đ§”The @nytimes is at it again, using a coconut to spin a devious curation of facts to make Hindus the bogeymen and everyone else their hapless victims.
This time, itâs about Mother Theresaâs charity.
This time, itâs about Mother Theresaâs charity.
Cutting off $13M in foreign missionary funding is narrated as oppressive. The missionaries are then portrayed as noble in the face of such evil. Bc, of course, missionaries in savage dark nations are nothing if not martyrs. How will they do with only their undisclosed wealth?
Of course, The Times seems to have forgotten that itâs become more widely known that Theresa was no saint.
They even said it themselves.
They even said it themselves.
âWhen The New York Times reviewed the British documentary Hellâs Angel, a film that highlighted some of Mother Teresaâs flaws, the paper concluded that she was âless interested in helping the poor than in using them as an indefatigable source of wretchednessâŠâ
ââŠon which to fuel the expansion of her fundamentalist Roman Catholic beliefs.â
The truth about her charity is frightening.
âThough Mother Teresaâs medical centers were meant to heal people, her patients were often subjected to conditions thatâŠâ
The truth about her charity is frightening.
âThough Mother Teresaâs medical centers were meant to heal people, her patients were often subjected to conditions thatâŠâ
ââŠmade them even sicker. In the same documentary, an Indian journalist compared Mother Teresaâs flagship location for âMissionaries of Charityâ to photographs that he had seen of the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp in Nazi Germany.â
ââWorkers washed needles under tap water and then reused them. Medicine and other vital items were stored for months on end, expiring and still applied sporadically to patients,â said Hemley Gonzalez, a noted humanitarian who briefly volunteered at Missionaries of Charity.â
âIn her hospice care centers, Mother Teresa practiced her belief that patients only needed to feel wanted and die at peace with God â not receive proper medical care â and medical experts went after her for it.â
âIn response to all the criticism, Mother Teresa allegedly said, âThere is something beautiful in seeing the poor accept their lot, to suffer it like Christâs Passion. The world gains much from their suffering.ââ
âHowever, when it came to her own suffering, Mother Teresa apparently took a different stance. When she began experiencing severe heart problems, she received care in a modern American hospital.â
Moreover, Theresa was known to rub elbows with the openly unethical and powerful to raise money for her âgood works,â including Haitian dictator Jean-Claude Duvalier and Charles Keating, an American financier who was behind the 1980s savings and loan crisis.
Where did all that money go?
âA 1991 report in the German magazine Stern also estimated that only seven percent of the millions of dollars she received were used for charityâŠNirmala Joshi, the leader of Missionaries of Charity who succeeded Mother Teresa, said the donationsâŠâ
âA 1991 report in the German magazine Stern also estimated that only seven percent of the millions of dollars she received were used for charityâŠNirmala Joshi, the leader of Missionaries of Charity who succeeded Mother Teresa, said the donationsâŠâ
âŠwere âcountless,â and there was only one person with the actual numbers. âGod knows,â Joshi said. âHe is our banker.ââ
We DO know, however, that none of the funding went to womenâs reproductive rights, which is a priority in all countries, including India.
We DO know, however, that none of the funding went to womenâs reproductive rights, which is a priority in all countries, including India.
So, to sum it up: Theresa and her charity did not provide safe medical care, glorified the suffering of poor, sick Indians, saw conversion to Christianity (and not healing the sick) as their ultimate goal, took millions from questionable foreign sources, were not transparent
âŠabout funding use, felt they were only answerable to their God, and openly discriminated against women.
And medical professionals and humanitarians around the world recognize this.
AND a documentary was made about this.
AND the @nytimes recognized (some of) this.
And medical professionals and humanitarians around the world recognize this.
AND a documentary was made about this.
AND the @nytimes recognized (some of) this.
But when the Indian govt acts to curtail funding to an org. that global medical professionals, humanitarians, film makers, and the @nytimes recognize is deeply problematic, the same @nytimes declares that HINDUS / âHINDU NATIONALISMâ are the problem?
And @ShashiTharoor agrees?
And @ShashiTharoor agrees?
Twitter wonât let me link this article.
Loading suggestions...