doing his best to destroy my country and the American way of life in the process.
As I've pointed out, when the image of Mao is found on a Christmas tree ornament hanging from the White House Christmas tree, you know the Republic is in trouble.

Islam is all about big lies and myths, this article sheds some light on seven of the most common of such lies and deceptions:

1. The myth: “Atheists cannot disprove the existence of God, which indicates that Islam is the correct religion”

The fact: There is no relation between Islam and God.

Atheists may not disprove the existence of God, but neither can Muslims prove His existence. The existence of God, to those who believe in God, does not indicate that Islam is correct. On the contrary it indicates that Islam is completely wrong. God is omnipotent, all knowledgeable and compassionate but the Quran describes a maliciously revengeful and uneducated or even illiterate god. In this sense, Islam is an offence to God. The poor language quality of the Quran, its inconsistency, its illogical reasoning and its unacceptable scientific mistakes make that book an insult to any writer never mind a god. A true believer in God should feel offended by the idea of relating a book with such an appalling standard to the omnipotent and merciful God. Muslims do it the other way; they turn their backs to God and glorify their book and justify its mistakes and claim it’s from god.

Of course, for those people who do not believe in God, Islam is not even worth considering.

2. The myth: “The essence of Mohammed’s message was to believe in Allah, which is Arabic for God”

The fact: The essence of Mohammed’s message was to believe in HIM not in Allah!

Muslims get shocked when they learn that the word ‘allah’ does not mean God but only a name for a god in the same way that Zeus, Apollo and Osiris are names of gods. Muslims get even more shocked when they learn that the pre Islamic Arabs already believed in God long before Mohammed was born, they even called their god Allah. Let us not forget that Mohammed’s father was named Abdu-Allah. Almost all Muslims have the misconception that the Pre Islamic Arabs used to worship stone sculptures, called ‘asnam’, which they believed to be their gods. This is not true even though some tribes carved stone sculptures to ‘represent’ their gods, but that doesn’t mean they worshiped stones. In Arabia in general, but in Mecca in particular, polytheistic religions were practiced freely alongside the monotheistic religions such as Christianity, Judaism, Sabeans and Ahnaf. Pre Islamic Arabia was an exemplary multicultural society with impressive religious tolerance (1). Freedom of religious practices was a treasured value in Arabia where all the Arab tribes lived in harmony and enjoyed mutual respect. It was Mohammed who introduced religious intolerance to Arabia and it was his followers who introduced it to all places they manage to control.

Mohammed imported the Islamic beliefs and rituals from the other religions in Arabia. Islamic prayers, Fasting and Pilgrimage with all its details, were copied from the existing religions. Mohammed also copied the Islamic sharia law from the existing practices in Arabia, this included practices like circumcision, cutting the hands of thieves and marriage laws. Understandably, Mohammed added his own flavour to those rituals and laws to suit his own personal taste. For example, Mohammed incorporated the Arabs’ tradition of forbidding the marriage between a man and his stepdaughter, but as Zainab, his adopted son’s wife, developed a nice sexy figure, he cancelled the entire tradition of adoption in order to add Zainab to his harem.

At this point, one cannot help but wonder: If Allah was already being worshiped, and if the Islamic rituals were already being practiced, and if the sharia law was already being implemented, what was new about Islam?

A legitimate question that has a simple answer: the only thing new about Islam was the addition of Mohammed’s name next to Allah!

3. The myth: “The Quran is the preserved word of Allah”

The fact: even during Mohammed’s time the Quran had undergone many changes.

This myth is based on the false assumption that the early Arabs had extraordinary memory, which is a myth in itself. The Quran was released over twenty-three years, most of it in Mecca with no scribes or facilities to write it. Even after Mohammed seized control of Medina, the Quran was not recorded in a systematic way. The Arabic script was still undeveloped, many letters and words shared the same appearance even though they had different meanings. Mohammed’s priority was not to write the Quran but to fight wars and subjugate the Arab tribes. Many ahadith indicate that Mohammed forgot some verses while others indicate that other verses (like the adultery verses) disappeared because they were eaten by a chicken or a goat!

The Quran reached us through history; Muslims who believe the above myth do so because they put their full trust in the Islamic history. I am afraid that it is the same Islamic history that casts doubts about the preservation of the Quran. An objective reading of the chapters about the collection of the Quran from Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, considered by Muslims most authentic books after the Quran, highlights the unreliability of the collection process. The Islamic history also tells us that Muslims were divided after Caliph Othman ordered the writing of the four official copies of the Quran. Some of top Muslims disagreed on which verses to include in those copies. In addition, there were mistakes in those official copies, which were reported to the Caliph, who accepted their existence but did not think they were significant enough to justify rewriting the Quran.

Othman’s copies were also written in a primitive script that only works as a reminder of the Quran rather than a true writing. Such undeveloped script was useless in preserving any message, never mind a legal book. It took another hundred years for the Arabic language to develop a reliable writing style.

Even if we assume that Othman’s Quran was accurate, which it wasn’t, they were useless to most Muslims simply because they had no access to them. The fact is that Muslims, in the first few centuries of Islam, managed without a clearly written Quran. The early copies of the collected Quran seem to have disappeared from history without any trace. Today’s Muslims are very sensitive to this issue and do not allow any objective study of this part of the Islamic history. A proper dating and analysis of the two ancient copies found in Samarkand and Istanbul is strictly guarded by the Islamic authorities. The German team (2) who was studying the copy found in Sana’a, Yemen in the 1970s was stopped and denied access to the script once the authorities sensed that the study could reveal a different Quran!

The story of Abdulla Ibn Abi Al Sarh (3) is of remarkable significance to the issue of preservation of the Quran. Ibn Abi Al Sarh used to scribe the Quran for Mohammed. As all Muslims know, most of the verses in the Quran have common closing sentences such as aziz hakim ( mighty and wise) and aleem hakim( meaning with knowledge and wisdom) and many more.

Once, Ibn Abi AlSarh wrote a verse that had one of those closing sentences, say aziz hakeem, but to make sure it wasn’t aleem hakim, he asked Mohammed: was it aleem hakim? Mohammed said: yes, it was. This was repeated many times until Abdulla Ibn Abi AlSarh came to the conclusion that Mohammed was a liar and the Quran was not divine because he could change its words. Ibn Abi AlSarh left Islam and secretly made his way to Mecca where he told the Arabs about his experience. The scandal was embarrassing to Mohammed who vowed to kill Ibn Abi AlSarh no matter what happens.

After Mohammed conquered Mecca, Ibn Abi AlSarh, who also was a milk brother to Othman Ibn Affan, the main financier of Mohammed’s movement, was captured and was brought to Mohammed. Othman used his influence on Mohammed and asked for his brother to be forgiven. Mohammed, surprised by Othman’s interference, masked his anger and said nothing while Othman quickly took his brother and went away.

Mohammed was angry with his men because they did not kill Ibn Abi AlSarh, their excuse was that Mohammed did not give them a signal. Mohammed said: We prophets do not deal with signals. After Mohammed’s death, Al Sarh had a successful political career under the Umayyad dynasty.

We do not know how much Ibn Abi AlSarh changed in the Quran before his defection, but we do know that those early Muslims especially under the Umayyad rule were aware that Islam was a big lie, which they used to their advantage.

4. The myth: “The Quran challenged mankind to produce a chapter like it, and they all failed.”

The fact: There are many texts on the internet which are indistinguishable from the Quran.

Any Arab with enough courage and reasonable command of the Arabic language can meet the challenge and win, and that includes the devout Muslims who would say: “NO this is impossible!” It is easy to compose a text that is indistinguishable from to the Quran; it is even easier to include a number of language and scientific mistakes for a more honest imitation to the Quran. But sensible people do not risk their lives; we know how Muslims would react. The Arab Muslims do not even try because they know how Allah would react.

This reminds me with an incident that took place many years ago when I was a young Muslim. I was visiting a friend who was already arguing with one of his relatives about a verse in the Quran, they were trying to find to which sura the verse belongs. I happened to know that the verse was at the end of chapter 2 (sura Albakara), which was correct as my friend’s relative double checked it in the Quran. I was happy and proud with my knowledge, and both my friend and his relative were impressed. Still browsing through the Quran, my friend’s relative challenged me to locate the following verse:

يا أيها الناس اتقوا الله ربكم الذي خلقكم وسواكم ورزقكم لعلكم تتقون ان يشأ ينصرم ويدخلك جناته وإن يشأ يخسف بكم ألأرض فتصبحوا من بعدها علئ ما فعلتم نادمين

Q.115: 1 “O ye people! Fear Allah your Lord, who created you, and fashioned you (perfectly) and provided for you, that ye may have the chance to learn righteousness; If He so will, He can make you victorious…”

(I still remember by heart the first part of the ‘verse’, but not sure about the rest. The translation is mine)

I didn’t know, but I knew from the style that the verse had a Medina style and must belong to one of the big chapters in the Quran. Although I wasn’t sure, my answer was that the above verse also belongs to chapter 2 (sura albakara). My friend’s relative broke into laughter because the verse was not even in the Quran, it was made up. My happiness and pride instantly evaporated, but the practical joke unleashed the Islamic monster inside me. I became angry and insisted that the false verse was obviously of very low standard compared to the Quran and I blamed the Satan for my failure in spotting the difference.

