Madhusudani Radha devi dasi (Maria Ekstrand) (Madhu)


abused Iskcon woman (Maria Ekstrand) brainwashed with bogus philosophy

Madhusudani Radha (Maria Ekstrand), Editor and owner of Chakra.org , blasphemies Lord Rama (Word)

NOTE: by carefully reading this article anyone can understand why so called devotees criticise Srila Prabhupada - because they are brainwashed with bogus philosophy indoctrinated by false IskCon Gurus.


From PADA, December 08th 2002


There have been some considerable complaints, all along but more so recently, about Madhusudani Radha dd (the legal owner of the former "CHAKRA" website
) especially from corporate ISKCON GBC's leaders, and complaints by their hanger-on cronies, such as Trivrikrama swami and his GHQ friends (see their letter below).

They are complaining about her real or apparent failings in Krishna consciousness. Yet the question remains: why then, did the same GBC party, make Madhusudani Radha dd the "legal owner" of their CHAKRA website? The GBC already knew that she has some apparently glaring doubts about Srila Prabhupada and Krishna consciousness?

So why was she made "the commander in chief/ owner/ military general" of "Krishna's Army Of Champions" and the GBC's spokesperson for theirs and ISKCON's web site: CHAKRA? Why was a woman with "serious doubts" about Krishna consciousness made their de facto spokesperson, by corporate ISKCON and its leaders? You also have to also ask, why would so many of these "big brave (GBC) men," some of them with a reputation for "sneering at women" (chauvinism) place "a woman" on their captain's chair and owner's helm of ISKCON's flagship operation when their web site was launched? Why?

And hence, the emerging question more and more folks ask is: was this all a "legal ploy" by some of the GBC's to deflect (potential) legal action against ISKCON and/or CHAKRA -- to this woman, namely Madhusudani Radha dd? By making her "the legal owner," she is then "legally liable" for the content of the web site? She would be the first person "legally named" in any lawsuit against CHAKRA? Right? Was this not just the same as the plot that other GBC "gurus" made against other various victimized, what professioanl con men call, "dupes," "stooges," or "fall guys"? This has occured before with the GBC's "gurus," making the "dupes" the "legal owners" of say a shell corporation that later defaults on taxes, making the poor "dupes" legally liable, while "the guru" runs off with all the misappropriated tax money and used it probably, for himself? Was this plan to make Madhusudani "the legal owner of CHAKRA" the same type of legal shell game scheme? Perhaps?

The answer to this, at least according to one of pada's little birdie spy types is: that there is a good LEGAL reason for making her the "legal" owner. According to our source, the GBC (OK the big brave "Krishna's Army Of Warriors": CHAKRA's kshatriya "men") was at the time of forming the web site, panicking at the idea they could be LEGALLY sued individually. This takes us to the "Windle Turley lawsuit" and the child molesting case, and the threat of legal action against the GBC's individual members. According to our source, the GBC were, at that time anyway, unraveling in fear, and hence they were reluctant and unwilling to have their "legal names" placed on a LEGAL document, such as the ownership of their CHAKRA web site. Of course other "brave warriors" like Sanat and Mukunda are expert at sending out their photos of exploding nukes, and meanwhile compromising with a law firm that helps "the free speech" of NAMBLA, the man-boy lovers club, but they cannot ratchet down the GBC the way Windle Turley has done? By the way Mukunda dasa has changed his e-mail address, so he can avoid replying, and he says you have to agree fully with your lawyers, so he has nothing further to add to his support of his team's homosexual pedophile lovers law firm?

Anyway, getting back to CHAKRA, so the story goes, that the GBC was alarmed that their CHAKRA web site might have to post, or it might attract, false statements (OK lies, slander, wrongful information, intentional distortions, deflections on molestation information, or denial of specific cases, or in sum: something illegal etc.) and someone might legally sue the web site, i.e. its owners, i.e. Madhusudani Radha dd. And there was a powerful law firm in the wings who could do exactly that. So apparently, quite handily, the brave CHAKRA warrior men volunteered her, or convinced her to volunteer, or they offered her "the service" -- again to a woman -- to give her the post of CHAKRA's legal "owner," so hers would be "the first head to roll" in a legal attack? Yes, once again it seems that "the brave GBC warrior men" were apparently -- hiding underneath the skirts of -- a woman? Again. "In case there is a fight, she will fight for us, got that guys"? That seems to be what is happening here, at least that is the impression some gather?

So the GBC's thinking apparently was, if there is a "legal problem" with CHAKRA, and Madhusudani Radha is the "legal owner," she will be the first person to be chopped into pulverized stew in the battle, since she will be named and sued first, and not the brave GBC army men? She will be the first pawn to be "sacrificed" in Krishna's brave army of warriors? Of brave men? So in short, it seems that the real reason she was made the "legal owner" of the GBC's web site was: that in the event of any "legal" complications from any problematic postings made on that web site, or complications from say, any GBC victim's testimony going astray or being changed on that site, and being legally contested, or who knows what, and so on and so forth, all the "legal flak" will fall into the lap of the brave "men" in Krishna's army of warriors? Oooops, I mean, while they are hiding behind the apron strings of the woman they are pushing ahead of them, namely Madhusudani Radha dd, as their "fall guy," or gal? Again, that seems to be what is happening here, at least that is the impression some gather?

