MOHAMMED HIMSELF CAME OUT OF "LINGAM"
Date: 20 May 2008
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 21:42:15 -0400
Subject: "SHIVLING" AT MECCA
Some esteemed readers of Free Internet Discussion Lists may have seen a Muslim Mullah mocking the very idea of Shiv Ling in Ka'aba before the inauspicious birth of Mohammed. (He did prove inauspicious as far as PARTITIONED India is concerned, and as far as the victims of WTC towers attack on Sep 11, 2001 are concerned.)
This "Mullah Moron" made cheap mockery of the fact, and laughed in the end at the "foolishness of the Hindus."
We should not let such ill mannered, fanatic, insulting morons get away lightly.
We ought to counter such guys at once and take the laugh out of their faces by telling them that their "great hazrat" Mohammed himself came out of a lingam, and so did his father.
In ancient India there were no taboos or sense of shame and guilt about human body. These were introduced by the Muslims and the Christians who connected parts of body to sin.
But in ancient Bharatvarsha the divinity and beauty of human body and form were accepted in the matter of fact way. Women were not taken FOUR AT TIME, their faces were not covered to hide, and they were not STONED TO DEATH nor were females barred from conducting service and "puja" at temples. Female molestation, abduction and rape stuck to Islam from the word "go". Parts of human body were not to be seen or mentioned, leave aside adored or appreciated. Islamic and Christian clergy crushed all such freedoms. Luckily the ANIMALS escaped the Writ of Mohammed and can show their bodies and also ACTS in entirety.
We also need to look closer at one painter Hussain in India in particular, who likes to paint Hindu goddesses naked,
What a strong EMANCIPATED Hindu nation should ask him, is, "Show us the mother of Mohammed in the nude."
Is there any other way of educating such Muslim Mullahs?
Is there any way of educating today's Mohammedans?
The simple answer is NO.
They have exclusivist dismissive mindset. They are uncertain about themselves and lack consistency and conformity.
They say we are not idol-worshippers. But look at what they do at the "Dargaahs" - not just Urs, but Chaadar Charhaana on the graves.
In villages they leave offerings of "Gurh" (unrefined sugar) etc. on the graves of their Peers.
In Kashmir at Hazrat Bal Shrine they revere the piece of hair, alleged to be of their prophet as a relic.
In Pakistan they have Jinnah's portraits-the father of their Nation and offer all kinds of obeisance.
Yet they claim, man-worship (Obeisance or revering etc.) is against their Faith
About the hair of Mohammed there is a story:
Two emissaries of Head Maulvi of Mecca sent a hair of Mohammed to be planted in the Valley of Gods, Kashmir, to lay claim just as today's explorers put flag on Mount Everest or the moon. But on the way they were waylaid by fellow Muslims who robbed them of all possessions.
In fear of Wrath of Allah one of these poor men PLUCKED A HAIR from his own head and continued on their journey towards Srinagar.
So what the Mohammedans, including that Moron Mullah, are worshipping is no different from the more logical and appropriate worship of Shivlingam at Mecca.