Some Arabs must have produced works that mimicked the Quran, but those who were lucky to survive, were forced to condemn their own works, which eventually disappeared from history. The problem is that Muslims have already made a prejudgement not to believe that any work can match the Quran.

It is noteworthy that the great Arab poets like Almutanabbi and Al maarri composed their own Quranic texts, which of course disappeared from history. I am a fan of Almutanabbi and can imagine how powerful his Quran would have been compared to the existing one. Nowadays, interested Arab atheists frequently post their own imitations on the Internet (4) (5).

The idea of a competition between Allah and one of his creatures in a language issue is ridiculous and is enough, on its own, to damage Islam. The non Arabs should be able to sense some foul racist smell in this challenge because they have been totally excluded from this competition game; Allah seems to play only with the Arabs!

5. The myth: “The Quran foretold many scientific discoveries”

The fact: almost every time the Quran got it wrong on science.

The Quran did not say anything that is scientific. In fact the Quran was not up to date even to the seventh century’s science. The Greek philosophers described a globe Earth and calculated its radius about 400 BC. A thousand years later the Quran was still talking about a flat Earth!

The Quran got it wrong almost every time it touched on a scientific issue, which is hardly surprising considering that it is a book of myths rather than science (6). Current Muslims go to the extreme to play with the Arabic language by twisting it and distorting its rules and word meanings in order to save the Quran from its embarrassing scientific blunders.

The myth of scientific miracles in the Quran is the latest big lie of the Muslim scholars in their attempts to market Islam in the age of science. The Muslims made hundreds of claims but all of them are based on lies and twisting the language which reflects how desperate the Muslim scholars are.

It is important to note that the existence of one mistake in the Quran means that the book is not divine and the entire religion is false.

6. The myth: “The Quran described the big bang”

The fact: the Quran only echoed the ancient myths about the creation of the universe.

The Quran only reflected the seventh century ignorance. Ancient cultures believed that the sky and earth were joined together until god stepped in to separate them. Muslims who make the above claim usually refer to verse “Q.21: 30 Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together then we separated them..” in which the Quran makes the same mistake and claims that it was Allah who did the separation. This scientific misconception described in the Quran was common in ancient Arabia, which explains why the verse says do not the unbelievers see? (awalam yara) which is an Arabic expression that implies “yes they see”. It is a common Arabic usage that when you say to a person: “don’t you see that house?” you imply that the person can actually see the house. Therefore, the Quran was talking about something the Arabs already knew.

Contrary to what the verse suggests, according to the Big Bang theory there was nothing in the beginning, no earth and no sky (7).

7. The myth: “The Quran described the development of the Embryo”

The fact: the Quranic description of the development of the embryo is completely wrong.

Muslims usually refer to the following verses “(Q.23: 12-14) We created man from a product of wet earth, then placed him as a drop of seed in a safe lodging, then We fashioned the drop a clot, and of the clot, We fashioned a lump, and of the lump We fashioned bones, and We clothed the bones (with) meat.”

The above description of fetal development are what we would expect from the women of the seventh century Arabia, but not as we would expect from a doctor, prophet or a god. It is usual for the Quran to repeat the prevailing scientific mistakes of its time, but in the above verses it probably has gone beyond the limits. The suggestion that the skeletal system (bones) is first created then clothed with flesh is simply a lethal mistake.

When Muslims debate this issue they refer to scientific illustrations, articles and western doctors who have no clue what the Quran actually says in Arabic. I do not see the point in subjecting the above verses to scientific scrutiny because there is no science involved at all. The verses are simply a reflection of the prevailing ignorance on the subject.

The Arabs criticized Mohammed whenever he said something that looks absurd to them but on this occasion they accepted the verses without any criticism, which indicates that the verses were in parallel with the prevailing knowledge in the 7th century Arabia (8).

