This Misunderstander of Islam claims that "Islamic scriptures have predicted a victory over 'non-believers'" for the Muslims. How can he say such a thing about the Religion Of Peace™? Can we get Honest Ibe Hooper and the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf to go over to Pakistan and explain to Azam Tariq about the Qur'an's true teachings of tolerance and peaceful coexistence with non-believers?
"3,000 terrorists for India battle: Pak Taliban," from Rediff News, July 26 (thanks to Arjun):
Pakistan's Taliban claims it has organised 3,000 terrorists for its declared battle against India, the Taliban spokesperson tells Tahir Ali in Islamabad.The Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan has declared it is training terrorists to launch an attack on India.
The TTP is the Pakistan counterpart of Afghanistan's Taliban and has been blamed for several terror attacks in that country.
TTP spokesperson Azam Tariq told this correspondent in a telephone interview that the TTP has vowed to capture "Hindustan".
"India is our jageer (domain)," Tariq said, "and we will attack to take possession of it. We are training lots of fighters and suicide bombers who will be used for this purpose."
He added the Taliban would fight a "decisive' battle" in India before proceeding towards the Middle East, presumably to evict Israel from that region.
After taking control of Pakistan and Afghanistan, the TTP spokesperson said the Taliban would move towards India.
Tariq said Islamic scriptures have predicted a victory over "non-believers".
"For us, whether they are Hindus or Jews, they all are the same. Soon, we will teach India a lesson. India's defeat at the hands of the mujahedeen is written in our religious books," he boasted.
Criticising relations between Pakistan and the United States, Tariq said, "We are not against Pakistan, but we don't like its pro-American policies; we will target their security forces, the secular leaders and other sensitive installations until the government does not change its anti-Islamic policies."
"What has Pakistan gained from American friendship? Despite Pakistan's role as a frontline ally in the war against terror, India is closer to the US. The Americans are not interested in solving the Kashmir issue and have shown their inclination towards India in this regard. Pakistani rulers should remember that only the mujahideen would come to their rescue in case of Indian aggression against their country."
"If Pakistan changes its anti-Taliban policies, not only can the mujahedeen free Kashmir from India, but can also capture India itself," Tariq declared.
When asked how the TTP is preparing for its declared onslaught against India, Tariq claimed, "We are preparing fighters to attack India. Sooner or later, when there is no tussle between the Pakistani forces and us, or after we defeat the Pakistani forces, the mujahideen will move towards Hindustan."
"There are around 3,000 trained suicide bombers with the TTP. Others are undergoing training. We are not preparing them for Pakistan, but for our real target -- the occupation of India," Tariq said.
Asked if the Pakistani Taliban was involved in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks, Tariq added, "We don't have any connection with those attackers or their backers, but we appreciate their struggle and sacrifices."
May another such as Shivaji rise to defend all Indian non-Muslims against the merciless Jihad:
http://www.australianislamistmonitor.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3616:shivajis-coronation-laudatory-landmark&catid=283:infidels-resistance&Itemid=63
"Shivaji’s Coronation Laudatory Landmark".
"There are around 3,000 trained suicide bombers with the TTP. Others are undergoing training. We are not preparing them for Pakistan, but for our real target -- the occupation of India," Tariq said.
In my mind, this statement is meant more for internal Pakistani consumption than anything else. It is at once an attempt to intimidate the government of Pakistan - "[we have 3000 suicide bombers at our disposal]" - and to rally public support for the Taliban cause "[we're the true standard-bearers of the Pakistani nation, ready and willing to fight the Hindus, unlike the present government]"
It's nothing but a tribal version of PR.
It is just unbelievable how BIG they think of themselves, these miserable Taliban blighters. Who do they think they are these arrogant 7th century barbarians? Do they seriously think they can bring India with a population of more than a billion people and nuclear warheads to its knees and take over? Are these Talibans with their fake religion blind too? Islam has never made Pakistan or Afghanistan or any other muslim country a super power in any way. In fact majority of muslims countries are poor and under developed. People living in these countries are poorest of the poor. Take over India indeed!
It is so galling that Pakistanis do & say this cr*p, and we stay all buddy-buddy with them, give them money, make excuses for them, and let them continue their ISI-funded terror attacks & their push for an unjust invasion, er, settlement, of Kashmir.
Meanwhile, for the biggest democracy on earth, and an English-speaking one to boot--one that could be a counterweight to authoritarian China on one side and the Islamist horde on the other, all we give India is a state dinner.
India should be one of our best allies, but we have Pakistan shackled to our feet!
This is why cluster bombs, artillery and strategic/tactical nukes exist.
Deluded morons, this is what happens when you:
A/follow a death cult.
B/ Marry your own relations.
As regular savvy readers of Jihad Watch, we are well aware of the deceptive Islamic game of taqiyya tactics and are not in the least bit surprised by this double-dealing treachery by this supposed American ally Pakistan.
After the fall of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, none of their top leaders such as Mullah Omar or al-Qaida’s Bin Laden have been captured to date because they were speedily spirited away by Pakistan’s ISI secret service to safe houses in Pakistan itself. From there they continue to live in safety till the present day while they continue their reign of terror with impunity.
This alliance of murderous thugs has never ceased financing, planning and launching attacks against both Afghanistan and India to continue their campaign of terror there against both military and civilian targets. This is why these conflicts drag on endlessly with no end in sight.
Ironically we now see these same thugs turning their cruel attention to the people of Pakistan itself. Tut, tut, fancy that - such ingratitude from their fellow Muslim warriors. Poetic justice at its best!
Dang, so much for the "Religion of Peace™".
Withdraw foreign aid and let the players in a nuke capable country fight over the table scraps. How do you think the Muslim World would react to President Apostate doing that?
I am impressed that an Australian lady knows about Shivaji !!
Indeed a poem in his honor said that if he hadn't been there, we all (Hindus) would have become Muslims.
Another said that he has the same relationship to the Mlechhas (Hindu derogatory term for the foreigner, in this context meaning Muslims), that lion has to the herd of deer.
The latter statement sounds supremacist like Muslims make all the time, but Shivaji, in reality was anything but a supremacist. In his reign, all were free to practise their religion, so long as they did not try to disturb or dominate others.
Having said that, a nation needs lions like Shivaji to deflate the Muslim claim that they are the supreme martial community, destined to defeat all others militarily.
Yes, another Shivaji will rise. India will not be conquered by Islam the way Persia and Egypt were. In fact, in the long run, I think Pakistan to will dissolve into India.
Sanjay
Greetings Sanjay. Indeed, dumbles is a veritable hive of knowledge. And I'm in no doubt that another, maybe even greater, Shivaji will visit you again.
Fighting to Islam is like awimming is to a shark, stop either and the life goes out of it.
Interesting analogy jac... echo's of 'Captain Clint' in 'Jaws '.
"We smote them and they scattered. The impious met death. They became fuel for Hell. All who aren't Muslims must go there. It will consume them while the Stoker [Allah] increases the heat. They had called Allah's Apostle a liar. They claimed, 'You are nothing but a sorcerer.' So Allah destroyed them." Ishaq:344
Don't praise *me*.
Praise the hard-working folks over at 'The Australian Islamist Monitor', and one of their team, who goes by the nom de plume of "Brigadier Chitranjan Sawant" . I read his account of Shivaji there, and thought it most inspiring and worth cross-referring here. And this was the perfect thread to put it in.
Are there any good movies about Shivaji?
Pakistan Taliban: "India is our domain, and we will attack to take possession of it...whether they are Hindus or Jews, they all are the same"
India is their "domain" and Israel is their "domain" and, in the end - this has to be grasped -- the whole world is the "Dar" or "House" or "Domain of Islam." If Dar al-Islam does not yet cover the entire globe, it is because the Infidels still manage to throw up obstacles -- such things as burqa bans and minaret bans, and the Encyclopedia Britannica, and the contents of our libraries and art museums, and the American Constitution, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, are among the obstacles to the spread, and then the dominance as by right, of Islam.
