1/n #Hinduphobia in Telugu film industry has gone to the extent of producing well-made blockbusters with A list actors mouthing Hinduphobic lines.
I am talking about the moving 'Shyam Singha Roy' starring Nani and Sai Pallavi, both excellent actors.
2/n The film is well made with a grippingly told story. Yet, the Hinduphobia and the Brahmin hatred comes through, and the director's mind-colonized mentality is very visible in the way he has portrayed the 'reformist' hero (Christian word, refer to @jsaideepak's book)
3/n Main story is set in the 1960s. There is a scene where dalits are denied access to a well as they are deemed unclean.
While untouchability as a practice existed in India the villains are Brahmin men with janeau, and the 'reformist' hero says "This is not your Rig Veda time'
4/n The hero's 'backward' brothers are shown wearing Indian outfits, with Hindu symbols. Whereas 'reformist' atheist hero is entirely in western wear, twirling moustache, and chain-smoking.
Hindu attire/symbols = bad
Western+smoking = good
5/n The film shows Devadasis as residing within a temple and never leaving a temple compound. This maybe true of Christian convents but Devadasis as temple dancers had free movement.
Even in Mrichchakatika times, Devadasis lived freely and went everywhere. #falseportrayal
6/n Also Devadasis lived in a colony close to the temple - never within temple walls. The cleanliness rules of a temple did not allow people to constantly reside there.
The janeau-sporting temple priest (Mahant) is shown as sexually abusing these trapped women within a temple.
7/n This brahmin priest supposedly has so much power that he can make the Devadasis line up, and choose one among them!
And at one point he chooses a young 8 year old! So Brahmin priest is shown as a pedophile. He carefully places his janeau over one ear and urinates on a woman.
8/n The reference to Rig Veda, portraying Brahmins as denying water to dalits, as predators and pedophiles, all the while flashing janeaus, shows high level of investment from #Hinduphobic forces using their money power to demonize Hinduism
9/n This does not end here. The hero after rescuing the heroine (a Devadasi) renames her 'Rosie' - ostensibly coz she looks good with roses in her hair. He says the Indian word for rose (Roja) but calls her Rosie anyway. Subtle bow to Christianity.
10/n Hero wearing western clothes is murdered by his casteist brothers who raised him, because he brought 'dishonor' to family by marrying a Devadasi.
Equating Hinduism to Caste and Caste only. Ref above on Brahmins, Hindu-outfit sporting evil brothers who commit fratricide.
11/n The heroine, 'rechristened' Rosie, says that she was sold to a temple "in exchange for a ricebag".
That is clever turnaround to hit at Hindus who use this slur for Christians who converted for money.
12/n The hero, when beating up the predatory Brahmin priest, walks up to Goddess Durga's Murti, places one slipper-clad foot on Her, and grabs a knife from the Goddess hand, to use as a weapon against the Mahant. Mahant is shown as a fighter who lifts hero with one hand.
13/n Note the casual disrespect of Ma Durga, with the slipper clad foot placed on the Murti. And BTW, I didn't know that Hindu priests were fighters or body-builders! Doubt that Hindus think of priests (who eke out a living) as fighters or body-builders.
14/n The way they have crafted a gripping reincarnation story, woven their Brahmin hatred and Hinduphobia overtly and subtly, invested in A-list stars to create a blockbuster-type of film, shows a carefully thoughtout and planned strategy to demonize Hindus and Hinduism.
*movie, not *moving
15/n Have never seen this kind of hatred in Telugu films; the way the westernized hero says "Rig Veda times' is truly sick. I dare him to utter a dialogue referencing any other holy book.
1/n With a likely new administration in January, I sure hope that the US does not start anymore wars in the Middle East, Venezuela or elsewhere.
Past wars were waged under some 'moral' pretext or other on oil-rich Middle East countries. Ended in disaster everywhere.
2/ GWB took out Saddam and it created the ISIS monster. Obama armed ISIS to take on Assad whose regime the US wanted to change. They cooked up some story about Assad gassing his people.
Tulsi who found and reported the truth of people's support for Assad was smeared.
3/ WikiLeaks vindicated Tulsi's stand.
Wars in the middle east create refugees from these theocratic states. The refugees who are used to theocratic laws pour into secular nations. They don't want to assimilate, and want their theocratic "God-ordained laws".
2/ It is a whole different mindset. Where Yazidi rapes and killings are not protested, where minorities are killed and abused and treated inhumanely, and no protests for that.
Where 'intellectuals' speak in support of beheading a teacher. And worldwide protests for a cartoon.
3/ This mindset is incompatible with free societies, where religious and gender freedoms are practiced, and freedom is enshrined.
Free societies should NOT allow adherents of this intolerant ideology to infiltrate. Education does not reform this mindset. Nor does wealth.
1/ I have a theory why leftists and Islamists are together. Leftists' "solidarity" with working classes can draw large crowds. Islamists have petrodollars. So Islamists routinely cry that they are 'oppressed'. Leftists pledge solidarity, Islamists money runs their campaigns
2/ Islamists end goal is to make the world a caliphate. To do that they need to enter as many open societies as possibly, using diversity, multiculturalism and shutting down any debate with the fake word 'Islamophobia'. Then they form enclaves, elect reps, and get into politics
3/ Leftists want campaign money, know that Islamists hate pagan faiths like Hinduism, so leftists indulge in Hinduphobia and call Hinduism 'oppression' while ignoring thetreatment of women and minorities by Islamic states. Islamists use leftists to gain political power gradually.