Islam does not separate religion from politics; in fact, the concept of religion in Islam emerged first, the state was 'an after-thought'. The additional Islamic law does not acknowledge 'the independent existence of state, nor is state regarded as a primary condition of human society. It makes the State completely subservient to the religion of the Prophet. According to the Islamic law, the state is only an instrument to serve the creed in the attainment of its objectives or fulfilment of ideals of the muslim brotherhood. The Islamic theory of state was, therefore, based on a three fold idea of one scripture, one sovereign and one nation; scripture was the holy Quran, sovereign was the imam (leader), also called Khalifa (the caliph)- political successor to the Prophet, and nation was the millat-the muslim brotherhood. The basic feature of the state, according to this theory, was its 'indivisibility' in all the three aspects. It contemplated the establishment of a theocratic state based on the Islamic law, and recommended only one sovereign, the caliph, to rule over the whole of the muslim world. The caliph was styled as the amir ul momnin-'the leader of the faithful'; his office was thus a political institution based on Islamic injunctions. The sovereignty resided in the millat which elected their imam or the caliph, and the latter was under religious obligation to implement the Islamic law on and for the benefit of his muslim subjects. The Islamic government was, therefore, one which was composed of the muslims, by the muslims and existed for the happiness and welfare of the muslims alone."
That according to the Islamic belief, Koran ( Quran ) is regarded as a divine book containing the words revealed by prophet Mohammad. The verses of Quran were in relations to the happening taken place during the particular events and the connotation of it has a different and separate back grounds , than the present scenario based upon the logical perceptions and that of intellectual property rights.That in the society, wherein the Rule of Law is supreme, the perceptions of authenticity is based upon the truthfulment of the statements and the orthodox superstitions with the ideological confrontation be wiped out in collaboration with harmony between other sections of the society.That the Muslims in India have seldom invited their own people for the public discussions of their creed in general. The effect of the preaching made by their prophet and most of them have idolized the verses of Quran at par with their religion. The result of such pressure being exerted by vociferous activities upon rest of citizens in case one may convince to have the introspection of the repercussions of such preaching which ultimately lead its followers and act of terrorism.
That such activities have been broadened to include the memberships, support, assistance or furthering the activities of some terrorists' organizations. The raising of funds intended for the purposes of `Terrorist Act' has always provided an enumerable loss to the life and property of the people worshiping the other religion than
Islam. Thus in a secular estate such activities of terror may provide a considerable loss to national assessed by declining in the terrorist participation in promotion of the financial assessed to out nation.
That the petitioner is seeking the direction from the Central Government to declare such preaching of `ZIHAD' for converting out nation as DARUL-E-ISLAM by the recital of verses of Quran as detrimental to the interest of the nation.
That the citizens having following of the other religion of Hinduism, Buddhist and Jainism including Jews, who are regarded to be "infidels" at the hands of "believer" of Quran, have their right to know in respect of their fault being committed by them on account of their non-violent and peaceful a domination of every religion.
Thus there is no moral and spiritual import except by a free and fourth right discussion and the interpretation of verses of Quran in its rights prospectives to the followers of the Islam.
That a citizen who is properly informed regarding the public opinion can only decide in the long run, as to whether the Quran qualifies or not as a religion scripture.
That by the mere reading of a few sayings of Quran – which proclaims " Preach cruelty, incite violence and disturbs" public peace, while verse –17 saying which " Promote on ground of religion, feeling of enmity, hatred and ill-will between different religious communities in India". The 31 saying further proclaim, " Insult other religious as also the religious belief of other communities.
That secular pattern in behaviour of Muslim majority in Bangladesh and Pakistan towards the Hindu minority simply demonstrates the cruelty and feelings of hatred amongst the fellow citizens in
keeping with the tenets of Islam.That it is submitted that recent photos of Bangladesh Hindus, who have been systematically uprooted from their ancestral home land, even after India had made great sacrifice for speculating liberation
for Bangladesh are mesirable, which is apparent from perusal of photographs of Mass-killing and gang-rapes conducted in Bangladesh.
The copies of photographs published in ------------ having naked bodies of women lying slaughtered and victims of rape, gang-rapes in the family of the Hindus minority at Bangladesh and the treatment given to the personnel of Border Security Forces are filed herewith as Annexure no.1.
That on one hand the Hindus, Buddhist, Jainism stood for non-violence, truthfulness, non-stealing, chastity and non-covetousness, while the preaching of Quran may puzzle them the adherents of another religion of Islam based upon the cruelty, violence and crime. Thus the concept of secularism as adhered by our nation has become antithesis with the acts of terrorism and recital of preaching from Quran.That there is the recital of the `SURAH & AYATEN', which are reproduced as Annexre No. 1
That it was submitted that communal strife and conflicts in its orthodoxy may be seen at Pakistan whose sizable number of Hindu population has been obliterated through murder or through forcible conversion. However, in the judgement passed by then Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vimal Chandra Basak on 17th May, 1985 had observed that making such order as prayed for would amount to abolition of Muslim religion.
That the problem is now aggravated by the facts that unlike other communities, Muslim are highly orthodox people and follow the sayings of Quran with fanatical zeal as a result of which even the sizable number of Muslim population can never have been peace on the soil of our nation.
That even the Muslim Act founded by Baha'iulah in Iran in 19th Century, whose 1 Millions followers are living in India for
spiritual unity, which is uncomphertable with Quranic preaching has been subjected to verse prosecution and the students have been expelled from school and colleges in Iran. In Shia nation and Sunni nation are themselves indulged in violent conflict resulting in numerous death. Thus a modified version of Surah and Ayat in the preset context of communal harmony is required to be given to its followers if the majority of the citizens are save themselves for the vast communal passions and religion fanaticism.
That section 295-A does penalize any and every act of insult or attempt to insult the religion or religious belief of class of
citizen, which are not perpetrated with deliberate and malicious intention of religious feelings of that class. It was observed by
the Hon'ble Court that in its opinion it cannot be said that Quran offers any insult to any other religion.
That the preamble of our constitution and Article 25 and 26 of our Constitution are providing freedom of conscience.
That the preamble proclaimed India to be secular states. However, it has been wrongly interpreted that offending Surah and Ayate of Quran if being forfeited from its publication and the recital may deprive a section of people of their right of thought expression, belief,
faith and worship, such action would amount to abolition of Muslim religion. This has been a wrong findings which are totally
inconsistent with the offended verses of its Surah and Ayat as reproduced above.That the application of section 153-A is squarely applicable for forfeiture and banning of the offending Surah and Ayat enumerated in the Quran as the same generates disharmony feeling of enmity and hatred and also the ill-will between different religion or community.
That untoward incident has been reported till then for carrying on the mutual enmity, hatred between section of the Muslim minority and Hindu Majority incite violence as main aim and object of Quran.That the petitioner most respectable submits that a lot of the terrorist activities have been sur-phased by the followers of the Islam mainly on account of preaching given in Quran, which has lead to the violence of Bombay Blast case of 1993 by Daud Ibrahim and Saleem, Ankaleshwar Temple blast, Killing the parliamentary attack, 11th September Tower Attack in America, series of bomb blast inside the railways compartments in Mumbai, Sankatmochan Mandir blast and complete elimination of members of other communities for territory
of Jammu and Kashmir and Godara blast are the evidence to demonstrate that the decision given by Justice Basak has not taken any probability of the happening mentioned above and as such the present writ petition requires to look into the facts of mass-acre and atrocities committed upon the innocent Hindu citizens. It is submitted that as the last word of prophet written in Quran the Muslims are not ready even to enter in argument or discussion while on the other hand there has been recent judgement of Supreme Court of Malaysia discouraging the bearing of turban by the students, which was adopted on account of being warn by prophet Mohammad. The true photo copy of the judgement passed by three judges bench of Malaysia Court is being filed herewith as Annexure no. 2 .
That the sources of Islam or Quran and Hadis, called as Sullah, the Quran contains the prophet "rebulation" ., while Hadis are al that prophet Mohammad did or said or enjoyed, forbade or did not forbid approved or dis-approved. The Quran is Hadis-mutawatir i.e. the tradition considered authentic and genuine by all Muslims from beginning. The interpretation used by its followers even in changed context of the present days scientific invention and in the light of 2 nuclear bomb invasions in two other centuries is not correct interpretation, which could have been said to be last word of prophet Mohammad as if prophet Mohammad would have been surviving today he would have not promoted Zihad in way of prayer of Allah, nor " infidel" so called Hindus would have been burned or slaughtered in such a manner as the followers of Islam have started practicing in the name of Quran.That the vary revelation of the word Islam from which the Muslim has been formed, the same drives from " AS-LAM' meaning solution to other and peace. Thus the meaning of infidel does not mean the fellow of other religion, but those who does not believe in any God and have indulged in the ruthless killing of animals and other fellow citizens, the true perceptions of the correct proposition of Surah and Ayat may be understood by healthy discussions in the matter. Thus every Hindu citizen has got the right to know the meaning of the infidel and status of Zimmis on which the Zaziya or capitation tax, was realised by the force of arms during period of slavery under the Mughals sub-ordination,That there is another aspect of the matter regarding the creation of quite painting by M.F. Hussain proclaiming himself to he follower of Islam. In the aforesaid paintings which have published and may be seen by any Hindu citizen, there has been naked goddess Durga and
goddess Saraswati, Lord Rama without his head and naked Goddess Sita sitting on the thee of Raman and also on the tail of Hanuman. Goddess Durgaji has been shown to the in coupling with the tiger, while goddess Parwati is shown in the union with the Elephant, while Lord Shiva is said to have been watching upon them. Can it be assumed that M.F. Hussain is a cynic or infidel, who is suffering from seizophrenia with the sadistic pleasure by assailing the sentiments of Hindu citizen of our country. The naked photographs of our goddess demonstrated in oil painting by M.F. Hussain are filed as Annexure no.2.
That on one hand the Hindu is considered to be tolerant for whom the
misrepresentation is given to be co-ordis by the Muslims, if the Hindus may start their counter aggressism by preparing the
