The Strange Strange Ways of the Pseudo-Secularists in India

The Strange Strange Ways of the Pseudo-Secularists in India
By S.P. Attri (USA)

1. Every society has people in it who confuse armed might with culture. They go into wool-gathering and start postulating suppositions that superior might means superior culture. Noticing the unimportance of their own position, they start feeling sorry for themselves and take to despising their own culture, which they regard as inferior compared to the culture of the conqueror.

Pulverized and crushed in spirit and fortitude, they start picking up the ways of the conquerors, imitating them to give themselves a shot of badly-needed self-confidence. After relegating their culture to the ditch in this culture- demoting process, they start noticing the short-comings of their own culture and begin finding fault with every thing that they have inherited from their forefathers. Feeling shrunken in stature compared to the conquerors, they try to tie-together with every group or force that is out to undermine their ancestral culture. They even begin to wonder if they have been worshipping the wrong gods and begin to further lose touch with their own native culture.

As more and more people join in to imitate the culture of the conqueror, the culture of the conqueror becomes a sanctioned virtue, and this method of culture pick-up by imitation, proves more effective than even indoctrination by the conqueror. By and large, such people lack the moral courage to persist and stick it out, traits that are needed to overcome the difficulties.

2. We Hindus have had more than our fair share of such self-alienated Hindus. Such self-alienated and estranged Hindus are born as Hindus but become ashamed of belonging to the Hindu Society, they want to disown it and set themselves up psychologically against it. They want to hide the truth of their own culture and want to display the insidious colors of their adopted culture, the culture of the conqueror. They are the greatest friends of the conquerors. These self-alienated Hindus bear a deep inferiority complex for Hinduism tete- e-tete Islam, Christianity, and the High-Tech West.

3. The problem of self-alienated Hindus is not new at all. We have had them during the regimes of the Moslem kings. In the days of the Moslem kings, these estranged Hindus indulged in reveries and confused the superiority of the Moslem might with the superiority of the Islamic culture. These bewildered, self-estranged Hindus muddled their way through life with any thought of their own culture completely put out of their mind.

Then when the British came, these self-alienated Hindus exchanged masters, replacing Moslems with the British, and continued their dishonorable, pre- conceived, anti-Hindu bias from the Moslem period on into the period of the British regime. They now wrapped themselves in the culture of the Victorious British and started cultivating the methods and mores of the Victor British. British manners and procedures became the object of their admiration and anything with the label of the "Mighty British" became the vanguard of their prized designation and dispensation.

4. Because of the background of history, the self-alienation of these Hindus has been a double-dose of hate-Hindu historical process. Napping and dreaming always in the culture of the conqueror, in time a whole class of self- alienated (The Phony-Liberal) Hindus grew up. Molded into the garb of the Western culture, individuals like Nehru and other Brown Sahibs (nick-name for The Phony-Liberal Hindus) tried their darnest best, with delirium and delight, to put Hinduism down, and squash and smash its backbone. The Brown Sahibs did this indecorous and depraved act with the help of the minorities, in the name and guise of uplifting the minorities, and creating more minorities in the process. The objective of this minority-ism, of course, was to fluster and fragment the Hindu Society, and to subvert and smash every symbol of Hindu Culture, all in the name of protecting the minorities. Consequently, therefore, malignant and malicious propaganda was coined and conducted, to make Hindus look like monsters who are out to demolish and decimate the minorities, if permitted to do so. Blaming Hindus for everything that went wrong in India, became the device and draft of Indians like Nehru and his Phony-Liberal Cohorts, the Brown Sahibs.

The Brown Sahibs have become aliens within their own Hindu culture, a culture on which they heap filth. It is because of the ponderous appeasement of the Moslem and Christian minorities by the Brown Sahibs, that the barbaric creeds of Islam and Christianity have become so aggressive in India and they refuse to peacefully live and co-exist with the Peace-loving Hindu.

5. Things have gone so bad that being anti-Hindu is now considered by the Brown Sahibs as being Truly Secular. Using this degraded form of definition of Secularism, they make a resolute attempt to denigrate India's national Vedic culture and its ancient heritage. For instance, Sanskrit is belittled as Hindu & Brahminical and its teaching is considered the same as wearing away the base of Secularism. By thus associating Sanskrit with Brahminism, Sanskrit is given a black eye by labelling it as caste-ist and is rejected on those grounds. Along with the Sanskrit, the shouting brigade of the pseudo-secularists relegates the Vedas, the Upanishads, Purans, and other Sanskrit literature also to the ditch. In short, what the pseudo-secular crowd (The Brown Sahibs) is saying is that the proper place for our Vedic culture and literature is in the garbage can.

Teaching of Sanskrit is also objected to by Moslems ( and Christians) who want to learn Arabic. But Arabic is not Indian. Sanskrit is. Also Vedas, Upanishads, Purans, are the common heritage of all Indians, Moslems and Christians included. Why should the teaching of Vedas, Upanishads, and Purans be discarded because the Moslems and Christians object to it? This point is particularly and potently significant because the Supreme Court has ruled that Hindutva is a way of life and is not a religion. Therefore, Vedas, Upanishads, and Purans have a priceless position in our heritage and they all need to be taught in all schools, to everybody.

What is the harm and what is the objection to teaching our culture to our children? Sanskrit is the gateway to all our ancient writings. It is ridiculous to insist that only Brown Sahibs have the smarts and the exclusive right to prescribe education rules for us. If Indian students are not going to learn their own culture in India, where else are they going to learn it?

6. Insult to Vedas and to Sanskrit is bad enough. Worse yet is the deliberate downgrading and denigration of goddess Saraswati which is imparted by the Brown Sahibs, in meetings in which their education ministers are present who show their uncivil and boorish behavior, by walking out. Can such people who have so much contempt for their past, be entrusted with the education of our children?

It is a dirty shame that, the greatest, the most ancient, the most perfect, and the most compatible language for computer-usage, because of being structured so rationally, the language of Sanskrit, is considered as dead by the Pseudo-Secular shouting brigade. This pseudo-secular attitude graphically demonstrates the mindless and rootless denial of Bharatiya (Indian) identity, in the name of secularism (pseudo-secularism, truthfully speaking) and it is a dramatic demonstration of how Macauley's ghost continues to haunt Bharat Varsha. The Spurious Secularism that is pushing the ghost of Macauley, is Opportunistic Secularism, it is based on vote-bank politics and is afflicted with the pathology of "minority psychosis." It is the same Spurious Secularism that objects to Saraswati Vandana. If pillars of Bharatiya culture continue to be eroded and rooted out, the future generations of India will be denied their cultural heritage and the grand and golden culture of Bharat Varsha will be lost for ever.

7. What is wrong with Phony-Liberalism (Pseudo-Secularism)? What is wrong is that it is undemocratic. Democracy says that majority should rule. Hindus constitute the majority of the population in India. Then why are the Brown Sahibs afraid of Hindu education? The real cause of this sickening shame is the group of Opportunistic Secularists who want to politicise the educational system of India (to make political capital out of it), to build up their vote banks, for their ulterior, self-serving motives. There is no other rational explanation!

The Macauley system of education presently on the books, continues to erode the confidence of the Hindu people in their own culture. In the meantime, both Islam and Christianity are tightening their noose around Hinduism in their campaign to dislodge Hinduism completely out of India. The fundamental message of Hinduism is the oneness and the underlying unities. Because of this, we must insist that we have our own Bharatiya Education System. Simply stated, we must Indianise, Nationalise, and Spiritualise our educatinal system and give a decent burial to the ghost of Macauley.

8. The dirty politics of Phony-Liberalism (Pseudo-Secularism) is doing another malicious mischief, it is trying to hide the truth and substituting consistent catalogs of falsehood in its place, with the avowed objective of promoting a composite culture and encouraging a fictional Hindu-Moslem Bhai Bhai connection. NCERT and other educational bodies have issued specific instructions for the writing of history books in India, with a "Fictional Vaporisation Cleansing" statement which says that: "The period of Moslem Rule in India is not to be portrayed as a period of Conflict, Collision, Or Discord between the Hindus and the Moslems."

With this kind of Pseudo-Secular laundering of the history books of India, the Brown Sahibs are concealing the sun of truth and parading instead their substituted dark clouds of falsehood, fiction, and delusion. The dirty politicians of this Phony-Liberal Clique, will never dare tell the truth to our young Hindu boys and girls about, what kind of Barbaric Islamic Havoc their ancestors lived under during the regime of the Moslem kings in India.

What the Pseudo-Seculars are hiding from our Hindu boys and girls are the facts of certainty and the recorded facts of history that destroying other people's places of worship was a favorite pastime of practically all Moslem rulers in medieval times, and a pious performance of this pastime was provided by Prophet Hazrat Mohammad himself and the precedent had now been set in concrete. Historic chronicles narrated by the Moslem chroniclers describe clearly that Allah and his Prophet had blessed the pulling down of the Hindu temples and the raising of mosques in their places, mostly with materials of demolished temples. This is called the Islamic theology of Iconoclasm.

9. Pakistan was a natural outcome of what and how Islam is taught and preached in mosques. It is a well-established fact that Quran and Islam stress the religious uniqueness and cohesiveness of the Moslem community. This theme is constantly drummed into the brains of the Moslems in sermons delivered in the mosques. Moslem masses who were fed on these sermons enthusiastically embraced the two-nation theory of the Moslem League, because it confirmed the basic teachings of the Quran. Further, the memories of the erstwhile Moslem rule in India, remained alive among the Moslems, and they were reminded of it by the Ulema again and again that having ruled India, Moslems should not allow themselves to be ruled by the Hindu majority.

By concealing and screening information on the Barbaric Havoc of Islam in Indian History, the Brown Sahibs are trying to create a false sense of serenity by constructing a cracker jackbox of thunderstruck falsehood. The Brown Sahibs are also slipping up by failing to realize that they themselves (the Brown Sahibs) are also on the hit list of both Islam and Christianity because in the eyes of both Islam and Christians, the Brown Sahibs are Kafirs and fit only to feed the fires of Hell. At this time, both Islam and Christianity are increasing at a hefty rate, are growing like cancer, and eating away the vitals of Hindu Society. The Brown Sahibs are shutting their eyes to this display of destruction and extinction of Hinduism. The naivety of the Brown Sahibs is nothing short of scandalous. And as the clich'e goes, they are not focussed on the bottom-line. On the other hand, insulting anything related to Hinduism and its cultural traditions, is in their mind, synonymous with Secularism. Many of these Brown Sahibs genuinely believe that insulting Hinduism is a royal road to getting Moslem votes.

10. In 1956, Nehru's Sanskrit Commission had recommended that Sanskrit be made a compulsory subject in all schools in order to preserve the intellectual pre- eminence of the Indian heritage. Before that, in 1927, Gandhi had written that not only Hindus but Moslems also should read Sanskrit because Ram and Krishna were their forefathers too. It must not be forgotten that Sanskrit is the oldest perfect language and contains the richest and the most prolific treasure of knowledge and wisdom.

Walk-out by the Brown Sahibs, from educational meetings designed to consider Sanskrit, Vande Matram, and Saraswati Vandana, are examples of their insulting, abusing, and degrading Hinduism and its various symbols. Anybody who criticizes their anti-Hindu and anti-national rhetoric, they detest and disdain him and paint him saffron. The Brown Sahibs are ready to accept the moral contents of the Quran and the Bible, but are not favorably inclined to accept the Ramayana or Gita. The assaulting and insulting of anything related to Hinduism and its moral tradition is the essence of their degraded secularism. The BJP is trying to reverse this damaging trend by proposing the study of the Vedas and Purans in schools. What all this means is that due to the disposition of pseudo-secularism inIndia, our Hindu ethos and culture is at the wit and mercy of foreign ideologies.

11. There was a time when Moslems (converted from Hinduism) ruled Hindustan and they used to tell us Hindus: Yes, we will defend you, but you will have to pay us "JIZIA" as required by our DEEN-E-QURAN. It became normal, therefore, for our Hindus to entrust their daughters and defense to the barbarian Moslem Masters. But times have changed and India is no longer under the jackboots of Islam. Can't we Hindus now stand up for our religion, culture, and rights now? The answer is YES we can, if we decide to, but not if we have the conviction of goats in our religion and in our Hindu people.

In all European countries, that claim to practice secularism, the concept of secularism, never stands in the way of coloring every important occasion with their Christian beliefs, practices, and symbols. All Moslem majority countries are exclusively Islamic. No other religious practices are permitted in Islamic countries. There is no distinction between state and Islamic principles. From Moslem point of view, all other religions are corrupted and their religious books are superseded by Quran. In Islam, the mixture of politics and religion is inextricable. Slaughter, plunder, and looting of Hindus (Kafir Hindus) is permitted and couched in Islamic terms, dividing mankind into Moslems and Kafirs.

In no Islamic or Christian country, are there any special rights for other religions (i.e. non-Islamic or non-Christian religions). They are convinced that Islam and Christianity will dominate the world and guide its destiny. Only in India, are there special rights, special privileges, and special monetary support to the Islamic and Christian minorities, all in the off-color name of secularism. In reality, this is not secularism, as practised anywhere, but minority-ism.

12. What to do about Phony-Liberalism? It should be clear to every rational-thinking Hindu that Hinduism is presently in the anti-Hindu literary siege and is being attacked with campaigns of disinformation war conducted against it by the Phony-Liberal Hindus, Moslems, Christians, and Marxists. It is a battle for the minds of men and we must fight this war to revive the thinking of the Hindu Society. We must challenge the media distortions against us, on TV, Radio, Newspapers, in Schools, every place. Only when the thinking of the Hindu Society itself is altered, will it be able to revitalize itself. Hindus must stop hiding in the veil of neglect and actively, ideologically, and scholarly, challenge the religions of exclusivity (Islam and Christianity) and expose their bone-chilling barbaric record of centuries.

13. Veer Savarkar advised:HINDUISE POLITICS AND MILITARISE THE HINDU

It is a filthy shame that we Hindus have not taken up this absolutely sound advice. Instead, we have taken up the worthless, rotten, and pre-posterous mumbo jumbo of Gandhi such as:

HINDU-MOSLEM BHAI BHAI and SARVA DHARMA SAMBHAVA etc etc

Just consider this:

We are repeatedly told that Hindu-Hindu Unity is impossible but Hindu-Moslem Unity is quite feasible. What kind of rubbish is this? This is the rubbish that is being parcelled out by the Brown Sahibs, who have distanced themselves from Hinduism and have lost all allegiance to Bharat Varsha and her sanctity.

14. Hindus are being driven from hearth and home but Brown Sahibs have nothing to say about that. Hindus are being murdered and persecuted nearly all over the world...in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Burma, Uganda, Fiji, Malaysia, and other places. Phony-Liberal news media of India invents Phony-Liberal terminology "To Explain This Rout Of The Hindu." Hindus killed in Sri Lanka are labelled as "Tamils." Hindus murdered and escaping from Bangladesh are labelled as "Chakmas" and "Refugees" and so on, to confuse the Hindu people. The aim of this Phony-Liberal terminology is to make the persecuted Hindus look like aliens...no business and concern of India, therefore, O.K. to forget them.

Why do the Hindus take so much Shit from Moslems and Christians? The answer is lack of Hindu Unity and the extremely short memory of the Hindus. And who are these Moslems that are being pampered? These are the same Moslems who used to repeat:

MUFIT SE LIYA HAI PAKISTAN KHOON SE LEYNGE HINDUSTAN

Again, it is the lack of Hindu Unity which results in the appeasement of these Worthless Mussalmaans. Why else would the Hindu Communist Traitor eat beef to prove himself a Marxist and his "Pseudo-Secularism" but if someone offers pork (pig-meat) to the Moslem Communist Comrade, the Hindu Communist Comrade opposes it. Why is this kind of falsehood and hypocrisy being thrust upon the Hindu in the guise and guile of Secularism? Because what, in fact, the Brown Sahibs are saying, through charades and hypocrisy of this type, is that "Religion Is An Opium" but only for the Hindus, not for Moslems and Christians. This kind of witless hypocrisy and dis-esteem of the Hindu is most reprehensible and needs to be brought to an end.

15. The outrage of the Hindu is enormous. More than thirty million Hindus have been driven out of Bangladesh. In addition, more than thirty million illegal Moslem infiltrators from Bangladesh have entered India. They have not been deported, instead they have been given ration cards and voting rights by the Brown Sahibs, Marxist Traitors, and other Haram-Khors, who took hefty bribes from the infiltrators. These criminals need to be rounded up, punished, and deported, and the corrupt officials of the Brown Sahib clique need to be made to cough up all the bribes that they have taken.

Because the Hindus were made to flee from Pakistan and Bangladesh, for their dear lives, justice and prudent economics demands that needed equivalent area be snatched from Pakistna and Bangladesh, to settle these Hindu refugees. Don't forget that only 200,000 Palestinian Moslems were uprooted upon the creation of Israel and the demand for their share of land has never ceased. In fact, it has created an International Problem, with incidents of terrorism, car-bombings etc etc… Then why don't thirty million Hindus deserve their share of land and why don't they deserve to be heard? People who regard this demand as "Hindu Fundamentalism" are traitors.

Why does nearly every Hindu shrink in fear at the mention of the two words "Hindu Rashtra?" There are so many fundamentalist Islamic countries and they don't cause any sensation in the mind of any Hindu. Why is "Hindu Rashtra" such a scary nomenclature? What is the problem with the Hindu mind?

16. As stated before, the solution to problems of Hinduism is Hindu Unity. Hindus need to wake up, understand this reality, and get united FAST! Islam's objective has not changed and it is to destabilize and finish off the Dar-Ul-Harb of Kafir Hindu India, as laid out in the Quran. What are our Brown Sahibs doing in the face of such dire challenges? Here is an example of their response:

Every Hindu pilgrim has to cough up Rs 10 while visiting any of his shrines but the Moslems going to Saudi Arabia for Haj get a subsidy of crores of rupees from the government of India. This glaring disparity in the treatment of the Hindus and the Moslems, shames the manhood of every Hindu and he wonders how long he will have to take this kind of Sh**?

Simply put, it is plain that traitors posing as Seculars, Liberals, and Anti- Communals are bent upon eradicating Hinduism from Bharat Varsha. These Traitors need to be exposed for what they really are...malicious and perverse, anti-Hindu double-dealing traitors.

17. To sum and recapitulate: Savarkar's one-liner is a timely solution for the problems of Hinduism and is repeated here for emphasis:

HINDUISE THE POLITICS AND MILITARIZE THE HINDU

Unbelievable!!! BBC says Taj Mahal a Vedic Temple

Unbelievable!!! You all should read the explanation given below the photographs. 

BBC says about Taj Mahal---Hidden Truth - Never say it is a Tomb 

No one has ever challenged it except Prof. P. N. Oak, who believes the whole world has been duped. In his book Taj Mahal: The True Story, Oak says the Taj Mahal is not Queen Mumtaz's tomb but an ancient Hindu temple palace of Lord Shiva (then known as Tejo Mahalaya). In the course of his research Oak discovered that the Shiva temple palace was usurped by Shah Jahan from then Maharaja of Jaipur, Jai Singh. In his own court chronicle, Badshahnama, Shah Jahan admits that an exceptionally beautiful grand mansion in Agra was taken from Jai SIngh for Mumtaz's burial. The ex-Maharaja of Jaipur still retains in his secret collection two orders from Shah Jahan for surrendering the Taj building. Using captured temples and mansions, as a burial place for dead courtiers and royalty was a common practice among Muslim rulers. 

For example, Humayun,Akbar, Etmud-ud-Daula and Safdarjung are all buried 
in such mansions. Oak's inquiries began with the name of Taj Mahal. He says
the term "Mahal" has never been used for a building in any Muslim countries 
from Afghanisthan to Algeria. "The unusual explanation that the term Taj Mahal derives from Mumtaz Mahal was illogical in atleast two respects. 

Firstly, her name was never Mumtaz Mahal but Mumtaz-ul-Zamani," he writes. 
Secondly, one cannot omit the first three letters 'Mum' from a woman's name to derive the remainder as the name for the building."Taj Mahal, he claims, is a corrupt version of Tejo Mahalaya, or Lord Shiva's Palace. Oak also says the love story of Mumtaz and Shah Jahan is a fairy tale created by court sycophants, blundering historians and sloppy archaeologists. Not a single royal chronicle of Shah Jahan's time corroborates the love story. 

Furthermore, Oak cites several documents suggesting the Taj Mahal predates Shah Jahan's era, and was a temple dedicated to Shiva, worshipped by Rajputs of Agra city. For example, Prof. Marvin Miller of New York took a few samples from the riverside doorway of the Taj. Carbon dating tests revealed that the door was 300 years older than Shah Jahan. European traveler Johan Albert Mandelslo,who visited Agra in 1638 (only seven years after Mumtaz's death), describes the life of the cit y in his memoirs. But he makes no reference to the Taj Mahal being built. The writings of Peter Mundy, an English visitor to Agra within a year of Mumtaz's death, also suggest the Taj was a noteworthy building well before Shah Jahan's time.

Prof. Oak points out a number of design and architectural inconsistencies that support the belief of the Taj Mahal being a typical Hindu temple rather than a mausoleum. Many rooms in the Taj Mahal have remained sealed since Shah Jahan's time and are still inaccessible to the public. Oak asserts they contain a headless statue of Lord Shiva and other objects commonly used for worship rituals in Hindu temples. Fearing political backlash, Indira Gandhi's government tried to have Prof. Oak's book withdrawn from the bookstores, and threatened the Indian publisher of the first edition dire consequences. There is only one way to discredit or validate Oak's research.

The current government should open the sealed rooms of the Taj Mahal under U.N. supervision, and let international experts investigate. 

Do circulate this to all you know and let them know about this reality..... 

Hey check this link ........it adds as a visual proof ......... 

http://www.stephen-knapp.com/was_the_taj_mahal_a_vedic_temple.htm 
seven-storied structure 

INDIA: THE GREAT LAUGHTER SHOW

INDIA: The Great Laughter Show - A Blog in ToI

As I watch the 'The Great Laughter Show', I realize that the history of India is replete with self-flagellation, masochism and self-goals.

A great country that extended from Hindu-Kush Mountains in present Afghanistan to Bali, Java and Sumatra and its influence as a rich and culturally vibrant country extended throughout the world. But then, when the invaders, marauders and looters came from the Northwest, they not only robbed our Sone-kee-Chidiya of precious jewels, gold and diamonds, they robbed us of our self-confidence, esteem and pride by raping and looting our invaluable heritage and rich cultural legacy. The country became smaller in size and much reduced in self-pride also. I'm keenly aware of the impact of history on national psyche and attitudes - let's face it, while for centuries, we Indians have been raped, massacred and indoctrinated with complete abandon, our leaders didn’t break this mold - not just our politicians, but also our media and our news outlet owners - they just standby, they don't feel the need to change things and put them in proper perspective. 

The last 60 years of our independent and sovereign existence are filled with abusing ourselves and belittling whatever is left of us. So much so, that many a people openly say that it was better to be a slave under Britishers than to be free. Now what kind of people are we?

It all started with father of our nation, Gandhiji credo of passivity and turning the other cheek. His claiming that the division of India will take place over his dead body. For every aggression and assault on Hindus in India, be it Noakhali or in undivided Bengal, Gandhiji put the blame on Hindus for the bloody murders and killings. Nay, the process had started much earlier with King Ashoka surrendering his sword and opening the borders for invasion. Buddha’s insistence on non-violence somehow made us believe that it is better to surrender our motherland than to fight for it. The British rule took away the remaining pride that we had in ourselves and we started belittling ourselves in front of others. Gandhijee agreed to divide the country on communal lines; despite the fact that a majority of Muslims had rooted for a Muslim Pakistan and Britishers agreeing to a complete transfer of Hindu and Muslim population across the borders, we took the lofty path of ‘secularism’ and allowed the proven infection of Islam to fester in our body India. Nehru took the Kashmir issue to UNO instead of accepting Patel’s advice of sending the Indian troops to Kashmir to remove the Pakistani Kabayalis and that resulted in a problem that has and will continue to plague our children and us forever. 

Despite the four wars imposed on us, can you believe that there exist large chunks of Indian Muslims and Punjabis like Gujaral-Kuldip Nayyars in our country who nurture affiliations and romantic notion of jaffi-diplomacy or lighting the candles at the Wagah border post for peace while Pakistani sponsored terrorists kill our innocent Indian citizens? There are these people who openly say that ‘India "must give up its inalienable right to Kashmir" and there’s no one to counter that? And, our leading journalists, openly publishing anti-India, hate-India propaganda in Indian dailies, and not a word is said - not a single editorial, no public criticism, nothing? When our own people berate the Hindu Pundits in the valley and hold them responsible for their own plight; after the Nadimarg and Chittisinghpora massacre of Indians, including women and children, many wrote scathing articles, criticizing the Kashmiri Pundits, blaming them for leaving the valley - essentially the they-asked-for-it point-of-view, I wonder what is it in our Hindu psyche that we continue to accept this? Many editorials regularly come out and blame the Government of India for many things and in the name of democracy and freedom of speech, we accept it with typical nonchalance. Mind you, not a word - not one word, criticizing either the Pakistani generals or the LeT. All these people, subtly yet completely undermined the case the Indian govt tries to build in international media on the persistent and genocidal nature of Pakistani terrorism. In essence, these Indians equate the ISI-backing army rule of perpetrators with us. After all, nobody in international media would cast any doubt on "Indian" writers, when they place the blame on ourselves, what can you say? 

I’m amazed when our own brethren show astonishment and doubts at the great work being done by our engineers, doctors and scientists throughout the world, as if it were something impossible for us Indians. They arrogantly believe that China can do it; Japan can do it, but India and Indians? Hmmm…. are you sure? We all end up believing that Indians just cannot do the kinds of things that we hear so often. Is it our inferiority complex? You watch the discussion on our TV channel and the chances are that we end up deriding, cussing and degrading India and us Indians. You tell that security people killed the terrorists and we end up doubting that. You tell that Ishrat was a terrorist trying to kill Modi, our media doesn’t believe that. But, when LeT accepts her ‘shahaadat’, we readily agree. When our own businessmen go to Dubai and pay money to Chhota Shakeel to sort out their business problems, or when he threatens T-Series not to interfere in his selling pirated CDs of Krrish, when our Gulshan Kumar is killed and we do nothing, when so many of these instances happen and we’re left blaming ourselves, but do nothing, what am I to infer? No matter what happens and how it happens, it is India that is at fault, Indians are responsible. Journalists say that they must remain balanced. In the end, we deserve what we get and we get what we deserve. 

We berate our magnificent achievements despite our massive problems and there is no one to tell these people to just shut up. Remember the NDA era when so much was done but day after day, the media would berate the communal BJP govt for one thing or the other? Our IT capabilities, our manufacturing base, our armed forces, our great strides forward - nothing but the scandalous, the extreme, the insulting exceptions would become the order of the day. Maybe, the journalists would score brownie points by being anti-establishment, but can you imagine the damage that this did to the psyche of our armed forces and our civilians? But, the fact remains is that if you point that out, you become a Communal and fascist Hindu Sanghi. Be it illegal Bangladeshis, the terrorists attacking our religious sites, the idea is not to protest but to maintain the communal amity. And, wait for the next attack on us. If you protest, you’ll be blamed for inciting the religious sentiments of the general public. And all this, when the Javeds, the Shabanas, the Teestas of India would call a democratically elected Chief Minister a Hitler, while eulogizing the General next door. Someone can be so audacious as to go to another country and demand that Modi be tried in the international court for genocide and we say - Wah! Wah! Or, to get sadistic pleasure when Modi is denied visa or when someone derides India in front of the world community. Our Arundhati Roys, our Mahesh Bhatts and our Medha Patkars insulting our common sense, I wonder, do we really deserve this? We bend backwards in the name of Confidence Building Measures and buses to Pakistan and all we get is insults and aggressions that are a part of Pakistani DNA. So, when our Confidence Building Measures do not impress Pakistan, when our free heart operations on the children of Pakistan still result in killing our innocent people, including children, when our open visa policy to the Pakistani groups still result in no visa for Javed Akhtar, when Pakistan and its General openly declare us and our country as their enemy, I wonder what is wrong with us idiotic Indians?

In this country of 120 Crore people, we have to continuously prove our secular credentials by selecting a Pakistani as the laughter champion, a Meera as the best actress, an Adnan Sami as the best singer, a Ghulam Ali as the best ghazal singer and a Pakistani musical group as the greatest? All this would be acceptable but there is no reciprocity and we continue to flaunt our secularism to anyone and everyone?

Sometimes, I wonder if there's a Indian public choice in one of these TV debates, between our Mannjee and Gen Mush, the public may root for Mush as more capable to rule us. You never know us Indians!

India has truly become the 'The Great Laughter Show’ of the world, I say!

The disgrace of politics

No one knows how to misgovern better than those who rule over us. None of our problems are all that difficult to resolve. They look complex because they are tangled in self-serving politics. Cut out the silly politics and they can be solved by a half wit. Contrary to all the rubbish we read, India is actually an easy nation to govern. Our people are simple, trusting, ready to listen. Till you push them to the very edge. But who will they listen to? The people who rule us are mostly venal and self serving. They are busy sharing the spoils of office than running India. That’s the problem.

Kashmir is not about AFSPA or Omar Abdullah. It’s about Delhi’s failure to address the real issues that plague the Valley. All decisions till now have been knee-jerk reactions to crises, not attempts to sort out the problems of the people, which stem from poverty, injustice, joblessness and broken promises. What’s worse, there’s no credible roadmap for the future either. The government has a million excuses starting with terrorism. But excuses don’t solve problems. Initiatives do. The right initiatives can change everything overnight. What Kashmir needs is a more intelligent, more compassionate response to their problems. It must feel it is an intrinsic part of the new India that’s emerging instead of being constantly written off as a terrorist haven. That the Kashmiris are still protesting by pelting stones, not lobbing grenades is the best proof that the problem can be resolved. Even after so many lives lost, it remains a political problem, not a problem of terrorism. 

Naxalites are similar. The tribals are not monsters. They are simple people who are nervous that their land and livelihood are being taken away by an uncaring State in tandem with big business interests. They have tried protesting in many ways. No one listens. No one cares. Not even a CPM government supposedly committed to the poor. In fact, every time they protest, they are brutally repressed. On top of that, all political parties try to exploit them. Can you blame them for losing their way? Yes, their leaders are misguided. But so is the government which believes that it can finish them off with brutal repression. Brutality resolves nothing. It exacerbates every crisis. Politics must take a back seat to restoring the traditional rights of tribals to their land and livelihood if this problem has to be beaten back. This is a political issue, not a law and order problem.

The same is true for food. India produces enough to feed everyone but not enough to satisfy the greed of those who trade in it. We have all seen shameful pictures of godowns packed with rotting foodgrains. This year the output will be even higher says the ministry. The Supreme Court has instructed the government to distribute excess foodgrain to the poor but this will never happen. Profit thrives on artificial shortage, and profit is what drives the politics of food. That is why the poor in India starve to death and we have more malnourished kids than even the poorest African states. It’s doubly sad that this happens even as our granaries are bursting at the seams. No, you don’t need more godowns as the ministry claims. Starvation and hunger in India is a political problem, not a problem of a genuine food shortage. 

Corruption too is a political problem. Indians are not as corrupt as we think. When you go to meet the CEO of a private company, the peon outside the door (if there’s one in the first place) doesn’t ask you for chai paani. Now try meeting a minister or his lackey. Everybody outside the door wants an entry fee. There’s something in the air of a government office that breeds corruption. This originally began when government servants were underpaid but now it has become an intrinsic part of the system. Almost everyone, from top to bottom, wears (like Chulbul Pandey) corruption as a badge of honour. No one’s ashamed to ask for a bribe. Yet corruption can be easily wiped out if we seriously want to. It is almost entirely a political problem.

Sports is another example. India will never excel in sports till we remove politicians and government busybodies from the sporting scene. They have destroyed our reputation and killed the fighting spirit of our sportsmen. Delegations that go to international sporting events are packed with more officials than sports people. As a result, the world’s second largest nation never ends up training or encouraging enough world class sports people. The few who do emerge occasionally quit out of frustration. Kick politics out of sports and we could become a first rate sporting nation.

Yes, all our problems, or at least most of them, stem from politics. If we can fight that, we can escape the fate of Sisyphus. If we don’t, this is the way we will stay forever. Cribbing. Fighting among ourselves. Never achieving our true potential as a nation and a people despite our amazing strength, fortitude, resilience.

Godsegiri v/s Gandhigiri

Godse's self-prepared defense in court:

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 were 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 in which thousands of Hindus, Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, Chamars and Bhangis 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 whatever Veer 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 single factor has done. 

All this reading and thinking led me to believe 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 (300 million) of Hindus would automatically constitute the freedom and the well-being of all India, one fifth of human race. This conviction led me naturally to devote myself to the Hindu Sanghtanist 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 Lokamanya Tilak, Gandhiji'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 those 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 mere dream if you imagine that 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 a 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 essentially 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 Gobind Singh as misguided patriots, Gandhiji 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 for ever 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 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 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 every thing; 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 and when to withdraw it. The movement might succeed or fail, it might bring untold disaster and political reverses but that could make no difference to the Mahatma's infallibility. 'A Satyagrahi can never fail' was his formula for declaring his own infallibility and nobody except himself knew what a Satyagrahi is. 

Thus, the Mahatma became the judge and jury in his own cause. 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 politics 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, disaster after disaster. 

Gandhi's pro-Muslim policy is blatantly 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 called Hindustani; it has no grammar; it has no vocabulary. It is a mere dialect, it is spoken, but not written.

It is a bastard tongue and cross-breed 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 purity of the Hindi language was 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 the 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 some 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 he was succeeded by Lord Mountbatten. King Log was followed by King Stork. 

The Congress which had boasted of its nationalism and socialism 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 August 15, 1947.

Lord Mountbatten came to be described in Congress circles as the greatest Viceroy and Governor-General this country ever had. The official date for handing over 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 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 '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 consider a deity of worship - my mind was filled with direful anger. 

One of the conditions imposed by Gandhi for his breaking of the fast unto death 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 for its break some condition on the Muslims in Pakistan, there 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 condition on the Muslims. He was fully aware of from the 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 had failed his paternal duty inasmuch as 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 and his doctrine of non-violence of which so much is made of, all crumbled before Jinnah's iron will and proved to be powerless. 

Briefly speaking, I thought to myself and foresaw 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 felt that the Indian politics in the absence of Gandhiji would surely be proved practical, able to retaliate, and would be powerful with 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 and 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 to be 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 of 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 preachings and deeds are at times at variances 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 establishment of 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 else 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 some day in future.