What a timely and vital contribution on Roma (below). Congratulations to the esteemed writer for his knowledge and motivation.
We ask, "What kind of GOVERNMENT or PARLIAMENT do we have in PARTITIONED India that is only concerned with keeping the natives ignorant of their own "tribe" or family AT HOME and scattered far and wide, some due to previous INVASIONS as in the 11th century AD and some SINCE 1947 due to Partition and subsequent mismanagement, corruption and death or neglect of moral fibre and NATIVE religions of our nation as typified by Nehru's deletion of the word HINDU from his Constitution straight after CONCEDING Islam in our five provinces turned over to separatist ISLAM overnight, and later by arrogant rule by semi dictator Indira "Gandhi" (who married Feroze KHAN) and her notorious rootless son who brought a foreign female and became notorious as "BOFORS' Chor".
Among those badly or deliberately neglected and BETRAYED were the happy and peaceful Buddhists of Chittagong, Skardu, Baltistan and Gilgit and the Hindus of North & even South Kashmir, East Bengal and Sindh, and the prosperous INDIAN settlements in Uganda, Fiji and Northern Sri Lanka as well all the Shinti and Roma, the lost children of Bharatvarsha.
While Bharat was the lucrative target for all the PREDATORS from the Middle East and the Europeans until 1947 the country that was partitioned with more Muslims left inside than driven outside, has been virtually suffocating under ONE dynasty since. We see the power and might of Italian born Catholic Sonia "Gandhi" and even her offspring Priyenka and Rahul who are provided security at the expense of poor tax payers as if they were royalty.
Among the tragic victims of this neglect are the Roma and Shinti. A nationalist, and truly patriotic, Government would have taken stock of situation and created a special Ministry for recovery and consolidation of our lost and wasted assets.
There appears to be a sham of an office in Chandigarh that is supposed to be responsible for gypsies but its role has not been appreciated or even understood. Just recall the last international Roma Conference held there over a decade ago and see who was the "man from government"? Did he have a clue to the history of western India where repeated invasions drove the whole population away?
As long as the Hindu nation does not take stock of its own affairs and as long as the Hindu nation does not grasp the implications of partition of 1947 and snatch its destiny from dynasty, India will develop in a lopsided manner. We shall certainly go on admiring those big countries like China and small countries like Czech Republic and Lithuania where national affairs are firmly in the hands of natives.
There is NO sign of the likes of Khans of Boollywood there who mesmerise the nation, nor a prime minister's son or daughter becoming the prime minister. With regard to latter, let us see the gruelling dual between Obama and Hillary in the USA. How tenaciously are they FIGHTING for their own nomination. Had it been our own Bharatvarsha, Clinton's wife Hillary would have AUTOMATICALLY become the President after her husband.
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Black money India top the list
Black Money In Swiss Bank ~ Swiss Banking Association report 2006
by Naman Sood on Apr 15, 2008 01:44 PM
Deposits in Banks located in the territory of Switzerland by nationals of following countries
Top 5 India---- $1456 billion
Russia----- $470 billion
UK-------- $390 billion
Ukraine $100 billion
China------ $96 billion
Now do the math India with $1456 billion or $1.4 trillion has more money in Swiss banks
than rest of the world COMBINED.
Public loot since 1947: Let us bring back our money
M R Venkatesh April 15, 2008 09:34 IST
It is one of the biggest loots witnessed by mankind -- the loot of the aam aadmi (common man) since 1947 by his brethren occupying public office.
It has been orchestrated by politicians, bureaucrats and some businessmen.
The list is almost all-encompassing. No wonder, everyone in India loots with impunity and without any fear.
What is even more depressing in that this ill-gotten wealth of ours has been stashed away abroad into secret bank accounts located in some of the world's best known tax havens.
And to that extent the Indian economy has been striped of its wealth.
Ordinary Indians may not be exactly aware of how such secret accounts operate and what are the rules and regulations that go on to govern such tax havens.
However, one may well be aware of 'Swiss bank accounts,' the shorthand for murky dealings, secrecy and of course pilferage from developing countries into rich developed ones.
In fact, some finance experts and economists believe tax havens to be a conspiracy of the western world against the poor countries.
