Processing please wait ...
|
K. G. Balakrishnan, H. M. Hussain, EVR, Karunanidhi etc. | |||
| Published on December 2nd, 2007 In Uncategorized | Views 748 | ||||
|
K. G. Balakrishnan, the Chief Justice of India asked counsel, “Do you know that women were not allowed to cover the upper part of their body? It was only after a revolution that they were allowed to cover the upper part of their body, so should we go back to that practice?” http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/thscrip/print.pl?file=2007112858950100.htm"date=2007/11/28/"prd=th" http://www.hindu.com/2007/11/28/stories/2007112858950100.htm Yes, Jehovah witnesses declared that they could not sing Janagana mana, because, it is against Jehovah. Supreme Court accepted! Hussian painted nude pictures of Hindu Gods and Goddesses. Court issued summons. arrest warrants - but none could do anthing - he has been in Dubai like Qutrochi. How he has gone there? Of course in a plane. Who allowed him? Of course Indian Customs and Immigration and other authorities? How he was allowed? What nonsense you are asking, you do not remember how Delhi Shahi Imam went to Pakistan and called Bharat Mata a bitch? Three High Courts issued arrest warrants, as he talked ill about the Judges. Everybody has right to worship or believe like Jehivah witness or Muslims. In Karnataka, one group of women used to perform nude worship. Lo! It was banned! Perhaps, they got a clue from the British, as they also banned the Druids ecently from performing similar ritual in England! Now K. G. Balakrishnan has asked:“Do you know that women were not allowed to cover the upper part of their body? It was only after a revolution that they were allowed to cover the upper part of their body, so should we go back to that practice?” Why can"t such revolution happen in the case of Hussian? And of course the Broda student to have some decency and decorum to be shown to the Gods? By asking, “… so should we go back to that practice?” , what he wants to imply? Fromthe same state, E. K. Nayanar claimed that “Rape is just likedrinking tea". When women organizations protesed, he clarifiedthat it as Marx or Communist manifesto tells like that. But, can we say why and how all are drinking tea? Supreme court of India has pronouced many judgments in religious context. But such judgments should be equal to all, as otherwise, secularism is disturbed. Therefore, his remarks in the context appears to be not necessary to drive out the point, as here the question is about the dress-code covering the body not uncover.
The above pictures have also taken the liberty of “freedom of expression" and “artistic talents"! How is that the Indian authorities do not want them promoted or approved as Indian SC Judges, Politicians, free-thinkers, intellectual writers and others act differently? Really, it is intriguing how KGB talks differently in the different context? |
||||
| ||||
|
| ||||
| ||||
|
|
||||||||||||
![[smokingjesus.jpg]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_lYcu629SJWY/RtARdSA4NoI/AAAAAAAAB_c/LjlDGRqJAIM/s1600/smokingjesus.jpg)
Posted on December 2nd, 2007
Who are Jehovah’s Witnesses?
They will extol and preach “God’s Kingdom” and this sounds attractive,what they hide from you is their blasphemous Watchtower cult version that Jesus has already had his second coming in 1914 and is working “invisibly” through them.
They have won 37 of their 46 U.S. Supreme Court cases, assuring us all of freedom of speech and assembly and equal protection under the law.
The sad irony is that the Watchtower Society *daily* abuses the human rights of thousands of its members. It denies current members the right of free speech by forbidding them to speak to former members, even close family members.
And it denies former members their right of freedom of worship by refusing to allow them to leave the religion with dignity, should they come to disagree with Watchtower’s practices or doctrines.
The ‘religion’ of Jehovah’s Witnesses is a dangerous cult that controls every aspect of its members’ lives.
Are they knocking on your door?
—-
Danny Haszard http://www.freeminds.org
Posted on December 3rd, 2007
What exactly they believe theologically?
Posted on December 3rd, 2007
In shimoga of Karnataka, there is a group who worship Goddess without any dress.
However, in 2002, the district administration in accordance with the suggestion by sorab tahasildar and as per the directions of special commission appointed by the state government banned the `nude worship’ of devi renukamba at chandragutti in sorab taluk in shimoga district during the jatra period. the jatra has been planned from march 20 to 25. the administration has allowed devotees only to worship the goddess at the temple and banned nude bath in varada river and offering of harake by devotees which was part of the jatra ritual some time ago. it may be recalled that the government after an ugly episode during the jatra 10 years ago has continuously banned the jatra. as per the old tradition of devotees in this area the `jogathis’ special devotees of devi used to offer `nude worship’ to goddess renukamba every year during jatra which evoked protest from the public and a number of organisations. accordingly, the deputy commissioner of shimoga issued a ban order at chandra gutti.
Here the following questions arise:
1. How the belief of that particular group is not respected?
2. In fact, the government could make arrangement from others entering the place, as they have no business there.
3. How the Constirutional provisions vary for each believing group?
Posted on December 23rd, 2007
Wonder, I find no reply from DannyHaszard !!!
