Congress Party

Alleges

"Saffron Terror"

– Part 3

ANTI-HINDU ACTIONS BY MAHATMA GANDHI

by V. SUNDARAM I.A.S (retd.)
     And
  Praveen Shanker Pillai

In our earlier article we had mentioned GANDHI’S contempt for and the sadistic manner with which he treated the Hindus. This time we shall attempt to list some of the immoral, treasonable and sadistically anti-Hindu actions of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi a.k.a Gandhiji a.k.a Mahatma Gandhi.

A.POISONING POLITICS WITH RELIGION
KHILAFAT MOVEMENT AND REKINDLING OF RIOTS BY MUSLIMS.

Gandhi’s first anti-Hindu act was the disastrous commitment of the mobilisation potential of the National Freedom Movement in general and the Congress Party in particular, to the Pan-Islamic aims of the Khilâfat Agitation in 1920-22. The Khilâfat Movement had been launched by the Ali Brothers --- Maulana Mohammad Ali and Maulana Shaukat Ali --- and their only intention was to restore the deposed Turkish Emperor to his throne in order to bring the whole of India under the ISLAMIC HEGEMONY OF THE CALIPHATE.

The Ali Brothers declared that this Jihad would be carried out not only against the British, but also against the Hindus who refused to cooperate. As usual, Gandhi ignored this clear Jihadi threat to Hindus. Gandhi’s decision to support the Khilafat Movement at that time was a perplexingly non-negotiated, grossly unpopular and patently unilateral anti-Hindu gift to the Ali Brothers.

In a moment of naked opportunism Gandhi made a simplistic calculation that by helping the Khilafat Movement he would become the leader of the Muslims in India just as he already was a leader of the Hindus and that with the Hindu-Muslim Unity thus achieved, the Colonial British Rulers would soon have to concede Swaraj. But again, Gandhi miscalculated and by leading the Indian National Congress to identify itself with the Khilafat Movement, he gratuitously introduced the violent Islamic theological element in contemporary politics, nay, in Indian Polity as a whole.

Gandhi’s mixing of religion with politics has led to a perverted interpretation of “Secularism” in India as meaning anything that appeases Muslims and Christians with the Indian State demonizing, degrading and discriminating against the Hindus. Now we see politicians of all shades and hues falling over each other to provide facilities for Muslims to the exclusion of Hindus. This Gandhian perversion of the Indian Polity reached its SADO-MASOCHIST apogee with the Talibanic Declaration by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that “Muslims shall have the first charge on the resources of the State”. Here, the ‘Maulana’ Prime Minister was mislead by his ‘Chief Kazi’ Justice Sachar who came out with his abominable Report for the demotion of the Hindus of India to the status of III Class Citizens!

B. GANDHI’S PERVERSION OF JUSTICE
DEFENSE OF SWAMI SHRADHANANDA’S ISLAMIC MURDERER.

Gandhi publicly denounced the Arya Samaj for its supposed sins of reconverting Muslims back to Hinduism through its SHUDDHI MOVEMENT. Gandhi’s unwarranted reckless and discreditable attack on the Arya Samaj provoked a Muslim fanatic Abdul Rashid to murder Swami Shraddhanandji on 23rd December, 1926. Gandhi’s reaction is best quoted in the words of Pattabhi Sitaramayya, the Chronicler of Congress History: “Now you will perhaps understand why I have called Abdul Rashid a brother and I repeat it. I do not even regard him as guilty of Swami’s murder?” The Majesty of British law prevailed over the fulminating political cum legal chicanery of Gandhi. Abdul Rashid was Sentenced to Death and hanged without much ado.

Today many court judgements are made on religious considerations and many criminals go scot free either owing to their religion or owing to the religion of the victims. Suryanelli rape case, Teesta Setalvad perjury case, Hazratbal Siege case and Congress Massacre of the Sikhs are instances in point.

C. TREASONOUS SUPPORT TO THE MUSLIM FANATICS THE ALI BROTHERS

The Late Dr. R.C. Majumdar wrote a three-volume work on the Indian Freedom Movement. In his foreword to this classic work, he put forward the view that Gandhi often acquiesced in the Pan-Islamic ideological issues raised by the Muslim leadership to the detriment of life and death, vital national issues. In this context, Dr. Majumdar cited Gandhi’s defence of the Ali Brothers when they invited the Amir of Afghanistan to invade India in defence of Islam. The British Government at that time rightly viewed the Ali Brothers as international Islamic terrorists and jailed them. Hearing of their impending arrest, the Maha-Muslim-Appeaser Mahatma Gandhi declared at Allahabad on May 10th 1921: “I cannot understand why the Ali Brothers are going to be arrested, as the rumour goes, and why am I to remain free. They have done nothing which I would not do. If they had sent a message to the Amir of Afghanistan, that if he came, no Indian, as long as I can help it, would help the government to drive him back.” Gandhi would commit even treasonous acts for and on behalf of Muslim appeasement regardless of consequences to the Hindu Majority in India or for that matter to the very survival of the Nation.

India’s External Affairs Ministry should have made great capital of the 26/11 Pakistani terrorist attack on Mumbai in November 2008. But the Sonia Congress led UPA Government performed one of the most spectacular faux pas imaginable at Sharm el Shaikh. The Indo-Pak Joint Statement of July 16, 2009 announced an Agreement to the effect that “action on terrorism should not be linked to the Composite Dialogue process (between India and Pakistan) and these should not be bracketed”. The implication was that Pakistan could continue to condone — or even encourage — acts of terror by its nationals in Mumbai and elsewhere, but normal bilateral engagement would not be affected. (3 Wasted Years by J.Gopikrishnan, THE PIONEER.)

D. GANDHI IN 1940 PREFERRED MUSLIM RULE TO EITHER BRITISH RULE OR PARTITION OF INDIA

Writing in the Harijan dated 13/10/1940 said Gandhi “the strongest power in the land would hold sway over all India and this may be Hyderabad for aught I know. All the big and petty chiefs will ultimately succumb to the strongest power of the Nizam who will be the emperor of India. If you ask me in advance, I would face anarchy to foreign rule whether British or any other”.

“It is the Muslims who will impose their will by force, singly or with British assistance, on an unresisting India. If I can carry the Congress with me, I would not put the Muslims to the trouble of using force. I would be ruled by them for it would still be Indian Rule”.

Gandhi ignored the seven hundred years of savage Muslim rule over India and preferred RESTITUTION of the same. He was too willing to overlook the Islamic atrocities like rape, loot, plunder, large scale destruction of Hindu, Buddhist and Sikh shrines, so elaborately chronicled by Muslim Historians between 1025 and 1707. Some freedom fighter, this Gandhi!

E. GANDHI’S FLIP FLOPS ON PARTITION

Gandhi accepted Partition as early as in 1942. In April 1942, Gandhi said: “If the vast majority of Muslims regard themselves as a separate nation having nothing in common with the Hindus, no power on earth can compel them to think otherwise. And if they want to partition India on that basis, they must have it, unless Hindus want to fight against such a division”.

