Monday, November 19, 2007

Sri Sri Loves Up A Gun-Running "Gandhi"

File under: Gurubusting and The Siddhi of PR

Sri Sri Ravi Shankar recently made a public relations appearance at the Yerawada jail in India, where Bollywood actor Sanjay Dutt is serving a six-year sentence for colluding with terrorist mobsters by storing various heavy weapons for them. Here is Sri Sri's "sage" advice to the incarcerated thespian:
Like Mahatma Gandhi served a sentence in Yerawada Jail, he (Sanjay) too is here for a while. I told him to believe as if he was paying a penance, soon all would be right.
As usual, Sri Sri makes a deft comparison that is anything but. Gandhi was in Yerawada as a result of his leadership role in the non-violent resistance to the British. Sanjay Dutt is there because he was gun-running for murderous terrorist thugs. But that's all the same to Sri Sri, as long as he squeezes out a bit more name and fame for himself.

Labels: ,

8 Comments:

At 11/20/2007 1:24 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

that was so terriably irresponsible of sri sri...i was shocked when i saw this on television.to compare gandhi with sanjay dutt reeks of ignorance and a zero intellect and dumbness....this man is going to lead his followers to moksha!!why,he's so deluded himself!!

 
At 11/20/2007 1:30 AM, Anonymous tatsat said...

Sorry, but you're completely wrong Jody - Sanjay's 'murderous terrorists' were Muslims, not Hindutva.

Read your links:

"Sanjay Dutt was sentenced to a jail term of 6 years for illegal possession of firearms acquired from terrorist acquaintances, who were responsible for the 1993 Bombay bomb blasts."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_Bombay_bombings

"The attacks are believed to have been coordinated by Dawood Ibrahim...

It is believed that the attacks were carried out in retaliation for the destruction of the historic Babri Mosque on December 6, 1992..."

Ibrahim is a Bombay gangster who happens to be Muslim. As gangster he had many Hindu associates, including Sanjay through funding of Bollywood movies. Absolutely none of the loyal Hindu gangsters under him would have been Hindutvists. By following a Muslim they were either supporting secularism or 'Judas-like' cynicism.

A rival Bombay gang, Bal Thackeray's 'Shiva Sen' (Army of Shiva), are Hindutvists though, and no one is saying Sanjay had anything to do with any of them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bal_Thackeray

By supporting Ibrahim, Sanjay was just showing gang loyalty, pro-Muslim in fact.

Yes, its complicated I suppose, but everyone knows the 1993 Bombay Blasts were a Muslim terror act, probably supported by Pakistan's ISI, because Ibrahim was given shelter in Pakistan it is said.

 
At 11/20/2007 9:30 AM, Blogger jody said...

you're completely wrong Jody

Thanks for the correction. Fortunately, it only required the omission of one word to fix.

 
At 11/28/2007 10:20 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

atlast jody, you have accepted openly that you are completely wrong....the entire views of yours are wrong..always..best of luck...

 
At 11/28/2007 10:25 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

you're completely wrong Jody

Jody

Thanks for the correction. Fortunately, it only required the omission of one word to fix.

11/20/2007 9:30 AM


Anonymous said...
atlast jody, you have accepted openly that you are completely wrong....the entire views of yours are wrong..always..best of luck...


Dear Jody,

Don't you love the drama some people drag around with them. So now "one word" equates for this person as, "the entire views of yours are wrong...always", and for good measure as they were hitting themself in the ass on their way out the door of their post... "best of luck"... not realizing they needed that for themself


Too funny!

 
At 11/28/2007 10:33 PM, Blogger jody said...

Don't you love the drama some people drag around with them.

Folks identify with gurudom in a way that fetters them to their deluded self-definitions, i.e: I am the blessed devotee of the divine guru who makes me feel special. Their emotional investment in these fetters cause them to vigorously, although usually rather weakly, defend their own self-indentification, to the detriment of their own spiritual understanding.

As my guru would say: "What can be done?!"

Not much, except to keep soldiering on in the face of this sort of limp opposition.

 
At 11/29/2007 8:33 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Folks identify with gurudom in a way that fetters them to their deluded self-definitions, i.e: I am the blessed devotee of the divine guru who makes me feel special. Their emotional investment in these fetters cause them to vigorously, although usually rather weakly, defend their own self-indentification, to the detriment of their own spiritual understanding.

As my guru would say: "What can be done?!"

Not much, except to keep soldiering on in the face of this sort of limp opposition.

11/28/2007 10:33 PM



And there you have it, dear Jody.

Always with thanks for the spirit of being kept on the up and up, in spite of all the projection that gets directed this way.

It can only be imagined those who this site has helped 'set free'...

 
At 11/29/2007 8:42 PM, Blogger jody said...

It can only be imagined those who this site has helped 'set free'...

I imagine very few, like none. But it has brought me into contact with some wonderful individuals.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home