The Obama “Winter White House” is a luxurious $8.9 million rental property, a 7,000-square-foot home on the southeastern coast of Oahu.

PETE YORN & SCARLETT JOHANSSON
I Am the Cosmos

Is it just me, or does it seem that most movie stars wanna be rock stars too? I mean, toss a dart in Hollywood and you’ll hit some actor who thinks he’s got the chops to rock out and the simple fact is, 99.9% of them suck at it! Why is it that Billy Bob Thornton, Kevin Bacon, Jared Leto and Russell Crowe all think they can force Bono to the unemployment line? Is the music biz so devoid of talent that there are record executives who think Juliette Lewis, Dennis Quaid and Kevin Costner need recording contracts? Can’t actors just be happy with taking huge paychecks for prancing around in front of a camera and leave my ears in peace?!! I guess not, ‘cuz now comes ‘Break Up’, the second simply God-Awful album from Scarlett Johansson. Apparently ‘inspired’ by the ’60’s duets of Serge Gainsbourg and Brigitte Bardot, she teams up with Pete Yorn…a great singer/songwriter who bloody well should have known better, but was probably blinded by ScarJo’s inner artist and etherial beauty! I had heard the buzz surrounding the release of this album back in the summer, but after her first lame attempt at grabbing the Golden Ring of Rock-God fame, Anywhere I Lay My Head, an ill-conceived mishmash of Tom Waits covers, I could give a damn if I never heard her disinterested moaning voice plod through another collection of self-important garbage, but then last night as I was driving back into the city, this dirge slithered outta the radio and almost forced me off the road. I am slack-jawed over how amazingly bad it is. I would gladly just jump in front of a bus in order to never have to endure the pain of listening even one more time, but I feel it’s my duty to warn all of the Friends of The List to avoid this nightmare set to music at all costs…so please listen at your own peril!!!

They called it “Hopenhagen” – was it for Mr Hope and change?

What follows is a collection of accounts about what went on after “Te bestest speech on climate”

Independentco.uk

When the President, in an unyielding speech, said that without international verification “any agreement would be empty words on a page”, that was too much for Mr Wen. He left the conference in Copenhagen’s Bella Centre, returned to his hotel in the city, and responded with a direct snub of his own – he sent low-level delegates to take his place in the talks. A high-level source told The Independent that the US President was amazed when he found who he was negotiating with, and clearly regarded Mr Wen’s absence as a major diplomatic insult. He snapped: “It would be nice to negotiate with somebody who can make political decisions”

So, bestest speech sends China out of the talks.

An earlier – before redacting Politico article as preserved in a commentary at the Confluence gives us what went on

At about 730 pm Denmark time – the president was supposed to have left an hour before — he learned that Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, with whom he was supposed to meet, was meeting with the leaders of India, South Africa, and Brazil – the main players holding up any sort of political agreement.

The president heard about this and said he wanted to go to the meeting.

“Four against one,” an official said to the president.

“No problem,” he replied.

A senior administration official says the president “barged into the meeting,” where he joined China’s Wen, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, and South Africa’s President Jacob Zuma.

The reporters’ pool note from that time said that President Obama walked into the room and called out from the door, “Mr. Premier, are you ready to see me? Are you ready?”

They talked for roughly 45 minutes and emerged with a non-binding political accord”

Here’s the version I found on Politico today

I, got into the multilateral room we’ve now figured out why we can’t get into that room: because that room has Wen, Lula, Singh and Zuma. They’re all having a meeting. … The President walks in … [T]here aren’t any seats, right, I mean, I think if you’ve seen some of the pictures, there were basically no chairs. And the President says, ‘No, no, don’t worry, I’m going to go sit by my friend Lula,’ and says, ‘Hey, Lula.’ Walks over, moves a chair, sits down next to Lula. The Secretary of State sits down next to him. … I want to make clear, we did not break into what we thought was a secret meeting, okay? … We were walking to meet our 7:00 p.m. appointment.”

and then a cleaned up version in Politico that ends up with a “meaningful agreement” and a really propagandized version in NY Times with diplomatic language from Brazil

Sergio Serra, Brazil’s senior climate negotiator here, confirmed that Mr. Obama had joined a meeting of Brazilian, Indian, Chinese and other officials, although he did not say that Mr. Obama walked in uninvited.

NYT also gives the illusion that something meaningful came out of this.

Todays’s  Politico account has the comment of the chief negotiator for the developing nations

“Squarely the blame is on President Obama. When you look very carefully and dig into what happened, you find that there is no difference whatsoever between President Obama and President Bush, except one of them tells it as it is,”

Umm- I don’t think he meant Obama.

Comparisons with Bush abound in every source I check

Having spurned Europe and the poor countries of the world, he will reap domestic political benefit. George Bush couldn’t have done this—the reaction would have been too great. Obama has taken the mandate that progressives worked their hearts out to give him, and used it to gut the ideas that progressives have held most dear. The ice caps won’t be the only things we lose with this deal.

The Independent also talks about Chavez’s performance

Hugo Chavez, fired off a string of insults at Mr Obama from the podium, saying he had been awarded “the Nobel Prize for war” and referring to his “Yankee Empire”.

But ice caps aside, the “unprecedented” event in Hopenhagen – “bestest speech on climate” got panned! In a headline!

Barack Obama’s speech disappoints and fuels frustration at Copenhagen

Totus must be hiding his screen in shame

Chavez of course had his own special review

Many reactions were strongly critical of Obama. Hugo Chávez, the president of Venezuela, described Obama’s speech as “ridiculous” and the US’s initial offer of a $10bn fund for poor countries in the draft text as “a joke”

but previously B0bot Guardian didn’t disagree much

The lacklustre speech proved a huge frustration to a summit that had been looking to Obama to use his stature on the world stage – and his special following among African leaders – to try to come to an ambitious deal.

B0bots cheer

Give em hell Barack!! Herding tigers comes to mind..

This agreement probably wont help much but its a start..

Indeed, hell he gave them!

The Guardian again

another quote from the G77 negotiator:

Lumumba Di-Aping, chief negotiator for the G77 group of 130 developing countries, said the deal had “the lowest level of ambition you can imagine. It’s nothing short of climate change scepticism in action. It locks countries into a cycle of poverty for ever. Obama has eliminated any difference between him and Bush.”

…

M J Napier

 “There’s no such thing as bad PR”, though Tiger is certainly testing that thesis. He doesn’t have PR at the moment (that much is obvious); his web site is still up providing a forum for the tens of thousands who need an audience – to rail against him. 

Step 1: Stop the bleeding. Close the website’s forum immediately!

There’s a special name for the arrogance some celebrities continually flaunt – and repeat. It’s that same word used for Xerxes, that pompous jackass who thought he could brush aside the Spartans like they were statues carved from butter; Hubris! What’s interesting here is that Hubris can be used (at once) for both the bold blunder of a megalomaniacal tyrant and Tiger’s feeble whimper and melodramatic avoidance.

Step 2: Get a PR Firm.

No one can say Tiger’s brand is definitively over. Let’s remember that one of his bailing sponsors, Accenture; was formerly known as Arthur Anderson until their public Enron involvement (which may explain their lack warmth to Tiger in this crises). A name change won’t Tiger you but even if his brand is similarly poisoned, the actions he takes now will craft the emergence and potential of the next life or deliver it still born.

PR firms should be sending Tiger thank you notes and chocolate, nothing could illustrate better that ‘Crises Management’ is not enough; Leveraged investment requires insurance.

His partners require that Tiger is insured for life and precious limbs but no one has required the indemnity of his reputation and bankability, a service only a PR firm can provide.

Crises Management will always be a tool in the PR arsenal but Crises Prevention is destined to be the new sexy.

Just consider; a billboard size Tiger smile proclaiming; he’s ‘Everywhere you want to be’?

In a continuing effort to bring you all the news that Obama media won’t bring you, we are introducing the “Rectum Round up”. This column will highlight all of the media, um, assholery. It’s not easy to make the round up, but being in the political world helps.

Newt Gingrich would have made the list for endorsing Scozzafava, Whoopi for her “it’s not real rape” comment. With the deteriorating respect for each other we face these days, this space ought to keep the interns busy each week.

This week’s is a gimme, it’s almost too easy. This weeks winner is also not one person, but two. The envelope, please. The Rectums of the week are none other than the two Democrat senators from New York; Schumer and Gillebrand (sp?) and no, I don’t care enough about her to verify the spelling of her name. Just what did they do?

Well, on the shuttle flight to New York, both Senators refused to turn their phones off after the main cabin door had been closed. Schmuck Schumer even went as far as to call the flight attendant a bitch, a slur in which he has since apologized. Worse, after he did hang up, a call from Harry Reid came in, to which Schmuck said, “It’s Harry Reid, I guess health care will have to wait till we land..” Putz, like anyone gives a shiite about Harry Reid.

It’s not what one is awarded when they make the Round Up, it is what is taken away. So the next time you see these two assholes in public, don’t shake their hands; the prize for making the Round Up is having their toilet paper taken away..

Remember This?