But the wars -- the Jihads -- against India and Israel have been going for quite some time, because they started before the Muslims became powerful enough -- through the OPEC trillions, the Muslim immigrant millions in Western Europe, and the appropriation of Western technology to spread the message of Islam -- to think it realistic even to try to extend their sway everywhere.
The Jihad against India is Pakistan's reason for being. It has no other reason for the kind of weaponry it has been wheedling out of the Americans for the past half-century, ever since the days of CENTO. Pakistan has fought three -- or is it four, or is it five -- wars against India, not to mention the mass-murdering war against the people in Bangladesh who for some reason did not find appealing the argument of the Pakistani government that "Pakistan" (West and East) had to remain as one for the Greater Good of Islam.
In the same way, the creation of the "Palestinian people" as a political weapon, like the creation of Pakistan as a Muslim redoubt, reflects a negative goal: the goal to strengthen Islam, and the case and cause of Islam. The "Palestinian people" as a construct exists in order to make more plausible, to the outside, non-Islamic world, the Arab and Muslim desire to destroy, if necessary not outright but, as the Slow Jihadists of Fatah recognize as necessary, by degrees, the Infidel nation-state of Israel.
India -- that is India unruled by Musilms -- is regarded with hatred, sometimes ill-hidden and sometimes open, by Muslims and Arabs because, having once been in Muslim possession, it is -- just like Israel -- highest on the Muslim list of lands to be taken, or rather, re-taken.
Now both Israel and India are countries which are imperfectly governed, and who have populations not allowed to understand the full reality of the wars being made against them, because so many in the political and media elites in both countries don't want themselves to speak openly about Jihad, or even to recognize it, and prefer to finesse the question, hoping that if they only play for time, somehow something will come up. But their best weapon is to speak the truth about the ideology that prompts the Believers to attack them, and to engage not only in acts of terrorism, or in acts of open warfare (qitaal), but also in all those other acts, not employing violence-- the Money Weapon, campaigns of propaganda and, where possible, Da'wa, and of course demographic conquest -- that can allow them to achieve, perhaps even more effectively, the very same aims as those Muslims who use terrorism.
But both countries can also take a kind of grim satisfaction, even as they should worry, about the fact of OPEC trillions, and millions of Muslim migrants, and the exploitation by Muslims of Western technology to spread the message of Islam, has meant that Arabs and Muslims no longer are so confined to the twin Jihads against Israel (which pretends to be all about "the West Bank" but is about all of Israel) and that against India (which pretends to be limited to Kashmir but is about, in the end, practically all of India which was once under rule by Muslim masters and overlords).
Now all the Infidels are in it together.
But they still do not want to recognize this. And even the new victims -- say Great Britain (what would happen to India if the Pakistani numbers, and power, grew and grew unhalted, unchecked, unreversed, in Great Britain?) -- are lead by people who are confused, timid, illogical.
Just look at David Cameron who in Turkey yesterday called for Turkey's admission to the E.U. Does he know what that means for the peoples of Western Europe, and what it would mean for those who rightly worry about the Islamization of Western Europe "by degrees"?
No, he doesn't. He's willing to send troops to Afghanistan to "fight the Taliban." But he's unwilling to see the wars on India (and still more, on Israel, where he apparently takes pride in talking about "occupied territories" - every inch, apparently, a mindless parroter of the official BBC line) as a Jihad, and unwilling to connect Turkey in the E.U. with the march of Islam everywhere that he apaprently can only recognize, and worry about, if it calls itself Al Qaeda and has Bin Laden and Al-Zawahiri at its head.
And there are dozens of camerons among our Western leaders. They can't connect the dots, because they lack the intelligence to see behind what seem to them as unconnected events and movements the single ideology of Islam. They just can't or won't grasp it, and can't quite believe things are as they are, and the threat is as it is. Stupidity has gotten them far, as it is, and so has ignorance. For them, it's been a winning hand. Why stop now?
DDA, I read the link given by you. I am glad the Australians had the wisdom to put a Hindu nationalist on the panel because we the "unfoolable" Hindus (to use a wonderful phrase I learned from Hugh on this website) know more about jihadist mentality than perhaps a yet untutored westerner (no boasting here, it is simply a matter of who experienced jihad more).
There used to be a good movie about Shivaji that we were shown as children in the school run by Hindu nationalists that I went to. But such is the dhimmitude of Hindu mainstream that a really excellent one is yet to be made. I will be on the look out for the old ones and send you the link if I find one.
London Jim, thanks for your remark. We think there is one Shivaji already, we do not his full potential yet, in Narendra Modi. He is being persecuted by India's "liberal" classes but we hope he will come out on top and turn India around politically, so to say.
Sanjay
Nothing belongs to Islam and Muslims in this world!! All they have got is by invading, looting, killing, murdering, raping, threatening, beheading, etc,... And these delusional morons think that India belongs to them, or Israel belongs to them and umpteen other countries in the world belong to them!!!!LOL....
Why don't the Indian leaders wake up and face the real intentions of Muslims, whether living in India at present or those jihadis in Pakistan who openly express their desire to take over India. It will be only with complicity of Indian leaders these guys may succeed because these leaders and the Indian MSM, and so called intellectuals are always shilling for Muslims. May be another Shivaji will rise(as somebody said above) and clean out all these traitors but for that conditions in India would have to deteriorate very very badly. Lets just hope that the Indian leaders face reality of Muslim intentions for India and act accordingly. and the same goes for leaders of the West, USA, Canada, Europe, Australia, etc., Muslims here also haved the same desire of taking over!!!
Tariq said Islamic scriptures have predicted a victory over "non-believers". "For us, whether they are Hindus or Jews, they all are the same.
All kufr is kufr with some differences in detail, but kufr none the less...At the root all kufr is Kufr. Kufr rejects Allah, and Mahound...Allah tells Mahoundians what he thinks about that in Quran 98:6...He also fingers Jews with Quran 5:82...And in the same Quran and the examples of Mahound, Allah is 'clear' about what he expects Mahoundians to do about it...Quran 8:39/2:193/8:60/9:5/9:29 and others...
So for an Abdullah, Tariq is right...Which should tell us to be prepared to stamp out any Islamic fires, before they become blazes...Essentially, that is exactly what JW/Shrugs/Pam/Robert/Wilders/SOIA/EDL and many others are doing...
The more stampers the better...spraying Islam with the water of truth, also has high value, it has the same effect holy water has on Count Drac'uallah...
India should never forget Mumbai..
http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2010/06/never-forget-mumbai.html
India should wipe out these Taliban Vermins from the face of the earth..
http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2010/07/taliban-vermins.html
The US should back India in this war..Enough is enough.
http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2010/06/deserve-victory.html
If push came to shove, and Hindus in India were fighting for their existence, I would volunteer to fight alongside my Hindu brothers and sisters of India, as many of my fellow countrymen already do in the Gurkha regiment. I am Nepali Bramhin whose ancestors migrated eastwards towards the sanctuary of the mountains of the present day Nepal some 1000 years ago after the Muslim barbarians poured into India lest they be converted to the fold of Islam. Am I glad that they did migrate to Nepal!!! Even to this day Indians in the border areas of Bihar call Nepal “Sarhad” or the frontier sanctuary for that very reason. Poor Nepali migrant workers call India Muglaan or “the land of the Moghuls.”
