The Exterminator

Aug

Fareed Zakaria: A Terror Sleeper Cell Awakened
Thayalan Reddy

It is high time that both liberals and conservatives realize that for all their misguided connotations about Mohammed and his religion, Islam itself is experiencing a new high. Such a circumstance, which may appear as a good thing to some, genuinely does not bode well for the overall welfare of humanity. Subsequently, we learn at our peril two vitally important lessons. Firstly, it is an inordinately dangerous exercise to awaken a terrorist cell because there is no ending to how many other cell groups will be activated. Next, once the fighting begins it is imperative that an untold number of significantly crushing blows be delivered so that the Muslim terrorists have little opportunities to wreak further violence. Although it may come as a surprise to many people, the simple truth is that those countries who want to maintain the peace within their borders must also turn into rubble every mosque that exists in the homeland. Of course, such an action must also be followed up by the hunting down and burning of every Quran that exists. Plainly, there is no other way to deal with the insanity that Islam’s mad Arabian prophet had unleashed in this world.

Given the barbarity and violence that Islam has showered throughout the centuries, it is sheer madness to believe that the building of any mosques to promote Mohammed’s insane teachings is a pursuit for peace. One has to understand that certain so-called religions cannot exist without the need for violence. To be sure the world’s oldest religion, Hinduism, does not belong in this category but Islam certainly does. So, whether they are built in Muslim countries or in areas that are dominated by Muslims, it is fair to say that non-Muslims should, at best, remain very fearful. After all, it is no longer a secret that those very structures will inevitably become the recruiting ground for terrorism. Conversely, when mosques are built in neighborhoods that are almost entirely populated by non-Muslims, they serve as a warning and a reminder that soon enough Muslims either through force or conversion will have a sizable majority in those regions. It is then only a matter of time that these terrorists will seek to impose sharia laws. This then is the face of Islam.

Now, there is no secret, among those who have bothered to study Islam, that wherever Islam had gone the most horrifying violence soon followed. This circumstance is by no means a recent phenomenon. Such a call for outright violence or what Islam calls a “widespread slaughter” had expressly come from no other place but the demented mind of Mohammed. It was truly the mad Arabian prophet alone, who had initiated the conquering of Mecca and the brutal slaying of its merchants and traders. Then in what can only be described as a typical Muslim ploy, he turned the situation around and claimed the he was being persecuted by his pagan brethren. Unless a person is a complete dolt, it ought not to be very difficult to realize that the people in Egypt, Syria, Iran, Yemen, Indonesia, India and other neighboring territories never persecuted Muslims. Why then did Muslim terrorists conquer these nations? Why was it necessary to take “booty” and institute a campaign of wide slaughter in which the blood of innocent non Muslim men women and children flowed freely in the streets. Why indeed did the Muslim conquerors feel the necessity to raped non-Muslim women and children and take them as slaves? The obvious answer is that a mad Arabian prophet named Mohammed concocted such a scheme because he hated the very notion of his person and his religion being rejected. In sum, this is the selfsame barbarian who desired that every corner of this planet must have a mosque so that on the so-called “day of judgment” he would get credit for having more followers than Moses.

Of course, Mohammed was not only concerned about the Hereafter. Nay, he also sought fame and fortune. Indisputably, one well established barbaric practice that he adamantly promoted is the conquering of territories in order to destroy the existing religious and social institutions. The explicit purposes for undertaking such a mission was to a) erect mosques on some of those very foundations of the religious institutions b) recruit more terrorists c) steal the wealth of the unfortunate victims and d) rape the women and children. The history for such devilish behavior does not merely stretch all the way from Egypt to Indonesia. By all accounts Mohammed had set such a precedent when he usurped the pagan Arab Kaaba and their chief god – Allah. He then went so far as to prostitute that moon god, Allah, in order to cajole people into believing that it was an almighty being. By now, it is quite clear that Islam used Allah’s name merely to promote the idea that Muslims were religious people who prayed five times daily. Yet, even this claim turns out to be a lie. Sure enough, for the entire claim that it is one of the pillars of Islam, nowhere in the Quran does Allah ever make the request that Muslims must pray five times daily. As a matter of fact Mohammed openly stated that one night of fighting was equivalent to 2000 years of prayer. How then is can anyone consider Islam a religion when it is in fact an out and out terrorist organization.

By far, when one thoroughly analyses the Quran it becomes altogether clear that Allah was merely an alter ego of Mohammed and that Mohammed was really in control of that entity. Genuinely it was never the other way around. It is for this very reason that a person can never be a Muslim even if he loves Allah with all his soul and all his might. Indeed, one necessarily has to accept Mohammed also if he wants little boys with eyes like pearls to serve him alcoholic beverages in Mohammed’s make belief Muslim paradise. Here again, there is no way around this situation. Yet, Muslims rarely question the fact that a proxy demigod like Mohammed is hardly a worthy representative to reveal what was here before this world came into existence and what will be here when all this is gone. At best, the only information that Mohammed can give anyone about god is that they must become terrorists and kill people so that they will earn the reward of seventy-two virgins.

No doubt it is often difficult to walk away from a belief that has taken a grip of the mind. This is especially true if one is foolish enough to believe that a fair share of beauties await them in heaven. Therefore, it is hardly a surprise that Muslim terrorists have chosen to hold on to Mohammed’s teachings even when their better judgment reveals how truly disgusting their prophet was really. Not surprisingly the doctrine of Islam embraced this sordid circumstance because it wanted the Mussulman to live a life of lies and deceit. In so doing, Islam enabled him to believe that his utterly backward religion is anchored in the most inscrutable Truth. In particular, such an indoctrination allows the Mussulman to believe among other things that both Allah and the angel Gabriel were totally overjoy that Mohammed had sexually molested his best friend’s baby daughter – Aisha – in his bathtub. As if such a prospect was not difficult enough for a devotee to bear, he had to then rationalize how it is that the pissy/shitty water from Mohammed’s putrid bathtub was given as talisman to the followers, who presumably drank it to prove their so-called faith in Islam.