suicidal Bomber upon Zama-Maszid and other mosque, the repercussion may be much serious resulting in the situation of riotes arson and genocide. Thus in order to provide a curve upon such happening judicial review is required to be done regarding the interpretation of offending Surah and offending Ayate of Quran as the same may not be misunderstood by its followers.
That the example of counter aggression has been seen at Iraq wherein Saddam has been executed by the American in his own country. It is submitted that there may be vested interest of other nations who remained opportunist to rule India on the policy of divide and rule amongst its citizens. Thus the ------given by Britishers for interpreting the Surah and Ayate of Quran is neither beneficial for our nation, nor the same is beneficial for Pakistan and Bangladesh to demonstrate their displeasure on the question of revaluation of truth amongst our fellow citizens.
That it has been brought to the notice of the Most of citizens that N.D.P.S. is used for providing the illusionary atmosphere of Zannat for preparing suicide bombers. It has been found that the individual under going through brain-drain through such illusionary perception was smiling just before few seconds of the blast. Thus the conclusion is in-escapable that the preaching of Quran to its followers by some time generate themselves the illusionary perceptions of providing the attainment to the heaven if they voluntary sacrifice their life in the name of Zihad as Allah ordered them for killng of infidels. Thus the judicial activism is required to be done for positive interpretation of such recital, otherwise slaughtering and thereby plundering of innocent people may lead to the counter aggression, which is not congenial for the development
of a Nation.
That in this manner Quran may never be regarded as the holy book, nor the Muslim religion based upon misconception of Zihad and Darul-E-Islam may never be able to get the generation in the mind of Hindus. The slogan of secularism and Sarvadharm Sambhawa, it is submitted that the individual Afzal who attached upon the Parliament has yet not been hanged under the guise of getting the protection as a repercussion of such hanging may not lead to the mob violence, which was seen during the period, when the cartoon of Mohammad was made in the remote country at Denmark.
That it is true that Hindus have fought Muslim invaders, who had locally established the Muslim dynasties. However our previous rulers have neglected to study the religious and ideological motives of such invaders and speculation remained unmindful of new phenomenon in their midst. Thus scullery dissertation of disciples of great learning may demonstrate the awareness--- ----
That the problem of Muslim fanatics who are the followers of offending Surah and Ayate of Quran by generating the concept of
Zihad and Darul-e-Islam is further magnified from the event of having the parliament attack. It is submitted that on one hand there is psychological fear generated in the mind of people from such attack and Godhara killing, but when in retaliation of act of terrorism, the counter aggressism was adopted by Hindu citizens in State of Gujrat then the entire word including appeasement policy of Government could not muster the courage of depreciating the Godhara killing, but the retrial after the acquittal of innocent citizens was further ordered to have been taken place in different State of Maharastra. In the course of the Moplah riot of 1921 anything was practised from arson to conversion to pregnant women being cut into pieces with unborn babies protruding from the mothers' corpses. Smt Annie Besant, the Irish lady, and the 1913 president of the Congress, after her
visit to Malabar, exhorted Gandhiji to see for himself the ghastly horrors. Since 9/11, Islamic terrorists have perpetrated any numbers of blasts and explosions. On record since October 2001 are 13 bomb blasts in the different cities of India from New Delhi in the north,
to Bangalore in the south, to Gandhinagar in the west to Guwahati in the east. The terrorists could well be misguided youth but what is particularly disturbing is that hardly ever does a responsible Muslim leader condemn the barbaric action. Nor does he apologize for any of
them. For the people of India, that is rubbing salt by the Muslim elite on the wounds inflicted by their misguided fellow religionists.
A time has come when the major crimes of Islamists are enumerated and Muslim leaders are confronted with them along with a demand for their apology. There are nine mega crimes for which apologies are called for.
The governments in India have taken the boycott of vande mataram lightly although, in effect, the Muslims refusing to participate is an insult to the nation. Vande mataram was the song of the Independence movement and would have been the national anthem but for Jawaharlal
Nehru's weakness for Muslim prejudices, Jana gana mana was therefore chosen although it was originally written as a tribute to King George V.
Over the decades, Hindu Muslim riots were mostly started by the latter. If this were not so, why have there not been Hindu Christian riots even in districts where the latter are dominant as in Nagarcoil? Until the political advent of the British, the communal equation was
so loaded that the Muslims felt secure. Once the Muslims were also reduced to subject status, their insecurity began the corollary of which were riots. In the course of the Moplah riot of 1921 anything was practiced from arson to conversion to pregnant women being cut into pieces with unborn babies protruding from the mothers' corpses. Smt Annie Besant, the Irish lady and the 1913 president of the Congress, after her visit to Malabar, exhorted Gandhiji to see for
himself the ghastly horrors, which had been created by his beloved brothers, Mohammad and Shaukat Ali.
The success of an Islamic expedition to non-Muslim land was also judged on the basis of the number of slaves made and sold. But for the late Dr K.S. Lal who wrote his magnum opus Legacy of Muslim Rule in
India and Muslim Slave System in Medieval India, this aspect of Muslim atrocity might have been completely forgotten. It began with the despatch of Parimal Devi and Suraj Devi, the two daughters of Raja Dahir to the harem of the Caliph, soon after he was defeated by Muhammad bin Qasim in 712 D. This was carried forward by Muhammad Ghauri, Khilji and Tughlaq. Even Emperor Jehangir traded in this
export business. The imposition of jazia on the Hindus on the excuse of protecting
their life and property is legendary. The object of protection was called a zimmi. The subject was dealt at length by Dr P. Saran in his book Studies in Medieval Indian History whose introduction was written by Prof. Mohammad Habib. The purpose of jazia was three fold: to raise money for the state, to impoverish the Hindu and to remind him that he was an inferior subject.
London could not persuade either the Congress Party or the Muslim League to accept the 1946 Cabinet Mission plan of a loose federation to be created in the wake of the British departure from India. It was equally clear that the Muslim League could not dominate the all India political scene, nor could Mohammed Ali Jinnah be the prime minister of an undivided India. If therefore, he had to be the head of the government or the state; Partition of the country was essential. The surest way to precipitate Partition, in the wisdom of the League led by Jinnah, was to engineer riots. They would frighten the Hindus into realising that it would be wise of them to let go the Muslim League dominated areas into Pakistan. The riots would demonstrate to the British that the Hindus and the Muslims were incompatible co-citizens. They had to be allowed to go their separate ways.
The Muslim League Supreme Council met in Bombay and on July 29 declared for "Direct Action", August 16 was fixed as the day for the initiation of the movement. Fiery speeches containing thinly veiled threats of Civil War and drastic action against "Quislings" followed. The League Press and the League spokesmen started a tirade against the Congress in particular and Hindus in general in Calcutta, the League papers started stepping up their programme of incitement causing great apprehension amongst all national circles. The uneasy dawn of the 16th found large bands of "processionists" armed with long sticks, iron rods, bludgeons and sharp weapons parading the city all over with League flags. Any shop that was even partially open was immediately stoned and the shopkeepers belabored. Vehicular traffic was forcibly stopped and the passengers beaten up. Sikh taxi-drivers were a special target and even lone cyclists did not escape. Any resistance merely increased the fury of the "peaceful rocessionists," looted shops, cracked heads and stab-wounds being the reply given to protests or remonstrance's. Police were significantly inactive; indeed the city was totally innocent of police protection.
Soon the city was ablaze from North to South and from East to West.The telephone wires were jammed with frantic appeals for police-aid from Hindus of all sections of the city, but these appeals were disregarded in toto. Even where by chance there were some police, they seldom did lift a finger, excepting in certain instances where they bestirred themselves in gleaning some loot. In some cases the police present are alleged to have said that they had orders not to interfere in such political demonstrations.
Mass butchery started with the early dawn of Saturday, while loot and arson spread like wild fire all over the city. The police had let the situation deteriorate till it was completely out of control and yet military aid was not called for. The carnage continued for two more days until the military took matters entirely into their own hands and very large forces were employed in penetrating deep over a widespread area. The situation was brought under control only after the direction and control of affairs relating to law and order had virtually passed out of the hands of the League Minister-in-charge of Law and Order, Mr. H.S. Suhrawardy, and his henchmen in officialdom.
Iconoclasm is a face of barbarism in the name of God. Which divine likes or dislikes icons or idols is a matter of opinion based on imagination or inculcation. But one thing is certain, for anyone to impose one opinion or the other is inhuman. My God is supreme as the Ten Commandments ordain in the Old Testament. My God is the only god and there can be no other god, the holy Quran contends. Both are
wrong. Simply because there flourished civilizations for long before the holy Bible was penned and well before Prophet Muhammad had his visions, which means that either there are other Gods or there is no god.
God or no god, it is desirable for men and women to switch off from the material and to pray or meditate about the spiritual. To enable ordinary people to focus on the spiritual, it is useful to provide icons, idols or walls. A Hindu idol, a Parsee fire, a crucifix over an altar for the Christian or a mimbar for the Muslim are helpful. For a mimbar to claim that it is sacred but an idol is profane deserving to
be destroyed, is patently wrong. Similarly for an Imam to feel fulfilled because a temple or a church has been desecrated is reprehensible. For him to worship in a mandir so converted to a masjid is more immoral.
Ignorant scholars often dismiss iconoclasm as being medieval; no point in wasting discussion on what happened centuries ago. If that be so,what is the need for pursuit of history which is always about
centuries past. Medieval history is not myth. Iconoclasm is equally contemporary. A Buddha statue was destroyed at Swat in Pakistan as recently as September 2007 (red letters). The tragic fate of the
Bamiyan Buddhas as late as 2001 is well known. The 20th century especially in its latter half has witnessed hundreds of desecrations.Unless the perpetrators are punished or retaliatory action taken, this barbarism will continue to prevail.
The biggest on going crime is terrorism. Since October 2001, post 9/11, there have been 13 major bomb blasts in India which have butchered hundreds of innocent people, women, children, ordinary citizens et al. The officially reported figures are low because they are announced soon after the incident and can only be based on dead bodies found. Those that are not recorded are not taken into account.What is shameful is that the acts of terrorism are seldom condemned by Muslim leaders probably because they are looked upon as episodes in jihad. How can anything sacred be condemned?

