MK GANDHI WAS THE TOP LEADER IN INDIA IN 1947. HE PROVED NO DETERRENT TO THE MUSLIM AGGRESSION. HE SHOWED NO GUTS AND PATRIOTISM IN DEFENDING SECULARISM & HINDU LIVES IN EAST BENGAL, SINDH, WEST PUNJAB AND KASHMIR.
WITH A COWARD LIKE GANDHI IT WAS CLEAR TO THE WHOLE WORLD THAT INDIA WILL BE EASILY MUTILATED AND BADLY SHRUNK & MUCH REDUCED IN SIZE.
AMONG THE FOOLS DECEIVED BY GANDHI WERE THE SIKHS WHO EARNED THE EPITHET "BAHADUR BUT BE-WAQOOF!"
A CENTURY AGO THEIR RULE EXTENDED TO KHYBER PASS. TRUSTRING GANDHI IN 1947 THEY LOST EVEN LAHORE AND NANKANA SAHIB AND ENDANGERED THE GOLDEN TEMPLE IN AMRITSAR AS WE SAW IN 1984!
TRUSTING HIM, THEY LOST THEIR LANDS, HOMES, FARMS, FIELDS, BUSINESSES AND EVEN LIVES IN WEST PUNJAB. FROM "SARDARS" THEY BECAME PENNILESS REFUGEES, FLEEING IN ALL DIRECTIONS. HAD THEY JUST DEPENDED ON THEIR OWN SWORDS THEY WOULD HAVE SURVIVED IN MULTAN, LYALLPUR, LAHORE, GUJRANWALA, SIALKOT, SARGODHA, JEHLUM AND RAWALPINDI.
YET THERE ARE SIKHS WHO, LIKE THE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF "DEMORALISED & DEMOLISHED" HINDUS, VOTE FOR CONGRESS PARTY OF COWARD GANDHI AND TRAITOR NEHRU!
ISN'T IT UNBELIEVABLE?
WILL THE "MUCH BASHED & BATTERED" HINDU SLAVES TAKE SEVEN CENTURIES MORE TO REALISE THAT THEY ARE HUMAN BEINGS LIKE THE MOHAMMEDANS AND THE ITALIANS- AND SECOND TO NONE ON EARTH?
In a message dated 30/01/2014 07:13:22 GMT Standard Time, xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
THE UTTER SCOUNDREL GANDHI AND THE LIST OF ALL HIS MISDEMEANANT ACTS. PLEASE READ. IF 10% HINDUS HAD ANY PATRIOTISM THEN GANDHI SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE MOST HATED PERSON IN INDIA.
On the eve of Martyrs day on 30th January, let us recount the Life and Achievements of our “Father-of-the-Nation”
Excerpts from Book (Questioning the Mahatma) review (Posted by Koenraad Elst)
Mahatma Gandhi was a heartless and manipulative tyrant without the redeeming feature of political merit.
Gandhi’s vision for India was confused, he twisted the meaning of straightforward terms like Swarajya (independence) to suit his own eccentric fancies
Gandhi never overcame his basic loyalty to the British Empire, and he didn't have the courage of his conviction when it was needed to avert the Partition of India
While playing the part of a Hindu sage in sufficient measure to keep the Hindu masses with him, he never championed and frequently harmed Hindu interests
Gandhi’s sexual experiments with young women were not a private matter but had an impact on his politics
Sri Rama had Vasishtha, Samrat Chandragupta had Chanakya, Shivaji Maharaj had Ramdas, but Gandhi never solicited the guidance of any Hindu rajguru. By contrast, every step of the way in his long formative years, he read Christian authors and welcomed the advice of Christian clergymen. This way, he imbibed many monotheistic prejudices against heathen Hinduism, to the point that in 1946 he insisted for the new temple on the BHU campus not to contain an “idol”. (p.466)
Gandhi took his Hindu constituents for granted but never showed any concern for specific Hindu interests. The story that he staked his life to quell the massacres of Hindus in Noakhali in 1947, turns out to be untrue: his trip to East Bengal took place under security cover and well after the worst violence had subsided
Wherever Hindus were getting butchered en masse in 1947-48, he advised them to get killed willingly rather than fight back or flee. It is breathtaking how often his writings and speeches contain expressions like: “I don’t care if many die.”
It was the first time in Hindu history that anyone qualified going down without a fight against a murderous aggressor as “brave”
All his fasts unto death proved to be empty play when he refused to use this weapon to avert the Partition, in spite of promises given. It was the only time when he ran a real risk of being faced with an opponent willing to let him die rather than give in
Gandhi made a caricature of Hinduism by presenting his own whimsical and eccentric conduct as quintessentially Hindu, such as the rejection of technological progress, maintaining sexual abstinence even within marriage, and most consequentially, extreme non-violence under all circumstances. This concept owed more to Jesus’ “turning the other cheek” than to Hindu-Buddhist ahimsa
Gandhi managed to read his own version of non-violence into the Bhagavad Gita, which in fact centers on Krishna’s rebuking Arjuna’s plea for Gandhian passivity. He never invoked any of India’s warrior heroes and denounced the freedom fighters that opted for armed struggle, under the quiet applause of the British rulers whose lives became a lot more comfortable with such a toothless opponent
Gandhi advises the educated scavenger to stay out of politics (p.480). Few readers will have expected the sheer nastiness of this saint’s temper tantrums. When a candidate from the scavengers’ caste approached Gandhi, the candidate was admonished for his “bookish English” and did no scavenging himself”
Gandhi’s supposed saintliness is incompatible with his well-documented mistreatment of his sons and especially of his faithful wife, whom he repeatedly subjected to public humiliation. Here too, Gandhi’s sexual antics receive some attention. The whole idea of an old man seeking to strengthen his brahmacharya (chastity) by sleeping with naked young women, is bad enough
When Sardar Patel expressed his stern disapproval of these experiments, Gandhi reacted with a list of cheap allegations, which Patel promptly and convincingly refuted
Gandhi’s sponsor G.D. Birla said that “Gandhi treated those whom he considered inferior to him in status with contempt and in wounding language”. (p.389)
Gandhi’s discomfort with Patel’s disapproval was a major reason for his overruling the Congress workers’ preference for Patel and foisting his flatterer Jawaharlal Nehru as Prime Minister on India instead.
Alas, Gandhi has handed over India’s destiny, to an emergent coalition of anti-Hindu forces. To replace Nehru as party leader, he had his yes-man J.B. Kripalani selected, not coincidentally the one among those in the know who had explicitly Okayed the chastity experiments.
The Mahatma’s private vices spilled over into his public choices with grave political consequences to the Hindu nation.
(Book review published in The Sunday Pioneer, 15 May 2011)
Posted by Koenraad Elst, on Wednesday, April 27, 2011, at 4:26 AM
Labels: Hinduism, India, Mahatma Gandhi, partition, Rajan | Radha
Any comments ... objections ... ????