I did not watch President Obama’s “60 Minutes” interview – I just did not have the stomach for it. I have, however, seen the clips where he gave himself a grade of B+ for his job performance thus far, adding that he could bump himself to an A- should health care pass.

Now, this is a far cry from reality as we know it. Back in August, CNN ran a performance poll, and America voted the following report card for the president:

Handling of the economy: C

Handling of foreign affairs: D

Handling of health care: C

This averages out to an overall score of C- for the first quarter of the year, at a time when he enjoyed an approval rate of 60-ish percent. I wonder if anyone has broken the latest polls to him? The very best that I have seen hovers at 46%, the rest plummet downward from that particular reference point.

Now, clearly he has fingered George Bush as the true villain of our economic wars. During the early days of Economic Armageddon, John McCain rushed back to Washington and went to work with his fellow Senators to try corrective actions. Barack Obama remained sequestered in a Tampa hotel with his coaches to work on his debate. He campaigned relentlessly, claiming that he could restore prosperity to the average American family – cue Peggy Joseph, please – and all would be well. Despite the advent of the Bestest Financial Team Evah, things are still not so great on Main Street, while Wall Street is in great shape. So, President Obama told “60 Minutes” that he did not become President to bail out fat cat bankers, and summoned them to a White House meeting. Sadly, three called in with inclement weather, so here we are. Congress must raise the debt ceiling, job losses, foreclosures, homeless and hunger continue unabated. The banking industry is reluctant to put forth a plan for their role in the recovery process, other than a generalized statement to attempt to help small businesses.

Foreign affairs are going swimmingly as well. Prime Minister Netanyahu is not on board with Obama’s Middle Eastern peace plan, and the Palestinians are reluctant to affirm Israel’s statehood, so no major conditions of his plan are currently working out well. Iran launched a new weapon with a reported range of 1200 miles, putting both Israel and southern Europe in their sites. The Iranian leadership has not received President Obama’s overtures at all well. Now the president sputters about sanctions – the only one that might possible work well would be an embargo of refined petroleum products, which would also somewhat lower gas prices here as well. Afghanistan seems to be a bottomless pit. The Left wants to leave, and even some right-wing friends have admitted that they agree that quite enough blood and treasure has been expended on Obama’s “War of Necessity”.

Health care is not yet a complete disaster, but it’s pretty close to it at present. I like the exchange idea, I’m all for the end of the perpetual “pre-existing” exemption, and I would stand up and cheer if insurers were mandated to spend 90 cents out of every dollar on actual patient care. I’m also certain that while I type this, any number of insurance companies have figured out ways around each and every stipulation. I am sick at the loss of the public option, with or without the infamous “trigger”. I am disgusted that the Dems did not have the spine to draw a line in the sand with the 55-64 Medicare buy-in. I have watched compromise after compromise melt like the polar ice caps. I am appalled that there have thus far been no Lieberman sanctions, because they “might need his vote”. One of the tv commentators said that the Dems were told by the president to get this bill through, and don’t worry about their horrified constituents, as he would provide “shelter and support” during the 2010 campaigns. I guess that no one has noticed that the Obama aura has been a mite tarnished? Or that he really didn’t show up that much even for the few elections in 2009?

So there are my thoughts on the three stated topics. If I were to grade the president, it would be as follows:

Handling of the economy: D. Wall Street and banking are better, so I can’t in good conscience give an F.

Handling of foreign policy: D-. When Iran flaunts the sanctions, change the D- to an F.

Handling of health care: F. Obama is the head of the Democratic party, whether he likes that or not. He was elected to administrate the will of the people, not the whims of Joe Lieberman.

What are your grades this quarter? By me, he’s flunking out.

This is an open thread.

This is delicious.

Why?

I can’t forget how annoyed Hillary Clinton’s supporters were with then-DNC chairman Howard Dean during the 2008 Democratic primaries, blaming Dean for mis-handling the controversy over Michigan and Florida delegates.  Dean’s refusal to count these delegates (along with thinly-veiled threats to Mrs. Clinton that she should drop out of the race) then-candidate — now-President — Barack Obama was able to go into future primaries with huge delegate lead and momentum to eventually win the nomination.

The president now shows his appreciation to Dr. Dean by proclaiming him ‘irrelevant’

Delicious?   Yes!!

Dont Even Think About It

Over the weekend we learned that Obama has earned a B+ for his tenure so far in Washington during an interview with the Queen of talk, Oprah Winfrey. President Obama claimed he would have had an A- if he didn’t inherit the problems he faces. While such megalomania is commonly found outside America’s borders, the last couple of months in America seems like Chavez land. In public, everyone praises Obama, yet he is polling even lower than W did at this point in his administration. Not one single point or promise made on the campaign has come to fruition. Socialized Medicine will not be realized, at least not in the true socialist form Barack wants. Climate Legislation was derailed by more evidence of falsified data, Guantanamo remains open, (and will stay that way if our sources are to believed), and his biggest promise, open, bi-partisan, and transparent government has become a parody of itself.

Lacking progress or any legislative improvments, the Obama Administration reacted the only way it knew how; Blame Bush. Honest and Reasonable Americans know that this ship sailed along with the race card long ago, but the minions and Obama’s media still cling bitterly to both. Despite over 60% of the electorate being against complete socialization of healthcare, Obama is forcing legislators to committ hari-kari for the sake of Governemnt Run HealthCare. For example, if Senator Blanche Lincoln (D)-AR votes for socialism, she loses re-election. Every single poll, internal or otherwise, supports this. Yet Lincoln is being told by her party she must. Ben Nelson (D)-NE just today was threatened with the closure of Offut Air Force Base, if he doesnt go along with the federally funded abortion clause in ObamaSorosReidStalincare. To screw with National Security over a petulant Obama not getting what he wants is something we have come to expect from the Far Left, but has he considered the additional job losses the closure would create?

Of course not. Anyone who would grade himself, much less that high, doesn’t give a damn. Anyone who would take his family to Hawaii for Christmas along with 40 reporters at a cost of close to 100 million dollars, just doesn’t care. By the way, the reporters’ trip is paid for by the taxpayers as well.

B+? Maybe on Planet Kool-Aid..

Paul Greenberg :

Some are awarded their Nobel Prize for past achievement. One thinks of Theodore Roosevelt’s mediating the peace that concluded the Russo-Japanese War of 1905 and led to the establishment of an international tribunal at The Hague to resolve disputes between nations. Bully for him! Barack Obama, it turns out, isn’t the first sitting president of the United States to be awarded the Prize.

Others earned their Nobels, whether for peace or literary accomplishment, in tribute to their courageous — and visionary — stands against tyranny and injustice in their own country. Names like Alexander Solzhenitsyn and Boris Pasternak come to mind. Both paid a heavy price for their courage, but the Soviet Union would pay a heavier one. That vast criminal enterprise is no longer with us, while “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich” and Doctor Zhivago will surely be read long after Soviet Communism is but a dismal memory.

Full article: Townhall.com.

When The Experts Are Just Plain Wrong

‘I doubt that the imagination can be suppressed. If you truly eradicated it in a child, he would grow up to be an eggplant.’
- Ursula K. Le Guin, American author (b. 1929)

‘You must not change one thing, one pebble, one grain of sand, until you know what good and evil will follow on that act. The world is in balance, in Equilibrium.’
- Ursula K. Le Guin, American author (b. 1929)

If these two quotes give evidence of one thing, it’s that just because a person is an expert in one thing does not give him the right to believe that he is on every subject.

By virtue of the needs of his art, a writer must be a thinker. However, there is no requirement that the thinking be clear, orderly, logical or that the material presented must be truthful. We need only follow the spoutings of pastors and politicians to show that.

Members of other professions, experienced with receiving respect for their knowledge and skills within the context of their work, often come to believe that their thinking must be correct on all subjects. Engineers and architects, for example, seldom admit they don’t know something. We call it arrogance when they act as if others don’t know what they are talking about and hubris when they can’t imagine being wrong.

As admirable as Le Guin’s writings are, especially her utopian science fiction, I can’t help taking issue with the two quotes that began this article. They are based on her thinking, her understanding of the world. On the subjects of education (child development) and ecology, her understanding may be of questionable value to the rest of us.

First, it’s true that children do not grow into eggplants. However, many grow into adults with precious little imagination and ability to think for themselves. Consider that the average American, for example, has his television running more than five hours a day. Television, the great stupidifier, encourages people to not think by providing them with whatever the producer wants his audience to know and believe. Viewers are not allowed to think for themselves if they follow the producer’s intentions.

Look at the lineup of television programs that grace (or disgrace) the screen these days and you will find faked reality shows, home videos that show people at their absolute stupidest, soap operas that demonstrate the worst in human morals and compassion and advertising designed to convince simple minds that they should become poor and unhealthy by buying the products advertised.

Not eggplants, no. But television is doing its best to bring human intelligence down to the level close to at least a smart eggplant. When the computer is the entertainment of choice, we have YouTube to show us that many people have reached that level of intelligence already.

Ursula Le Guin seems to live in a world protected from the realities of entertainment by the average person. For one thing, she reads, which gives her perspectives that non-readers never experience. Reading stimulates the imagination as television, the internet, movies and video games never can. She can’t conceive of people not having an imagination. She is sadly mistaken.

As an educator who has taught young children as well as older ones, I can tell you that imagination has been all but eliminated (at least channeled) in many of them before they leave primary school. As I classroom teacher I found it hard to stimulate children to be creative in non-traditional ways.

As for ecology, Le Guin is correct that the universe is in equilibrium. However, she is dead wrong that nothing should change. Nature itself is the greatest force for change.

When one factor changes or many change as a result of natural disaster or human tragedy, nature regroups and establishes a new equilibrium.

Look what happened after the disaster 65 million years ago when the dinosaurs disappeared. Whether an asteroid struck our planet or climate change eliminated the food dinosaurs ate matters little now. What matters is that mammals succeeded them, and here we are.

Look what happened 225 million years ago when as much as 97 percent of life on land and 85 percent of life in the oceans were wiped out.

Nature adjusts. The universe establishes equilibrium with whatever conditions exist at the time. No matter if we destroyed ourselves, nature would adjust to a new equilibrium.

When Le Guin recommends that we “must not change one thing” for fear of upsetting the equilibrium she fails to understand the concept. In fact, we must change what we do that is destructive, at the least.

We need to consider as many consequences of what we do as we can possibly conceive. We will never know them all, positive or negative. We will always make mistakes and have some successes.

What’s more important is that we must not let those who will profit in the future from mistakes we allow to be made today convince us that we are doing the right thing by ignoring the negative consequences of the action. As the saying goes: if something looks too good to be true, it likely is.

US wars in Iraq and Vietnam spring to mind, events costing millions of lives and trillions of dollars. With nothing gained from either but obscene wealth for suppliers of war materials and fuels. Education, meanwhile, suffers as teachers must do without more and more.

Demanding that politicians tell us the truth and the whole truth will never work. The only thing that will work is to educate all people, all children, and to promote diligence and civic responsibility actively.

Doing nothing out of fear of making mistakes and allowing the imaginations of our children to be destroyed through rigid teaching methods and strict control (consider the tragedies of Zero Tolerance, for example) do nothing to make the world a better place.

Denying the truth simply makes it worse. We teach and learn or we suffer the consequences.

Bill Allin is the author of Turning It Around: Causes and Cures for Today’s Epidemic Social Problems, a guidebook for teachers and parents who want to know what to teach children that will help their development, and when.
Learn more at http://billallin.com

In November 2006 Pope Benedict XVI had categorically stated that St.Thomas never visited South India. Is it not the inviolable duty of  the Catholic Archdiocese of Madras to implicitly accept  with reverence and humility the public stand taken by present Pope  Benedict XVI on the  issue of St. Thomas and his alleged visit to South India?” – V. Sundaram

A rupees 50 crore plus mega production in silver screen on St. Thomas, one of the twelve apostles of Jesus Christ, who is believed to have spread the Christian faith in Tamil Nadu and Kerala, is under way. This film is going to be launched as a major project by the Catholic Archdiocese of Madras-Mylapore on 3 July 2008. This proposed film will deal with the story relating to the journey of St. Thomas to Edessa, a town in Syria in 29 AD. His travel through Persia to Taxila in modern Pakistan and return to Jerusalem will also be covered. It has been reported that the legend relating to his reaching Kerala in 52 AD and his subsequent 20 years of preaching the Christian faith in India will constitute the major part of the proposed film. St. Thomas’s meeting with Thiruvalluvar is going to be yet another interesting part of the story.

The myth of St. Thomas and the destruction of the Mylapore Shiva temple by the Portuguese was thoroughly exposed by Ishwar Sharan in his landmark book, The Myth of Saint Thomas and the Mylapore Shiva Temple, first published in 1991. The second revised edition of this book was brought out by Voice of India, New Delhi, 1995. This interesting book brought out how history was distorted by our foreign rulers to conceal their misdeeds and how even today these fraudulent myths are accepted as real history by many in this country including the government itself. Long before Ishwar Sharan published his book in 1991, one T.K. Joseph wrote a number of books on St. Thomas in the early 1920s. He had done years of research on the South Indian tradition, and had presented his findings to a number of famous scholars of his time, who had replied to him by post. For example, in 1926, Prof. E J. Rapson, who had written on St. Thomas in the Cambridge History of India,wrote as follows to T K. Joseph: ” I have read your letter carefully and my impression is that you have given good for doubting the historical truth of the story of St. Thomas in South India.”

In 1927, Sylvain Levi, the renowned French indologist and scholar, wrote to T.K.Joseph:  “You are right in  denying any historical value to local legends which have nothing to bring to their support. What is known from early books points only to Northwest India, and no other place, for St. Thomas’s apostolic activity and martyrdom. This is, of course,mere tradition, not real history”. Likewise, in 1952, Prof. K S Latourette, the Yale University church historian, and author of A History of the Expansion of Christianity, wrote to T.K. Joseph and said: “The evidence against St. Thomas in South India is very convincing.”  The same view was repeated in 1953 by Father H. Heras, SJ, the then Director of the Historical Research Institute, St. Xavier’s College, Bombay, when he wrote to T.K. Joseph: “I am fully convinced that the tomb of St. Thomas has never been in Mylapore. I have said that many times.”

What is interesting to note is that T.K. Joseph also wrote to the Encyclopaedia Britannica editor at Chicago in 1950 pointing out the glaring errors in the article on St. Thomas in the Encyclopaedia’s 14th edition in 1947. He was not successful in getting them corrected. Ishwar Sharan in his book referred to above, has clearly shown that the article on St. Thomas in that edition of Encyclopaedia Britannica was grossly mistaken, not only in factual essentials but also in proper interpretation. In this context the words of Ishwar Sharan are worth quoting, “We can only conclude that the Encyclopaedia Britannica’s editors like their cooked up St. Thomas story and plan to keep it intact for more editions to come”.

[The Encyclopaedia Britannica which is a Catholic-oriented encyclopaedia, still maintains the same spurious St. Thomas entry in its Internet edition today and is followed closely by the Internet's infamous Wikipedia. Wikipedia has become an overt platform for Christian propaganda in India, and is presenting the public with a fabricated and factually incorrect account of the St. Thomas fable and related St. Thomas churches and sites in India. Any attempt to change these entries is met with violent resistance by the Christian article editors and administrators - Editor].

Now what is the fraudulent myth about St. Thomas? We are told by Catholic ”historians” that Judas Thomas, a brother as well as an apostle of Jesus Christ, landed in Malabar in 52 AD, founded the Syrian Christian Church, and travelled to Tamil Nadu for spreading the Good News when he was killed by the “wily Brahmins” in 72 AD at the Big Mount (now called St. Thomas Mount) near Madras, at the behest of a Hindu king named Mahadevan. The San Thome Cathedral on the beach in Mylapore is built on the spot where the saint is supposed to have been buried.

As Sita Ram Goel puts it, ”This spot, like many others of the same spurious sort, has become a place of Christian pilgrimage not only for the flock in India but also for the pious Christians from abroad”. He had examined the story of St. Thomas in 1986 when he wrote a book on the papacy during he Pope’s visit to India. Sita Ram Goel had discovered that while some Christian historians doubted the very existence of an apostle named St. Thomas, some others had denied credibility to the Acts of Thomas, an apocryphal work, on which the whole story is based. Even hose Christian historians who had accepted he fourth century Catholic tradition about the travels of St. Thomas, had pointed out the utter lack of evidence that he ever went beyond Ethiopia or Arabia Felix. The confusion according to them, had arisen because ancient geographers of the Graeco-Roman world often mistook these countries for India

Bishop Stephen Neill in his History of Christianity in India: The Beginnings to 1707 AD declared: “A number of scholars among whom are to be mentioned with respect Bishop A.E. Medlycott, J.N. Farquhar, and the Jesuit Dahlman, have built on slender foundations what can only be called Thomas romances, such as reflect vividness of their imagination rather than the prudence of historical facts”.

Bishop Stephen Neill was very pained by the spread of the spurious history and he lamented: “Millions of Christians in India are certain that the founder of their Church was none other than the apostle  Thomas himself.  The historian cannot prove it to them that they are mistaken in this belief. He may feel it right to warn them that historical research cannot pronounce on the matter with a confidence equal to that which they entertain by faith.”

Now a question can be raised: What difference does it make whether Christianity came to India in the first or the fourth century? Why raise such a squabble when no one denies the fact that Syrian Christians of Malabar are old immigrants to this country? The motives for the manufacturing of the myth of St Thomas were carefully analysed and detailed by Sita Ram Goel as follows:

Firstly, it is one thing for some Christian refugees to come to a country and build some Churches, and quite another for an apostle of Jesus Christ himself to appear in flesh and blood for spreading the Good News. If it can be established that Christianity is as ancient in India as the prevailing forms of Hinduism, then no one can nail it as an imported creed brought in by Imperialism.