Following Gandhi’s lead Rajagopalchari had drawn up a plan in 1943 for partitioning India as a basis for settlement with the Muslims and secured Gandhi’s approval when he visited him in jail during his fast of February 1943. In April 1944, Rajagopalchari carried on negotiations with Jinnah.

Gandhi made a U-TURN in March 1947. Gandhi told Azad on 03/03/1947 “If the Congress wishes to accept partition, it will be over my dead body. So long as I am alive, I will never agree to the partition of India. Nor will I, if I can help it, allow the Congress to accept it”.

When opposition to the acceptance of partition was running high in the meeting of the A.I.C.C. on 14/6/1947, Gandhi made YET ANOTHER U-TURN. Gandhi spoke for about 40 minutes urging the acceptance of Partition. He said if the A.I.C.C. threw out the recommendations of the Working Committee, they must find a new set of leaders who could not only constitute the Working Committee but also the government. No other Congress leader could ever match Gandhi either in his Charisma or in his capacity for Conceptual Confusion.

F. FAILURE TO PREVENT PARTITION OF SACRED BHARATVARSHA

Gandhi took special care not to use his famed public weapons of FASTING, SATYAGRAHA and CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE against the RELIGIOUS PARTITION OF INDIA. What or whatever happened to his grandiloquent concept of HINDU-MUSLIM UNITY has not been analyzed by any well-known Historian of that period.

INDIA IS PERHAPS THE ONLY INSTANCE OF A COUNTRY IN WORLD HISTORY WHICH SURRENDERED VAST SWATHES OF ITS TERRITORY WITHOUT LOSING A WAR.

What did patriots do in other countries when their countries were partitioned? Abraham Lincoln fought a series of battles with courage, conviction and nothing else! Finally America was united.

Ho chi Minh and General Vo Nguyen Giap fought a long and protracted war for Ten years against the French and later the Americans to unite North and South Vietnam. Israeli Jewish patriots fought off the Partition of their Holy Land between Jews and Arab villages to obtain durable and defendable borders despite being militarily opposed by every Arab country.

In India, Genuine Patriots and FREEDOM FIGHTERS were either killed or deported by the British Colonial Authorities. Bal Gangadhar Tilak (1856-1920) was transported to Mandalay and Lala Lajpat Rai (1865-1928) was beaten to death by the British colonial police. Aurobindo Ghosh was exiled to the French-Ruled Pondicherry. Vinayak Damodar Savarkar (1883-1966), considered by the British Colonial Authorities as their most dangerous enemy, was deported to the Cellular jail of Andamans and Nicobar Islands, where he was kept under solitary confinement and tortured for years. Meanwhile, India’s servile FREEDOM PETITIONERS, euphemistically known as “Moderates” of the Congress were treated by the British Government gently as Class A political prisoners having separate ventilated cells and private bathrooms.

Independent Israel was ruled by Israel’s genuine FREEDOM FIGHTERS of the Haganah, a Jewish paramilitary organization in the British Mandate of Palestine from 1920 to 1948. But those who were left in India by the British after Independence, to enjoy the Offices of power and pelf, were either Collaborators or pusillanimous FREEDOM PETITIONERS and not genuine FREEDOM FIGHTERS.

Today, India is today regarded with derision by world powers as a Muslim terrorist-friendly country and treated with contempt, on a daily basis, by even our smaller and much weaker neighbouring countries as a “soft state”.

G. FAILURE TO PREVENT THE GENOCIDE OF HINDUS.

The Ali Brothers had lured thousands of Muslims all over India into the Khilafat Movement by their mischievous propaganda that the Restoration of the hegemony of the Caliphate in Turkey would be a prelude for the return of Islamic Rule in India. In this context it has to be borne in mind that the last Mughal Emperor of Delhi Bahadur Shah Zafar II was sent to Rangoon on exile after the Indian Mutiny in 1858. From 1858 till 1920, there were practically no Muslim riots in any part of India. This long spell of peace for 62 years was shattered by Gandhi’s ill-advised, impulsive and intemperate head-long dash into the maze of Pan-Islamic politics of Khilafat Movement launched by the Ali Brothers.

The Arabs did not want their countries to remain under the control of the Turkish Sultans and Mustafa Kemal, the President of the Turkish Republic abolished the obsolete and unpopular Sultanate as well as the Caliphate. Khilafat Movement WAS A MEGA FLOP insofar as the restoration of the Khalifa was concerned. Though the efforts of Khilafat leaders collapsed, their fury would not abate inside British India. The fanatical mullahs and maulavis began to preach to the gullible Muslim masses that India is Dar-ul-Harab” and with the removal of the British all that was necessary was for them to kill as many Kaffir Hindus as possible in the shortest possible time and Muslim Rule could then be restored in India. The Muslim Moplah cowards turned the fury of their savagery against the unsuspecting, unprepared and unarmed hapless Hindus of Malabar. This resulted in the gruesome Genocide of Hindus let loose by the Moplah Rebellion of 1921.

The Moplah rebellion as it was called was the most prolonged and concentrated attack on the Hindu religion, Hindu honour, Hindu life and Hindu property. The Moplahs murdered and plundered abundantly, and killed or drove away all Hindus who would not apostatise. Somewhere about a lakh (100,000) of people were driven from their homes with nothing but their clothes they had on, stripped of everything. Dr Annie Besant, a revolutionary lady from Ireland, with genuine affection for the Hindus of India travelled from Calcutta to Malabar to see for herself at first hand, the atrocities committed by the savage Muslim Moplahs. She has graphically recorded the fact of how several Hindu women from aristocratic families were raped by the Moplahs in the presence of their husbands.

BUT THE SADISTIC ISLAM-EMBRACING GANDHI NEVER THOUGHT IT NECESSARY OR FIT TO GO TO MALABAR EVEN ONCE. Even if a single Muslim had been killed at that time in Malabar, Gandhi would have surely rushed with great alacrity to Malabar and given his sanctimonious humbug of hypocritically pious advice of Ahimsa and Satyagraha to the Hindus of Malabar!

Gandhi who had brought about this calamity on India by his Muslim Appeasement policy kept mum. He never uttered a single word of reproach against the aggressors nor did he allow the Congress to take any active steps whereby repetition of such outrages could be prevented. On the other hand he went to the length of DENYING THE NUMEROUS CASES OF FORCIBLE CONVERSIONS in Malabar and blatantly lied in his paper ‘Young India’ that there was only one case of forcible conversion. Gandhi wrote in an article which appeared in ‘Young India’ of 8 September, 1921: He praised the Moplahs for being “among the bravest in the land. They are God fearing. Whilst I was in Calcutta, I had what seemed definite information that there were only three cases of forced conversions? But I don’t think it seriously interferes with Hindu-Muslim unity”. He sang the same swan-song for the next 27 years!