The Quran claims that the Jews and Christians have used every endeavor to hide or suppress many data. Some of these are related to the tidings of the arrival of Muhammad. In this section of our book we shall dwell on passages that have likely been suppressed. The three monotheistic religions have addressed mankind, bringing almost the same message, with a few reservations that are particularly related to rituals. That God is one and man should adore only one God, the Omnipotent and Omniscient, are common to all the three religions. The Day of Judgment is another common feature. Protection of human life and of the right of possession, sharing one’s riches with the poor, seeking peace and justice, praise of God on every occasion, giving thanks to God and praying are some other points shared by these three religions. As time went by, the clergy and their ignorant followers corrupted the original tenets of the creed. The Quran makes allusions to these men who corrupted the originality of the religion in the garb of religious devotees (See: 2-The Cow, 75; 5- The Feast, 13; 9- Repentance, 31-34). This issue is outside the scope of the present work and will be the subject matter of another publication. To misconstrue meanings, to idolize and deify prophets or religious men, and to make interpolations in the scriptures have been the salient points of this trend. Once the bigots of all the three religions are disposed of, mankind will understand better that the messages of all of them are the same. This is, however, beyond the scope of the present book.

The Torah, the first Book of the three monotheistic religions, predicts the advent of Jesus and Muhammad. The gospels bear witness to Moses and make allusions to Muhammad, while the Quran, being the last Book sent, confirms both Books that preceded it. The miraculous predictions in the Quran are valid evidence that confirm the other Books. (However, we must take due note of the fact that the Old Testament and the New Testament may have been affected by interpolations in the course of time, although many of their fundamental messages remain the same.) I intend to examine the indication related to the advent of Muhammad. What many Christians are apprehensive about is the discrediting of the concept of the Trinity and the belief that Jesus is merely a Prophet. If one accedes to the fact that the gospels predicted the advent of Muhammad, the extolment of Jesus to the point of deification will automatically cease. The signs in the gospels heralding the advent of Muhammad have been hushed up. The church will continue to stick to its age-old creeds in order to be able to wield its ongoing authority and maintain its very existence. We must remember that Jesus spoke Aramaic. The oldest versions of the gospels are in ancient Greek and Latin. Some interpolations may have taken place
during the translation into those languages.
PARACLETE
61- And when Jesus of Mary said, “O children of Israel! I am God’s messenger to you, confirming the Torah before me and giving glad tidings of a messenger to come after me whose name is praised (ahmad).”
61-The Column, 6

The Quran says that Christ gave glad tidings of the advent of Muhammad. Those who failed to directly recognize such an expression in the Gospels - based on the Quran’s statement that the believers in the Bible had concealed their religion - thought that the Christians had obliterated the relevant verses in the gospels. This may have been true for some of the verses. Some researchers have concluded that some of the meanings have been misconstrued and that the said tidings in the Quran still existed in the Gospels.

The Quran mentions the adjective “ahmad” (meaning being more praised). As a matter of fact the names Ahmad and Muhammad stem from the same root. Some are of the idea that “Ahmad” was a proper noun. In our opinion, its literal sense should prevail here. For the name Muhammad is mentioned in four different places in the Quran: (See, 3- The Family of Imran, 144; 33-The Parties, 40; 47-Muhammad, 2; 48- Victory, 29). This is our opinion. However, nothing would change if “Ahmad” were to be taken for a proper name. Both have some meaning and are derived from the same root, viz. H-M-D.

Let us take a look at the prediction of the Prophet in the Gospel according to John. Jesus’ last words, exchanged with his disciples before he was arrested and taken away at the conclusion of the Last Supper, are recorded only in the Gospel according to John. The other three Gospels do not mention them (ascribed respectively to Matthew, Mark, and Luke). How should we explain, then, the absence of his conversations with his disciples in the three other gospels? Can it be that they existed once in the other gospels, but were omitted afterward?

15- If you love me, you will keep my commandments.
16- And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper (Paraclete) to be with you forever.
John 14, 15-16

26- But the Helper (Paraclete), the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.
John 14, 26

7- Nevertheless, I tell you the truth; it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I don’t go away, the Helper (Paraclete) will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you.
8- And when he comes, he will convince the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment.
John 16, 7-8

13- When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.
14- He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.
John 16, 13-14

Christians claim that by “Paraclete” is meant Gabriel. On the other hand, Prof. Maurice Bucaille, who censures the interpretation of the word “Paraclete” mentioned in the gospels as the Holy Spirit (Gabriel), gives the following account based on the etymology of this Greek word, pointing to its meaning: “The teaching of mankind referred to here is in no way restricted to the inspiration provided by the Holy Spirit(Gabriel).

Due to its intrinsic meaning in the Greek that denotes spreading of knowledge, it has a concrete connotation. The Greek verbs ‘akouo’ and ‘laleo’ refer to concrete acts which can only be related to a being endowed with the sense of hearing and speech. Therefore, attribution of such acts to Gabriel is preposterous. The logical conclusion is that the reference in John’s Gospel must be to a man endowed with the sense of hearing and talking, like Jesus Christ. The Greek text categorically requires these faculties. It follows from this that Jesus Christ had predicted that God would send after him another man who would bear God’s commandments and messages, to be transmitted to mankind like the mission of a prophet. The words in some of the present texts referring to the Holy Spirit are interpolated. The objective was to alter the meaning of a text in which the advent of a new prophet was predicted.”

THE PROPHET
19. Now this is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levies from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who are you?”
20. He confessed, and did not deny, but confessed “I am not the Christ.”
21. And they asked him “What then? Are you Elijah?” He said, “I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” And he answered: “No.”
John 1, 19-21

Three questions are asked to John the Baptist to which he gives negative answers: 1) Are you Christ? 2) Are you Elijah? 3) Are you the Prophet? In the Gospel according to John, John the Baptist explicitly states that he is not Elijah. Three different people are mentioned: 1) Jesus; 2) Elijah; 3) The Prophet. We know that John the Baptist was contemporary to Jesus. The Gospel says that Elijah had come and suffered in man’s hands (Matthew, 17, 12). Who was “the Prophet” then? Men had been waiting for the advent of the Prophet mentioned in the Old Testament (Deuteronomy18, 18; we have already examined this in the previous chapter). It is clear, then, that “the Prophet” is a person other than Jesus. Who was, then, “the Prophet” who had not come yet during the time of Jesus and carried the messages of God to the people? We think that there is no other person than Muhammad who fulfilled this mission after Jesus.
HOW TO RECOGNIZE FALSE PROPHETS?
15- Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.
16- You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes or figs from thistles?
17- So every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit.
18- A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit.
19- Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
20- Thus you will recognize them by their fruits.
Matthew 7, 15-20

Nowhere in any of the gospels does it say that no other Prophet will come. The following criterion is given in the gospel: Examine the fruit and distinguish between the one who speaks the truth and the one who is a liar. If no other prophet had been predicted to come after Jesus Christ, he might have said: Whoever comes after me claiming to be a prophet, he is a liar. The method that Jesus suggested to distinguish between the true and the false prophets is a sufficient proof of the advent of a prophet after Jesus. This fact should constitute an acceptable evidence for Christians. Someone who came after Jesus, who believed in one God, who put his trust in God, who loved Him and was instrumental in establishing societies that had gotten rid of their idols, could not be any person other than Muhammad.

Despite all these signs in the Old Testament and the New Testament, rabbis and the Christian clergy have vied with one another to hush them up; the viewpoints of the Catholic and Orthodox churches, the Pope in Rome and the archbishops, whose names are not mentioned in any one of the Gospels, seem to be more authoritative than the Scriptures for the majority of the Christian population.
MEETING AT A COMMON POINT
Neither in the Old Testament nor in the New Testament is there anything to suggest the validity of the dogma of the Trinity. The idea of the trinity is a forced argument. The authority of the Church has overruled the authority of the gospels. The Trinity has become the sine qua non of Christianity. Had the dogma of Trinity been so important, shouldn’t it be explained over and over again by God’s messengers and prophets in the Old Testament, or at least in the gospels of the New Testament? Christians confirm the Old Testament as an authority. How is it that the Holy Spirit (Gabriel), indicated to be one of the three, is not mentioned as such in the Old Testament? Why is there no mention in the Old Testament of the advent of the Son of God or the transfiguration of God? If this were so important why do we not encounter it anywhere in the Old Testament, which is the revelation of God?

The problem of God the Father and God the Son was the consequence of an interpretation made by the Church. God in the contemporary Gospels is referred to as the “Father” of all men and his believers, his sons. The words “Father” and “Son” are but similes, as an impartial reader may readily see:

So that you may be the sons of your Father who is in the heaven.
Matthew 5, 45.

Our guess is that an expression that the persons referred to in the Aramaic language as the God and Lord of all people was rendered into Greek as “Father” and the expression that referred to “a cherished servant” was rendered as “Son.” The source of this distorted translation must have been the men clothed in religious garb. As we have no Aramaic version in hand, we cannot prove this argument. However, the way these words are used in the Gospels supports our point of view. The religious authority that silenced all arguments against it during the Nicene Ecumenical Council laid down the concept of the Trinity. Before concluding, I would like to quote two more verses from the Quran.

31- They take their anchorites, their priests and the Christ, son of Mary, as Lords instead of God. Yet they were all commanded to worship only one God. There is no god except He. Glory to Him, from having the partners they associate.
9-Repentance, 31

The word kafa’a stands for legitimacy of a marriage. It is widely, but fallaciously or deceptively, propagated that the Qur’an and genuine Prophetic traditions consider Muslims as equals, and hence, allow any Muslim to marry a suitable Muslim spouse from any background. In choosing an ideal partner for marriage, they propagate the notion that the Qur’an recommends piety (taqwa) and faith (iman) as the only mark, rather than birth or wealth. They cite examples of the Prophet that he had allowed freed slave men to marry the Arab women. In this regard, they cite the example of Zaid, a black slave freed by Muhammad, to whom the Prophet gave his cousin Zainab in marriage. But they ignore the fact that this marriage was sham, a ploy, set up by aged Muhammad in his desire to add the young and beautiful Zainab into his own harem (read the story: Sex With Daughters-in-Law: Divinely Ordained in Islam).
One must also take into account that the famous Salman the Persian, a distinguished convert of Muhammad, had to withdraw his desire to marry a daughter of Caliph Omar, because he was a non-Arab. It should be added here that Salman had saved Muhammad and his community, and, Islam, for that matter, in the Battle of the Ditch by giving Muhammad the idea of digging a trench surrounding his community as defence. Muhammad himself had thanked Salman for the saving the day for Islam and praised him and his people for their excellence in knowledge.
The social hierarchical system, as recognized by the Quran and Prophet Muhammad (read more here: Racism in Islam: Allah’s White Faces), in which the Koreish were placed at the height of nobility, followed by other Arab tribes, followed by non-Arabs, later on evolved further transforming Islamic societies into a sharply hierarchical social order. Notions of social hierarchy based on birth, clan or race also gradually became incorporated into the corpus of writings of Islamic jurisprudence or fiqh. Taking a spouse from outside one’s kafa’a was sternly frowned upon, if not explicitly forbidden by the fuqaha (jurists). For a non-Arab, marrying an Arab, particularly a woman, became a social crime during the entire age of Islam, continuing to this day in Arab societies.
In the Indian subcontinent, the vast majority of Indian Muslims follow the Hanafi law. The opinions of the classical Hanafi scholars regarding kafa’a continued reflect the caste system and social hierarchy. Most Indian Hanafis seem to have regarded caste (biraderi), understood as hereditary occupational group (i.e., division of labour) as an essential factor in deciding kafa’a. It was continued to be determined on consideration of following salient points: (1) legal status as free or enslaved (azadi), (2) economic status (maldari), (3) occupation (pesha), (4) intelligence (‘aql), (5) family origin or ethnicity (nasb), (6) piety (taqwa), and (7) absence of bodily defects.
In this way, the caste system was legitimized amongst Muslims of India through the notion of kafa’a: taking a spouse from outside one’s kafa’a was sternly frowned upon, if not explicitly forbidden by the fuqaha. In support of this notion of kafa’a, the ulama used to refer to a hadith according to which caliph ‘Umar refused to let a girl from a rich family to marry a man from a lower class.
But later on, many scholars raised their voice against the above-mentioned caste system amongst Muslims declaring it un-Islamic, out of their ignorance of course. Contemporary Indian Muslim scholar, Maulana ‘Abdul Hamid Nu’mani, was one of them. Nu’mani belonged to the Ansari caste of hereditary weavers, traditionally considered ‘low born’ by ashraf Muslims. He asserted that, according to the Qur’an, kafa’a should be considered only on piety. Hence, the only criterion for deciding a marriage partner should, ideally, be his or her personal character and dedication to the faith. In other words, he suggested that, there should be no religious bar for a Muslim man, even from a low caste, or a low caste Hindu convert to Islam, to marry a Muslim girl from a high caste or vice versa.
However, caste and caste-based social hierarchy, through the notion of kafa’a, were accepted and propagated as a social norm and binding for Muslims by important sections of the ulama. It is widely practised amongst Muslims today, despite some Muslim scholars’ denouncement of it (as do Hindus in their society). So, the Muslims of India, who usually denounce Hinduism for its caste system and try to project that Islam is free from this evil, are either ignorant or trying to hide caste system deeply integrated in Muslim society.
In conclusion, let me emphasize that the Muslim society of India are not at all free from many of the socials ills of Hindu society, they frequently point to. They are often as stark and integrated in the Muslim society, but remain unrecognized, unspoken. The Hindus have recognized all its past and continuing social ills and are making strenuous efforts to rid their society from them. The Hindus of India would cleanse their society of these ills and move forward to become a proud and contributory part of the emerging global civilization: the sings are all there for one to see.
Unfortunately, the same cannot be expected of the stagnant Muslim world, of India’s Muslims in particular. The Arab Islamic imperialism they embraced did little to free themselves from what they call the ills of Hinduism. Instead, the debilitating, violent nature of their new ideology is crippling them in every respect: their contributions to all indices of social and national development and progress are declining.. Poverty, lack of education, propensity of violence, human rights violation within the Islamic community and beyond are becoming the hallmark of their community within the wider Indian society.
Freeing themselves from the yoke of the Arab imperialism, from the debilitating cult of Islam, remains a precondition for the subcontinental Muslim society (and of the wider Muslim world) to march toward progress and prosperity. Freedom and liberty to choose as one wishes to live one’s life, to pursue one’s dream, is a precondition to excel in the race of modern civilization. The Islamic creed imparts religious scruples at every step of one’s life to pursue what is needed to excel in today’s society. For India’s Muslims, returning to their civilizational root, which, undoubtedly, allows much greater freedom and liberty, is an option to them. They just have to look around to realize where their non-Muslim neighbors are heading to and where their own society.

A critical assessment of the superimposed hypothetical conjectures upon the identity of the women in Muslim culture- Hindu -Hate them .

In Hindu Sanskrit ( Culture) women independence is not prohibited. She is not required to live under the protection of father at young age thereafter under the domination of her husband and lastly under her son domination when she attain the old age. She is not required to stand behind the row of the man despite the fact that she may be more educated than her husband. The demand of the dowry at the time of the marriage of the daughter, permanently joining the family of her husband is not only illogical demand, as is being created by Muslim culture, but the same is again the demonstration to the society by the affluent and educated class of the Hindus to treat the women child with neglect at the time of her growth inside the womb and they are seldom killed through abortion and even after taking their birth. Thus the demand of the dowry and the offering of the same is a crime against humanity. The institution of marriage is subjected to great abuses and has become repugnant to the principles of Hindu law. The polygamy has led to the perpetration of revolting crime. No marriage should be permitted and the male may not be allowed to make any contact with another women when his one wife is alive. However Has rat mohd. conducted fourteen marriages in his life time and his prophecies to the Muslim for conducting four marriages during their life time is the cause of disparity in the society and there by inviting the Hindu counter part to commit such crime under the lust of the carnal desire and on the experimentation as instigated to them by Muslim citizens. Thus the preaching of the Quran provides the discrepancy in the harmonically atmosphere between the two sect of the society living in our nation. The Muslim according to Sura wakara, aayat of Quran no.223 may treat their wife as that of the agriculture field of harvesting the crop for which they are free to dig the women wherever they want to dig her. In case of divorce by reciting talaq thrice at a time or during the sleep, the wife has to undergone the co habitation with another person only there after she may become the valid wife of her husband. The lady in Muslim is considered as “hurray” and are treated like the property conquered during the war time of Daruley -e- Islam required to be converted from Daruley-e –herb. Thus the Muslim cannot be permitted to sit idle during the period of living under the predomination of other religion and he is forced to commit jehad by killing other fellow citizens. Thus the preaching of hazrat mohd and his action during his lifetime have now become detrimental to the interest of majority of the citizens belonging to the non violent community of Hindu civilization. Such a preaching are the seditious crime upon other fellow citizen and thus the same is prohibited under section 95 read with 96 of Cr. P.C and under section 153 –A and also under section 251 – A of IPC .
The women under Muslim law are seldom solemnized as Muslim religion may justify the child abuse.
Thus following the tradition of the muslim women may be given the punishment death penalty.
Amongst the Muslim religion her entrance at the place of worship is prohibited. She is treated as the machine for reproduction of the children.
There has been instances of beating to such women as according to muslim religion, prophet mohd had committed the same atrocities which are described under the haddish, based upon the treatment given by their prophet to his thirteen wives and many concubine during his remaining period when his wife Khadiza died at the age of 75 yrs when prophet mohd. was running at the age of fifty years and survived upto 65 yrs of age. The women is bound to live under the covering of the garment as the exposure of the women in normal dress may induce other person to indulge in sex. The Qumran sheriff is not allowed even to touch by the women during menstruation. Nobody is allowed to react in case a Muslim male co-habit with other women before his wife. It is regarded that no one should provide the constraint upon the carnal desire of the male to indulge in sex with any women except who has taken the feeding of the milk at their teenage with the same mother. Thus according to Muslim religion the women is only a commodity and she has no right to express her desire and to live like a living human being. The peer is a Persian word representing to the old person suffering from prostrate gland which enlarges due to the disproportionate secretion of estrogen hormones and this provides the increase of sexual impulse and as such the old man known as the peer and maulvi again stimulate their desire to enter in co habitation with some young girl. The girl married with the old man may be subjected to neglect for rest of the time when the impulsive compulsion of the old man minimizes during deficiency of androgen hormone. Thus the women from their childhood till their death are always subjected to be exploited under the guise of the preaching of Quran and haddies by Muslim. She is considered to be the powerless creature having no right of inheritance in comparison to male counterpart from their childhood. Under the Bangladesh Muslim civil law the women can only inherit one- fourth portion of the property in comparison to half portion of the property given to the son.
Under our common law children are given the name of their father but seldom the name of the mother is required to be given in any educational institution or even at the time of employment. Thus the lady who carries the child in her womb for more than nine months , may not have any right to remain her identity associated with such child after giving him/ her birth.
The half of the population created by the almighty God just to provide the continuity of the survival of the human being is neglected. Till the orthodox superstitions and hypocrisy with psychopharancy prevalent in these two major religion may not be checked by the strict enforcement of law and drastic punishment may not be awarded by the legislature against such discrimination, the progress of the country may not be given effect to for the prosperity and the growth of progeny amongst the human being . ( Taslima Nasree

Our reply to democracy, grenade and blast
To the faith of the believer of Islam , therefore, has been added a
compulsion -- to prove itself again.
"Death is just an insignificant word for them," begins the report
in News of 28 November, 1997 on the annual gathering of the
Mujahidin-e-Taiba. "Killing those who do not share their set of
Islamic values is the only reality. The congregation was flooded with
thousands of people with these beliefs..." "And the massive gathering
of people delivered one message loud and clear," the paper
reports, "there is no dearth of manpower in Pakistan for the fanatic
forces to indoctrinate. 'If I die fighting, I will be greeted in
heaven by Allah who will smile upon me,' said a 20-year old mujahid
from Okra." The paper reproduces at length the views and exhortations
of "Professor" Saeed who heads the organization which is conducting
the congregation, the Jamaat Dawa-wal-Ishad. He conveys a simple
message, it says : "It was God who had ordered the establishment of
the law of Islam everywhere in the world." He calls for a jehad, says
the paper, for ending the democratic system in Pakistan and turning
it into "a pure Islamic State governed by strict Shariat laws." At
the congregation he rejects democracy, proclaiming, "the notion of
the sovereignty of the people is un-Islamic -- only Allah is
sovereign." [That has been the provision in each of Pakistan's three
Constitutions since the Objectives Resolution was passed in 1949.]
And these notions have been well internalized by the congregation,
the paper reports : "The whole place was full of signboards with
slogans like 'Jamhooriat ka jawab, grenade and blast." (Our reply to
democracy, grenade and blast). "The Dawa chief said his
organization's main interest in Pakistan was to pick people and train
them to wage jehad in countries wherever an un-Islamic government was
in power," the paper says. "God has ordained every Muslim to fight
until his rule is established," he declared. "We have no option but
to follow God's order." stoke terrorism, sending army regulars,
spreading fabrications at every international gathering -- it
pictures to itself as jihad, as a religious undertaking, indeed as an
Allah- ordained duty. Concocting lies then becomes a device for
discharging that duty. "War is stratagem," the Prophet has said, "War
is deceit." [Sahih Muslim, Volume III, pp. 945, 990-91; Sahih al-
Bukhari, Volume IV, pp. 166-67; Sunan Abu Dawud, Volume II, p. 728]
Thus one may lie, one may kill the enemy while he is asleep, one may
kill him by tricking him. [For instance, Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume IV,
pp. 164-65, That is one problem: for the man or force weaned on
jihad, the concoctions are an intrinsic part of the struggle he is
waging, for him the fact that the war he is waging is Allah-ordained
is a complete justification for cruelty, for lies and the rest; on
our side, we don't just shut our eyes to the concoctions that result
from it, we shut our eyes even more tightly to the Ideology of which
they are but the result. Belief makes one not just blind, it makes
one reckless. A teenage Muslim girl was killed by her parents last
night and her body chopped into pieces because she dared to elope and
marry the man she loved. Mohsina Akhtar's murder came to light when
Muzaffarnagar police stopped three persons carrying a huge gunny bag.
Inside were pieces of the 18-year-old's body and a chopper and an axe
used in the "honour killing".
Superintendent of police (rural) Lucknow , sri Arvind Pandey said the
three Mohsina's mother Iqbal Jehan, maternal uncle Kallu Mohsin and
brother Mohsin - confessed they were on their way to dump the pieces
in a canal near Lalauna, the west Uttar Pradesh village where Mohsina
was murdered.
Iqbal told him it was the body of a "shaitan" (devil). "Yeh shaitan
meri beti thi. Humne unko maar dala (This devil was my daughter. We
have killed her)." "All three admitted that they killed Mohsina
because she loved a Muslim boy from a neighbouring village and
married him after eloping a month back," the officer said. "I have
handled many such incidents of honour killing but this was one of the
most gruesome." Police sources said the girl's father, Mohammad
Akhtar, who hasn't been arrested, will be questioned tomorrow. Senior
superintendent of police Sushil Kumar said Iqbal, who has another
daughter, didn't betray any remorse. "When they were produced in
court today, she was silent, as were Kallu and Mohsin. Iqbal said she
had to kill her. She said she was not feeling good after the murder
but has no regrets," the SSP added. Residents said one reason for the
lack of regret is the increasing social recognition such honour
killings - common in the northwest frontier region of Pakistan - are
getting in western Uttar Pradesh. "Villagers often pool money to bear
the legal expenses of a family that kills a wayward daughter," said a
resident of adjoining Baghpat. "An elopement makes it difficult for a
family to get a match for other daughters," said Rajiv Soni, a social
worker. According to police files, 23 cases of honour killings have
been reported in the Baghpat-Muzaffarnagar-Saharanpur-Bijnor region
since 2006, including six this year in Muslim families. Yesterday, a
woman who had been forced into marriage was shot dead by her brother
for refusing to go to her marital home. "I suspect hardcore
fundamentalist elements are encouraging these incidents," said
Shaista Amber, a member of the All India Muslim Women's Personal Law
Board. Mohsina had fallen in love with Mukhtar Mahmud, 20, a resident
of Bilaspur, a village about 2km from her home. The family had
recently shifted to Lalauna, where Mohsina's maternal uncles live,
and found that neighbours knew about the affair. Her uncle Kallu told
the police that the family tried to stop her as society frowns upon
such relationships. But Mohsina and Mukhtar eloped and got married
last month. Soon, the whispers "inki ladki bhaag gai hai" - got
louder. The family's instant reaction was fear of social ostracism.
Iqbal had to marry off another daughter. So Mohsina had to be killed.
Unconfirmed reports said a small group of elderly residents also
ruled that Mohsina should be killed to protect the family's honour.
The young couple made the mistake of returning home last week. Last
night, Mohsina was hanged from a ceiling fan of a room in her
maternal uncles' house. Her body was then taken to a cattle shed
where it was cut into pieces. The lesson he internalises is that
Allah shall always come to the aid of believers, that the side of
Allah shall prevail. So all one has to do is leap. The belief having
been drilled into him that he is doing Allah's Will -- or, as in
Marxism-Leninism, of History – the believer just cannot believe that
the fault may lie with him. As the war he is waging has been ordained
by Allah, the one who is opposing him must, by definition, be doing
so for some perverse reason, for some ulterior purpose.