Secondly,  the Catholic Church in India stands badly in need of a spectacular martyr of its own. Unfortunately or it, St. Francis Xavier died a natural death and that too, in a distant place outside India. Hindus, too, have persistently during the last 500 years, refused to oblige the Church in this respect in spite of all provocations. The Church has had to use its own resources and turn out something. St Thomas, about whom nobody knows anything, offers a ready-made martyr.

Thirdly, the Catholic Church can malign the Brahmins more confidently. Brahmins have been the main targets of its attack from the beginning. Now it can be shown that the Brahmins have always been a vicious brood, so much so that they would not stop from murdering a holy man who was only telling God’s own truth to a tormented people. At the same time, the religion of the Brahmins can be held responsible for their depravity.

This is the argument that Karunanidhi, the Tamil Nadu chief minister,  loves most and therefore I am not surprised he has agreed to participate in the inaugural function connected with the proposed movie on the manufactured myth of St Thomas. He would only have serious political doubts about the engineering qualifications of Lord Rama (who, definitely, is not from Syria or the Middle-East!) and not about the baseless myth of St. Thomas!

Fourthly, the Catholics in India need no more feel uncomfortable when faced with clinching historical evidence about their Church’s close cooperation with the Portuguese pirates in committing abominable crimes against the Indian people in the sixteenth century. By connecting the fraudulent myth of St Thomas to the first century AD, the commencement of the Church can be disentangled from the atrocities of the Portuguese era. The Church was here long before the Portuguese arrived. It was a mere unfortunate coincidence that the Portuguese also called themselves Catholics. Guilty by association is groundless.

Lastly, it is quite within the ken of Catholic theology to claim that a land, which has been honoured by the visit of an apostle, has become the legitimate patrimony of the Catholic Church. India might have been a Hindu homeland from times immemorial. But since the day St Thomas in India in 52 AD, the Hindu claim stands cancelled. The country has belonged to the Catholic Church from the first century onwards, no matter how long the Church takes to conquer it completely for Christ.

Koenraad Elst wrote a brilliant foreword to Ishwar Sharan’s book titled The Myth of Saint Thomas and the Mylapore Shiva Temple. Let us hear his words:  ”St. Thomas  never came to India and the Christian community was founded by a merchant Thomas Cananeus [aka Thomas of Cana, Thomas of Jerusalem, Knai Thoma or Thomman] in 345 AD, a name which readily explains the Thomas legend. He led 400 refugees who fled persecution in Persia and were given asylum by the Hindu authorities. In Catholic universities in Europe, the myth of the apostle Thomas going to India is no longer taught as history, but in India it is still considered useful. Even many vocal “secularists” who attack the Hindus or “relying on myth” in the Ayodhya affair, ff-hand profess their belief in the Thomas myth. The important point is that St. Thomas can be upheld as a martyr and the Brahmins decried as fanatics. In reality the missionaries were very disgruntled that the damned Hindus refused to give them martyrs whose blood is welcome as “the seed of the faith”), so they had to invent one. Moreover, the church which they claim commemorates St. Thomas’s martyrdom at the hands of Hindu fanaticism is in fact a monument of Hindu martyrdom at the hands of Christian fanaticism”.

In November 2006 Pope Benedict XVI had categorically stated that St.Thomas never visited South India. When Catholic Indian missionaries want to manufacture false and fictitious fables to deliberately mislead the poor and gullible masses of India for purposes of mass conversion (known as ”harvesting of souls”), then they are capable of  treating even  the Pope in Rome with supreme political contempt! The mega budget film on St.Thomas to be produced by the Catholic Archdiocese of Chennai should be viewed against this background.

Historian Veda Prakash, after conducting a methodical research published a book in Tamil in 1989. In this book, Indiavil Saint Thomas Katukkathai, he called the bluff of St. Thomas—a bluff marketed by the Catholic Church and its missionaries in India since the middle of the 16th century—and convincingly proved with irrefutable documentary evidence that the present Santhome Church, has been built on the very site where the original Kapaleeshwara Temple of Mylapore stood for centuries till the 1560s. Sometime after 1560, the Portuguese destroyed the Kapleeshwarar Temple on the beach at San Thome and built a church.

Veda Prakash’s statement about destruction of the original Kapaeeshwara  Temple by Christians was confirmed by Dr. R. Nagaswamy, formerly Director of Archealogy Tamil Nadu. In an article ”Testimony to Religious Ethos”, published in The Hindu of 30 April, 1990, he wrote: “A great study of the monuments and lithic records in Madras reveals a great destruction caused by the Portuguese to Hindu temples in the 16  century AD. The most important temple of Kapaleeshwara lost its ancient building during the Portuguese devastation and was originally located near the San Thome Cathedral. A few Chola records found in the San Thome Cathedral and Bishop’s House refer to Kapaleeswara Temple and Poompaavai. A Chola record in fragment found on the east wall of the San Thome  Cathedral refers to the image of Lord Nataraja of the Kapaleeshwara Temple. The temple was moved to the present location in the 16 century and was probably built by one Mallappa …. A fragmentary inscription, 12 century Chola record, in the San Thome Church region refers to a Jain Temple dedicated to Neminathaswami.”

The point of view of Veda Prakash on the spurious and dubious visit of St.Thomas to Mylapore was later confirmed and established with formidable documentary and literary evidence by Ishwar Sharan in his book titled The Myth of Saint Thomas and the Mylapore Shiva Temple published in 1991. Ishwar Sharan has demolished the fabled, fabricated and fraudulent myth of the visit of St.Thomas to Mylapore in the first century AD and his murder and martyrdom in 73 AD.  My current story is wholly based on the facts presented by Ishwar Sharan.

The legend of St. Thomas in Madras is clearly the fabrication of the Portuguese to camouflage their destruction of the ancient Hindu Shiva Temple of Kapaleeswarar in 1561, which was situated on the seashore, at the very place where the San Thome Church now stands. Nearly 1000 years before the barbarous and savage Catholic Portuguese destroyed the Kapaleeswarar Temple, the great Saivite saint of sixth century AD, Thirugnanasambandar, sang 6th Poompavai Padikam Thevaram as follows:

Thirugnanasambandar wrote in a moving manner: “The Lord of Kapaleeswaram sat watching the people of Mylapore—a place full of flowering coconut palms—taking ceremonial bath in the sea on the full moon day of the month of Masi”. I am presenting below another beautiful verse of Thirugnanasambandar relating to Kapaleeshwarar Temple:

In the same strain sang yet another great Tamil mystic, saint and poet Arunagirinathar who visited the Kapaleeswarar Temple in San Thome in 1456, in his Thirumayilai Thiruppugazh:

The above verse of Arunagirinathar can be translated into English thus: “Oh Lord of  Mylai (Mylapore) temple, situated on the shores of the sea with raging waves….”

The ancient Kapaleeswarar Temple at San Thome visited by  Thirugnanasambandar in 6th century AD and Arunagirinathar in 1456 was destroyed by the Catholic Portuguese in 1561. To cleverly cover up this criminal act, the Catholic Church has come up with the fraudulent fable of martyrdom of St. Thomas at Mylapore in 73 AD. The Portuguese domination of Mylapore lasted from 1522 to 1697, by which time the British had established themselves in the Fort St. George and adjoining territories and the Portuguese had to withdraw to Goa where heir empire lasted in 1962.

As Swami Tapasyananda has observed: “In Goa Portuguese rule was noted for a spree of destruction of Hindu temples and persecution of the Goanese, so much so that large sections of them had to flee that territory and settle all along the west coast of India. They are the Gauda Saraswats. The fate of these Goanese would have overtaken the temples and the people of Madras also, a foretaste of which contingency they got in he destruction of the holy  Kapaleeshwara Temple. Thanks to the British domination of the region after 1697 and the consequent elimination of the Portuguese, this tragic fate did not overtake them. The British had more political maturity and diplomatic perception, which helped them perceive that trade was more important for themselves than religious propaganda”. No wonder that the British kept an attitude of indifference towards the religion and religious edifices of the people of India in whose midst they carried on the trading activities which eventually led to the establishment of a great political empire not only in India but in other parts of the World.

Sita Ram Goel in his outstanding book titled History of Hindu-Christian Encounters (AD 304 to AD 1996), has given his magisterial verdict: “The history of Christianity, crowded as it is with crimes of the most horrendous kind, provides a running commentary on the Christian doctrine. And the biggest share in Christian crimes down the centuries can safely be allotted to the Roman Catholic Church, its head, its hierarchy, its theologians, its religious orders and its missionaries. There is, however, one criminal field in which the Roman Catholic Church has remained unrivaled. No other Christian denomination —there are as many as 23,000 of them– comes anywhere near the Roman Catholic Church when it concerns the committing of blatant forgeries and foisting of pious frauds. It is no exaggeration to say that starting with Jesus Christ, the entire doctrinal and institutional edifice of Catholicism rests on a series of staggering swindles. The Roman Catholic Church in India has remained true to this tradition. The literature it has produced during the last five centuries is full of lies of the filthiest sort, not only about Hindu religion and culture but also about its own “religion” and role. And this garbage heap is topped by the hoax about the so-called St Thomas”.

After our Independence, the Catholic Church went on spreading the myth of murder and martyrdom of St. Thomas at Mylapore in the first century AD. Meanwhile, the Liberation Theology of the Church had added a new dimension to it. St. Thomas  started being sold not  only as the first founder of Christianity in India but also as the first to proclaim a new social message in this country. A section of the “secular” media in Madras, in the late eighties, presented this new portrait of St. Thomas through an article written by one C.A. Simon in the Indian Express under the title “In Memory of a Slain Saint”. After repeating the same old standard fraudulent story of the Catholic Church in India,  C.A. Simon struck a new revolutionary note: “St. Thomas spent the last part of his life in Madras preaching the Gospel. A large number of people listened nd embraced the way of life preached by him. The oppressed and downtrodden followed him and claimed equal status in society as it was denied to them by the prevailing social norms. He condemned untouchability and attempted to restore equal status to women”.

This bold and brazen Christian scribe had written with great confidence because similar fictitious stuff, presented in a plethora of books [by S. Muthaih of The Hindu] as well as the popular press, had passed off without being challenged. He was not aware that formidable Hindu scholars had started examining Christian claims about Christian doctrines and Christian saints, as also the calculated Christian calumny about Hinduism, Hindu society, Hindu  culture, and Hindu history It is very unfortunate that certain editors of the pseudo-secular media allowed their respected columns to be used to promote this Catholic romance as historical fact in this age of excellent and critical scholarship. Though Veda Prakash had sent his book on the myth of  St. Thomas to the Indian Express as early as September 1989 for review,  yet the Indian Express had ignored it.  The Indian Express did apply the same standard of censorship to C.A. Simon. While it treated Simon with respect, it treated Veda Prakash with utmost contempt.

The anti-national and anti-Hindu pseudo-secular mafia of print and electronic mass media is being closely watched by the awakened Hindus of India today. Hindus of India are determined to win their war against the planned, organized and launched dissemination of disinformation in regard to Sanatana Dharma, Hindus, Hinduism, Hindu culture and Hindu society by the criminal cabal controlling the print and electronic media in India today.

Very recently Pope Benedict XVI shocked the Christians of  South India in general and Syrian Christians  of Kerala in particular by making a statement to this effect: “St. Thomas preached Christianity in western India [now Pakistan] from where it spread to other parts of the country. He was not the Apostle who ever came to southern India”.

This statement of the Pope has been viewed by Christians of South India as having the effect of taking away from St. Thomas, the traditional title of  ”Apostle of India”.  Though the Pope  referred to St. Thomas having preached Christianity in western India, yet he did not actually use the expression “Apostle of Pakistan”. According to George Nedungatt, a faculty member of the Oriental Pontifical Institute, Rome, who wrote an article in Satya Deepam, a mouthpiece of the Syro-Malabar Church, the Pope’s recent statement may indirectly imply that St. Thomas is an “Apostle of Pakistan” and not India! In the same article, it has been stated that perhaps Pope Benedict XVI feels that the area St. Thomas evangelized was not south India, but what he called “western India” corresponding roughly to today’s Pakistan. As the Pope sees it, south India was not evangelized by St Thomas , but by Christians from North-Western India, seemingly at a later period.

Ishwar Sharan in his pioneering work of research, has clearly brought out the fact that the myth of St. Thomas is a prototype of today’s popular Jesus-in-India story. The first story of St. Thomas in India was invented by the Syrian Christians of Malabar and later taken over by the Portuguese. The second story of Jesus in Kashmir was promoted around the beginning of the 20th century by Western spiritualists who also paraded as historians of the arcane. To quote the words of Ishwar Sharan: ”Both fictions are attractive to foreign spiritual seekers and to convent-educated Hindus who fancy the idea that an apostle of Jesus, or Jesus himself may have visited India. The Hindus do not notice that in these legends neither St. Thomas nor Jesus are presented as seekers of Truth or admirers of Hindu religion and culture. They are presented as teachers of a superior faith or as enlightened social reformers who are persecuted by avaricious and degenerate Pagan Brahmin priests.”

The St. Thomas story was invented to give the Syrian immigrants Indian ancestry and the patronage of a local martyr-saint—Christianity is the  religion of martyrs—and it was resurrected and embellished in the 16th century by Jesuit and Franciscan  missionaries who needed a pious  story of persecution to cover up their own persecution of the Hindus. There is another reason for the Catholic Church to promote the story in Madras, for during that period (16th century) she and her imperial Portuguese “secular arm” destroyed many Hindu  temples in Mylapore and its environs. The original Kapaleeshwar Temple was destroyed in 1561 and on its site the present St. Thomas Cathedral was built.

The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) has never investigated the origins of early Christian churches in India in the same way it has studied old mosques and other Muslim monuments. Proper study of ancient Churches has been done by German scholars and awaits translation and publication in English. The work done by the German scholars shows that most 16th and 17th century churches in India contain temple rubble and are built on temple sites.

The story relating to the martyrdom of St. Thomas on St.Thomas Mount in Madras is fictitious. This will be clear from the physical fact that there are six (6) tombs for St. Thomas in South India. Two (2) are in San Thome Cathedral at Mylapore, a third(3) is on an island south-west of Cochin, a fourth (4) in a Syrian Church at Thiruvancode in Tranvancore, a fifth (5) in a Shiva temple at Malayattur in Tranvancore and a sixth (6) at Kalayamuthur, west of Madurai, near the Palani Hills. Likewise, there are six (6) tombs for St. Thomas abroad. One is in Brazil, a second in Germany, a third in Japan, a fourth in Malacca, a fifth in Tibet and the sixth in China.

The most exciting part of the fraud is that, this is not the end of the matter of tombs. Marco Polo  (1254-1324) was the first story teller to place the tomb of St. Thomas in south India and an unnamed  village on the Coromandel Coast. According to the apocryphal Acts of Thomas by Bardesanes (154 AD to 233 AD) of Edessa in Syria, St. Thomas was buried in a royal tomb on a mountain in King Mazdai’s desert country and the Ethiopian version of the same Acts of Thomas has the  tomb located in Quantaria, which some say is ancient Gandhara in Afganisthan. The Alexandrian Doctors of the Church say that the tomb is in Parthia, i.e., Persia, but Antipope Hippolytus of Potus says it is in Calamina, a city much discussed and never found, and which today remains as elusive a place as the Elioforum of the Passio Thomae (a medieval redaction of the Acts). Still others say the tomb is in Betumah, which the Syrians identify with Mylapore but which the Arabs say is east of Cape Camorin. Col. Gerini in his Researches on Ptolemy’s Geography of Eastern Asia, says Bethuma is to the East of Singapore.

T.K. Joseph, author of Six St. Thomases of South India accepts Marco Polo’s story but believes that the identification of the tomb in Mylapore as a Christian tomb is a case of wrong identification, of the Syrian Christians identifying the tomb of a Muslim Thomas with their Christian Thomas. T.K. Joseph is unwilling to concede that the Mylapore tomb is a Portuguese fake. He seems to treat the problem of St.Thomas as an internal matter of the Christian community rather than as a problem of Indian history. He refuses to consider the Hindu side of the story or to admit that temples were destroyed in Mylapore in the 16th century by Franciscan monks and Jesuit priests. As Ishwar Sharan hilariously concludes: “T.K. Joseph rejects the Malabar and Mylapore legends of St. Thomas as inventions, but seems to be unaware that Marco Polo’s “tall tale” is also that–a tall tale of St. Thomas picked up in a Ceylonese port bazaar and retold with additions to an Italian public [new research suggests most of Il Milione was invented in Constantinople and that Marco never travelled to China at all - Ed]. His acceptance of the geographical designation “India” in the Acts of Thomas, as the field of the apostle’s work, is unreasonable,as the internal cultural evidence of the Acts points to West Asia and not North-West India. T.K. Joseph admits that he is forced to accept  Thomas did come to North-West India and may have been buried near ancient Taxila“.

T.K. Joseph and other Christian scholars who depend on the Acts of Thomas to fulfill their St. Thomas desires — seem to be unaware of Thomas Paine’s famous dictum concerning another collection of acts and gospels — the Bible. Thomas Paine (1737-1809) said: “It has often been said that anything may be proved from the Bible; but before anything can be admitted as proved by the Bible, the Bible itself must be proved to be true; for if the Bible be not true, or the truth of it doubtful, it ceases to have authority and cannot be admitted as proof of anything”.

Against this background it can be asked, where then is the tomb of St. Thomas, if the two in Mylapore are Portuguese fakes? Where did he experience his passion and seal his mission with blood if not in India? We do not know the answer to these questions, but there is a verse in an ancient St. Thomas hymn which reveals more than it conceals:

Thou despist error; Thou destroyest unbelievers:  For, in the city where thou truly liest, There never lives any of the heretics, Jews. or Pagans.”

The unlimited capacity of the Catholic Archdiocese in Madras to manufacture fraudulent fables was brought to full public view in open court on February 6, 1986 when P. Aruvudayappan, II Metropolitan Magistrate, Madras delivered his judgment in criminal case No.100087/82. I am quoting below the operative portion of this judgment: “Taking advantage of the soft attitudes of public witnesses 2 and 3 (Father Mariadoss and Father Arulappa), the Defendant Ganesh Iyer had taken from them about Rs.13.5 lakhs between 1975 and 1980. This has been clearly established.”

How and why did Archbishop Arulappa hand over a whopping amount of Rs.13,49,250/- to Ganesh Iyer for a spurious research project? Why had the Archbishop not bothered to verify the authenticity of the criminally fake ”documents” produced by Ganesh Iyer in  support of his research thesis (which was originally proposed to him by Archbishop Arulappa himself!) Why did Archbishop Arullappa not deem it necessary to accompany Ganesh Iyer to the various sites of his ”research” in India when he had found adequate time to accompany him to Rome, the Vatican, Germany, France, Spain and the United States.

The story of the intimate intellectual relationship between Archbishop Arulappa and Ganesh Iyer (given the title of Acharya Paul by Archbishop Arulappa himself!) indeed constitutes a glorious landmark in the i ntellectual history of Christianity in India! Archbishop Arulappa had directed Acharya Paul to establish a nexus between St. Thomas and Thiruvalluvar, regardless of the concerns for exact chronology or authentic history. ”Scrupulous” Acharya Paul extended his full cooperation to the equally “Scrupulous” Archbishop! The whole story relating to this gigantic hoax was exposed in an article in the Illustrated Weekly of India in its issue dated April 26-May 2, 1987. This article, titled “Hoax!” was authored by K.P.Sunil. This very article was incorporated by Ishwar Sharan in his book on St. Thomas under the title “Archbishop Arulappa Makes History”.

The Catholic Archdiocese of Madras seems to be drawing its inspiration today from Archbishop Arulappa and Acharya Paul for establishing the spiritual relationship between St. Thomas and Thiruvalluvar in its proposed mega-film project on St. Thomas.

“Every cleric must obey the Pope, even if he commands what is evil; for no one may judge the Pope’. — Pope Innocent III (1198-1216)

I have been reading in the Internet a series of articles on Rome’s fraudulent history by Dave Hunt. I am quoting below some excerpts from his brilliant book titled A Woman Rides the Beast: The Roman Catholic Church and the Last Days by Dave Hunt.

“The Roman Catholic Pope has often been the most powerful religious and political figure on earth. This is true today, ven though the Pope no longer has at his disposal the armies and navies of past Roman pontiffs….  The Vatican’s constituency of 980 million followers is at least three times the number of citizens in any Western democracy and is exceeded only by the population of China. Even more important, these 980 million people are scattered throughout the world, many of them holding high political, military, and commercial positions in non-Catholic countries. Moreover, the Pope has thousands of secret agents worldwide. They include Jesuits, the Knights of Columbus, Knights of Malta, Opus Dei, and others. The Vatican’s Intelligence Service and its field resources are second to none…. Remember, the Pope’s 980 million subjects are bound to him by religious ties, which are far stronger than any political loyalties could ever be. No secular government can compete with the motivational power of religious belief….”

The extra-ordinary position of the Pope in relation to members of the Church was expressed succinctly in Rome’s La Civilta Cattolica, which a papal journal described in the mid-nineteenth century as “the purest journalistic organ of true Church doctrine” (J.H. Ignaz von Dollinger, The Pope and the Council) “It is not enough for the people only to know that the Pope is the head of the Church … they must also understand that their own faith and religious life flow from him; that in him is the bond which unites Catholics to one another, and the power which strengthens and the light which guides them; that he is the dispenser of spiritual graces, the giver of the benefits of religion, the upholder of justice, and the protector of the oppressed” (La Civilta Cattolica, 1867, Vol. XII).

The Catholic World in August 1871 (Vol. XIII) declared as follows: “Each individual must receive the faith and law from the Church with unquestioning submission and obedience of the intellect and the will…. We have no right to ask reasons of the Church, any more than of  Almighty God…. We are to take with unquestioning docility whatever instruction the Church gives us”. The same requirement of unthinking submission is demanded in Vatican II. The Code of Canon Law likewise reasserts the same rule: “The Christian faithful, conscious of their own responsibility, are bound by Christian obedience to follow what the sacred pastors, as  representatives of Christ, declare as teachers of the faith or determine as leaders of the Church”  (James A. Coriden, Thomas J. Green,  Donald E. Heintschel, eds., The Code of Canon Law, Canon 212, Section 1; Paulist Press,1985).

In November 2006 Pope Benedict XVI had categorically stated that St.Thomas never visited South India. In the light of what has been stated above, is it not the inviolable duty of the Catholic Archdiocese of Madras to implicitly accept with reverence and humility the public  stand taken by present Pope Benedict XVI on the issue of St. Thomas and his alleged visit to South India? In these columns yesterday, I had referred to the gigantic fraud that shook the foundations of the Catholic Church in Madras in the late 1970s and early 1980s when  Reverend Archbishop Arulappa was the head of the Catholic Church in  Madras. The Catholic Church has seen to it that a lot of embarrassing details relating to this fraud have been swept under the mat. The fearless journalist who exposed this fraud in April 1987 was K.P. Sunil. He wrote an article under the title “Hoax!” in The Illustrated Weekly of  India, April 26-May 2, 1987. I am summarizing the facts contained in the article.

Reverend Dr. R. Arulappa,  Archbishop of  Madras Diocese claimed that he had been duped by one Acharya Paul, also known as Ganesh Iyer. The ”criminal” (at any rate not “civil” by any standard!)  association between these two characters began in the early 1970s. Ganesh Iyer, ho had embraced the Christian faith, was a self-styled Bible preacher known as John Ganesh. During the course of his evangelical journeys, he went to Thiruchirapalli and met a Catholic priest called Father Michael of the Tamil Ilakkiya Sangam (Tamil Literary Society). He presented himself to Father Michael as Dr. John Ganesh, Professor of Philosophy and Comparative Religion at the Banaras Hindu University. He also told Father Michael that he had returned from Jammu and Kashmir where he was involved in research on Christianity in India. Father Michael put him on to another priest, Father Mariadoss of Srivilliputhur. Dr. John Ganesh impressed Father Mariadoss with his mastery over Christian theology. He showed him copies of notices extolling him as a speaker. He produced letters written to him by several scholars in the fields of education and religion. He also showed Father Mariadoss many photographs of palm leaf  writings and copper plate inscriptions, which were several centuries old. Dr. John Ganesh told Father Mariadoss that these ancient documents  and artifacts in his possession, traced the origins and development of the Christian faith in India. He convinced Father Mariadoss that he was not in a position to further pursue the research on account of want of money and other constraints. Taken in by the approach of Dr. John Ganesh, Father Mariadoss took upon himself the task of locating funds for the successful completion of the research project which he felt would prove to be a shot in the arm for Christianity in India. Father Mariadoss gave Dr. John Ganesh Rs.22,000/- towards his research project. As he could not give more money, he introduced the researcher to Archbishop Arulappa, the head of the Catholic Church in Madras. Thus began the most exciting intellectual relationship between Archbishop Arulappa and Dr. John Ganesh who was given the name Acharya Paul by Archbishop Arulappa himself.

Archbishop Arulappa held the view that St. Thomas before his martyrdom on a hill near Madras in 72 AD, now called St. Thomas Mount, met Thiruvalluvar and influenced the bard to the extent of converting him to the nascent Christian faith. Thus a  revolutionary theory had been propounded. What remained to be obtained was proof of such an occurrence. Archbishop Arulappa came to the conclusion that Ganesh Iyer, posing as Dr.John Ganesh, could play a vital role in establishing his new theory. Archbishop Arulappa  entered into a deal with Ganesh Iyer and entrusted the research work relating to the establishment of the spiritual connection  between St. Thomas and Thiruvalluvar to him. The Archbishop was also overwhelmed by Ganesh Iyer’s mastery of Christian theology. As a clever and crooked operator,  Ganesh Iyer agreed not only to establish the nexus between St. Thomas and Thiruvalluvar through his  research but also to furnish formidable  evidence as to how the three great epic Hindu sages from the East —Vashista, Vishwamithra and Agastya—had clearly prophesied the birth of Jesus Christ.

In 1975-76 Ganesh Iyer began his research. And the Archbishop   Arulappa started funding the same in a liberal fashion. Ganesh Iyer produced photographs of palm leaf writings and copper plate inscriptions at periodic intervals. Whenever the Archbishop asked to see the originals, he was informed by Ganesh Iyer that they were stashed away in the safe custody of the Indian government’s archaeological departments and museums all over the country.  As it was not possible to persuade these agencies to part with the priceless documents, Ganesh Iyer  agreed to get the copies of the relevant documents duly authenticated by these agencies. Thus Ganesh Iyer produced forged copies of photographs and other documents bearing the seals of the state archaeological                  departments and the museums from which he claimed to have obtained them for purposes of completing his research. The cruel joke is that Archbishop Arulappa gave a total amount of nearly 13.5 lakhs to Ganesh Iyer between 1975 and 1980 for  doing his great research for tracing the hallowed roots of Christianity in India!

The point to be noted is that Archbishop Arulappa never went even once along with Ganesh Iyer to any part of India to see for  himself whether Ganesh Iyer was doing genuine work or not. Archbishop Arulappa knew  how totally the spurious whole effort was right from the beginning. In 1976, Ganesh Iyer obtained a passport in the name of Acharya Paul. In 1977, accompanied by Archbishop Arulappa, he went abroad to the Vatican, among other places, where he had a lengthy audience with  Pope Paul VI. The duo then visited several religious congregations and spoke about comparative religion. Wherever they went, Ganesh Iyer, spoke about the origins of Christianity in India and about his ”monumental research”.Lot of money was collected in Europe for funding further research.

Soon after their return to India, Archbishop Arulappa was pressurized to file a complaint with the police against Ganesh Iyer. After a through  investigation, the police arrested Ganesh Iyer on April 29, 1980. A criminal case was filed  against him and on February 6, 1986, P. Aruvudayappan, Second Metropolitan Magistrate  Madras sentenced Ganesh  Iyer to undergo 10 months rigorous  imprisonment. Even when the criminal case was going on in the court, a civil suit for compromise was also filed by the Archbishop in the Madras High Court.  Soon after the verdict in the criminal  case was given on February 6, 1986,  the compromise decree was also taken up in the Madras High Court. Ganesh Iyer who had defrauded the Archbishop to the tune  of nearly 14 lakhs was let off without any  further punishment. Thus ended with a calculated whimper, one of the “holiest” subterranean alliances in the history of Christianity in India!

To conclude with the  words of Sita Ram Goel:  ”High-sounding  theological blah blah not withstanding, the fact remains that the Christian dogma is no more than a subterfuge for forging and wielding an organizational weapon for aggression against other people. It is high time for Hindus to dismiss the dogma of Christianity with the contempt it deserves, and pay attention to the Christian missionary apparatus planted in their midst. The sole aim of this apparatus is to ruin Hindu society and culture and take over the Hindu homeland”.

This article originally appeared as a four part series on the News Today website. Images in this Bharata Bharati reprint have been added by the editor.

“Fraudulent Myth of the Tomb of St. Thomas” Special Review and Comment by “Baritone” V. Sundaram Part I | Part II | Part III | Part IV

The video below is of the Portuguese built Our Lady of Expectation Church on Big Mount or St. Thomas (originally called Brungi Malai after the rishi who had lived there). It was built in 1547 when the Portuguese destroyed the Hindu temple on the hill. The church contains an 8th century stone Persian cross that is attributed to St. Thomas. The church also contains a number of paintings depicting St. Thomas being killed by a brahmin wearing namam. The whole story is a fabrication maintained by the Church and meant to malign and denigrate Brahmins and the Hindu community.  See http://hamsa.org/18.htm for all details of the Portuguese occupation of Big Mount now called St. Thomas Mount.

All St. Thomas in India links here:

• The St. Thomas Teller
• An attempt to impose a concocted history of Thomas on the people – B.R. Haran
• Legitimizing the destruction of the Kapaleeswara Temple and the building of Santhome Church – Dr. Subramanian Swamy
• ASI deeply involved in the cover-up at Santhome Church & St. Thomas Mount – Ishwar Sharan
• Pope denies Thomas landed in India but Church plans mega-budget movie – Sarve Samachar
• Indian bishops are allowed to pervert Indian history? – Ishwar Sharan
• Can you name the only saint who left behind his TWO skeletons? – S. Kalyanaraman
• The fabled, fabricated, and fraudulent myth of the visit of St. Thomas to Mylapore in the 1st century – Vivekajyoti Blog
• Part-I: Indian researcher Veda Prakash condemns St. Thomas movie project.
• Part-II: Indian researcher Veda Prakash condemns St. Thomas movie project.
• All Hamsa.org St. Thomas resources here.

A while back, I was led to Jason Cohen’s blog post on not trying to look like a big company when you’re not. Jason makes a good point, that when Lockheed Martin is ready to order 1000 copies of new software they probably won’t buy it from a small company anyway. That’s often true. But I think there’s a more important reason to knock off the high-falutin’ corporate image thing.

I bring this up here, on a blog about making software projects not suck, because so many software developers and consultants have single-person operations, and often carry on their business on nights and weekends. I’m not opposed to that! I’m just pointing out why a big fakey web presentation just makes you look silly when it matters. (Same goes for business cards with pretentious titles.)

What’s your best presentation tactic?

If you’re an individual freelancer, or running a very small bueinss, are you better off having an impressive, big-company website look? How’s that going to work out? Game this in your head a little.

Your prospective client has some reason, any reason, to prefer to deal with a larger company. They’re solid on this point, for whatever reason.

Even when you do hook the attention of a bigshot prospect, then what? Someone from Lockheed is going to call you and then… what? Do you think they’ll make that million-dollar order over the phone? Do you think they won’t want to visit your office, or at least ask for the glossy marketing materials?

That’s silly. The very first thing they’ll figure out when you answer the phone is that it’s just you. It will be obvious when every voicemail box has your greeting on it. When you return calls on lunch hour from your day job. When they ask who else you’re bringing to the presentation and you say, “Nobody, just me.”

Did they really want to deal with a big company? How long did you succeed in fooling them?

It makes me think of a dog chasing cars. I’ve always wondered, what the heck is the dog going to do when he catches one? Likewise, when you get that much-anticipated call from Lockheed Martin, because they (hypothetically) think you’re the marketing person at a big, impressive, established company… what were you going to do next?

Let them say no

Ike Krieger built much of his sales training practice on the concept of “uncovering a ‘no’ that was going to happen anyway.” His angle is this: if there’s a good reason for not buying your product or service, nobody benefits from a long sales process. So part (not all!) of the Krieger process is to give the prospect explicit permission to say no, to find out all the reasons for not buying, to examine the reasons that might prevail, and to address those reasons immediately.

By the way, Ike has since merged his practice with Andrew Sokol’s; the program may have changed, but the concept of “uncovering the no” is brilliant. You might as well start now.

You can’t fool them anyway

The other thing is that the fake-big-company website is an awfully thin veneer. It only takes a minute for potential prospects to notice things like:

• not mentioning any staff by name
• leaving yourself out of the “About Us” page
• saying “we” without explaining who “we” are
• using a lot of stock images
• a “contact us” form rather than a real phone number and email address
• generalities

It’s not just the early adopters

Jason’s post offers a neat alternative to the fake-big-company concept. Why not position yourself, if you’re a very small firm, as the solution for early adopters? Play to their need to innovate, to try new things, and to work directly with people who can solve their problem–even if the source is neither conventional nor proven: you.

As Jason puts it, “Should you come off as a big, established, safe company or as a cool, passionate, small team who wants to make a difference?”

Still, I think the issue is larger than that. Everyone talks about “authenticity” as a marketing technique, but if you can’t manage that you should at least not be directly misleading. It rarely gets your foot in the door, and even then you just end up with a sore foot.

There’s no part-credit for the sale you almost made. Just present who you are and what you actually do as directly as possible.

Back to you

Have you tried using “big company look” to represent your mom-and-pop business? Did it ever attract and convert accounts that you wouldn’t have gotten with a more authentic presentation? I’m curious. I wonder whether the “let them say no” approach is as sound as it seems. Tell me about it in the comments.

We all know someone like President Barack Obama. You know… the kind of person who tells a whopper of a lie, then leaves before you have a chance to call him on it. 

I think that’s why Obama is the most traveled President in history at this point in his Obamanation of a Presidency… Immediate case in point: Where is President Hope and Change today? Why, he’s off to Norway to pick up his Nobel Peace prize and insult the king. Look back across the few days and you’re bound to find some outrageous statements from Obama, knowing he would be fleeing the country shortly. And it doesn’t take long.   

During Tuesday’s speech at The Brookings Institution in Washington, DC. to roll out his stimulus style jobs plan, “The One”  praised his own team for creating ”ambitious” financial reform and “sweeping” economic recovery initiatives, then took pot-shots at  the Republican party for having created the economic mess and then leaving it for him to resolve. Reality check: It was the Democratic pet projects Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac coupled with the Democratic Clinton administration forcing banks to make loans to those who would not normally qualify for them that largely  led to the bank insolvency crisis.  Add an inch to Pinnochio-bama’s nose.

“We were forced to take those steps (to jump-start the economy) largely without the help of an opposition party which, unfortunately, after having presided over the decision-making that had led to the crisis, decided to hand it over to others to solve.” 

 Reality check: See above. The decisions were made by people like Presidents Carter and Clinton in terms of the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac debacle. As for not having the help of an opposition party? Well, someone should inform the President it’s hard to assist in these matters when you are locked out of participation.  And even when the Republicans are not locked out of the chamber, Nancy Pelosi (House Speaker) and Barney Frank  join with  Harry Reid (Senate Majority Leader) to marginalize involvement from across the aisle.  Add two more inches to Pinnochio-Bama’s nose. 

Obama said the crisis was caused not just by economic weakness but the “weakness in our political system” — one corroded by the “bitterness of partisanship,” and the “endless campaigns focused on scoring points instead of meeting our common challenges.”  

Reality check: Welcome to the unending presidential campaign of Barack Hussein (don’t use that name until I’m elected) Obama.  Add two more inches as he was attempting to pin that tail on the wrong donkey.  

“We’ve seen the consequences of this failure of responsibility. The American people have paid a heavy price.” Obama referred to the nation’s unemployment as a ”human tragedy.”  

Reality check: Of course, he’s implying the Bush administration is responsible for everything this country is facing. Therein, witness his biggest lie yet. Perhaps if the President focused on preserving, protecting, and defending the Constitution (as his oath of office  requires) instead of trying to find ways to circumvent and develop end-runs around it, he might actually accomplish something positive.

Bbut until then, that final accusation by Barack Obama will have to be reserved for his hagiography autobiography. Two… no, three more inches, for not only wasting our time and tax dollars, but for having the audacity to attempt to place the blame everywhere but the one place it deserves to be placed.  Add it up and what do you have?

 Mmmm-mmmm-mmmm… 

 ”Gotta go now… they’re giving me the Nobel Peace Prize today…” 

 Gerry Ashley

By Chad Pergram

Lawmaker sees ’stark symbolism’ in White House’s Christmas cookies shaped like nut sharing name with controversial community group

[...]

“Bill Clinton redefined a two and a three-letter word,” Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) said, a reference to Clinton’s denial of the Lewinsky scandal . “But from the man who wrote ‘The Audacity of Hope,’ we were served the very redefinition of the word ‘audacity.’”

Full story:  FOXNews.com

[...]

“I tell you, if I was a heart patient and Gallup was my EKG, I’d visit my doctor,” Gibbs said of the influential polling organization, according to Politico.

“If you look back, I think five days ago, there was an 11-point spread, now there’s a 1-point spread,” he continued. “I mean, I’m sure a 6-year-old with a crayon could do something not unlike that.

“I don’t put a lot of stake in, never have, in the EKG that is the daily Gallup trend.” Gibbs added that he doesn’t “pay a lot of attention to the meaninglessness of” the poll.

More: LifeSiteNews.com.

Rule by the best and the brightest.

William McGurn:

Some mistakes are so big that only smart people are tempted to make them. One is the faith in Big Government.

We’ll see that in full force today, when Barack Obama gives another major address on the economy. On the generalities, there won’t be much real disagreement. But at a time when many claim to see no difference between the two political parties, President Obama and his Democratic allies are making one distinction paramount: their operating assumption that bigger government is better government.

More: WSJ.com.

Harry Reid

If class were cash, Harry Reid, the personification of the Peter Principle at work in the Senate, would be as deeply in debt as he and his ilk have put the United States government (i.e., the American taxpayer).

Some people just can’t escape criticism. One of those unfortunates is Creigh Deeds. First, there’s a scathing editorial from Doug Wilder, who many waved off as a has-been when he predicted the inevitable. From the RTD:

Candidly, though, I will state that Deeds’ inability to resonate with the base of the party was not his only failure, as some have claimed. He also failed to connect with the overall root base of Virginia voters of all persuasions — particularly independents and crossover Republicans. If a candidate cannot attract the votes of a broad-based coalition, it becomes extremely difficult — if not impossible — to win any statewide election in this commonwealth.

That is Virginia Politics 101, but sometimes it does us all good to refresh ourselves about the lessons these past few decades of elections have taught us.

…..

With the concerns of the base about job losses, under-employment, health care, and resources for infrastructure improvements mounting on an almost daily basis, Democrats will have to start showing that the base — which has been so essential to so many of us having been elected and put into positions of leadership — has real reasons to believe that its votes matter, and that it will see tangible results, notwithstanding the present dilemma of the party.

Meanwhile, outgoing Governor Tim Kaine shows that a little loss like that on November 3rd is no cure for arrogance. From the Politico:

In an interview in Monday’s Danville Register & Bee, Kaine, who’s also chairmen of the Democratic National Committee, said that he would have run for re-election if Virginia governors were not limited to one term and that if he had run again he “probably could have won pretty easily.”

So you really think that the voters of Virginia would have just ignored your billion dollar deficits? Indeed, there was one candidate on the ballot that worked with the Governor and defended his fiscal policies tooth and nail only to get whomped just as bad. Can’t poor Creigh catch a break? Just like the incoming Governor he’s still got a job to do, and I’m sure he’ll be glad when session comes. Will he become a leading critic of the administration? Time will tell.

Of course, Tim Kaine also threw himself a lavish party at the Hat Factory in Richmond with over 1,400 guests. No word if this was on the government kitty….but its clear that His Excellency would rather us remember “the good times” like a boyfriend desperate to get back with a girl he mistreated.

Sometimes, as a person, you can do something which you think is so utterly brilliant.
I took this picture, i think it is so brilliant, i dont care what anyone else thinks.
So there.

Just spotted Jim Collin’s latest book. I’ve always enjoyed his previous books – Built to Last and Good to Great. This one is Great to Bad! How once great companies fail. He identifies 5 stages of decline.

1. Hubris born of success.
2. Undisciplined pursuit of ‘more’.
3. Denial of risk and peril.
4. Grasping for salvation.
5. Capitulation to irrelevance or death.

Sobering reading as an individual, team, organisation or civilisation.

I’m thinking of climate change and the current financial meltdown.

I liked this quote – “The signature of the truly great versus the merely successful is not the absence of difficulty but the ability to come back from set-backs, even catastrophe, stronger than before.”

There’s always hope …. if it’s well-founded!

Subject: WW II Battleship sailor tells Obama to shape up or ship out !

This venerable and much honored WW II vet is well known in Hawaii for his seventy-plus years of service to patriotic organizations and causes all over the country. A humble man without a political bone in his body, he has never spoken out before about a government official, until now.

He dictated this letter to a friend, signed it and mailed it to the president.

Dear President Obama,

My name is Harold Estes, approaching 95 on December 13 of this year. People meeting me for the first time don’t believe my age because I remain wrinkle free and pretty much mentally alert.

I enlisted in the U.S. Navy in 1934 and served proudly before, during and after WW II retiring as a Master Chief Bos’n Mate. Now I live in a “rest home” located on the western end of Pearl Harbor, allowing me to keep alive the memories of 23 years of service to my country.

One of the benefits of my age, perhaps the only one, is to speak my mind, blunt and direct even to the head man.

So here goes.

I am amazed, angry and determined not to see my country die before I do, but you seem hell bent not to grant me that wish.

I can’t figure out what country you are the president of.

You fly around the world telling our friends and enemies despicable lies like:

” We’re no longer a Christian nation”

” America is arrogant” – (Your wife even announced to the world,”America is mean-spirited. ” Please tell her to try preaching that nonsense to 23 generations of our war dead buried all over the globe who died for no other reason than to free a whole lot of strangers from tyranny and hopelessness.)

I’d say shame on the both of you, but I don’t think you like America, nor do I see an ounce of gratefulness in anything you do, for the obvious gifts this country has given you. To be without shame or gratefulness is a dangerous thing for a man sitting in the White House.

After 9/11 you said,” America hasn’t lived up to her ideals.”

Which ones did you mean? Was it the notion of personal liberty that 11,000 farmers and shopkeepers died for to win independence from the British? Or maybe the ideal that no man should be a slave to another man, that 500,000 men died for in the Civil War? I hope you didn’t mean the ideal 470,000 fathers, brothers, husbands, and a lot of fellas I knew personally died for in WWII, because we felt real strongly about not letting any nation push us around, because we stand for freedom.

I don’t think you mean the ideal that says equality is better than discrimination. You know the one that a whole lot of white people understood when they helped to get you elected.

Take a little advice from a very old geezer, young man.

Shape up and start acting like an American. If you don’t, I’ll do what I can to see you get shipped out of that fancy rental on Pennsylvania Avenue. You were elected to lead not to bow, apologize and kiss the hands of murderers and corrupt leaders who still treat their people like slaves.

And just who do you think you are telling the American people not to jump to conclusions and condemn that Muslim major who killed 13 of his fellow soldiers and wounded dozens more. You mean you don’t want us to do what you did when that white cop used force to subdue that black college professor in Massachusetts, who was putting up a fight? You don’t mind offending the police calling them stupid but you don’t want us to offend Muslim fanatics by calling them what they are, terrorists.

One more thing. I realize you never served in the military and never had to defend your country with your life, but you’re the Commander-in-Chief now, son. Do your job. When your battle-hardened field General asks you for 40,000 more troops to complete the mission, give them to him. But if you’re not in this fight to win, then get out. The life of one American soldier is not worth the best political strategy you’re thinking of.

You could be our greatest president because you face the greatest challenge ever presented to any president.

You’re not going to restore American greatness by bringing back our bloated economy. That’s not our greatest threat. Losing the heart and soul of who we are as Americans is our big fight now.

And I sure as hell don’t want to think my president is the enemy in this final battle.

Sincerely,

Harold B. Estes

When a 95 year old hero of the “the Greatest Generation” stands up and speaks out like this, I think we owe it to him to send his words to as many Americans as we can. Please pass it on.