Gandhi’s support to the Moplah Muslim Jihad against Hindus in Malabar gave confidence to the Muslims that they could carry out more religious violence against the Hindus without fear of reprisals. The immediate impact of this was the recrudescence of violent Muslim riots in different parts of India. The worst riot was at Kohat in the North-West Frontier Province in September 1924 in which several Hindus were killed and more than 500 houses and shops belonging to the Hindus were looted and burnt down. Three hundred people met a Delhi but could not resolve the conflicts. In April 1926 a riot in Calcutta resulted in the death of 44 Hindus and grievous injuries to another 584 Hindus. On the morning of 4th September 1927, Muslims made a pre-meditated attack a Laksmi Puja procession in Nagpur with javelins, daggers and knives. 22 were killed and more than 100 injured in riots that continued for two days. Between 1922 and 1927 an estimated 800 Hindu lives were lost and 5,000 Hindus were injured in nearly 112 communal riots.

The fire of Islamic hatred for the Kaffirs inaugurated by Mahatma Gandhi and his Ali Brothers during the days of Khilafat Movement in 1921 turned into a raging conflagration on 15th Aug 1947. What ensued was catastrophic destruction and massacres across Northern India From the Rann of Kutch to the Bay of Bengal resulting in the death of millions upon millions of Hindus during the Partition Riots. The riots that escalated after Independence brought about the biggest transfer of populations in recorded history. Millions of Hindus were forced to flee to India while the police and army stood aside watching the gruesome drama in a helpless manner. Over ten million were rendered homeless as they fled their ancestral homes to become refugees.

Gandhi had made false promises of security of life, limb and property to the Hindus of the designated Pakistani areas and he took no effective political action to prevent the GENOCIDE, FORCIBLE CONVERSION OF HINDUS TO ISLAM, THEIR CAPTURE AND ENSLAVEMENT, GANG-RAPES OF HINDU WOMEN AND FORCIBLE EXPULSIONS OF HINDUS FROM THEIR ANCESTRAL HOMES.

For reasons best known to himself, Gandhi chose not to use his well-known and usual weapon of a fast-unto-death to force Mohammed Ali Jinnah to go back on his demand for Religious Partition of India, a move which cast a genuine doubt about all his earlier much-touted “bravery” of all his earlier fasts "unto death" undertaken against the more malleable British opponents in colonial India. The greatest religious bloodbath in the world since the Crusades occurred during the Religious Partition of British India into India and Pakistan. The violence against Hindus continues to this day in Pakistan and Bangladesh.

H. FAILURE TO TAKE PARTITION TO ITS LOGICAL CONCLUSION --- EXCHANGE OF POPULATIONS

If political acquiescence in the Partition could still be justified as a matter of historic inevitability, then there was no excuse what-so-ever for Gandhi’s obstinate insistence upon half measures like his rejecting plans for an organized EXCHANGE OF POPULATION between India and Pakistan which was welcomed by Jinnah and Dr B.R. Ambedkar. For a permanent solution to Hindu-Muslim issues, Jinnah had suggested exchange of populations. This proposal was endorsed by Dr B.R Ambedkar. Greece and Turkey had exchanged their populations amicably and avoided bloodshed after the World War I.

EXCHANGE OF POPULATION was certainly a lesser evil as compared with the bloody religious and ethnic cleansing let loose by the Muslim marauders in both West and East Pakistan between 1946 and 1950. Gandhi and Nehru rejected Jinnah’s sensible suggestions. Organized exchange of population was a far lesser evil when compared to the bloody religious cleansing that actually took place. Had they agreed, the Hindu-Muslim issues that India faces today would have become a thing of the distant past! Jinnah would always be remembered for having created a separate homeland for the Indian Muslims. Gandhi, on the other hand, would be remembered for his unrelenting efforts to destroy the Hindu identity of India.

(http://www.janasangh.com/jsart.aspx?stid=282) Gandhi : A crypto Muslim, KR Phanda, Apr 2008)

I. ABANDONMENT OF THE HINDUS TRAPPED IN PAKISTAN IN AUGUST 1947.

After handing over crores of Hindus to the mercy of the Muslims of Pakistan, Gandhii and his unthinking followers advised them not to leave Islamic Pakistan but continue to stay on. The Hindus left behind in Pakistan were caught unawares by a series of atrocities let loose against them by the Terrorist Muslim Authorities in Pakistan.

Sikhs numbering 15,000 were shot dead. Hundreds of Hindu and Sikh women disrobed and taken in processions and sold in the market places like cattle. Thousands and thousands of Hindus had to run away for their lives and they had lost every vestige of their ancestral property and wealth. When all these bestial brutalities against Hindus and Sikhs were taking place in Pakistan, Gandhi did not even by a single word of protest censure the Pakistan Government. Several cruel anti-Hindu initiatives taken by the Muslim authorities in Pakistan to root out the Hindu culture and the Hindu society were the direct political outcome of the essentially pro-Muslim and anti-Hindu teachings of Gandhi and his Congress Party.

All sense of proportion had vanished when Gandhi advocated non-violence not as a technique of moral pressure by a weaker on a stronger party, but as a form of masochistic surrender to a cruel oppressor. Even when the killing had started, Gandhi refused to take pity on the Hindu victims, much less to point fingers at the Pakistani aggressors. Instead, he told the Hindu refugees from Pakistan to go back and die. On 6th August 1947, Gandhi spoke to Congress workers on the incipient communal conflagration in Lahore thus: “I am grieved to learn that people are running away from the West Punjab and I am told that Lahore is being evacuated by the non-Muslims. I must say that this is what it should not be. If you think Lahore is dead or is dying, do not run away from it, but die with what you think is the dying Lahore. When you suffer from fear you die before death comes to you. That is not glorious. I will not feel sorry if I hear that people in the Punjab have died not as cowards but as brave men.” (Hindustan Times, 8-8-1947, CWoMG, vol. LXXXIX, p.11).

To be sure, it would have been better if Hindus could have continued to live with honour in Lahore, but Gandhi himself had refused to use his supposed ‘ethical’, ‘moral’, ‘spiritually political’ and ‘politically spiritual’ power in that cause, viz. averting Partition. Instead, Gandhi was dismissing as cowards those who saved their own lives by fleeing the scene of savage massacre let loose by a vastly stronger enemy, viz. the Muslim marauders of Pakistan. In the advice that Gandhi now gave, the whole idea of non-violent struggle got vitiated, perverted and cruel.

The 1937 Elections had returned Congress Ministries in the North-West Frontier Province. The people in the North-West Frontier Province led by Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan wanted an option to either go Independent in addition to the options of joining India or Pakistan. Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan had personally conveyed this request to Gandhi. The Khan and his Pathans did not want to join the Punjabi Sunni dominated Pakistan. The Congress did not give the people in the North-West Frontier Province this option of Azadi. Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan and his patriotic Pathans were betrayed by Gandhi to the fanatic Muslims. Punjabi Sunni-dominated Pakistan now demands Azadi option for the Indian-held Kashmir Valley, the option that they had denied to the Pathans in 1947!

