Thursday, July 8, 2010

Are Hindus Violent?


Are Hindus Violent? - Part 1
By: Bandyopadhyay Arindam

Are Hindus violent?
In recent times Hindu organizations like the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal,
are increasingly, accused of propagating violence. In Orissa and Karnataka, Hindus stand
indicted for homicide and Church destruction in response to the brutal murder of a Hindu
Swami and to aggressive Christian evangelism. Some politicians, English media and Islamic
leaders have raised a chorus, despite the proud claims of responsibility by Islamic
terrorist groups and firm evidence collected by the investigating authorities, claiming that
it is Hindus who have covertly initiated the series of recent terrorist activities of serial
blasts to discredit the Muslim minorities, in the strange logic that Hindu groups stand to
benefit the most if Muslims are defamed. Consistent with this bizarre rationale is the
shrill demand for a ban on these Hindu organizations, by Muslim appeasing politicians and
hypocritical, self appointed watchdogs of human rights. Meanwhile the thinly veiled
Christian empires of the West have lent their political muscle along with their treasuries
to cower upon a weak-kneed Indian government. The Pope, the Italian, French, European Union
and US governments have risen up in unison to demonstrate that the modern Western State is
nothing more than the executive arm of the Church. Such is their concern over the loss of a
few Indian Citizens since their stripes are Christian, as if affiliation to a Church
overrides their national and cultural identity of eons. Our minority Prime Minister has done
his due diligence by claiming the Hindu"s reaction in Orissa to be a national shame.

So are the "nonviolent" Hindus taking recourse to violence? Do Hindus indulge in unprovoked
violence? Even if provoked, is "Hindu" violence justifiable? Should Hindus retaliate and be
revengeful? What is the Hindu scriptural dictate"?
During the Mahabharata war, according to the Bhagvat Gita, Lord Krishna revealed himself to
Arjun and asked him to wage "dharma-yuddha". Do we question the Lord for inciting Arjun into
violence? Was Lord calling for revenge or was he merely advocating preservation of Dharma
and the path of righteousness that befits Kshatriya Dharma? Arjun rightly feared the
destruction but the Lord merely asked for right action guided by Dharma, not action tailored
to outcomes of personal gain.
To make a nonviolent interpretation of the Gita, was what perhaps Mahatma Gandhi did, but
that does not negate the need for necessary violence, without which we would not have any
need for judiciary, police or armed forces. Protection of self is a necessity - all civil
societies so agree. Nobody argues that nonviolence is a desirable quality. It is true that
Hindus do not force their religion on "non Hindus". On the other hand, history is witness to
the violence and atrocities committed by Muslims or Christians all over the world, past and
present, in the name of religion. A malignant self-destructive nonviolence has been subtly
allowed to sprout and mushroom in the collective psyche of the Hindus, and "inaction" has
been deceptively euphemized as "tolerance" to destroy our righteous will. Our independence
struggle has been almost totally credited to this Gandhian philosophy, which is a huge
injustice to the large number of leaders and common people who have given up their lives for
our freedom.
Have Hindus always been nonviolent? Don"t we believe that the "virtuous Devtas" always
fought the "evil doing Asuras"? Wasn"t it a necessity for Lord Vishnu to incarnate
repeatedly in the form of his various "avatars" to save the universe from evil forces?
Wasn"t it required of Ram to kill Ravan for a just cause? Didn"t Krishna use his divine
power right from childhood to slay the demons and "save the innocents" repeatedly?
It is devious to say that Sanatan Dharma preaches only "nonviolence"? It is equally wrong to
claim that tolerance of atrocities and adharma is a virtue. On the contrary acceptance of
"adharma" is not merely cowardice, it is also sinful. This is why Swami Vivekananda said,
"if there is a sin, it is weakness"
Does that make Hinduism the same as other religion in its approach to the concept of
violence? The answer is no. Unlike the scriptural sanction of violence in propagation of
some monotheistic faiths, Sanatan Dharma has no such parallel; it merely exhorts one to
righteousness, which does not include propagation of one"s faith as the only true faith.
This is a foundational difference which must never be lost sight of.
Hinduism does not promote violence when it is not necessary or against the innocent. Even in
war we had our ethos and principles. Harold Wilson (1786-1860), a British Orientalist wrote
"The Hindu laws of war are very chivalrous and humane, and prohibit the slaying of the
unarmed, of women, of the old, and of the conquered. "
Megasthenes observed ". among the Indians, . by whom husbandmen are regarded as a class that
is sacred and inviolable, the tillers of the soil, even when battle is raging in their
neighborhood, are undisturbed by any sense of danger, for the combatants on either side in
waging the conflict make carnage of each other, but allow those engaged in husbandry to
remain quite unmolested. Besides, they never ravage an enemy"s land with fire, nor cut down
its trees"
Can we say the same about the invaders of Bharatvarsha over the centuries? Even our
whitewashed history, as we read today, will not support that. Whole scale massacres, rape
and destruction in the name of religion and God were the rule rather than the exception.
Dr.Younis Shaikh, Pakistani and author of "Islam and Women" writes "..eighty million were
slaughtered and millions of women were was standard practice for Islamic warlords
like Ghori and Ghazni to unleash the mass rape and enslavement of hundreds of thousands of
women after the slaughter of all males. A large percentage of Muslims in South Asia today
are the progeny of forcible conversions and systematic rape campaigns by marauding Muslim
invaders. "
In the words of Alain Danielou (1907-1994), French philosopher and writer, "From the time
Muslims started arriving, around 632 AD, the history of India becomes a long, monotonous
series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions. It is, as usual, in the name of
"a holy war" of their faith, of their sole God, that the barbarians have destroyed
civilizations, wiped out entire races..Mahmoud Ghazni.was an early example of Muslim
ruthlessness, burning in 1018 of the temples of Mathura, razing Kanauj to the ground and
destroying the famous temple of Somnath, sacred to all Hindus. His successors were as
ruthless as Ghazni: 103 temples in the holy city of Benaras were razed to the ground, its
marvelous temples destroyed, its magnificent palaces wrecked..Indeed, the Muslim policy vis
a vis India, seems to have been a conscious systematic destruction of everything that was
beautiful, holy, refined. "
The Western (read Christian) mission on India was no less barbarous. This was Max Mueller"s
comment" "India has been conquered once, but India must be conquered again. the ancient
religion of India is doomed, and if Christianity does not step in, whose fault will it be? "
The history of Christianity, despite the deception of fables of love and mercy of the
savior, has been a trail of bloodshed and horror wherever it has stepped in the world. It is
an unrelenting continuity of persecution of peoples who differed from the Christian
doctrine. The "dark ages" of Europe testify to the horror of crusades, slavery, witch hunt
and annihilation of the "pagans"
The Goa Inquisition (1560-1812) in India, the idea of St. Francis Xavier (who is glorified
by the unknowing Indians, in the form of all the educational institutions that bear his
name, in almost every major cities in the country) was described thus by a Christian
historian Dr. T. R. de Souza, "At least from 1540 onwards, and in the island of Goa before
that year, all the Hindu idols had been annihilated or had disappeared, all the temples had
been destroyed and their sites and building material was in most cases utilized to erect new
Christian Churches and chapels. Various vice regal and Church council decrees banished the
Hindu priests from the Portuguese territories; the public practices of Hindu rites including
marriage rites, were banned; the state took upon itself the task of bringing up Hindu orphan
children; the Hindus were denied certain employments, while the Christians were preferred;
it was ensured that the Hindus would not harass those who became Christians, and on the
contrary, the Hindus were obliged to assemble periodically in Churches to listen to
preaching or to the refutation of their religion. "
All in the name of the cross!
Bharatvarsha and Hindus have tolerated all this before independence. Are Hindus any better
off now? Has their lot changed? Have they revived themselves in any meaningful way?
Rizwan Salim, reviewer, New York Tribune, writes, "Given the reality that Hindustan is the
longest surviving ancient civilization and Hindus have to their credit so many unaccountable
and such astonishing achievements of architecture and painting, music and dance, poetry and
drama, epics and narratives, intellectual systems and philosophical doctrines, healing
systems and mind-body disciplines, Hindus of every caste and class today should have
possessed a well-informed and well-developed, intense and, fully conscious cultural pride.
But one of the principal tragedies of contemporary India is that the majority of even the
educated and otherwise affluent Hindus does not possess a deep and extensive knowledge of
their culture-and do not give evidence of an intensely felt cultural pride. Lacking profound
cultural knowledge and intense cultural pride, India"s intellectuals regard the fashionable
ideas and ideologies from Europe and America as unquestionably superior to Bharat"s
thousands of years old Hindu culture and wisdom. "
We still remain under forces that do not allow us to live our life and practice our religion
freely in our own country. Our subjugators prefer the tolerant, docile harmless Gandhian
Hindu. We are made to believe that an assertive Hindu is not the "real Hindu"; only the
assertive Christian and the assertive Muslim is real - that being their natural state has to
be so accepted!
It is unfashionable to claim oneself as a Hindu - doing so is equated to "being a
fundamentalist". The same "stigma" does not apply to a Muslim or Christian - it is their
religious right!
Hindus are being denigrated by their own media and politicians in the name of "secularism"
which is equated with anti-Hinduism. In India, most of print and electronic media is
controlled by foreign funded, anti-Hindu forces that are more than happy to denounce
Hinduism and spread misinformation about Hindu religious icons and scriptures. Irrespective
of truth and morality, it is "progressive" thinking to talk about minority rights and
politically correct to voice minority concerns. Since Hindus have suffered for 14 centuries,
suffering for the Hindu is but natural. Why talk about it?
Every attempt is made to divide Hindu unity, to disrobe Hindu pride, to denigrate Hindu
saints and deities. Our religion is portrayed as superstitious, our tradition as old
fashioned, our beliefs as non-progressive. Our history is distorted and our achievements are
belittled. Our historical exhibitions are forcefully shut down, our processions are
diverted, our celebrations are rescheduled and our meetings are disallowed to avoid
"minority displeasure" and to promote "peace and communal harmony". Ram is abused as a
drunkard and Krishna is vilified as a "characterless womanizer", while an invited Pope
openly aspires to change the religion of our land and a resident chief Imam continuously
delivers anti-national speech and open threats to the integrity of the country.
Sankaracharya is treated worse than an ordinary criminal and not even allowed to cook his
own food but Abdul Madani, the "main accused" in the Coimbatore bomb blast case, which left
58 dead, is provided all the facilities, including a regular masseur and Muslim terrorist
inmates regularly make phone calls from their cell phone to Pakistan.
It is non-secular and communal to talk about Vivekananda"s nationalism, to sing Bankim"s
Vandematram, to dream of Gandhi"s Ram Rajya, to reclaim our demolished temples of Rama,
Krishna and Shiva, but it is perfectly secular and consistent with minority rights to
portray Bharatmata and our Gods in nude, to refuse to hoist the tricolor in madrassas, to
wave flags of our enemies in our soil and to preach that our religion, the Sanatan Dharma,
that Rishi Aurobindo described as the "soul of India", as a dark mythology that guarantees a
ride to hell and thus needs to be rescued in the name of the father and the son.
Terrorist groups are sympathized with as "victims of circumstances", their families
compensated and taxpayers money is spent for their legal aid, duly endorsed by "secular"
ministers; terrorist victims are brushed away as collateral damage and urged to maintain
peace and harmony. Police and armed forces, who risk their daily life and safety for our
protection, are vigorously scrutinized to detect even the minutest of flaws, by so called
"human right sympathizers of terrorism".
