Comments on: The Triumph of Truth By Repeated Assertion

By: vishfulwords

vishfulwords — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 05:07:31 +0000

I once put in a reply on this thread way back, when I was not just less aware, but completely aware of one side of the issue, and that, believe me, is a terrible position to comment from or take a stance bt anybody, even worse than being less aware about the whole issue, since it creates a dangerous bias!
Now, after having Rajeev’s blog, one that I wholeheartedly believe, deserves the Thinking Blogger nomination, I have got a look on the issue from different perspectives.
And, I daresay, yes, there are a lot more angles to it apart from the purely religious. Most of the opinions that I may want to express have already been done by the writers above. And yes, the war of words between wanderlust and Sam made great reading!
Well, thank you, wanderlust, for a sensible post and directing me to Rajeev’s blog!

By: Nitin

Nitin — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 05:35:25 +0000

@Priya
Agree

By: Vishnu

Vishnu — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 23:57:48 +0000

A good post quite sensible one. Hurting anybody’s religious sentiments is wrong be it Hindu or Muslim.
The rule of the book should be applied without any bias. But sadly nothing but the fear of losing votes seems to spur these politicians. A spineless PM, “dutybound” female first citizen and a pig of an agnostic tamil moron help very little to save the situation.

By: C Sivakumar

C Sivakumar — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 07:17:28 +0000

Thank you Priya for the wonderful post. I wish that these pseudoseclarists are shown the door. But alas! what is the alternative. Anyway, I think we need to first show these bunch of morons the door first and then think of the alternative!!

CSK.

By: wanderlust

wanderlust — Tue, 25 Sep 2007 19:32:54 +0000

@Tony
>>anyone else needs a
that’s just your opinion.
>>all this side tracking n calling names
I’m not guilty of either. Nor am i guilty of mudslinging.
Cor, this is just arguing. do not take it personally – grow up. I hate to be the one to break this to you, but when people argue about issues, they argue about the issue, too, with no personal jibes. Take for example this one.
>>read the sports page, solve the crossword and chuck the newspaper
final year jobless+growing presence of ebooks over paperbacks+recurring powercuts ensure that a lot more time is spent with a newspaper. And.. we’d also like to know about when we’ll be called to vote next, who to vote for (we have friday off for municipality elections ).. so most of us will choose not to follow your advice.

By: wanderlust

wanderlust — Tue, 25 Sep 2007 19:23:36 +0000

>>your recourse to ecological and practical reasons
those were not exactly for bolstering my argument. i mentioned those coz they nullify the standard oft-quoted “economic progress” arguments which vishfulwords had put across.
The point i chose to stress by citing those was, though it is not economically feasible, the government still chooses to go along with it, putting in plain light its intentions.
>>Project was approved by none other than a certain BJP government
The issue is not which government what goes. It’s that This government isn’t exactly doing right by making claims like what it has. No matter which government does it, it’s wrong.
>>‘feigning’ ignorance.
Isn’t it obvious by the amount of info i’ve put here that i’m doing quite the contrary?
>>Rowan Atkinsons play
You seem to be from NITW. It was one of your college-mates who said he found it offensive.
>>western television
What about Danish cartoons? And protests against Darwinism being taught in schools (In the US of A, nonetheless) as they clashed with Genesis? Fatwas against writers? Have you read Stephen King’s Carrie by any chance?
And… India is the first country to ban Satanic Verses. India also bans Da Vinci Code. Because they trigger sensitive emotions. But any Nirad Chaudhuri can make arbit comments on india and get away with it. Execute one Iraqi, and Bangalore is on fire.
>>And put that post back on the page
I’m afraid I have my security at risk… not only did your college-mate find it offensive, but also a few others who weren’t as mild also did. And I’m not Karunanidhi that I can get away with stuff like that.
>>its called Adams Bridge because according to Islam
Hey, just make that a bit more public. It might just save the livelihoods of a zillion fisherfolk and save an entire ecosystem.
>>shouldn’t even bat an eyelid if it had 1 billion atheists
Not when we have been denied our heritage. Systematically brainwashed. When the reason people turn atheists is Truth by Repeated Assertion. When we have been forced to be atheists by truth by repeated assertion. Our temples desecrated since 10th century. Being made to pay Jazia for so bloody long.
How many people know the Indus Valley Civilization (Now being given the secular name of being in the Ghaggar Hakkra Valley) was originally called the Indus-Sarasvati civilization (The Sarasvati river being very central to the entire civilization… how many times is it even mentioned in the history books?)? How many people take pride in it being the world’s first and possibly finest example of town-planning? Ask any civil engineer worth his salt about their town-planning schemes, and if he’s sufficiently informed, he’d say it was one of the best (i’ve had it from great civvies in my college). How many pages in textbooks are devoted to study of our very own civilization? and how many to that of Mughals/Sultanate? Why is the Aryan Invasion theory being accepted as the sole truth and taught in schools when there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary? In other words, why did Nehru’s government concern itself so much about CREATING atheists of hindus? going by your logic, they should have not batted an eyelid when they had a billion believers.
Most countries make romantic mysteries out of their legends. Look at the search for Atlantis. So many scientists pursuing it fulltime. And look at us… we aren’t even willing to accept that one of the the world’s first dockyards (In Lothal, Gujarat) deserves to be (atleast nominated) a wonder of the world over a mausoleum.
I would prefer non-personal attacks, which don’t talk about my awareness or the lack of it or whatever it is that wins you debates in wherever you come from. as a rule, NITKians debate on and discuss issues, not improvised personal attacks.
I’m not being judgemental about you and casting aspersions on your frame of mind or current mindset and I’m responding with logic, you’d better do the same. Be polite and relevant, or be marked spam.

By: Tony

Tony — Tue, 25 Sep 2007 19:23:24 +0000

TIP OF THE DAY

read the sports page, solve the crossword and chuck the newspaper

By: Tony

Tony — Tue, 25 Sep 2007 19:19:32 +0000

hey ppl tone down the mud slinging…

as far as i knw
the govt proposed it n more or less took it back…got a few scapegoats frm the geological survey team or whatever period

all this side tracking n calling names is baseless n needless…

i guess most ppl will agree that the UPA is more secular than the NDA anyone else needs a head-boiling session

By: Sam

Sam — Tue, 25 Sep 2007 18:40:09 +0000

Well, just before I made the comment I did make it a point to do a bit of reading and kind of try to relate it to your case for the bridge, however weak it was. However, I cannot convince you that I do know some of the ‘basic premises’ since you seem to dispel views that are contrary to yours with a condescending sense of general awareness. In your case , you do not make any mention of a premise however ‘basic’ it may sound, save for the fact that your pride is sullen by a pseudo secular government. But then again, your recourse to ecological and practical reasons is understood given the weakness of your argument. What you should understand is that the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project was approved by none other than a certain BJP government which was in power at that time. Surely, you were not aware of that !!!!! Why didn’t anyone make such a big hue and cry then. Isn’t it amazing that a government supported by the Jan Sangh overlooked the emotions and feelings of people like you and went on to approve such a project. Even if it were the Congress govt. who first thought about it, they surely weren’t doing it for kicks sake ( pun intended ). Or are you going to go and say that this is another form of minority appeasement. Anyways, as they say, its better late than never. You must understand, that i’m not for once doubting your awareness, after all, i said, you were only ‘feigning’ ignorance.

And Yes, some people would be hurt if they saw Rowan Atkinsons play. Only, I would place them in the same category as you. Hasn’t it ever crossed your mind that in the west, regardless of religious opposition, the media making a mockery of important religious figures is allowed to all extents. Haven’t you seen western television at all, limiting yourself to the Sunday renditions of Mahabharata and Ramayana. A few episodes of South Park should do the trick. Educate yourself !!!! ( And put that post back on the page )

And FYI, its called Adams Bridge because according to Islam, Adam is said to have crossed the strait to reach Adams Peak, which is in Sri Lanka.

“not many hindus have pride in their religion. and any attempt to redress that is called “saffronization”.”

So is it the Cong govts fault that not many people have pride in their religion. From what I last heard, a secular govt. shouldn’t even bat an eyelid if it had 1 billion atheists instead of 1 billion ramsevaks.

By: wanderlust

wanderlust — Tue, 25 Sep 2007 05:46:36 +0000

@vishfulwords:
i suggest you do some reading-up on the implications of sethusamudram project. ecological, mainly. it is NOT economically feasible. it’s gonna take some 50-75 years to break even. and who knows if fuel and fuel costs will even be a concern then! and if they want to reduce the breakeven point to 25 years, they have to increase toll for ships using the channel. and the channel can only be used by very small freight carrying ships. who will prefer to go around srilanka if either ways they’re going to be paying around the same amount.
and they would prefer going around srilanka for another reason. the width of the channel is 12m. which is too small, even by smaller ships’ standards. they’ll have to slow down till speeds are 0, coz otherwise, they’ll run aground, and then take measures so as to cross the channel unharmed, which take two hours to set up, and a further two hours to wind up, and cross the channel at a very very very low speed. it all seems like too much trouble for virtually nothing.
and for the ecological impact: the biggest protests are coming from the christian and muslim fishermen of rameshwaram and surrounding areas. the dredging is harmful for the fish population, their livelihoods are going to be the most affected. (someone say economic development?) and ships crossing the area is going to have a huuuge negative impact: the warden of the gulf of mannar says now sea-cows are losing their way because these animals communicate by sending vibrations in the sea, and ships and dredging upset the rhythm
other concerns include the tsunami’s impact. and yet others the rich marine life of the ecosystem at the gulf of mannar.
There are also three alternate routes for the same project. all of which do not go thru the coral reef. which is a unique ecosystem all by itself.
INSPITE OF ALL THIS, if the government decides to go ahead with the dredging, it is quite obvious what their intentions are. it bodes a very bad time ahead for hindus. the government is simply not being “secular”, merely being pseudosecular. they want to break the backbone of the nation, the spirit of the nation.
i suggest you read on this.. you can start here
Maybe then you’ll have some solid opinions on that, backed by facts, and express them the write way, too, with much less ambiguity than i have.
@sam:
oh, great, so anyone says something right, and that something happens to be something in favor of the majority, they get labelled terrorists etc etc.
yeah, that is something you’ll just say, that you dont mind the wailing wall being broken etc etc… but what about your fellow christians… once i’d put up a post on this blog which was transcript of Rowan Atkinson’s “sermon” where he says jesus christ was just a magician who pulled tricks and one-liners, and mary magdalene was his assistant and that paul daniels is really the son of god [and this was from rowan atkinson, not me], and the comments i received on those were simply too much; i had to remove that post. whereas, if i put a parody of Ramayan or Mahabharat, like many bloggers i know do, there will be people who laugh and say “good one!”. Hindus are tolerant. and every step is being taken to take advantage of that fact and slowly raze down our pride… little drops of water make a mighty ocean never held truer. systematically, we have been taught that our religions and our gods are all fiction. not many hindus have pride in their religion. and any attempt to redress that is called “saffronization”.
adam’s bridge is what the british called it. just like Victoria Terminus. and Calcutta. And Bangalore. it is called ramar sethu. or raamar paalam.
it is quite obvious you dont know the depth of the issue, nor have you made yourself aware of facts that are to me, basic premises. this is not the place for ignorant comments. i dont have enough time to dispel ignorance of each ill-informed commenter. kindly do some preliminary reading up before you comment here.