ઇસ્લામમાં Aurat યોનિ થાય છે. અથવા pussy


I

In Pakistan, india and Bangldesh
Aurat means Vagina or Pussy.
SOME TIMES ; By. Santosh Bhatt

Islam નો મહિલાઓ જાતીય માણસોhu તરીકે જોવામાં આવે છે. તેમના શરીરના દરેક ભાગમાં શૃંગારિક માનવામાં આવે છે. તેના પ્રત્યેક ચોરસ ઇંચ, જાતીય છે. તેના સમગ્ર શરીર ખાનગી ભાગો હોવાનું માનવામાં આવે છે કારણ કે તે, હેડ માંથી ટો કવર જ જોઈએ.
પાકિસ્તાન, સ્ત્રીઓ awra કહેવામાં આવે છે. Awra અથવા aurat આવરી લેવામાં આવે છે કે શરીરના ભાગ છે. જો Awra ખુલ્લુ પાડવું ઇસ્લામમાં ગેરકાનૂની છે અને પાપ તરીકે ગણવામાં આવે છે. વ્યુત્પત્તિશાસ્ત્રની રીતે, શબ્દ Awra “defectiveness”, “અપૂર્ણતા”, “ડાઘ” અથવા “નબળાઇ” થાય છે જે રુટ ‘awr પરથી આવ્યો છે – જો કે સૌથી સામાન્ય ઇંગલિશ અનુવાદ “નગ્નતા” છે.

ઇરાન ઇસ્લામિક શાસન સ્ત્રીઓ zaifeh કહે છે. તે માટે સ્ત્રીની છે “નબળા.” ગુપ્ત માં ખામી છે મુહમ્મદ સ્ત્રીઓ અનુસાર ત્યારથી આ પણ માનસિક નબળાઇ સૂચિત. ઇસ્લામમાં સ્ત્રી પરિસ્થિતિ ઉપર આ રકમનું. તમે આ કરતાં વધુ સ્પષ્ટ હોઈ શકે નહિં.
સ્ત્રીઓ નબળા, ખામીયુક્ત અને ખાનગી ભાગ છે, તેઓ પુરુષો સાથે હોઇ શકે છે કે જે કોઈપણ સંપર્ક તરીકે જોવામાં આવે છે કે સમાજમાં જાતીય અને ગેરકાનૂની ગણવામાં આવે છે.

મુસ્લિમ દેશોમાં મહિલાઓ અલગ છે. ખૂબ જ બાળપણ છોકરાઓ અને છોકરીઓ સિવાય રાખવામાં આવે છે. તેઓ એકબીજા સાથે રમવા નથી, એકબીજા સાથે શાળાએ નથી.
એક મુસ્લિમ મહિલા સમગ્ર શરીર ખાનગી ભાગ છે. તમે તેની સાથે હાથ મિલાવવા હોય તો તેથી તે તેના ડાળી કે શાખાઓ વચ્ચેનો ખૂણો સ્પર્શ તરીકે જ છે. તે તેના વાળ દર્શાવે છે, તો તે તેના pubic વાળ જાહેર થયેલ છે. તેના બધું જાતીય અને ખાનગી ભાગ છે.

ઇસ્લામ સ્ત્રીઓ તેમના પુરૂષ સંબંધીઓ ના namoos (ناموس) છે. Namoos આશરે સન્માન, પરંતુ તેને એક લૈંગિક સૂચિતાર્થ સાથે ભાષાંતર કરી શકો છો. Prying આંખો માંથી તેમના માદા કિન રક્ષણ પર મુસ્લિમ ટકી આ namoos.

એક મહિલા તેની સુંદરતા અથવા અજાણી વ્યક્તિ માણસ માટે મંત્રણા દર્શાવે છે, તો બધા તેના પુરુષ સંબંધીઓ ના namoos ઘાયલ થયેલ છે. ઇજાગ્રસ્ત namoos રિડીમ કરવા માટે આ એકમાત્ર રસ્તો લોહી સાથે ડાઘ ધોવા માટે છે.

પિતૃપ્રધાન સમાજ સ્વ અવમૂલ્યન અર્થમાં સાથે પુરૂષો પેદા કરે છે. તેથી, જ્યારે મુસ્લિમ માણસ “સન્માન,” તેમણે કાબૂમાં રાખવું હેઠળ તેમના આશ્રિતો સ્ત્રી રાખી શકો છો કેવી રીતે લગભગ સંપૂર્ણપણે આધાર રાખે છે.

તેમણે અનુભવતું છે કે કરવું નિષ્ફળ કરીશું. કુલ દરેકને તેમને વિશે વાત અને તેની પીઠ પાછળ તેમને હસવું આવશે કે જાણે છે.

કુલ કરવામાં આવ્યું છે જે મહિલા હત્યા “defiled.” ઇસ્લામિક સોસાયટી, જેમ કે એક માણસ પર નીચે જોવા નથી, પરંતુ તેમણે ghairat (ગૌરવ, સન્માન, અર્થમાં) હોવા તરીકે lionized છે તેના દ્વારા namoos પુનઃસ્થાપિત કરી શકો છો.

પ્રશ્ન આ ગાંડપણ અટકાવવા માટે કેવી રીતે છે. હવે અમે આ સમસ્યા રુટ કારણ ખબર કે જવાબ સ્પષ્ટ છે. આ સમસ્યા ઇસ્લામિક misogyny છે.

અમે ગુપ્ત માં ખામી નબળી અને આવરાયેલ છે કે ખામીયુક્ત વસ્તુ તેની સ્ત્રીઓ વર્તે છે કે સમાજ પાસેથી વધુ અપેક્ષા રાખી શકો નહીં. સ્ત્રીઓ dehumanized છે અને sexualized સન્માન હત્યાનો પરિણામ છે. જ્યાં

ઇસ્લામમાં, એક છોકરી માટે પરિપક્વતા વર્ષની 9 વર્ષ છે અને એક બોય માટે 15 વર્ષ છે. આ એક 9 વર્ષના છોકરી અને 15 વર્ષના છોકરો પરિપક્વતા સમાન સ્તર ધરાવે છે માનવામાં આવે છે કે થાય છે.

હવે, જો છોકરી છ વર્ષ અગાઉ બોય કરતાં પરિપક્વતા પહોંચે, પછી શા માટે સ્ત્રીઓ ચાર્જ હતી ભગવાન સ્થળ પુરુષો? માતાનો ભગવાન જજમેન્ટ સાથે કંઇક ખોટું હતું?

સન્માન હત્યાનો ઇસ્લામિક દેશોમાં અસર માત્ર સમસ્યા નથી. સરમુખત્યારશાહી, હિંસા, આતંકવાદ, ગરીબી, માનવ અધિકારના દુરુપયોગની, અને મુસ્લિમ દેશોમાં સ્થાનિક છે કે અન્ય સમસ્યાઓ એક યજમાન બધા ઇસ્લામ ઉપદેશો કારણે થાય છે.

મુસ્લિમો ઓનર પોતાના પુત્રીઓ અથવા હત્યાનો ભયાનક કૃત્ય છે જે બહેનો ઓફ કિલીંગ નથી, અમુક એક તમારા પોતાના પરિવારના સભ્યો કિલીંગ માં ઓનર છે તે મને સમજાવો કૃપા કરીને?
કુરાન likens કુલ વિલ્સ તરીકે એક માણસ દ્વારા ઉપયોગમાં લેવા માટે એક ક્ષેત્ર (ખેડ) માટે એક મહિલા,: “તમારા સ્ત્રીઓ યે ચાલશે જેથી તમારા ખેડ પર જાઓ તમારા માટે ખેડ (કેળવવા માટે છે)” (2:223) .

કુરાન પણ એક મહિલા જુબાની કે એક માણસ વર્થ અડધા છે કે જાહેર: “તમારા પોતાના માણસો, બે સાક્ષીઓ મેળવો અને યે પસંદ જેમ કે પછી બે માણસો એક માણસ અને બે મહિલાઓ,, માટે ત્યાં ન હોય તો તેમને એક errs જો સાક્ષીઓ, અન્ય તેના “(2:282) યાદ કરી શકીએ.

તે પુરુષો ચાર પત્નીઓ સુધી લગ્ન કરવા માટે પરવાનગી આપે છે, અને એ પણ ગુલામ કન્યાઓ સાથે સંભોગ છે: યે યે અનાથ સાથે justly વ્યવહાર સમક્ષ રજુ કરવાનો પ્રયત્ન રહેશે ડર છે કે “જો, તમારી પસંદગી, બે અથવા ત્રણ અથવા ચાર મહિલા સાથે લગ્ન, પરંતુ જો યે યે (તેમને સાથે) justly વ્યવહાર માટે સમર્થ નથી રહેશે કે ભય, તો પછી માત્ર એક, અથવા (એક કેપ્ટિવ) તમારા જમણા હાથ ધરાવે છે, કે જે અન્યાય “(4:3) કરવાથી તમે રોકવા માટે વધુ યોગ્ય રહેશે.

જો તે પુત્ર માતાનો વારસો પુત્રી કે બે વખત માપ પ્રયત્ન કરીશું કે જે નિયમો: “અલ્લાહ (આમ) તમે તમારા બાળકો (વારસા) ગણાવે દિશામાન: પુરુષ માટે, બે સ્ત્રીઓ કે બરાબર એક ભાગ” (4:11) .

બધા વરવા છે, મુસલમાનોનો મુખ્ય ધર્મગ્રંથ તેમના અવગણના કરનારું પત્નીઓ હરાવ્યું પતિના કહે છે: “તેઓ (સ્ત્રીઓ આધાર માટે) તેમની મિલકત ખર્ચ કારણ કે અલ્લાહ એક્સેલ તેમને એક અન્ય સામગ્રી, અને આ બધુ મેળવી આપ્યું છે કારણ કે પુરૂષો, સ્ત્રીઓ ચાર્જ છે. તેથી સારા સ્ત્રીઓ અલ્લાહ સાવચેતીભર્યું આપ્યું છે કે જે ગુપ્ત માં રક્ષણ માટે, આજ્ઞાકારી હોય છે. યે બળવો ડર જેમને તે માટે, તેમને સમજાવવું અને અલગ પથારી તેમને દેશનિકાલ કરવું, અને શાપ તેમને “(4:34).

તે ઇસ્લામિક છૂટાછેડા કાર્યવાહી (65:4) “હજુ સુધી માસિક ધર્મમાં ન હોય તેવા લોકો માટે લાગુ પડશે કે” નક્કી, પૂર્વ તરુણ કન્યાઓ માટે લગ્ન માટે પરવાનગી આપે છે.

મુસ્લિમ શિક્ષણ અથવા સિદ્ધિઓ પર ગર્વ ન લો અને વિજ્ઞાન શ્રેષ્ઠતા હાંસલ કરવાની પરંતુ તેમના ગૌરવ બદલે બે કાન વચ્ચે તેમના પોતાના માદા સભ્યો બે પગ વચ્ચે છે .. વલણવાળું ..
ત્યાં આ બધા સમસ્યાઓ માટે એક સ્પષ્ટ ઉકેલ છે, પરંતુ તે કહે રાજકીય ખોટો છે. આ સમસ્યા Islam નો છે, અને ઉકેલ તે છુટકારો મેળવવા માટે છે. આ વિશ્વાસ વિશે સત્ય કહેવાની અને ખ્રિસ્તી અને અન્ય તમામ ધર્મો ટીકા કરવામાં આવી છે કે આ જ રીતે ટીકા જરૂરી છે.

જોકે, Moslims પૃથ્વી પર દરેક અન્ય વિશ્વાસ ટીકા, પરંતુ ઇસ્લામ અને મોહમ્મદ કાર્ય ટીકા કોઈ કોઈ મોટી છે તે માટે યોગ્ય છે. સ્ત્રી હોઈ બને જે સાથી નાગરિક સાથે જ બસ પર જુલમ નિષિદ્ધ છે.,

અને હાથ મિલાવવા અથવા આંખ સંપર્ક નથી. સ્ત્રીઓ સાથે કોઇ સંપર્ક જે માત્ર તેમને પાપ અને તેણે બળાત્કાર કરી શકે છે કારણ નહીં હોય, પણ તેના પુરુષ સંબંધીઓ ભંગ કરશે, લૈંગિક આ મેલું Moslim પુરૂષો પેદા કરી શકે છે.
કુરાન (4:34) પુરુષો સ્ત્રીઓ ચાર્જ છે કહે છે. આ જ શ્લોક “સારો સ્ત્રીઓ અલ્લાહ સાવચેતીભર્યું આપ્યું છે કે જે ગુપ્ત માં રક્ષણ માટે, આજ્ઞાકારી હોય છે.” કહે છે

આ ગુપ્ત તેમના awra છે. ઇસ્લામમાં મહિલા આખા શરીરને જાતીય ગણવામાં આવે છે, કારણ કે તેઓ તેમના શરીરના દરેક ભાગ આવરે છે અને અજાણી વ્યક્તિ પુરુષો સાથે સંપર્ક ટાળવા જ જોઈએ. શ્લોક 24:31 સ્ત્રીઓ માને છે, તેમના ત્રાટકશક્તિ ઓછી સામાન્ય હોઈ શકે છે અને તેઓ તેમના bosoms પર તેમના veils ડ્રો અને અજાણ્યાની માટે તેમની સુંદરતા દર્શાવવા જોઈએ નહિં જ જોઈએ છે.
પશ્ચિમમાં, એક મહિલા તેની સાથે ડાન્સ પણ ગાલ પર તેના ચુંબન અને લૈંગિક ગણવામાં આવે છે કે જે કંઈ સાથે હાથ મિલાવવા કરી શકો છો.
ઇસ્લામમાં Aurat યોનિ થાય છે.

Islamic Jihad returns to India


Islamic Jihad returns to India
2012, Sept. 8th.
Source: Hindu voice.

In my last editorial I mentioned, ‘what about Indian Muslims who, at the drop of a hat, come on the streets shouting ‘Islam is in danger’?’.

The editorial also mentioned how genuinely enlightened Muslims from Arab countries such as Bahrain, Iran, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey and United Arab Emirates are travelling to Prasanthi Nilayam in Puttaparthi, Andhra Pradesh, India to sing and worship in an Ashram and to share in the peace, tolerance and happiness in the Samadhi [Ed. “higher consciousness] of Satya Sai Baba [Ed. An Indian guru, spiritual figure, mystic, philanthropist and educator], none of which is available in Islam.

To prove me right, Muslims in Mumbai came on the street (in Azad Maidan) on 11th August 2012 by way of a ‘peaceful rally’ in support of Muslims being allegedly attacked in our own Assam and also in another country, Myanmar.

As provocative speeches were in progress, a section of the crowd became “incited” and rioted.
Rioting Muslims molested lady police staff, snatched away weapons from policemen, burnt many vehicles, attacked and injured 45 policemen and set on fire a police van and a few OB vans.