Hindus are expected to shut their eyes, ears and mouth in reaction to all of these
activities. Any protest against atrocities committed by non Hindus, calls for the wrath of
media as "militancy", "fundamentalism" and "extremism".
Sadly, most of these so called secularists, politician and media intellectuals, who are
totally anti-Hindu in their words, deeds and thinking, are not believers of any other faith
but are actually Hindu by birth and perhaps will have Hindu rituals at death.
Hindus are cornered, resentful and frustrated but they have still largely remained true to
their Dharma of tolerance and nonviolence. Should they keep on doing so for eternity?
The vast majority of Hindus live a life of peaceful and non-interfering existence, contended
with their small nucleus of family and friends, happy with their fate and faith, worshipping
their Gods in their own way, in their temples or in the corner of their house, without any
malice to other religions.
Their demands are also few - just a little bit of peace and noninterference in exchange,
from the non-Hindu religions. Just an assurance from their elected leaders and government,
that the country"s resources are to be used for the development of the entire population,
without religious and other bias. Is it too unfair or adharmic to ask that in their, own,
independent country, in which they are still the majority?
Hindus watch silently in the case of "Rama Sethu" and "Amaranth shrine" that their own
leaders pamper all except the Hindus and crush the Hindu"s just rights with arrogant
impunity. They see and realize that non-Hindu religions get their demands fulfilled and
things done because they are much more organized, more forceful, more connected, more
political, more aggressive and more threatening. On the other hand, there is a conscious
effort of multiple forces to prevent Hindus from organizing.
Hindus have seen their land divided, their people uprooted before and they see again the
shadow of infiltration by the same perpetrators, encroaching their country, with the support
of their own leaders and government.
Hindu religious institutions are being governed by people, including non Hindus,
contemptuous of their faith. The sacred donations they put at their deity"s feet are used,
not for temple upkeep, but to fund mosques or for religious pilgrimages to Mecca and
The country"s public resources, instead of being used for all countrymen, are diverted to
provide "economic and educational packages" to the non Hindu community, while the Hindu poor
and uneducated are left to mend their lot on their own. Muslim and Christian educational
institutions run on government subsidies and discriminatively cater to their respective
communities with total disregard to demographic representation. There is no such subsidy
available for Hindu institutions.
The larger Hindu community, already hamstrung by caste and tribe reservations, does not have
demographically proportionate access to education and jobs, in their own country.
Hindus worries and concerns fall on to deaf ears. Hindu sentiments do not carry any values.
Their newspapers and televisions largely follow the line of a shamelessly biased and
distorted "secularism".
A Hindu action is "condemned" eternally; a Muslim or Christian action is "minimized".
A Muslim or Christian reaction is "justified"; a Hindu reaction is "thrashed and trounced"
for days.
A Hindu saint is murdered, that is "normal" news. The Hindus react to it, that is
uncivilized and barbaric.
When Muslims pelt stones on Hindu temples and processions, it is forgivable but when Hindus
retaliate, it is punishable.
When they shout, "Allah is the only God" next to your door, it is their religious right but
when Hindus chant "Jai Sri Ram", it is instigation.
Hindus of Kashmir were forced to leave their land and live as refugees in their own country
- that hardly raised a human rights" concern. Hindu refugees from the time of partition are
still not citizens of India but Bangladeshi infiltrators of recent times are welcomed with
voter cards and ration cards and our ministers plead for their citizenship.
Hindus watch as Pakistan and Bangladesh continue to wage religious animosity, decimate their
minority Hindu population, actively participate in terrorism and wage overt or covert war
towards India.
Hindus read that their Jawans get killed regularly from cross border firing and feel their
national pride shattered with each "peace talk" and each gimmick of "peace buses" and
"Samjhauta and Moitri expresses".
Hindus see that their government, lead by their Human Resource Minister, Arjun Singh, has no
hesitation in allotting funds for development of Madrassas and Mosque but wants to throttle
the Ekal Vidyalaya movement, the single teacher schools that are the only hope of remote,
tribal area children, because they teach "the Indian way (A for Arjun rather than A for
Apple)" and because they are "communal" since they are run by Hindu organizations. (Hindus
wonder whether Mr. Arjun Singh would like to disown his Hindu name or the name of his Fifth
Guru and whether it would be more Indian to say, "A for Ali or Alexander", instead.) The is
the same Arjun Singh who, without hesitation, approves the decision of Jamia Millia Islamia
University to fund legal aid to two of its students accused in the Delhi serial blasts.
Hindus wonder why the Prime minister of their country, instead of ensuring constitutional
equality, claims, "Muslims have first right to national resources", and are bewildered when
their Prime Minister bats for their enemy with comments like "Pakistan too is a victim of
terrorism" and ""Let us not brand Indians and Pakistanis as terrorists" or announces,
"Terrorists and those who support them are enemies of the people of India and Pakistan"
Hindus worry when the Shahi Imam Bukhari of Jama Masjid aspires "We were rulers here for 800
years. Inshaallah, we shall return to power here once again"" and threatens "this country is
in for another partition, so let us be prepared for nation wide riots and violence. "
The anti-Hindu political clout and media has no intention or courage to criticize such
anti-national activities or to protest the riots and killing of Hindus on the pretext of
Danish cartoon and death of Saddam Hussain. Whenever the minorities are "angry", they are
justified to vent it by killing Hindus and looting their properties. The media conveniently
forgets the unprovoked violence of the Moplah riots, the Direct Action Day, the Noakhali
murders, the Partition related massacres and the extermination of millions of Hindus in
The Babri masjid (previously known as Janmasthan Mosque, signifying the birthplace of Ram)
demolition is repeatedly reminded as the justification of the country wise and subcontinent
wise temple destructions and Hindu killings that followed but the burning of over fifty
"karsevaks", mostly women and children, as the provocation for Gujrat riot, is conveniently
whitewashed by a fake enquiry commission, as an accident. The centuries old mayhem of Hindu
and Indian society is deliberately wiped out of History books, in the effort to "promote
communal harmony". But the Gujrat riot, where, even according to the opposition Congress
Government"s statistics, 25% of the fatalities were Hindus and scores died from police
firing, is forced into history books as a "planned Muslim genocide", thus, ironically,
testifying which community actually disrupts communal harmony the most.
If a victim has a Muslim name like Rizwanur, the media and political circus continues for
weeks but hardly anybody raises a eyebrow about a Hindu called Shailendra Prasad, who is
beheaded, on the order of a "Muslim village court" for marrying a Muslim woman, in communist
ruled west Bengal. (Kangaroo court "executes" man for marrying outside religion.
The Hindus are continuously reminded that "terrorists have no religion" and "all Muslims are
not terrorists"; hardly a consolation for the centuries of killings and destruction that
still continues. Hindus want their sufferings to be acknowledged, to say the least. The Jews
do not send suicide bombers to Germany for the Nazi atrocities but they sure want the world
to keep on remembering their sufferings. The Hindus want the same for their much larger
holocaust, because truth and not revenge, is also what they seek.
Despite being on the receiving end for centuries and even now, Hindus have so far still
maintained their ethics. How many of Hindu Muslim conflicts are initiated by Hindus? How
many Hindus bomb are blasted in a hospital or a busy market or mall, to cause death of
innocents? If so called "oppression" was the cause of birth of a terrorist, how many
terrorist have we seen from the 400,000 Kashmiri Pandits who were uprooted and forced to
live in refugee camps for over a generation? If "lack of education" was the reason for
becoming a suicide bomber, how do you explain the doctors and computer scientists, who are
members of Indian Mujaheddin, involved in serial blasts?
Hindus remembers what Rishi Aurobindo had said about Hindu Muslim integration, "I am sorry
they are making a fetish of this Hindu-Muslim unity. It is no use ignoring facts; some day
the Hindus may have to fight the Muslim and they must prepare for it. Hindu-Muslim unity
should not mean the subjection of the Hindus. Every time the mildness of the Hindu has given
way. The best solution would be to allow the Hindus to organize themselves and the
Hindu-Muslim unity would take care of itself, it would automatically solve the problem.
Otherwise, we are lulled into a false sense of satisfaction that we have solved a difficult
problem, when in fact we have only shelved it."
Organized, united and assertive is what Hindus have to be, for therein lies their survival
and the integrity of their motherland.
(To be Continued ...)
Are Hindus Violent? - Part 2
By: Bandyopadhyay Arindam
(Continued from Part 1)
And then, as if the "peaceful" Muslim menace is not enough, the Hindus are also being
"blessed" by the presence of the other major religious invader, the "God fearing and
ever-loving" Christians.
Many of us do not realize that Jesus was neither a Christian nor did he start Christianity.
Christianity, as we know today, was compiled by his followers over the next few centuries.
In close association with "western imperialism", Christianity has successfully conquered
majority of the world by centuries of violence, causing extinction of "pagan" ancient
civilizations of the Greek, the Romans, the Red Indians, the Mayans, the Aztecs, the
Australian aborigines and the indigenous African population. Having killed and converted the
populations in the name of the cross, they then preach nonviolence, take control of the
resources and rule the countries in the name of "democracy", manipulating the leaders and
the government to satisfy their need. Aided by the wealth that was accumulated by robbing
the conquered people, and military aggression, they lure countries into development in the
name of Industrialization, followed soon by Westernization and then Christianization. The
cultural and religious invasion is smooth, well organized, well funded and well executed,
amply masqueraded by such "faith based benevolent social services" like establishing
Christian educational and healthcare institutions and setting up non-governmental aid and
human rights organization that subtly promote western interest and missionary activities. It
is hard to blame the innocents who are easily attracted and fall for the glamour and
material comfort of "modern" life. Age old indigenous traditions and cultures are thus
gradually erased and humane qualities of morality, ethics and values get redefined.
In 1999, Pope John Paul II, gave a call to evangelize and "conquer" Asia in the third
millennium. So far, other than a few smaller countries like Vietnam, Philippines or South
Korea, Christianity is yet to set a firm foot on Asia continent, largely because the ancient
civilizations of India and China and the faith in the Eastern religions, largely Hinduism
and Buddhism. But since the last decade or so, with the active support of fundamental,
Christian Governments, dominated by the Bush lead Americans, evangelism has reached a new
dimension. Unable and hesitant to effectively manipulate the theocratic Muslim countries or
the communist Chinese for fear of retaliation, they have pounced upon India as a major but
soft target.
One has to realize that Christianity worldwide has always been and still is an
institutionalized, politically motivated, power hungry organization. The good old "father"
in a white robe, with a cross, as depicted in our movies, spreading "love" and "mercy", is
not necessarily the whole story. The current Pope Benedict, on his trip to Brazil, had
described the genocidal destruction of America"s pre-Columbus cultures as a "purifying" act
which gave the natives just what they were "longing" for. What a way to officially endorse
the mass murder, slavery and military aggression.
Have you heard of the AD2000 10/40 window? Their website overview describes, "The core of
the unreached people of our world live in a rectangular-shaped window! Often called "The
Resistant Belt", the window extends from West Africa to East Asia, from ten degrees north to
forty degrees north of the equator. This specific region. encompasses the majority of the
world"s Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists -- billions of spiritually impoverished souls." This
zone is the new area of evangelic activities, claimed to be the only guaranteed, one-way
ticket for the billions of non-Christian "impoverished souls" to go to heaven. India falls
right within it and the part of Northern India is felt to be the "core of the core"
consisting of poor, illiterate peoples who, thus, needs to be salvaged.