By allowing the proliferation of tax havens in the twentieth century, the western world explicitly encourages the movement of scarce capital from the developing countries to the rich.
In March 2005, the Tax Justice Network (TJN) published a research finding demonstrating that $11.5 trillion of personal wealth was held offshore by rich individuals across the globe.
The findings estimated that a large proportion of this wealth was managed from some 70 tax havens.
Further, augmenting these studies of TJN, Raymond Baker -- in his widely celebrated book titled Capitalism's Achilles Heel: Dirty Money and How to Renew the Free Market System -- estimates that at least $5 trillion have been shifted out of poorer countries to the West since the mid-1970s. It is further estimated by experts that one per cent of the world's population holds more than 57 per cent of total global wealth, routing it invariably through these tax havens. How much of this is from India is anybody's guess. What is to be noted here is that most of the wealth of Indians parked in these tax havens is illegitimate money acquired through corrupt means. Naturally the secrecy associated with the bank accounts in such places is central to the issue, not their low tax rates as the term 'tax havens' suggests. Remember Bofors and how India could not trace the ultimate beneficiary of those transactions because of the secrecy associated with these bank accounts?
by Naman Sood on Apr 15, 2008 01:44 PM
Deposits in Banks located in the territory of Switzerland by nationals of following countries
Top 5 India---- $1456 billion
Russia----- $470 billion
UK-------- $390 billion
Ukraine $100 billion
China------ $96 billion
Now do the math India with $1456 billion or $1.4 trillion has more money in Swiss banks
than rest of the world COMBINED.
Public loot since 1947: Let us bring back our money
M R Venkatesh April 15, 2008 09:34 IST
It is one of the biggest loots witnessed by mankind -- the loot of the aam aadmi (common man) since 1947 by his brethren occupying public office.
It has been orchestrated by politicians, bureaucrats and some businessmen.
The list is almost all-encompassing. No wonder, everyone in India loots with impunity and without any fear.
What is even more depressing in that this ill-gotten wealth of ours has been stashed away abroad into secret bank accounts located in some of the world's best known tax havens.
And to that extent the Indian economy has been striped of its wealth.
Ordinary Indians may not be exactly aware of how such secret accounts operate and what are the rules and regulations that go on to govern such tax havens.
However, one may well be aware of 'Swiss bank accounts,' the shorthand for murky dealings, secrecy and of course pilferage from developing countries into rich developed ones.
In fact, some finance experts and economists believe tax havens to be a conspiracy of the western world against the poor countries.
By allowing the proliferation of tax havens in the twentieth century, the western world explicitly encourages the movement of scarce capital from the developing countries to the rich.
In March 2005, the Tax Justice Network (TJN) published a research finding demonstrating that $11.5 trillion of personal wealth was held offshore by rich individuals across the globe.
The findings estimated that a large proportion of this wealth was managed from some 70 tax havens.
Further, augmenting these studies of TJN, Raymond Baker -- in his widely celebrated book titled Capitalism's Achilles Heel: Dirty Money and How to Renew the Free Market System -- estimates that at least $5 trillion have been shifted out of poorer countries to the West since the mid-1970s. It is further estimated by experts that one per cent of the world's population holds more than 57 per cent of total global wealth, routing it invariably through these tax havens. How much of this is from India is anybody's guess. What is to be noted here is that most of the wealth of Indians parked in these tax havens is illegitimate money acquired through corrupt means. Naturally the secrecy associated with the bank accounts in such places is central to the issue, not their low tax rates as the term 'tax havens' suggests. Remember Bofors and how India could not trace the ultimate beneficiary of those transactions because of the secrecy associated with these bank accounts?