Hindus in Bangladesh are getting killed, raped, driven out on a daily basis and yet the Indian Government, under the pernicious Gandhian / Nehruvian “Secular” influence, does not care to raise a finger in protest against the Bangladeshi Government.

J. HINDU REFUGEES FROM PAKISTAN THROWN OUT IN THE COLD

One of the seven conditions imposed by Gandhi for the breaking of his fast unto death in the second week of January 1948 related to the mosques in Delhi occupied by the Refugees. This condition was to the effect that all the mosques in Delhi, which were occupied by the Refugees, should be vacated and handed over to the Muslims. Gandhi asked the Government to declare that such occupied mosques should be protected. Gandhi got this condition accepted by the Government on account of sheer coercion brought to bear upon them by his fast. Those were the days of bitter or extreme cold and on the day Gandhi broke his fast it was also raining. Thousands of Hindu families of refugees who had come to Delhi for shelter were driven out into the cold and rain from many of the abandoned Mosques (indeed for centuries!) while no alternative provision was made by the Government for their temporary shelter and living. Many families taking with them their children, women-folk and what little belongings they had with them went to Birla House saying, ‘Gandhi, do give us a place for temporary shelter’. While Gandhi made a passionate demand for the evacuation of the abandoned mosques occupied by the homeless refugees, he did not care to demand a similar condition to the effect that the Hindu Temples forcibly occupied by the Muslims in Pakistan should be handed back to the Hindus. But it was never possible for the cries of these poor Hindu people to reach the pro-Islamic ears of Gandhi living in ostentatious poverty in the sprawling luxury of Birla House in the capital of the treacherously truncated India!

Hindu religious refugees from Pakistan seeking asylum in India are denied refugee status in India by the Government of Italian criminals, by Italian criminals and for Italian criminals.

K. GANDHI’S CRUELTY TO HINDU WOMEN VICTIMS OF MUSLIM OPPRESSION

MISOGYNY OF GANDHI

According to Michael Connellan, Gandhi despised his own sexual desires and preached that the failure to control carnal urges led to complaints including constipation. He believed that sex was bad for the health of an individual, and that sexual freedom would lead Indians to failure as a people. He took his own celibacy vow unilaterally, without consulting his wife. His sexual hang-ups caused him to be a misogynist with monstrously sexist views. His view of the female body was warped. As accounted by Rita Banerji, in her book Sex and Power, “he believed menstruation was a manifestation of the distortion of a woman's soul by her sexuality”. Gandhi also waged a war against contraceptives, labelling Indian women who used them as whores.

In the words of the Indian writer Khushwant Singh, “nine-tenths of the violence and unhappiness in this country derives from sexual repression”. Gandhi believed Indian women who were raped lost their value as human beings. He argued that fathers could be justified in killing daughters who had been sexually assaulted for the sake of family and community honour. He moderated his views towards the end of his life. But the damage was done. Gandhi cemented, for another generation, the attitude that women were simply creatures that could bring either pride or shame to the men who owned them. India today, according to the World Economic Forum, finds itself towards the very bottom of the gender equality index. Of course, Gandhi isn't singularly to blame for India's deeply problematic attitudes to sex and female sexuality. But the violence of his thoughts towards women has contributed to countless honour killings and immeasurable suffering.
[http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jan/27/mohandas-gandhi-women-india ‘Women suffer from Gandhi's legacy’ - by Michael Connellan]

Gandhi was never moved by the sufferings and miseries of the Hindu victims of Muslim oppression. On the contrary, he used to shed tears for the Muslim marauders when they occasionally got their comeuppance. All through his political career, Gandhi pandered to the ever-increasing Muslim demands irrespective of the horrendous cost which the naive and trusting Hindus had to pay as a result of Gandhi’s disorder of obsessive compulsive Muslim appeasement policies and actions.

Many Hindus of this country do not know, what Gandhi, the Mahatma and the ‘Apostle of Nonviolence’, thought about this abusive behaviour of the Muslims towards Hindus. In the ‘Navajivan’ Issue of 6th July 1926, Gandhi wrote that “I WOULD KISS THE FEET OF THE (MUSLIM) VIOLATOR OF THE MODESTY OF A (HINDU OR SIKH) SISTER”. (‘Mahatma Gandhi’ - Political Saint and Unarmed Prophet, by Dhananjay Keer, Popular Prakashan, p-473.)

Just before the partition, both Hindu and Sikh women were being raped by the Muslims in large numbers. GANDHI ADVISED THEM THAT IF A MUSLIM EXPRESSED HIS DESIRE TO RAPE A HINDU OR A SIKH LADY, SHE SHOULD NEVER REFUSE HIM BUT COOPERATE WITH HIM. SHE SHOULD LIE DOWN LIKE DEAD WITH HER TONGUE IN BETWEEN HER TEETH. THUS THE RAPIST MUSLIM WILL BE SATISFIED SOON AND SOON HE WILL LEAVE HER. (‘Freedom at Midnight’ by D Lapierre and L Collins, Vikas, 1997, p-479.)

Is this not the advice an Imam in a Mosque in Saudi Arabia would be expected to give to a non-Muslim woman who seeks advice regarding mass-rapes by Muslim Men? This is why K.R Phanda described Gandhi as “A CRYPTO-MUSLIM”.

Now it ought not be very difficult to comprehend the righteous indignation that must have driven Nathuram Godse to the fierce frenzy of using a pistol against Gandhi at Birla House on the 30th of January 1948.

L. TREASONOUS SUPPORT TO PAKISTAN, AN ENEMY STATE, AFTER ITS INVASION OF KASHMIR.

Undertaking a fast unto death in order to force the Indian government to pay Pakistan 55 Crore Rupees from the Indian Treasury was a treasonable act. Pakistan was originally legally entitled to this money, but given its unprovoked unilateral aggression against the State of Jammu and Kashmir in October 1947, it would have been fit and proper to withhold and to retain this amount as legitimate compensation for war damages caused by Pakistan in the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir.

Coming on top of Gandhi's abandonment of the Hindus trapped in Pakistan in August 1947, it was this totally treacherous and traitorous stance. His use of his choice moral weapon of going on a fast (which was not used to save either India's unity or the lives of the persecuted Hindus in Pakistan) in the service of an enemy State's Treasury, that angered a few Hindu Activists to the boiling point of carrying out his assassination.
(Learning from Mahatma Gandhi's mistakes. by Dr. Koenraad Elst http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/fascism/gandhimistake.html)

The seditious Pro-Pakistani tradition established by Mahatma Gandhi until 1948 is being ably carried forward --- nay enriched --- by the Sonia-slave Sushil Shinde who has earned the Islamic distinction of being the only Indian Home Minister to be publicly thanked by Lashkar-e-Taiba Chief HAFIZ SAEED for using the epithets ‘HINDU TERROR’, ‘SAFFRON TERROR’, BJP / RSS TERROR’ etc.

M. FAILURE TO SUPPORT INDIAN SOLDIERS

On 23 April 1930, after several Khudai Khidmatgar leaders were arrested in North West Frontier Province, a large crowd of the group gathered at the Qissa Khwani bazaar. The British ordered troops to open fire with machine guns on the unarmed crowd. Several hundred were killed, with many more wounded. One Platoon of the troops of the Royal Garhwal Rifles, refused to fire at the crowds. The entire platoon was arrested and many received heavy penalties, including life imprisonment. [Johansen, Robert C. (1997). "Radical Islam and Nonviolence: A Case Study of Religious Empowerment and Constraint Among Pashtuns". Journal of Peace Research 34 (1): pp. 53–71. ] GANDHI DID NOT DEFEND THE BRAVE GHARWALI SOLDIERS.

The Royal Indian Naval Mutiny was initiated by the Ratings of the Royal Indian Navy on 18 February 1946. 78 of a total of 88 ships mutinied. The mutineers in the armed forces got no support from the Congress leaders. Mahatma Gandhi, in fact, condemned the ratings’ revolt, his statement on 3 March 1946 criticised the Ratings for revolting.

After the WW II, the Red Fort trials of captured INA officers in India provoked massive public outcries in support of their efforts to fight for Indian independence against the Raj. The Congress under Gandhi realized that "India adores these men, who are on trial." Gandhi's letter to Lord Wavell [Mahatma Gandhi: The Last Phase. By Pyarelal. Ahemadabad 1956. Pg 184 cited in Indian National Army and the Raj by Harkirat Singh]

While The INA was eulogised under popular pressure and glorified to suit the Congress propaganda. The Congress did not support the Gharwali Soldiers or the Navy Ratings.

Lord Mountbatten the Viceroy set a pre-condition for Independence that the INA soldiers shall not re-inducted into the Indian Army and this was agreed to by Nehru. Any genuinely patriotic Indian leader would have re-inducted the patriotic INA Soldiers and Officers after Independence. But India got only FREEDOM PETITIONERS like Gandhi and Nehru and not genuine FREEDOM FIGHTERS like Netaji Subash Chandra Bose.

N. VANDE MATARAM – National Song –
Disgraced, Mauled and Mutilated by Gandhi

This song has been honoured for a century as the most inspiring exhortation to the Bengalees to stand up like one man for their nation. During the years, particularly from 1917 to 1922, the reputed singer and patriot Vishnu Digambar Paluskar of Maharashtra used to sway the inaugural session of Congress every year in December with his deep and resonant singing of ‘Vande Mataram’ SONG. However, when Paluskar came on the dais to sing at the Kakinada Session in December 1923, he was stopped by the Congress President Maulana Mohammed Ali. The Maulana exclaimed that singing of music was taboo in Islam and as such he would not permit it. The entire Assembly was stunned; everyone, including the great “Mahatma”, sat dumbstruck, unable to think of a proper reply or retort to the Islamist President of the Congress. Paluskar, however stuck to his post of duty. In a voice filled with righteous indignation he retorted to the Maulana: “The Indian National Congress is not the monopoly of any one particular sect nor is this place a mosque, where singing could be prohibited. You have therefore no authority to prevent me from singing the ‘VANDE MATARAM’ SONG.” Maulana Mohammed Ali walked out in a huff having failed in forcing his Jihadi agenda on the mild and meek Kaffir Hindus who had assembled there. The not-so-mild-and-meek Vishnu Digambar Paluskar then went on to sing the patriotic song ‘Vande Mataram’ with manly gusto, to the great delight of all those present.
(UPA “Secular” Kick To Both National Song And National Anthem –I By V. Sundaram I.A.S (retd.) http://ennapadampanchajanya.blogspot.in/2010/02/upa-secular-kick-to-both-national-song.html)

When Congress Party formed the Government in seven Provinces in 1937 under the Government of India Act of 1935, the Congress Party began commencing the Provincial Assembly proceedings in these Provinces, with the singing of ‘VANDE MATARAM’ in accordance with its past tradition. The Muslim League, equally true to its Muslim supremacist and separatist tradition declared war against ‘VANDE MATARAM’ SONG.

In a bizzare ideological surrender of the Congress party to the machinations of the Muslim League in 1937 the Congress Party, casting aside with Gandhian contempt, the strong feelings, sentiments and emotions of the majority Hindu Members of the Congress Working Committee, decided to 'circumcise' the major portions of ‘Vande Mataram' SONG leaving out only the first two stanzas of the song depicting the physical features of the motherland. Indeed, it was in those ‘cut out’ subsequent stanzas of the SONG that the real essence of our Nationalism and the Spirit of the Freedom Struggle lay enthroned and enshrined.

O. NATIONAL FLAG AND ITS DENIGRATION

Removal of Tri-Colour Flag - Quote from the book Tragic Story of Partition “The Flag Committee in 1931 consisted of Patel, Nehru, Maulana Azad, Master Tara Singh, D B Kalelkar, N S Hardikar and Pattabhi Sitaramayya recommended that the National Flag should be of kesari or saffron color having on it at the left top quarter the Charkha in blue. However, the A.I.C.C. did not dare to differ from Gandhi’s choice of the tricolor scheme and simply okayed his decision. The flag was unfurled at every Congress meeting. On the occasion of every imaginary or real success of the Congress Party, public buildings, shops and private residences were decorated with that flag. If any Hindu attached any importance to Shivaji’s Hindu flag, “Bhagva Zenda” the Flag which freed India from the Muslim – domination it was considered “communal”. Gandhi’s tri-colored flag never protected any Hindu woman from outrage or a Hindu temple from desecration, yet the late Bhai Parmanand was once mobbed by enthusiastic Congressmen for not paying homage to that Tricolour Flag.

When the Mahatma was touring NOAKHALI and TIPPERAH in 1946 after the BEASTLY OUTRAGES ON THE HINDUS, the Tricolour Flag was flying on his temporary hut. But when a Muslim came there and objected to the presence of the Tricolour Flag, Gandhi quickly directed its removal. All the reverential sentiments of millions of Congressmen towards that Tricolour Flag were cast away in a minute, because that would please an isolated Muslim fanatic in the name of the illusive, nay ever elusive, Hindu-Muslim Unity.

FOR GANDHI, APPEASEMENT OF MUSLIMS WAS MORE IMPORTANT THAN ANY PUBLIC EXPRESSION OF PATRIOTISM.

GANDHI WAS THE PRIME MOTIVATOR BEHIND THIS UNWARRANTED MASOCHIST SURRENDER OF INDIAN NATIONALISM BEFORE THE ALTAR OF MUSLIM APPEASEMENT.

THIS MASOCHIST SURRENDER CONTINUES TO THIS DAY UNDER THE UNION AND STATE GOVERNMENTS UNDER VARIOUS CONGRESS, COMMUNIST AND CASTE-BASED, RACIST POLITICAL PARTIES.

Here is one of the scores of examples: More than 30,000, mostly Hindus and Sikh civilians were killed during the 14-year-long Pakistani sponsored Islamic terrorism in Kashmir Valley. Due to terrorism, 3.70 lakh Hindus and Sikhs were forced to leave the Valley and there has been almost total ethnic cleansing of the Hindus and Sikhs from there. In an act of Masochist Gandhian surrender the UPA Government declared a relief package, in May 2009, to the dependents of Islamic terrorists who fought against the integrity of India and were killed by the security forces in violent encounters in Jammu & Kashmir State. But the dependents on these civilian victims of Jihad are not entitled to get any relief package or pension.

P. FAILURE TO PREVENT COW SLAUGHTER

Gandhi on Cow-slaughter – “Today Rajendra Babu informed me that he had received some fifty thousand postcards, 20-30 thousand telegrams urging prohibition of cow slaughter by law. In this connection I have spoken to you before also. After all why are so many letters and telegrams sent to me. They have not served any purpose. No law prohibiting cow slaughter in India can be enacted. How can I impose my will upon a person who does not wish voluntarily to abandon cow-slaughter?”

Quote from the book Tragic Story of Partition “In the Muslim All Parties Congress held in January 1929, Aga Khan pointed out that in the home of islam-Arabia there was no custom of cow sacrifice. It was also pointed out that in other Muslim countries no one took religious objection to the playing of music before mosques.” Said Dr Ambedkar: “Islamic Law does not insist upon the slaughter of the cow for sacrificial purposes and no Muslim, when he goes to Haj, sacrifices the cow in Mecca or Medina.”

Q. GANDHI’S MURDER OF DEMOCRACY

The Congress functioned like a fascist organization. Gandhi was the supreme dictator like Stalin or Mussolini. What Gandhi said the Working Committee accepted; then it went to the All-India Congress Committee which adopted it, and then the Congress followed like sheep and obeyed like zombies. There is no room for any other independent opinion. Everything was fixed up before and the people are only allowed to talk over it as in Stalin’s Parliament.

Mahatma Gandhi throttled the democratic conduct of public affairs by refusing to co-operate with Subhas Chandra Bose who was the duly elected President of the Congress Party in 1938. Gandhi’s non-cooperation caused Subhas Chandra Bose to leave India for organizing armed revolt against British Rule in India.

On the eve of Indian Independence, almost 90% and more of the Pradesh Congress Committees were unanimously and overwhelmingly in favour of Sardar Vallabhai Patel becoming the First Prime Minister of Independent India. Again, Gandhi gave a death-blow to democratic conduct of public affairs by insisting on making Jawaharlal Nehru the Leader of the Congress Party in the Constituent Assembly and thereby making it possible for him to become the First Prime Minister of Independent India. Gandhi was to the Congress Party what Hitler was to the Nazi party in Germany of 1930’s, an absolute Dictator. This dictatorial tradition established by Mahatma Gandhi under the umbrella of a malevolent ‘CONGRESS HIGH COMMAND’ spawned an evil dictator, Indira Gandhi in June 1975. Now we suffer the ignominy of being ruled by an unelected Prime Minister Manmohan Singh appointed by another unelected Italian citizen with known links with the Russian Intelligence Agency. 15TH of August has slipped into the dustbin of history. INDIA NEEDS TO ENGAGE IN A FRESH STRUGGLE FOR INDEPENDENCE from the patently anti-national --- I mean anti-Sanatana Dharma --- ways of the Sonia Congress Party, an Abrahamic outfit in thought, word, deed and seed indeed!!

R. GANDHI’S SATYAGRAHA AND ITS RELEVANCE TO INDIAN INDEPENDENCE

Did India get independence because of Gandhi?
What is the relevance of Gandhi’s famed QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT OF 1942 to the Indian Independence?

SPURIOUS ARGUMENT FOR AHIMSA

Gandhi has, while describing his nonviolence given the example of a ‘tiger becoming a follower of the creed of non-violence after the cows allowed themselves to be killed and swallowed in such large numbers that the tiger ultimately got tired of killing them.’ Several millennia have passed since tigers started living on Earth. Tigers have eaten umpteen number of cows. Has any tiger ultimately got tired of killing cows? Has anyone ever seen a herbivorous tiger, or a tiger eating Malai Kofta or drinking Lassi for that matter?

AHIMSA AGAINST ANY OTHER COLONIAL RULER

Englishmen coming from a small island off the coast of Europe had bloated egos and they craved world-esteem and their home country being a democracy, the English in Inda wanted to have their conscience at ease. But if only Gandhi had had to deal with the Russians or the German Nazis, they would have put him out of their way long time back. During a meeting with Lord Halifax in 1938, Hitler had pledged his support to the preservation of the British empire and offered his formula for dealing with the Indian National Congress: “kill Gandhi, if that isn't enough then kill the other leaders too, if that isn't enough then two hundred more activists, and so on until the Indian people will give up the hope of independence.” Ahimsa would not have worked with any other Imperial power.

DID GANDHI REALLY EVER FIGHT FOR INDEPENDENCE?

Gandhi had realized that he had been outsmarted by the British by 1947. They had successfully isolated him from Nehru and Patel. Only young firebrands Jayaprakash Narain and Ram Manohar Lohia supported Gandhi’s opinion against Partition in the CWC.

On June 2, one day before the Partition resolution was to be passed by the CWC, Lord Mountbatten visited Gandhi to seek reassurance that Gandhi would not create hurdles. “Mr Gandhi,” Lord Mountbatten asked. “I hope you will not oppose my (Mountbatten Plan to partition India ) plan?” Gandhi on his day of silence wrote on a scrap of paper: “Have I ever opposed you?” Mountbatten preserved that paper as historical evidence and it is still there in the Mountbatten papers.

HAS ANY ONE FOUGHT FOR INDEPENDENCE WITHOUT OPPOSING THE COLONIAL RULER?

When that debate on the Indian Independence Bill was going on in the British Parliament, Winston Churchill made a concerted attack on the Labour Prime Minister Clement Attlee. He said: “We built the glory of the British Empire for 150 years and you surrendered to Gandhi, who has no arms, no bullets, no guns and no ammunition.” Attlee said: “Mr. Churchill, it is true that we quit India but we quit with grace. Are you under the impression that our Empire survived in India for 150 years on the strength of Indian people? We were there on the strength of the Navy and the Army.” And he referred to what happened outside India when Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose founded the Indian National Army and the Royal Indian Navy's revolt in February 18-23, 1946 in Bombay, Calcutta and Karachi. IT WAS THE INA AND THE RIN MUTINY OF THAT MADE THE BRITISH REALISE THAT THEIR TIME WAS UP IN INDIA.

It was Savarkar who, during World War II, encouraged Indians to join the army, firmly convinced that Indians must be strong in military terms. In a manner of speaking, he was the forerunner of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose. It was he, not Gandhi, who first lit the swadeshi bonfire of foreign clothes in Pune on 7th October 1905. (Ironically, Gandhi criticized that action from far away in Phoenix, South Africa although he himself did precisely that 16 years later.)

An extract from a letter written by P.V. Chuckraborty, former Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court, on March 30 1976, reads thus: “When I was acting as Governor of West Bengal in 1956, Lord Clement Attlee, who as the British Prime Minister in post war years was responsible for India’s freedom, visited India and stayed in Raj Bhavan Calcutta for two days. I put it straight to him like this: ‘The Quit India Movement of Gandhi practically died out long before 1947 and there was nothing in the Indian situation at that time, which made it necessary for the British to leave India in a hurry. Why then did they do so?’ In reply Attlee cited several reasons, the most important of which were the INA activities of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, which weakened the very foundation of the British Empire in India, and the RIN Mutiny which made the British realise that the Indian armed forces could no longer be trusted to prop up the British. When asked about the extent to which the British decision to quit India was influenced by Mahatma Gandhi’s 1942 movement, Attlee’s lips widened in smile of disdain and he uttered, slowly, ‘MINIMAL’.”
The Tribune, Sunday, February 12, 2006 (http://www.tribuneindia.com/2006/20060212/spectrum/main2.htm)

S. GANDHI’S HYPOCRISY

1. MEANS MUST JUSTIFY ENDS

Gandhi was fond of saying that means must justify ends. “They say that 'means are after all means'. I would say that 'means are after all everything'. As the means, so the end. Indeed, the Creator has given us limited power over means, none over end... The means may be likened to a seed, and the end to a tree; and there is the same inviolable connection between the means and the end as there is between the seed and the tree. Means and end are convertible terms in my philosophy of life.”

In an act of unprincipled and naked opportunism the Gandhi dragged the unwilling Congress into the Khilafat Movement of Muslim fanatics to ostensibly secure Muslim support for freedom struggle. The consequence was nothing short of catastrophe. In this case the “Means” did not achieve the “Ends” let alone justify it! This never stopped Gandhi from moralising to the Hindus on the “Means”!

2. GANDHI’S BRAGGADOCIO (empty boasting and swaggering self-aggrandizement)

Gandhi told Azad on 03/03/1947: “If the congress wishes to accept partition, it will be OVER MY DEAD BODY. so long as I am alive, I will never agree to the partition of India. nor will I, if I can help it, allow the Congress to accept it”. The Partition occurred but Gandhi remained alive. All along the mass of Indians trusted Gandhi to keep the country together. But in the end he betrayed their trust and in result, millions & millions died – and countless others lost their homes, property, and families. Why did he not redeem his pledge? Gandhi’s former secretary and biographer, Pyarelal, recorded that Gandhi would angrily lash out at his critics and say should he kill himself just to satisfy others? Gandhi was following that old realist adage: Those who fight and run away, live to fight another day! But when heated calls came for the division of India, then MK Gandhi passively accepted the partition of country by keeping maun vrat (vow of silence). If unprincipled and naked opportunism is Realism then Realists ought not to indulge in empty boasting and swaggering self-aggrandizement which is precisely what Gandhi said and did.

3. PREACHING AHIMSA ONLY TO HINDUS AND NEVER TO MUSLIMS-
TELLING HINDUS NOT TO DEFEND THEMSELVES

Constantly for nearly one year after the horrible Noakhali massacre, our nation was as if, bathing in the pool of blood. The Muslims indulged in horrible and dreadful massacre of humanity followed by reactions from Hindus in some parts. The attacks by Hindus on Muslims in the East Punjab, Bihar, or Delhi, were simply defensive reaction to unprovoked Quran-prescribed Muslim religious savagery on the non-Muslim. It is not that Gandhi did not know that the basic cause of these reactions was the outrages on Hindus by the Muslims in the Muslim majority Provinces.

But still Gandhi went on condemning strongly such actions of only the Hindus, and the Congress Government went to the extent of threatening to even bombard the Hindu in Bihar to check their discontent and reactions against Muslims which was mainly due to the Muslim outbursts and atrocities in Noakhali and elsewhere. Gandhi had often advocated during the course of his prayers that the Hindus in India should treat the Muslims with respect and generosity even though the Hindus and Sikhs in Pakistan may be completely massacred. This will be evident from extracts given below from Gandhi’s prayer speeches:

“We should with a cool mind reflect when we are being swept away. Hindus should never be angry against the Muslims even if the latter might make up their minds to undo even their existence. If they put all of us to the sword, we should court death bravely, may they, even rule the world, we shall inhabit the world. At least we should never fear death. We are destined to be born and die; then why need we feel gloomy over it? If all of us die with a smile on our lips, we shall enter a new life. We shall originate a new Hindustan.” (6th April 1947). A greater psycho-analyst than Sigmund Freud or Carl Jung has to be born to psycho-analyse the pro-Islamic mania of Mahatma Gandhi

4. DIRECT ACTION

When Lord Wavell invited Jawaharlal Nehru to lead the Provisional Government, the Muslim League refused to join that Government by starting a Council of Direct Action against the Government headed by Nehru. On the 16th of August 1946, a little more than two weeks before Pandit Nehru was to take office, there broke out in Calcutta an open massacre of the Hindus which continued for three days unchecked.

During the three days that the massacre of Hindus took place, the police in Calcutta did not interfere to ensure the protection of life or property. Innumerable outrages were let loose under the very eyes and nose of the Guardians of Law, but nothing mattered to Gandhi. To him Suhrawardy was an object of admiration who he publicly hailed as a “Martyr”. No wonder two months later there was the most virulent outbreak of Muslim fanaticism in Noakhali and Tipperah in East Bengal. According to a report of Arya Samaj, 30,000 Hindu women were forcibly converted and the total number of Hindus killed or wounded was three lakhs. More than three Crores of Rupees worth of Hindu property looted and destroyed. After that macabre drama, Gandhi chose to undertake, ostensibly alone, a tour of Noakhali District. It was indeed a rare act of protection of Hindus by Gandhi.

5. ADVICE TO KASHMIR MAHARAJA

About Kashmir, Gandhi again and again declared that Sheikh Abdullah should be entrusted the charge of the State and that the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir should retire to Benares for no particular reason than that the Muslims formed the bulk of the Kashmir population. This also stands out in contrast with his attitude on Hyderbad where although the bulk of the population is Hindu, Gandhi never called upon the Nizam to retire to Mecca.

T. THIS IS NOT AN ATTEMPT TO ‘DENIGRATE’ GANDHI

There were other intelligent and powerful Indian patriots who have made sacrifices even greater than those made by Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. They must not remain unhonoured, unmourned and unsung. We are merely attempting to remove the congress manufactured myths to sustain and perpetuate in interminable succession one half-breed ‘Family’ at the expense of this vast country, our punya bhoomi.

Gandhi did undergo remarkable sufferings for the sake of the nation. He was influenced by Leo Tolstoy with whom he exchanged many letters, and he in turn influenced Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela. He did bring about an unprecedented awakening in the minds of the people.

Gandhi also did nothing for personal gain; however he was not honest enough to acknowledge the defeat of the principle of non-violence at the hands of the violent Islamists.

Gandhi was one among the rare breed of Indians who understood the immense power of political MARKETING. Gandhi knew that Hindus, true to their Rishi Parampara, respected those who renounced the world and sought no personal gains. So Gandhi successfully marketed himself as an icon of pious renunciation and earned the respect and loyalty of the Hindus and inspired several noble souls to make great sacrifices at any cost and to carry out great works. Shri Aurobindo had said in his Uttarapara Speech that India rises with the rise of Sanatana Dharma. Gandhi proved the aptness of this observation. In sharp contrast, the Hindu leaders who appealed in the name of purely political patriotism left the innately spiritual Hindu society cold and unresponsive. By constantly claiming and proclaiming that he was an unstinting votary of the time-honoured Hindu verities of Satya, Bhakti, Ahimsa, Tyaga, Nishkaama karma, etc., Gandhi was able to command the religious allegiance of the Millions of Hindus in India. It is not therefore surprising that Gandhi became the Supreme Commander of the forces of national freedom in India.

India a scientifically advanced civilization lost its freedom to Islam by giving up vigilance and by its confused understanding of savagely violent and barbarously cruel enemy. Pakistan is an outcome of this failure. This failure was not a failure of the Labour Class or the failure of the Mercantile Class or the failure of the Warrior Class, but a failure of the Intellectual Class. The Intellectual Class had failed to study the Quran, analyze it and find the link between the Quranic verses and Muslim aggression and terror. Pakistan was a creation of the Quranic Arab Imperialism and it fell to the lot of Jinnah to be the most vocal vendor of Pakistan.

Sita Ram Goel is right in his criticism of the Hindu right-wing. Justice demands that Nationalists must review Hindu history vis-a-vis Islam and lay the blame where it belongs. They will find that Mahatma Gandhi was neither the first nor the last to accord the status of religion to Islam, the dignity of a deity to Allah, the aura of an Avataar to Mohammad the Arab, the sanctity of a scripture to the Quran, the holiness of saints to the sufis, the majesty of a place of worship to a mosque and the rights of a Minority to the Muslim Millat. There is no doubt that Gandhi’s failure vis-a-vis Muslims was great and had disastrous consequences. But the failure can be attributed to him only insofar as he was at the helm of affairs during a critical period of Indian history. However, most Hindus are still chanting the Gandhian formula of sarva-dharma-sama-bhava in the face of Muslim fanaticism, though nearly five decades have passed since the demise of Gandhi.

Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, the spiritual and political progenitor of Justice Rajendra Sachar of today, projected the remnants of Islamic Imperialism as an oppressed Muslim Minority requiring special treatment. No Hindu leader called the bluff of this Islamist bully, rather they donated generously to his Anglo-Oriental Mohammadan College at Aligarh, which soon became the hot-bed of neo-Islamic Imperialism and contributed to no small amount to the creation of Pakistan.

During the Swadeshi Movement and Boycott, the Muslims led by the Ali Brothers of Khilafat Agitation fame were shipping off to Turkey the Western clothes abandoned by the Indian masses, instead of burning them like the Hindus did. Muslims let loose an orgy of riots, which were particularly violent and beastly in Bengal, but there was no retaliation by the Hindu leaders. The only Hindu response to this Muslim Mayhem was to hail scoundrels such as Sirajuddaulah, Hyder Ali and Tipu Sultan as freedom fighters and national heroes. Again Gandhi was not on the scene.

During the Lucknow Pact of 1916, the Hindu leaders in the Congress conceded not only separate electorates to Muslims but also one-third representation in the Central Assembly to a less than one-fourth of the total Indian population. It was Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak who was the leader of the Congress at that time.

On the suspension of the Non-Cooperation Movement in February 1922, Muslims made no secret of their belief that they had been betrayed by Gandhi. They let loose another orgy of their barbarous Arab violence all over the country. It was in the midst of this bloodshed and while Gandhi was in prison that Deshbandhu Chitaranjan Das led the Bengal Provincial Congress into signing a Hindu Muslim Pact, which permitted Muslims to kill cows during their festivals but forbade Hindus from playing their music before the mosques! Recruitment of Hindus in the public services in Bengal was to be stopped till the Muslims filled sixty percent of the posts!

Mahatma Gandhi’s failure vis-a-vis Islamic intransigence and Islamic violence was failure of the larger Hindu society. The Hindu Intellectual Class failed to see the pattern of perverse behaviour of Muslims being derived from the teachings of the Quran and the Sunnah and the Hadits of Mohammad of Arabia. Even when Islam had shown its true face to the Hindu society quite early in its long interaction with the latter, not only in the devil-dance of its Muslim swordsmen but also in the jihadi anti-kaffir pronouncements of its Muslim historians, Mullahs and Sufis, the Hindu Intellectual Class, denied the stark reality and viewed Islam through the telescope of Hindu spirituality. The assorted Hindu Gurus, Swamis, Sants and Acharyas continued to preach Ahimsa and Moksha and failed to teach the Hindu Rulers and householders their respective Dharma. [‘Perversion of Political Parlance’ by Sita Ram Goel, Voice of India publications, New Delhi. 1995.]

We must also mention that the Hindu Warrior Class too failed in implementing the dicta, made known to them by KAUTILYA in his masterpiece, The ARTHASHAASTRA, the world’s first treatise on Polity and Administration. The Hindu Mercantile Class failed in learning from the successful European Christian experience of the Jewish Businessmen that money power grows from political power and military power.

While Gandhi was visibly sincere in his praise of the “noble faith of Islam” his followers today are continuing his Islamic appeasement policies with their eyes on the Muslim vote-bank. This is not only advancing the cause of Arab Imperialism but also compromising Hindu honour, including national security.

Gandhi’s failure vis-a-vis Islamic intransigence and Islamic violence was undoubtedly the failure of the larger Hindu society. However it should not be forgotten that Gandhi was at the helm of affairs during a critical period of Indian history. Using his position as the absolute Dictator of the Indian National Congress Party and by extension the larger Indian freedom movement, he created the Nehru DYNASTY by installing Jawaharlal Nehru as the Congress President after Motilal Nehru on the latter’s importunate request. Gandhi strengthened the Hindu-hating Nehru DYNASTY by making Jawaharlal Nehru the first Prime Minister of India.