Dubya’s ‘l’affaire India’

[Guest guest]

<h4>Dubya’s ‘l’affaire India’</h4>

 

Pramit Pal Chaudhuri

 

 

New Delhi, February 26, 2006

 

 

 

In early 1999, George W. Bush met with eight foreign policy advisors, collectively known as the Vulcans, in his ranch at Crawford, Texas. He was preparing for his White House bid. They were there to tell him about the world.

 

 

 

Well into the briefing, Bush interrupted: “Wait a minute. Why aren’t we talking about India?” The Vulcans — who included Condoleezza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz — looked at each other. India didn’t matter, they explained.

 

 

 

Bush’s response: “You’re wrong.” He gave three reasons.

 

 

 

One, India was a democracy of one billion people and that was “just incredible.” It is a mantra he still chants with near reverence at the mention of India. Two, Indians were geniuses with software. No Vulcan knew what he was talking about. Three, “You all are going on about the need to balance China. You can’t do that without India.”

 

 

 

Bush later took aside two Vulcans, the present National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley and Bush’s first ambassador to India, Robert Blackwill. “If I am elected, I want a paper on how to transform the US-India relationship on my table before inauguration.”

 

 

 

In December 2000 Bush became US president-elect. He called in Hadley and Blackwill and demanded, “Where’s my paper on India?” They had forgotten. They spent Christmas in the White House reading up on this faraway country that the most powerful man in the world was so fixated on.

 

 

 

Bush’s first term was tumultuous for much of the world but advantageous to India. Funnily, these apposite experiences were for the same reason: Dubya was, as Rice once put it, “convinced that he hadn’t come here to leave the world the same way he found it.”

 

 

 

Echoing the Vulcans, Bush saw the world unprepared for new threats like rogue states and rogue nukes. So he worked to change the international order. Europe feared the loss of privilege. But an aspiring India saw an opportunity to move up the ladder. The sole superpower was rewriting the global rules; India worked hard to influence the writing in its favour.

 

 

 

It helped that large chunks of Bush’s worldview fitted neatly with Indian objectives: missile defence, use of force against terrorism and, finally, reworking the nuclear regime. In each case, India manoeuvred to be inside the tent rather than out.

 

 

 

Nukes were the Big Shift . Ashley Tellis, an author of the US policy, explained that Bush “chose to turn Washington’s long-standing approach to New Delhi on its head.” His administration “embarked on a course of action that would permit India more — not less — access to controlled technologies”. Bill Clinton had offered the same — but only if India gave up its nukes.

 

 

 

The new approach was labelled Next Steps in Strategic Partnership. Hadley later admitted the state department couldn’t have come up with a duller name. It was a symptom of what bedeviled the India policy of Bush’s first term.

 

 

 

[Excerpted --- read more at Hindustan Times]

[Guest guest]

...now let him find India's greatest powerhouse - Srila Prabhupada's books...

 

BDM

[Guest guest]

and the complete collection of Caitanya Caritamrtas in his library at Kennebunkport. I don't know if he has read them, but he honors them by accepting them as a gift.

[Bhakta Don Muntean]

Hari Bolo!

 

Thank you - I'm very pleased to hear that!

 

Yes Mr. Bush Jr. is going to look into those books - soon I hope - but - he shall at some point!

 

Thank you for that information!

 

YS,

 

BDM

[Kulapavana]

Dubya just want to send more American jobs to India, so that his rich buddies can make more profit...

[Guest guest]

Well that is a nice way to 'not' encourage?

 

I think that when he is in India - he shall see Krishna - somewhere. He is still seen nearly 'everywhere' there - right?

 

I'm praying that Lord Krishna reaches out to him and leaves a lasting impression - enough so - that he seeks out Srila Prabhupada's Books etc., yes - it is possible and - it is needed for himself and - our world.

 

I'm not saying that he's going to convert or anything [but we can hope] but he shall - with God's Grace broaden his perview in spiritual matters.

 

He is going to experiance the dynamic Krishna - within his own heart.