Intolerant Opportunist fanatics via judicial pseudo secularism/terrorism are the cause of defeat to idealistic Hindu
Combating terrorism, now being discredited by intolerant fanatics and opportunists politician, under whom ,the elite citizen, responsible for the executive functioning and the Investigating agencies responsible to protect the sovereign power of the State are knee down in anticipation of their posting for greasing their palm. This is the greatest problem of the world. It has become the threat to the Nations, who encouraged it during the process of the struggle of cold war, with fellow nation. The god of hated filled cult having its mandate to get the rid of the world of proclaimed “infidels” and “heretics”, are themselves struggling against their own weaknesses The kingdom of Arabia was formulated on the principles, that this world rejected all type of injustice, violence, breach of peace, bloodshed, murder and plunder. Jihad was defined after the battle of Bard. It is written in the “Kitbag al Tauhid”. The tomb of Prophet Muhammad was virtually destroyed in 1803 at Medina and People Stripped the Kaba at Makah. These people were declared Blasphemous. Virtually “Jihad”, which was earlier known as the struggle against oppression and rather a struggle against their own weakness, has started combating against their own people. There was the reformation. People disallowed ceremonies for marriage and death. They prohibited the worship of the saints, adorning of graves, tomb and monuments. They prohibited and provided the restriction upon holding religious processions, sharing art, music and dance and provided the proper place to women as their god only exposes fickleness of their minds. Most of the Muslim peers are flourishing, because of Hindus only, and will be shut if Hindus stop visiting them. The mosquitoes are flying in the air to drag the blood from the body of the defenseless Non violent citizen. Mosquitoes, even lesser in number, will suck the blood of Majority. They become the scorpions, if the number of carnivorous human being are proportionately increased to insufficient numbers. These people are viper snake converted to Cobra. The number of these poisonous reptiles Increased. Even, if they increased in quarter to the number of other community, they become pythons. Stop them from doing So in India, otherwise we will be buttered, as Hindus are Buttered in Bangladesh, Malaysia and Pakistan. The submissive nature of the Hindus is evident even today, even a single person of other faiths Hindus are credulous by nature. They simply believed what others said without suspecting the ulterior designs of the enemy. There were occasions when the idealist Hindu rulers sincerely honored a treaty or ceasefire in war but the crook enemy took undue advantage of their credulousness and captured them. If there were Jai Chands in medieval times, there are Laloos, Paswans, Mulayams, Arjuns in this era, who, for their momentary selfish motives, are selling the interests of the Hindus in the name of secularism without realizing the irreparable loss being caused by them to their community. Gandhi’s secularism always aimed at destruction of Hindus at the hands of Muslims. Paswan’s secularism advocates a Muslim Chief-Minister in Bihar. Arjun’s secularism believes in distorting our history. Numerous such pseudo secularists have always been active to destroy the Hindus. Making films on Hindu Gods & Goddesses causes irreparable harm to the faith. Human beings personifying Hindu Gods & Goddesses, pasteurization of vulgar scenes/songs in temples, showing Hindu Gods & Goddesses smoking in ad films only lowers their respect in the eyes of people. . Inviting censure of Sikhs by films like “Sava Lakh Se Ek Ladaoon”, and “Jo Bole So Nihal” are live examples of the concern of the Sikh community for their gurus, which regretfully is missing in the attitude of the Hindus. The beggars wearing masks of Hindu Gods and posing as Gods for begging in bazaars & streets definitely reduces obeisance for the Gods. The Muslim invaders exercised every atrocity on the native Hindus. They attacked us. They looted wealth, slaughtered innocent people, converted Hindus to Islam at the point of sword. They kidnapped our women and raped them with pride. They broke temples and erected mosques over them. They even decked idols of those temples in the stairs to humiliate Hindus. Famous historian late sri P.N. Oak claims that the so called Muslim monuments in India were originally the Hindu buildings. The Muslim invaders plundered them, captured them, broke them, sacrilege them and converted them into Muslim monuments. The Hindus, instead of considering them a stigma on the National honor take pride in calling them national monuments. Millions of rupees are spent on their maintenance. Some have been given the status of heritage buildings. A community of self honor would never accept such humiliation like this It is marriage within consanguinity. Though marriage within consanguinity is against Hindu marriage Act, but the custom overrides the statutory provisions. This weakens the uniformity of the custom at national level and makes us a subject of ridicule by others. I have seen Sikh leadership fighting collectively on different issues like Delhi riots, turban issue in France, kirpaan issue in Sweden, Santa-Banta (ridiculing cartoons) issue in Mumbai, turban-scanning issue in America. All the Sikh leaders irrespective of their political affiliation fought it collectively. Similarly, Prophet Mohammed’s picture (cartoon) in a Danish newspaper attracted protest from Muslims all over the world. Conversely, you can amply see Hindu leaders neutralising efforts of their own brothers without doing something for Hindu welfare and blaming of violating secularism. It is nothing but a cheap effort to earn momentary & transient acclaim from others. On the contrary, the leaders of other faiths are fighting collective, forgetting their political differences, definitely fetches them tangible results. Mulayam’s secularism impels him declare holiday in U.P. on last Friday of Ramjan. Mulayam, Pasvan throwing Iftaar parties to Muslims and wearing Muslim caps on their heads shamelessly is the burning example of pseudo secularism. . Conversion of Bangladesh from a secularist to an Islamic nation in 1979 did not perturb these secularists, nor did the planned elimination of Hindus in Bangladesh and Pakistan caused qualms of conscience to them. Now the only Nepal Hindu Country is Extinguished. If the journalist has started hurling the shoe on the face of Union Home Minister. It is the beginning of retaliating of the outrage emotion of the people to thwart the govt. , which is continuing by sheer opportunism and will perish it existences, as the combating the Islamic violence will come to an end. At least Mr. Jagdish Titaler and mr. Shajjan have been eliminated from the Zone of the fight in this battle by their field set up by their own guardian, for whom these criminals participated in Genocide and Murder of Khalsa Akhali People.
All the members of the court are considered as wounded, where justice is found wounded with inequity, and judges do not extract the dart of inequity from justice or remove its blot and destroy inequity, in other words where the innocent are not respected and the criminal are not punished. A virtuous and just person should never enter a court and when he does so, he should speak the truth; he who holds his tongue on seeing injustice done, or speaks contrary to truth and justice, is the greatest sinner .Justice destroyed, destroys its destroyer; and justice preserved, preserves its preserver. Hence, never destroy justice , lest being destroyed, it should destroy thee. In this world justice or righteousness alone is man’s friend that goes with him after death. All other things or companions part on the destruction of the body and he is detached from all company. But the company of justice is never cut off. When injustice is done in the government court out of partiality, it is divided into four parts of which one is shared by the criminal or doer of injustice , the second by the witness, the third by the judges, and the fourth by the president king of an unjust court. Legal justice , with a humane mission, must update itself to legitimize progressive urges, discern the reality of social changes and design its delivery system, so as to obviate the dominance of the Proletariat by the accelerate people’s access to effective., limitative justice. The contemporary command of social justice, which is also the socio-economic demand of the common people, is that the prevalent forensic astigmatism shall be corrected by sloughing off archaic, arcane authoritarian procedures which often spawn the paradox of a wealth of abuses and a poverty of access vis-à-vis institutions of legal justice.
The bar and the bench are meant to provide mutual assistance for dispensing the justice. A prominent Bar is always considered to be of utmost requirement for imparting the duties assigned to the Judge, while deciding the case before him. The opportunist Lawyers always get their position in the matter of Elevations of the Supreme Court and High Court Judges. How , one may forget the Incident of the Supersession of the three Judges, When Justice A. N. Ray was elevated as Chief Justice of India by Smt. Indira Gandhi. She purposely restricted the free speech of Indian Hindus, who were subjected to atrocities by the fundamentalists Muslims and ultimately the Suppression of the Right of free expression, Prohibition against resurrections and Suppression of the Right of Life came into Picture. It was the period worst than the period of British Rule, When at least Hindus were given their due protection against atrocities committed by Muslims and by Hindus upon the weaker Section Of Society. How one can forget the humiliation suffered by Justice H.R. Khana for giving the minority Judgment in MISA preventive detention matter pertaining to ADM Jabalpur case .Judicial activism was based upon accountability of the Executive action in the State. This was increased during the period , when Judges Of High Integrity, and Potentials were being elevated to the Bench. It was just after taken over the process of selection of Judges by The collegiums of The Judiciary. The system of Give And Take In the process of the Elevation Started. It was during the period of adorning the crown by the Judge of the particular religion, that 20 judges of insignificant age were elevated with the Idea of promoting the Jihad in the arena of the Judiciary also. Judicial activism abrogated just after their elevation. It has been finally came to an end. It is well known that accountability is not wanted by the criminals and when the foundation of their religion are it self based upon sex and crime, how does this situation , which promoted the deception by falsehood, cheating, subjugation and abrogation of the means of innocent citizen for promoting Darul E Islam may not be liken by them. Why these individual will invite the risk to have their Transparency and accountability. There was the mission with political agenda to capture the entire world in dominance of a particular religion, while Hindu judges remain satisfied with their lust for greed, power, favoritism and Corruption. Thus the beginning of opportunism has gone to the extend that Kashmir Brahmins, who were uprooted from their motherland, but their representative, after emergence of Gandhi- Nehru Nexus, for being them elevated to supreme Court and High Court of Delhi, have now started declaring that Aurangzeb was the Secular and the painting of M. F. Hussein depicting the portraits of Ma Durga, Ma Swarswati, Ma Parvati, Mata Laxmi and Even Naked Bharat Mata. The chapter of Judicial activism, which was once started by the esteem respected Judges of Supreme Court was not only eroded, but the Judgment given BY Justice Kuldeep Singh in Smt. Sheila Dixit, Mr. Kamal Nath cases ( In reM.C. Mehta Motal – Bias River Water Diversion were Reviewed by these Justices. . Smt. Indira Gandhi had taken the license to denounce the authority of Comptroller and accountant General by getting the Expenditure disproportionate to its pre audit limit, which was not changed. Now the Government is ruled by alien power. Sonia Gandhi has taken the command in her hand to mis-utilization the investigating agency of Central Bureau Of Investigation to get her political empire remain intact, even if no confidence motion passed by majority of political party. Now the Nation is Govern without any Ethics, that is , if you Show me the man, I will make a Law to benefit him. The judicial Activism is Over. The people are ruled by alien power. They can not Combat Islamic Jihad. Law does not talk with Justness. There is no accountability. Judges are elevated, having no essential qualification, which is based upon rational classification. Opportunists are elevated. Supreme Court Stay the entire proceedings, even beyond the scope of the adjudication placed before Them. Justice Nirmal Yadav elevated, who are indulged in briary . Number of Judges remained involved in Provident Fund Scam, but who has been resigned till yet. This idea may promote us of secularist Time and again Commissions have been constituted to convict, by hook or crook, the accused of the 1984 Delhi riots. It is the matter of disgraceful event in the history of Judicial accountability, that Justice, U. C. Banerjee may declare that there was no incident of Godhra Burning of Ram Kar Sevak and there after , even after the acquittal of the innocent people in Post Godhra Violence, Which Provoked on Account Of the Arson Of Godhra Mass Burning , the further trial in 2002 Gujarat riots even after their acquittal by the courts of law. On the other hand, terrorists like Wassan Singh, Zaffarwal and Jagjit Singh Chauhan deserving severe punishment have gone scot-free for want of proof and it did not impel any secularist to deplore such acquittal and seek re-trial. Mushrooming madrasas in the country indulging in anti-Indian activities. This does not worry these secularists but they have the audacity to term the activities of RSS and VHP as anti-nationalists. For them, religion-based reservation for the Muslims in AMU is not an anti-national act, but the alleged discrimination in relief-distribution to the quake-hit in Bhuj surely perturbs these secularists. 5% reservation for Muslims in A.P. awaiting emulation by Bihar and many other State Governments is another burning example of their secularism. Pampering the Muslims at the cost of the Hindus is an unpardonable sin, which cannot be forgiven by any rational and nationalist Indian. It is nothing but a political gimmickry for appeasement of Muslims to garner their votes, which has rendered the Hindus orphans in their own land. The coming generations of ours are being recklessly thrown to a disadvantageous position. The virtual slavery is inevitable for us. The irony is that their secularism erupts only when the interests of the non-Hindus are involved. Thousands of Hindus being murdered in Mopla and Naokhali riots before partition, lakhs of Hindus being butchered and cores suffering displacement during partition in 1947 did not make a dint on any of these secularists. Thousands of Hindus being slain in Punjab and Jammu & Kashmir and lakhs are being rendered refugees in their own motherland. This did not shake the soul of the secularists. Conversion of Bangladesh from a secularist to an Islamic nation in 1979 did not perturb these secularist, nor did the planned elimination of Hindus in Bangladesh and Pakistan caused qualms of conscience to them. The kar-sewaks burnt alive in Godhra. This doesn’t make any difference to these secularists, but its reaction in the form of Gujarat riots is termed as a “blot” on humanity and the heads are “lowered in shame”. Muslim invaders looted & demolished thousands of temples and erected mosques over them, but redeeming Ram Temple from underneath Babri mosque is the “blackest day” in their life Secularism (or pseudo-secularism?) has done immeasurable harm to Hinduism. The selfish Hindu leadership, both religious & political, is always eager to compromise the interest of Hindus for transient gains, in the name of secularism, without realizing the harm caused to the religion in the long run. Is this secularism not applicable to Muslims? Never does a Muslim ever talk of respect to the other faiths. Hindus are always eager to appease the other communities (Muslims, Sikhs, Christians etc.) by following their customs/rituals. We may justify it as secularism, but actually it reflects our wavering faith in our own Gods and Goddesses. On the contrary, rarely is a follower of other faiths seen in our temples or practicing our rituals. The Hindus are not ready to bear pain involved in fighting for their own rights and always look towards others to fight for them. This philosophy has made us cowards to such an extent that we did not retaliate, even the invaders, who attacked us in our homeland. Just a handful of Muslim invaders attacked us, captured us, slew us, converted many to Islam, outraged the modesty of our women, broke our temples and used every possible atrocity to destroy Hinduism, but the philosophy of non-violence made the Hindus surrender every where. The Hindus, who believe always in the existence of Gods and Goddesses as the symbolic representation of their faith in the form of worshiping of trees meant for their own protection of life as synonymous to god like peepal, banyan, banana, tulsi and jand, tamarind, kalamba etc, as all having medicinal values and their cultural triggers. Their zoolatry is in worship to the different form of animals, as their existence is required to maintain Eco- Environment- Ecological Balance for survival of Human Race. Lack of faith has seriously affected unity among the Hindus and has lead to disorganization and weakening of the Hinduism. On thousands of occasions, Hindus have miserably failed to protect the respect of their Gods and Goddesses and religious This makes us unorganized and leads to lack of consensus on trivial issues like dates of Hindu festivals. Our religious scholars seldom agree on single date for festivals leading to celebration of festivals on different dates. This dilutes the devotion & enthusiasm and also impels a sense of ridicule for our religion in the minds of others. This is solely because of non-availability of a centralized religious command. This gave the others an excuse to shy away from the duty to sacrifice for the country. Whenever there was any attack, it was the Kshatriyas, who were to face the brunt. Many a time, their short number or non-availability of fighter-Kshatriyas, lead us to their defeat in wars.

Snake Hunter Blog-Editor Sez,

The Recent White House Appointment Of Rashad Hussein As The U.S. Envoy To The Organization Of Islamic Conference (OIC)...

Is a direct insult to our troopers in combat zones, and to their families here at home. - reb
___________________________________________