why Hindus lost
Think it overWas caste a decisive factor in India’s defeat?By M.S.N. Menon
No, I do not think so, Why? Because the caste system was not so oppressive as is being made out. Let us see what A.L. Basham has to say on the matter. He says: “In no other part of the world were the relations of man and man and of a man and the state as fair and humane” as in India. (The wonder that was India). He was perhaps comparing the lot of the Scheduled Castes in India with the lot of the slaves in Greece and Rome. It is, therefore, wrong to say that the caste system was responsible for the defeat of the Hindus at the hands of the Muslim invaders. There is no evidence that the Scheduled Castes were ready to join hands with the invaders against their so-called “tormentors”. It is also wrong to say that Vaishyas and Shudras did not take part in battles. They did. Vastupala, the great warrior under the Chalukya king Lavanaprasada, declares with great pride: “It is a delusion to think that the Kshatriyas alone can fight and not vaniks (merchants). Did not Ambada, a vanik kill Mallikarjuna, the warrior, in battle? I, a vanik, am as well known in the shops as in the battlefield.” (Art of War in Ancient India by Prof. P.C. Chakravarty) The Kashmiri and Hoyasala (Mysore) kings recruited Shudras for their armies. Shudras could attain imperial positions under the Rajput rulers. The ruler of Sind during the visit of Juan Chwang, the Chinese pilgrim, was a Shudra. The Nandas were Shudras. And in order to protect Hinduism and the Hindu society, Shankara created ten Saiva acetic orders, made up largely of Shudra recruits. He also freed these para-military forces from the caste system. What can we infer from all these? We can infer that the Vaishyas and Shudras had not accepted the caste system, that they were as good fighters as the Kshatriyas, that the kings had no objection to the recruitment of Shudras as soldiers, that Shankara did not believe in the caste system, that the orders he created had no caste. Not only these. The lower orders of Hindu society could hold high positions in the state. Thus, Kumarapala, the Chalukya king, appointed Sajjana as governor of Chittor, He was a potter. It is such recognition of their worth that kept the Shudras within the Hindu fold. Jawaharlal Nehru said that the caste system was flexible before the Muslim advent, which is why it was bearable. There is an impression that the caste system was deeply entrenched all over India. Not true. It was prevalent only in some parts of the country. Thus, it had no deep roots in the South, in Sind, Magadha and Anga. In Kerala, the entire army was made up of the so-called Shudras. The Himalayan territory was mlecha region. The ultimate damage of the caste system, says Nehru, was what it did to the self -respect of the lower orders of Hindu society. It degraded a mass of human beings and gave them no opportunity to get out of their predicament. This feeling of degradation might have warped their outlook and their willingness to fight for their country. But we can only speculate on these matters. It is time to ask the question: did caste cause our defeat? I believe caste was only a marginal factor. It was not for want of brave men that the Hindus got defeated. It was not even because the Muslims were superior. It was because, for the first time, the Hindus, a highly civilised people were facing a barbarous enemy who had no rules of war and were prepared to take to unheard of brutalities. Thus, we have Haajaj, the governor of Iraq, exhorting bin Qasim to follow the injunction of Allah in the Quran (47.4) that is to strike off the head of any infidel. No wonder, when Debal, capital of Sind, fell to bin Qasim, he ordered the massacre of the entire population. The killing went on for three full days. And the loot went on for even longer. Serge Trifkovic writes (The Sword of the Prophet): “The massacres perpetrated by Muslims in India are without parallel in history.” This is confirmed by Ziyauddin Burani, a contemporary of Khusrau. He says that “wars against Hindus were not ordinary wars. They were massacres of extermination.” There are many such instances. Amir Khusrau writes: Had not the Shariah granted exemption from death by payment of the poll tax (Jaziya), “the very name of Hind, root and brach, would have been extinguished.” And Al-Biruni himself writes that the invasions of Mahmud utterly ruined the prosperity of the country. “The Hindus became like atoms of dust scattered in all directions.” The invaders singled out the Rajputs and their families for massacre. This must have demoralised the Rajputs. Remember, dear Reader, during the Second World War, the Japanese, surrendered to the Allies, although they were far more superior to the American men. Why did they do it? Because the ruthless Americans were ready to exterminate the Japanese. The Hindus were in a similar plight. They were face to face with an enemy who observed no rules of war, who were determined to exterminate the Hindus. Resistance would have brought extermination. I think it was this dilemma which forced the collapse of the Hindu resistance. Not because of caste factors. (But I am not making any “final statement”)
No, I do not think so, Why? Because the caste system was not so oppressive as is being made out. Let us see what A.L. Basham has to say on the matter. He says: “In no other part of the world were the relations of man and man and of a man and the state as fair and humane” as in India. (The wonder that was India). He was perhaps comparing the lot of the Scheduled Castes in India with the lot of the slaves in Greece and Rome. It is, therefore, wrong to say that the caste system was responsible for the defeat of the Hindus at the hands of the Muslim invaders. There is no evidence that the Scheduled Castes were ready to join hands with the invaders against their so-called “tormentors”. It is also wrong to say that Vaishyas and Shudras did not take part in battles. They did. Vastupala, the great warrior under the Chalukya king Lavanaprasada, declares with great pride: “It is a delusion to think that the Kshatriyas alone can fight and not vaniks (merchants). Did not Ambada, a vanik kill Mallikarjuna, the warrior, in battle? I, a vanik, am as well known in the shops as in the battlefield.” (Art of War in Ancient India by Prof. P.C. Chakravarty) The Kashmiri and Hoyasala (Mysore) kings recruited Shudras for their armies. Shudras could attain imperial positions under the Rajput rulers. The ruler of Sind during the visit of Juan Chwang, the Chinese pilgrim, was a Shudra. The Nandas were Shudras. And in order to protect Hinduism and the Hindu society, Shankara created ten Saiva acetic orders, made up largely of Shudra recruits. He also freed these para-military forces from the caste system. What can we infer from all these? We can infer that the Vaishyas and Shudras had not accepted the caste system, that they were as good fighters as the Kshatriyas, that the kings had no objection to the recruitment of Shudras as soldiers, that Shankara did not believe in the caste system, that the orders he created had no caste. Not only these. The lower orders of Hindu society could hold high positions in the state. Thus, Kumarapala, the Chalukya king, appointed Sajjana as governor of Chittor, He was a potter. It is such recognition of their worth that kept the Shudras within the Hindu fold. Jawaharlal Nehru said that the caste system was flexible before the Muslim advent, which is why it was bearable. There is an impression that the caste system was deeply entrenched all over India. Not true. It was prevalent only in some parts of the country. Thus, it had no deep roots in the South, in Sind, Magadha and Anga. In Kerala, the entire army was made up of the so-called Shudras. The Himalayan territory was mlecha region. The ultimate damage of the caste system, says Nehru, was what it did to the self -respect of the lower orders of Hindu society. It degraded a mass of human beings and gave them no opportunity to get out of their predicament. This feeling of degradation might have warped their outlook and their willingness to fight for their country. But we can only speculate on these matters. It is time to ask the question: did caste cause our defeat? I believe caste was only a marginal factor. It was not for want of brave men that the Hindus got defeated. It was not even because the Muslims were superior. It was because, for the first time, the Hindus, a highly civilised people were facing a barbarous enemy who had no rules of war and were prepared to take to unheard of brutalities. Thus, we have Haajaj, the governor of Iraq, exhorting bin Qasim to follow the injunction of Allah in the Quran (47.4) that is to strike off the head of any infidel. No wonder, when Debal, capital of Sind, fell to bin Qasim, he ordered the massacre of the entire population. The killing went on for three full days. And the loot went on for even longer. Serge Trifkovic writes (The Sword of the Prophet): “The massacres perpetrated by Muslims in India are without parallel in history.” This is confirmed by Ziyauddin Burani, a contemporary of Khusrau. He says that “wars against Hindus were not ordinary wars. They were massacres of extermination.” There are many such instances. Amir Khusrau writes: Had not the Shariah granted exemption from death by payment of the poll tax (Jaziya), “the very name of Hind, root and brach, would have been extinguished.” And Al-Biruni himself writes that the invasions of Mahmud utterly ruined the prosperity of the country. “The Hindus became like atoms of dust scattered in all directions.” The invaders singled out the Rajputs and their families for massacre. This must have demoralised the Rajputs. Remember, dear Reader, during the Second World War, the Japanese, surrendered to the Allies, although they were far more superior to the American men. Why did they do it? Because the ruthless Americans were ready to exterminate the Japanese. The Hindus were in a similar plight. They were face to face with an enemy who observed no rules of war, who were determined to exterminate the Hindus. Resistance would have brought extermination. I think it was this dilemma which forced the collapse of the Hindu resistance. Not because of caste factors. (But I am not making any “final statement”)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)