 

Also - if there are jobs going to India - so what!?

 

The west has had it all - [to some measure] at the expense of other countries [like India] - so now we have to include them.

 

Of course there is the issues of 'slave labor' in these countries - in terms of very low pay - but - it is a start.

 

Countries like India have a lot to offer and they have needs too - so we have to accept that we do live in a global economy and - in this regard we have to continue to make the right adjustments - to this global economy - that each part 'neatly' serves the others - that is the goal for the future.

 

We cannot look at our western economies as being strong - at the expense of these other's.

 

So in that regard - if Mr. Bush is going to send some jobs to India [and other places] - that is very good.

 

So while Mr. Bush is in India I'm praying that Krishna reaches out to him...

 

YS,

 

BDM

[Bhakta Don Muntean]

Well that is a nice way to 'not' encourage?

 

I think that when he is in India - he shall see Krishna - somewhere. He is still seen nearly 'everywhere' there - right?

 

I'm praying that Lord Krishna reaches out to him and leaves a lasting impression - enough so - that he seeks out Srila Prabhupada's Books etc., yes - it is possible and - it is needed for himself and - our world.

 

I'm not saying that he's going to convert or anything [but we can hope] but he shall - with God's Grace broaden his perview in spiritual matters.

 

He is going to experiance the dynamic Krishna - within his own heart.

 

Also - if there are jobs going to India - so what!?

 

The west has had it all - [to some measure] at the expense of other countries [like India] - so now we have to include them.

 

Of course there is the issues of 'slave labor' in these countries - in terms of very low pay - but - it is a start.

 

Countries like India have a lot to offer and they have needs too - so we have to accept that we do live in a global economy and - in this regard we have to continue to make the right adjustments - to this global economy - that each part 'neatly' serves the others - that is the goal for the future.

 

We cannot look at our western economies as being strong - at the expense of these other's.

 

So in that regard - if Mr. Bush is going to send some jobs to India [and other places] - that is very good.

 

So while Mr. Bush is in India I'm praying that Krishna reaches out to him...

 

YS,

 

BDM

[Guest guest]

Don’t mis-underestimate Dubya

The Indian Express ^ | March 01, 2006 | Jaithirth Rao

 

As we prepare to welcome the leader of the world’s most powerful republic, it behooves us to make sure that we grapple with facts, not just biased opinions. It is unfortunate that so much of the information about the US is derived by our elites from the eastern seaboard, Left-leaning media who are on the opposite side of the American political spectrum from George W. Bush and who therefore have a vested interest in opposing and disparaging him.

 

The images of Bush they have succeeded in planting internationally are that Bush is dim-witted, a simple-minded religious fanatic, a supporter of a rapacious plutocracy. None of these are based on facts. But like all propaganda, there is a feeling that repeated often enough, loudly enough, it’ll become the accepted truth.

 

Let us take a look at the facts. The Bush family is as elitist as they get in America. Bush’s grandfather was a Republican senator from Connecticut. His son, George Bush Sr, took the decision literally to move the family “west”. This may seem like an accident. But what an intelligent and fortuitous accident it was. They moved to the southwest just as this part of the US was gaining demographically. The likelihood of a president of the US bobbing up from Connecticut, with its declining population, is pretty low. Texas on the other hand has been for the last 35 years on the rise economically and politically. The Bush family moved to Texas just as the state was moving from over a century of Democratic domination to becoming a bastion of the Republicans. Incidentally, a branch of the Bush family represented by the president’s younger brother has moved to Florida, another state with burgeoning demography and a flourishing economy. The family’s uncanny ability to anticipate the future and “move” to where the future will happen needs no better proof.

 

President Bush attended Yale and Harvard Business School. Critics will of course make snide remarks that this was on account of family connections. While that may help to some extent, to be dismissive of his attendance of top-class academic establishments would arguably be one more silly under-estimation of the man. Despite representing what is viewed by many as a political party committed to the white Protestant cause, Bush has reached out to the Hispanic community with intelligence and sensitivity. If nothing else, this represents another wise anticipation of demographic inflexion. The Republican Party would condemn itself to irrelevance if it fails to co-opt the growing Hispanic population. At considerable risk to his popularity with xenophobes within his own party, Bush has proposed a Guest Worker programme which is immigrant-friendly and responds to the concerns of the Hispanic voter. His ability to re-fashion himself as a “non-elitist” or to convert a marginal first term victory into a decisive one in the second round are not acts of the politically inept. Those who think of him that way seriously “mis-underestimate” him!

 

Bush has shown a broad-mindedness and inclusiveness in his appointm-ents that completely demolishes the argument that he is merely a mouthpiece for evangelical Christians. He may be a sincere, pious, believer in his faith, but he’s consistently stood for the separation of church and state and for the inclusiveness of all groups. This may be for principled reasons or because he his politically smart. The net effect has been positive. His executive and judicial appointments embrace Catholics (also new entrant into the stable of Republican supporters), Jews and African-Americans. Note that both his secretaries of state (the senior-most cabinet members) have been African-American. His surgical approach to Senator Trent Lott when he resurrected long-forgotten racial antagonisms is a classic example of heightened sensitivity.

 

In foreign policy, Bush has the reputation deservedly or otherwise of cold-shouldering Europe (or is it just Old Europe?) and reaching out to China and India. Again, one sees the same knack of grasping the future rather than swimming in the glue of the past. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and he have created an Indo-US CEO forum. Contrast this with Chirac’s clumsy response to the Mittal-Arcelor deal. China is the economic powerhouse of the future and India is headed the same way. Bush’s visit to China highlighted this despite the dozens of reservations and differences on Taiwan and other irritants. He was warmly received by the Chinese elite, an important lesson for his Indian counterparts.

 

As a betting man, the very fact that Bush is positive about India means that it is quite in order to go long on the Indian stockmarket. His ability to spot the trend has a tested track record. It is equally important to pay attention to the fact that almost instinctively he is on our side on a variety of issues, be it the approach to Islamist terrorism or the approach to nuclear power as a viable, even desirable energy source for the world. He has maintained a clear distance from ecology fundamentalists who would deny India nuclear fuel and at the same time hector us not to burn high-sulphur coal. How exactly are we supposed to provide for an energy-starved population who do not aspire to remain permanently poor?

 

The one argument I find most entertaining is that he is doing all this for the good of the US. Of course he is. That is what makes his approach so credible and self-sustaining. He has been elected by Americans to further their interests and that’s what he is doing. If he can find that doing business with India makes sense within that agenda, it seems to me that we have all the elements of a relationship not based on frothy rhetoric but on sound convergence of interests. It is in this spirit of intelligent practicality, conscious of our vital interests that we should “do business” with this pragmatic Texan.

 

Jaithirth Rao is chairman and CEO, Mphasis

[Kulapavana]

sending american jobs to India does not really help india, and it certainly does not help america. soon everybody will be working for a minimum wage for international capital holders. their big lie is:

 

- americans get lower prices for goods made overseas

 

initially, that may be true, but as american wages go down to keep in line with international labor market, americans can buy less. on top of that, the prices still keep going up.

 

- the wages in India will go up

 

yes, they will - a little bit, but so will the prices for goods and services, and in the end the increase in prices will keep the standard of living down.

[Guest guest]

One may give his order at the Mc Donalds drive up microphone, but there is not a person taking your order in that building. That person is in calcutta, making a buck before lunch and a buck after lunch. The corporations cannot profiteer unless there are no minimum wage laws, safety compliance, etc. So, India is the friend of the corp, and Bush is the mf traitor who would sacrifice the first born of every american family (except those of his anti-christ worshippin thug-friends) to feed this corporate till.

 

Friend of India? Hes not even a friend of humanity, how could he be considered friend of anyone.

 

mad mahax

[Guest guest]

Don, Don, Don--sweet, naive, trusting Don. Not only will Bush not see Krishna, but he won't experience India. He'll hang out in plush suites, eat beef, and find ways to make India a better market for American services (and whatever goods we may still produce). He'll do whatever he can to undermine India's real wealth: its spiritual culture.

[Guest guest]

Why were the Hare Krishna's the first to speak at the first memorial of the 9/11 attacks - I recall that it was Ravindra Svarupa who spoke - he read a verse from Sri Isopanisad - may have been text one.

 

President Bush was at the Cathedral - right there in the first row!

 

So why were the Hare Krishna's asked to speak and why were they the first to speak? Think about that?

 

It's time to encourage...

 

BDM

 

[Bhakta Don Muntean]

...So here are comments Mr. Bush made today regarding India:

 

"...home to a proud civilization. Thousands of years ago the people of this region built great cities, established trading routes with distant lands, and created wonders of art and architecture. Its reputation for wealth and wisdom attracted many..." [my italics]

 

BDM

[Guest guest]

I'm praying that everyone may find Krishna! And I'm happy enough to encourage this demon to the extent that it makes sense, but getting all giddy because he's going to India is just goofy. Sorry.

 

As far as Ravindra's speaking at some meeting, I'm sure there was a lot of wrangling about who would represent Hinduism at the function, and Ravindra and Anuttama got a big score. So where has been the influence of Mahaprabhu in W's life since then? He got a little sukriti, and that's wonderful. What--d'you think he's the next new bhakta at the Potomac temple? You'd have to wait a good many lifetimes for that one.

[Guest guest]

But not him. He's there for the money. He took his shoes off for Gandhi's memorial, but did he look up any Vaishnavas? Nope--he thinks they're devil worshipers.

[Guest guest]

in their hatred, and so far out in left field that they are out of the ballpark. Supporting women's right to kill their babies and they think they make Srila Prabhupada happy.

 

Maybe if mahaksa ever visited India, or associated with sadhus he could give up his hatred of conservatives.

 

When pigs fly.

[Guest guest]

Quote:

 

Supporting women's right to kill their babies and they think they make Srila Prabhupada happy.

 

Reply:

 

Yes it is sick isn't it. Actually it would appear that real Vaishnavas are quite 'conservative' on most issues...

 

BDM

 

 

[Guest guest]

Quote:

 

he thinks they're devil worshipers

 

Reply:

 

There was a time I would have agreed with that but -0 I sense that isn't true. Just call it a hunch...

 

BDM

[Bhakta Don Muntean]

 

...So here are comments Mr. Bush made today regarding India:

"...home to a proud civilization. Thousands of years ago the people of this region built great cities, established trading routes with distant lands, and created wonders of art and architecture. Its reputation for wealth and wisdom attracted many..." [my italics]

BDM

Mr. Bush noted in another speech:

"...Tonight we stand on the ruins of an ancient city that was the capital of an Indian kingdom thousands of years ago...At the heart of a civilization that helped give the world mathematics...In the birthplace of great religions, a billion souls of varied faiths now live side-by-side in freedom and peace..."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/03/20060303-5.html

"A Man of Faith Factually Guided by and thus - Leading and Guiding by His Faith"

BDM

[Bhakta Don Muntean]

[Bhakta Don Muntean]

 

Here is the original painting - does it look like I took anything out of the picture with Lord Rama - does it look 'original' like that?

[mahak]

 

in their hatred, and so far out in left field that they are out of the ballpark. Supporting women's right to kill their babies and they think they make Srila Prabhupada happy.

Maybe if mahaksa ever visited India, or associated with sadhus he could give up his hatred of conservatives.

When pigs fly.

Haribol. I have no trouble with conservatism. I have trouble with liars, described by SB as the greatest bane of the earth planet.

Conservatives reject vehemently this anti-christian (anti)theocracy that has taken place in the USA. These are skull and bones types, satan worshippers, whose goal is a BF SKINNER type of population culling, society restrructuring, etc. Barry Goldwater and Nelson Rockefeller (not to mention the founder of GOP, Abe Lincoln) stand so far apart from those calling themselves conservatives.

As far as my stance on abortion, I stand for the denial of the pharmaceuticals of their human carcass. But bush dont, he panders to the abortion industry while attacking mothers everywhere, denying their right to rid themselves of horrible mates and live alone with their children. Bush considers women chattel, a similar view of his islamist friends like bin ladin family et al.

But I dont talk to bushies, because they are told the lies so much they believe them, a formula perfected by Joseph Goebles, the hero of the neo-fascist pretending to be conservatives. Conservativesw would not be so absolutely fiscally irresponsible as the present administration.

In fact, I kinda liked Nixon. He created the Environmental Protection Agency, presided over real clean air acts, etc. He got us out of vietnam (eventually, recognizing futility when he saw it). He also supported the troops with his pocketbook, not just lying rhetoric. As a civilian worker for DOD during Nixons reign, we got raises unheard of before and since. He protecteed AMERICAN industry, and would never go for this anti-conservative nonsense globalism.

Just smile and snicker, and follow the armageddonist that really believes that God was killed by satan. Save the fetus and watch babies die of malnutrition. Believe the lies coming from the media and the pulpits of the armageddonist. And shower with love that coke head drunk you call Mr. Prisident.

And, BTW, Srila Prabhupada would cringe everytime he was referred to as a conservative. He embraced the liberalism of Lord Chaitanya, he is patita pavana, a friend of those who are disenfranchised, not a murderer of such.

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[Bhakta Don Muntean]

I Pray that Mr. Bush [and all souls] approach Lord Narasinghadeva - just as Pralahda Maharaja did [note: I've changed the Lord's color in this picture:

[Bhakta Don Muntean]

 

Haribol. I have no trouble with conservatism. I have trouble with liars, described by SB as the greatest bane of the earth planet. Conservatives reject vehemently this anti-christian (anti)theocracy that has taken place in the USA.

These are skull and bones types, satan worshippers,

whose goal is a BF SKINNER type of population culling, society restrructuring, etc. Barry Goldwater and Nelson Rockefeller (not to mention the founder of GOP, Abe Lincoln) stand so far apart from those calling themselves conservatives.

As far as my stance on abortion, I stand for the denial of the pharmaceuticals of their human carcass. But bush dont, he panders to the abortion industry while attacking mothers everywhere, denying their right to rid themselves of horrible mates and live alone with their children. Bush considers women chattel, a similar view of his islamist friends like bin ladin family et al.

But I dont talk to bushies, because they are told the lies so much they believe them, a formula perfected by Joseph Goebles, the hero of the neo-fascist pretending to be conservatives. Conservativesw would not be so absolutely fiscally irresponsible as the present administration.

In fact, I kinda liked Nixon. He created the Environmental Protection Agency, presided over real clean air acts, etc. He got us out of vietnam (eventually, recognizing futility when he saw it). He also supported the troops with his pocketbook, not just lying rhetoric. As a civilian worker for DOD during Nixons reign, we got raises unheard of before and since. He protecteed AMERICAN industry, and would never go for this anti-conservative nonsense globalism.

Just smile and snicker, and follow the armageddonist that really believes that God was killed by satan. Save the fetus and watch babies die of malnutrition. Believe the lies coming from the media and the pulpits of the armageddonist. And shower with love that coke head drunk you call Mr. Prisident.

And, BTW, Srila Prabhupada would cringe everytime he was referred to as a conservative. He embraced the liberalism of Lord Chaitanya, he is patita pavana, a friend of those who are disenfranchised, not a murderer of such.

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

Quote:

Srila Prabhupada would cringe everytime he was referred to as a conservative

Reply:

But you must follow the rules and regulation as it is enjoined in the shastra. Not that “Krsna will give me protection and I may do whatever I like. I can eat anything I like, I can do anything I like.” Just some rascal advises that “There is no such thing, restriction, in the self realization. You can eat anything, you can do anything.” People like that program. And as soon as there is restriction, they do not like. Because we put so many restriction, I am called in the western world, “Swamiji, you are very conservative.” So we have to become conservative, follow the rules. Not that we give liberty, that “Whatever you like, you do, and at the same time you make progress, spiritual life.” That is not possible. [bG 4.21, lecture, 1974]

Somebody says that “Swamiji is very conservative. He has got so many rules and regulations,” but I have not introduced one percent. One percent. Because it is not possible to introduce all those rules and regulations in your country. My policy is following the footstep of Rupa Goswami. He says that somehow or other, let them become first of all attached to Krsna. [bG 7.1, lecture, 1968]

That poet Allen Ginsberg, he said, “Swamiji, you are very conservative.” No, I am the most liberal. You do not know. If I become conservative, then none of you will come to me. [sB 1.2.10, lecture, 1973]

we are so much conservative. Because if we are actually after Krsna, then we must accept the real method [Room Conversation, April 02, 1972]

So we can see that Prabhupada was very conservative - but for practical purposes he couldn't relate in his level of 'purity' to our 'impurity'.

Conservatism - that is what we have - sure Vedic culture while very broad - is indeed very conservative - from our modern liberal view.

In fact - it is this modern 'liberal' view that is at the crux of the decay in our society and in every society - it isn't the fault of any one nation or person or group - it is a proclivity of kali yuga - the Age of Quarrel.

Liberal has come to mean 'without restrictions' - it seems that the morality issue for example is one of conservative or liberal.

One is either for restictions and responsibilites or they're for things like - abortion.

We do need to see our conservative leaders fine-tune their conservative understandings - of course one who is a 'true' conservative wouldn't ever abuse others.

Today's liberals have to see that they want the same things as conservatives prosperity freedom and - a security in these.

SO we again consider Srila Prabhupada and - his time and circumstances appraoch to things.

For example:

the Lord is situated in everyone’s heart as the witness, and as such He is the supreme director of sanction. The director is not the enjoyer of the fruits of action, for without the Lord’s sanction no one can enjoy. For example, in a prohibited area a habituated drunkard puts forward his application to the director of drinking, and the director, considering his case, sanctions only a certain amount of liquor for drinking. Similarly, the whole material world is full of many drunkards, in the sense that each and every one of the living entities has something in his mind to enjoy, and everyone desires the fulfillment of his desires very strongly. The almighty Lord, being very kind to the living entity, as the father is kind to the son, fulfills the living entity’s desire for his childish satisfaction. With such desires in mind, the living entity does not actually enjoy, but he serves the bodily whims unnecessarily, without profit. The drunkard does not derive any profit out of drinking, but because he has become a servant of the drinking habit and does not wish to get out of it, the merciful Lord gives him all facilities to fulfill such desires. [sB, 2.9.25, purport]

So in this way too the government is to regulate ALL such things:

Similarly, although the government may license liquor shops, this does not mean that liquor shops should be opened unrestrictedly and illicit liquor smuggled. Licensing is meant for restricting. [sB, 4.22.34, purport]

So in this way a good government may regulate such activities - and they should be both - liberal and yet conservative - enough so to see the need for further adjustments in this connection.

Where? In connection to another long-standing 'prohibition' - one that is costing billions and billions of dollars in North America - resources needed for other things.

So that is just some small thoughts on this - just see here the conservative Srila Prabhupada being very liberal:

Prabhupada: Yes. That if you want to eat meat and chicken, then you first of all sacrifice before that deity. So at least they’ll be restricted from eating meat purchased from slaughterhouse. But this rascal civilization, one side they’re advertising “Stop cruelty to animals,” another side they’re opening unrestricted slaughterhouse. Just see. One side they’re allowing marriage of woman every week, another side contraceptive. Just see their contradiction. [Morning Walk, 1974]

Of course I like this:

...how good dictatorship can be a bad thing?...my proposition is that they should not commit, either the king or the elected person should not commit mistake. But if you try to educate the mass of people to become educated to elect the right person, that is very difficult. But if a king, a person, is educated nicely, that is easier. That is my point of view [Room Conversation, July 23, 1973]

Quote:

These are skull and bones types, satan worshippers

Reply:

Bush isn't a satanist and that 'skull and bones' club at yale isn't a satanic group - they are a college fraternity with a big rumor for a reputation - their lodge isn't even used anymore.

So many rumors. I was once in the occult [the real occult not the hollywood occult] if truth be told many people used to call me 'devil don' in high school! Yes it's true! Due to rumors and the like - that was my nickname.

Of course I understand all these things in proper perspective now.

I also well understand that it is very foolish to use occultic measures to change things. [for the few who understand it's real power]

The new world order isn't a lucifer worshipping cult [lucifer is a fiction] - despite the many rumors about that. If anything - they worship Vishnu in one of His many Forms.

Quote:

As far as my stance on abortion, I stand for the denial of the pharmaceuticals of their human carcass.

Reply:

That isn't very clear now is it? What is your position?

I think you're commenting on aborted fetal stem-cell use - of course that is a sick practice and is one reason abortion must be made criminal - so that diseased people do not have to made into lab rats - with this contaminated process.

Here is Srila Prabhupada's position:

The so-called civilized man does not take account of this horrible condition of life, and sometimes, for the purpose of sense gratification, he tries to kill the child by methods of contraception or abortion. Unserious about the horrible condition in the womb, such persons continue in materialism, grossly misusing the chance of the human form of life. [sB, 3.31.17, purport]

At the present moment, however, in this age of Kali, abortion—killing of the child within the womb—has become very common, and sometimes a child is even killed after birth. If a woman performs such an abominable act, she gradually loses all her bodily luster [sB 6.16.14, purport]

Therefore it may be simply he’s wandering from one womb to another, one womb to another. Because he committed that sinful activity abortion. Now the man who causes his abortion, he also being punished, that “You’ll never see the light of this world. You’ll simply have to live one womb to another, one womb to another. Go on.” So nature’s punishment is like that. But these foolish people they do not know. [bG 2.12 lecture, 1973]

YS,

BDM

[rand0M aXiS]

 

President Bush in Delhi

Mar 4, NEW DELHI, INDIA — President Bush's Interfaith Meeting Replaces Visit to Akshardham Delhi Temple.

US President George W. Bush will hold a meeting with nine prominent persons representing five religions tomorrow including a Shia leader from Lucknow, a Tibetan monk and a Dalit scholar. Bush will meet these religious leaders on Thursday afternoon following the lunch hosted by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

This list includes Mohammed Ammar Rizvi, a politician and Shia leader from Lucknow, Swami Agnivesh, Doboom Tulku, a Buddhist monk and scholar from Tibet House, Tarlochan Singh and Syed Zafar Mahmood, an advisor to the government and member of the Sachar committee looking into the socioeconomic status of Muslims in India.

While Washington has been keen on the idea right from the start, sources said, there was some discomfort in New Delhi over such a meeting. Initially, the US was toying with the idea of holding this in the form of a ceremony at the Akshardham temple but decided against it after feelers that these meetings must not be made a public affair.

Sources said there was also a security rationale in not going ahead with an inter-religious public meeting given that some religious organizations are protesting the Bush visit. As a result, this interaction is being called a "private meeting" by Indian authorities while the US side is more candid with National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley indicating such a meeting ahead of the visit.

Bush is known to be sensitive to religion and takes these scruples seriously. He has often remarked at meetings that India despite its huge Muslim population, does not have an Al-Qaeda operative and said so in admiration while introducing the Prime Minister to wife Laura Bush last July.

Some of the other religious heads include L. M. Singhvi from the Jain community, James Massey, a prominent Dalit scholar, spokesperson for the Catholic Archdiocese in Delhi Dominique Emmanuel and Acharya Sri Vasa Goswami from the Sri Chaitanya Sansthan.

 

 

:D:D