Many cameras of Press persons were snatched and smashed. Many reporters were thrashed. The mob unsuccessfully tried to throw a senior reporter of a daily into a burning vehicle. Many shops in the sub-way were set on fire.

Even female office workers were not spared molestation.

The rioting mob did not spare even the ‘Amar Jawan’ Stambh [Ed. Memorial to Indian Soldiers fallen in battle] in front of the main office of Mumbai Municipal Corporation. It is a memorial for those who sacrificed their life in the freedom battles. Rioting Muslims completely demolished the memorial.

Can you imagine a ‘peaceful’ rioter vandalising the memorial for our Jawans? [Ed. Lit. “young men”, here referring to (young) soldiers.]

Even if there is an iota of nationalism in him he could not have touched it. Far from revering the memorial for our Jawans, these Muslim rioters had the gall to destroy it.

If they are not Jihadis, what are they?

It is reported that Muslims from Kurla (a suburb of Mumbai) boarded trains for CST armed with lathis, iron rods, swords and petrol. They alighted at CST, a distance of about 18 Kms, and indulged in these heinous acts of violence. Inspite of prior information, the police did not stop them on the way.

Were the police prevented from doing so, by the Congress govt.?

If Hindus or any Hindu organisation had created such a riot (which is unimaginable), the Congress Govt. would have riddled their bodies with bullets.

Leaders of all ‘secular’ parties would have pounced on the organisation demanding its ban.

The Govt. would have shown it as a proof of ‘Saffron Terror’.

Will they term the 11 August riots in Mumbai by Muslims as ‘Green Terror’?

They wouldn’t, because it is against their secular Dharma. And Vote bank dirty Politics.

The Mumbai riots by Muslims was the outcome of the over-appeasement of minorities and also the Congress policy of ‘Muslims should not be hurt’.

The Raza Academy which called for this ‘peaceful’ protest did not utter a single word when nearly four hundred thousand Hindus were driven out of Kashmir by Jihadis.

The persecution of Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh does not register with them. Sunni Muslims wantonly killing Shia Muslims in Pakistan and Iraq does not bother them.

They close their eyes when the Taliban behead innocent Muslims in Afghanistan.

Now their hearts bleed for Myanmar Muslims who have been refused asylum even by Bangladesh, a Muslim country.

In the month of August 2012, we saw two agitations – one being held by Baba Ramdev in Delhi, against corruption and black money and the present one under discussion being held by Raza Academy.

In the former, we could see patriotic fervour. Their protest was only against the misrule of the UPA Govt.

Every one was carrying a national flag. The protesters were peaceful and orderly. No public property was damaged.

In the latter, we could see only anti-patriotism. No one carried the national flag. On the contrary, photographs show that there was at least one Pakistani flag.

This demonstration took place in the month of Ramzan, when Muslims were supposed to observe restraint.

But while Ministers and Political Leaders were enjoying “Iftar” parties [Ed. Daily sunset parties at which Muslims celebrate being able to eat again], Muslims assembled at Azad Maidan for a ‘peaceful’ demonstration, started a riot profaning the “sanctity” of the month.

What has happened in Assam is a fight for the survival of the indiginous Hindus.

Muslims in Assam and Bangladeshi infiltrators have joined hands to eliminate local Bodos, who are Hindus.

It is idiocy to describe it as an “ethnic clash” or a “clash between nationalists and anti-nationalists”.

It is Islamic jihad.

Muslims – whether from India, Pakistan or Bangladesh – consider themselves as one Community. Islam does not recognise national boundaries.

It does not believe in nationalism.

Islam wants to establish its rule over the entire world.

Muslims are acting according to this Islamic dictum.

What has happened in Assam was waiting to happen. In fact, this may be repeated in many parts of India as illegal Bangladeshi Muslims have settled all over India, with the help of local Muslim organisations. Otherwise, how do one explain the fact that many families of Rohingya Muslims from Myanmar have reached Delhi, Hyderabad, etc.?

Are they not infiltrators? Illegal Alien?

Who is giving them asylum?

And how are they being sustained?

Compare this with how the Govt. treats Hindus from Pakistan who refuse to go back in fear of their lives.

Looking at what has happened in Assam and the support given by Muslims in Mumbai, Pune, Bangalore, Lucknow, Ranchi, Bareilly, Sirohi, etc. one can certainly be sure that Jihad has arrived in India.

This has been seen in various parts of the world at various times in history.

This is primarily the consequence of a mixture of Islamic theology and its history.
Unless we have genuine and uncompromising political and military will (which the UPA Govt. does not), this Jihad is likely to be replicated in other parts of India too in the near future.

Posted by FFI Editor

How to debate with Muslim or Moslim?


DEBATING ABOUT ISLAM – PART 1
Once you know something about Islam and try to talk to others, you may find yourself in a debate. Here are some of the “standards”.

CAN YOU READ ARABIC?Â
Everyone from Muslims to atheists uses this. The implication is that Arabic is a unique language that can’t be translated and therefore, how could you know what you are talking about? First, the Koran claims to be a universal message for all humanity for all times. If the message is universal, then it must be able to be understood by all. If the message cannot be understood by everybody, then by definition it is not universal. So, which is it?

Another thing to consider is that over half of the Koran is about kafirs and politics. Do you really think that a political message about a kafir cannot be understood by the kafir? If so, what is that message that cannot be understood?

It must be made clear which Arabic is being spoken about. The Arabic of the Koran is classical Arabic which is about as similar to modern Arabic as the English of Chaucer and Beowulf is similar to modern English. Said in another way, not even a modern Arab can read classical Arabic. It is estimated that fewer than a thousand scholars who read classical Arabic can compose a paragraph on a random topic.

And what about the nearly billion Muslims who don’t even understand modern Arabic? If it is necessary to understand classical Arabic to understand what the Koran is about, then how can those billion non-Arabic-speaking Muslims understand the Koran? And if they cannot understand the Koran how can they be Muslims?

Ask the person who presents the argument if they have any opinions about the doctrine of Christianity. Then ask them if they read Hebrew, Aramaic or Biblical Greek? If they do not read those languages how can they form an opinion about something they have to read in translation? Of course they can read it and form an opinion, the same way we can read and understand the Koran.

A secondary question is why would anyone want to believe that the Koran couldn’t be understood? What is the purpose of believing that out of all the books in the world, why would there be one that cannot be translated?

The Koran is only 18% of the total doctrine. Would the questioner believe that the other 82% of the doctrine not be understood as well?

WELL, THE CHRISTIANS DID…Â
This response usually comes after some grim facts are given about Islam. This is probably the most common response from non-Christians. The best response is to ask if they have a reason that they don’t want to talk about Islam, since they want to change the subject. The average person knows next to nothing about Islam and sometimes this gambit is merely a way to steer the conversation into a familiar ground.

They are just trying to prove that Islam is not any worse than Christianity. At this point, welcome the chance to compare the two. Choose the ground of comparison. The best place to start is the founders. Compare Mohammed to Christ. The other good comparison is in ethics. Compare Islam’s dualistic ethics to unitary Golden Rule ethics.

Another version of this is that the person will compare some failed Christian to a “good” Muslim they know at work. It is fairly useless to do personal comparisons. How do you choose which Muslim out of 1.5 billion Muslims and which Christian do you choose out of a couple billion Christians?

A variation on the “Well, the Christians did …” is “What about the Crusades”? This is the time to say you welcome a comparison of the Crusades to jihad. Start with the question of why the Crusades were needed. Islamic jihad caused the invasion of the Middle East. The Crusades were a response to a cry for help by the tortured and oppressed Christians in their native land. Did the Christians do some very wrong things? Yes, but notice that the Crusades have been over nearly a thousand years. Jihad is active today. And while we are at it, why do academic libraries have many books on the Crusades, which lasted only 200 years, and so few on jihad, which has lasted 1400 years? The West has analyzed the Crusades forever and has never analyzed jihad.

I KNOW THIS MUSLIM AND HE SAYS…
Why is the Muslim your friend knows the only Muslim out of 1.5 billion that makes him the expert on Islam? Remember, the average Muslim knows very little about the doctrine of Islam. Why? Because, historically the imams have acted as the high priests of Islam and they have never made the doctrine simple to understand. That is one way they keep their prestige and power.

But once you know something about the doctrine, you can say that you know also know a Muslim, and his name is Mohammed, and what you say comes from the Sunna. In short, your Muslim, Mohammed, can beat your friend’s Muslim on any issue of doctrine. If the Muslim your friend knows says something about Islam that agrees with Mohammed, then it is right. If what he says contradicts Mohammed, then he is wrong. So this Muslim your friend knows is either wrong or redundant, but never more right than Mohammed.

I KNOW THIS MUSLIM AND HE IS A NICE MAN
Probably so. What does that prove about Islam? He may follow the Golden Rule and not Islam. That is, he may be a poor Muslim and a good person.

Now is the time to explain about the Islam of Mecca and the Islam of Medina and which one is the more powerful. It is also time to explain about dualism and how Islam always has two faces.

Stay with doctrine and history of Islam, never get personal and talk about an individual Muslim. Actually, there is one way to talk about any Muslim, show how what they do and say follows the doctrine.

Besides, you know this Muslim and his name is Mohammed. Don’t talk about “Muslims,” talk about Mohammed.

THAT IS NOT THE REAL ISLAM
If you are quoting the Koran or the Sunna, then it is the real Islam, by definition. The Koran and the Sunna are Islam, the real Islam. All other Islam, such as is found in the media, is the false Islam. There is only one real Islam, the doctrine of Islam.

THEY DON’T REALLY BELIEVE THAT.Â
This comes after you have revealed some horrific part of the doctrine. What do Muslims call themselves? The believers. What do they believe? The Koran and the Sunna. They say that is what they believe. Really believe.

I KNOW THIS MUSLIM AND HE IS NOT VIOLENT
This is a restating of, “I know this Muslim and he is good man.” He may be a poor Muslim and a good man who follows the Golden Rule.

But, the statement shows that there is no understanding of the duality of Islam. The Koran has both violence and tolerance against the kafirs. Today in America the power of Islam is just getting started, so Islam is still weak. When Mohammed was weak in Mecca, he did not kill anybody. Islam is still in the first phase of jihad here.

But the Koran says that one Muslim can beat two kafirs. It also says that Islam must be the dominant political system. So when Muslims reach a third of the population (that makes it 2 to 1), they will be in the full stage of Medina and violence becomes a standard operation. But even then, we know from the Sira, that many Muslims just don’t have the stomach for the violence. The Sira shows that Muslims can support jihad many ways, besides personal violence. The “peaceful” Muslim you know is commanded to give money to Islamic charities and the charities give the money to the actual fighters.

WHAT ABOUT THE VIOLENCE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT?
Look at the violence in the Old Testament. It has two qualities—local and temporary. None of the violence is commanded to be global and eternal. In each case the violence is directed in a political struggle and when it was over it was over.

The violence in the Trilogy is for all Muslims, in all places and for all time. Jihad is to stop only when every kafir submits. Look at Mohammed, the perfect example. He was involved with violence until the day he died. And on his deathbed he directed eternal violence against the kafirs when he said in his last breath: “Let there be neither Christian or Jew left in Arabia.”

IF ISLAM IS SO VIOLENT, HOW CAN IT BE SO SUCCESSFUL?
The Sira records that when Islam committed violence, it attracted new followers. As Osama bin Laden says: “People like a winning horse.” After 9/11 in the US, new followers joined Islam. Communism was a political system that preached, promised and delivered violence and it attracted many people. Many people love violence. Have you never paid any attention to Hollywood? Violence is piled upon violence and people line up to see it.

Islam is growing rapidly. but most of the growth can be attributed to high birth rates, not conversion. Islam’s growth in kafir countries is due to immigration, not conversion.

DEBATING ABOUT ISLAM – PART – 2
1. A Federal prosecutor may be in trouble because he’s a smart, successful kafir.

2. Jihad against the Christians at the highest level!  A Common Word is supreme jihad by Islamic scholars and the Muslim Brotherhood, championed by the usual dhimmi suspects at Yale, Harvard and Princeton Divinity Schools. Here’s the brilliant rebuttal by knowledgeable kafirs to this taqiyya-fest titled, “Truth About A Common Word.”

3. The Muslim Brotherhood supreme guide in Egypt on Bin Laden the jihad fighter, Sharia law and various other hot Islamic political topics. From Memri.org.

THERE ARE DIFFERENT KINDS OF ISLAMÂ
The differences in the different kinds of Islam are due to religion, not politics. Take the Sunni/Shia split, the largest division in Islam. Both Sunnis and Shias completely agree on how to treat kafirs and jihad. All Muslim subscribe to one of five schools of the Sharia and the Sharia’s position regarding kafirs and jihad is the nearly the same for all the schools.

The only big difference is whether to use violent jihad or peaceful jihad against the kafirs.

HADITH—SOME OF THOSE AREN’T REAL
If you quote a hadith to a Muslim and they don’t like it, they will say, “Well, some of those hadiths are not acceptable (or true or some other disclaimer).” And that is true. Actually, when a Muslim says that, they are practicing taqiyya, sacred deception and duality. If it is a hadith, then a Muslim cannot be denied the right to follow it. It is Sunna.

The hadiths from Bukhari and Muslim are the creme de la creme of hadiths. When Bukhari made his collection, he threw out 99% of those he found. Those 99% are the unsure ones, the other 1% which are used here are authoritative.

THE MYTH OF THE ARABS, ABRAHAM AND ISHMAEL
The core of the myth is told in the Koran about how Adam built the Kabah at Mecca. It was the first house of worship. Then Abraham brought Ishmael to Mecca, prepared to perform the sacrifice demanded by God. Ishmael was left in Mecca with his mother, Hagar.

We have a very detailed report of Mecca at the time of Mohammed right down to the names of individuals, their children and wives. Arabs were very keen on family relationships. A person’s very name gave you his father’s or son’s name and a chain of relationships. One of the things that infuriated the Meccans about Mohammed was that he said their ancestors were in Hell since they were not Muslims.

Not a single person in Mohammed’s Mecca is named Abraham, Ishmael, or Hagar. Not one. Why? They had no knowledge about any relationship between the Arabs and Abraham. They knew of the Jews and Abraham, but they made no claim of kinship with their names. After Mohammed, these names became common amongst Muslims.

This has another large implication. Islam claims that Muslims, Christians and Jews are members of the Abrahamic faith. Not so. There is no such thing. It was an unsubstantiated claim by Mohammed.

THE ISLAMIC GOLDEN AGE
If you spend any time talking about Islam you will hear: “What about the greatness of the Islamic Golden Age? Why, the West got all of its real learning from the Muslims. They preserved the Greek philosophers, invented algebra, chemistry, the algorithm and laid the basis of our learning.” Or: “The high point of human civilization occurred in Baghdad and Moorish Spain. It was all peace and harmony with Christians, Jews and Muslims living in multi-cultural compatibility.”

“When Europe was mired in the Dark Ages, Islam was a shining light on the hill. “

Hmmm. Let’s go over the data. Notice that the best of Islam is compared with the worst of the West. First, there never was a “Dark Age”. This prejudicial naming came from the time of the Renaissance when they looked back at the dogmatic approach to knowledge in medieval times and wanted to separate themselves from it. It is just like new rich wanting to shed their poor ancestry.

Let’s examine the Middle Ages for a moment and see how they came about. The collapse of Greek and Roman civilization came about from internal problems of too much wealth for too long. The ravages of the bubonic plague wiped out an estimated 30 to 60 percent of the European population, making it vulnerable to invasion. The annihilation of the centers of learning came from the jihad of Islam. So even if you want to use the term Dark Ages, at least recognize the influence of jihad.

And let’s look at how “un-dark” the “Dark Ages” were. Everyone agrees that the Renaissance was one of humanity’s great moments. But how did all of that greatness spring from the “Dark Ages”? You don’t get a champion racehorse from a plug mare. The Middle Ages were a time when the European man was created. The collapse of Roman central government allowed a new culture to emerge that was a fusion of Roman, Greek, Celtic and Germanic culture. Part of this culture was mechanical genius.

Europe was creating a new mind, the mind that would change the world by producing practical machines such as water mills and a thousand small improvements in daily life. The cathedrals were a stunning tribute to humanity and works of great beauty.Â
Without the Middle Ages there could not have been a Europe or a Renaissance.

Now look at the Golden Age of Islam in Baghdad. Where did it come from? Not from Islam. The Koran was the first book written in Arabia. Architecture in Arabia consisted of mud huts. Mohammed’s house was made from mud bricks; a man could touch the ceiling and a curtain served as a door. Arabic culture was barely iron age with its only art being poetry.

So where did the learning come from? Islam crushed the Christian, Zoroastrian, Buddhist and Hindu cultures and brought them all together in one culture. The scholars of these cultures were brought together and created an intellectual surge called the Islamic Golden Age. It was kafirs who created this so-called Golden Age while Islam took the credit. As an example, we call our numbers Arabic numerals. But the Arabs got them from the Hindus and took credit. We should call our numbers Hindu numerals.

It was Christian dhimmis who translated all of the Greek and Roman literature for their masters. Later, when this material was translated back into Greek and Latin, the Muslims got the credit for the work. In short, Islam got its knowledge just like it got its wealth— from theft and violence.

Islam cannot sustain any intellectual effort. Their own scholars cannot do the work due to the limitations of the dogma of Islamic thought.

And what were the Muslims able to do with this knowledge? Not much. What did they do with glass? Make pretty windows for the mosque. Europeans took glass and made microscopes and telescopes as well as stained glass. What did the Muslims do with mathematics? Not much. They combined the mathematics of the Greeks and Hindus and created algebra. And what did they do with algebra? Nothing. When it came back to Europe, the Europeans created calculus and physics.

A list of the great Arabic scholars reveals that many on the list were Christians with Arabic names. And the best of the Muslim scholars turned out not to be very Muslim and their works were later demolished by Muslims who were true to the real knowledge of Islam, the Koran.

Now let’s look at the great Moorish Spain. It was supposed to be a great center of multiculturalism. Of course, there was that day in Cordoba when the Muslims killed 8,000 Jews, but ignore that. What did Islam do as soon as it came to Spain? Shipped a thousand blondes off to be slaves in North Africa. But ignore that. Then there was the day when, after a battle against the Christian knights, they beheaded all the corpses and all the prisoners to build a hill of skulls. A Muslim then mounted the hill of skulls and issued the call to prayer. But ignore that.

How can any culture that makes slaves and dhimmis of all kafirs be called great? Simple. It served the needs of the groups that pushed the idea. It was Voltaire and Jewish scholars who created the idea of the Golden Age in Moorish Spain. Why? As an intellectual counterweight to the hated Catholic church. That propaganda attack survives today. It is the intellectuals who hate Christianity today, who push the same ideas.

If Islamic learning was so great, then where are the great Muslim scholars of today? No Islamic nation has ever had a Nobel prize in science. Not one. There have been eight Muslims who shared Nobel prizes in science, but it occurred in working in kafir nations and with kafir partners.

Bill Warner

Signup for our weekly newletter.

copyright 2008, CBSX, Inc. dba politicalislam.com

Use this as you will, just do not edit and give us credit.

Permalink:Â http://www.politicalislam.com/blog/debating-about-islam-part-2/

Religion is not for the weak” – Swami Vivekananda


Swami Vivekananda

Swami Vivekananda (Photo credit: On Being)

“Religion is not for the weak” – Swami Vivekananda

via Atanu Dey on India‘s Development

An article on Swami Vivekananda in the Wall Street Journal of 30th March titled, “What Did J.D. Salinger, Leo Tolstoy, and Sarah Bernhardt Have in Common?”

makes for delightful reading. What they had in common was their devotion to Swami Vivekananda, the man who introduced Vedanta and yoga to America.

I did not know that. But anyway, it’s the sort of positive article about a Hindu monk that would give conniptions to the leftist “secular intellectuals” in India.

But the Wall Street Journal does not suffer from the knee-jerk negative reflex of the main stream English language media in India;

the latter would recoil with horror at the mere thought of publishing a laudatory piece about a proud Hindu. Wouldn’t that be tantamount to endorsing — horror of horrors — Hindutva?

Yoga is popular in the US and in many non-Muslim parts of the world. Why it is not popular in the Islamic world is interesting (and more about that later.) An excerpt from the WSJ article:

Although all but forgotten by America’s 20 million would-be yoginis, clad in their finest Lululemon, Vivekananda was the Bengali monk who introduced the word “yoga” into the national conversation.

In 1893, outfitted in a red, flowing turban and yellow robes belted by a scarlet sash, he had delivered a show-stopping speech in Chicago.

The event was the tony Parliament of Religions, which had been convened as a spiritual complement to the World’s Fair, showcasing the industrial and technological achievements of the age.

On its opening day, September 11, Vivekananda, who appeared to be meditating onstage, was summoned to speak and did so without notes.

“Sisters and Brothers of America,” he began, in a sonorous voice tinged with “a delightful slight Irish brogue,” according to one listener, attributable to his Trinity College–educated professor in India. “It fills my heart with joy unspeakable…”

Then something unprecedented happened, presaging the phenomenon decades later that greeted the Beatles (one of whom, George Harrison, would become a lifelong Vivekananda devotee).

The previously sedate crowd of 4,000-plus attendees rose to their feet and wildly cheered the visiting monk, who, having never before addressed a large gathering, was as shocked as his audience. “I thank you in the name of the most ancient order of monks in the world,” he responded, flushed with emotion.

“I thank you in the name of the mother of religions, and I thank you in the name of millions and millions of Hindu people of all classes and sects.”

I feel a kinship to Swami Vivekananda–which arises not merely from my being a Bengali and a Hindu like he was. It’s more of an intellectual kinship that transcends space and time.

Swami ji had the power to move people spiritually and emotionally. I knew that George Harrison was influenced by Indian thought but I did not know that the path lay through Vivekananda:

“No doubt the vast majority of those present hardly knew why they had been so powerfully moved,” Christopher Isherwood wrote a half century later, surmising that a “strange kind of subconscious telepathy” had infected the hall, beginning with Vivekananda’s first words, which have resonated, for some, long after.

Asked about the origins of “My Sweet Lord,” George Harrison replied that “the song really came from Swami Vivekananda, who said, ‘If there is a God, we must see him. And if there is a soul, we must perceive it.’ ”

The teachings of Vedanta are rooted in the Vedas, ancient scriptures going back several thousand years that also inform Buddhism, Hinduism and Jainism.

The Vedic texts of the Upanishads enshrine a core belief that God is within and without—that the divine is everywhere.

The Bhagavad Gita (Song of God) is another sacred text or gospel, whereas Hinduism is actually a coinage popularized by Vivekananda to describe a faith of diverse and myriad beliefs.

Vivekananda’s genius was to simplify Vedantic thought to a few accessible teachings that Westerners found irresistible. God was not the capricious tyrant in the heavens avowed by Bible-thumpers, but rather a power that resided in the human heart.

“Each soul is potentially divine,” he promised. “The goal is to manifest that divinity within by controlling nature, external and internal.” And to close the deal for the fence-sitters, he punched up Vedanta’s embrace of other faiths and their prophets.

Christ and Buddha were incarnations of the divine, he said, no less than Krishna and his own teacher, Ramakrishna.

Swami Vivekananda was valued for what he represented — Indian thought — and recognized by some of the brightest minds in America. One of them was Nicola Tesla. A few years ago I came across a wonderful documentary on Tesla. (I will dig up the reference later.) There I got to know that Swami Vivekananda and Tesla had met.

[Sahah] Bernhardt, in fact, introduced him to the electromagnetic scientist Nikola Tesla, who was struck by Vivekananda’s knowledge of physics. Both recognized they had been pondering the same thesis on energy—in different languages.

Vivekanand was keenly interested in the science supporting meditation, and Tesla would cite the monk’s contributions in his pioneering research of electricity. “Mr. Tesla was charmed to hear about the Vedantic prana and akasha and the kalpas [time],”

Vivekananda wrote to a friend. “He thinks he can demonstrate mathematically that force and matter are reducible to potential energy. I am to go to see him next week to get this mathematical demonstration. In that case Vedantic cosmology will be placed on the surest of foundations.” For the monk from Calcutta, there were no inconsistencies between science, evolution and religious belief.

Faith, he wrote, must be based upon direct experience, not religious platitudes.

As I said before, the WSJ piece is quite delightful. But I have one tiny disagreement. It is this:

Vivekananda’s influence bloomed well into the mid-20th century, infusing the work of Mahatma Gandhi, Carl Jung, George Santayana, Jane Addams, Joseph Campbell and Henry Miller, among assorted luminaries.

And then he seemed to go into eclipse in the West. American baby boomers—more disposed to “doing” than “being”—have opted for “hot yoga” classes over meditation.

At some point, perhaps in the 1980s, an ancient, profoundly antimaterialist teaching had morphed into a fitness cult with expensive accessories.

The claim that Vivekananda “infusing the work of Mahatma Gandhi” is untenable. Swami Vivekananda exhorted people to be strong, while Gandhi’s call to Indians (and anyone else who would care to listen) was passivity and resignation. Gandhi told people to surrender passively in the face of evil. India has indeed followed Gandhi’s path and rejected Swamiji’s. Examples of that would fill volumes but let me just point out one simple instance.

Auranzeb was one of the many tyrannical rulers of India who slaughtered Indians wholesale. One of the major thoroughfares of the capital of India prominently bears his name.

One can understand that Pakistan celebrates those who invaded and subjugated India but it is absolutely puzzling to see India do so. Why?

The answer must be because Indians are weak. I believe that the day that Indians throw off the yoke of subjugation will be the day that India embarks on the path to emancipation and freedom.

Weak people don’t have the freedom to take what is best and what is good for them. Instead they are forced to take whatever is least threatening to their overlords.

The English language main stream media of India is what it is because it is filled with weak people doing what they are allowed to do by the neo-colonial rulers of India. An article praising Swami Vivekananda would be unthinkable in the Indian MSM.

Imagine if Vedanta and yoga were to be introduced as part of the curriculum in Indian schools. You bet there would be howls of protests from all corners of India.

Vedanta and yoga — what Swamiji meant by the word “religion” — are not for the weak. The intellectuals and seekers of the West who came in contact with Vivekananda and the message he embodied were strong. They freely drank deep from the well of Indian wisdom.

. . . Christopher Isherwood and his friend Aldous Huxley, who wrote the introduction to the 1942 English-language edition of “The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna,” a firsthand account (originally published in India in 1898) described by Huxley as “the most profound and subtle utterances about the nature of Ultimate Reality.” Nikhilananda, Salinger’s guru, did the translation, with assistance from Huxley, Joseph Campbell and Margaret Wilson, the daughter of the late president.

Huxley and Isherwood were introduced to Vedanta in the Hollywood Hills in the late 1930s by their countryman, the writer Gerald Heard. In a fitting counterpart to the New York Center, the Hollywood Vedanta society was likewise run by a scholarly and charismatic monk, Prabhavananda, who initiated the English trio of writers.

Like Nikhilananda, Prabhavananda was a magnet for the intelligentsia, and his lectures often attracted the likes of Igor Stravinsky, Laurence Olivier, Vivien Leigh and W. Somerset Maugham (and led to his writing “The Razor’s Edge”). Inspired by Isherwood—who briefly lived at the center as a monk—Greta Garbo asked if she too might move in. Told that a monastery accepts only men, Garbo became testy. “That doesn’t matter!” she thumped. “I’ll put on trousers.”

Henry Miller, who made headlines with his torrid and banned “Tropic of Cancer,” visited with Prabhavananda at the Hollywood center, devoured a small library of Vedanta books and settled down in Big Sur in 1944. Throughout his memoir, “The Air Conditioned Nightmare,” Miller invokes Vivekananda as the great sage of the modern age and the consummate messenger to rescue the West from spiritual bankruptcy.

The supreme irony is that India itself needs rescuing from spiritual bankruptcy — all the while when India itself has the world’s largest stock of spiritual capital safely locked away. As they say in Hindi, दिये के नीचे अँधेरा (“it’s dark right under the lamp”.) Perhaps centuries of slavery has robbed Indians of the discriminating faculty and the intelligence to recognize true wealth and wisdom.

Isherwood’s commitment to Vedanta, like Salinger’s, was unswerving and lifelong. Over the next 20 years, he co-translated with Prabhavananda the Bhagavad Gita, Patanjali’s “Yoga Aphorisms” and Shankara’s “Crest Jewel of Discrimination,” and was the author of several books and tracts on Vivekananda and Ramakrishna.

Alright, I have quoted enough from the WSJ piece. It’s a fairly long piece and I recommend it in its entirety. Here’s one last bit from it.

India has scheduled a yearlong party to commemorate the 150th anniversary of Vivekananda’s birth, beginning on January 12, 2013. There will be plenty of readings of his four texts on yoga as a spiritual discipline. Nine volumes chronicle his talks, writings and ruminations, from screeds against child marriage to Milton’s “Paradise Lost” to his pet goats and ducks. But if there were a single takeaway line that boils down his teachings to one spiritual bullet point, it would be “You are not your body.” This might be bad news for the yoga-mat crowd. The good news for beleaguered souls like Salinger was Vivekananda’s corollary: “You are not your mind.”

[Read more on Swami Vivekananda in this blog.]

Things you can do from here:
Subscribe to Atanu Dey on India’s Development using Google Reader
Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites

http://www.taslimanasrin.com


http://www.taslimanasrin.com

http://www.taslimanasrin.com/fool the poor.htm

TIMES NEWS NETWORK

AUGUST 27, 2002

TASLIMA NASRIN

I heard in the morning that my book, Utal Haowa (Wild Wind), has been banned inBangladesh.

The reason that was put forward by the government was that my book had destroyed the socio-political amity of the country.And that there were anti-Islamic statements in my book. The first part of my autobiography, Amar Meyebela, was also banned inBangladesh. Both these books chronicle my life. I have just one thing to say in this regard. You have no freedom of expression inBangladesh.

I have penned my views on politics, society and religion and they need not necessarily match the views of the government. If there is democracy in a country, a citizen will have the freedom to talk his mind out.

WhatBangladeshoffers in the name of democracy is farce. It is no democracy at all. Elected politicians act like dictators. But this is nothing new forBangladesh. Ever since 1971 whenBangladeshbecame independent, this has been continuing there. Various political parties use religion as a pawn to garner votes. Religion is the best tool with which you can fool the unlettered, the poor.

The government has taken away from me my right to citizenship. No government allows me to go toBangladesh. Whichever party has come to power has tried to throttle my voice. They are trying to show that they are doing all this to protect their religion. I understand, this will help them win votes.

But this is only going to push the country back by a thousand years. The possibility ofBangladeshever becoming a secular state is being destroyed by such acts.

Can you call a country a democracy where freedom of speech is not encouraged? Is it possible to dream of a healthy society in such a country? Never. No wonder political terror is pushing the country to the brink of devastation.

Murders are rampant, women are being raped, they are committing suicide. Ever since religion was made the guiding force of nation-building, torture on humanity has been on the rise. Fundamentalism destroys the amity between people. If this is not criticised, we will not have right-thinking people around. Without this, religious sentiments will keep a nation years behind in everything.

Who is Nehru, GAndhi…A Truth By History


1.GHIASUDDIN GHASI – Literal meaning of name-Kafir Killer. Mughal noble man who was the city Kotwal of Delhi.Persian ancestry. The British issued a shoot-at-site order to finish off all mughal noblemen who could be potential claimants for the throne of Delhi.

This ethnic cleansing was done by Sikh and Gorkha soldiers with an efficiency, which only they are capable of.

This muslim escaped from Allahabad and left for Agra. On way he was stopped by the British and asked to identify himself.

He gave his name as Ganga Dhar. Dhar is a Kashmiri brahmin surname.

When asked to explain his Persian features he told them he was a Kashmiri Brahmin.

The British believed him. If they had investigated him properly the history of India would have been totally different.

2. MOTI LAL NEHRU – Son of Ghiasuddin Ghasi. Hindu only by name. Was a muslim like his father. He picked up a Persian word ‘nahr'(canal or nullah) and added the sound ‘oo’ to make it sound like a Kashmiri Brahmin name. That was how the name Nehru was born.He was a totally unsuccessful vakil’s assistant(mukhtear) in the Allahabad court. In utter desparation he worked as a pimp at 77,Mirganj,Allahabad which was in a red light area.

3. THUSSU – Innocent, poor brahmin girl from Kashmir.After the death of his first wife during delivery, Moti Lal went to Kashmir and married Thussu. He renamed her as Swarup Rani.This innocent girl was not aware of Moti Lal’s evil designs.

4. MOBARAK ALI – Very successful and prosperous lawyer from Allahabad. Moti Lal befriended him in order to get a job under him. On bringing Swarup Rani to Allahabad he immediately gifted her to Mobarak Ali. Mobarak Ali kept her in his house Irshad Manzil for his pleasure. When she became pregnant, Mobarak Ali asked Moti Lal to take her back. Moti Lal requested Mobarak Ali to have the delivery at Irshad Manzil as he was living in a brothel. But Mobarak Ali refused.As per Sharia Laws even a @#%$ has a right of inheritance if he is born in his father’s house.So Moti Lal took Swarup Rani to the brothel at 77, Mirganj where the child was born.

5. JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU – @#%$ child born to Swarup Rani and Mobarak Ali. The Nawab of Oudh on hearing that this muslim child was living in a brothel, took him to his palace. Jawahar Lal lived in this palace from age 1 to 10. It was here that his circumcision ceremony took place. He was taught Persian and Urdu by the Nawab of Oudh. He never knew a word of Sanskrit or Hindi. Went to Trinity College,England. Came back and started an unsuccessful lawyer’s practice in Malabar hill, Mumbai. Arrested by Mumbai police for molesting a Parsi girl working in his office. Went on to become the first prime minister of India. Famous womaniser. He once had a keep who was a catholic nun. When she became pregnant,the catholic church stepped in and helped him out by sending the nun out of India. Ever since, the Catholic Church has grown in India with a speed that has not been mathched anywhere else in the world. They used to black mail Jawahar Lal and got what they wanted. Jawahar Lal died of syphillis.

6. INDIRA GANDHI – Daughter of Jawahar Lal and Kamala Kaul. Her real name was MAIMUNA BEGUM. She was a practicing muslim throughout her life. She was once invited to Mecca by the King of Saudi Arabia. Only muslims are allowed to enter the city of Mecca. Even the Saudis knew the truth but the Hindus were kept in the dark for obvious reasons. Our p-sec journalists worked overtime to push the news of the invitation under the carpet. Once she told one of her lovers M.O.Mathai, secretary to Nehru,”I will never marry a Hindu. I hate them. “This explains why she never took any action to save the lives of the Hindus in East Bengal. This also explains why she always surrounded herself with anti-Hindus.

7. FEROZE GANDHI – Contrary to popular belief, he was not a Parsi. He was the son of a muslim, Nawab Khan, who was the liquor supplier at Moti Lal’s brothel. His mother was a Parsi who converted to Islam after marrying Nawab Khan. In later years converted to christianity due to influence of his daughter-in-law Sonia Maino. His real name was FEROZE KHAN.

8. RAJIV RATTAN BRIJESH ROBERTO NEHRU GANDHI – Rajiv Gandhi was born to Feroze Khan(Feroze Gandhi) and Maimuna Begum (Indira Gandhi).His circumcision ceremony was conducted secretly. He was a muslim until Sonia Maino converted him to christianity. He went to Cambridge for his studies at the expense of the Indian tax-payer. He spent his time reading porn books and running after girls. Did not pass a single exam in three years. Was asked to vacate the hostel. Lived in the Indian High Commissioner’s residence for the remaining period of his stay in England. Picked up a low class Italian girl for a one night stand. But the girl had other ideas. He never got a degree from Cambridge. Was made a pilot(without any licence) in India to impress the low class Italian girl whom he was planning to marry.

9. SONIA MAINO – Low class Italian village girl from the village of Orbassano near Turin in northern Italy. Her ambition in life was to become an ‘au pair’ girl. In plain English it means ‘part time servant maid’.She had a get-rich-quick mentality which was typical of low class Italians. Someone suggested to her that she could go to Oxford or Cambridge where rich boys from all over the world were congregating for their education and they were looking for good looking young girls. This girl chose to go to Cambridge. If she had gone to Oxford, the Indian public would have been spared a lot of trouble. She went to Cambridge under the pretext of picking up some English which would be useful for her job as an au pair girl. She was picked up one night by Rajiv Gandhi from a Greek pizza place in a back-alley of Cambridge. The rest is history. She owns a shop named Ganpati in her native village of Orbassano on Regina Margherita Street, which is run by her sister Marouchka. To a visitor it would look as if they are dealing in Indian made trinkets associated with Hindu gods, like small figurines of Ganpati and pictures of Krishna as a baby.But they were actually selling original antique idols of Hindu gods stolen from Indian museums and Hindu temples in India.They have reduced the scale of business after the Italian police started investigating them. Her present financial empire leads all the way to Pablo Escobar,the head of the Colombian drug cartel. She exports coffins to a company called Tribute Caskets in Kansas City. A senior executive of this company Virginia Cover de Rodrigues is a very close friend. This woman owns a bank account code named Svenska into which the Bofors kick back money was paid. This Virginia is also a close friend of Manuel Noriega of Nicaragua.The president of the Vatican Bank Archbishop Paul Marcinkus who was doing money laundering for Escobar suddenly disappeared with a lot of money. The police were looking for him all over the world. He was safely sitting in no.10,Janpath doing in-house catholic services for Sonia Maino.

10. SANJAY GANDHI – @#%$ child born to Maimuna Begum(Indira Gandhi) and Mohamad Yunus. Went to England like his brother for studies, funded by the Indian tax payer. His original name was Sanjiv Gandhi. When he was about to be caught by the British police for stealing a car,a fresh passport was issued by the govt. of India with a new name Sanjay Gandhi, to escape arrest. When he was a boy his mother disappeared alongwith him for a couple of days. The excuse given was that the boy had a speech defect and had to undergo a surgery. This was one more lie from the family of congenital liars. The truth was that circumcision was done for Sanjay Gandhi and Indira Gandhi underwent an abortion to avoid the birth of the child sired by M.O.Mathai. In his later years he came across some photos of Indira Gandhi with Dhirendra Brahmachari in some compromising positions. Used to blackmail and physically assault his mother. Could have been assasinated by the Russians on a request from Indira Gandhi herself. The Russians would have gladly done it as Sanjay Gandhi was pro-American.

11. THE RANI OF ETAWAH – Dumb, stupid Hindu woman. On the death of her husband the Raja of Etawah, she found that she would have to part with her entire kingdom as she had no children. Asked Mobarak Ali and Motilal to fight her case. They asked her for Rs.500,000.00. This was a very, very big sum in those days. The Rani paid in full. They shared the amount between them and did not fight the case. The case was lost in the lower court. They then told the Rani that they would fight the case in the higher court. They took another 500,000.00.They split this amount also and did not fight the case.The case was lost in the higher court also. They then told the Rani that they would fight the case in the Privy Council in London. They demanded up and down plane fare, a fat fee for themselves and a fee for a British advocate to fight the case in London. The smart British advocate said that the Rani could get hold of an infant of the appropriate age and say to the entire world that she was pregnant at the time of the Raja’s death. This idea worked and the Rani’s kingdom was saved.This stupid Rani thought that Mobarak Ali and Motilal had saved her. She gave them a lot of money and gave Amethi,a part of her kingdom to Motilal. Ever since the members of the Nehru >family have been behaving as if Amethi is their private property. This was how Moti Lal bacme a very rich man. He bought Irshad Manzil from Mobarak Ali. Irshad Manzil in Persian means ‘House of happiness’.Moti Lal changed the name to Ananda Bhavan which means ‘House of happiness’ in Sanskrit.Jawahar Lal was not born in this house as our pseudo secular historians would want us to believe.

12. MOHANDAS KARAMCHAND GANDHI – So called Apostle of Truth. Aided and abetted in spreading the biggest lie in the history of mankind.

On thinking about this whole issue, I think we Hindus alone are responsible for this situation. How could a small family of muslims and Christians fool so many Hindus for so long and still continue to do it? I am reminded of what Abraham Lincoln once said,”You can fool some people all the time or all the people for some time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time”….

Bhargava Vsn i dnt knw wether dis is true or not! but i hate nehru bastard & his family :

Hindu Samrajya From where u have got this refrence
, if it is true then we will print in all history school books when india become’s HINDURASHTRA

Tarun Goyal

अब सिर्फ प्रत्यंचा चडाने का ही समय है…शांति पाढ अब सरकार को भी पसंद नहीं वो ही आमने सामने का युद्ध चाहती है…

जब सन्यासी निकल पड़ा है युद्ध के लिए…..तो जनता कब तक सोती रहेगी…

Idiotic Hindu Historians..What a tragedy


SOME TIMES BY ; SANTOSH BHATT

A country that forgets it’s history is destined to repeat the same mistakes of history. Sadly Indian history is being rewritten by the same hindus whose ancestors were raped and looted by the same scum bag moslems and these scum bags are being written in glorifying terms by the idiotic hindu historians.What a tragedy the country has to go through.

 No tragedy is worse than forgetting history and we have not even known the true history of our country.We are being ruled by scum bags and we are slogging it for scum bags and we are writing the Hindus are as a rule spineless. cowardly and miserly people. They have no self respect.

They have no knowledge of their own scriptures. Thousands of years of foreign rule has wiped out all traces of greatness and bravery from these people.

The hindus who are there now have no connection to the hindus of the yore. these are all inferiority quality humanbeings who happen to be in india. The secularism nonsense has emasculated the hindus.

Do I see a hope? Yes provided the idotic hindus read the scriptures of other religions and compare it to their own, to even comprehend what treasure has been left behind.

Read Qrand, bible and Holy Shreemad Bhagavad Geeta and decide,  you would want to follow which book. olden era or scum bag rule. Frustrating to say the least.

I did my schooling in India and I don’t remember any history book highlighting the atrocities of the mughals. Infact, the mughal period is shown as a golden period of art and civilization in India.

Thanks to the internet and the ability of researchers to bring out the facts and reach out to everyone, this knowledge is no longer something that the leftist /Marxists like Romila Thapar can prevent from spreading.

Muslims steadfast deny such atrocities even take place and they never take active measures to oppose these goings on.

Muslims are guilty of nothing when it comes to dealing with non-Muslims under Islam.

Indians and everybody else is going to need to grow a spine and understand that there can be no peace between Muslims who want to bring darkness and ignorance to the world and non-Muslims who are fighting to survive.

India’s first education minister @ the federal level was a Muslim who had Arabic heritage.

India’s first prime minister was brought up on British education and was conditioned to regard Indic history as inferior to the Mughals.

Aligarh Muslim University was very worried that any truth about Muslim invasion and rule would cause a massive anti-muslim backlash.

Leftists always hated religion but they had no balls to pick on Islam. So they picked on Hinduism as they were sure that in the aftermath of Gandhi’s assassination, Hindus would be easy pickings.

These leftists were given prominent roles in Jawaharlal Nehru University (which produces anti-Indians by dozens) and National council for educational research and training (NCERT) which writes text books.

Net Net……Hindus will never come to know about these atrocities and Muslims will always be told that Islamic rule was the most benign on Hindus.

Nadir Shah of Iran invaded India in 1738–39. After committing great massacre and devastation, he captured a large number of slaves and drove them away along with a huge plunder. Ahmad Shah Abdali from Afghanistan invaded India thrice in the mid-eighteenth century. In his victory in the Third Battle of Panipat (1761), some 22,000 women and children of the slain Maratha soldiers were driven away as slaves.

 As already cited, the last independent Muslim ruler, Tipu Sultan, had enslaved some 7,000 people in Travancore. They were driven away and forcibly converted to Islam.

Enslavement of the infidels in India went on as long as Muslims were ruling with authority.

The consolidation of power by the British mercenaries in the nineteenth century eventually ended enslavement in India. Even during the Partition (1947), Muslims kidnapped tens of thousands of Hindu and Sikh women and married them to Muslims: a form of age-old enslavement (discussed already).

 In November 1947, as already noted, Muslim Pathan raiders carried away Hindu and Sikh girls from Kashmir and sold in the markets of Jhelum (in Pakistan).

These are accounts of enslavement by Muslim invaders and rulers mainly in Northern India. Enslavement was going on in earnest in far-off provinces across India, including Gujarat, Malwa, Jaunpur, Khandesh, Bengal, Mewad and the Deccan, which were either under the control of Delhi or were independent Muslim sultanates.

The records of enslavement in those regions were not always recorded systematically.

%d bloggers like this: