To A Very Confused And Contrary Don

Submitted by Rakshas 10 Anan (India), Nov 26, 2005 at 13:45

You said, 'All it needs is for one political leader to scream "Western powers are enslaving our people through their missionaries" and you will have millions of devout Hindus shouting on the street and rampaging and burning Churches like the way they did somewhere in 1997-99.'

--You mean this sincerely, don't you, and are not mistaken about it? The reason why I passed your offensive remark is your ignorance of the situation. Read what you wrote once again, and longer if you please, until light dawns. Pardon my "Refined English", but I think your remark smacks too much of polemical hectoring, too little fact. Obviously you haven't got over the fact that over 70 years ago, Mahatma Gandhi did in fact say something similar, that motivated millions of devout Hindus and other Indians to reclaim their independence from the British and other colonial powers (France and Portugal in smaller pockets). In fact Americans did the same in their country, but being majority Christians by then, did not have to suffer indignities on the score of religion, in addition to colonisation! Had millions of devout Hindus gone rampaging in the streets 'like they did somewhere in 1997-99', there would not have been a single Christian or his Church left in all of India! But in the very period that you have mentioned in vagueness, for your information, Hindu-majority India had a Christian President, K. R. Narayanan (1997-2002).

Also read your lines below:
‘The reason I responded to your message was to see your reaction of what your reaction would be when someone was accusing Mother Theresa of being a terrorist or "menace"...I know of many Indians who swear by the integrity of Mother Theresa and speak of her with adoration. But you instead of defending her, you went straight to attacking the missionaries as if you were waiting for a "golden opportunity!"…Please see the situation in your country and try to see who is ruining or "eroding" the "Indian identity"….'

-- Mr. Don, Allonehhob it was, who in his post, "To my friend iasius", dated November 14, 2005 said, "Who knows, maybe next time you will say that Mother Teresa was actually a terrorist, I am sure you will find lots of proofs to support your argument."

Iasius replied, "allonehhob, again!" dated November 16, 2005, ‘Stepmother Teresa wasn't a terrorist in the pious Islamic sense. But she was equally menacing. Read Hitchen's "Missionary Position".'

--Why should I defend her following your prescription, Don? Are you not confident enough of yourself being able to do it adequately, or someone else from among the Missionary tribe you are seeking to defend in such an obtuse manner? I haven't yet read Hitchen's book cited by Iasius, and wish to reserve my judgment for now. You may want to ask Iasius himself directly about it though, because I have not maligned Mother Teresa in any way. I hope you are aware that this is a posthumous reference, and it would not be in good taste to do so. I think Allonehhob erred in making that out-of-place reference to start with. What I do think is that for all the messianic zeal, Christianity seems to have produced very few saints in many recent millennia.

With all the troubled hotspots like Iraq and Afghanistan, which by definition should have been on the priority list of the missionaries, why are they so concerned about India, where the majority of the population sees them as agents provocateurs trying to undermine national sovereignty and do not want them in their midst? I think you are right for the first time when you say, "Missionaries have got to fear more from Indians than Indians have to fear missionaries!" Glad you got the message as far as the first part of your statement goes; the writing is on the wall regarding the second part though, with all the anti-Hindu propaganda indulged in by the missionaries, their NGOs and media organs in India itself. Your own posts are evidence enough of this!

Even then, Hindus are refined people, or there would be no missionaries or voluble Christians left in their midst, despite all the obvious abuse of the majority faith and its people, and also of Indian culture and history per se. All I need to do is to refer to another article by Dr. Pipes, under [The Pakistan Example and] A War Against What?, dated October 1, 2002, to make my point clear.

I think it is only after the world abjures conversions in toto, whether Islamic or Christian, can there be real peace and universal harmony in the much troubled world. This much should have been obvious after a quick review of the timeline for religious warfare, ever since the two deluded Abrahamaics set out upon their unmitigated pogroms against an unsuspecting world.

India in particular is in great danger from the proselytising zeal of both Islam and Christianity, with the hapless Hindu caught between their unholy urge for world domination, and it would be better if they chose somewhere closer home to their own lands to fight the next round of the Crusades! In addition, there are the communists to consider, and it is truly fascinating to see the extent to which Christians, Muslims, Communists and the media 'Secularists' are cooperating in a vicious joint front against Hindus and Hinduism, in India and in international forums.

While the Christians and Muslims have had a theives' agreement amongst themselves since the end of the Crusades to carve up the world in mutual agreement until the next round, it is Hinduism that serves to remind both of their considerable failure on this score. Eliminate Hinduism from the face of the earth, and the rest, including Buddhism and other Eastern religions will be pushovers! Currently beleagured in its homeland is another thorn-in the-flesh esp. for contemporary Islam, viz. Judaism, of course.

All that the two 'main warring forces' have achieved thus far, is the hardening of a Hindu resolve to defend their religion and culture to the bitter end, come what may. Please don't take this lightly. HANDS OFF INDIA, PLEASE!

And when you say, "Nobody is a fool," I think you are countering the great American aphorism that 'A Sucker Is Born Every Minute!' --This is in the context of Hindu donations to missionary coffers, in case you've forgotten.

You say, "Hinduism didn't originate in India. It is a foreign religion. While your "head" has been "harvested" by this religion, directly or indirectly, why do you have negative feelings when you see your Indian brethren adopting Christianity? (Also a foreign religion to India)."

--You really want me to highlight your pathetic mistakes, Don? It is very sad, I think, the extent to which Missionaries and their sympathisers can go in the pursuance of their jingoistic agenda. You are perhaps unaware that Hindu means those from the region of the River Sindhu, (--the 'S' being pronounced as 'H' in Arabic), or the Indus, as it was called by the Greeks! So Hinduism is the religion practiced by Indians. I think this much should suffice for an ordinary intelligent person? Indians don't proselytise, so there is no question of harvesting heads. But yours was certainly harvested by Christian missionaries, 'directly or indirectly' at some point?

On top of all that provocation, Don, when you ask in feigned innocence, "Can you please state what negative things I had said?", I feel very sorry for you indeed. Not too convincing, you know?
But I do feel sorry for you, because obviously you are a very elderly person nursing cherished illusions about a far and distant world that you know very little about, inspite of your assertion to the contrary. I don't wish to be the agency for your disillusionment. The truth will stand the test of time, should you wish to accost it at first hand at any point. Even then, your comments are old fashioned and abusive of a culture that has taken too many hits from the combined forces of Islam and Christianity. Please forgive me if I don't care to reply your ill-informed posts in the future. As for your great faith in Missionary salvation of the world, I will conclude with the reminder, "The Road To Hell Is Paved With Good Intentions."

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".