Talk:Dalitstan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
More information about this article... ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on February 11, 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.

Contents 1 Anti-Hindu?? 2 Fake map and fake source 3 Letter in middle of article? 4 Patent nonsense 5 Dalistan article survives proposed deletion 6 Original Research Removed

[edit] Anti-Hindu??

There is no evidence/link given to prove that this organization is anti-Hindu. It can be classified though as anti-Brahmin. I will try to edit this to a more POV version, and until proof is given, it shouldn't directly that this is an "anti-Hindu organisation". Mar de Sin ^{Speak up!} 21:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Dear Basawala,

Absolutely, it is an anti-Hindu organization.

Some examples from its web site: [1]

: THE HINDU RELIGION EXPOSED

Brahmins always criticise, condemn and mock other Religions. Most of the most virulent anti-Muslim, anti-Christian and anti-Sikh literature in the world has been, and is being, published by Brahmans. Their criticism and mocking is unreasonable and unacceptable. In fact, they are often blatant lies and falsehoods.

In his autobiography, Dr. Charles, an American scholar says that it is very simple to define a Hindu. He says a Hindu means "one who believes anything and everything if said in the name of God and shall never question its authenticity".

LUSTFUL SITA VS THE "IMPOTENT" RAMA

The negationist television serials depict Sita as supposedly denying Ravan's advances. However, the oldest versions of Ramayana (read - tose not yet manipulated by the Brahmins) belie these falsehoods, and amply demonstrate that Sita willingly eloped with Ravana, the Black Tamil King.

Thus Sita told Rama "You are no better than a womanmonger who lets his wife for hire and makes his livelihood. You want to be profited by my prostitution". Sita also told Rama "You lack in POTENCE, manners and charm" and she called her husband a simpleton.

PORNOGRAPHY IN RAMAYANA

Pornography is replete in the Ramayana, especially in the older unedited versions. The oldest Ramayanas are in fact Buddhist versions, and they preserve much of the true character of the vicious Rama and his adulterous wife Sita.

THE NAKED HINDU YOGIS OF KASHI

Many of the Yogis of Kashi (Banaras) live naked and beg for their living. They live in dirty, unhygienic conditions, and drug addiction is rife among them.

SEX WITH COWS

In many Hindu temples there are sculptures depicting men having sex not only with women but also cows. What is the meaning of this? Is not the cow sacred? If it is, then it should be worshipped not sexually assaulted!

The answer is that the low-caste people were so frustrated because the Brahmins had abducted all their women as Devadasis that they had to satisfy their desires with cows. Whilst the Brahmins were busy raping their women, the Sudra men had to copulate with cows !

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vikramsingh (talk • contribs) .

It is not outright anti-Hindu. It does criticise Hinduism, but none of that amounts to hatred, only accusations. Mar de Sin ^{Talk to me!} 20:06, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I must admit, your evidence does prove that Dalitstan is pretty critical of Hinduism, but it attacks perceived problems in Hinduism, not the religion/religious beliefs/practices, or the Hindu people as a whole, only certain aspects of Hindu society that does not represent Hinduism as a whole. Mar de Sin ^{Talk to me!}

The tone of the site was clearly hatemongering. That is why it got banned in India. It makes clear falsehoods as a means to propagate hatred. Descriptions of many such sites devoted to hating other religions are listed on wikipedia as hate-sites.Hkelkar 20:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

It is listed as a hate-site here:

http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/FAS/Bromley/classes/confres/hatedir.pdf

Hkelkar 20:19, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Hate group, sure, but how is it anti-Hindu enough to label it solely as that? Mar de Sin ^{Talk to me!} 20:30, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Then the sentence should be changed to "Anti-Brahmin and anti-Hindu hate group". However, just saying anti-Hindu is actually less drastic. Like I said before, if jewwatch.org can be labelled anti-Semitic (even tho it's also anti-Black, anti-hispanic etc), and stormfront.org can be labelled racist (even though they deny it and just say "White Nationalist") in the beginning of the articles themselves, then anti-Hindu here is apt.Hkelkar 21:51, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Dear Baswalaji,

You seem to be defending the Dalitstan organization by minimizing what they are. Can you give an example of what is "anti-Hindu"? --ISKapoor 01:29, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fake map and fake source

The map's sources are definitely fake. There is no "Mughlistan Research Institute" in Jahangirnagar, Bangladesh. The very name of the supposed creator of the map "Sheikh Bangistani" is sufficient proof of the hoax. --Ragib 02:52, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I did not place said image but thats how Dalitstan cited it. Dalitstan.org works in weird ways and I'm not surprised that the "research institute" and the creator are fake. Thanks for helping expose the lies perpetrated by the hate site.Bakaman _Bakatalk 16:38, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

If the dalitstan.org site is indeed the source of the image, then definitely they are inventing things that are not there in reality. --Ragib 17:04, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

The site was creepy. It had a section on "pornography in the Ramayan". They loved to misrepresent moral and religious stories to that extent, as if Valmiki was a pervert.Bakaman _Bakatalk 17:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Letter in middle of article?

I am pretty new to wikipedia but I've hardly seen a letter reproduced anywhere that could not be summarized in text in 1-2 lines. Is this necessary in an encyclopedia article? I'll wait for a response from those concerned and then delete it if none is offered. Requesting action from more experienced wikipedians on this matter. Thanks.--Antorjal 19:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Summarizing with a link provided to the letter is the correct action I think.Bakaman _Bakatalk 00:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I've done that. Regards. --Antorjal 01:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Patent nonsense

The claim appears

However, at the present day, Shaivism is confined to the Dalits and Adivasis, who form 25% of the population.

Saivism is not "confined to Dalits and Adivasis". That is just patent nonsense. --BostonMA 16:08, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Quite true, quite true. Shaivism is the standard belief for many Hindus in West Bengal and Orissa. I couldn't agree with you more. But the text is lifted varbatim from the hate-site and stated as their (completely false) claim.Hkelkar 18:07, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Its also prevalent among Iyers and Marathi Brahmins.Bakaman _Bakatalk 00:47, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dalistan article survives proposed deletion

[edit] Original Research Removed

I edited out the following paragraph... "It may also be noted that many of these 'authors' may be fictitious - for example authors with a south Indian names like Naidu write their English as if written by a Urdu speaking person. One can also become aware of the large scale incongruities and incoherancies of the writing. For example "Uthaya Naidu" writes in one paragraph "The advent of the Mughal Caliphate of Delhi in Mughalstan (Indus-Ganges Valley) meant the end of the apartheid varna system in the north". The next line is "Here the Aryan Brahmins collaborated with the Aryan Islamic invaders from Central Asia and maintained the apartheid varna system". It looks like elementary logic does not apply to the Hindu haters of the site. In their anxiety to malign Hinduism , one line is contradicted by the next line."

This is original research by a Wikipedia editor, and not acceptable. 208.102.209.167 23:29, 27 March 2007 (UTC)Joshua