It is useful to know that Mohammed had painstakingly crafted such barbaric practices to ensure that a Muslim was a completely different animal. Indeed for all the absurd claims that Islam is a peaceful religion it is altogether quite clear that the usurpation of the pagan Kaaba in Mecca and the wanton destruction of the giant Buddhist statues in Afghanistan is an intrinsic part of the Islamic teachings. However much Muslims may want the kafirs (non-Muslims) to believe that such events are anomalies the preponderance of evidence reveals that thousands of temples as far away as India were systematically destroyed by those Muslims terrorists? The salient point here is that the actions of the Muslim terrorists are not executed as a “gotcha moment”. Nay, it is the standard practice of Muslims to denigrate their victims and make them question their own sanity and their faith. Such a tactic was adopted almost immediately by Mohammed because he above anyone else understood that Islam had nothing else to offer beside an absurd monotheistic doctrine. Meanwhile, he gave his victims no hope of rebuilding their worship centers because his terrorists were too busy erecting mosques on those very properties.

One such occurrence involved the destruction of a very sacred Temple in Ayodhya. In what still remains a very tense situation, Muslim terrorists several centuries ago targeted the Hindu Temple because it represented one of the better known avatars of India – Lord Rama. The reason for targeting such a temple is hardly a secret when one considers that the life of Lord Rama is captured in one of Hinduism’s greatest epics – the Ramayana. This attack reveals a great deal about what is really behind the thinking of Muslims, who seek to build their mosque near the ground zero site in New York. Firstly, the Twin Towers represented the tallest and grandest attributes of America. By way of comparison, the Ayodhya temple also represented the grandest achievements of the Hindus who spared no cost when it came to expressing devotion for their Gods. No doubt, such practice must have incensed the Muslim conquerors immensely. Very definitely, as long as Islam exists it will never tolerate any such genuine devotion by people of other religions. One reason for the Muslim terrorists’ outrage is that their prophet hardwired them to believe that such structures deserved to be pillaged and destroyed because Islam alone worships the one and only true god.

It is not out of the question that Mohammed must have anticipated how the victims of his evil actions would react to his senseless need for murder and mayhem. In fact, the best way to understand this situation is to attempt to recall the feeling of loss, mistrust, disappointment and other emotions that the victims of 9/11 felt when they had witnessed the destruction of the Twin Towers. Likewise these feelings were also experienced by the unfortunate Hindus, who had witnessed not just a building, but also their most sacred religious structures being destroyed repeatedly by the Muslim terrorists. Then as if to add insult to injury the Muslim terrorists established their authority by erecting Mosques on the very foundation of the destroyed Temples. Who then can deny that such an act was not arrogance in its most evil form?

Curiously, many Muslims terrorists have come to rationalize the obliteration of the temple in Ayodhya as something akin to granting a spiritual favor to the majority Hindu population. In their demented minds they believe the destruction was necessary because Prophet Mohammed alone reserved the right to tell other people how they must or must not worship. In fact, when it comes to the so-called practice of idolatry, their prophet had granted them the right to kill those who supported such a thing. Yet, Muslim terrorists refuse to acknowledge the fact that Mohammed was an incurable idolater in every sense of the word. To be sure he proved to be far worse that the people that worshipped the golden calf in Moses’ times. Who among those in the Muslim fold can ever deny that the mad Arabian prophet not only revered the pagan black stone in the Kaaba? In point of fact Mohammed in no uncertain terms had also kissed and licked that idol. How then is Mohammed not an idolater? Furthermore, the absolute proof of his worship of idols has already been established by Salman Rushdie. In that instance, Mohammed had gone so far as to sanction the worship of Allah’s wife and daughters – Alat, Manat etc. This alone proves that every Muslim is a complete idiot and a terrorist for wanting to destroy a practice that their prophet similarly engaged in viz. idolatry.

Now, Muslims will argue that they have several intellectuals that are neither idiots nor terrorists by any stretch of the imagination. One such person they will readily point to is none other than Fareed Zakaria. Many people will recognize this Muslim terrorist because he is a well known both as a Newsweek journalist and a CNN host. Zakaria usually comes across as an incisive finder of the facts and rarely disappoints his audience. Yet, in his pathetic speech on CNN this Muslim terrorist claimed that he could not in “good conscience” keep the Hubert Humphrey Award for First Amendment Freedoms, which was given to him by the Anti-Defamation League. Evidently, he took issue with the fact that the League had opposed the building of a Mosque near Ground Zero. According to the Huffington Post, Zakaria goes on to state: the man behind the proposed Ground Zero Islamic community center, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, “has spent years trying to offer a liberal interpretation of Islam” and “argues that America is actually what an ideal Islamic society would look like because is it (sic) peaceful, tolerant and pluralistic. Zakaria further asserts, “His (imam Rauf) vision for Islam, in other words, is Osama Bin Laden’s nightmare.”.

Keeping in mind all that has been stated above, it is instructive to delve into the mind of this so-called Muslim intellectual. Firstly, Zakaria’s claim of “good conscience” is amusing and puzzling at the same time? Genuinely, in the call for “Jihad and wide slaughter” the doctrine of Islam absolutely demands that a Muslim have “no conscience” whatsoever. This is particularly true because Allah – the demented alter ego of Mohammed) – decreed that it is an act of mercy to kill the infidels and idolaters. Therefore, when Zakaria in good conscience defends the erection of the mosque near ground zero he is also in good conscience defending the right of that institution to promote the idea of killing idolaters and waging a Jihad against non-believers. Inextricably, such beliefs are the fundamental teachings of Islam.

No doubt, the members of the Anti-Defamation League have to examine their consciences regarding the decision to honor Zakaria with an award as well. The truth of the matter is that no Muslim, who really has a “good conscience”, can ever remain a Muslim if he ever believes in the freedom of religion. How can it be otherwise when their demented founder had claimed that he alone was the “last prophet and that Allah had sanctioned the killing of idolaters?” If nothing else, Mohammed’s absurd claim meant that anyone who contradicted him was not only a liar but also deserving of death. Therefore, it is fair to claim that the notion of prophet-hood has caused a great deal of madness in Islam.

It is also fair to say that Zakaria provides an interesting insight into the madness that Islam has caused to its followers psyche. Somehow, the CNN host seems to believe that America is actually what an ideal Islamic society would look like because it is peaceful, tolerant and pluralistic. Firstly, true Islam will never tolerate freedom of religion. This is backed up by Mohammed’s own desires which unequivocally demanded that no other religion but Islam should be practiced in Arabia. As for the prospects of peace and tolerance one has only to witness how Hindus have faired under Muslim rule in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh to recognize that tolerance and peace is never the ideal of Islam. As if such a thing is not terrible enough, Muslim violence against other Muslims is hardly a tame affair. Still, it is quite sad to witness that Zakaria had to stoop to outright lies when he stated that Islam is for plurality. In the very country that he hails from Muslims who enjoy the greatest religious freedoms have not only sought to divide an already divided India. Nay in places like Kashmir, Muslims cannot contain their eagerness to pillage and plunder the Hindu neighborhood and drive them out. The truth of the matter is that Islam can only survive under dictatorships. Indeed, if democracy really got a grip in Islamic countries, Muslim women will be the first to reject the insane doctrine of the Arabian prophet, who himself was a dictator.

Therefore, when Zakaria asserts that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf’s “vision for Islam is Osama Bin Laden’s nightmare,” he is hardly being candid. After all, the role of a Muslim sleeper cell is to promote the opposite ideals of Islam when the times are bad for the religion. Having come out badly beaten as a consequence of 9/11, Muslims terrorists, in the form of Imams and journalists have realized that it would be sheer madness to promote their anti-rational prophet true desires for Islam viz. murder, mayhem and the taking of booty. When faced with such a situation, the cunning prophet had warned Muslims to be extremely untruthful when dealing with non-Muslims. Hence it is no coincidence that a confused Muslim American population is now forced to plead that their religion is a peaceful one. The salient point to remember is that that every American would have been witnessing a wide slaughter perhaps more widespread than what the Native Americans had encountered at the hand of white Christians if the Muslim terrorists had succeeded in conquering America on 9/11. Therefore, it is entirely untrue that Islam would ever aspire to allowing freedom of religion with all it concomitant liberties. Such a thing would mean that people are free to draw Mohammed having sex with a little child in his bathtub or criticizing the manner in which Mohammed both treated and represented women in the Quran.

In the final analysis, it should be of no mystery to anyone to witness what is really going on with Fareed Zakaria. He – like anyone who swears by the Quran – is a Muslim terrorist. His current role as a terrorist is to protect the image of Islam even if it means he must make outrageous claims such as the one in which he states that Islamic ideals are very much in keeping with what America represents. This claim is utter balderdash. For the most part it is hardly different to the feelings expressed by some Afrikaners, who repeatedly voted for an Apartheid government while they pretended to be against racial discrimination. In like manner, the role of a sleeper cell is to force such a false image upon an unsuspecting non-Muslim nation so that they may be confused into believing that acts of terrors like the one that was deliver on 9/11 did not mean that Islam had lost its peaceful ways. After all, Islam is banking on the fact that it has plenty time to bring to fruition the mad desires of Mohammed to capture kill and convert the heathens. It is during times like these that it needs people like Zakaria to reduce the pressure by staving off some of the pressure that Islam is currently encountering. Still, it ought to be remembered that even if the whole world is converted to Islam, nothing good or grand will ever come of it. The truth of the matter is that Muslim terrorists have been so damaged by the teachings of Islam that they will inevitably fight among themselves. It is very likely that one of their wars would have involved the question of who among the Muslim factions had the longest beard.

Thayalan Reddy is the Author of Islam: Mohammed Sex for Terrorism Scheme.

Categorized in Islam
Tags: Fareed Zakaria

Jul

A Hindu Response to Racist Journalists, Police and Murderers

Leave a Comment

Although the facts remain largely ignored, it ought to be known that the historical victimization and outright murder of millions of Hindus were perpetrated by people of monotheistic religions – Jews, Christians and Muslims. For the most part, the massacres have received little attention because Hindus unlike Jews, Muslims and Christians are generally reluctant to dwell on their sufferings. Seemingly, they also sought to avoid creating an elaborate documentations of embarrassing episodes in which they had sometimes hopelessly failed to protect their culture, tradition and nation.

Consequently, some of the most unlikeliest of killers remain free of bloodstains even as their crimes have been monumental to say the least. By far, a vast majority of people may be surprised to learn that one of the greatest perpetrators of genocide in India were none other than Jews. In no uncertain terms, these people in their greed to promote the East India Company had caused the deaths of more Hindus than Hitler had ever done to the Jewish nation. Indeed, the facts are plain that their participation on behalf of the said company led to the defrauding and wholesale murder of Indian people throughout the 18^th and 19^th Centuries. Indeed, few can deny that it was the Jewish-Prime Minister of Britain – Benjamin Disraeli – who had presided over the deliberate and wholesale famines, which led to the deaths of upwards of 30 million Hindus in India. We know now that such famines could not have occurred without the Jewish controlled agency of the British Government being involved. Hence, it is utter nonsense to glorify the suffering of the Jews and ignore what they had done to the Hindus.

Simply stated, if Hindus had been left to their own devices, they would have come up with a plan to prevent starvation as they had done in all previous occasions. Hindus throughout their history were competent agriculturalists, who had successfully provided for themselves before Disraeli‘s government took over the affairs of Hindus. All this changed, during Disraeli’s rule. Indians were forcibly separated from their families and homeland when they were forcibly shipped to places like Africa, Trinidad, Jamaica and other places. The explicit purpose for the inhumane exercise was to fulfill Britain’s need for slave labor in its sugar cane plantations throughout its colonies. We know for sure that many Hindus perished at sea in an attempt to get back to mainland India as soon as they had realized that they had been duped by the Disraeli government. Therefore, it may serve the Hindu well to ask: Could such deliberately murderous undertakings have been done to warn Indians that they ought not to come in the way of the Jew and his greed for money?

Now discerning Indians had trusted that Time Magazine would have been sensitive to the plight of the Hindus especially with regard to their victimization and slaughter. Yet, its editorial board saw fit to allow an insensitive and downright insulting Jewish writer – Joel Stein – to spew his racial hatred against Indians in their fledgling magazine. For many decades now it has become clear that Time Magazine has promoted unworthy Christian causes in a very charitable light. This is the reason that none of its articles ever take the position that Jesus was a fictional character, whose historicity – not to mention his so-called Shroud of Turin – was always in great doubt. Rather the magazine has swallowed hook, line and sinker the thoroughly absurd belief that the Jews are somehow God’s so-called chosen people. Could this be the reason that God – in addition to extracting revenge for killing his so-called son – might have chosen Hitler to kill Jews? Sure enough, Time’s editorial board is so thoroughly ignorant of the fact that Jesus was a spiritual fraud that they refuse to believe their own Bible which thoroughly refutes his so-called resurrection and death on the cross. It follows that the spiritual blindness of its editors is so thoroughly entrenched that it now seeks to defend the new messiah on the block – Joel Stein – as if his words are gospel too. It is no coincidence therefore that the magazine justifies Stein’s insult of Indians as a writing exercise which was done strictly under the color of “humor.”

Obviously, if Stein’s article was written with humor in mind then it is quite permissible to suggest that all the Jews in Time Magazine, including Mr. Stein himself should have been a part of Hitler’s ” burnt offering” (Holocaust). Very definitely, had such a circumstance been a reality then all Indians would not have had to suffer their wickedly humor. After all, in Stein’s case it is quite evident that his rotten background qualifies him for what George Bush would have considered a “preemptive strike.” Perhaps the only question remaining would be whether the gas chambers or some form of shock and awe would be appropriate to wipe out this trashy journalist and prevent him from spewing hate in the future. Judging form Stein’s confession alone it is apparent that he very likely resembles Saddam Hussein – who was also a thief and a hater. Lest it be forgotten, Stein betrayed his friend, when he had accused him of stealing from an Italian Restaurant. Still, it would have been better for him to reveal whether he had eaten the pig’s penis that his friend had stolen. But Stein reveals that he too was just as much a rogue as his friend. Sure enough, the self-confessed shoplifter freely admits that he had stolen from his local A&P. Of course, Stein leaves little doubt that he also has a proven background as a pervert. In his article Stein unabashedly admits that he snuck into theatres to see R-Rated movies. Ironically, the Hindus would have welcomed the prospect that all Jews retain some curiosity about a woman’s vagina. In so doing, they might very well have saved the world a great deal of misery by simply sticking their fingers into Mary’s vagina to determine once and for all whether the Jewish whore was really a virgin. Plainly, such an examination would have saved a great deal of bother especially in India where Christian conversion has become a menace to the nation because the Jewish religion gave birth to Jesus’ unholy crap.

No doubt, with his shoddy upbringing it is hardly difficult to understand the reason that Stein fails to comprehend how a group of Indians from halfway across the world would “chose a random town in New Jersey to populate.” Evidently, Time Magazine’s “humorous” writer seems to ignore the fact that the Hindus were the very people whom his ancestors had sought to murder and pillage in order to gain such niceties as spices, gold, diamonds and rubies. Apparently, Stein’s amnesia is convenient because it allows him to set aside the fact that he would not have been in New Jersey let alone America if his people did not rape, murder and rob the Native Americans. Next, it is doubtful that this Jewish scum realizes that all Indians are forever grateful to the Native American people because they had suffered mightily for what would otherwise have been the fate of Hindus. This fact ought not to be discounted because the outright killing of the Native Americans and the raping of their women and children began when America was mistaken for India. Could it be that Stein is angry because Hindus have successfully occupied his town by the most non-violent means as opposed to the role that his ancestors played in helping to slaughter innocent people to steal their lands and resources?

In his article Stein mentions India’s poverty as if such a thing is a curse. He conveniently forgets that people in America are not only eating out of garbage cans but also starving. Evidently, this materialistic kook also failed to recognize that as recently as 2 1/2 Centuries ago India was the wealthiest country in the world. Again, all that changed when the Jews conspired with the British to wipe out 30 million Hindus in their greed to control the financial affairs of India. This greed is still ongoing when one considers the role of Jews as bankers and financiers, who may still be contributing to the ongoing global financial crises.

Without question, the Hindu people would have loved to be the friends of the Jews. After all, they share a common enemy viz. Muslims. However, no such friendship is possible when people like Stein seek to insult the dignity and integrity of the Hindus. In truth, Stein is not the only Jew who makes a living insulting Indians. Sufficient documentation of facts reveals that even Jewish Arms Dealers who stand to make trillions of dollars from India have not hesitated to insult Hindus. Yet, these people still find a ready market to sell their military garbage to India. Indeed, it is high time that India shoves the outdated Jewish armaments up the collective asses of Jewish people like Stein. Genuinely, the ratiocination of logic suggests that India should invest in research and development and let Israel supply the Chinese with its outdated weaponry. This fact is significant when one considers that irrefutable evidence proves that Pakistan has been receiving vastly superior military hardware than what Israel and America has sold to India.

In particular, it should be understood that Stein’s reference to “dot head” is interesting and particularly insulting. Notably, there was a time (1980’s) when frenzied white and Jewish youth would insult and beat Hindu women and men for wearing the traditional red dot on their foreheads. According to Anupan Chander, one particular incident in 1987, led to the death of a thirty-year-old Indian immigrant bank manager, Navroze Mody, who was beaten to death by a gang chanting “Hindu, Hindu!” It should not surprise anyone that Joel Stein belonged to such a gang. Evidently, the gang, which earned its reputation as the “Dot Busters” was too afraid to go after the Hell’s angels. Therefore, they settled on a “soft target” viz. hardworking Hindu woman. Genuinely, the assertion that Stein might have been a “dot buster” is hardly farfetched when one considers the ease in which he mentions the words “dot heads” in his article. Given his early days of criminality, it seems fair to suggest that he was quite capable of rolling out with his thieving gang members to target the Indian community. Finally, Stein’s curious reference to spicy food fails to take into consideration the fact that one man’s pleasure is another man’s poison. Still, as a Jew it might not be such a terrible idea for him to “humor” himself by spicing up the pig’s penis that his friend had stolen and pretended that he was eating chicken curry.

The fact of the matter is that Indian’s should not tolerate any b/s or hate talk from anyone even if is disguised as humor. When such bigoted behavior is entertained, Hindus are bound to face the wrath of undisciplined, prejudiced minds that will use such “humor” to attack them violently. This assertion is not an exaggeration as witnessed in the so-called dot-head incidents which began with the labeling of the victim and then escalated to murder. Indeed, people of color would easily recognize this tactic because George Bush and many white Christian authorities have used such a measure to either conduct so-called preemptive wars or outright killing of innocent people. It is worth reiterating that the process almost always involves labeling the enemy and then victimizing them for the explicit purpose of promoting murder, mayhem and looting.

Not surprisingly, the Jewish President of Edison Police Union (Joel Stein’s Hymie town) proudly claimed that “Indians are cockroaches, animals, Illiterates and that Illegal must Go home” (Italics by author). According to Dave Makkar, a distinguished Indian activist,” these racial Slurs were openly made in the presence of Print & TV Media in broad day light under the administration of Pro Zionist/Israeli Democrat Zionist womanizer Governor Jon S Corzine, Zionist Slave Asian Mayor Jun Choi and Zionist Police Union President Michael Schwartz. (For more information of the victimization of Indians follow the thread that are provided below). In fact, one of the largest targeting and victimization of Indians within the United States took place under the presidency of Ronald Reagan. In what amounted to a tortious interference of businesses, the zero tolerance policy opened the door for upwards of 50,000 Indian and Asian businesses being shut down or put under financial hardship by local and federal authorities. This state of affairs was conducted under the pretext that the businesses were somehow guilty of illegally distributing drugs even when their clients were smoking crack in the privacy of their hotel rooms. The theory was based on the premise that the client would not have had the drugs if the hotel did not sell them. Consequently, if the hotel guest had purchased the drugs hundreds of miles away it would not have mattered. Many white police who hated Hindus abused their powers by openly supplying drugs to the motel clients and then charging the owners for not adhering to the zero tolerance law. Clearly, this is the extent of the hatred that the Hindu citizen has faced in America.

Obviously, as far as Hindus are concerned, it is one thing to lose their businesses and quite another to prematurely lose their lives. In fact, Indians are learning relatively late that even in America their lives or loss of it counts for little. Consequently, the perpetrators of crimes against Hindus have many positive incentives to target them. Firstly, they can be assured that the police will engage in shoddy investigations. Secondly, Indians are reluctant to report crimes because they are aware that many prosecutors and police officers will twist the crime to suit the perpetrators needs. Indeed, it is not uncommon for the authorities to either cover up or ignore an Indian’s request to bring charges against the police or its chosen citizenry. One such case that is glaring involves the beating of an Indian at the hands of the police. According to Dave Makkar, in July 2006 Rajnikant Parikh was brutalized in front of 30-40 witnesses who the county prosecutor Kaplan found not credible because every one of them was Indian! When a few people in the community objected to it the police union & their supporters called, “Indians are cockroaches. animals, illiterates and illegal go home.

Quite obviously, under such tyrannical circumstances, the police department has given the green light to members of the offending community to squash Indians as though they are cockroaches. This situation ought to be of grave concern to every Indian, however mild-mannered he or she may be. Sure enough, many Hindus or their children will someday encounter such corrupt circumstances. As it is one family has already been placed under this unfortunate situation. Indeed, it may interest Hindus to know that the very person who is handling the Diveyendu Sinha murder case in Edfison is none other than county prosecutor Bruce Kaplan. According to Dave Makkar, this is the selfsame prosecutor, who went to great lengths in order to aid Township of Edison, Edison Police Department and Police Union to cover up the police brutality incidents of July 4^th involving Police Officer Dotro’s beating of Rajnikant.”

It may well be that the five individuals who were involved in the murder of Diveyendu Sinha and the beating of his children, must have taken their example from their police department. After all, the department had depicted Indians as cockroaches and as someone who did not belong to the United States. How then could the killers have missed comprehending such a depiction when their authorities had set the course for victimization by a) unhesitatingly beating Rajnikant b) successfully covering up the charges of police brutality and c) arrogantly referring to Indians as cockroaches? In truth, the police on that occasion had demonstrated their awesome power of corruption by using Officer Dotro’s brother, an ICE attorney, to deport Mr. Rajnikant. In so doing, the City of Edison effectively denied Rajnikant his legal right to litigate the police brutality charges. Plainly, only an arrant fool will fail to recognize that the constitutional and civil rights of an Indian had been violated in this instance. Nevertheless, it would be equally ignorant to ignore the fact that the killers were inspired by their law enforcement to squish the so-called cockroaches.

It is time that India responds to such corruption in kind. Hindus should begin by hunting down those Americans who murdered thousands of its citizens in the Bhopal Massacre. Sure enough, it may a useful prospect to try or retry the perpetrators and hang them as soon as they are apprehended. Given the nature of the crime and the people who had suffered in that awful situation, the Indian authorities would do well to use every scheme in the book to track those mass murderers down. Factually stated, the Americans who were involved in the Bhopal Massacre are hardly different from the members of Al-Qaida. These are the real cockroaches. Furthermore, it makes sense to pursue Kaplan and Dotro for any crimes against humanity that they had violated in the beating and subsequent cover up of brutality against Rajnikant. These people whereabouts should be monitored and their apprehension should be swift if they dare to leave the United States.

The salient point is that Indians should fully recognize that America is crowded with hate mongers and corrupt authorities like Dotro and Kaplan. These people are either too lazy or too ignorant to understand that Hindus may share a similar identity to some Muslims but the religion of Hinduism has no place for permanent wars and outright terrorism against the righteous. Perhaps, people like Dotoro and Kaplan could care less that Hindus have suffered more 9/11 events than any nation on the face of this planet. As a matter of fact, the number of people that died during 9/11 pales into insignificance when one considers the staggering number of Hindus that have been murdered Jewish, Christian and Muslim terrorist attacks. Undoubtedly, as long as people like Dotro and Kaplan exist Hindu children born in the United States will forever be persecuted or terrorized. Plainly, Hindu survival in America depends on the realization that this is the nature of the beast. As much as they will deny it Dotro and Kaplan’s behavior are borne out of sheer racism that is masked as law enforcement. These are the cowardly white boys who could not hold their own against black men in a sporting field; therefore, they hide behind the authority of law enforcement in order regain the authority which the lost in the sporting fields.

Indeed, when it is advantageous to them these officers will play one race against another. Already Kaplan, the county prosecutor, has shown a stubborn resistance to try the perpetrators as adults. In addition, there is a subtle campaign to promote the belief that the death of Professor Sinha was not racially motivated. Now if this were true then how is it that a member of the tiniest minority in America was selected to die, Indeed Hindus have good reason to wonder why it is that the boys did not kill members of Officer Dotro’s or Mr. Kaplan’s families. Interestingly, the perpetrators could have killed any one of a large number of white and Jewish families in the district. Why then did they choose an Indian especially if race was not a factor?

Moreover, unconfirmed reports indicate that three blacks and two whites were involved in Professor Diveyendu Sinha’s murder. His two children knew some of killers that were involved. Clearly, it is preposterous to suggest that Professor Sinha’s death was not the result of a hate crime under the circumstances. There can be no question that Professor Sinha’s death qualifies as a hate crime because in that instance two particular ethnic groups teamed up to kill a member of a minority community. Had they truly respected cultural diversity no such death would have occurred? Rather, their behavior seems to be the classical case of two in groups picking a fight with someone who they did not consider as a part of America. It is no different from the beliefs of Edison’s police Union who not only considered Indians as cockroaches but also wanted them to leave the country. More importantly, the killers knew who this family was and still set out to target them.

Curiously, the reason that the authorities in New Jersey are reluctant to file hate crimes charges is that they are concerned the very labeling of charges may someday come back to haunt their police department. Presently, the New Jersey police force is facing a lawsuit for the cold blooded killing of Emil Mann, a Native American man of the Ramapough Nation. The victim, who belonged to one of the smallest minorities of the Native American tribes, was also murdered in cold blood by a police officer. Evidently, the genocide of Native Americans in their own land by white racist Christians is still very much alive in America. There are a number of other discriminatory cases particularly involving members of the Indian community that are outstanding in the state of New Jersey. Many of these cases may also fit into the category of hate crimes. However, it may serve Indians well enough to know that they cannot and must not depend on the local press to expose the goings on in their State. That institution is beholden to the authorities who provide their revenues. In fact, it may serve the cause of the Indian minority to prefer federal jurisdiction when it comes to matters pertaining to their civil rights etc.

In sum, Hindus must clearly understand that they cannot remain silent or wonder who will be the fodder for the next racist police or citizen who wants to take their anger out on them. Professor Sinha’s murder must challenge us to seek both appropriate as well as all kinds of remedies to solve the problem. We must begin by calling for the boycott of Time Magazine in India, Their paycheck which supports Joel Stein’s racist “humor” only help to goad the journalist to denigrate Hindus. It also inspires other ethnic groups to hate our so-called spicy ways. In addition, Hindu organizations that really care for the Hindu people must act forthrightly and demand that all cases involving Indians must be thoroughly investigated and that the charges against the perpetrators of crimes against the Hindu people must not include half measures. Next, the entire Hindu community has an obligation to ensure that the people who murdered Professor Sinha must be brought to justice. We cannot afford to wait for another Hindu to be beaten robbed or killed because he merely wants to take a walk outside his house.

Hindus in America should also broaden their focus. We should play a part in reexamining Israel arms deals with India. Why should we tolerate countries like Israel and people like Stein from becoming rich by exploiting us? Finally, it bears noting that Hinduism not only implores its followers to go into the battlefield and fight for the sake of preserving righteousness. Nay, our religion implies that a person can never be a Hindu if he fails to act when he knows that the cause of righteousness has been transgressed. Professor Sinha did not deserve to die nor did his children deserve to be beaten up. If Hindus fail to register their outrage then it is assured that the next time their father or children are killed nobody would give a damn too.

Thayalan Reddy

Categorized in Uncategorized

Jan

Buddhism’s Challenge to Brit Hume

Leave a Comment

Buddhism’s Defense of Tiger Woods

Many hundreds of centuries have been unnecessaryly frittered away on the highly fraudulent belief that Jesus had vicariously saved humanity. This assertion is not the imagined or entertained view of Buddhist alone. In truth, a strict interpretation of the Bible by eminent scholars proves that Jesus will never do what he had failed to do in the first place – viz. save the Jews. Yet, people like Brit Hume unashamedly seek to mislead the Tiger Woods of the world that Jesus’ doctrine contains powerful spiritual truths, which will set them free. This begs the question: How could Jesus be trusted to deliver on his promise when he was given the golden opportunity of being placed on a cross and he had totally failed to prove his worthiness? One discovers that instead of presenting himself before his people and so-called saving them, he had escaped as a common criminal never to be heard from again.

Generally, followers of the Buddhistic faith would hardly concern themselves with the prospect that someone from the Christian faith has once again behaved brashly, dishonestly and even foolishly, to promote his religion. They understand well enough that Jesus from heaven, who did not know whether the world was geoid or flat, had sold them what clearly must be regarded as nothing short of a spiritual fraud. Therefore, it is no coincidence that Christians are required to play the role of a sheep, while their shepherd prepares a non-existent paradise. For as much as Christians may want to believe otherwise, the truth of the matter is that Jesus had cleverlytricked them to forever expect his’ impossible second coming. Fundamentally, it has not happened in 2000 years and it will never happen for the rest of eternity.

Still, one has to wonder how Christianity can be so successful when all it has to offer is utter lies and deception. Most times, the reason is quite plain to the Buddhists. They understand all too well that Christian conversion is a lucrative scheme, which nets its missionaries billions of untaxed dollars. Therefore, Jesus has become the cheap bar of soap, which his irrational missionaries use as a marketing gimmick. However, it still remains a curious and repugnant affair to the Buddhists that a religion would stoop to sell its god in the despicable manner that Christians do. More than ever, such a situation smacks of earthly greed rather than heavenly wisdom.

Brit Hume, The Christian Bigot

For centuries now the Buddhists have kept rather quiet about these and other repugnant and curious Christian tactics. They had hoped that sensible people would understand that religious conversion; however, noble it may appear on the surface, is an utterly shameful practice that inevitably requires lies, faked miracles, exaggerations and outright deception to fuel it. Moreover, few may deny that child molestation, social strife and holy wars is intrinsically linked to religious conversion.Yet, for all the detrimental effects of religious conversion, the inane need to become fishers of men is still ongoing. Consequently, such merciless tactics as exploiting the sufferings of non-believers and frightening them with the childish prospect of hellfire are legendary. Truly, it is well said that corrupt Christian missionaries, many of whom are child molesters, have not encountered a suffering or disaster that they have either failed to exploit or to profit from. Oftentimes, they fail to realize that even they too have to suffer terrible tragedies. These have very definitely come in the form of electing a black president, whom white, racist, conservative Christians love to hate, and the experiencing a 9/11 event. More recentlyit even came in the form of Hurricane Katrina, where a number of Christians perished.

Nevertheless, it is stunning to us that Brit Hume, who is neither a missionary nor a profiteer, has chosen to denigrate the religion of Tiger Woods in a bid to exploit or profit from his unfortunate circumstances. More alarmingly, Hume had made his observations about Tiger’s need to make a somersault of his character not as a journalist for Fox News but rather as a person, who sought to gain an advantage for his own religion. But then again it is very evident that Fox News is overcrowded with overzealous religious kooks. Now, could it be that Hume’s recommendations stem from his need to follow Jesus’ shoddy command, which the Bible quotes as follows:

Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost?

How then, under such a decree, would any person remain an impartial journalist? It is clear that Jesus is quite insane for advocating a god that is made up of three parts. The fact that he claims to be one important part of God is quite laughable because he previously claimed in the Bible that only God is good. This necessarily means that Jesus is evil. Now, while most Buddhists are not in the business of taking sides on matters such as these, it certainly appears that Fox News cannot be trusted as long as it retains journalists who advocates for a retarded Jesus. Still, for whatever reason Hume may have chosen to lecture Tiger Woods, many Buddhists now feel an overwhelming obligation to reveal to all Christians that they are really not in a position to lecture or convert anyone. Indeed, the time has come for the followers of Buddha to reveal how incredibly deceiving and untrustworthy Jesus and his beliefs are really. Obviously, such an undertaking cannot be fully contained in this writing. Therefore, a direct debate with the Christian fundamentalists is necessary to clear the air.

For this purpose the a select group of Hindus and Buddhists are prepared to challenge the Pope and his minions as well as Pat (diamond thief) Robertson and Brit Hume not to mention any other Christian authorty of standing to contact criticbooks@yahoo.com to set up a debate on any of the major networks either in America or elsewhere. This is neither an empty challenge nor one that will be fail to extract a punishment if Christians seek to ignore the invitation. Buddhist are willing to show that Jesus was the devil. Therefore, theydemand that Christian prove that he was God, son of God, messiah, truth, Holy Ghost, Unholy Ghost or whatever nonsense they foolishly believe. Since they dare to convert others it is only fair that they dare to provide the truth.

Before charging into the likely subject matter for such a debate, the followers of Buddha feel obliged to both offer pertinent information and also request some information from Mr. Hume. To begin with, many Buddhists trust that they are hardly stepping the bounds when they take up the issue of Sandy Hume’s suicide. Since he too was a journalist – albeit a drunken one – Buddhists are confident that his father (Brit) would not mind answering a few questions about his son. Firstly, they would like to know the reason that Sandy Hume had committed suicide. Was he a homosexual like Jesus? Did Brit attempt to convert him to Christianity like he did Tiger Woods? Why did Brit’s son turn to drinking and taking drugs in the first place? Was the Hume family such terrible lot of people that their son saw little or no need to honor them? Could it be that he was sexually molested as a child? Conversely, could it be that Sandy had honored his father by committing suicide as Jesus had previously attempted to do? After all, Brit Hume worships a man named Jesus, who also attempted to commit suicide. Lest it be forgotten, Jesus positively requested – nay begged and bribed – Judas to betray him. The information sought herein is for the explicit purpose of guaging what Christianity has to offer in terms of moral decency and correct thinking. Given what is already know of the Hume family it seems veryapparent that Jesus is definitely not doing a great job with providing the key to happiness.

Regarding Hume’s observation of Tiger Woods mundane weaknesses, Buddhists would be remiss if they did not bring up the subject of homosexuality. Many Buddhist know, well enough, that Jesus had had at least one homosexual relationship with a little boy in Bethany. Christians and non-Christians alike may be familiar with the boy named Lazarus, whom Christians would love to believe is still alive because Jesus supposedly had resurrected him. However, Lazarus, who was the baby brother of Mary Magdalene, shared a more intimate secret with Jesus. It is a secret that the Christian church and specifically Bishop Clements did not want to share with the rest of the world. The truth of the matter is that documentary evidence is extant which proves that Jesus did sexually molest the little boy named Lazarus. Again, this is a know truth that even the Catholic Pope cannot deny because one of its trusted agents (Bishop Clements) helped to cover up the entire affair. Therefore, Christians should not display their hypocrisy when they pretend that they hate the very notion of homosexuality. Clearly, their lord and savior – Jesus Christ – was every bit a homosexual. And what’s wrong with being homosexual — nothing. Still, many Buddhists would dearly love to know whenter Brit Hume hates Tiger Woods because he slept with many women or he loved Jesus Christ because he had sex with little boys.

There is some rumour that Sandy Hume was driven to suicide because his father was mean spirited Christian bigot, who acted as a dictator. This seems quite plausible to many Buddhists when they consider that Brit now wants to atone for his sins by asking – albeit misguidedly – Tiger to join his beliefs. Rather than attempting such a foolish measure, it seems wise for Brit Hume go to a Buddhist monastery instead. There are certain rigorous disciplines which may prove useful his removing the nasty impressions that have caused his undisciplined mind to be judgmental of people who are outside his Godforsaken beliefs.

In the Buddhist belief system, they are taught that it is largely the manner in which the children are raised that creates the content of their character. Those scholars who have taken the time to read about Buddha may recall that when he was conceived, his mother lived exclusively in a monastery. In so doing, his mother exposed to spiritual thoughts of the highest order. Yes, believe it or not, Buddhists do believe that a pregnant mother’s mind is intertwined with her child (in a similar manner as a tape recorder). Therefore, she must pay particular attention to the unborn baby’s development by association with holy people even at that early stage in the pregnancy. This was not the case with Jesus’ mother. In fact, many Buddhists would be bold enough to assert that Jesus’ mother was a deplorable whore in comparison to Mayadevi (Buddha’s mother). Genuinely, there can be no greater lie than the one Mary had perpetrated, when she had stated that God had fathered her so-called only begotten son. Sometimes in their deepest meditations even Buddhists cannot help wonder about the absurd stupidity of Christians. How could they ever regard Mary as a virgin when she had many other children besides Jesus? This is a dumfounding prospect to say the least because Joseph, her husband, had to live with the possibility that all his children may have been fathered by other men.

It is no wonder that Jesus became as insane as he did. This assertion is not as poppycock as Christians might seek to believe. Indeed, Jesus’ family members recognized and even openly stated in the Bible that he was insane. But who can really blame Jesus for embracing the dark side? Very definitely, more than a few people would have become quite unstable mentally under the circumstances. This is especially true when one seriously considers that Jesus was raised by a mother, who was known as an adulteress in her village. Yet, for all her wanton ways, Mary never helped to dissuade her son from pretending to be the only begotten son of god.

Lord Buddha would never have tolerated such a deceitful circumstance. His life is a testimony to his unimpeachable upbringing and character. Indeed, as Buddha grew into a young man, his parents ensured that he follow strictly, the path of morality and spirituality. The child subsequently became a man, who possessed the deepest compassion for all humanity. Nor surprisingly, his religion spread over the whole of Asia, without the benefit of a Jihad or Crusade. Moreover, his followers neither desired to kill Native Americans nor rape their women and children as Christians have maliciously done in America. In particular, there is never the need to burn a single witch in the Buddhistic religion. This is not unexpected because Buddhism recognizes that nobody must be blamed for his or her spiritual condition. Everyone is responsible for his destiny.

The salient point is that Buddhism is dedicated to pointing out the way to Nirvana – an immortal, indescribable state that everyone, without exception, is an heir. By far, in Buddhist practice and teachings one will not encounter the selfishness of a Mohammed or a Jesus, who selectively and fraudulently reserved the highest state only for their terrorists and ardent supporters. Buddhist believe that a god, who creates such a dispensation, must be quite psychotic. They also firmly believe that if Tiger Woods ever joined such a god, he too will become just as psychotic. This begs the question: Is Brit Hume in the business of driving people crazy by imploring them to join a retarded god called Jesus? Mostly Buddhists have no option but to accept that such an assertion is true because even the eminent ABC anchorman – Peter Jennings – had unequivocally believed that Brit Hume was a religious kook.

It is instructive to make a final but cursory examination of the Christian religion as viewed from a Buddhist perspective to round off this essay. Perhaps, it may provide a glimpse of what will be encountered in the proposed debate. Here now are some of the problems that the Buddhists have encountered with the Christian religion:

1. Why did Jesus lie to his disciples, when he promised them that he would return in their very lifetime?

2. Why are Christians attempting to save non-Jews when Jesus emphatically stated that he had come to save the lost sheep of Israel? Tiger Woods has never been a lost sheep of Israel. How could he when it is evident that Tiger Woods is not a Jew.

3. Why did Jesus lie that he had died on the cross. Clearly, the Bible reveals that his heart was still beating at the time. In short, his crucifixion was a faked event. Hence, all Christians are living a diabolical lie when they refuse to accept that Jesus did not die for anyone let alone himself.

4. Why did Jesus retain the services of secret disciples, who had purchased his tomb in advance? Why were these men given custody of Jesus after the crucifixion?

5. Why was a young man hiding in Jesus’ tomb when Jesus should have been inside? Surely, that deception alone proves that Jesus was not the messiah of the Jews let alone the rabbits and the toads?

6. Why did Jesus deceive the world that he had stayed in the tomb for three days and three nights? The irrevocable truth is that Jesus never kept his promise to the Jews, who sought that particular sign by insisting upon it. This single failure is in itself sufficient to relegate Christianity to the land of deception.

7. The Book of Malachi conclusively states that Elijah would come before the messiah. Jesus did not dispute this fact. Instead, one discovers that Jesus had lied and told the Jews that John the Baptist was Elijah. However, the facts support John’s claims alone. This monumental lie conclusively proves that Jesus was a major spiritual fraud. Indeed, there is hardly a more powerful denial than the one John the Baptist made in the Bible when he vehemently denied Jesus’ claim that he (John) was Elijah.

8. Could this be the reason that Jesus wanted all Christians to become cannibals? Nobody should ever forget that the Eucharist, which is Jesus’ prescribed ritual, involved the symbolic eating of his filthy body and the barbaric drinking of his tainted blood. In our Buddhist way of thinking such an act whether in word, thought or deed is unadulterated cannibalism. This begs the question: Does Brit Hume truly wants Tiger Wood to become a cannibal like him by changing his beliefs?

It is our duty to point to more damaging facts about Christianity that are already contained in the books respectively entitled: Jesus is Satan and The Plotted Course ( for copies contact criticbooks@yahoo.com). It is genuinely the bible on everything that is wrong about Jesus.

In closing, the worshippers of Buddha would remind of a new dispensation. Without equivocation, all Buddhists from now onwards will no longer allow any fraudulent religion or misguided person to insult their religion. Otherwise, ill-informed journalists, who want to pose as preachers, are bound to use their secular positions to mislead the true devotee of God. When such a thing occur you may be sure that the Buddhist community will challenge any and all Christians and if theydare to hide it will be necessary to expose them at every turn.

Thayalan Reddy

Categorized in Christianity
Tags: Brit Hume, Fox, Tiger Woods

The Exterminator
Mission – exterminate religious arrogance

Islam: Zero Tolerance in Ground Zero

Fareed Zakaria: A Terror Sleeper Cell Awakened

A Hindu Response to Racist Journalists, Police and Murderers

Buddhism’s Challenge to Brit Hume