Prithivi Narayan Shah, the Hindu king who unified the petty principalities into the present day Nepal when asked by one of his advisors what his long term plan was, he is said to have replied, “I am building the sakkal (real) Hindustan.” By this he meant that India was not the real land of the Hindus because Hindus were not in control of their destiny in “Muglaan.” Alas, this great and astute king who left behind a treasure trove of great advices known as Divya Upadesh (in which he speaks of he speaks of his kingdom being a garden of 36 flowers after the 36 diverse ethnic groups) is now being denigrated as a tyrant and a Hindu bigot by the secular political establishment dominated by (guess who) Hindu Brahmins after Nepal was declared a secular republic in 2006. The Hindu monarchs of the latter periods were incompetent at best and corrupt arrogant bullies at worst, and I agree with the need to abolish the monarchy. However Nepal could have remained an official Hindu republic and a “Sarhad” (sanctuary) for Hindus as it has always been throughout its history. But now that the last officially Hindu nation has been systematically destroyed by the leftist commie Brahmins of Nepal with the backing of the UPA government, Hindus don’t have a single nation in the world which they can call their own. Muslims are the fastest growing minority in Nepal and currently stand at 5% of the population.
Christians have been their own masters in Europe and the New World, the Muslims in the Middle East since these places turned to Christianity and Islam with a few minor fluctuations here and there (Balkans, Iberia, Crusader Kingdoms). The Hindus in India have been in charge of their destiny only for the last 60 years after a gap of 1000 years! And India is already moving ahead by leaps and bounds. If Indians (Hindus) want to keep the momentum going, and rediscover their knack for science, arts, mathematics, exploration of the cosmos, and regain their place at the forefront of science, arts, literature alongside other great civilizations as was the case in Ancient (Hindu) India before the invasion and occupation by the Muslim hordes, Hindus HAVE to remain in control of their nation and their own affairs. They cannot let the Muslims from without (Taleban) or within (Indian Muslims) conquer, outbreed and subjugate them again. Whatever little initial momentum Hindus have gained after a gap of millennia will all be lost to the dark force of Islam. This time India will not be given a second lease on life. India WILL turn 100% Muslim unlike in the past. India will then be an enemy of all free people.
India needs more leaders like Shivaji Maharaj. It is a pity that true patriots like Narendra Modi are ceaselessly hounded by the corrupt Congress. If other states had leaders like Narendra Bhai Modi, India would easily register double digit growth like Gujrat does year after year under Modi. The congress doesn't want to see clean, efficient governance, or the unleashing of the true potential of Hindu India that was stymied by centuries of Muslim rule.
The congress feels they are entitled to run India as their own property and perpetuate the same corrupt, weak and fatalistic governance that they have encumbered Indians with for the last 60 years, and makes India famous in the world for its poor people and slums. It doesn’t have to be that way as Hindu patriots like Narendra Modi have shown us with the Gujrat miracle (which is still a continuous work in progress). Anything that a modern day Hindu reformer like Narndra Modi does is a threat to the Congress way of doing things and is a threat to their entitlement to rule. So they bring down a true patriot like Modi with smear, legal cases or any other means at their disposal.
At least for now Modi is winning elections. God forbid the day BJP looses in Gujrat will be the day a son of the soil, who has always striven for the betterment of his people and has delivered tangible development not just hollow words, will be crucified at the altar of fake secularism. Sadly, it will be Hindus in the congress that will be aiding and abetting the one Hindu leader who stood up for fellow religionists against Muslim tyranny. Hindu disunity and Muslims exploiting the disunity has been the oft repeated theme in Indian history.
Stupidity has gotten them far, as it is, and so has ignorance. For them, it's been a winning hand. Why stop now?
Put another way: when ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise.
What does it say about us? We insist on voting these people in, time after time. It's not just our leaders who are at fault. Many people would also prefer to look the other way. Battling evil is hard. "Peace in our time" is a more appealing campaign slogan. It wins more elections.
Hi kaffirpagan, I signed up just to reply to your comment. As an indian hindu, I couldn't agree with you more. Too bad Nepal is no longer a hindu country. I hope this is reversed one day. My family had to leave bangladesh because we were hindus, and people don't seem to realise that we have no other land to call our own. Our history, heritage, spirituality, mythology, everything is connected to this land. There is only one word for politicians in the UPA govt and that is "traitor".
All the best to you.
Most of the Hindu political leaders are afraid to talk anything ill against these terrorising Muslims.They fear their vote bank will suffer if they do,but these Hindu political leaders are very generous in curtailing the Indian Christian activities who are very peaceful and law abiding.. In fact,the Christians,though being a small minority,engage themselves in opening schools for the downtrodden,hospitals for the poor ,and welcome people of all religions to these institutions etc. In spite of these, Christians are tortured as in states of Assam,Karnataka,and Gujarath. The west is closely observing this trend of high class Hindus.Hindus fail to realize in case of any Islamic aggression, it is the west,that has to come for their help.
The persecution of Christians in India is shameful. I remember a pastor and his son burnt alive in a car by a Hindu mob in Orissa some years ago. However these incidents are few and far in between and the media in India is quick to highlight and repeatedly hammer home any atrocity Hindus commit against Christians or Moslems.
But atrocities against Christians happen most frequently in tribal areas, where there exists some tension between the newly converted Christian communities who were formerly low caste Hindus, and the remaining Hindus. These tensions often predate the conversion of Hindus to Christianity and concern sharing of the dwindling resources on which tribals live off.
Christians in urban India are the most successful, best educated and the leading personalities in almost all sectors.
It is unfortunate that the aggression that could have been channeled productively (not in the form of burning people which is utterly barbaric even if the victims are Muslims) against the real enemy is directed against hapless Christians who are non-violent and productive members of the society.
There is probably a misconceived sense of Hindu-Muslim solidarity among Hindus in India. The history books teach young people that Hindu and Muslim sepoys fought together against the Christian British during the great Mutiny of 1857 and how Hindus and Muslims had "peacefully" co-existed in India before the British used the divide and rule policy and partitioned India. There also seems to be a sense among the Hindus that anything Christian equates with the West when in fact the fastest growing Christian nations are non-Western.
Also, the fact that zealous Christian missionaries are known to have denigrated the Hindu practices such as idolatry as demonic before large Hindu crowds exacerbates the tensions. But still killing Christian missionaries because they condemn your faith is utterly against the Hindu Dharma. There is no canonical sanction (unlike in the Koran) for what Hindu mobs do in their anger to Christians.
Hey Nishant! Thanks for your note. Where do you live now? I hope not West Bengal because it is fast turning into another Bangladesh. I feel for the Hindus, Buddhists and Christians who are left behind. I hope the Indian government grants citizenship to all of them instead of the Muslim Bangladeshis who are pouring in to the districts of WB and skewing the demographics in their favor. I wont be surprised if WB asked for cession to Bangladesh after a few decades making the Chicken Neck of India (gateway to the NorthEast of India) would be rendered even thinner.
This is something that I have wondered about all the time.
Is America so stupid that it cannot see through Pakistan?
After Russia and the cold war lost its vigour, America should have chummied up with India, not only because it is a large, vibrant democracy but because it would provide a counter to China.
Why did that not happen?
World history would have been so different if Pakistan had not had all those american dollars with which to incite religious hatred.
What happened to India:
Islam + Sword = Forced Proselytizing
What is happening to India:
Christianity + Money = Induced Proselytizing
I do not see a difference. It is cultural genocide either way.
"India is our jageer (domain),"
Jageer translates more like fiefdom than a domain. A fiefdom where they can do whatever they want with impunity. Their baap ki jageer .
I beg to differ with you. The immense destruction wrought upon India by Muslims is in NO way comparable to the handful of Indians that are peacefully converted to Christianity, albeit with financial inducement. Hinduism will have to let go of the caste system if it wants the lower caste dalits from opting for Christianity. I dont blame the lower caste Hindus if they voluntarily choose to convert to Christianity because other Hindus have always treated them as sub humans.
Hinduism has been a self critical faith. Now it is time to let go of the degrading caste system and untouchability. Otherwise more and more low class Hindus will abandon Hinduism. And we cannot blame Christians for that.
Mistakes were made. I could live with that if we at least learned from those mistakes and changed our foreign policy now.
Wow, to see Hindus and Jews viewed with equal hatred by the Mohounds is something that made my day and made me very proud.
After 1300 years of war with Islam, there are stil many Hindus who are willing to take up the fight once again. Although most of the Hindus have been brainwashed by convent education to see the Muslims as their friends and brothers, there are still many Hindus who have remained awake and alert and others who are just waking up.
I saw a reference in one of the comments to 1857. Yes it is taught in India's Macauley designed educational system as a Hindu-Muslim united front against the European invaders, however, nothing could be further from the truth. Hindu and Sikh kings joined the British against the 1857 revolt because they were not in favor of the reestablishment of the Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar and the reawakening of the Muslim empire which they had all fought against. Their is always an attempt to tie in Hindu heros like Jhansi ki Rani and Nana Saheb or even Tatya Tope, however none of them approved of the Mutineers or their actions, these heros had their own greivences with the Brits and just saw the opportunity for them to settle the injustices against them, but there was no such Hindu-Muslim unity crap. Even Nepal's Jung Bahadur replied to the Mutineers' request to join them with a reply that if the Brits were attacking the Hindu religion, then Nepal would fight the brits, but there was no evidence as such and instead, Jung Bahadur and his brother Ranodip Singh led their Gurkha troops and saved the Brits from the siege of Lucknow 1857.
Anyways, I'm on a tight schedule, would love to chat but have to run.
Cheers.
Wow, Jews and Hindus in the same sentence....SWEET!!!
-Ayo Gorkhali
Vicram,
I agree with KaffirPagan. There is no comparison between what the Muslims did and what the Christians did to India.
There is antagonism between Christians and Hindus and some part of it is justified. Those Americans and Europeans who see red in this statement would do well to remember that Christians and those trained by Christians are almost invariably against those fighting jihad on the subcontinent. I have personally taken ridicule from such like many times. Christians on the subcontinent almost invariably ally with Muslim jihadists against Hindu nationalists fighting jihad.
Having said this, Christians are nowhere close to Muslims when it came to harming India and Hindus. There was rarely violence initiated by Christians. Never unreasonable demands (except the recent one for reservations, perhaps). Never a refusal to understand the good in Hindu culture of the like we see in Muslims.
Also, remember that it was Christian British who made Hindus aware to the full glory of great pre-Islamic civilization that Hindus created and Muslims all but destroyed. But for Sir James Princep, we would not even be aware of the great Asoka and inscriptions some of the contents of which anticipate human progress by millenia ! They discovered Ajanta and Ellora and acted to revive and preserve the great creations.
That is not to condone the racist behavior of the British. The anger against Christians and the British is fully justified. But still, let us not compare them to the abusive and destructive Muslims.
Sanjay
I hope India clobbers the Pakistani Taliban. Something tells me that these Pathologicalstan Taliban wouldn't fare too well against well-armed, well-trained Sikhs or Gurkhas.
Vicram and Sanjay: Maybe the main reason why Indian Christians--now mostly led by Indians and won to Christ by Indian witnesses--are fearful of Hindu nationalists has something to do with an Australian missionary burned to death, or ostracism by Hindus?
Further, Christianity has been on the Indian subcontinent from the earliest centuries of Christianity, and it is held that Didymus Judas Thomas ("Doubting Thomas" of the Gospel of John) was the first to propagate Christianity in the vicinity of Kerala, and was also martyred there. That's about six centuries before Muhammad.
Dear Kepha,
"I hope India clobbers the Pakistani Taliban. Something tells me that these Pathologicalstan Taliban wouldn't fare too well against well-armed, well-trained Sikhs or Gurkhas."
You forgot to mention one more important group, the Rajputs, who had carried on the struggle against Islam since day one and were the inspiration for many of the militant groups of the subcontinent, Sikhs, Gurkhas, Marathas, Dogras etc etc.
However, you would find this humorous, there are many Pakis who claim to be Rajputs (obviously they are lying) and when you ask them how can they have a Hindu warrior identity and claim to be a Muslim, they come up with the most ridiculous reasoning.
Musharaf, the former PM of Pakiland, once said in an interview that there were two reasons why Pakistan lost the Kargil war...the Rajput Regiment and Gorkha Rifles.
Hi Kaffir, well I stay in the west of India now. About the christian debate, I disagree somewhat with you. Much of the anger against christians is justified. Although not as bad and violent as islam, christianity is also ultimately a dogmatic faith. It is not like hinduism which accepts the validity of all spiritual paths. Once a person converts, he and his descendants forever lose their hindu heritage (which is losing a lot). Not only that, they tend to view anything hindu as something foreign/pagan/native and good for ridicule. This is understandable because they have lost the heritage. It is a complete loss of identity and I have seen this with all of the many christians I have known. Exceptions are rare and I have not met any.
The caste system is something that hindus need to seriously resolve, but the changing the hindu colour of the country will always make people angry. Conversion in the end is another form of violence. The intent to convert shows intolerance, a supremacist belief, and ignorance about other cultures.
I agree with what Kaffir Pagan has said. It is unacceptable for any one to attack Christian missionaries just because they are condemning & attacking Hindu faith. There are peaceful ways to protest if any one is hurt by the methods employed by some Christian missionaries. Many Hindus think that since they belong to a largely non-proselytizing religion,missionaries should leave them alone. But if they want to think like that, they should do more to alleviate the caste based discrimination. I completely disagree with what Vicram Singh has said - it is absolutely foolish to compare Islam with Christianity. India would any day prefer to have more Christians & not more muslims.
I also don't agree with the views of some people here who are suggesting that converting to Christianity will mean that all those low caste ppl who are currently being discriminated by Hindus will lead a much better life. Caste system is purely a social problem & it takes more than simple switching of religions to eradicate this problem. Today we see high caste Christians discriminating low Caste christians, high caste Muslims discriminating low caste Muslims & so on.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8090009.stm
I also believe that the Hindu nationalistic groups became more active only recently, after the violence against Hindus by muslim terror groups spiked after 1987, when the Soviet-Afghan war ended & when Pakistan stated supporting insurgency in India. These loosely organized right wing Hindu groups then also started targeting christian missionaries, who in their own zeal to gain more converts started following some unethical means to woo local population like offering them money, printing books denigrating Hindu gods & some times even supporting insurgent groups like in some north eastern states of India.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/south_asia/717775.stm
However, the tensions between Hindus & christians are only intermittent & more importantly people belonging to both religions are smart enough to realize that radical Islam poses a grave threat to both of them. For example, Christian organizations & right wing Hindu groups like VHP, who normally don't see eye to eye over the conversion issue, joined hands to fight together against love jihad.
http://tinyurl.com/25ogla4
I wish to see more cooperation among infidels like this & in stead of fighting over petty religious differences among themselves, they should fight against the greatest threat to us all - Islam!
There is something that Hindu and Sikh and secular Indians here present must point out to their Christian neighbours and work-mates and yes, friends, and to every Christian they happen to meet, over and over and over again: that no matter how many times and with what plausible smiles the Muslims may present themselves to Christians in India as allies against 'Hindus who persecute Muslims and Christians', it must be grimly borne in mind at all times that **Muslims regard Christians as polytheists, just like Hindus!**. Were Muslims to get the upper hand in India, Christians would be wretched downtrodden dhimmi virtual slaves, right alongside the Hindus.
Because of the Christian belief in God-as-Trinity, the Christian belief that the Jewish man Yeshua of Nazareth is the only-begotten Son of God the Father, and because of the Orthodox and Catholic Christian veneration of Mary the Theotokos, the 'Mother of God', **Muslims see Christians as practitioners of shirk, 'assigning partners to allah', which in Muslim eyes is the worst sin of all, far far worse than murder and sedition.
As to that, to help open their eyes, give them the words of a Muslim, as reported by two astute western observers of Islam, Samuel Zwemer and Andre Servier.
In 1920, in the journal "Moslem World," Vol. 10, pp. 154-155), Zwemer wrote:
“Its [Islam's] intolerance and persecuting spirit have been revealed within the past few years, the blood of a million {Armenian Christian} martyrs testifying to the failure of Islam, its absolute failure to understand the words that open every chapter save one of their Sacred Volume: ‘God the Merciful and Compassionate’.
"A few years ago one of the leading Moslems of Baghdad wrote an article for a French journal, entitled, 'The Final Word of Islam to Europe' :
QUOTE - ‘For us in the world there are only believers and unbelievers;
' love, charity, fraternity toward believers;
'contempt, disgust, hatred, and war against unbelievers {point out to Christians that this shows clearly a Muslim's total rejection of the Golden Rule, 'do to others as you would they should do to you ' - dda}
‘Amongst the unbelievers **the most hateful and criminal are those who, while recognizing God, attribute to Him earthly relationship, give Him a son, a mother** {my emphasis - dda}.
‘Learn then, European observers, that a Christian of no matter what position, from the simple fact he is a Christian is in our eyes a blind man fallen from all human dignity.”** {my emphasis - dda}… END QUOTE.
In an article by Andrew Bostom I discovered that the 'French Journal' mentioned by Zwemer was a Parisian Muslim review - Le Mecherouttiete - edited by one Sherif Pasha; that the author was an influential member of the Ottoman Committee of Union and Progress, one Sheik Abd-ul-Hack, a [supposedly] “progressive” Young Turk; and that the article [presumably originally written in French] appeared in August, 1912.
Bostom's article included more choice passages from Abd-ul-Hack's tirade, as reported by Andre Servier in his book 'The Psychology of the Musulman' (I also checked the 1924 English translation of Servier's book, online, myself).
"Understand, you European observers, that a Christian, whatever his position may be, by the mere fact of his being a Christian is regarded by us as a blind man lost to all sense of human dignity. [this paragraph is a handy alternative translation of the passage which Zwemer also cited].
"Our reasoning with regard to him is as simple as it is definitive.
"We say: the man whose judgment is so perverted as to deny the existence of a one and only God, and to make up gods of different sorts, can only be the meanest expression of human degradation;
"to speak to him would be a humiliation for our intelligence and an insult to the grandeur of the Master of the Universe.
"The presence of such miscreants {i.e. Christians - dda} among us is the bane of our existence;
"their doctrine is a direct insult to the purity of our faith;
"contact with them is a defilement of our bodies; any relation with them a torture to our souls." END.
So, my dear Indians here reading or posting: whenever you meet a Christian in your country, give them those hair-raising passages from Abd-ul-Hack and warn them that they ought *not* to let themselves be tricked into making common political cause with the Muslims in anything, for the moment the Muslims gain power, they will persecute Christians as well as Hindus, unmercifully; and the reason for that, is because *Muslims are taught to absolutely despise Christians on account of Christians being POLYTHEISTS*.
Oh, and here's something else, too, from the Hadith, to share with the Christians (and any Jews that you meet). As Mohammed was dying, he pronounced a curse both upon Jews and upon Christians.
Bukhari:V5B59N727 -
"When Allah's Apostle became seriously sick, he started covering his face with a woolen sheet. When he felt short of breath, he removed it, and said, "That is so! Allah's curse be on Jews and Christians".
In Mumbai, the evil Muslim raiders in that Pakistan-sponsored ghazwa raid attacked, tormented and murdered Hindus, secular people, westerners (Christian and secular) and Jews. They killed whatever non-Muslims they could get. And on a number of occasions they carefully distinguished Muslims from non-Muslims, and let the Muslims go, whilst keeping the non-Muslims captive, to be tormented and murdered. (Thus carrying out to the letter Quran surah 48: 29 - "Those who follow him [Muhammad] are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another”.
The anniversary of that attack is only a few months away.
We Infidels have a number of major Jihadist attack anniversaries coming up.
In September, of course, there is the anniversary of Sept 11, and the big SIOA rally against the 9/11 mosque.
That anniversary is closely preceded by the anniversary of the Muslim ghazwa raid upon the Beslan school, and the torture, rape and mass-murder of helpless Russian Christian and secular mothers, fathers and little children.
On October 12th Australians will remember the 88 Australians who were murdered in the jihad bombing of the Sari Nightclub in Bali. in 2002..it is our single biggest loss of citizens to Jihadist mass-murder, as yet... and other countries, whose citizens were also murdered in that attack, will remember likewise.
Then, in November, there is the anniversary of Muslim Pakistan's open act of war against India, the attack on Mumbai.
Each of those dates could be a good time on which we non-Muslim Resisters can organise to perform, not just in the countries whose citizens were murdered, but in other allied non-Muslim countries, commemorations that are not merely acts of mourning, but acts of defiance and cultural celebration, and statements of refusal to submit.
If Indians in *my* home city in Australia were to organise a rally to Remember November Mumbai! Defy the Jihad! Never Surrender! I would be there with bells on. And I would expect any Islamosavvy non-Muslim Australians of Indian extraction to be turning up in force to whatever event is held in Australia to commemorate Bali.
Kepha,
The incident you refer to was a most despicable act by Hindus. The culprit was tried and punished in accordance with Indian laws. No organization of any color came to the support of the killer. Though mind you, the killer was remorseful since he had intended to only burn the vehicle and said he did not know there were people inside.
However, the root cause of the Hindu-Christian conflict is not this incident. The root cause is that Christians associate more easily with the west, and they sneer at the ante-diluvian Hindu culture. If it was limited to expression of contempt sometimes, the antagonism would be so little as not to be worth noting.
However, Indian Christians behave in some ways like jihadi Muslims. They instinctively oppose the progress of India, and they instinctively ally with the most virulent, abusive forces, including jihadi Muslims, to counter Hindu nationalists.
I tried to think what would be Christian point of view against Hindus after finishing the last para. Honestly, I had difficulty understanding it. Their expressed grievances are that Hindus did not allow reservations to Hindu converts to Christianity, which hampered the Christians' proselytising activities.
It could also be that Christians' contributions to Indian society have not been fully appreciated (which are immense) and that Hindus still tend to view Christians as "outsiders".
I was wrong to say that Hindu antagonism towards Christians is fully justified. It is only partly justified but there have been wrong doings on both sides.
The central point is - Hindu Christian antagonism cannot at all be compared with Hindu - Muslim enmity. To name both these in the same breath is to compare a neighborly quarrel over an overhanging tree, with murders of families and abduction of women by one party of the another.
This is a little off topic but some here are debating the role christian missionaries play in India and why Hindus feel strongly about these activities .. click on the link below to watch .. It is part of a 3 video series ..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52Jok2Jzt3s
There have been numerous instances of christian missionaries offering various types of inducements (financial and otherwise) to the poor to get them to convert . This is why there is such a strong reaction to these activities. Christians are welcome to practice their religion but they should also show respect towards other peoples beliefs .
Christian missionaries in India should be trying to convert Muslims. Let them concentrate on the Muslims who, even should they wish to jettison Islam, having realized or had explained to them the intolerable conditions which caused their own ancestors to become Muslims, might find it difficult to wade back into the river of Hinduism which, though a wide and slow-moving and welcoming river, may not offer a guide as to which caste such re-converts should be assigned. Those unhappy with Islam, or who can be made unhappy with Islam if they are properly informed about how Islam stunts mental and moral growth, and thus explains the political, economic, social,intellectual, and moral failures of Muslim states (see Pakistan) might need something without a caste system, and Christianity offers that. The goal: Anything but Islam. This will require much of those missionaries, because Muslims will be a more difficult, and more violent, group to work with than Hindus.