Posted on July 17th, 2008
கொலைக் குற்றவாளிகளான காஞ்சி சங்கராச்சாரிகளின் வழக்கைத்
விரைவுப்படுத்தக் கோரி புதுச்சேரியில் நடைபெற்ற ஆர்ப்பாட்டம்
http://www.viduthalai.com/20080716/news18.html
புதுச்ச ரி, ஜூலை 16- காஞ்சி சங்கராச்சாரிகளின் வழக்கை விரைவுபடுத்தக் கோரி 1-7-2008 அன்று காலை 10 மணியளவில் ஆர்ப்பாட்டம் தொடங்கியது. முதலில் கோமு. தமிழ்ச்செல் வன் தொடக்கவுரையாற்றி னார். தோழர்கள் ஆர்ப்பாட்ட முழக்கத்தை முழங்கினர். தலைமை வகித்த மாவட்ட திராவிடர் கழகத் தலைவர் வ.சு. சம்பந்தம் விளக்கவுரையாற்றி னார். தொடர்ந்து செயலாளர் இராசு, மகளிரணி அமைப் பாளர் விலாசினி, பொதுக்குழு உறுப்பினர் லோ. பழனி, மாவட்ட ப.க. தலைவர் வீர. இளங்கோவன், வே. அன்பரசன் ப.க. அமைப்புச் செயலாளர் பீம. கிருஷ்ணமூர்த்தி மற்றும் கழகத் தோழர்கள் உரை யாற்றினர். இடையிடையே மாவட்ட அமைப்பாளர் குமார், செயற்குழு உறுப்பினர் இரா. நா. முத்துவேல், இந்திரசித், அன்புநிலவன் ஆகி யோர் இயக்கப் பாடல்களைபாடி முழக்கமிட்டனர். ஆர்ப்பாட்டம் பகல் 12 மணிக்கு முடிவுற்றது. துணைச் செயலாளர் ஆ. சிவராசன் நன்றி யுரையாற்றினார்.
ஆர்ப்பாட்டத்தில் ஜி. கிருஷ்ணமூர்த்தி, சிவ. வீரமணி, பெ. ஆதிநாராயணன், களஞ்சியம் வெங்கடேசன், இரா. சதாசிவம், கரு. சி. திராவிடச் செல்வன், தி. இராசா ஜீவன், மு. ஆறுமுகம், துரை. முனுசாமி, சா. பாலமுருகன், ப. மன்னாதி லிங்கம், சி.செல்வராஜ், ச. மீனா, டி. சரசுவதி, கலைவாணி, ஆறுமுகம், கு. பாஸ்கர், செ. இளங்கோவன், கே.ஜி. ஜெயச் சந்திரன், இராவணன், என். கணேசன், தேவராஜ், சு. சுப்பிர மணியன், ஆத்தூர் மகேந்திரன், பெரியசாமி, சக்திவேல் மற்றும் பல தோழர்கள் கலந்துகொண்டனர்.
Posted on November 26th, 2008
The response “with anger and hurt at the withdrawal of the M F Husain film” is not shown when he drew Hindu Gods and goddesses naked, obscene and prone, and depicted by the secularists.
Even the Supreme Court Judge KGB supported hus depiction as pointed out in the main artuicle above.
———————
Withdrawal of Husain film piques filmmakers at IFFI
26 Nov 2008, 0418 hrs IST, Alexandre Moniz Barbosa, TNN
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-3757854,prtpage-1.cms
PANAJI: Film makers, especially those involved with the making of short films and documentaries, responded with anger and hurt at the withdrawal of the M F Husain film, ‘Through the eyes of a painter’ from the Short Takes section organised by the Films Division of India alongside the 39th International Film Festival of India (IFFI).
“I can’t understand why the film was withdrawn. This is a democratic country and everyone has a right to see the film. I have seen ‘Through the eyes of a painter’ several times. This is ridiculous,” said Jahnu Barua, president of the Indian Documentary Producers Association (IDPA).
“Any civil society group can protest and for political reasons, the government of the day is going to listen. There are always going to be groups from civil society who will oppose a work of art. But who will arbitrate this?
“This is extra-legal censorship and we condemn it,” said Rakesh Sharma, a documentary film director whose film ‘Final solution’ on the politics of hate — which was set in Gujarat — had been banned in India before a campaign forced the ban to be lifted.
The Hindu Janajagruti Samiti had sent a protest letter to the Films Division of India asking the latter to cancel the screening of the film.
The letter, uploaded on the HJS website, gives the reason that Hussain, through his paintings, had “hurt religious and national sentiments of crores of Hindus and Indians… and has been accused of outraging religious sentiments, promoting enmity between different religious groups, selling obscene material and disturbing national integrity.”
Kuldip Sinha, director of the FDI said, “At the moment the film has been deferred. It has not been withdrawn. We’ll see whether it can be shown later as that will depend on the schedule.”
Sinha explains that the reason for “differing” the showing of the film, slated to be screened on Tuesday is because, “We didn’t want anyone to create a problem. We were made aware that some people were not happy, and to preserve the image of the country and the image and peace of the festival, we have differed the showing.”
People in the film industry though are not too happy with the decision. “They have been targeting Husain. He is the most senior and outstanding artist of India. Who has given them the right to make such a demand?
“The government should have defied them. How can the government allow itself to be dictated to by such groups?” questioned Rinki Bhattacharya, vice chairperson of the Children’s Film Society, India.
Similar views were echoed by many other film producers and directors. Onkar Lal Sharma, film writer, producer and executive committee member of the Film Federation of India said, “I have seen this movie.
There is nothing objectionable, it has a censor certificate and is a work of art. Hussain is a great artist and the country is proud of him.”
Ramesh Tekwani, vice president of the IDPA, suggesting that IFFI delegates wear a black band in protest said, ‘Through the eyes of a painter’ is a very old film. Today it was to be screened at this festival, but somebody protested, not the censor board, and it was withdrawn. We make our films to be seen.”