Similarly, the Joshua Project is a research initiative seeking to highlight the ethnic
people groups of the world with the least followers of Christ. The mission of Joshua Project
is to identify and highlight the people groups of the world that have the least exposure to
the Gospel and the least Christian presence in their midst, with the ultimate objective to
find out which people group need an initial church-planting movement in their midst and what
ministry resources are available to help outreach among the least-reached?
With the vigor of a major military operation, missionaries have chalked out 75000 pin codes
in India to get demographic information that perhaps is not available even to the Indian
Government. The whole objective is to reach the "unreached", to plant a church (often
actually nothing more than a prayer hall), within every walking distance, to increase the
number of harvested souls.
Where is the spirituality here? Where is it serving the mankind?
Christian missionaries now-a-days are more often full fledged, employed people working with
the sole motive of harvesting the soul and increasing the number of Christians, especially
so after the waning grip of Church"s control of the disillusioned mass in Europe and
"The method used by Christian missionaries in converting is like a network or multilevel
marketing technique used by multinational companies. In the first place they appoint young
people by giving them a salary of Rs 4000 to 4500. They will go around meeting the gullible
people in market areas, in buses etc., become friends and take them to church to introduce
to the father there. Upon introduction they will be paid Rs 2500 per person... Further
follow-up with them and finally conversion to Christianity by changing the name, they get an
incentive of Rs 10000 onwards. The more they convert the more bonus points are added."
(Newlife Christian Prayer meets abuse Hindus)
Here are some other facts on Conversion, probably unknown to many. (Conversion statistics,
Why We Need Anti Conversion Law)
. An annual budget of US $145 Billion is spent for missionary activities worldwide.
. Each year, churches around the world perform US $1.1 billion worth of research in 3,000
languages. Missionary literature in today"s libraries number 175,000 different titles in 500
languages. They run 13,000 major libraries. They publish 22,000 periodicals and print 4
billion tracts every year.
. They operate 1800 TV and radio stations propagating Christianity.
. They have on their role, 4 million full-time workers, larger than the combined military
strength of USA and Europe. This is the largest single army of workers save the red army of
China, to propagate Christianity.
. The total cost of Christian conversions averages $330,000 for each and every convert. It
costs Christians 700 times more money to convert someone in rich developed countries such as
Switzerland than in poor developing countries such as India. (That is why India is being
heavily targeted).
. Each day 10,000 Chinese are converted to Christianity.
. Each year 3.5% of Africans (6 Million) convert to Christianity.
. In India, it is estimated that 5,000 people are converted to Christianity everyday. That"s
one person every 17.28 seconds!
. In 1972, there were 26 indigenous missionary agencies in India; in 1997 there are more
than 200.
. There are more than 100,000 Pastors evangelists and preachers, working in India.
Not many are aware that after the Government of India, the Christians are the largest
land-owner in India. Despite the small percentage (claimed to be 2.5%, though actual figures
are much higher since many lower caste Christians, who constitute 70% of the Indian
Christians converts, do not report their new religious affiliation for fear of losing their
reservation benefits) of the population, they have a strong hold by virtue of their
political and financial connections. As per the Government of India"s Ministry of Home
Affairs report (2007) of Receipt of Foreign Contributions by Voluntary Associations, out of
the 15 top donor agencies eight were Christian, seven are "secular", and the total fund
donated was over $ 336 million. These non- governmental organizations have no obligation to
declare where that money is spent.
Christianity has grown phenomenally in the Northeast India. According to 2001 Census the
percentage of Christian population in Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Nagaland are 34, 70,
86 and 89 percent respectively. Practicing Hinduism is forbidden in some areas and several
Hindu saints have been killed. (
Separatist group bans Hindu festivities .) Hindus have been turned into minority in the
Northeast but, not surprisingly, without any "minority right". Many of the North-East
separatist organizations like the National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB),the National
Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT) and The National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN),
are not only Christian dominated, but enjoy overt or covert backing of the missionaries. A
BBC report in 2000 states that the NLFT was involved in forcing Tripura"s indigenous tribes
to become Christians and give up Hindu forms of worship in areas under their control. The
government of Tripura had proof that the state"s Baptist Church was involved in backing
separatist rebels. Tripura Chief Minister Manik Sarkar was quoted to testify the arrest of
Mr Nagmanlal Halam, secretary of the Noapara Baptist Church in Tripura, with a large
quantity of explosives. (Church backing Tripura rebels)
It would have given the billions of Indian immense pride if our nuclear-obsessed Prime
Minister had the guts to hurl these facts at the "self acclaimed, Christian masters of
democracy and equality", rather than the meekly surrendering to the accusation of "Christian
massacre" in India.
Christianity is also growing rapidly in the Southern states of Kerala, Karnataka and Tamil
Nadu and in Orissa. Tamil Nadu and Chennai are the state and city respectively, which get
the maximum amount of foreign funds. ( Receipt of Foreign Contribution by Voluntary
Associations). No doubt, Chennai is the fastest growing Christian hub of South Asia. Where
they are not as powerful, the missionaries" use the tactics of fraud, allurement and
misinformation to achieve their goal. But it is just a matter of time before they organize
their own henchmen to provide necessary muscle power. Not unexpectedly, during the recent
Orissa turmoil, a Christian leader from Orissa, much in the style of Imam Bukhari, warned
that if the government failed to stop attacks on his community, Christians will be forced to
raise a militia for self-defense.
Despite all these, Hindus have been largely tolerant to Christian aggression. The growth of
Christianity by itself is not so much the reason for Hindu resentment, but it is the methods
employed, from simple allurement of the poor, to the lies and deception to mislead, the
staging of miracle healings to persuade, the "trading of soul" in exchange of medical,
vocational and educational help, the defamation of Hindu traditions and scriptures and above
all the vilification of Hindu Gods, Goddesses and Deities that has been far below any level
of decency and respect. In the current conflict of Mangalore, which had no prior history of
clashes between Christians and Hindus, not only the local residents, but even the Mangalore
Diocesan agreed that the violence had broken out against forcible conversions. (Mangalore
residents blame forcible conversions for violence)
Ask a "good" Christian how he would react if one vilifies Mary or Jesus? Ask how he will
protest if one says that the story of Jesus" dying on the cross for the sins of mankind, the
subsequent resurrection and then rising to heaven, is a fake and deceitful story. Ask him
why so many biblical researchers even doubt the existence of Jesus , claiming it to be a
concoction of fables copied from the lives of Krishna, Buddha or Mithra. Wasn"t 25th
December the pagan birthday of Mithra, the Sun God, which the Christian borrowed?
Ask him why one has to believe in the Father and Son theory to go to heaven. What happened
to the rest of mankind before Christ arrived and to all the rest of the mankind who do not
believe in Christ? Why is the Christian God superior to other Gods? Is it because of the
combination of physical force and financial power of its followers? Why is it okay to
derogate other religions but intolerable to receive a protest against the church? Why it is
so necessary to have more disciples of Jesus - is he such a lonely Son? And why does one
have to use the path of allurement, of lies and deceit to convert - is there not enough
strength in the "love and mercy"?
The cause of the recent disturbance in Orissa, the brutal, organized execution of the
octogenarian, Hindu saint, Swami Lakshmanananda, along with four of his disciples on the eve
of Janmasthami, has been, as usual, downplayed. Initial full blown propaganda was in effect
to absolve the Christians of any responsibility and blame the Maoist for the ruthless
savagery (Maoists claim they killed "fascist" VHP leader in Orissa). The news that the
authorities have initially detained five local Christian people after the incident was
Now we are witnessing open admission by the Maoist that they are hand in glove with
Christians and were pressurized to eliminate the Swami. (Why Swami Laxmanananda was killed?)
According to Ashok Sahu, a retired IPS officer, who specializes in left wing extremism, "A
lot of Maoists were converts to Christianity and were involved in the (earlier) December
violence". (Who killed Swami Lakshmanananda?)
The unholy nexus between the Church and the Maoist is not new. The transformation of Nepal,
which used to be the only official Hindu country in the world, into a Maoist democracy has
not been without the blessing of the church. (New alliances, strange bedfellows emerging in
new Nepal: The church and the Maoists)
The anti-Hindu response to the widespread, subsequent Hindu reaction to the Swami"s murder,
has been totally predictable: the media, the politicians, the human rights group, the
minority rights group, the world Christian community, the Padmashree wife of Graham Staines,
the Vatican and even the White House responding in well orchestrated fashion, with the
apologist Prime Minister of the Government of India obliging them by declaring it as a
"national shame".
Where is the attempt to voice the Hindu"s side of the story? One has to be an explorer to
find news or articles in India media, news or television, which tries to honestly portray
the truth to the public. There is hardly any mention of the systematic and forceful methods
employed in conversion of tribal people, the increase in the Christian population in
Kandhamal District from 6 percent in 1970 to 27 percent in 2001, the massive land grabbing
by Christians, the politics of reservation and quota, the atrocities suffered by the Hindu
Vanavasis, the destruction of their idols and their temples, the rampage on their houses and
cattle, the "unidentified" people setting fire to Hindu houses, the atrocities of Christian
mobs, the rumor of Christian militia or the plight of the Hindus in relief camps?
(Evangelists tie up with Maoists to create mayhem in Kandhamal
India"s vengeful Christians turn to murder as Hindus step up their killing campaign) One can
be assured that the media will continue to highlight the "atrocities of the Hindu
fundamentalist on peaceful Christians" as they still do with the Staines murder (always
included as a footnote on any mention of religious conflict in Orissa) but will make sure
that people forget the killing of Swami Laxmanananda Saraswati, "the figurehead of the
extremist, Vishwa Hindu Parishad" just as they have forgotten another Janmasthami incident,
the bomb blast at the Krishna temple belonging to the ISKCON society in Manipur, in 2006,
that killed six people and injured 50 other including Damodora Swami, International Director
of ISKCON, who succumbed to his injuries, 2 months later.
Sensible Christians have come to understand the animosity that is generated by forceful or
deceitful conversion. R L Francis, convener, Poor Christian Liberation Movement (PCLM),
observes, "The tragic turn of events in Kandhamal in Orissa once again highlights the urgent
need for church authorities to immediately halt the fraudulent conversions of India"s Tribal
and Dalit populace, which are causing so much heart-burning and cultural anxiety."
Recently an unqualified apology was tendered by Right Reverend J Jon Bruno, bishop of the
Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles, on behalf of Christian community to Hindus worldwide,
denouncing proselytization by Christian missionaries, and "for centuries-old acts of
religious discrimination by Christians, including attempts to convert them." (Episcopal
Christians apologise to Hindus for discrimination, proselytisation)
Father George Palakkapillai, a Christian clergy of Kerala, had earlier admitted, "The
demeaning comments against Hindu gods and goddesses that are made by Christians for
conversion purposes are the basic reason of conflict between the two communities."
The inciting events of the spontaneous Hindu uproar in Mangalore and other places in
Karnataka, is the instigation of the New Life Foundation, a particularly aggressive and
radical Christians group"s hostile campaign to convert people, which has been denounced by
both the Hindus and the Catholics. (New Life Church under fire from Hindus and Catholics)
Its methodology and approach adopted were quite distinctive. It makes the innocent and
gullible converts to trample upon the photos of Hindu gods and goddesses, insult Hindu gods,
use foul language against gods and goddesses. (Hindu gods are lesser god; they do not
deserve the capital G!). What has been conveniently downplayed by the media are facts that
large part of the "peaceful" Christian mobs have been armed and holing out in the Churches,
that Hindus including a local leader of Sri Rama Sena have been murdered and that at least
some of the battles have become more of Police-Christian fights rather than having any Hindu
involvement. (Wounded hearts)
Interestingly, various so called secular and human rights activists have been reported to be
working overtime to undermine a peace initiative executed by the Catholic Christians, led by
the Bishop of Mangalore Dr. Aloysius Paul D"Souza and Hindu organizations, actually
condemning the Bishop for "compromising" Christian interest during the peace talk. (Secular
activists ruining the chances of peace) Margaret Alva, former member of parliament, general
secretary of Indian National Congress, close advisor to the Congress President, Sonia Gandhi
and an obvious representative of the Christian political clout that governs this nation, has
been quoted to say, "We (Christians) will form suicide squads to counter Hindus" ( Times of
India, 20.09.2008, quoted)
This is not anything new - this has been the time tested strategy. They will provoke and
incite and when reacted upon, will cry victim, blame "Hindu fundamentalism" and raise the
flag of minority rights and religious freedom. The complicit media will buy and propagate
their story, the gutless, biased seculars and human right activists will obviously find
fault with the majority community, the vote hungry politician, often a minority himself,
will yell at the top of his voice to "denounce atrocities against minorities. At the end of
all when the truth is revealed as otherwise, it will be suppressed and one more stigma will
be permanently attached to the Hindus and their organizations.
How long and why should Hindus tolerate this?
Hindus have seen the Christian propaganda at full throttle in the Jabhua, Madhya Pradesh
case, in Sept 1998, when a group of people raped 4 nuns and the obvious suspects were
workers of Hindu organization. Hell was raised for days but when the criminals were
arrested, it was found to be mostly Christians themselves, without any member of any Hindu
organization being incriminated. Not a word of apology or a statement of correction was
offered to the Hindu organizations.
The same was the case of the hugely publicized, death of the evangelist, missionary Graham
Staines and his two children in Manoharpur, Orissa. The sympathy factor created by the
unfortunate death of the two children made international news and Hindu groups were
lambasted. Following investigations, it was found that no Hindu group was involved. The
chief accused Dara Singh himself also denied any association with any Hindu group.
There are numerous such cases where Hindu groups have been blamed, almost automatically,
duly sensationalized by our media and politicians, that have later been found to be
unrelated to any Hindu organizations. (Interested readers should check out, "Ground Reality
about allegations of so-called assaults on Christian Missionaries", a VHP Press Release).
Each instance is orchestrated to leave a mark of "guilt" in the mind of the unsuspecting,
ill-informed, common Hindu; a psychological gain that the Christians use to further their
cause. Never is an apology conveyed for any of these false accusations - a planned
psychological warfare.
It is true that undesirable incidences do happen as in any mob violence. But can a conflict
or fight happen without involvement of the other side? In the current situation in
Karnataka, the Hindu organizations have categorically condemned the destruction of religious
properties but that hardly changed the secular crowd"s mindset. Contrast this with the
repeated e-mail claims of the Indian Mujaheddin that they are behind the serial terrorist
blasts. The media and politicians, in this case, are arguing to save the terrorists of the
Indian Mujaheddin, even doubting their existence and actually blaming that there is a Hindu
hand to defame Muslim name.
The recent violence in Assam that killed at least 50 people and injured more than 100 is
hardly getting any importance in the news media. It was initially reported as clashes
between Bodos and illegal Bangladeshi migrants (Assam violence toll rises to 40) and is now
suspected a systematic ethnic cleansing perpetrated by the National Democratic Front of
Bodoland (NDFB), a Christian affiliated rebel group, fighting for an independent tribal
homeland. ( Assam violence was systematic ethnic cleansing, says minister) against a
predominant Muslim crowd of Bangladeshi infiltrators. One does not hear any major uproar
from secular political leaders or any stunting gimmicks from human right activists in this
clash of the "peaceful religions", since there is no "Hindu extremist, involved.
(To be continued...)

Are Hindus Violent? - Part 3
By: Bandyopadhyay Arindam
Continued from Part 2..
One question does arise - why is our media, politicians and human right activists so biased
and one-sided. Is it just their naivety? Is it their lack of self esteem, resulting from
centuries of foreign rule? Is it fear from otherwise becoming the "target of wrath of
minority extremists"? Or is there some other vested interest like power, money and
influence? Do they really hate the faith of their motherland so much that they cannot see
through the nefarious designs? Why is the Indian media, specially of the English language
variety, so hell bent to belittle and ridicule Hinduism and its priest and followers and
almost invariably go gaga on any achievement while pretending ignorance in case of any
blemish of other religions and its propagators?
Forty years of selfless, dedicated work of Swami Lakshmanananda, himself a Dalit, amongst
the tribals of Orissa, fails to impress our media. Contrast that with Graham Staines"
motivated, missionary activities that were glorified by pages of mainline news, after his
death. When was the last time we saw an article praising the work of Ramakrishna Mission or
Bharat Sevashram Sanga? Is it because they are Hindu, Indian organization, not as filthy
rich as World vision International or Caritas India, Delhi, that their effort and spirit is
not worth mentioning?
A Hindu God-man in far off Austin, Texas, accused of sexual charges or a child death in a
Hindu Ashram is sensationalized with speculations. How often do the India media try to
illuminate the mass about the menace of child pornography or sexual exploitation practiced
by Christian priests worldwide that are acknowledged and covered up by huge compensations?
(Catholic sex abuse cases. Evangelist arrested in child porn case. Kerala priest, film
director, politician held for minor"s rape)
Why do the mainstream media do not miss any instance of glorifying the "saints" of
Christianity but fail to explore criminal activities of Christian pastors. (63 priests in
Kerala face criminal charges)
Where is the follow up of alleged 975 "mysterious deaths" that took place at The Divine
Retreat Centre in Kerala"s Muringoor, which claims to be the largest Catholic healing centre
in the world, between 1996 and 2006 (Scandal at Christian retreat centre)
Why does one not come across any investigative journalism on mainline newspapers on cases
like the "suicide" of "sister Abhaya", the 21-year-old Catholic nun found floating in the
well of the Pius X Convent Hostel at Kottyam, March 27, 1992, under mysterious
circumstances. Fathers and Sisters of the convent are suspects, and it has been reported
that a former Congress Prime Minister"s office had tried hushing up the case and that the
High court, had reprimanded the CBI for tampering with some relevant CDs containing data on
narco-analysis. The case remains undecided even after 16yrs.
A recent, similar "suicide" case of Sister Anoopa Mary, 23-year-old nun, found hanging dead,
inside her room at the Saint Mary"s Convent at Kollam, is now under judicial probe after
accusation of mental and "other" harassment from the victim"s family.
A church is destroyed and the blame is automatically placed on "Hindu fundamentalists". A
temple ransacked however becomes the work of "unidentified miscreants". (Now, attempt to
attack temples in Orissa.)
And how about when it is a Christian who attacks the church? (Church attack in Kerala, A
Christian under arrest
Church Games spread to other states)
Why can"t the visual and print media who run sensational stories to link Hindu organizations
with the attacks, fail to report these game plans and managed attacks.
Or do they don"t want to?
It is time for these so called secular politicians and media personnel to realize that
Hindus are not going to take it anymore. Hindus realize that they are cornered and isolated.
Their media, their political leaders, their government hardly care for their well being
because they are perceived to be peace-loving, tolerant and thus incapable of protest or
retaliation. Above all, they do not take a united stand and thus do not count as vote banks.
But things have started to change. The silent, united resolve of the Jammu people should
serve as a warning. The restlessness in Orissa and Karnataka are early signs. Hindus are
rising! Beware the traitors! Bharatvarsha and Hindus have been around since ancient time and
have survived assaults after assaults. Yes, we are peace loving, tolerant and
non-interfering. We had sheltered the Jews and the Parsees during their difficult times. We
are broadminded enough to accept people of all religious faith including the Muslims and
Christians. We consider the Indian Muslim and Christians as sons of the soil and admit their
equal right and freedom. But Hindus want reciprocity. Hindus want coexistence with respect
and honor. We want non Hindus to respect our temples and our deities if they desire that we
will respect theirs. Hindus are no more willing to accept their malicious intents of
intrusions and heinous designs of deceptions. We have learnt from our mistakes and do not
want to live anymore as second class citizens in our own land. We want to live with our
heads held high; we want to protect our culture and revive our pride.
We want to do it peacefully. But if that is not acceptable to others, then we are prepared
to fight for our rights. We have fought for our "azaadi" before and we sure will not shy way
from another fight against all the evil forces that threaten our existence and our country.
The cycles are changing. The uprising is visible, the mood change is palpable. At least some
Hindus are preparing to pay back in the same coin. The Khudiram Basus, the Mangal Pandeys
and the Bhagat Singhs amongst us, are ready for sacrifice again.
How about the rest of us - the peaceful, tolerant and forgiving, if not indifferent, Hindus?
We took pride and satisfaction at the steely resolve of the people of Jammu when they
brought the government down to its knee, with their united stance. But did we, the rest of
the country, really join them? Do we stand united? Do we claim our majority interest? Why
We forgave Muhammed Ghori by mistake and the Muslim rule started. We welcomed East India
Company and the British Rule ensued. We allowed Vasco da Gama to land in Goa and the
Inquisition followed. When are we going to learn? We dream to be a superpower but hesitate
to uproot a few weeds in our backyard.
Are we going to sit on the fence always or are we going to join now? What is each of us
supposed to do? We need to think hard.
Should we continue to compromise our self-interest, as we have done for centuries, for the
belief that "all religions are equal", when Muslims and Christians continue to remind us
that they do not consider Hindus as their equal? Should we continue on the path of
"nonviolence" and "tolerance", despite being gradually decimated?
If an intruder comes to our house and wants to take our valuables, wants to hurt us, how
should we react? If they lure our unsuspecting son or daughter with "gifts" in exchange of
their soul, should we protest? If they abuse our heritage and threaten our faith and
tradition, should we resist? If yes, then why should we react differently when it involves
our larger family, our motherland?
Should we react and resist?
Do we have the right of self- defense?
Should we use violence for our self protection?
Is that violence condemnable? Or, is it to be embraced?
Each of us has to make that decision and work for it. Our country is at crossroads. Our
future depends on how we fight now. Will India head for another partition? Will India become
a Christian nation?
Koenraad Elst, in his book, "Negationism in India", writes, "Consider the situation in
Africa: in 1900, 50 % of all Africans practiced pagan religion; today Christian and Islamic
missionaries have reduced this number to less than 10 %.....That is the kind of threat
Hinduism is up against.
Do we think it is inconceivable? Have we forgotten history so soon? Have we forgotten the
"friendly" nation of Iraq that was once "used" against Iran? Are we not subsequently
witnessing the invasion that started on the pretext of "weapons of mass destruction" and has
killed over one million Iraqis, all because the "born-again Christian" American President
had "received a call from God"? Should we be waiting for that kind of a catastrophe to
strike Bharatvarsha?
What is our role going to be? Look to the inner Krishna forever guiding us through the Gita
at every battle where Dharma stares upon the face of Adharma. The battle is eternal as is
the call for righteous action, irrespective of consequences, that the Lord takes
responsibility for.
There in lies the answer.
(The author, a practicing physician, is not affiliated with any Hindu organization.)

The dark side of terrorists revealed in MSN Internal Security Get it now.

No comments: