Is Brahmakumaris.info an impartial website?

Mainly DEDICATED to Ex-BKs.
A neutral forum for congenial discussions and reservations related to the Godly Knowledge between ALL parties.
Post Reply

Do you consider http://brahmakumaris.info to be impartial?

Yes, it is impartial.
9
32%
It is impartial as it is possible to be.
11
39%
It could be more impartial.
4
14%
No, it is not impartial at all.
4
14%
 
Total votes: 28

User avatar
john
Reforming BK
Posts: 1606
Joined: 03 May 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Location: UK

Post by john » 06 Dec 2006

Oh yes ... that's not really a news story for you, is it? You're more interested in a fantastic story about a sham poll of your accolytes on this website saying they want the Murlis to be made public! Excellent!
Infinitely more interested. Murlis are here to serve the world. You seem to be more interested in panto. I cannot decide whether you are a stooge, a troll or plain stupid. I think you've had far too much attention and it's getting really hard to take you serious any more. Whether you can understand it or not posters on here do care about what is going on as regards the BKs.

User avatar
eromain
ex-BK
Posts: 85
Joined: 09 May 2006

Post by eromain » 06 Dec 2006

Here's a good news story: The annual panto at GCH is in 10th year I believe...it meant over 10,000 children have had the opportunity to see a Xmas panto FREE and be given an insight to true human values.
I would LOVE to read your attempts to turn this into an article. Go for it sweetchill!!! World Renewal will be heartbroken at not having the scoop!

User avatar
pbktrinityshiva
PBK
Posts: 133
Joined: 06 May 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: PBK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: Godly service
Location: Australia

Post by pbktrinityshiva » 06 Dec 2006

They'll get a Christmas panto ... but i wonder if anyone will tell them about God Father (Father Christmas) ... :( probably not ... they'll have to settle for a list of abstract values. I think its wrong to say no one gets heaps out of the BK events though. I see myself many, many get so much out of it, its life changing. I see many happy souls in BK. Its the more knowledge hungry souls which eventually get tired of the same kinds of seminars etc and must move on in search of the truth.

I think sometimes its easy to forget ShivBaba loves equally. Sweetchill, I hope you would stop being provocative and understand many people here have probably been a BK longer than yourself. Please make some positve post about good things BK is doing, I would truly like to know. I know they are doing so.

User avatar
mr green
ex-BK
Posts: 1100
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Post by mr green » 06 Dec 2006

I had a large part in one of the pantos. It was a lot of fun and the kids did love it, Netti does a great job, she is very talented.

I wouldn't knock it, but both sides of the coin should be available to the public so they can make an impartial choice :lol:.

User avatar
sweetchill
BK
Posts: 52
Joined: 22 Nov 2006

Post by sweetchill » 07 Dec 2006

Mr Green!

I knew I sensed a bit of a kindred spirit in you. :D Finally a bit of common sense - BOTH sides of the coin should be shown in the news article section! (What a radical idea). But don't hold your breath. Eugene is still getting excited about something that happened 20 years ago (now there's a hot current news story for you!).

I am sorry the panto is dismissed so readily by many of the posters on this forum - it touches people in a much more real and genuine way in the local community around GCH than many of the petty obsessions on this forum.

User avatar
eromain
ex-BK
Posts: 85
Joined: 09 May 2006

Post by eromain » 07 Dec 2006

Sweetchill you really should show some respect for the victim of those events. Trust me, it doesnt feel like 20 years for her.

User avatar
sweetchill
BK
Posts: 52
Joined: 22 Nov 2006

Post by sweetchill » 07 Dec 2006

My post was referring to YOUR obsession, Eugene. You're the one who pushes her case continually into the limelight so that you can shield behind it to make your jibes. That's quite sad.

User avatar
eromain
ex-BK
Posts: 85
Joined: 09 May 2006

Post by eromain » 07 Dec 2006

It was you who brought the issue of my child abuse work up in this thread, all I've done is responded to you and had the cheek to ask you to explain yourself when you make your attacks. If that is me obsessing fine, I have been deluding myself into thinking it was me being prepared to account for my actions.

And then today it was you who used the events of twenty years ago to make a point, not me. And what was your big point? Just a gratuitous insult. Well, you are welcome to insult me. Frankly, I would rather such as you insulted me than praised me. But to use those events as if they are ancient history and irrelevent and trivial is an insult to her. I am sorry if that seems like I am grandstanding but there has been a long history of BKs trivialising and explaining away what happened to her. Well, you cant. The effects of such actions upon a child are usually permanent and I am sorry but for you to refer to it in such a way I personally find offensive.

And how am I shielding behind it when everyobody knows my name and nobody yours? It was you who just used her to make a jibe at me not the other way round. Anything I wrote about her in my report was with her blessing and she showed more courage than I ever have in allowing me to do such. So, to be blunt, when it comes to her please find another way to insult me.

User avatar
fluffy bunny
ex-BKWSU
Posts: 5365
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: ex-BK. Interested in historical revisionism, failed predictions and abuse within the BK movement.

Post by fluffy bunny » 07 Dec 2006

sweetchill wrote:My post was referring to YOUR obsession, Eugene. You're the one who pushes her case continually into the limelight so that you can shield behind it to make your jibes. That's quite sad.

Sweetchill, please makes amends.

We read in the papers quite regularly of child sex abusers being brought to justice 20 or even 30s years later, teachers, priests etc. Given that in the case of the BKWSU child sex abuses it happened at two different main centers in India by two different BK pedophiles preying on vulnerable foreign/Western children, it suggests to me some communication or a "ring" within the organization.
  • Why then did the Brahma Kumari Seniors not investigate and report said abuses rather than cover it up? I fully expect you to avoid answering yet again.
As I understand, they have instead re-written them as mere "allegations" rather than as "incidents" and, now, passed the blame onto a Shudra taxi driver rather than acknowledged them as BK Brahmins. One of which at least remained with access to children for years after.

I would like to explain why after 20 years this still has relevance in the light of other revelations since, and why it is good that it is publicly documented and discussed, but I would like you to respond to this first.

Of course, I understand that child prostitution and corruption is much more rife in India, the female's position and the concept of shame within a patriarchal society and the misapplication of the theory of karma suppress such issues coming to the public's attention. But aren't the Brahma Kumaris meant to be changing all that, and if so, why not in their own backgarden first?

User avatar
mr green
ex-BK
Posts: 1100
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK

Post by mr green » 07 Dec 2006

Yhat was a cheap jibe sweetchill, try and be a bit more sensitive.

Ex-BKs you may feel are non-BKs but they are still human beings ...

and I never said that the panto is not exploited by the BKs as a cynical PR excercise.

User avatar
john
Reforming BK
Posts: 1606
Joined: 03 May 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Location: UK

Post by john » 07 Dec 2006

I am sorry the panto is dismissed so readily by many of the posters on this forum - it touches people in a much more real and genuine way in the local community around GCH than many of the petty obsessions on this forum.
I cannot really take it in what you are saying here, everyone and his brother does a 'panto'! I don't want to take away from 'panto' and keeping kids amused for an hour or so, but shouldn't BKs be championing something a bit more, errrr ... you know ... yogaish

Am I to take it you are personaly involved with the 'panto'? Why not do a little ad so we can all come along?

User avatar
sweetchill
BK
Posts: 52
Joined: 22 Nov 2006

Post by sweetchill » 07 Dec 2006

Fair enough,

My apologies Eugene ... I went too far.

User avatar
fluffy bunny
ex-BKWSU
Posts: 5365
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Please give a short description of your interest in joining this forum.: ex-BK. Interested in historical revisionism, failed predictions and abuse within the BK movement.

Post by fluffy bunny » 08 Dec 2006

sweetchill wrote:My apologies Eugene ... I went too far.
But not far enough to answer my question.

worldpeace
ex-BK
Posts: 53
Joined: 15 Aug 2006
Affinity to the BKWSU: ex-BK
Location: Bangalore

Post by worldpeace » 08 Dec 2006

Sweetchill,

From all my observations I can definitely say that you don't show the basic courtesy of answering members on this forum. I thoroughly understand your respect and regard for BKWSU. I too had and still have. But remember, if you are hurting even a Shudra - that's against Shrimat. And you know, Baba has asked BKs to be more courteous with XBKs.

I hope you study Murlis. If you claim yourself to be a BK (not just for the namesake), then you either owe an answer or just retire from this thread announcing that this is a wrong place for you to be. 7 pages! and nothing meaningful has been achieved. There is so much knowledge to be discussed.

Dear Moderator,

If we are not going to get meaningful answers, what is the purpose is letting this thread grow and waste time and space?

Thanks and Regards.

User avatar
sweetchill
BK
Posts: 52
Joined: 22 Nov 2006

Post by sweetchill » 08 Dec 2006

Dear Worldpeace,

I've apologised - I am sorry if you don't think I mean it. I am happy to apologise again - if it makes any difference to you.

If you look at the topic of the thread - you'll notice it was to raise the issue of the alleged impartiality of this website. I think it's been a robust discussion, actually (and I've received some "enlightening" answers which have opened my eyes further to some of the other posters on here).

I have answered many questions throughout this thread (even though many have nothing to do with the topic). If people have other specific things they want to challenge me on, then they should start a new thread.

As I have repeated on a number of occasions - I am not an official BK voice on this forum. So I feel no compulsion to answer all questions (many of which are loaded with an agenda) - I am not on trial here (although that would be quite fun, I admit). Yes, I am happy to make clear that I don't have answers for every question put to me - but let me make some points to further clarify a few things:

* My belief is that this website is totally biased with a clear agenda against the BKs. No-one else on this forum thinks that - which for me tells its own story.
* No, I don't think Murlis should be made public
* No, I don't accept that there is some great conspiracy to hide/change the Word of God through revised Murlis (I think it is right and proper that they should be revised).
* I don't know what was investigated with regards to the child abuse claims - but then, no one else on this forum does either. We are all free to make our own judgements about it.

You may think this thread is pointless - but then you can choose not to read it. I think it's probably one of the most revealing threads on this forum (just look at the number of views compared to other threads).

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests