Date: 3/12/2001


Response to editor, The Daily Telegraph, London, on March 11, 2001.

The whole world ought to know the OTHER side of the story, since in the case of "CONGRESS CONTROLLED/INTIMIDATED COOLIE COLONY OF PARTITIONED INDIA" there is always only ONE side of every story- and that is what pleases the almighty "DYNASTY" and its vast establishment spawned by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru.



With regard to the book-review by Philip Ziegler, "A Despot Who Loved Democracy", (The Daily Telegraph, March 10, 2001, p. A5), we wish to say that his comment does not reflect truth or reality.

Mrs. Indira Gandhi was autocratic and arrogant to the extreme. What better proof of that than the manner of her sudden and violent death when her own intolerance met head on with an appropriately matching Sikh response?

Indira was born with "a silver spoon in her mouth", the sole child of India's most powerful and fabulously rich political personality of the last century- Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru.

Like her father, she studied in Europe, not in India to get a "feel" for her people. She was not the one to move among her poor people except at election time. She did not found a single charity. She remained insecure with the masses, aloof and arrogant, rumoured to have had several fruitless and frustrating secret love affairs which the timid and subservient Indian media have not dared to expose.

Nothing is said of her marriage. She ignored the wishes of her family to marry a Sunni MUSLIM young man of Allahabad. His surname KHAN was quickly changed to GANDHI, to deceive the people of India.

Her son, Sanjay, encouraged or tolerated by her, was ‘law unto himself’ and the Review has rightly brought this out.

Indira was very paranoid about any threat to her own position. She wished to remain at the top for ever. Declaration of Emergency is an instance.

She perceived a threat to her Dynasty from two sides: the Tamils in the South and the Sikhs in the North. Both had never been fully "crushed and pulverised, and GENETICALLY DEGENERATED" by the former savage MUSLIM, and ruthless BRITISH, rulers in the preceding centuries like the Hindus throughout northern India.

So she set about their decimation, and to "teach them a lesson". Golden Temple in the North and the grand Hindu temples in the South were her ultimate strategic targets.

She had plans for the Tamils which her son Rajiv put into practice a decade later that ironically cost his own life in the manner of his mother's, and she clashed with the Sikhs over their demands for some petty concessions.

But she openly favoured the state of Kashmir which is a Muslim majority state. It was promptly granted, and conceded, a lot more than just a few petty concessions, as early as 1948!

She never thought of abrogating Article 370 of the Constitution which confers countless privileges on that State. Nor did she extend its provisions to the other states. That was amazing democracy!

To maximise the hurt and grief on the entire Sikh community, she chose an important anniversary in the Sikh religious calendar for the actual day of attack, or Operation “Blue Star”. That was her "love of people” in her democracy.

Hundreds of innocent pilgrims, including women and children, who had come to Golden Temple in Amritsar on that occasion, fell to army bullets. Shameless army officers ("Eunuchs in Uniform") accepted awards for "gallantry" for killing own people while totally overlooking the occupation of North Kashmir by Pakistan!

Mark Tulley and Stish Jacob of BBC, in their book, "Mrs. Gandhi's Last Battle", have brought out the treacherous deceit and cunning behind the manner and timing of that attack.

At the same time she imposed curfew on the entire state of Punjab and expelled all foreign journalists from Amritsar, hardly a democratic act.

The review does not touch on the war in the East. She liberated EAST Pakistan, only to return it to ISLAM unconditionally in the same way as her father had conceded five provinces of India to Islam in 1947- without a condition.

It is noteworthy that Mrs. Indira Gandhi did not show any love of Secularism, or India, when she failed to commend them to Shaikh Mujiburrahman and let him proclaim yet another sovereign Islamic state of Bangladesh in 1972. At the same time she refused to grant even one tenth of the sovereignty of East Bengal to East Punjab and West Bengal, even to Tamil Nadu!

Thus while she fully met the aspirations of sovereignty in EAST Bengal, she crushed the same in other states like Kashmir, Punjab and Tamil Nadu.

The worst act of her rule was the intimidation of media. It was intellectual vandalism. Editors and journalists had to hail her as "Indira is India!" and write columns upon columns in her praise in order to prove their own credentials of patriotism and secularism. (Secularism in her India meant a threat and a warning to the Hindus, "You dare question the constitutional status of the Mohammedans in POST-PARTITION India!")

She never once thought of taking Broadcasting out of State ownership and control. Amazing for a “democrat” who had come to Switzerland for her education, who was the daughter of a barrister-at-law from London!

Katherine Frank may be sympathetic to Indira Gandhi but there was NO reason for Philip Ziegler to be impressed by her.

Yours truly



What do YOU think of Khanum Indira "Gandhi"? Post your views fearlessly on this website if you care a hoot for democracy in India.