Lucan, thanks for the video, although I didn't watch it because these things piss me off so much.
@Hugh, Christians will never try to convert muslims because such a thing would be injurious to life or limb as one christian professor recently found out. There will be a huge violent backlash by muslims and the politicians will turn a blind eye because muslims form their votebank. It is only the idiotic hindus who are targets for conversion because they are soft and not united. Any attempts by hindus to speak against the rape of their heritage is named as "anti constitutional", "right wing intolerance" etc etc. It has become one big joke.
Hugh,
Apart from the caste system, Hindus are also terrible at seeking converts. For a Muslim who has managed to escape the mental prison of Islam, atheism or Christianity is indeed a better alternative (unless the family has some memory of which kind of Hindus they were before conversion, and even then Hindu mentality is such that most Hindus will have difficulty accepting them back).
However, for Christian missionaries to preach to Muslims in India ! The idea is sure to make Christian baiters in India gloat !
It is like asking a lamb to enter the lion's den !! Christians missionaries have never done it. And they will never do it. Let alone encouraging conversion from Islam, even starting Christian charity work, say a school run by nuns in a Muslim dominated neighborhood will be, as Nishant put it "injurious to life or limb" !!
A practical and workable approach for Christians will be to put in more effort to align with Hindus, especially Hindu nationalists, stop berating Hindu civilization and culture and continue the good work and convert whoever is willing to become a Christian. Even this much will give them enough freedom to operate in India and I think I can fairly represent a majority of Hindu nationalists - none of us will entertain any idea of any kind of political action against them.
Most importantly, such an approach will significantly strengthen the bulwork against Islam in India. Christians, though a tiny minority, are very influential and some the hidden respect that most Hindus have for the British reflects on them also. If they are aligned with Hindus and against Islam, it will add far more strength to the fight against Islam than indicated by numbers.
Sanjay
I quickly scanned some of the comments about Hinduism and Christianity butting heads.
Just quickly wanted to add that only among the Hindus can a Sikh become Prime Minister and an Italian Catholic become head of the ruling party (Sonia Gandhi). You won't find that kind of tolerance easily anywhere else. And also Mother Teresa getting a State funeral, well, thats because of Hindu attitudes and tolerance, had Mother Teresa been in Bangladesh or Pakistan, then we would have seen the real struggle she would have had to face,
As Hugh said, it would be best if the Missionaries began converting the Muslims, but as Nishant pointed out the Missionaries are afraid for their lives and so they pick on Hindus. Not very noble or courageous when you decide to choose the easy pickings.
The missionary ingress into India is VERY LETHAL and has the capability to do irreversible damage to the very fabric of Hindu society. In North East India, where I have spent a lot of time, I have seen how tribal folk who have been part of the Hindu fold for eons are carefully identified, coaxed, induced and converted. The usual tactics are inducements of money and indoctrination on how being of a different racial stock are really "different" from the "main land" Hindus. The next step is separatism. Converts and "witnesses" from two Southern Indian states are mostly responsible for the conversion efforts. ( I have also witnessed how these "witnesses" grovel in front of European missionaries )
So all of you Hindus on this board - stop being politically correct and tell things as they are.
Do not take pride in things such as the ability of an Italian to become the de-facto head of the Indian state (Gorkhali). We have to have no go areas.
Learn from the Europeans/Americans - freedoms of speech, religions, etc are all fine, but some positions/areas are no go if you are not a Christian.
If the Hindu civilization is to be saved, I suggest all Hindus look at current and unfolding threats with equal attention.
If I have offended anybody, my apologies - just as the Islamization of Europe must be prevented, the Hindu nature of India must be preserved.
Hugh, Christian missionaries in India did make efforts to bring Muslims to Christ. Indigenous Indian churches continue to do so. Years ago, Billy Graham's Indian associate was Dr. Abdul Haqq. Guess which religion his grandfather (or was it his father) left? Also, consider people like Patrick Sookhdeo and Bp. Michael Nazir-Ali. You might like to visit the site _Answering Islam_, run by someone named Jochen Katz.
As I've said before, the Holy Spirit of God does appear to be doing a surprising work among Muslims in this day and age. I don't know that much about what's happening with Christian witness to Muslims in India, but I suspect that it goes on.
On a light note: Years ago, an American missionary in India was having an earnest conversation with a Hindu whom he hoped would become a Christian.
"Now, don't you want to go to heaven when you die?" The missionary asked the Hindu.
The Hindu shook his head in polite regret. "Heaven cannot be such a good place," he said thoughtfully. "Otherwise, the British would have grabbed it years ago."
Vicram, agree fully. Hinduism is a religion without any defense, because it has no offense. The concept of conversion does not exist because hindu philosophy and practices are so universal. The hindu organisations which have come up in the last 100 years are a reaction to other aggressive religions in india. I think this is a good thing, because sometimes people understand only the language of fear. Combined with this we also need spiritual organisations to spread, and every hindu must contribute in some way to this cause.
@DDA, Thanks for such unconditional support and acceptance.But I doubt most Indians even know what we are talking of.Such is the state of ignorance and dhimmitude that I see around me here in India.It is slowly,very slowly ,changing;thanks to sites like Jihad watch,FFI.org and Islamwatch.
About Christian missionary work :I feel some Indian Hindus are
replacing Dhimmitude to slam with Dhimmitude to Christianity[this is the perception I get from the comments here]
I have a few christians and muslims among my friends.My relations with them was as an equal ;whether they operated from the same point is moot.One among my friends,a neighbour, decided to do her bit of evangelising amongst us ,in the neighbourhood,that is Hindu with her as an exception. She came home to give a Christian pamphlet which,I knowing what it may contain[I had heard and seen Evangelists spouting their stuff,in our public transport,with utter disregard to how we may feel about it.],politely refused,as she was:1)my neighbour;2) she was elder to me. I had just done the rangoli[a traditional hindu art form] in front of our house when she said that Rangolis are of the devil and should not be done[mind,I was doing this in front of my house,not hers];then she said why are you worshipping plants and animals,referring to the Tulasi and Cows]. That I am living in Darkness and she is being kind and doing me a favour by pointing out these things about my religion.It was then I realised how hindus and their practices were being percieved by others. All others could see is us worshiping our parents,teachers,plants and animals;but they can't and don't understand the idea behind such acts.,that it is more like limiting what cannot be limited so that we can relate to it;that our worship is like a micro level model of something that is HUGE. But that is besides the point.
When an evangelist talks to me about being in the "Dark",he/she does not acknowledge that: a)I am a person who has intelligence to discriminate between the right and the wrong of things[their point is I am wrong because I say that Jesus is one of the many gurus/guides who came to us];because I don't read or follow the bible.
b)That I have a right to my practices just as they do to theirs.[I don't go telling them that they must not have a christmas tree,the palm sunday cross or a 'JesusSaves'sticker on their door].
This is only one instance of how evangelists operate in India.The other ways are of course the much touted 'rice-bag/money' variety,that is more commonly known. They also have even worse ways of luring people to their faith,which is really disgusting.That is the abuse of power ,whether as a counsellor with a client/patient[one friend had gone to him for a post 26/12 Tsunami PTSD counselling was asked to become christian to over come her fear.Another became a christian after her neighbours told her that their was devil in her house causing the marital problems she had ,and that it will become better if she converted.I have heard of instances when children in a 'christian' school are brainwashed with scary stories and asked not to participate in their family festivals and religious functions.[does this go against the institution of Family-asking people to reject their spouses or parents.Is this Christian family value to go against Parents,because of what they were taught in school,the parents were decent god fearing,law abiding people].I also know of College hostels run by 'Christian'Nuns where girls from poor families are targeted with pro Christian and anti-Hindu propaganda,to convert,thereby separating them from their families.