Apparently, some of the GBC said, "oh brave heart warriors of Krishna's army, there may be a legal minefield here, so, can you ladies walk ahead of us men warriors first? You are a woman and so you have to go first. Ladies before gents ya know! We insist! This is a war! We are Krishna's army of brave warrior men! Do you mind if we hold the strings of your skirt while we send a woman to boldly goes where no man dares to tread? Oh deary me! Mommy help us! We are the brave warriors and we have seen a huge attack coming at us, yes, we are under major assault, it is some weedly old bookkeeper named pada, so run and grab your teddy bears and plastic ray gun zappers, get under the bed, and scream for a counter attack! Brave men ho! I mean Madhusudani Radha dd: forward march! Hep two three four, hep two three four, ladies before gents, hey, hey, hey. Its ok, fellow brave soldiers in CHAKRA's army, mother Madhusudani is going to shake her feather duster into the dark closet over there and see if there are any boogey men, have no fear, she is our miner's parakeet." Is this what occured here?

Well, what can we say here at PADA? The whole problem with our secret spy's analysis is: it makes too much sense don't it? If so, at least the good news is that they are making a woman into their lead general and chief warrior, this is an improvement over their making children their cannon fodder. Well, if Madhusudani is your minefield picker, miner's parakeet, sorry guys, even she is not going to work in that capacity forever. You'll have to find another dupe, or CHAKRA army general supe, hey, hey, hey. Why didn't Trivrikrama make himself the legal founder father of the GBC's web site if they are so wunnaful?

The rest of the GHQ letter rambles quite a bit so we cannot print it all in this issue, but just for example, they go back to their old arguments that females do not need any modern technical "education." The GBC never preaches this in their own temples, mind you, which are chock full of hindu ladies who are all getting their college degrees. Apparently, the Western class of females just need to know some basic farming skills, since they are going to live like some rural Amish housewives on a farm? And thus they only thing Western women need to know is: how to milk a cow? Fine except, where is your Amish farm for your Amish housewives?

You GBC have no farms for these women, nor constructive employment, nor facility, what to speak of medical arrangements for the sick, for the thousands of ISKCON women you have got -- already? Nor do you have thousands of good prospective husbands ready and willing to take care of these alleged rural house wife women? You have a nice rural mail away bride program here, except: no facility, no farm, no husband, nowhere for the bride to go? And you are in big illusion if you think you have something for devotee women, since Trivrikrama has to sell junky trinkets, to women, in a city, himself? And besides, you already kicked out the men, the women, the children, and they are not coming back soon, especially when they see the same faces of the same people who drove or kicked them out, at the GBC meetings, over and over and over?

Worse, the "protected women" of ISKCON you have already are complaining of apparently being oppressed, even when their husbands take sannyasa or move to another temple to "serve" ISKCON, these women are often not being protected, what happens to these women? You are thus often not taking care of the various "devotee women" you have already got, especially those whose husbands leave. And if they get sick, even if they are dying of cancer, there is no protection -- again, already? More simply and more blunty: the Amish take care of their society's farm women "cradle to grave," and you GBC usually don't. Thus, if any rank and file Amish woman needs housing for some reason, she gets housing. If her children have basic needs problems, that woman is not told to go get foodstamps, rather she gets help. If her husband dies or leaves, again she gets help. If the Amish woman gets sick, she gets help, and so on ad infinitum. And we all know you GBC have no such overall infrastructure to protect your ISKCON women? Nor could you build one, since you already kicked most of us men out, and we were the people you needed: to make that protective infrastructure work?

Now you say, our ISKCON women also do not need to be educated, then what? Then they cannot even take care of themselves in the society they live in? There is no "spiritual society" that is taking care of them now, you certainly are not, but at least if they are educated they can fend for themselves? Yet you say, they cannot have any support, they cannot even learn how to fend for themselves? But your gurus go to very EXPENSIVE colleges, and they are spending big money on getting their own big Harvard college degrees, but your women need to only know -- how to milk a cow? Why do your gurus need to know the scientific explanation theory for making latex plastic anyway? Srila Prabhupada wanted his sannyasis to preach at the colleges, not to go to learn from the big professors there? So the women, those whom you drove or kicked out anyway, they will need to get a job, yet you say they cannot get any education to get a job? But "the sannyasis," those who are supposed to never "need to get a job" and who were told by Srila Prabhupada not to get a job but to preach at the colleges, they are getting trained -- how to get a job by getting their college degrees? One nice and humble devotee woman had to become a strip-club worker in a topless and bottomless stripping night club, why, because she had no education for a better job? She had to feed her child. You are not going to feed her child? Is this how you want our devotee ladies to end up?

So is this "sexist"? It seems to be, since your party says that "if you are a man" then you can keep on going to expensive colleges for life, and getting a stack of college degrees upon degrees, even after you are fifty years old. And your "men" also get free college housing, free big expensive car to drive to college, free college expense account, free big feasts before going to class, free big medical expenses paid, free massage therapists from the stress of going to college, free spa and bubble bath to relax after college class, free computers for college, free wild looking Hawaiin printed shirts to wear to college, free vacations in the bahamas for your men's "beauty tans" during college semeter breaks, all this for life. Tamal was going back to England to go back to college, and so on. And don't forget some of your sannyasis get NICE xxx porno movies (?) it seems, to look at "college cuties get lessons from the teacher"?

