Mother Teresa, Gandhi, Dalai Lama? Please...
Watching TV last night I noticed how much I didn't know of the lies that are spreaded through the whole world. But now...well let's see...First it's the monumental lie of Mother Tesera, qualified by a columnist (Hitchens) like the worst fraud of modern history. Here's a link to the complete history in various links (because there's to much lies): Mommie Dearest ; India has no reason to be grateful of mother Teresa ; Mother Teresa on Theory and Practice ; Mushroom Award: Mother Teresa. There's a lot more. I'll resume the history:
"Mother Teresa is the worst fraud of modern history"- said Christopher Hitchens. The columnist has been studying the so called "Angel of Mercy" for a long time. The first thing atributed to mother Teresa, when someone speeks of her, is the merciful and dignified treatment that she gave to her neighbors. And it's the first and worst lie ever about her. In his convents the treatment was, at best, the same offered to cows preapered to be slaughtered. The conditions inside her institutions were detrimental of the human dignity: uncomfortable beds, a single bathroom to all the people (wich wasn't even washed from time to time), in general poor conditions of health and the worst of all, visitors of the "doomed" were not allowed!. This is a direct derivation (perhaps) of the eternal Teresa's worship to suffering. Yes to her suffering was the best way to achieve God, so the people that were already suffering had to suffer more only because she wanted to. She said that the body of the poor habitating her convent should reflect the devastated body of Jesus. The other thing atributed to her is the great expenditure in favor of the poors that she did with the money that she received in form of donations. The thing is really that there's no record of any contributions of this fraud to the poors in no part of the whole world, less in India. But then where's her money? Well she spended great part of it constructing more "convents of suffering", with her name and the name of his mission "Mission of Charity" (?), yes no single moeny was spended to help the poor and cure the poverty in India, all was spended to glorify her own image.
The last thing are the prizes that she won, of course all her defenders put the prizes above all to "clean" her image. With the Church in the worst of it's moments, i.e. officers commiting rapes, and it's image on the floor, it needed a new christian hero. The best way was to take this old bitch, and turn she in the new charity image. The prizes then came in accordance. The beatification was a logic conclussion of the all this fraud. the Pope even reduced the numbers of "miracles" so she could become a saint.
Next there's Gandhi. There's nothing to say about his method of freedom fight or his wisdom, but was he really a saint? Of course not there's no saints, "Saint's should be presumed guilty, and proven innocent". But then where's the proof? Strangely the prooves are inside his own book. I'll make this shorter: In his book Ghandi expresses his doctrine. Part of it, as many people of his time, was directed towards intolerance. He called the africans "kaffirs" ("negros" in english, "negros" too in spanish), and inferior race, barbarians, he said that they should be treated as such, he didn't even wanted to have an african by his side, avoiding all chances of encountering one, of course this was a normal thing in his days. Next there's his sexual "problems", he was very promiscous sexualy, but besides that, he loved enemas, yes he loved to had his anus clean. If he had done that to himself only, then there was no problem, but no he wanted to clean other people's anuses, namely his female companions. Yes he forced his companions to use enemas, of course we all know why, don't we? In fact the floor could end bathed in excretation.
Of course he was no saint, but this is only to desmithify his image. All in the name of the truth sirs. Here are some links: The myth of "Mahatma" Gandhi ; Myth of Mohandas; Enema usage and other things; Mohandas the eccentric; The Gandhi that few know.
And last, but no least, the allmighty Dalai Lama, wow even Richard Gere follows him he must have something!!!. The truth is NO, he has not the best phylosophy, if you want phylosophers go and read some books, the old ones, those are real phylosophy. As all we know the Dalai Lama is the top of the food chain, at least he was there before China invaded his precious Utopia. All people stangely support his policies, many don't understand that helping him to recover his grounds will be replacing an evil, for a worst evil. In the community of the Tibet, long ago, the people were forced to live and die mantaining the precious lives of the "high class". Speaking bad or looking bad to the allmighty Dalai Lama meant certain death, they tortured the poor wretch, the punishment were from extirping eye balls to decapitations. Of course all the people lived in slavery. China has improved the things a lot, besides it's depotics views of society. But returning the land to this myth will cause worst real problems, the Tibet will fall again under the grasp of another tyrant, worst than any other modern state. But even the states had been helping the man, with money of course, wich is of unknown destiny. The premise is basic, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", that's how the USA wants to assure an advantage (strategic perhaps) over China, by recovering the Tibet and instaurating a base there, already pacted with the all peaceful Dalai Lama, wich ironically sais no to violence, lies and cheating...
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
Bookmarks