'Evil' Hindu Practices

[Husky]

(I will hopefully get to the point by and by. Bear with.)





Remember the Hindu family where the dad got a job as geologist in Norway, then the Norwegian authorities stole their kids for "evil Hindoo practices" such as:

1. the parents [color="#0000FF"]co-sleeping[/color] with their little bubs (something all Hindu parents/grandparents/aunts/uncles do, not to mention many a mammal. Should all such mammals' young be sent off to foster homes too? No? Actually, whenever I visit home in India, my sleeping arrangements usually comprise of the most of/the entire family all napping in the same room: in a line of beds spread on the ground);



2. the parents fed babies by hand (same as many a Hindoo parents and elders still do for little ones. Actually, I continue to eat with my hand - definitely when I'm back Home. Should I be locked up? Indeed, I've seen how birds feed their bairn with their beaks - which surely must be even more "morally" wrong - methinks we should put their babies in cages to protect them from their own parents????)



3. the mother breastfed in a manner the Norwegians decided was "wrong". Not sure what she was supposed to have done wrong here.





Before I get to my point on "co-sleeping", need a recap - from :

hunwww.is/2011/12/25/kidnapping-of-children-a-big-industry-in-norway/

Yes, the page at the link is indeed called "Kidnapping of children, is a big industry in Norway". And as the domain ends on .is, it's an Icelandic site.

They seem to know their neighbours well.



Anyway, as the page explains:



hunwww.is/2011/12/25/kidnapping-of-children-a-big-industry-in-norway/

Kidnapping of children, a big industry in Norway

[color="#0000FF"]Kidnapping of children, is a big industry in Norway. A grotesque instrument for criminals in and around the public administration.[/color]



Norwegian so-called “child protection service” is a grotesque criminal activity, as a tool for criminals in and around the public administration. There are very many children, parents and families who have had their lives destroyed by this grotesque business that threatens everybodys dearest and nearest values. While there are many who also benefits from and who earns on the kidnapping, catch hold, harassment, false documentation, torture, exploitation and out-plundering of children, parents and families. A very very big and central problem in Norway. In Sweden, Denmark, England and some other countries too.



Read more about this, for example, on the following links:

– africanpress.me/2007/02/20/[color="#0000FF"]barnevernet-child-protection-services-in-norway-destroy-families-says-professor-skaanland/[/color]

– www.fampo.no/cps.html



– hunwww.is/2012/02/11/[color="#0000FF"]norway-offers-residence-permits-in-exchange-for-children/[/color]

– hunwww.is/2012/02/11/more-from-russia-about-the-norwegian-terror-regime/



– forum.r-b-v.net/viewtopic.php?p=31595#p31595



–

This is a major known issue: organised and deliberate theft of children. One that others - e.g. the IJslanders above - apparently not only know about but have been monitoring.

Child trafficking in broad daylight: completely "legit".





Now for the relevant recap comment at last, as support for what the "crimes" of the parents were that the Norwegian authorities listed as reasons for taking their cubs away:

It is customary in these cases to accuse the parents of emotional abuse of their

children. This is characterised by a lack of consideration for the children, lack of

love and affection. However, what are the proofs for this accusation? [color="#0000FF"]The Norwegian

Children Welfare Services have only come up with hand-feeding, co-sleeping and

“wrong” breast-feeding.[/color] Contrary to what the Norwegian ambassador is implying,

there are no deep, dark secrets in this case. The parents have not been accused of

physically molesting their children nor have they been accused of sexual abusing

the children. So what are the reasons the CWS have confiscated the children?

Obviously, this is a difficult question for the CWS to answer because there is none.



from: Cecilie Bedsvaag – Posted on: Mar 1, 2012 at 16:54 IST

("Lack of love and affection", indeed. Quite the opposite clearly as co-sleeping and hand-feeding etc are typical examples of human mammals that care about their young. Heathens - like other mammals - intrinsically know the importance of the physical proximity of the parents in rearing the young. Many a baby monkey still clings to its parents as if for dear life and the parent monkeys by nature allow this since that increased bonding between babe and parent monkeys and keeps it safe/makes it feel safe.)



It seems the mum's villainy in breast feeding was that she fed the cub when it asked for the milk, rather than according to some timetable determined by the Norwegian authorities as optimum feeding times for a baby:

“As a reader, I am unable to evaluate if there was any risk at all to the children’s development, but surely I can see the risks created by the actions of the authorities. Isn’t that a bigger crime committed by the state, of denying a baby her breastfeed, and denying the mother the right to breastfeed her child ? Aren’t there Human Rights organisations in Norway? [color="#0000FF"]“On demand” feeding has been blamed. “On demand” breastfeeding will never become “overfeeding”. It is those strictly time-based feeding regimens that are suspect and constitute pseudo-science. The human body has its own intelligence and the baby will cry for food when he/she is hungry. All that is natural.[/color] Real science understands it perfectly too ! The family should take these authorities to court.



from: Kumar – Posted on: Jan 26, 2012 at 08:48 IST”

Anyway, having invented absurd reasons to steal the children, the Norwegians (BTW, any christos involved again, by any chance? One can usually smell them about when stolen kids are involved) -

again: so then the Norwegian authorities stole the parents' little babies and put them in separate alien Norwegian "foster" care until the kids would turn 18. Probably to ensure that the Bhattacharyas' babies wouldn't turn into adult heathens: thereby decreasing the number of the world heathen population again. Possibly to be raised as christoterrorists too (or fodder for christopaedophilia for all I know) thus increasing the number of christoterrorists in the world by 2 again. (Yes, they *are* doing nazi math, it's what christoislamics do.)

Recap from The Chindu, for support:

In a memorandum submitted to the President, the grandparents have said that Abhigyan had already lost his mother tongue. Both the children are traumatized as Barvevarne has arranged to keep them with foster families till 18 years. They have already broken the relation between the natural parents and the children, now they are going to snap the relation between the kids, they said.

Getting to the point at last: remember how "co-sleeping" is listed as a crime? A team of NRIs was trying to raise visibility on the issue to help these poor Hindu parents get reunited with their pups. For some reason, the NRI defence team tried to argue that "co-sleeping" is accepted in (presumably other) western countries.

But let's get this straight: co-sleeping is considered *controversial* in western countries, as was obvious again from a recent Time issue where "co-sleeping" was listed as one of the "controversial" techniques for better parenting as "devised"/advised by some all-knowing western paediatrician.

Time cover shows mum breastfeeding son, 3

Fri May 11 2012



[...]

The Time article explores the rise of attachment parenting, a set of [color="#FF0000"]controversial[/color] [color="#0000FF"]techniques made popular by US pediatrician[/color] Dr William Sears [color="#0000FF"]which includes[/color] baby-wearing, extended breastfeeding and [color="#0000FF"]co-sleeping[/color].

Perhaps the American paediatrician association will soon patent this co-sleeping "technique" under this "attachment parenting" method?



But then, until christo nations start doing something as a fad, it is all "Evil heathen practice" onlee. And once the christonations adopt it, it becomes the new rage and is explained as "beneficial" to baby and helping it to bond well, learn well, socialise well and become well-balanced in life etc etc (summarised in that positive-sounding "attachment parenting" catch-phrase above).



Indeed, it's quite possible that tomorrow parents all over Norway will be doing the same, having learnt it in a manual. Anyone betting Norwegian kids won't be ripped from their parents then and thrown into Norwegian foster care?





Meanwhile, many a heathen culture - being basically mammals when you get down to it (and basic parenting is quite instinctive and innate in mammals) - has since aeons known all about how co-sleeping helps to comfort the cub, as well as other methods of bonding with the baby like kissing it*, singing gently to children and hand-feeding them, etc. (All such "attachment parenting" will soon become popular in the west. But raising their young well is what heathen societies and other mammals do. Even the hand-feeding that Hindoo elders regularly do with Hindoo youngsters may one day become popular in the west, where it will be advertised as some "genius innovation for social bonding in human familial settings" no doubt.)



* As we know from docos, a mum kissing its baby gets a specimen of the bacteria and allergens etc that are currently present on the babies' skin - which possibly oozed out from the skin. This specimen is imbibed by the mother during the kissing process, whose body then manufactures anti-bodies and other stuff helpful in babies' immunity. These then end up in the mother's milk which the cub drinks to raise its immunity against such things.

Human mothers are quite oblivious to how their affectionate kissing of their whelps - or licking in the case of other mammals - is thus helping to biologically strengthen their babies against disease, but they do it all Correctly instinctively anyway.





As regards the article in the Time magazine: the first noticeable controversy was about Time's cheap cover photo of an American mum breastfeeding her 3-year old (an age frowned upon as past breastfeeding in western society. Don't know much about non-western societies as regards the age for weaning. At the very least there's more chance of females becoming pregnant again *after* they have weaned their first litter. Among Indians what I've noticed is that this tends to often be after the baby's turned 2 or 2 something, but not quite sure. Recent western studies have concluded that not only are babies who are fed on their own species' mother's milk more intelligent than babies on other milk or formula, but that a minimum of two years of mother's milk is also an important contributor to the human baby's intelligence. While I don't know the upper limit, I hazard to guess that young can't subsist on mere milk forever...)



No one seemed to notice how - predictably - the same "American mum" in the Time ragazine cover has also abducted I mean adopted an African baby. "Saving the poor abandoned babies of the world" - you know, the way the Norwegian authorities "saved" the Hindu babies from their heathen parents - is something western women** like to see themselves doing. Playing saviour/hero by encouraging abductions of other nations' and other communities' children to make themselves feel superior. Sick.



** Western men like to see themselves "saving" - aka marrying etc - "ethnic" women (what I tend to think of as the "Phileas Fog" syndrome, unless someone has already coined this phrase?), whereas western women like to see themselves "saving" ethnic children. I predict that western children will try to save ethnic hamsters/pets next, No?

The last would be in line with that famous statement by a western feminist (would be Gloria Steinem I suppose, since it's the only feminist whose name I know): "Men love women. Women love children. Children love hamsters. There is no reciprocity."



Gawd forbid that women could love men or that men could love children or that children could love their parents back or that all adults could care about animals (hey, who wouldn't want to walk around with some cuddly moonjur or mooshika in their shirt pocket - admit it, it's so cute. I mean, you can pet its head with your thumb while you wrap your other fingers around it <img src='http://www.india-forum.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> The very idea is cute). Oh and gawd forbid that hamsters/etc maybe just want to be left alone and would perhaps have liked to have been left there in the wild, to raise their own families... I recall a Kungfu Hamster video that went viral on Utoob. (Well it's possible that hamsters and the like will be willing to forego all the free food and secure lifestyle that a human can give them for a chance to pursue their own biological purpose to procreate - by natural selection, rather than have humans planning to "breed" them with pre-selected mates. Such denial of self-determination for other animal species is actually not fair, especially as it flies in the face of nature...)



Hmmm, I suppose one can view Steinem's statement from a biological perspective to *force* it to make sense - though I don't know that Steinem meant it that way:

that males have a much stronger drive to mate (i.e. with females) in order to spread their genes about, while female mammals are more into producing progeny and thus spend their efforts in raising the offspring (mammals as we know take longer to raise than some other animal species). Both make evolutionary sense in that genetic data is programmed to try to propagate itself and survive, and gets its carriers to do the hard work for this. Meanwhile babies... must get tired of all the never-ending coddling and be looking to find some other helpless creature - e.g. hamsters - to coddle in return/revenge??? The last is clearly a supposition...

But if Steinem did mean it in a biological sense, why should she speak of "men" and "women" etc - i.e. about humans - and not more generally about animals?



Uh-oh I've digressed more than usual. The point(s) of this post ended a long time ago. Never mind. I can't play at being serious forever. (Well, at least I never pretend to be deep and intellectual and profound and thereby make an even greater fool of myself. My acting talents don't stretch that far.)