The Westerners always poke fun at us, humiliate us, humiliate our faith, our pride, our gods, all sentimental values.....they kept doing this again and again and still r doing it...
All this westerners r always fond of writing and preaching the world as they like...and to get publicity they will goto any extent like even rape our indian pride to make shitloads of money!!!
WTF, How dare this C.suckers even take a single nerve to say some shit like that about Mahatma Gandhi?!!!
But guess what...they will and will keep on...Who cares?
Now a days he never talk aobout stategic matters. In flag hoisting drama BJP leaders were himiliated to the lowest core. He never mentioned anything about that until now. He was rejected and banned from campaigning in bihar still he took it smilingly. LA lot of hindu leaders like aseemananda, sadvi etc. are harrassed by police. no word from him. Whenever he opens his mouth he talks about Global warming, world economy, guj economy etc. He slowly improving his contacts with PM manmohansingh and other congis. Most of the people who pray him do not like gandhi. But to appeace congis he banned the book. Modi also like to go in gandhi way and become so popular and to get abuses from his own people.
Re: Modi becomes a coward.
by BHARATIYAN on Apr 01, 2011 01:04 AM
He is any day better than an Itali0n and her Chapprassis.Yesterday Madam was there on the ground cheering the team LOL she doesn't even know what is cricket........Jokers/Fakers.
Re: Re: Modi becomes a coward.
by josestv@rediffmail.com on Apr 01, 2011 03:37 AM
how u know that she doesn know cricket??alleast she was der cheering for India...y u r trying to find a fault in dat???
I will only say this - If you are bluntly honest and questioning about all your icons, including gods like Rama and Krishna, you will have so many doubts that you cannot really like most of them.
Very few historical figures stand up to scrutiny over decades and centuries. Unfortunately these are not the people who lead nations and masses in political movements.
Shivaji had eight wives, always ran from the battlefields.
Krishna married 16000 women who were previously exploited by Jarasandh.
Some Vyas it seems provided the seed for three children Pandu, Dhratrashtra and Vidur.
Bhim had a son called Ghatotkach from a demonness in the jungle.
Karna was virgin-born from Kunti by a hymn to the Sun.
Funny stories abound.
About real people, factual stories of uncomfortable nature abound.
This means that you cannot have a totally clean idol who is also a famous personality.
One tends to believe that clean life is not possible.
This is not true.
The clean people often do no become famous. Jyoti Basu is not as famous as Gandhiji. WEll, I am not sure he had a 100% clean record in terms of violence during protests yet. Dr. Salim Ali was a straight man.
My point is that famous people who you normally know and respect will often have a small dark side.
Re: ignorance is bliss
by Kris Kane on Apr 01, 2011 02:01 AM
ok.. what do you mean by "dark side" ?
Lets go even deeper:
1) why r you being so judgemental on bigamy ? why do you suppose bigamy is "immoral" ? The option for following monogamy or polygamy must be left to individual isnt it ?
In societies that bred strong, virile, healthy and rich men who could support more number of females - polygamy was practiced.
Whats wrong here is "enslavement and oppression of women".. Not the concept of polygamy itself.
Most closed minded people believe as such owing to their western-trained mindset owing to british influences.
But thats against the laws of nature.
On average a man has 3-4 sezxual partners even in india during his lifetime.
Doesnt that defeat the concept of Monogamy ?
2) It speaks volumes of Krsna's greatness that he gave refuge to those 16,000 destitute women under the umbrella of marriage.
It doesnt lower him, lifts him to a higher standard.
And mind you, he only married 8 women - out of his own volition.. same argument for polygamy can be used here to justify his actions.
(3)How else would you revive a blood line which is about to go extinct ? that was the LAST RESORT that Satyavathi had to resort to.. I see nothing wrong with that - even morzally.
4,5 & 6 - you r craczy and come from some tiny bangali village.
Re: ignorance is bliss
by Devdutt Nayak on Apr 01, 2011 12:38 AM
Better not to look hard.
If you do look hard then make sure that you also see 1000s of not-so-famous people who are clean.
And take them as role models.
Gandhiji is a mystery at least to me. He managed razor-sharp politics, a massive burden of responsible living, and near-flawless austerity, all the time for decades.
Either it got to him sometimes, or he had really good reasons which you can know only if you take the time to look really REALLY hard.
Then when you tell what you know to other people, they laugh at you until they do the same tough research :-)
Better explanation is Gandhiji was human and might have made some mistakes - which I dont know and am not hinting or assuming anything - just ignore it.
Re: Re: Why did Modiji banned this book?
by Sunil D on Apr 01, 2011 12:51 AM
i hope you are rite.. as modiji being unmarried till this age and homosexual versus abt gandhiji in this book may have some spill over on his image..
This is what Indian state does to GENUINE INTELLECTUALs and ARTISTS ! Bans their work and insults them..
Lelyveld is one of the world's leading anti-razxism advocates who won the pulitzer in 1960s for writing the TRUTH about the brutality of apartheid in South Africa.
He was born in a family of staunch LIBERAL and REFORMIST jzw advocates who worked tirelessly to improve BLACK people's lives during the peak of apartheid.
His father Arthur was a Rzabbi who was once beaten with tire rods by white supremacists for fighting against apartheid in USA.
Compared to that, we all know who was sozxnia's father - a follower of mzxssolini and Nazxi/faxscist SUPREMACIST who hated non-white people.
The eagerness to silently BAN this work without discussing it in public and w/o a whimper shows the HATEFUL, RUTHLESS, HYPOCRITICAL szxkcular mentality.
One that has two standards for FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION:
STANDARD 1 - If you dare say even the TRUTH after long painful detailed meticulous investigation about szxCKULAR icons or those from certain "votebank" comyoonities, it can be BANNED because it hurts the "sensitive" szxckular mindset. Eg: Tazxlima, Lelyveld.
STANDARD 2 - You can indulge in venemous vitriol or heap the filthiest of abuses in the most vulgar, brzen manner on religious/divine icons of one comyoonity... and you will be immune from protection. Eg: MFhzxssein, M Karunanidhi.
He used to sleep with naked women to test his self-control..
Gazxndhi was probabzly gazy for mzxlims... given his support for khzilafat movement and even condoning Armenian genocide in TUrkey as well as mophzlah massacres of hzcindus in kerala.
The szxcickulars worship this fazg as their gozd while laughing at our hzcindu gxds and gxdesses.
Re: Who knows
by Kris Kane on Mar 31, 2011 09:51 PM
The last I heard, this book was baznnned by indian state.
Well, when someone pulls down THEIR FALSE gozd and shows how much idi0tic they are to keep believing in this nonsensical, antidharmic szxckularist ideology..
Szxckulars LAUGH at hzcindus at our devotion to LORD RAzMA and our outrage at insults to Gozxddesses Sazrazswati by perverted artists.... they try to shield the perps under the pretext of "free speech"..
What will they do now ?
The entire world is laughing at THEIR most esteemed icon - for being just a fzxag.. and out of that mental softness, he chiseled out this perverted ideology called "szxckularism".
Perhaps, the szxckulars will pretend not to be even aware of the concept of "hypocricy" in their lexicon.. while obviously moving forward with banning this book.
Suppressing truth and clandestinely blurring out differences between reality and propaganda is their forte.. who knows they'll even start rumors that Mr. Lelyveld - a pulitzer prize winning journalist - is also hidden sanzxghi sympathizer because of his "jezxwish" roots.
I am totally opposed to the idea of banning books or other works of art. I may or may not subscribe to a particular idea. I may or may not support a particular thought. I may or may not enjoy a work of art. But that does not give me the right to ban a book or a painting or a cartoon etc - as has been done in the case of Rush-die, Taslima Nasreen, Maqbool Fida, Kurt Westergaard (the Danish cartoonist who drew a cartoon of Muha--2mmad), or now this book by Lelyveld.
Re: Re: Re: Banning is bad
by rdpakr on Mar 31, 2011 08:53 PM
I completely disagree. Democracy is not universally applicable to all aspects. There is a certain code of conduct we must respect - especially with respct to National symbols and leaders. If we respect National flag so much as to have protocols in hoisting and unhoisting, why not pay respect to our Father of the Nation. I too may not agree with non-violence at all times, but I would never make a controversy out of it to get some brownie points.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Banning is bad
by bak bak on Mar 31, 2011 08:54 PM
nonsense!!!! then, throw ur freedom of speech into dustbin and instead change it to "freedom of censored speech" into the constitution!!!!!
I am totally opposed to the idea of banning books or other works of art. I may or may not subscribe to a particular idea. I may or may not support a particular thought. I may or may not enjoy a work of art. But that does not give me the right to ban a book or a painting or a cartoon etc - as has been done in the case of Rush-die, Taslima Nasreen, Maqbool Fida, Kurt Westergaard (the Danish cartoonist who drew a cartoon of Muha--2mmad), or now this book by Lelyveld.
