Loading...

Monday, November 17, 2014

The Failures of Nehru on the eve of 125th birthday celebrations

Good Read

http://shankhnaad.net/index.php/nation/aryavart/national-politics/84-congress/134-article-119

Tuesday, November 4, 2014

Nathuram Godse - Final Speech in Court

I had the chance to review the last speech of Godse in the court during his trial proceedings
Please see below

Nathuram Godse - His Last Speech

"May it please Your Honour"
Nathuram Godse

[On 8 November 1948, Nathuram Godse (19 May 1910-15 November 1949) rose to make his statement in court. Reading quietly from a typed manuscript, he sought to explain why he had killed Gandhi. His thesis covered ninety-pages, and he was on his feet for five hours. Godse's statement, excerpted below, should be read by citizens and scholars in its entirely, for it provides an insight into his personality and his understanding of the concept of Indian nationhood – Editor]
"Born in a devotional Brahmin family, I instinctively came to revere Hindu religion, Hindu history and Hindu culture. I had, therefore, been intensely proud of Hinduism as a whole. As I grew up I developed a tendency to free thinking unfettered by any superstitious allegiance to any isms, political or religious. That is why I worked actively for the eradication of untouchability and the caste system based on birth alone. I openly joined anti-caste movements and maintained that all Hindus are of equal status as to rights, social and religious, and should be considered high or low on merit alone and not through the accident of birth in a particular caste or profession.
I used publicly to take part in organized anti-caste dinners which thousands of Hindus, Brahmins, Vaishyas, Kshatriyas, Chamars and B-----s participated. We broke the caste rules and dined in the company of each other. I have read the speeches and writings of Dadabhai Naoroji, Vivekanand, Gokhale, Tilak, along with the books of ancient and modern history of India and some prominent countries like England, France, America and Russia. Moreover I studied the tenets of socialism and Marxism. But above all I studied very closely what Veer (brave) Savarkar and Gandhiji had written and spoken, as to my mind these two ideologies have contributed more to the moulding of the thought and action of the Indian people during the last thirty years or so, than any other factor has done.
All this thinking and reading led me to believe that it was my first duty to serve Hindudom and Hindus both as a patriot and as a world citizen. To secure the freedom and to safeguard the just interests of some thirty crores (three hundred million) of Hindus would automatically constitute the freedom and well-being of all India, one fifth of the human race. This conviction led me naturally to devote myself to the Hindu Sanatanist ideology and programme, which alone, I came to believe, could win and preserve the National Independence of Hindustan, my Motherland, and enable her to render true service to humanity as well. Since the year 1920, that is, after the demise of Lokmanya Tilak, Gandhi's influence in the Congress first increased and then became supreme.



His activities for public awakening were phenomenal in their intensity and were reinforced by the slogan of truth and non-violence, which he paraded ostentatiously before the country. No sensible or enlightened person could object to these slogans. In fact there is nothing new or original in them. They are implicit in every constitutional public movement. But it is nothing but a dream if you imagine the bulk of mankind is, or can ever become, capable of scrupulous adherence to these lofty principles in its normal life from day to day. In fact, honour, duty and love of one's own kith and kin and country might often compel us to disregard non-violence and to use force. I could never conceive that an armed resistance to an aggression is unjust.
I would consider it a religious and moral duty to resist and if possible, to overpower such an enemy by use of force. (In the Ramayana) Rama killed Ravana in a tumultuous fight and relieved Sita. (In the Mahabharata) Krishna killed Kansa to end his wickedness; and Arjuna had to fight and slay quite a number of his friends and relations, including the revered Bhishma, because the latter was on the side of the aggressor. It is my firm belief that in dubbing Rama, Krishna and Arjuna as guilty of violence, the Mahatma betrayed the total ignorance of the springs of human action. In more recent history, it was the heroic fight put up by Chhatrapati Shivaji that first checked and eventually destroyed the Muslim tyranny in India. It was absolutely essential for Shivaji to overpower and kill an aggressive Afzal Khan, failing which he would have lost his own life. In condemning history's towering warriors like Shivaji, Rana Pratap and Guru Govind Singh as misguided patriots, Gandhi has merely exposed his self-conceit.
He was, paradoxical, as it may appear, a violent pacifist who brought untold calamities on the country in the name of truth and non-violence, while Rana Pratap, Shivaji and the Guru will remain enshrined in the hearts of their countrymen forever for the freedom they brought to them. The accumulating provocation of thirty-two years, culminating in his last pro-Muslim fast, at last goaded me to the conclusion that the existence of Gandhi should be brought to an end immediately. Gandhi had done very good work in South Africa to uphold the rights and well being of the Indian community there.
But when he finally returned to India, he developed a subjective mentality under which he alone was to be the final judge of what was right or wrong. If the country wanted his leadership, it had to accept his infallibility; if it did not, he would stand aloof from the Congress and carry on in his own way. Against such an attitude there can be no halfway house. Either Congress had to surrender its will to his and had to be content with playing second fiddle to all his eccentricity, whimsicality, metaphysics and primitive vision, or it had to carry on without him. He alone was the judge of everyone and everything; he was the master brain guiding the Civil Disobedience movement; no other could know the technique of that movement. He alone knew when to begin it and when to withdraw it. The movement might succeed or fail, but that could make no difference to the Mahatma's infallibility. 'A Satyagrahi can never fail' was his formula for his own infallibility and nobody except himself knew what a Satyagrahi is.
Thus the Mahatma became the judge and the jury in his own case. These childish insanities and obstinacies, coupled with a most severe austerity of life, ceaseless work and lofty character made Gandhi formidable and irresistible. Many people thought that his policies were irrational, but they had either to withdraw from the Congress or place their intelligence at his feet to do with as he liked. In a position of such absolute irresponsibility, Gandhi was guilty of blunder after blunder, failure after failure, and disaster after disaster. Gandhi's pro-Muslim policy is blatantly illustrated in his perverse attitude on the question of the national language of India. It is quite obvious that Hindi has the most prior claim to be accepted as the premier language.
In the beginning of his career in India, Gandhi gave a great impetus to Hindi, but as he found that the Muslims did not like it, he became a champion of what is called Hindustani. Everybody in India knows that there is no language in India called Hindustani; it has no grammar; it has no vocabulary. It is a mere dialect; it is spoken, not written. It is a tongue and a crossbreed between Hindi and Urdu, and not even the Mahatma's sophistry could make it popular. But in his desire to please the Muslims he insisted that Hindustani alone should be the national language of India. His blind followers, of course, supported him and the so-called hybrid language began to be used. The charm and the purity of the Hindi language were to be prostituted to please the Muslims. All his experiments were at the expense of the Hindus.
From August 1946 onwards, the private armies of the Muslim League began a massacre of Hindus. The then Viceroy, Lord Wavell, though distressed at what was happening, would not use his powers under the Government of India Act of 1935 to prevent the rape, murder and arson. The Hindu blood began to flow from Bengal to Karachi with little retaliation by the Hindus. The Interim Government formed in September was sabotaged by its Muslim League members right from its inception, but the more they became disloyal and treasonable to the government of which they were a part, the greater was Gandhi's infatuation for them.
Lord Wavell had to resign as he could not bring about a settlement and was succeeded by Lord Mountbatten. King Stork followed King Log. The Congress, which had boasted of its nationalism and secularism, secretly accepted Pakistan literally at the point of the bayonet and abjectly surrendered to Jinnah. India was vivisected and one-third of the Indian Territory became foreign land to us from 15 August 1947. Lord Mountbatten came to be described in the Congress circles as the greatest Viceroy and Governor-General this country ever had.
The official date for the handing over of power was fixed for June 30, 1948, but Mountbatten with his ruthless surgery gave us a gift of vivisected India ten months in advance. This is what Gandhi had achieved after thirty years of undisputed dictatorship and this is what the Congress party calls 'freedom' and 'peaceful transfer of power'. The Hindu-Muslim unity bubble was finally burst and a theocratic state was established with the consent of Nehru and his crowd and they have called it 'freedom won by them with sacrifice' - whose sacrifice? When top leaders of Congress, with the consent of Gandhi, divided and tore the country - which we considered a deity of worship - my mind was filled with direful anger.
One of the conditions imposed by Gandhi for his breaking of the fast related to the mosques in Delhi occupied by the Hindu refugees. But when Hindus in Pakistan were subjected to violent attacks he did not so much as utter a single word to protest and censure the Pakistan Government or the Muslims concerned. Gandhi was shrewd enough to know that while undertaking a fast unto death, had he imposed some conditions on the Muslims in Pakistan, here would have been found hardly any Muslims who could have shown some grief if the fast had ended in his death. It was for this reason that he purposely avoided imposing any conditions on the Muslims.

He was fully aware from past experience that Jinnah was not at all perturbed or influenced by his fast and the Muslim League hardly attached any value to the inner voice of Gandhi. Gandhi is being referred to as the Father of the Nation. But if that is so, he has failed in his paternal duty in as much he has acted very treacherously to the nation by his consenting to the partitioning of it. I stoutly maintain that Gandhi has failed in his duty. He has proved to be the Father of Pakistan. His inner-voice, his spiritual power, his doctrine of non-violence of which so much is made of, all crumbled against Jinnah's iron will and proved to be powerless.
Briefly speaking, I thought to myself and foresaw that I shall be totally ruined, and the only thing I could expect from the people would be nothing but hatred and that I shall have lost all my honour, even more valuable than my life, if I were to kill Gandhiji. But at the same time I thought that the Indian politics in the absence of Gandhiji would surely be practical, able to retaliate and would be powerful with the armed forces. No doubt, my own future would be totally ruined, but the nation would be saved from the inroads of Pakistan. People may even call me or dub me as devoid of any sense or foolish, but the nation would be free to follow the course founded on the reason, which I consider necessary for sound nation-building.
After having fully considered the question, I took the final decision in the matter, but I did not speak about it to anyone whatsoever. I took courage in both my hands and I did fire the shots at Gandhiji on 30th January 1948, on the prayer-grounds in Birla House. I do say that my shots were fired at the person whose policy and action had brought rack and ruin and destruction to millions of Hindus. There was no legal machinery by which such an offender could be brought to book and for this reason I fired those fatal shots. I bear no ill will towards anyone individually, but I do say that I had no respect for the present government owing to their policy, which was unfairly favourable towards the Muslims. But at the same time I could clearly see that the policy was entirely due to the presence of Gandhi.
I have to say with great regret that Prime Minister Nehru quite forgets that his preaching and deeds are at times at variance with each other when he talks about India as a secular state in season and out of season, because it is significant to note that Nehru has played a leading role in the theocratic state of Pakistan, and his job was made easier by Gandhi's persistent policy of appeasement towards the Muslims. I now stand before the court to accept the full share of my responsibility for what I have done and the judge would, of course, pass against me such orders of sentence as may be considered proper. But I would like to add that I do not desire any mercy to be shown to me, nor do I wish that anyone should beg for mercy on my behalf.
My confidence about the moral side of my action has not been shaken even by the criticism levelled against it on all sides. I have no doubt that honest writers of history will weigh my act and find the true value thereof someday in future."
Nathuram Godse was hanged a year later, on 15 November 1949; as per his last wishes, his family and followers have preserved his ashes for immersion in the Indus River of a re-united India

Are you nuts ? by Robert Vadra

What is so nutty about asking a question to Mr Vadra about the land deals he had made with the haryana govt that is discussed in public media on the hour ?
The Govt of India - GOI sends a 36 panel team for Z+ security for this nut job to go to his Gym.
Let me tell you what is nuts.


  1. Some one called Vadra that no one in the national scene knew 20 years back is reportedly worth thousands and thousands of crores
  2. The only qualification Vadra carries is marrying Rajiv's daughter
  3. What is more nuts is the mysterious deaths of every one in Vadra's family - Dad / Sister / Brother
  4. More mysterious is foreign mom seems to not care for all the lost ones and is busy building business empires with entitled son-in-law of the first congress family
The only thing that is not nutty is thankfully you have not taken the Gandhi last name and given it to your kids following the family tradition - FEROZE KHAN.

I give that to mr. vadra, because if the buddhu goes without kids and priyanka morphs to vadra, that will be the end of the "so-called-nehru-opportunistically-turned-gandhi" family.

Hope to see that in my life time.

Monday, November 3, 2014

Oct 31st - Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel - BirthDay - Lost, Forgotton, Denied, Rejected Leader in Indian History

Oct 31st 1875 was when Sardar Patel was born. How many of us truly knew his birthday until PM Modi organized the Ekta Run. Very few including me.
While young, i had true admiration of Mr. patel through stories from my father and grand father.
I decided to research and find the roots of this Nehru family blackout on Patel's history in India.
We celebrate children's day on Nov 14th, but as i can see only Halloween day is observed on Patel's birthday. It may be fitting as halloween is a sign of remembering the martyrs. Patel was a true fighter, no agenda, no politics , non nonsense statesman.

I reviewed the news over the weekend and Congress party is claiming the PM is giving undue importance to Patel's birthday while forgetting to celebrate Indira Gandhi (Ghandy)'s birth day.
Again, What a Joke ?
UPA was in power for 10 years and micro-focused in mastering the acts of making money through corruption. Its natural to forget to celebrate the life of their party founder. I say this with a clear definition, the current day congress party is a transformation of CONGRESS(I), growing up i remember Congress(I), some how in the years to go, this master minded thugs have transformed the name back to congress party to milk the benefit of freedom movement.
Questions

  1. Why did the UPA sleep and not rejoice their party leader by commemorating say instead of children, Elderly day on Indira Priyadarshini's birthday ?
  2. Congress party issued a statement that Sardar patel belongs to congress party so the BJP is trying to cash in on the issue, Really, is this even an argument, The world knows what the Nehru clan did to Patel's legacy. For starters please read the wiki page on patel but there are more links to provide the true story. NOTE: Dont trust the history books that we studied when young, happens to be the books printed by Nehru family.
  3. Indira Ghandy should be given similar recognition, Really, Do these people have any sense, why you want to complain a mountain and mole hill ?
I credit PM Modi to take up issues that have been forgotten, brainwashed to forget by the Congress party - Nehru family faction. 

Lets go back a bit in history and see the issues in which Nehru and Patel clashed and what the outcomes have been

  1. Partition Proposal of 1946 - Please refer to what Nehru's leadership role vs Patel's leadership actions. Using Patel's strategy the Congress folded in to the May 1946 proposal and Patel could convince 597 Kings to fold into India except for Jammu and KashmirJunagadh, and Hyderabad.
  2. Of the 3 provinces , Junagadh and Hyderabad went PATEL's way - History will speak for the rest on the political value of his decisions. Does any of us even think about the control of Nizam in Hyderabad or the legacy when traveling to Hyderabad, all we can think of is TOLLYWOOD and the IT corridor. 
  3. Kashmir became an EGO issue between Nehru and Patel - The War of 1947 was not dealt the way Patel wanted to deal with, Diplomacy kicked it and the useless Nehru ideology paradigm kicked in and today after 70 years we are where we are with KASHMIR due to one person's ego -- J/NEHRU. 
One thing im simply amazed is if you go back researching history you will find that from 1945 to 1947 there were a lot of changes that happened in India. Interestingly enough, Nehru was not to be seen in any of they KEY strategic decisioning the shaped india's future.
He was simply given the position of PM by Gandhi, if there was a popularity contest definitely Nehru was no party to it. Then comes the middleman business done by Gandhi and gave Nehru the price and the consolation price - Deputy PM / Home Minister to Patel.

Lets face it we are an integrated nation today because of the work Patel did , so celebrating the man that united 600 princely kingdoms is completely timely, if not delayed and forgotten for all these years.



Saturday, November 1, 2014

The First family / Son / Daughter / Son-in-law - part 1

I have been wanting to write about this for a while, but did not want to author some thing half baked.
This wont be one post but a multi part series.
Lets start from the origin

Who are these so called Gandhi family running the INC / Congress Party - The institution that is synonymous to the movement who got India the independence ?

Jawaharlal Nehru - 
proclaimed nationalist and son of a wealthy lawyer who grew up in estates, private tutors, cambridge education and given a career in law followed by politics by pure entitlement.
Any struggle to reach goals or survivorship skills to over come challenges - ZERO - NONE

Indira Gandhi -
Only daughter of J. Nehru 
Legal born name - Indira Priyadarshini 
Spent most times with Mom Kamala Kaul in large palatial estates with private lessons / tutors.
Has she seen real world again, studied in govt schools, street life ?
None ZERO

How did she get her surname  - Gandhi ?
being a Nehru or Priyadarshini 

Enters the First Son in law - Feroze Khan Ghandy - true name - born parsi / muslim

How does this family switch their surname to Gandhi when the dad is a born parsi/muslim with a totally different surname.

Should the Rajiv be called - Rajiv Khan Ghandy ? and Sanjay Khan Ghandy and Indira Ghandy ?

Sonia Gandhi -
This is the height of comical climax, Born in a italian family and got married to Rajiv she switches her surname to GANDHI 

Rahul Gandhi
There is really nothing interesting or even worth to write about this clown.
He can be summarized in one statement " COLOSSAL DISAPPOINTMENT OF THE ENTIRE FAMILY"
He is born in 1970 and he is 44 years old and claimed he had a spanish girlfriend 10 years back, im not a fool to believe a venezulan latina is waiting for you for 10 years.
Its high time he should come out of the closet.
There is nothing wrong about it, just saying......

Priyanka Gandhi & Robert Vadra
Ok this is even more funnier - 
Robert Vadra, who is this guy ? 
Born to Maureen (foreign national ) and Rajinder Vadra 
Now tell me some thing how do every one in Robert's family die or kill themselves in a 10 year period
are they that foolish or screwed up ?

My simple question is from the times of J/Nehru has there been any thing sane about the personal relationships / lives of this family ?

  • Affairs with Mount Batten's wife 
  • Marriage with a Parsi and dubious name change that is clearly politically opportunistic
  • One son marries a beauty pagent model
  • Another son marries an Italian waitress who runs this country's largest national party 
  • 3rd generation is even more messed up 
  • 4th generation is growing to be teenagers 
If you follow this for 100 years, a simple pattern repeats
we went from a autocracy, kings ruling, Foreign slavery, Family slavery 

What next ?
The next part will go deep into each "SO CALLED Gandhi" But NEHRU or GHANDY descendants and reveal the real face of each of them....

What a joke ?

All we learnt in CIVICS and HISTORY growing up was

Nehru Chaacha, Gandhi Thaatha 
NAM
5 year plans
Planning commission
Socialistic Ideologies
Welfare driven statehood

what crap, has any one of these worked ? 

Did the clown fraternity that we read in our History books really fetch freedom or were the British bankrupt that they could not deal with colonies after WWII and just decided to pack bags and leave ?

Lets get some honest answers ?