Day: January 11, 2015

  • Mother Teresa Missing Millions Inhuman Treatment

    Indian Government may glorify her, people might adore her thanks to media buildup of Mother Teresa.

    She has been beatified , that obnoxious ritual where some evidence is cooked on the Miracle having been performed and one is declared a Saint by a Corrupt institution.

    Please read my post ‘Mother Teresa Glorified Human Suffering, a Media Creation’

    Much murkier is the origin and the utilisation funds of the Missions established by Mother Teresa.

    One is appalled at the inhuman treatment to the inmates of the Charity Home.

    * Portions of the Citation from  (www.stern.de) , Germany. Translated from German.

    Mother Teresa .Image.jpg
    Mother Teresa.

     

    The organisation has 6 branches in Germany. Here too financial matters are a strict secret. “It’s nobody’s business how much money we have, I mean to say how little we have,” says Sr Pauline, head of the German operations. Maria Tingelhoff had had handled the organisation’s book-keeping on a voluntary basis until 1981. “We did see 3 million a year,” she remembers. But Mother Teresa never quite trusted the worldly helpers completely. So the sisters took over the financial management themselves in 1981. “Of course I don’t know how much money went in, in the years after that, but it must be many multiples of 3 million,” estimates Mrs Tingelhoff. “Mother was always very pleased with the Germans.”

    Perhaps the most lucrative branch of the organisation is the “Holy Ghost” House in New York’s Bronx. Susan Shields served the order there for a total of nine and a half years as Sister Virgin. “We spent a large part of each day writing thank you letters and processing cheques,” she says. “Every night around 25 sisters had to spend many hours preparing receipts for donations. It was a conveyor belt process: some sisters typed, others made lists of the amounts, stuffed letters into envelopes, or sorted the cheques. Values were between $5 and $100.000. Donors often dropped their envelopes filled with money at the door. Before Christmas the flow of donations was often totally out of control. The postman brought sackful of letters — cheques for $50000 were no rarity.” Sister Virgin remebers that one year there was about $50 million in a New York bank account. $50 million in one year! — in a predominantly non-Catholic country. How much then, were they collecting in Europe or the world? It is estimated that worldwide they collected at least $100 million per year — and that has been going on for many years.

    While the income is utter secret, the expenditures are equally mysterious. The order is hardly able to spend large amounts. The establishments supported by the nuns are so tiny (inconspicuous) that even the locals have difficulty tracing them. Often “Mother Teresa’s Home” means just a living accommodation for the sisters, with no charitable function. Conspicuous or useful assistance cannot be provided there. The order often receives huge donations in kind, in addition to the monetary munificence. Boxes of medicines land at Indian airports. Donated fountains and powdered milk arrive in containers at Calcutta port. Clothing donations from Europe and the US arrive in unimaginable quantities. On Calcutta’s pavement stalls, traders can be seen selling used western labels for 25 rupees (DM1) apiece. Numerous traders call out, “Shirts from Mother, trousers from Mother.”

    Unlike with other charities, the Missionaries of Charity spend very little on their own management, since the organisation is run at practically no cost. The approximately 4000 sisters in 150 countries form the most treasured workforce of all global multi-million dollar operations. Having taken vows of poverty and obedience, they work for no pay, supported by 300,000 good citizen helpers.

    By their own admission, Mother Teresa’s organisation has about 500 locations worldwide. But for purchase or rent of property, the sisters do not need to touch their bank accounts. “Mother always said, we don’t spend for that,” remembers Sunita Kumar, one the richest women in Calcutta and supposedly Mother T’s closest associate outside the order. “If Mother needed a house, she went straight to the owner, whether it was the State or a private person, and worked on him for so long that she eventually got it free.”

    Report of inhuman treatment .

    I first learned of the plight of the Kolkata children from two international aid workers, both qualified nurses and committed Catholics. They came to me after working as volunteers for the Missionaries of Charity last Christmas. Both made the comparison with images that emerged from Romanian orphanages in the early 1990s after television news teams first gained access.

    “I was shocked. I could only work there [Daya Dan] for three days. It was simply too distressing. . . We had seen the same things in Romania but couldn’t believe it was happening in a Mother Teresa home,” one told me. In January, she and her colleague had written to Sister Nirmala, the new Mother Superior, to voice their concerns. They wrote, they told me, out of “compassion and not complaint”, but received no response. Like me, they had been brought up in Catholic schools to believe that Mother Teresa was the holiest of all women, second only to the Virgin Mary. Our faith was unwavering, as was that of the international media for about 50 years. Even when the sister in charge of the Missionaries of Charity’s Mahatma Gandhi Welfare Centre in Kolkata was prosecuted and found guilty of burning a young girl of seven with a hot knife in 2000, criticism remained muted.

    The most significant challenge to the reputation of Mother Teresa came from Christopher Hitchens in 1995 in his book The Missionary Position. “Only the absence of scrutiny has allowed her to pass unchallenged as a force for pure goodness, and it is high time that this suspension of our critical faculties was itself suspended,” he wrote, questioning whether the poor in her homes were denied basic treatment in the belief that suffering brought them closer to God. Hitchens’s lonely voice also raised the issue of the order’s finances, which in 1995 (and still in July 2005 when we were filming) seemed never to reach Kolkata’s poorest.

    Susan Shields, formerly a senior nun with the order, recalled that one year there was roughly $50m in the bank account held by the New York office alone. Much of the money, she complained, sat in banks while workers in the homes were obliged to reuse blunt needles. The order has stopped reusing needles, but the poor care remains pervasive. One nurse told me of a case earlier this year where staff knew a patient had typhoid but made no effort to protect volunteers or other patients. “The sense was that God will provide and if the worst happens – it is God’s will.”

    The Kolkata police force and the city’s social welfare department have promised to investigate the incidents in the Daya Dan home when they have seen and verified the distressing footage we secretly filmed. Dr Aroup Chatterjee, a London-based Kolkata-born doctor, believes that if Daya Dan were any other care home in India, “the authorities would close it down. The Indian government is in thrall to the legacy of Mother Teresa and is terrified of her reputation and status. There are many better homes than this in Kolkata,” he told us..

    Citation.

    http://www.srai.org/mother-teresa-where-are-her-millions/

    http://indianrealist.com/2010/05/14/the-squalid-truth-behind-the-legacy-of-mother-teresa/

  • How Indian History Was Distorted, The First History Of India

    British rule of India has made Indians doubt their own culture, civilisation.

    Seemingly well qualified scientists and others dismiss India’s rich culture, History and the icons of India, Rama, Krishna,Shiva, despite being presented with astronomical archeological evidence.

    Such is the entrenched misinformation by the British in their about 350  years of Rule of India.

    If one were to look for information on India and Hinduism, references pop up written by Western Authors, most of them self-proclaimed Missionaries, starting from Robert De Nobili of Tamil Nadu, Bishop Caldwell, Max Mueller, right to our secular educated Indians.

    Ancient India.jpg
    Bharatvarsha.

    Indian sources do not get any importance at all nor were they available in one place.

    You find only westwern authors books as ‘Auhentic source”

    Just who stated this whole business of rewriting Indian Histroy?

    And who wrote this First Indian History ?

    It was by James Mill who wrote the First Book, ‘History of British India’ in  1806.

    ( His son John Stuart Mill was a great Western Philosopher)

    “James Mill began his History of British India in 1806, expecting it to take him about three years, but its completion proved to take instead twelve years, with three substantial volumes at last being published early in 1817. The work was immediately successful among British imperialists and secured for Mill for the first time a degree of prosperity. It led, with the support of David Ricardo andJoseph Hume, to Mill’s appointment in 1819 in United_Kingdom as assistant (later chief) examiner of correspondence at the imperialEast India Company at an annual salary of £800. By 1836, when he died, this income had become £2,000”

     

    The book begins with a preface in which Mill tries to make a virtue of having never visited India and of knowing none of its native languages. To him, these are guarantees of his objectivity, and he boldly claims –

    A duly qualified man can obtain more knowledge of India in one year in his closet in England than he could obtain during the course of the longest life, by the use of his eyes and ears in India.

    However, Mill goes on in this preface to say that his work is a “critical, or judging history”, encompassing singularly harsh attacks on Hindu customs and a “backward” culture which he claims to be notable only for superstition, ignorance, and the mistreatment of women.

    From the historical perspective, Mill tells the story of the English and, later, British acquisition of wide territories in India, severely criticizing those involved in these conquests and in the later administration of the conquered territories, as well as illuminating the harmful effects of commercial monopolies such as that of the imperial East India Company.[3] As a philosopher, Mill applies political theory to the description of the civilizations of India. His interest is in institutions, ideas, and historical processes, while his work is relatively lacking in human interest, in that he does not seek to paint memorable portraits of Robert Clive, Warren Hastings, and the other leading players in the history of British India, nor of its famous battles.[1] Indeed, the History has been called “…a work of Benthamite ‘philosophical history’ from which the reader is supposed to draw lessons about human nature, reason and religion”.[6]

    Despite the fact that Mill had never been to India, his work had a profound effect on the British imperial system of governing the country, as did his later official connection with India”

    James Mill & Mr. Charles Grant from Helebary College, wrote History of India and classified most of the literature of India as Mythological..

    And the grounds for calling Indian History as Mythology.

    The events in these texts seemed to go before the date of creation of the earth as fixed by Father. James Usher as 9 AM, 23rd Oct, 4004 BCE. Hence these texts which describe India and the existence of its civilization prior to this time could not be real and must be mythical or imaginary. A fact that has now been proven wrong by modern cosmology and traditional archeological finds. Hence this premise of Mr.Mill & Mr. Grant has been found to be flawed.

    2. It was held by the colonial British that Alexander defeated Porus in 326 BCE and spread culture and civilized thought to India and that until then Indians were uncivilized barbarians. So the civilization described in these texts which seemed to be more advanced in science, technology, culture, philosophy and linguistics could not have existed prior to the arrival of Alexander and hence the texts are mythical. Not only has the existence of a civilized India prior to the arrival of Alexander been proved beyond an iota of doubt, the talk of the defeat of Porus in the hands of Alexander is also now being questioned with the uncovering of various pre biblical texts and piecing together various circumstantial evidences which point to the contrary namely, Alexander being wounded and defeated by Porus . Hence this premise of Mr.Mill & Mr. Grant is also flawed.

    3. The British came up with the concept of the Aryan Invasion of India which spread culture and civilized thought to India and that until then Indians were uncivilized barbarians. Hence, again, the civilization described in these texts, which seemed to be more advanced in science, technology, culture, philosophy and linguistics could not have existed prior to the Aryan Invasion and hence the texts are mythical. The Aryan Invasion has now been dismissed by the Western historians as a figment of concoction by the British to justify their occupation of India as a rightful occupier of this Indian territory and beneficiary of its natural resources by painting the Indians themselves as belonging to the Aryan race in reality who had invaded and settled in India and set aside the original inhabitant Dravidian race as lower castes. This Aryan – Dravidian classification has now been proven to be racially incorrect as the entire Indian population has been found to belong to the same race despite their differences in features and complexion. Also the study of traditional Indian text has thrown to light how the terminologies Aryan and Dravidian were based on geographical division and not racial, cultural or civilizational. Thus this premise of Mr.Mill & Mr. Grant also seems to be flawed.

    4. They held that the Genealogies were incoherent and hence the texts were imaginary or mythical. It is to be noted that while texts contained Genealogies, their focus was on key human achievements, Dharma and Principles to be followed – basically lessons for life. Given this, there is a therefore a good possibility for gaps or inconsistencies in discussing the order in Genealogy, but that cannot detract from the historicity of the texts.”

    All the four reasons are false and wilfully incorporated.

    Alexander did not win the war against Porus.

    And Chandra Gupta never met Megasthanes!

    1. Megasthenes has nowhere mentioned the word Maurya
    2. He makes absolutely no mention of a person called either Chanakya or Kautilya.
    3. Indian historians have recorded two Chandra guptas, one of the Maurya dynastyand another of the Gupta dynasty. Both of them had a grandson called Ashoka. While the Mauryan Chandragupta’ s son was called Bimbasara (sometimesBindusara), The Gupta Chandragupta had a son called Samudragupta. Interestingly Megasthenese has written that Sandrakuttos had a son called Samdrakyptos, which is phonetically nearer to Samudragupta and not Bindusara.
    4. The king lists given by the Puranas say that 1500 years elapsed from the time of the Kurukshetra war to the beginning of the Nanda dynasty’s rule. If one assumes the Nandas’ period to be 5th century BCE, this would put the Bharatha war around 1900 BCE whereas the traditional view has always been 3100 BCE. This gives a difference of 1200 years which go unaccounted.
    5. Megasthanese himself says 137 generations of kings have come and gone between Krishna and Sandrakuttos, whereas the puranas give around 83 generations only between Jarasandha’s son (Krishna’s contemporary) to the Nandas of the Magadha kingdom.. Assuming an average of 20 to 25 years per generation, the difference of 54 generations would account for the gap of the 1200 years till the time of Alexander.”

    This link from wikipedia says that “After victory, Alexander made an alliance with Porus and appointed him as satrap of his own kingdom”. This is difficult to believe: IMO no noble king would accept his kingdom back after being defeated.

    Also claimed there: “Exhausted and frightened by the prospect of facing another giant Indian army at the Ganges River, his army mutinied at the Hyphasis (modern Beas), refusing to march further East. Alexander, after the meeting with his officer Coenus, was convinced that it was better to return.” Did that mutiny actually occur?

    After traveling hundreds of miles from Greece and even winning the battle, why would Alexander return without conquering India?

    Specifically, I want to know what actually happened in the battle between Alexander and Porus: Who won? Was it true that King Porus defeated Alexander and made him flee back to Greece ? Whoever won the battle, Alexander or Porus, what historical evidence is there regarding what actually happened in that encounter?”

    And the Myth of ryan Invasion.

    Please read my post on this which conclusovely disproes Ayan Dravidian Theory.

    Citation.

    http://www.historicalrama.com/IndianTextMyth.html

    http://ramanisblog.in/2014/07/04/chandra-gupta-megasthanes-never-met-history-faked/

    http://history.stackexchange.com/questions/10104/why-didnt-alexander-invade-india

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_History_of_British_India

  • Correcting Indian History ‘Historical Madness’?

    Followers of this blog may be aware that I post articles on Hinduism the West Christened Hinduism, that are facts and verified,

    Be it the Date of Rama, Krishna , The Vedas,Knowledge which is contained in Hindu texts that are proved by modern Science.

    I do not hesitate to write on inaccuracies in Hinduism,Indian history.

    I have come across two prominently displayed articles in the Deccan Herald dated 11 January, where the main focus seems to incite fear among the Public that the proposed correction, I am not sure whether this would actually happen, though I wish it does), of Indian History as we know is ‘Saffronising’ Indian Education’

    It is Historical Madness.

    “Unlike Nehru’s India as a nation of syncretised culture (ex: “unity in diversity”), the rightist or militant Hindutva idea of new India is based on a known rhetoric of Hindu (or Aryan) superiority constructed from selected fictions and myths contained in ancient Hindu religious texts, and which consider Islam and Christianity as alien invasions. This is a kind of historical madness. It is going to glorify Hindu nationalists like M M Malviya, K B Hedgewar, M S Golwalkar, Nathuram Godse, etc as against secular nationalist like Gandhi, Tagore, Ambedkar, Phule, Bhagat Singh and Nehru.”

    It would “glorify Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Malaviya,Hedgewar,Golwalkar, and Nathuram Godse against the secularisst like Gandhi,Tagore, Ambedkar,Phule, Bhagat Singh and Nehru”.

    I am shocked to read that reading about Tilak, Malaviya and others is a sin.

    How?

    Have they indulged in terrorism or converted people to Hinduism?

    Were they uneducated ruffian politicians?

    Were they not virtuous without any scandal, public and private?

    Did they not speak about out Heritage and pointed out the false history foisted on us,( which many westerners agree to)?

    Yes Godse killed Gandhi, it is to be condemned.

    But does that make one suspect his love for India?

    Golwalkar and Hedgewar?

    What are their sins?

    That they lived  impeccable lives?

    They were erudite scholars?

    Or most importantly tried to bring the Hindus together who were being made to hate their Hindu Culture?

    Now about Gandhi.

    One of holy cows about whom nothing but the best is to be said,

    Was Gandhi the only person who brought freedom to India single-handedly?

    Did Gandhi repudiate Indian Scriptures?

    Was it fair on Gandhi to force the Indian Government to accede Pakistan with disproportionate assets as if India were his ancestral property?

    Nehru,

    What more myths you want to state as History?

    No doubt he was instrumental in building India.

    Equally true is the fact that Kashmir mess is his creation.

    As to personal character, he can not hold a candle to Malaviya and others.

    As to the gentleman, who is reported to have written the Indian Constitution  and a Social reformer, Ambedkar, I have quite a few articles.

    As to people who say personal life is different is from public life, I say that one who is not impeccable in personal life can not be a model Public figure, for it is morally wrong.

    Then there is the fear psychosis being introduced.

    What are the myths these secular want to avoid?

    That Sanatana Dharma is very old,

    Vedas contain advanced scientific concepts.

    I I read in the same paper that some scientist has stated that ‘ the statement that Hindus knew about Vaimanika Sastra, Plane Building is non sense ‘, I shall be replying this shortly?

    Lord Rama and Krishna’s dates have been authenticated by astronomical events and by Archeology.

    Krishna’s Dwaraka,

    Ravan’s Castle, Sita’s prison,

    Axle of Ravana’s Pushpaka Vimana,

    Jarasandha’s Town,

    All these have been found.

    Vedas have calculated the velocity of Light .

    That Alexander never invaded India.

    Muslims destroyed Hindu temples and converted millions of Hindus by the sword?

    That the Taj was built on a Shiva Temple?

    That the Vatican was a Siva Temple,

    Petra Jordan Has a Siva temple,

    St.Peter’s Cathedral’s Courtyard is shaped as the Shiva Linga,

    Archeological evidence has been found throughout the world that the Sanatana Dharma was present everywhere,

    That the idols in many South Indian Temples had to be hidden to escape the wrath of Islam,

    That Krishna married a Pandyan Princess,

    That Aryan Invasion is a nonsense propagated by the west,

    Max Mueller deliberately misinterpreted Hindu scriptures,

    That Macaulay openly admitted that his intention to introduce was to make Indians lose their respect for their culture,

    That the Bible and Koran were concocted stories to serve political greed,

    Britishers , during their rule of India, have killed about One Billion Indians?

    That the Christians allot funds to convert Hindus?

    Christians ridicule Hinduism and at the same time have included many Hindu practices into their fold.

    Making corrections , with authentic sources is no crime.

    So is quoting Hindu texts.

    It is not as though , every thing about Modern science is about to be banned in India.

    Believing this is Madness.

    Citation.

     http://www.deccanherald.com/content/452800/distorted-facts-selective-biased-content.html