But! If you are a poor woman, you can only learn: how to milk a cow? And when your devotee woman gets sick, she has to live on the street from a shopping cart and collect welfare payments and die in a trash dumpster, while your "man," GBC or guru, apparently goes to Los Angeles' Cedars Sinai hospital and he gets the best doctors on the planet? I dunno, this all sounds pretty damn sexist to me? Of course, if your party needs a fall guy for legal reasons, better get a woman to do the job? So this does appear as "sexist" to many folks and I'd have to side with the femi-nazis here and say that in this respect, they are right. So you are converting people en masse to become feminists because you are distorting things so you can exploit the female sector, they are often the ones collecting money to pay for your college and extravaganza lifestyle in many cases? But when these women require money for their needs, old mother hubbard GBC says, the vault is empty?

You have also NOT taken care of the ex-boys and girls who were bungled in your bogus system of education you already made, again already. And you are being sued for not giving proper care to your own society's children, the ones you already have, no proper care, again already? One gurukuli told me that if the GBC simply agreed to pay for their college education of any ex-gurukuli who needed it, the whole Windle Truley suit could have probably been avoided. But your vault is always empty, except when your guru needs a new Cadillac? And your women will have to live at the austere farm, wearing a used army jacket in the snow with rubber boots, milking the cow at four in the morning, while Satsvarupa manages Gita Nagarai from the well heated Howard Johnson's motel, where he goes out and buys his milk at the store, and your gurus are desssing in silk clothing while your alleged farm woman has to wear a used army coat? Is this sexist? You tell me?

Worse, you have no idea of practical reality of what it takes to maintain women or children? Let us follow your example, if you take a nice simple "Amish housewife" away from milking her cow at the farm job, and dump her into downtown San Franscisco, on the sidewalk beside the Geyhound bus station, within 12 hours, or less, she will be robbed, if not roughed up, if not severely assaulted, if not raped, if not killed? The people living normally in the big city environment, there are some very rough characters there, indeed. So the poor simple Amish lady would probably not be able to comprehend how to deal with that environment? Our modern devotee women though, they can survive in these cities, because they are aware of the environment there, in sum they are educated. And thus they know how things work in these environments. Your "cow milking skills" are useless in this environment. To be fair, even an Amish "man" would not do too well in this environment...

So, our devotee women are NOT living in a protected Amish type farm environment, or a rural varnasrama environment, where they are sitting in a rocking chair watching the veggies grow in their garden, sewing clothes from some happy Vaikuntha sheep? Nor would "a nice Amish housewife" survive in the same places where our devotee ladies live NOW? You need to be educated to live in the environment you have to deal with NOW? And that is why the US law is that you have to be educated NOW, that is the law NOW, because if you are not, you will be easy cannon fodder for rogues and exploiters in ANY city. And if you are a woman, you may well end up as a night club stripper, or worse a beaten up prostitute for a violent pimp, or whatever, but you will not be able to survive there unless you know how to deal with the ropes of the city, and in sum, you are educated. Is this what you want for women? That is what it seems? Is this policy "anti-women," you tell us?

No, our devotee girls and women are not living on an ISKCON or Amish farm period? They are living mostly, in the city? They need to be educated for how to survive in that city. And if all they know is "how to milk a cow and sew wool mittens," they will not be able to survive in that city? Maybe you do not want them to survive? Maybe you are the women haters people think you are? And indeed the uneducated women will be severely exploited, and indeed, they will even die in that city? Worse, some of our nice devotee ladies are TODAY and NOW already dying anyway in these cities, of various illness like cancer, and there is ALREADY not ANY support system for them -- from your party? You say, better if they also have no education, then what?

They will not even get to the point of what they have got now? They are at least a little resourceful now from being educated, but under your plan, they will not even get to be old enough to get cancer, they will die sooner, since they are NOW in a city environment. Then again we find your type of people saying: women should not go to school, women should accept polygamy, guys, this is illegal? The ISKCON society is seen as a maverick lawless gangster operation and you are stressing on things: that are illegal? Great. This simply begs more questions here guys, but thanks for the reply (see as below) thanks pd


TRIVRIKRAMA SWAMI PARTY (TSP)
about Madhusudani Radha devi dasi

(pada had said) Another example of their false logic is that the above party, all men, in the article below they try to demonize an innocent woman devotee like Madhusudani Radha, saying de facto that she is a borderline severe offender because her view is that: gurus make mistakes?

-----------------

TSP: No. She [Madhusudani - Maria Ekstrand] is a demoness, you simply do not know this 'woman'.

[PADA: She is a "demon," according to you at least, because she apparently thinks: that gurus are defective, gurus fall down, and God is also (a chavinist) defective since His "defective" gurus are: His pure representatives? Sorry, this is all the philosophy of the GBC? In 1980 the GBC wrote a paper in conjuction with their Gaudiya Matha advisors "The Mahajanas Have Difficulties," saying that the great devotees are defective and some of the GBC have said this in many other of their lectures and so on as well. And in 1986 Trivrikrama swami wanted to kick me out of the Berkeley temple since, I had said that gurus are not defective (and they are not having illicit sex with men, women and children). So she is simply repeating your ideas that Krishna's pure representative, the guru, is defective? So if her ideas are demon, and she is repeating some of your ideas, where does that place this issue? Srila Prabhupada says that the people who think "gurus are ordinary men," "gurusuh narah matih -- narakah sah," they are the demons. That means the GBC are the demons and she is simply repeating your ideas? Srila Prabhupada also said he was being poisoned, maybe it is you who does not know your associations?

Next, did Madhusudani give Krishna a bad name like the GBC has? No, the GBC has given Krishna a bad name. Is she one of them? No. Anyway, here you merely beg the next question, why was Madhusudani, "a demoness" in your estimation, put in charge of being the chief legal owner and site manager of your GBC's and ISKCON's biggest flagship web site, CHAKRA? Why is "a demoness" qualified by the assembled GBC's view, to be given the post of legal chief, owner, operator and manager of the GBC's CHAKRA site (and legal name) which, according to Tamal Krishna, was the GBC's inner sanctum web operation? Why is the GBC placing "a demoness" -- in charge -- of ISKCON's inner circle of public news forum and allowing her to represent the GBC, ISKCON and SRILA PRABHUPADA? Sounds very odd ...doesn't it? And more to the point, why wasn't someone like Trivrikrama made "the owner"? Why was he and other GBC hiding behind her skirt and allowing her to be in that post?

And why is the GBC making "a demoness" ISKCON's de facto public spokesperson, not only for their CHAKRA web site, but indeed for the entire ISKCON society? This makes no sense, she is "a demoness," so she is placed -- at the legal helm -- of your GBC's and corporate ISKCON's web site as its owner and operator? She is "an insulter of God and guru," at least according to you, so this is why she was made the chief owner of: ISKCON's and your GBC's site? So I do not need to "know this woman," as you say above. It is your party who gave her that post. And it is your party who kept her there, despite so many warnings that the site had major problems, including problems with her co-manager, Vipramukhya ex-swami. And his antics were reported all along BY us at PADA. You finally agreed with us that Vipramukhya is a cracker jack guru, but that is what we said in 1986? You are Johnny always come lately? Why?

Madhusudani told some of our PADA folks that she was a GBC elite among only a few of whom had the CHAKRA site's password. "Only me and a few EXCLUSIVE GBC" have the key passwords to enter the GBC's CHAKRA site. So it is your party who gave her the ONLY keys to your Boeing 747 passenger plane filled with hundreds of ISKCON passengers and now you say: you gave the keys to a drunken street car captain? A demoness? This begs the question: why? If she "hates Krishna" as you allege, why was she made the managing commanding general of your army, or what your GBC said is: CHAKRA's "Krishna's Army Of Champions"? I may or may not "know" this woman as you say, but before I would make this woman pada's chief commanding general, and would give her the key passwords to my web sites, I'd find out what she thinks about the issues --first?

This simply shows that the GBC is still not paying any attention to the qualifications of those whom they place in charge of theirs and ISKCON's -- important projects? OR the GBC wanted to put her there as the LEGAL owner of CHAKRA to CHEAT and ABUSE her in case of legal troubles? Or what? And almost at the same time your party made Madhusudani Radha dd your legal chief of CHAKRA, as soon as Tapah punja got out of jail for conspiracy to Sulochana's murder, your party placed him in an authoritative post at New Vrindavana? Why are you placing "demons" and "conspirators to murder" in your posts of big authority all the time? Again, you are begging more questions than answers?]

TSP: She has no real respect for Srila Prabhupad.

[PADA: Again, why was she placed then as in legal charge of the GBC's and ISKCON's web site?]

TSP: She absolutely has no faith in his words. She is a feminist, which is another name for a demoness.

[PADA: I do not know much about "the feminist movement," except that many chauvinistic moronic "men" in ISKCON have drove many nice women over to that view and camp. There has been an epidemic of divorce in ISKCON for a lot of reasons, but in sum the ISKCON society has a reputation for not being supportive women in general, or the institution of marriage, very meaningfully. Srila Prabhupada lamented that, and he said that the marriages in ISKCON were a joke, so he no longer could recommend that institution, it was failing. He also said that he wanted everyone to be married, that this renunciate sannyasa order was not working, but then "the sannyasis" replied, they are not going to give up their bogus posts, and what, they poisoned him so they could stay in that ill gotten post?

The GBC in any case did not follow up, and try to resolve the crisis? Srila Prabhupada said there was a crisis with failed marraiges, and the GBC's job is what, to solve what he says is a crisis, and they did not address it? OK, there are cases where the women is to blame, but more often it seems to me that the "husbands," some of the ones I've seen personally, have not been too impressive with the way they treated their female partners. And more importantly, and more unfortunately, some (or many) of the "GBC managers" have encouraged this ignoring, shunning, harassing, oppressing, and in sum "exploiting of women mood." And some of the leaders have thereby encouraged mistreatment of women, even sometimes beating of women, and of course divorce and splitting the family unit. For example, while New Vrindavana was being advertised as "ISKCON's flagship operation," many or most of the marriages there were being broken up with no small amount of help from the managers? So this breaking the family, and breaking the backs of the women and children thereby, this is what is demoniac. Will there be "a feminist reaction," i.e. the women feel they need to defend themselves OUT OF NECESSITY? You bet. Therefore, your ISKCON GBC management infrastructure has broken the femi-nazi genie out of the bottle -- themselves?

Simply look at the GBC's "annual reports." There is always some huge "big important meeting" where the GBC members are flown in from all over the world to converge, not to address the problems of women, or family break downs, but rather to suppress and hide something like Jayatirtha's drug problem, or to suppress and hide another guru's homosexual problems, and so on. There is apparently no real big concern for an emergency meeting that, the institution of marriage is not working and it is creating a crisis for women and children in ISKCON? Or, there is a crisis in the massive purges of devotees? Or, there is a crisis in the alienation of the women? Or, there is a crisis in the mistreatment of children? Or, there is a crisis in the bad public perception, these are not the priority issues? And if we look at the tone and tenor of the annual GBC reports we will find that these types of "ISKCON's social ills issues" are often not discussed or soft-pedalled, while the important things are: the yelling, shouting, if not vociferous screaming, over the all important things like, who will be guru for this zone or that zone? They are meeting now in Los Angeles, are they there to discuss ISKCON's breaking down family problems, and how to treat women and children better, or no, they are probably there discussing money, their favorite topic?

And so these policies of oppressing women, and not helping some of the irresponsible men become more capable, and other repressions of the institution of marriage and/or women, and subsequent abuse and abandonment of duty to women, and so on, was indeed fully supported and encouraged by some of your "leaders." And after some of your worst anti-female policy leaders were exposed and driven out, then your party reinstated the SAME leaders of that evil empire, the yes-men, the henchmen or orchestrators of the irresponsible policy of mayhem towards women, such Devamrta, Umapati, Kuladri, Tapah punja, and the whole pack of "managers" that drove hundred and maybe thousands of women over to "the feminists." And your party upholds the same people who simply gave untold numbers of women untold grief, then you wonder, why are the women upset? At this rate, it is a wonder there is even one woman left in ISKCON? And now your biggest "guru" Radhanatha wants to apparently reinstate Kirtanananda, the guy who has said that women are smelly fish, that women should be beaten like a drum, the guy who personally broke up umpteen marriages and ruined so many women's and children's lives, and so on? And Kirtanananda is also implicated in child molesting and murder? So, if all of us who oppose this are all "feminists," isn't that convenient for you?

One of these women told me she had to go out and buy condoms for her "good husband" since he was "humping her like a rabbit," and they could not manage the children they already had. Some women have told me their guru encouraged their husband to be oppressive to them. So if there is a trend towards the "feminist rebellion," perhaps it is some of you "big men" who are certainly -- a big part of that problem? This problem has not evolved in a vacuum, just like your child molester lawsuit did not evolve in a vacuum? Why have "the feminists" taken such a strong stand to challenge your party, in a few words it is simple: they are not "being protected" -- as they were promised they would be in ISKCON. There is a policy problem, and the result is the "feminists" backlash.... and of course "if" Madhusudani was made the legal head of CHAKRA to protect your big men legally, as is alleged already, then the problem here is that: she caught you!]

TSP: In her own words she has called Lord Ram Chandra S..t and spelled it out also.

[PADA: So again, this means you admit that the GBC are -- not minding their own house? You placed a person who (allegedly) says Rama is s..t, as your ISKCON legal web site's owner? Nothing new here, you also placed Devamrita, Radhanatha, Umapati, Kuladri, Tapah punja, and all the homosexual pedophile king's horses and all that pedophile kings men, and lets not forget mass molesting and murders occured under that king's empire, in places of authority back in the ISKCON circuit. Again? And then you make a guy like Vipramukhya your guru, the guy who advertises the Atkins diet, he is the guru leader of ISKCON?

Then you wonder why everyone is challenging you, and they are upset with ISKCON? Because, you have no bona fide authority, and worse, you are placing certified corrupt people, or simply mad fools, in the posts of your authority and even as: your GURUS for ISKCON? So this reflects poorly on Krishna and ISKCON? Then again, many people all over the planet think of ISKCON as a gangster operation, that Krishna is a bad guy, that there is some homosexual pedophile orgy going on here, and so on, all due to your regime's bad publicity: made by the GBC? So you are making people think of God as some evil thing, and you are the ones who "spell that out" every day? She may have some impact for a few people, at best, whereas your party has convinced millions of people that Rama is a bad person?

Nor are you dealing with you pattern of being irresponsible. Why wasn't Jayapataka, Madhusudani's "guru," pulled onto the carpet by the GBC party YEARS AGO for her statements? Why was she not told to recant, or get her off the CHAKRA board? Why did she have to voluntarily resign -- after some years of interminable muddling? If Vipramukhya had not blooped, and precipitated the CHAKRA collapse crisis recently, she'd still be the chief legal manager and owner of your GBC's web site? Why was she posted as the legal owner -- at all? You are avoiding these questions? Why was this not fixed a long time ago, since it was known a long time ago, and instead it had to -- fix itself, by her resignation? Why is the GBC not fixing these problems at the outset, instead of waiting till their toilet leaks into the downstairs apartments, and your neighbors have to call the plumber? Why are you never calling the plumber yourself? And why are you placing other dubious folks in charge of other areas, like Umapati, Tapah punja: ...AD INFINITUM, and that is your pattern? So now, you admit that you posted yet another "problem case" as "the owner" of your web site, what else is new? You never listened to us when we say, hey do not make Jayatirtha your guru, he is a floozy? Instead you kicked us out and went forward making this floozy into your guru, then that floozy into a guru, and now, you admit you made an alleged Rama hater as your web site owner, and so on. Why do you keep doing this?]

TSP: Why? Because Ram banished Sita when the common men gossiped about her chastity. She thinks s-it of Ram. And many times she has accused SP of being backward, an old Bengali man who was hampered by an outdated culture (because of his views on dharma, that women are NEVER to be given independence). MRdd chokes on these words of SP. That is why "WE" say the woman IS a demoness. We only mixed words to be polite.

[PADA: You are the ones who are mixed up? You party takes one (at worse) "demoness," (at best) "mixed up woman," and places her as the legal owner at the helm of your party's GBC's web site? She is really, or allegedly, making outrageous statements, and then your GBC team, and her GBC "guru" "responds" -- gutless wonders that they are, by saying and doing nothing? Nor does the rest of the GBC do anything of substance? Jayapataka should have reigned her in years ago if this was the case? And if he failed to act, then the GBC should have taken him to task as well? You fail to tell us: why was no CONCRETE action EVER taken to correct her statements -- years ago? And instead, after you saw so many warning signs that she had some serious defects, you promoted her as almost the equal status to your gurus like Vipramukhya? And since her main statement of complaint is that gurus fall down, why was not the origin of this idea traced back to the GBC leaders like Trivrikrama and have him kicked out for making these absurd attacks on the parampara system?

It seems there is an agenda to keep misguided or even corrupt people in posts of power and legal ownership? Why? And when they leave, or when they go to jail for assisting in murders like Tapah punjah, you can't wait for them to get out of jail, to place them back in seats of authority? And Jayapataka still has a bunch of his ex-goondas and/or ex-molesters like Satadhanya et al. still there in Mayapura, at least as was reported by Adridharana dasa? Adri even says some of those goons were building a bomb -- to blow up some devotees? Why are you always seemingly aiding, abetting and keeping these kinds of people, at all? Why? Then you wonder why the "feminists" attack the GBC, well it is also the rank and file devotees who are attacking the GBC, the ex-gurukulis are also attacking the GBC, the women in general are also attacking the GBC, the public is also attacking the GBC, the media is also attacking the GBC, Windle Turley is also attacking the GBC, the FBI is also attacking the GBC, the immigration service is apparently also questioning things, ... and did we forget, the poison case is also attacking the GBC, it seems they are all fed up with you and they are all attacking, and it will get worse unless you change. You can re-arrange the deck chairs on the Titanic, big deal.

In any case some are saying that your GBC tolerated Madhusudani's ideas for all these years because the whole plan was to make her the legal head to protect the GBC legally? The consensus is that maybe that the GBC is corrupt, so they tolerate things that are "off" to protect themselves legally and so on. Maybe the GBC similarly had to make Tapah punja an authority? Maybe he knows too much? Maybe the roses in his garden are growing nicely due to what is buried beneath them? Again, in any case, it appears you did not care what Madhusudani said at all, all along, since you had another agenda? Now that your house of cards with her has collapsed, and she is declaring independence from you, you can come out with your real feelings? You never liked her all along? She was merely a legal puppet dupe for the GBC? You used her to protect some of you legally? And now that she did that job faithfully, and she is no longer required since she is finally seeing through your scheme, you can toss her out like a used kleenex, as has occurred to thousands of other women? That is simply going to wedge her further against the GBC, so you are simply making more enemies for yourself, and the GBC, and ISKCON, by this policy.

Anyway, this is avoiding the real point, the GBC are "big men" who placed her in that seat and let her stay even after they knew there were troubles? And no wonder Madhusudani Radha dd thinks women are suffering from being "dependent" (often on some foolish "men") and are "not protected." She sees this as the model for: ISKCON, where women have been exploited so badly it is incredible. Maybe she was being exploited herself by being the legal owner of CHAKRA to protect some of your GBC pals from legal action?

She sees the practical "result" of exploited women as a reflection of -- the siddhanta? I am not saying she has a right to insult Ram, but there are underlying causes that helped give her this negative attitude, just like many so many of ISKCON's former devotees have become negative about Krishna consciousness, just like some of the ex-gurukulis have also got the same negative attitudes, and some of the public have got the same negative attitudes, and so on, and you never understand that? Nor do you realize that it is the GBC that placed her in the position of being doubtful of the philosophy: They GBC are the ones who told her that gurus fall down; The GBC are the ones who told her that gurus are or they become homosexuals; The GBC are the ones who told her that Vipramukhya is a guru? And now, after your party's filling her up with these nonsense ideas, then they placed her in the seat of authority -- and the GBC did ALL of this in the first place? And if you placed Madhusudani R dd there legally to protect your big men, as some already assume, then this is another indication that you are worse than "weak" women yourselves? "She chokes on Srila Prabhupada's words," so, "make her the legal chief"? You are not making any sense here?]

TSP: Of course, all woman are blameless, who is to blame are men who have no sense of what is dharma who do not give women proper protection. But, some women are too damn independent they reject any and all attempts to protect them, they are not to be blamed, still, they are but less intelligent women, after all, but neither are the men to be blamed who try in sincerity to protect them.

[PADA: Well who "tried" what here? The GBC "tried" to make a web site they said was to counter the poison complaint, ok pada, and then they put a person like Madhusudani at the helm as LEGAL managerial owner of the site. And then your own big clown gurus like Vipramukhya were the main writers, and then your other big clowns like Kirtanananda's former henchmen were also writing. You even admit: CHAKRA was a circus? So how is this her fault? She is merely "a woman," remember? So if there were problems, the problem rests on the shoulder of your men, namely Trivrikrama, Vipramukya, Umapati, and the founder of the site, Tamal? The GBC should have managed their OWN site, and they did not do so. Blaming the victim here, of your mismanaging -- again? So we all know that Vipramukhya was behaving like a fool by advertising the Atkins diet, mostly meat, he was also posting photos of himself on a broomstick, and this is all old news, he was saying idiotic things way back in 1986, and we reported that the two GBCs then, and nothing was EVER done? Instead, after your hearing thousands of reports that he was acting like a fool, he was promoted to writing for and running your web site and BEING your "successor to GOD": GURU? Even most of the women knew Vipramukhya was a joker way back in 1986, they were giggling at his foolish lectures then, so only your idyoot's party of "men" thought he was "the sum total of the demigods: guru"?

So -- YOU ARE THE ONES NOT PROTECTING PEOPLE FROM IDIOTS POSING AS GURUS! Madhusdani, or the feminists are right, you "men" are not protecting others. They is correct on that count. So blame yourself for this, they are not to blame, they were told that Vipramukhya is a guru -- BY YOUR PARTY. That this has caused them to have doubt, well no kidding! And if you posted MRdd as the legal head so that she would take the brunt of potential legal actions, as some already say is the case, shame on you! What if CHAKRA got a 5 million dollar lawsuit and she lost everything, then you would say, stupid offender woman, after she sacrificed her life for you?]

TSP: Hey, Ram was a chauvist, so was Krsna, He married 16,108 wives, that is after leaving his crying 16,108 girl friend gopis.

[PADA: And now you are posting worse "insults to God" than MRdd? Why are you giving these ideas and not explaining the behind the scenes reality? Read what you just wrote here, this is more insulting than almost anything I have ever read anywhere?]

TSP: And not one of His wives were allowed to divorce and remarry. Even Nityananda Prabhu wasn't satisfied with just Mother Jahnavi Devi, but He married two wives at the same time. Some even say 3 wives. He too was a polygamist. And that is illegal today, and is on the black list of every liberal feminist.

[PADA: No wonder about "today," some ISKCON men have proven they cannot care for even one wife, but yet some of them want more (and more) wives? So this "polgamy" idea is nowadays simply another excuse to have more and more wives and: illicit sex and often resultant children. It is already going on since some ISKCON men have already been married two, three, four, even five or more times. Again this has taken place -- already, not counting assorted "girlfriends" and so on. This is de facto polygamy but really, irresponsible. This has nothing to do with Nityananda prabhu? You are the ones juxtaposing bad behavioral distortions of modern times with these examples of great souls? Some of you want polygamy, but this is also: now illegal? So this is another problem, some of the modern ISKCON men can generally barely take care of one wife, and yet some are already taking another, and another wife? And they are maybe talking some jibberish about polygamy, so the women say, hah, this is all bogus, it is an excuse for more sex with more women and being irresponsible for the women and the children, the man has -- already? So there will be a backlash from the females if these bogus policies are created, that is natural?

It seems Srila Prabhupada said: Let us stress on managing one woman first? That is not being done today -- already? So perhaps "the feminists" are smart, sometimes their existing husbands, or their friends husbands, may not be able to take care properly for even one wife? And yet the man wants more wives, or he is mumbling about polygamy as well in some cases? And the result of a lot of this is that many ISKCON women are -- getting "karmi" men, or living back again with their "karmi" mothers, or they are on "karmi" public welfare, and so on? This is the result of the GBC's policy of not trying to create a social fabric encouraging single family units, and worse, some of the leaders have encouraged splits, divorces, separations, and even worse, sometimes "the guru" was having illicit sex with his own married disciples?

What does this have to do with Nityananda prabhu? Indeed we heard stories that some ISKCON leaders were encouraging devotee women to "get divorced," "get another devotee man who is faithful to the GBC guru," and/or to "go on welfare." There are rumors that abortion was encouraged from some of the "women's collecting partys." In Berkeley, the managers were encouraging devotees to collect Social Security, food stamps and so on, and now we want these types of people to have -- two, three, four or five -- wives? So Krishna could maintain 16,108 women, that is what you failed to point out, but some of our men cannot take care of -- one sixteenth of a woman? So we are asking women today to accept things like polygamy when there is a huge problem keeping one wife, and it is illegal to boot? So we have to point out that polygamy in Krishna's example is not the same as polygamy with some lusty fool of modern times?

How will we feed all these multi-wives -- we have no idea? These multiple wives or unmarried women, and their children, may end up on welfare or public assistance? Many of them do. Some of these "men" are ALREADY paying multi-child support to one, two, three women, and they want -- another woman? They now want: number two, number three, number four, number five wife? What kind of society is this? And now some of these multi-marrying men are importing women from the third world, because then they get essentially a free slave with no legal basis to challenge them if the woman needs to. Wake up. This is a social disaster.

This is "women protection," or "protecting men's sex life" or what, silly? So the feminist argument will come forward as a reaction. One report said that ninety five percent is the divorce rate in ISKCON, and this is probably not far off? This is the real "worst crisis of ISKCON," it has no social fabric, no social infrastructure, and the pillars of ANY social infrastructure is: the family unit. And the GBC has been systematically destablizing that unit by attacking it on every level they can, it seems at least? And now some of you are talking about not allowing educating the women, and allowing polygamy, so this is even more demoralizing and destabilizing for the women's view, it will drive the women away. Goody, then we can have a nice homosexual peodphile haven? Is that your real plan? So this is what we needed, varnasrama, the family will be the unit and we build the society on these units.

The GBC even tried to destabilize my family unit in the maximum degree, some of them even wanted to orchestrate killing me and making my children have no father at all? Even these GBC clones like Sanat and Mukunda, they said the same thing, Puranjana must be killed so his children will suffer. They enjoy seeing children suffer. Save the perps, kill the exposers, and molest and terrorize the children, this is demon but this is not coming from the Madhusudani's per se? Of course these above brave guys were not to be found while we said these molester gurus and their perps have to go in the late 1970s? So, save the perps, kill the persons exposing the perps, this is the GBC policy. And so, save the women beaters, exploiters, and harassers, and drive out the persons who object. The women know this is going on though? And now that the kids have grown, they know it too? So there is rejection of the GBC and their clones, this is going to increase. No small wonder then that Sanat and Mukunda have now joined forces with their new legal team: that is apparently defending "The North American Man Boy Lover's Association."

Is Madhusudani "a demon" like these "devotee killer" people? Well, she never wanted to have me killed? She also understands that the child molesting issue is a serious one. The problem is that ISKCON "men" always seem to just want to attack the victims, they never seem to say, let us chop up the perps? So this is not what men do? Men protect the women and the children, but this exploiting of women and children is instead going on, so much so people say that the victims should be beaten or even killed, to terrorize them all the more. So this is again coming from the top, the GBC policy has been to defend the perps, the exploiters, the women beaters, the molesters, and so on, and this has dribbled down to other layers. Now people are apparently even working with the defenders of the man boy lovers club. This is how badly it has deteriorated.]

TSP: And Lord Gauranga, what a chauvist He was. His father died when He was young - still we do not find Him encouraging poor mother Saci to find another husband and remarry. No. He had no real compassion for women. Yet, when Gauranga's first wife died of a snake bite, Lord Gaurange accepted another wife right away, a 14 year old minor aged girl. Imagine, he was at least 10 years older, in his 20's and he marriages a 14 yr old, 2 in a row. Then, just a few years later, when the girl was no more than 16, still a minor aged girl, Gauranga goes and deserts her. He leaves her. The poor minor aged girl, 16, poor Vishnu Priya, to cry everyday for the rest of her life. He never gave her permission to remarry someone else and have a real life.

[PADA: Jeepers, look at what you are saying, and then you wonder why Madhusudani gets: the wrong ideas? You are the ones painting Lord Gauranga as a fool, as you do above, so she gets this theme -- from you guys? This was my point to you all along, these negative depiction's are also coming from you, and she is just repeating, and thus you just proved that by your writing as above? I remember some Indian man telling me once that Krishna was an irresponsible joker who ran away from the gopis to get some more women? You sound like that man, and he was at least honest, he told me he hates Krishna. And you go on and on with your negative depiction's ---]

TSP: No, He EXPECTED her to be an obedient slave of dharma - to be an obeidiant slave of a wife - even after he leaves her.

[PADA: Well there you have it, if you are a woman and you devote yourself to God, you have to be His "obedient slave," thus most women will say, sign me up as a feminist. Wouldn't you? You "men" are getting them to join the feminists. Where does Srila Prabhupada speak as you do -- about the Lord, or about His associates, or about women in general? You are again not explaining this, just giving the negative side only? No wonder your sisyas like Madhusudani are perplexed? First of all, no one is expected to be like Lord Gauranga's associates? I also divorced and did not remarry, why, who knows, but it is not because I am "Krishna's slave"? You are making the Lord look like a fanatical extremist, then you wonder why people are turned off, and the feminist idea is gaining, it is because of your "preaching." Oddly, it is the wacky 10,000 years predictions of the IRM that is also giving ammunition to the Narayana Maharaja camp and helping building that camp, you guys are shooting your own selves in the foot.]

TSP: She was forced to have to love her one and only husband in the form of a piece of neem wood, carved to look like Him. Imagine that?

[PADA: Well yes, imagine that you are making a negative commentary just as bad as the folks you critize? You make it sound like Lord Chaitanya was some uncaring mad man -- yourself?]

TSP: The modern feminist would have him locked up. He really was a Mad Man.

[PADA: This is how you speak, this is how your sisyas then speak, and so, Madhusudani is one of your sisyas, ie victims.]

TSP: Even when He came back to Bengal and inquired about His mother Saci, He didn't have the courtesy to even inquire about poor Vishnu Priya.

[PADA: This is great, first your say God is a mad fool, now you say God has no common courtesy, He is an unpolished street bumkin? Well, this is where your followers get these ideas from...]

TSP: At least he could have gone over and said, "hi", right.

[PADA: You are the ones who are second guessing God here, then you wonder why this is spreading, you are also the source of the illness.]

thanks pd

Please also read:
Why I am Leaving ISKCON

 

Feminists Want to Change Prabhupada's Books

Feminists Openly Blasphemy Srila Prabhupada

Srila Prabhupada was Blasphemied, and the GBC Remained Silent

Feminist Theories and their Effect on ISKCON

Feminists Violently Disrupt the Vrindavan Kartik Festival

A Philosophical Refutation of ISKCON GBC's 2000 & Women in ISKCON Resolution

Notes from a Think Tank (a very detailed exposition of feminism) (Word)

Madhusudani Radha (Maria Ekstrand), Editor of Chakra.org , blasphemies Lord Rama (Word)

Debate about feminism in ISKCON on Dandavats.com 


reply to: angel108b@yahoo.com
pada archives: http://www.harekrsna.org/


Chant Hare Krishna and be happy!
All glories to His Divine Grace A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada!