One-stop shop to make India 20 times richer

Category: Religion

My open wager with ANYONE about this “prediction” about World War 3 starting on 13 May 2017

Someone forwarded this on Whatsapp:

Clairvoyant horacio Villegas, who predicted Donald Trump’s victory way back in 2015, has now predicted May 13th as the advent date of WW3. According to a report published in Daily Star, Horacio has prophesied that WW3 would begin on the 100th anniversary of Our Lady of Fatima’s visitation which falls on May 13th and that Donald Trump will be crowned the “Illuminati King” .

He also foretold that Donald Trump would be the man responsible for WW3 . World Leaders will attack Syria which will then get Russia, China and North Korea also in the battle fray.

According to his statement,

“The main message that people need to know in order be prepared is that between May 13th and October 13, 2017, this war will occur and be over with much devastation, shock, and death.”

Even Nostradamus had earlier predicted,

“Mabus will soon die, and then will come, a horrible undoing of people and animals, at once one will see vengeance, one hundred powers, thirst, famine, when the comet will pass.” Mabus here is Bashar Al Assad, the Syrian president.

MY RESPONSE

Happy to bet against this nonsense. Rs. 2 lakhs that there will be no WW3 on 13 May 2017. On 14 May we will get the results.

Actually, if the prediction is true, this is the best time in the last 70 years to short shares. Crores waiting to be made for the believers.

Bryan Caplan has a rule: if you make a prediction (or support it) put your money where your mouth is. I follow that rule. I have wagered with AK and Modi (of course, none of them dare take on the bets). Happy to wager with any spiritualist/ ghost believer/ telepathist, on anything which is supernatural. Easy money to be made.

Continue Reading

The mega-criminal Eugenio Pacelli, Pope Pius XII – the Catholic Pope who supported Hitler AT EVERY STEP

Continuing from here, I conducted 2 minutes of further research. I came across an extremely well researched document by John Cornwell that states:

Eugenio Pacelli, Pope Pius XII, the Pope during World War II … was patently, and by the proof of his own words, anti-Jewish. … He had helped Hitler to power and at the same time undermined potential Catholic resistance in Germany. … He had implicitly denied and trivialized the Holocaust, despite having reliable knowledge of its true extent. And, worse, … he was a hypocrite, for after the war he had retrospectively taken undue credit for speaking out boldly against the Nazis’ persecution of the Jews.

I think the matter is 100 per cent clear – that Christianity has unequivocally been the most murderous religion in human history. Islam comes only a feeble second.

Now, of course, Modi and his Hindutva gangs are determined to enter this competition for murder and mayhem. But Hinduism remains a distant third – in comparison to the havoc caused by Christianity and Islam.

 

Continue Reading

Hitler was not only executing the Protestant Christian agenda, the Catholic Pope required his birthday to be celebrated through special prayers

I’ve mentioned on many occasions on this blog that Hitler was a Christian and how the anti-Jew pogrom he was carrying out was nothing more than the execution of the plans of Christian leaders such as Martin Luther. (e.g. see The racist Rushton was funded by Pioneer Fund, supporter of Adolf Hitler’s race policies)

Today I chanced upon the following video by the inimitable and greatly mourned Christopher Hitchins. In this he notes that not only were the Protestants right behind Hitler, the Catholic Pope himself was right behind him:

Fascism, the original 20th century totalitarian movement is really historically another name for the for the political activity of the Catholic right wing. There is no other name for it…  It’s the Catholic right. Mussolini. You can’t quite say that about Hitler – National Socialism – because that’s also based on Nordic and pagan blood myths, leader worship, and so on. Though Hitler never repudiated his membership of the church. And prayers were said for him on his birthday every year till the very end on the orders of the Vatican.”

Continue Reading

Although Islam is a 100 per cent false, irrational and fascist, it is even more fascist for a government to impose a burqa ban

Following from my comments made in 2011 here, I’ve made some more comments on FB recently. Making note of them:

Couldn’t agree more (with this). The idea that the state should involve itself in the dress that citizens wear is fascist.
Yes, Islam is a fascist and irrational (and particularly dangerous) belief system, but criticism and debate regarding religion is the prerogative of citizens; not the business of government. A government must be religion blind.
Everyone must be free to pursue their delusions so long as they do so peacefully.

FURTHER:

It is not the business of government to keep looking at people’s faces. If the government has a particular case against someone, they should pursue it through courts.

I’m assuming at airports where security IS important, people are forced to remove their burqa to show their face and confirm ID. That is perfectly fine, but in day to day life, I’m afraid government has no business to want to see people’s faces.

FURTHER:

We have had burqa clad women in India ever since I have known India. Even today lakhs of women wear the burqa. In all these years there has never been any issue that I’ve experienced with women in burqa becoming a security threat to India.

At a minimum, you will need to provide evidence if you (as government) wish to impose on people’s freedoms. It is a very serious matter to ask people to change their dress just because you (Rahul) have a belief (probably more irrational than any religious belief) that women in burqa pose a security threat.

A government is the servant of all of us, including women who wear burqa. Before a servant can ask us to remove the burqa, the servant must prove the reason for reducing freedom.

Government that imposes a “burqa ban” is more fascist than Islam, and that’s saying a lot.

FURTHER

it is important that all liberals remain firmly committed to liberty and refuse to allow government to intervene unless there is direct threat of violence.

a dress is a form of freedom of expression. Although Islam is FASCIST and hates freedom of expression, we the liberals must insist that Muslims be free to practice their beliefs and express their beliefs so long as they are not violent. Burqa is not violent. So let’s not allow governments to stop Muslim women from wearing a burqa. Likewise I hope that Muslims will allow people to mock Mohammed and say whatever they wish to say about Islam, since speech is non-violent manner (unless there is a direct incitement t violence).

Freedom of expression cuts both ways,

 

Continue Reading

Question: Is it appropriate to cite the Old Testament to criticise the “God” of Christianity?

A bit of a controversy started on FB based on my citing the Old Testament (OT) as proof of the violence and inhumanity of the Christian God, here.

A key question is: are Christians accountable for the Old Testament? Or is the “god” of the OT radically distinct to the “god” of the NT? Did Christ “bring” to the world a new “god”?

I’ve concluded, after a bit of further review, that the two “gods” are indeed the same My interpretation (i.e. the Christians are accountable for their violent OT God – apart from the massive violence in the name of Christianity seen over the past 2000 years – except perhaps the past 5-6 decades) must stand. Christianity is a fundamentally a violent religion.

Some key proofs (in relation to the close relationship between OT and NT).

Quora: Does Christianity need the Old Testament? Could it be scrapped with little loss?

Christianity Today: Do we still need the Old Testament now that we have the New Testament?

Mmany Christians point fingers at the Islamic God. But as they say, those who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones at others.

This comment is intended for people like Dom Azares. The only moral position in relation to Judaism, Christianity and Islam (and all other religions) is to reject them outright.

 

 

Continue Reading