Christian NGOs that run orphanages or schools use such practices to scare children to become christians,and when their parents protest,their wrong doing is hidden and they give a spin that 'Hindu Nationalists'[then are they not nationalists as they are Christians]are targeting their 'good'work.Please read Mrs.Hilda Raja's blog to know more about NGO's such as World Vision.
Hindus could not open new Colleges or schools as easily as those of the 'Minority communities'. About Khandamal,the latest of Hindu-Christian clashes,A Hindu swamiji was killed in his ashram as his operations for the welfare of the people in the region was hampering Christian missionary work.They were trying to replicate what happened in the north east ,in that region of Orissa.The culprits have still not been caught.
So unless there is a spirit of "live and let live ,and let bygones be bygones" ,amongst Christians and Hindus in India,there is no t much hope for either peace nor development in India. Very sorry for the long post,but I thought this needs to be told.
"So unless there is a spirit of "live and let live ,and let bygones be bygones" ,amongst Christians and Hindus in India,there is "not much hope for either peace nor development in India. Very sorry for the long post,but I thought this needs to be told."
It pains me to see such criminal lack of self confidence among Hindus. Conditioning has been quite effective, I can see.
@Nishant - "Combined with this we also need spiritual organisations to spread, and every hindu must contribute in some way to this cause."
I totally agree. On a lighter note - Hindus are pretty tight fisted and it often a crowbar to open up their purses.
"So unless there is a spirit of "live and let live ,and let bygones be bygones" ,amongst Christians and Hindus in India,there is "not much hope for either peace nor development in India. Very sorry for the long post,but I thought this needs to be told."
It pains me to see such criminal lack of self confidence among Hindus. Conditioning has been quite effective, I can see.
@Nishant - "Combined with this we also need spiritual organisations to spread, and every hindu must contribute in some way to this cause."
I totally agree. On a lighter note - Hindus are pretty tight fisted and it often a crowbar to open up their purses.
Hindus are pretty tight fisted and it often a crowbar to open up their purses.
- Damn right about that Vicram, and it is part of the problem, hindu selfishness and apathy. But the word must be spread.
Sita, thanks for telling it.
As a practising Christian myself - who is very well educated in the core Christian texts, and also aware of Christian history, warts and all, on all continents (my most recent reading on the subject being David Bentley Hart's "The Story of Christianity") - I do find it very, very hard to believe the assumption implicit in some of the postings by vehement Indian Hindus, that most or even all Christians of Indian ethnicity and nationality, for example, must be assumed to have joined the Church *only* because they were the helpless victims of 1. trickery and/ or 2. bribery and/ or 3. threats, and that most or even *all* Christians, whether Indian or Western or Chinese or African or anything else, who attempt to 'show and tell' their faith whether in another country (be it India or anywhere else) or in their own, to persons of another belief-system, are ipso facto committing 'violence' and are evil charlatans practising 1. bribery and/ or 2. threats/ violence and/ or 3. lies/ trickery/ manipulation. Or that acts of Christian charity, wherever and whenever performed, are merely some kind of trick - manipulative attempts to control and brainwash people, rather than sincere, if imperfect, attempts to follow the example of Christ, display the beauty of the form of Christ, and exhibit the reality of what Christians call 'the kingdom of God'.
I would be curious to know precisely *how* some of our Indian posters interpret the concept of 'freedom of religion' or 'freedom of conscience'; or whether they think there should be a flat ban upon *anyone's* being permitted to change his or her religion. Sure, some people change religion for the 'wrong' reasons; but some change religion because they become sincerely interested in a different religion, and decide to change, of their own free will. Europeans of Christian background have become Buddhists, and Buddhists of Chinese background have become Christians; should such changes be forbidden? Or only permitted in one direction? Should people in India be absolutely forbidden to change their religion (because they can't be trusted to do the 'right' thing and remain Hindu)? And if they nevertheless insist on changing, should they be punished for it, or 're-educated', or *forced* to return to their religion of origin? And what if, no matter what is done to them by way of punishment for becoming Christian, some of them, even if it's only a few, simply...refuse to change back?
What if you discover that someone has decided to become a Christian without any contact with Christians at all, simply from reading a Hindi translation of the Bible?
What do you do with that person, if they insist they have neither been bribed, nor tricked, nor forced? And if they refuse to leave their new faith, even on pain of death? What will you do, if the person says, 'I will not renounce Christ'. If you beat the person, and imprison him or her, and he still says: 'I cannot renounce Christ? I *cannot* regard him as merely a human teacher, or as one among a thousand avatars. He is unique, my only Lord." What do you do then? Is it even possible to imagine that someone might choose freely, and stick to their choice? Or have you so convinced yourselves that *no-one* could ever choose christianity of free will and intelligent conviction, that you must classify all converts to Christianity either as fools and victims of evil, or as evil traitors worthy of death?
Pursuant to my posting above.
Nothing I have said there alters the fact that if, say, I had to choose between living in India and living in China, I would choose India; and that, speaking as an Australian, of the two regional powers I regard India as a preferable ally against the global Jihad, because although China also is non-Muslim I *do not trust* and *do not like* the post-maoist dictators who currently run China.
In any case: may the Jihad be defeated on every front!
Good luck and a blessing on those Indians who have the task of confronting a larger Muslim Fifth Column than any nation in the West is as yet afflicted with.
The sections describing what Muslims did in India, that are included in Bostom's Legacy of Jihad anthology, made horrifying reading. I could only manage them in small sections at a time.
It makes me feel physically ill when I hear someone like Azam Tariq plotting to conquer and enslave India, all over again.
DDA, I expected this. Typical christian questions. The problem is that there is no way to answer your questions without saying things that Christians will not want to accept. A philosophical discussion with christians is impossible, because christians base their arguments on dogma, and non verifiable beliefs. And that is combined with a complete lack of knowledge of any other type of spiritual tradition, philosophy or religious thought. However I will still try.
1) What if someone decides to become a christian on his own and insists that Christ is his "True" lord? Well no problem at all, because the number of such people would be miniscule if not for the activities of the churches. Especially because hinduism accepts all spiritual paths. Plenty of hindus go to churches and even keep photos of christ/mary in their puja rooms along with other dieties. My uncle keeps a photo of the Virgin in his wallet and he believes it protects him, but he is hindu through and through. Many bengali hindu families have a tradition of baking a cake on christmas, and even now, my 80 year old grandmother wants to know why we haven't baked a cake on that day (if we haven't).
2) You speak about the example of christ, the beauty of christ and the kingdom of god. The problem is that christianity believes that divinity is expressed and is accessible only through christ. The eastern religions do not hold such narrow views. Divinity can be received by anyone in the world without aligning himself with any organised religion. It depends on the purity of heart, and spiritual effort, and has no relation to the "forms" that one focuses devotion upon, or the type of worship one does. The Absolute does not make childish demands for only one type of worship. India has very sophisticated and comprehensive spiritual traditions, not just limited to hindus, which most christians would know nothing about. The funniest thing is christians think only they know spirituality. Christianity works, yes, but so do a million other things about which they have no clue.
3) What we mean by freedom of religion? What I described above. We have always had it. But when someone thinks he/she alone is following the right path and all others are wrong and need to change their ways, then that person starts to work AGAINST the freedom of religion. That is the problem with Abrahamic religions.
4) Hinduism is naturally tolerant, because we accept the validity of all spiritual paths. There would have been no problem with christians if they would mind their own business and practice their faith. Ask the Parsis. But when you go about trying to convert the very people who tolerate you, then you take tolerance for granted.
I will not go too much into the spiritual and philosophical side of hinduism. That is too vast.
Is it clear why christianity "as it exists today" is offensive and repulsive to us? Gandhi is supposed to have said "I love your Christ, but hate christians". We fully believe that Jesus christ did not intend such a religion.
DDA :"What if you discover that someone has decided to become a Christian without any contact with Christians at all, simply from reading a Hindi translation of the Bible?"
