India! I dare you to be rich

Category: Religion

It is time for Muslims (even Wahabis) to assemble, to fight the ISIS. This evil won’t go away on its own.

I hope my Muslim friends (I have many, on Facebook) will now pay heed to the ISIS's ultra-Islamic agenda and try to understand how it is being driven by ISLAM, not by any fictitious American/Israeli intervention (yes!, some have even suggested to me that Israel has created ISIS! How terribly misinformed can one get).

So here's the problem. 

These people (ISIS) are GENUINE Muslims, following the Koran to the last word, exactly as it was intended.

If you go to them and preach alternative views (as one Muslim friend has proposed here), it won't work with them.

But this is not the first time the Muslim world has seen such a fight between fundamentalists and the moderates. It is an ongoing, cyclical phenomenon. India had Aurangzeb (but also had Akbar, for instance).

The solution is also clear: these extremists have to be given ACTUAL (physical) battle, and decapacitated. They can't be fought ideologically. And they can't be (and should NEVER be) fought by Americans or Western powers.

If the West directly enters the battlefield, it will merely promote the growth of the ISIS.

The battle needs to be fought WITHIN THE MUSLIM WORLD.

In the face of the ISIS brand of Islam, even the Wahabi brand looks rather moderate! All these people (moderates, and even Wahabis) need to organise an army of Muslims to fight ISIS.

I'm sorry, but I don't think such ideological battles within religions can get fixed without physical war. The level of brainwashing among the ISIS folk can't be undone thorough discussion or persuasion.

The fight for liberty will have to wait the resolution of these religious fights. The journey for the liberation of mankind is going to be long and tedious. Religion is one heck of an obstacle to human progress.

Continue Reading

ISIS’s ultra-Islamic world: slavery, crucifixtion, cutting off hands, jizya. AND the return of Christ – to save the Muslims!

Things are looking bad for the world, with the rise of the ISIS and the so-called "true" Islam. I'm making note of some dramatic points from Graeme Wood's article, below. Bolding, title, colour annotations mine.

The situation clearly started with someone taking their Koran too seriously. Now it will probably not end well – for them. If it was not such a terrible thing to read about, one might even have a bit of a laugh at the whole thing, so amusing is this idea of reviving 7th century customs in a modern world. 

And of Christ himself coming back to lead the Muslims to glory! As they say these days, "lol".


“Slavery, crucifixion, and beheadings are not something that freakish [jihadists] are cherry-picking from the medieval tradition,” Haykel said. Islamic State fighters “are smack in the middle of the medieval tradition and are bringing it wholesale into the present day.”

"The Koran specifies crucifixion as one of the only punishments permitted for enemies of Islam. The tax on Christians finds clear endorsement in the Surah Al-Tawba, the Koran’s ninth chapter, which instructs Muslims to fight Christians and Jews “until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” The Prophet, whom all Muslims consider exemplary, imposed these rules and owned slaves."

when the Islamic State began enslaving people, even some of its supporters balked. Nonetheless, the caliphate has continued to embrace slavery and crucifixion without apology. “We will conquer your Rome, break your crosses, and enslave your women,” Adnani, the spokesman, promised in one of his periodic valentines to the West. “If we do not reach that time, then our children and grandchildren will reach it, and they will sell your sons as slaves at the slave market.”  [Sanjeev: Surely these people are EXTREME nuts!]

In October, Dabiq, the magazine of the Islamic State, published “The Revival of Slavery Before the Hour,” an article that took up the question of whether Yazidis (the members of an ancient Kurdish sect that borrows elements of Islam, and had come under attack from Islamic State forces in northern Iraq) are lapsed Muslims, and therefore marked for death, or merely pagans and therefore fair game for enslavement. A study group of Islamic State scholars had convened, on government orders, to resolve this issue. If they are pagans, the article’s anonymous author wrote,

Yazidi women and children [are to be] divided according to the Shariah amongst the fighters of the Islamic State who participated in the Sinjar operations [in northern Iraq] … Enslaving the families of the kuffar [infidels] and taking their women as concubines is a firmly established aspect of the Shariah that if one were to deny or mock, he would be denying or mocking the verses of the Koran and the narrations of the Prophet … and thereby apostatizing from Islam.


Before the caliphate, “maybe 85 percent of the Sharia was absent from our lives,” Choudary told me. “These laws are in abeyance until we have khilafa”—a caliphate—“and now we have one.” Without a caliphate, for example, individual vigilantes are not obliged to amputate the hands of thieves they catch in the act. But create a caliphate, and this law, along with a huge body of other jurisprudence, suddenly awakens.


The caliph is required to implement Sharia. Any deviation will compel those who have pledged allegiance to inform the caliph in private of his error and, in extreme cases, to excommunicate and replace him if he persists. (“I have been plagued with this great matter, plagued with this responsibility, and it is a heavy responsibility,” Baghdadi said in his sermon.) In return, the caliph commands obedience—and those who persist in supporting non-Muslim governments, after being duly warned and educated about their sin, are considered apostates.

The Islamic State differs from nearly every other current jihadist movement in believing that it (ISIS) is written into God’s script as a central character. It is in this casting that the Islamic State is most boldly distinctive from its predecessors, and clearest in the religious nature of its mission.


After its battle in Dabiq, Cerantonio said, the caliphate will expand and sack Istanbul. Some believe it will then cover the entire Earth, but Cerantonio suggested its tide may never reach beyond the Bosporus. An anti-Messiah, known in Muslim apocalyptic literature as Dajjal, will come from the Khorasan region of eastern Iran and kill a vast number of the caliphate’s fighters, until just 5,000 remain, cornered in Jerusalem. Just as Dajjal prepares to finish them off, Jesus—the second-most-revered prophet in Islam—will return to Earth, spear Dajjal, and lead the Muslims to victory.

Continue Reading

Something even more sinister is afoot: the delusion of an Apocalypse, in Islam

It is very hard to understand why Islam is becoming so violent these days. There was a time (particularly in India) when saints like Kabir flourished. There was a strong spirituality and everyone sought the best from each other's religion. Muslims have been a highly respected part of Indian society for hundreds of years (except sporadically), till British rule actively divided communities to shrink India's potential post-independence power (they have succeeded very well splitting India into shreds). 

But today, it is becoming very hard to get Muslims to even acknowledge the problem, leave along work out a way to solve the problem. I've left a debate on FB (here) since these people now insist that it is the USA that is arming the ISIS! What a crazy idea! How can people go so wrong?


I'm glad one Muslim has accepted this truth, a lady by the name Anooshe Mushtaq. I quote extracts from her article in The Australian, today. What she points to is about something really sinister brewing in Islam: a view the the Apocalypse is upon us. Sure: the Muslims ARE creating an apocalypse for many innocent humans, and yes they will BURN IN HELL (Sadly, there is no hell, but these evil monsters deserve to burn eternally, such is the level of evil they are demonstrating on a daily basis). 

Well, if this is the ideology of the ISIS, then the remedy is clear: All sane elements within Islam should take over and remove this ridiculous myth.

Believe it or not, Islam central to radicalisation and ISIS
JUNE 27, 2015

I am a Muslim female who was born in an Islamic country and lived most of my life in Australia.

Many Muslim migrants experience Western culture as corrupt, threatening their cultural and ­religious heritage. 

It is clear the issue of radicalisation is of national prominence, but how well do the government, commentators and the public understand it? 

My family migrated to Australia in 1985. A few years after migration, I was invited to attend a Muslim youth camp that was organised by the Lakemba and Melbourne mosques. The focus of the camp was to reinforce the faith of attendees in Wahhabi Islam. The strong message was that the Muslim youth at the camp represented traditional Islam and as a result were the “chosen ones”.

The message I heard at the camp was that Allah wanted the youth to be his ambassadors. Therefore, their duty was to change “corrupt society” by spreading the name of Allah…. Assimilating into the Australian way of life at that time was frowned upon.  Similar Muslim youth camps are still run today.

There has been extensive research seeking to understand Islamic State’s ideology and why it is attracting followers. Graeme Wood’s insightful piece in The Atlantic, “What ISIS Really Wants”, observes that “Islamic State is no mere collection of psychopaths. It is a religious group with carefully considered beliefs, among them that it is a key agent of the coming Apocalypse.” … Islamic State is devoutly religious and its core strategy is based on its understanding of Islamic teachings on the Apocalypse.

Wood argues that attempts to label Islamic State as “not Islamic” — a tactic frequently used by politicians ­attempting to express solidarity with mainstream Muslims — fundamentally miss the point. Islamic State is very Islamic.

Islamic State follows the Wahhabi sect of Islam.

Islam shares the concept of the Apocalypse with Judaism and Christianity. As strange as it sounds … Islamic State’s belief that the Apocalypse is imminent is key to its appeal and the success of its radicalisation messages. 

There are 12 major signs of the Apocalypse in Sura al-Qiyamah. … Islamic State propaganda seeks to convince the Muslim diaspora the Apocalypse is near and they should return to the caliphate lest they be judged unrighteous on the Day of Judgment. 

The propaganda is laden with religious symbolism and hidden meanings, drawing on teachings from the Koran and cultural traditions dating back a thousand years. Every word and act is carefully chosen to convince those reared in the Muslim tradition that the caliphate is true and the Apocalypse is coming. What seems medieval, or even pointless to nonbelievers, is designed to demonstrate to Muslims that Islamic State is legitimate and believers should return before the Day of Judgment.

Continue Reading

I urge Muslims to stop telling us that Islam is a religion of peace. Evidence points against such a claim. #2

I wish to respond to Ali Jamal Kidwai who has asked the following questions: 

Rafiq Lasne…..Have been hearing these intellectual rants often…….Now u answer since u have forwarded this and must have thought a great deal before doing so……

1)….What do u want the Muslims to do exactly? Please outline clear cut ideas….Maybe one of them is to pick up arms.
2)…..Who do u feel is fighting these beasts on the Ground?
3)……Who do you think are the main victims of these beasts?
4)…..What is the situation of west asia pre 1990?
5)…..Since u are a facebook activist…..Are u member of any Muslim Anti ISIS fb pages…there are inumerable out there….

And Rafiq i want u to answer these please….thanks…

The Americans in 2 Gulf wars killed and miamed 1000s of people……Did a Rafiq Lasne ask the American people what they are doing to control the 'beasts'………

Since yesterday ive been seeing a lot intellectuals that too fb ones attacking Muslims in what happened in Kuwait Kabone and Tunisia……..Didnt u guys realise that the ones killed were muslims too? Some of them have not been buried till now also and you guys have already started on your agenda of belittling a whole community……….Now pls dont start of with 'we do this to Modi and RSS too'. Sick and tired of hearing this……or 'when we attack the Sangh then Muslims support ys bla bla bla……its stale now. U hate Modi or Love Modi….I dont care buddy.

For your intake…

On a Friday, during Ramzan, while in Sajda a bomb is detonated killing 25 ppl in a Mosque…….How Islamic is this Rafiq Lasne….u and the guy who wrote the article maybe Islamic Scholars too….please enlighten us..

Ali Jamal Kidwai And finally something which is beyond the consumptiom and digestion of a few of u…….The Shias and the Sunmis offered the Isha prayers together in the same mosque which was attacked yesterday in a show of strength and unity……

I will await your answers Rafiq Lasne to my first comment…do enlighten me with your pearls of wisdom.


The youtube episode first.Neil Cavuto was interviewing Kissinger. Extracts from the ISIS transcript below:

2:05 Neil Cavuto Let's switch gears to ISIS.  …  Do you agree that ISIS has the upper hand?

2:24 Kissinger: The fundamental problem is that ISIS has about 30,000 irregulars. They are not technical trained to fight. They have only the heavy equipment that they capture from us, or from forces that we have armed. If they can stand up to American opposition and to American airpower and if we can find no way to defeat them, every day that they stay in the field will look to the local region and maybe to [?] as the American inability to deal with the mortal threat. This will generate volunteers and make the subsequent prosecution of the war more difficult.

So Kissinger has NOWHERE EVEN REMOTELY implied that "ISIS gets its weapons from the USA". This idea is idiotic in the EXTREME. Just putting a headline that is ENTIRELY FALSE doesn't make it true.

Second, I had clearly noted that Muslims are killing Muslims. That doesn't prove that Islam is a religion of peace.

I'm merely asking Muslims to ACKNOWLEDGE that Islam is NOT a religion of peace, or is not seen as such by many of its own followers. Once such an acknowledgement is made, things can change.

Continue Reading

I urge Muslims to stop telling us that Islam is a religion of peace. Evidence points against such a claim. #1

I posted a few comments today on FB. Links below:

Muslims against Muslims

Muslims against everyone else

What do these mad Muslims hope to achieve?

What do these mad Muslims hope to achieve? That the world will learn to love Islam through these random killings? That people will believe the LAME claim of some Muslims that Islam is a "religion of peace"?

Do these people forget how Gandhi achieved respect across the world? Not through killing but through forbearance.
And that mythical Jesus (he never existed) is respected by everyone even as the Popes (most of them extremely corrupt, self-seeking and violent) are condemned.

If Islam does not teach non-violence and forbearance, the **entire** religion must be condemned.

This nightmare of the Muslim world taking upon itself to randomly kill people can only end with the end of Islam. Or its total transformation into a religion of peace.


Muslims may wish to recognise this problem

I need to hear from Muslims a RECOGNITION of the problem within their religion. That it is generating BEASTS at an alarming rate. And I don't mean animals (who are the most respect-worthy creatures on earth; – and that includes the reviled pigs), but devils: humans with a mind that is so perverted and distorted with evil, that they do not have any claim to be human any more.

Only once this problem is recognised can any solution be found.

Constantly asserting that "Islam is a religion of peace" is simply not going to work.

There is something inside the SOUL of Islam that creates a culture of deep disrespect for human life, among some. That something has to be identified and nipped, discarded. Publicly identified and discarded.

No religion whose followers ***frequently*** resort to suicide bombings and mass, random killings, can lay claim to be a "religion of peace". [See:]

A Facebook friend shared the above and faced a somewhat unpleasant response:

I'm posting the image of the conversation, below:

More in a separate blog post.

Continue Reading

Sanjay Sonawani’s Origins of the Vedic Religion: And Indus-Ghaggar Civilisation #1

I have a problematic habit: I question everything. When I start examining any issue I test all claims. That often means going to the original sources. But that's not all. I question the original sources for their methodology and integrity. I beat up all arguments and claims to death – till only the truth remains standing.

It is this approach that led me to throw out the Out of India Theory (OIT) within just a few days of starting reading up on the subject. I've already elaborated the "big picture" reasons why that theory is untenable. The common sense test was badly offended by the OIT.

That doesn't mean AIT is "correct". I've come out with a view that there is an In and Out Theory (call it IOT). That ideas can come and go (in various forms and shapes) is not remarkably interesting: just the way the world works. 

In the process of "beating the arguments to death", I found that even stalwarts like MK Dhavalikar make massive deductions on the basis of facts that are not established. He is an archaeologist but his paper "Archaeology of the Aryans" necessarily makes use of the findings of numerous other disciplines. Unfortunately, he seems to take as "fact" things which are not necessarily facts. He doesn't "beat the arguments to death". He is a good archaeologist but a poor critical thinker. He needs to weigh the "facts" and attribute a "truth value" to them. Most importantly, he needs to assemble alternative explanations even for the well-established facts. 

An example is his assertion: "It has now been scientifically established that the river dried up in the lower basin because of change of courses of its tributaries, viz Sutlej and the Yamuna, the former joining the Indus system and the latter, the Ganga".

I NEVER take anything as "scientifically well established" because I know how poorly most empirical science is conducted, and understand the limitations of data. (Climate "science" is absolutely bogus in most respects, for instance).

So I started testing this "well established fact".

And within minutes I found that this is a minefield. The assumptions made by people on the basis of a mere "satellite map" are frighteningly vast! Is this how people do science?!

In this process of investigating this a little bit further I chanced upon Sanjay Sonowal's 2015 book, Origins of the Vedic Religion: And Indus-Ghaggar Civilisation. I've now bought the book (readily available in kindle) and browsing through it.

Here's the section on the Sutlej-Jamuna issue. The man does have a critical mind. It would be worthwhile reading his book. I'll talk more about the book and its findings in the next few days/weeks. I am trying to assemble, separately, a set of facts that ARE true. These facts constrain all "theories" in this space, but definitely the Saraswati as a major river is not a "fact" to rely upon. 

Did Yamuna and Satlej ever change their course?

            It is widely assumed by the Indian scholars that during the Harappan Phase, Yamuna and Satlej used to be tributaries of the Ghaggar river. It is said that the Yamuna and Satlej added ample water in the Ghaggar channel and made it a mighty river. This assumption has been derived from the satellite images that show the palaeo-channels of both the rivers. However, the satellite images do not define the minute topography and geological age of the river channels.

            Did Satlej and Yamuna ever flow in the channel of the Ghaggar? We need to consider opinions of various scholars in this regard.

            According to ‘Current Science’ report (2004) contributed by Indian and German scientists, “…the Saraswati did not carry glacier waters. The Ghaggar-Hakra area does not show mineral deposit of Himalayan glaciers, and thus it could not be a big, perennial, glacier fed river, but, rather, a smaller, seasonal, monsoon fed one. Based on sediment geochemistry and composition and geomorphologic and palaeoclimatic constraints that the Ghaggar-Hakra river was likely always Siwalik fed.

            Further, the report adds, “The suggestion of glacial sources and the Yamuna and Satluj rivers draining to the river Saraswati through Ghaggar before they were pirated by the Ganga and Indus respectively, are not supported by our isotopic data. If these hypotheses were correct, we would expect to find sediments derived from the Higher Himalayas in the Thar. Our data also do not support the idea that there was a change in the source area for the Ghaggar from a glaciated region to rainfall region.” 12

            The report emphatically states that the Satlej and Yamuna being the tributaries of the Ghaggar, even in the remote past is a myth nourished by scholars neglecting the vital proof. According to the same report, the waning of the Ghaggar was only because of the declining of the rains, which was a gradual process, and not because of the capture of its tributaries by the other rivers or any tectonic events.

            This means Satlej and Yamuna were never tributaries of Ghaggar, or at the least they were not feeding Ghaggar during the Harappan times, if taken into the considerations the other reports. Satlej and Yamuna are glacial fed rivers. Had they been feeding the Ghaggar in the past, the glacial mineral traces would have been detected in the sediments of the Ghaggar channel, but that is not the case according to the above-mentioned report. Rather, mighty rivers such as Satlej and Yamuna feeding a moderately small river even in the remote, pre-Harappan, past is a ridiculous idea.

            In a research paper, published in “Geology”, Peter D Clift et al states, “…although loss of the Yamuna from the Indus is likely to have occurred as early as 49 ka and no later than 10 ka. Capture of the Yamuna to the east and the Sutlej to the north rerouted water away from the area of the Harappan centers, but this change significantly predated their final collapse…… Throughout the Holocene, including the Harappan period this river was fed only by seasonal monsoon rain in the east. This rain-fed Ghaggar-Hakra was active until after 4.5 ka and was then covered by dunes before 1.4 ka. What this means is that the Ghaggar-Hakra, unlike any of the major Indus tributaries, was not fed by snow melt, which begins in Spring and may be unpredictable, but was entirely reliant on swelling its banks from the summer monsoon.” 13

            According to Sanjeev Gupta (Imperial College London), the river sediments ceased in the tract of the palaeo channel after 14,000 BCE, long before the Indus civilisation era had began. He reached this conclusion after his team did extensive drilling in the 30-40 m thick sand body in the subsurface beneath a tract of the Ghaggar-Hakra palaeochannel adjacent to the Indus city of Kalibangan.14

            The Project Palaeo-Environmental Research Group — FB conducted field research and analysis of satellite imagery to identify the former course of the Ghaggar river and determined the causes and the dates of its avulsion. Contrary to its description in the Rig Veda text, field evidence demonstrates that the Ghaggar was not a large river, but a small one capable of providing water for agriculture only during the monsoon season.15

            Sedimentary Geologist Suvrat Kher, referring to the research of Clift and his colleagues, states on his blog that the Yamuna and Satlej stopped feeding the Ghaggar long before 50,000 and 10,000 years respectively. While doing in-depth analysis of the critical issue, he clearly states that, “…I have stressed that this attempt to link a hypothesis of a mighty Saraswati to the presence of Aryans is misguided and the one that has caused harm to the public understanding of the topic and to what constitutes good science. Many geologists and archaeologists accepted the validity of a glacial Saraswati without critically weighing the evidence. Taking their cue, in web forums and books, supporters of a glacial Sarasvati have popularised the hypothesis of a late river avulsion and often presented it as irrefutable evidence favoring the indigenous Aryan theory.” 16 This statement speaks for itself.

            The research paper published in  “The current Science” which was mentioned earlier, also concludes that, ‘If the snowline did not drop to the Sub-Himalayan ranges even during glaciations and the glaciers continuously occurred only in the HHC, a higher rainfall for the huge erosion of Sub-Himalayan lithologies and to sustain the rivers was essential. Our isotope data provide a scientific basis for the absence of a glacial-fed, perennial Himalayan river in the Harappan domain, i.e. the River Ghaggar is not the Saraswati as far as its origin in the glaciated Himalayas is concerned.” 17 (Emphasis mine.)

            From the abovementioned facts, we can conclude the following:

            1.      The Ghaggar is not the mythical river Saraswati.

            2.      The possibility of the mighty Satlej and Yamuna being the tributaries of the comparatively minor monsoon-fed rivers is unlikely. 

            3.      Even if considered, though unlikely, that the Satlej and Yamuna were flowing through the Ghaggar Channel before they changed their course, it was quite long before when even the early phase of the Harappa culture had began.

            4.      The decline of the Harappan culture was gradual for several centuries due to the climatic changes and was not a sudden event as thought by some scholars.

            5.      At the least, equating the Ghaggar with Saraswati cannot become the basis of indigenous Aryan theory.

            It appears that the problem with some was also to find anyhow the location of the Vedic people in the vicinity of IGC sites to stake the big claim that they were authors of the magnificent civilisation. Scholars like Kazanas seriously try to place the date of the Rig Veda in third millennium BC to coincide with the previously supposed date of Yamuna and Satlej changing their course, but the hypothesis is ridiculous in the light of the geological findings. 18 C

            For the time being, let us leave aside the geological proofs, which clearly indicates that the Ghaggar could never have been Rig Vedic Saraswati, and consider different other points of view as to why the Ghaggar could not have been Saraswati.

            In addition, we have already discussed that the Ghaggar river never was a lost river, like Saraswati. It always flowed, though seasonably, in summer showers, though its water discharge had reduced considerably because of the weak monsoons. Desertion of the Harappan sites was a gradual process that might have continued intermittently over hundreds of years. No foreign aggression or sudden natural or social calamity in the vicinity has been recorded. Still there are other socio-cultural evidences as well which misfits the Ghaggar as a candidate for being the lost Saraswati.

Continue Reading
izmir escort escort izmir izmir escort izmir escort escort beylikdüzü ankara escort ankara escort