DDA ,I was not talking about those people who chose to be Christians after being exposed to it.I am talking about those 'Christians' who use manipulation of the sort I have mentioned,those in power who misuse their power to get converts for the sake of numbers,and then use those numbers to promote divisiveness in society and the community.
Is that right or even 'Christian'?
I am talking of those who mock and disparage someone just because he/she is not a Christian.Is that the unconditional Love that Jesus was supposed to have propagated.
I am sorry that you have misunderstood what I have written.I do have still many other Christian friends[of all denominations] who do not subscribe with the views of this particular friend[yes,she is still my friend,her grand daughter and my son had enjoyed a lot of time playing together,and her Daughter in law was an even closer friend of mine ,but she does not subscribe to her mother-in-laws views; in fact she has said that her mother-in-law scares her, too, constantly with her rigid views.[we do not live in the same area anymore,hence lost touch]
Also it was by talking and discussing with my other christian friends that I was able to get over the pain of being abused,which was what had happened,in the name of evangelising.Also, in the wrong place and with people of a different temperament, it would have become a very ugly situation, spoiling the amity that existed in the neighbourhood, amongst people of different languages and religions[yes there were a few muslims and more christians down the street. That was what I meant about "live and let live' and letting bygones...etc..
As a student of sociology myself, I was able to see how a simple individual problem could lead to the communal tension that people hear about so much in India,and in the end only the Hindus get blamed.
There are instances of children coming home and telling parents,that they are worshipping the devil,.. come on,is that all you can see? When a child who studies in a christian school attends the church/chapel service so her teacher will notice her,and makes her parents to take her there,then it is scary .That there are Dhimmi parents who will not take a stand for themselves,out of politeness/a fear of being politically incorrect/or getting on the wrong side of the superior, is pathetic and frustrating. Even regular,normal,Christians[I mean people like you]support us in such situations.For example in Christian Colleges in India that take government aid,they have to fill a certain [major]percentage with students from their religion.The other community students are to compete for the left over seats.While a Christian with even 60% could get admitted for any course she chooses,a non Christian has to get above 90% for the same.This type of anomaly in educational expectations are noticed by Christians themselves.Even Christians themselves speak out against such manipulative behaviour by others in their name,but our political & media bosses chose to not hear them for the sake of political and business expediency.
dumbledoresarmy, Christians are fine people and Hindus have no problems at all. All the Hindus want to do is preserve their culture and beliefs. Our culture and beliefs have existed thousands of years before Christ walked the earth. The souls of thousands of our generations have gone back to God without knowing Christ. I am sure my soul will mix with Brahma, without me having to know Christ. And it will be the same for the next thousands of generations.
In the light of this, I can not fathom the Christian need to proselytize. The Christian belief that souls can be saved only through Christ actually leads to disruptions and conflicts in other societies where Christianity is not a native belief. Instead of participating in disrupting communities - why not just be a good Christian and help people without feeling the need to proselytize.
Having said that - I do not not find fault with what is happening in Indonesia - right or wrong, they have a right to prevent blatant proselytizing. How can a "native" counter the power of money that the missionary brings ? On the other hand, I was equally disgusted at the very thought of the Mega Mosque coming up in Ground Zero.
Cultural sensitivity is for all, not just for Americans or Christians.
Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Article 19.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."
Well, we know that in dar al Islam both of these articles are regularly and continually violated, in that all non-Muslims are severely restricted in their religious practice and forbidden to invite Muslims to join their faith, whilst Muslims employ all imaginable means to induce non-Muslims to become Muslims; while any questioning or criticism, let alone lighthearted or serious mockery of anything to do with Islam, can lead to the death of the Muslim or non-Muslim dissenter (not only in Muslim lands; see Theo Van Gogh) and we know that anyone who tries to leave Islam, for another faith or no faith, is liable to be killed.
But I do wonder, sometimes, in light of the remarks sometimes made about Christians by some Hindu posters here, whether those posters would not, if they could, impose (even, at times, by the use of physical violence) upon Christians in India - whether native-born or foreign, whether new converts or descended from generations of believers - a raft of restrictions strongly resembling the restrictions placed upon non-Muslims (of whatever religion) by Muslims in Muslim lands.
After all, one person in this thread seemed to think that Muslims in Indonesia were fully justified in violently attacking Christians in Indonesia. On the grounds that 'blatant proselytizing' (for Christianity) ought to be stopped wherever those nasty Christians try to do it (though I did not get the impression that the Christians who were attacked, were in fact engaging in any kind of unethical or aggressive activities). Query: even if the Christians concerned are native Indonesians, peacefully attempting to persuade Muslims to leave the murderous Religion of Blood and War, would our Indian poster believe it to be entirely just if Muslim jihadists slaughtered all the Christians?
DDA, I was quite sure you would not get the point, and I was right.
The next time, don't quote laws, declarations and constitutions. These are the last refuge of those who are morally deficient and blind.
QUOTE: whilst Muslims employ all imaginable means to induce non-Muslims to become Muslims; UNQUOTE
You seem to have great objection to this, while christians do pretty much the same thing, including killing people. You object to it even though the UDHR which you have quoted supports it. I'm quite sure you still don't see the hypocricy.
You haven't been reading what people have been writing so there is no point trying to explain further. Supremacists cannot be changed I guess, however, no one cries when get what they deserve.
"Query: even if the Christians concerned are native Indonesians, peacefully attempting to persuade Muslims to leave the murderous Religion of Blood and War, would our Indian poster believe it to be entirely just if Muslim jihadists slaughtered all the Christians? "
I APOLOGIZE TO YOU IF MY COMMENTS INDICATED I WAS ADVOCATING VIOLENCE, I WAS NOT.
If people join Christianity by a process of discovery, it is ABSOLUTELY fair. But the rate at which conversions are happening point to inducements, the patterns of which I have pointed out before. I want to preserve my culture and identity and I have a set of resources to work with. The missionaries on the other hand have resources which overwhelm my resources. How do I level the playing field ? PLEASE, I AM BY NO MEANS ADVOCATING ANY VIOLENCE.
I do not have much love for Islamic ideology myself, but let not the kettle call the pot black, Christians/Christian nations have been pretty murderous and brutal until recently - Nazis, Atomic bombs on Japan, not to mention being covetous of other nations' wealth ( breaks the Bible's primary directive ).
You must simply gain control over your primordial urge to proselytize - it is just another form of Jihad. The differences in the environments explains why Mohammad's ways to get people into Islam was violent, whereas Jesus had a more coaxing "by education" approach. To all non-Semites, the approach is different, but the aim is the same.
As I have said before, righteous humans have existed before Christ walked the Earth - so why is it that Christians feel that theirs is the only way the soul can be saved or even why they or their nations are the most righteous on Earth ? Be happy in your faith, let people follow their faiths, if people change their faith to your faith, well and good, but just because you believe you are doing God's work does not give you the right to impact other cultures. You will find peace will prevail.
I hope you do notice that ALL conflicts in the world currently IS a clash between/with Semitic religions - all of whom insist that theirs is the only way to redemption - or fell they have an entitlement to righteousness. This is very unlike Hindu/Buddhist/Sikh philosophy - which talk about many ways to God and the One God.
Let me ask you - would you allow unabated immigration of Asians into your nation ( on the pretext of being an open society ) to the point that the political power tips away from your favour ? I guess not.
I have read much about what the Lebanese Muslims are doing in Australia - what if that repeats in all of Australia ? Or what if they increase to such numbers that they demand independence from Australia - just as Southern Sudan wants to secede from Sudan. There we no Christians in that part of the world before missionaries arrived. Would Australians be ok with Muttahida-Emirate-el-Lebalia 100 years from now ?
I suggest you all visit http://www.conversionwatch.org and you will see what kind of a fight Hindus have on their hands.