“An History of India as it Happened (not as it was written)”:

 “An History of India as it Happened (not as it was written)”:

It is not only Indian historians, who are negationists, but also western historians and India-specialists. We know that the first historians of Indian – the Britishers – twisted India’s history to suit their theory that they had come to civilize a race which was not only inferior to them, but also was supposed to have been heavily influenced in its philosophies or arts by European invaders – read the Aryans or Alexander the Great. But what is less known is that today many western historians not only still cling to these old outdated theories, but also actually more or less will fully mislead the general European public, who is generally totally ignorant and takes these “knowledgeable” comments about India as the absolute truth. One example is France, which has a long tradition of Indianists, who devote their time and life to the study of India. The main school of historic research in France is called the CNRS (National Center of Social Research), which has a very important South Asia section, of which India, of course, is the main component. Unfortunately, many of these India-specialists are not only Left-leaning, that is they are very close to the ideas of the JNU historians, with whom they are anyway in constant contact, but are also specialists of the Mogul period of India history, which is to say that they are sympathetic to Islam’s point of view on India, while they often consider Hindus as fanatics…

Take for instance one of the recent Indian History books published in France “Histoire de l’Inde moderne” (1994 Fayard / Paris), the authors (there are seven of, all famous Indianists), having subscribed to the usual Aryan invasion theory, accuse Shiva “to incarnate obscure forces” (Introduction III) and of course use the word “fanatics” to describe the Hindus who brought down the Ayodhya mosque. Basically, the book does an apology of he moghol period in India; while keeping quiet about all their crimes. In the chapter dealing for instance with Vijaynagar, the last great empire of free India, which symbolized a Hindu Renaissance after nine centuries of savage Muslim conquests, one cannot but perceive the enmity of the authors for Hinduism. The two young princes, founder of Vijaynagar who were converted by force to Islam when in captivity, are accused of “duplicity”, because they reverted back to Hinduism as soon as they were free; then the French historians highlight the “ambition of Brahmins, who used these two young princes to reconquer the power that at been lost at the hands of the conquering Muslims” (page 54); the book then mentions “the unquenchable exigencies of the (Hindu) central power in Vijaynagar”, forgetting to say that that for the first time in centuries, Hindus could practice freely their faith, that they were not killed, their women raped, their children taken as slaves and converted to Islam. And all this to finally sum up in seven words the terrible end of Vijaynagar, which has left a wound in the Hindu psyche even up to today: “looting and massacres lasted for three days”…

But the authors of “Histoire de l’Inde moderne” do not only run down Hindus, they also glorify Muslims, particularly the Moghols. Babur for instance, this monster who killed hundreds of thousands of Hindus and razed thousands of temples becomes at their hands a gentle hero: “ Babur did not like India and preferred to isolate himself in the exquisite gardens he had devised, with their geometrical design, their crossed canals, which evoked to him the rivers of paradise”. Oh, God what a sensitive poet! And to make it sound even more glorious, the author adds: “there he translated a manual of Koranic law and a Sufi treaty of morals”. Oh, what a saint and lover of humanity… Aurangzeb, the cruelest of the Moghul emperors, has also the full sympathies of the authors: “Aurangzeb seems to have concentrated on himself the hatred of militant Hindus, who attribute to him systematic destruction of temples and massive conversion drives. But this Manichean impression has to be seriously countered (page 126)”… Unfortunately for the authors, as we have seen earlier, Aurangzeb was not only proud of what he was doing to the Hindus, but he had his scribes note each deed down for posterity… In 2006 the same authors published “L’Inde contemporaine”, with the same prejudices and bias against Hindus and their political parties.

These French Indianists have also a tradition of speaking against the BJP, which they have always labeled as “fundamentalist” and dangerous for the “secular” fabric of India, although the BJP has been in power for quite a few years and nothing dramatic has happened to the secular fabric of India. The problem is that these Indianists not only write lengthy and pompous articles in France’s main newspapers, such as Left-leaning Le Monde, explaining to the ignorant reader why is India on the point of exploding because of fanatic Hindus, or how the Harijans in India are still the most downtrodden people on earth (this is why when President Narayanan visited France in April 2000, all the French newspapers chose to only highlight that he was an untouchable and that religious minorities in India were persecuted, nearly provoking a diplomatic incident between France and India), but unfortunately they also advise the French government, who like his citizens, is often shamefully ignorant and uninterested by India. This is why, although there has been a lot of sympathy for the French in India because of their tolerant response to the Indian nuclear tests of 1998 (whereas the whole western world reacted hysterically by imposing absurd sanctions), France has not yet bothered to capitalize on this sympathy and has not managed to realize that India is the ideal economic alternative to a very volatile China.

It would be nice to say that Indian journalists are not blind to this influence of French Indianists and the adverse impact it has on Indo-French relations, but when Christophe Jaffrelot, for instance who wrote many a nasty books on Hindu fundamentalism and is most responsible for the bad image the BJP in France, comes to India to release the English translation of his book, he is feted by the Press corps and all kind of laudatory reviews are printed in the Indian Press. So much for secularism in India.

And, ultimately, it is a miracle that Hinduism survived the onslaught of Muslim savagery; it shows how deep was her faith, how profound her karma, how deeply ingrained her soul in the hearts of her faithfuls. We do not want to point a finger at Muslim atrocities, yet they should not be denied and their mistakes should not be repeated today. But the real question is: Can Islam ever accept Hinduism? We shall turn towards the Sage, the yogi, who fought for India’s independence, accepting the Gita’s message of karma of violence when necessary, yet who had a broad vision that softened his words: “You can live with a religion whose principle is toleration. But how is it possible to live peacefully with a religion whose principle is “I will not tolerate you? How are you going to have unity with these people?…The Hindu is ready to tolerate; he is open to new ideas and his culture and has got a wonderful capacity for assimilation, but always provided India’s central truth is recognised.. (Sri Aurobindo India’s Rebirth 161,173)
Or behold this, written on September 1909: “Every action for instance which may be objectionable to a number of Mahomedans, is now liable to be forbidden because it is likely to lead to a breach of peace. And one is dimly beginning to wonder whether worship in Hindu temples may be forbidden on that valid ground (India’s Rebirth p. 55). How prophetic! Sri Aurobindo could not have foreseen that so many Muslim countries would ban Rushdie’s book and that Hindu processions would often be forbidden in cities, for fear of offending the Muslims. Sri Aurobindo felt that sooner or later Hindus would have to assert again the greatness of Hinduism.

And here we must say a word about monotheism, for it is the key to the understanding of Islam. Christians and Muslims (and Jews) have always harped on the fact that their religions sprang-up as a reaction against the pagan polytheist creeds, which adored many Gods. « There is only one real God they said (ours), all the rest are just worthless idols ». This « monotheism versus polytheism business » has fuelled since then the deep, fanatic, violent and murderous zeal of Islam against polytheist religions, particularly against Hinduism, which is the most comprehensive, most widely practiced of all them. It even cemented an alliance of sorts between the two great monotheist religions of the world, Christianity and Islam, witness the Britishers’ attitude in India, who favoured Indian Muslims and Sikhs against the Hindus; or the King of Morocco who, even though he is one of the most moderate Muslim leaders in the world, recently said in an interview: « we have no fight with Christianity, our battle is against the Infidel who adores many gods ».
But as we have seen earlier, Hinduism is without any doubt the most monotheist religion in the World, for it recognises divine unity in multiplicity. It does not say: « there is only one God, which is Mohammed. If you do not believe in Him I will kill you ». It says instead: « Yes Mohammed is a manifestation of God, but so is Christ, or Buddha, or Krishna, or Confucius ». This philosophy, this way of seeing, which the Christians and Muslims call « impious », is actually the foundation for a true monotheist understanding of the world. It is because of this « If you do not recognize Allah (or Christ), I will kill you », that tens of millions of Hindus were slaughtered by Arabs and other millions of South Americans annihilated by the Christians. And ultimately the question is: Are the Muslims of today ready to accept Hinduism ? Unfortunately no. For Muslims all over the world, Hinduism is still the Infidel religion « par excellence ». This what their religion tell them, at every moment, at every verse, at the beginning of each prayer : « Only Allah is great ». And their mollahs still enjoin them to go on fight « jihad » to deliver the world of the infidels. And if the armies of Babar are not there any longer; and if it is not done any more to kill a 100.000 Hindus in a day, there is still the possibility of planting a few bombs in Coimbatore, Mumbai or Varanasi, of fuelling separatisms in the hated land and eventually to drop a nuclear device, which will settle the problem once and for all. As to the Indian Muslim, he might relate to his Hindu brother, for whatever he says, he remains an Indian, nay a Indu; but his religion will make sure that he does not forget that his duty is to hate the Infidel. This is the crux of the problem today and the riddle if Islam has to solved, if it wants to survive in the long run.

We will never be able to assess the immense physical harm done to India by the Muslim invasions. Even more difficult is to estimate the moral and the spiritual damage done to Hindu India. But once again, the question is not of vengeance, or of reawakening old ghosts, but of not repeating the same mistakes. Unfortunately, the harm done by the Muslims conquest is not over. The seeds planted by the Moghols, by Babar, Mahmud, or Aurangzeb, have matured: the 125 million Indian Muslims of today have forgotten that they were once peaceful, loving Hindus, forcibly converted to a religion they hated. And they sometimes take-up as theirs a cry of fanaticism which is totally alien to their culture. Indeed, as Sri Aurobindo once said: “More than 90% of the Indian Muslims are descendants of converted Hindus and belong as much to the Indian nation as the Hindu themselves”…(Rebirth of India, p.237) The embryo of secession planted by the Mahomedans, has also matured into a poisonous tree which has been called Pakistan and comes back to haunt India through three wars and the shadow of a nuclear conflict embracing South Asia. And in India, Kashmir and Kargil are reminders that the Moghol cry for the house of Islam in India is not yet over.

One of the main reasons I have decided to build in Pune a Museum of Indian History, dedicated to the great Shivaji Maharaj (who is depicted in Indian History books as a petty chieftain and a plunderer), is that it will not be enough to rewrite Indian History in books, it will also have to be done in STONE. Please see our website fact-india.com and contribute financially, if you can, to the making of that Museum (we have US, UK and Indian tax exemption). We are also looking for IT persons to donate time to do presentations, animations & GAMES based on the lives of India’s Hindu heroes: Shivaji Maharaj, Maharana Pratap, Rani of Jhansi, Ahilyabhai, the Vijaynagar empire, etc. You can contact me at fgautier@rediffmail.com

courtesy  Francois Gautier, a french author and journalist, who has been covering India and South Asia for the last 35 years. All throughout his reporting years, he noticed that most western correspondents were projecting the problems, warts and shortcomings of India. Hence when Francois Gautier got a journalism prize (Natchiketa Award of excellence in journalism) from the Prime Minister of India, he used the prize money to mount a series of conferences & exhibitions highlighting the magnificence of India and the threats to its sovereignty.

Historical Evidence of Mahabharata

As far as, drawing of astronomical map of 3000 BCE era goes, a wrong map could easily be drawn by anybody without citing the complexities and gaps in logic involved, anybody who is not a sincere qualified scientist can draw such a wrong map using available softwares.
This Kaul and group, is not aware of “Paul Lerner” and therefore not included him in his list of agnosticism, “Paul Lerner” is a graduate of Cambridge university and now a faculty, who did write a book “Astrological Key in Mahabharata” and tried establishing that Mahabharata war is merely a symbolization of Spring Equinox falling to Asvini-Chitra axis, there was no actual war, Paul identifies, Yudhisthir, the eldest of Pandavas with Ajameedha and relates that with zoidical sign of Aries ( Aja), and thereby, “Paul Lerner” establishes knowledge of Signs existing in Indian land, But, another aspect of Paul Lerner’s so called research is absolutely trash that there was no happening of Mahabharata war, we find there are variety of people with their level of intellect and agenda.
The debate has already established that Greeks were not knowing anything specific either about Zodiacal – Signs or about Zodiacal – Nakshtras as listed in Atharva Veda ( Nakshtra Sukta, 19’th chapter)  with explicit reference to Moon’s path, Kaul being perfect ignorant and a copy cat, never knew about Moon’s path in the Nakshtra Sukta, those guys are also running away from having a debate on their anti vedic panchanga, this is their level.
“Paul Lerner” underlines that epic relates to the appearance of constellation of  Canis Major, particularly Sirius, that’s a star of southern hemisphere and was also visible at plane of India-Egypt  but never from Europe or Greece particularly.
So far as ascertaining the timing of Mahabhrata is concerned, Dwaraka excavations provide archaeological inputs, the oldest reference to Mahabharata is found in Griha Sutras, such asAsvalayana Griha Sutra’s 3rd adhyaha that cites Mahabharata and enlists Mahabharata age sages, next comes Patanjali who also cites Mahabharata heroes, Asvalayana also gives same astronomical  pointers of watching Shaptarshi and Arundhati stars at the time of marriage by just married couple in the beginning of evening, that’s calculated by Tilak, Jacobi and arrived at, to be a phenomena of  2000 BCE to 2300 BCE, this period is ratified by number of astronomers without exceptions, Thus, Asvalayana, Apastmba grihasutras relates to era 2000 BCE to 2500 BCE and Therefore, we are clear that Mahabharata didn’t war happen after 2000 BCE, Coincidently, one of the opponents of Mahabharata’s occurrence with the beginning of Kaliyuga i.e before 2000 BCE, The well known, RN Iyngar too excites and supports Shaptarshi-Arunndhati phenomena of that antiquity and makes a contradiction to his own argument against Aryabhatta’s citation and so many others for Kaliyuga age and latest dating of Mahabharata by Prof Narhari Achar..













History Mystery 

Have a history teacher explain this—– if they can. 

Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846. 
John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946. 

Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860. 
John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960. 

Both were particularly concerned with civil rights. 
Both wives lost their children while living in the White House.

Both Presidents were shot on a Friday. 
Both Presidents were shot in the head 

Now it gets really weird.

Lincoln ‘s secretary was named Kennedy. 
Kennedy’s Secretary was named Lincoln . 

Both were assassinated by Southerners. 
Both were succeeded by Southerners named Johnson. 

Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in 1808. 
Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy, was born in 1908.


John Wilkes Booth, who assassinated Lincoln, was born in 1839. 
Lee Harvey Oswald, who assassinated Kennedy, was born in 1939.

Both assassins were known by their three names. 
Both names are composed of fifteen letters. 

Now hang on to your seat. 

Lincoln was shot at the theater named ‘Ford’. 
Kennedy was shot in a car called ‘ Lincoln ‘ made by ‘Ford’. 

Lincoln was shot in a theater and his assassin ran and hid in a warehouse. 
Kennedy was shot from a warehouse and his assassin ran and hid in a theater.

Booth and Oswald were assassinated before their trials. 

And here’s the kicker… 

A week before Lincoln was shot, he was in Monroe , Maryland 
A week before Kennedy was shot, he was with Marilyn Monroe. 




1) Fold a 
NEW $20 bill in half… 

2) Fold again, taking care to fold it exactly as below 

3) Fold the other end, exactly as before 

4) Now, simply turn it over…        

What a coincidence! A simple geometric fold creates a catastrophic premonition printed on all $20 bills!!! 



As if that wasn’t enough… 
Here is what you’ve seen…

Firstly The Pentagon on fire..        

Then  The  Twin Towers.

..And now .. look at this! 

Disaster (Pentagon)
Disaster ( Twin Towers )
Disaster (Osama)???

It gets even better 9 + 11 = $20!

Creepy huh? Send this to as many people as you can, because:    Hey, this is one history lesson most people probably will   not mind reading!







This a new take on Gandhi – Godse episode….interesting reading….

I had never seen his statement before. A long read but it is towards the end that he comes out with the why he did it.

Gandhiji Assassin Nathuram Godse’s Final Address to the Court Nathuram Godse was arrested immediately after he assassinated Gandhiji, based on a F. I. R. filed by Nandlal Mehta at the Tughlak Road Police staton at Delhi . The trial, which was held in camera, began on 27th May 1948 and concluded on 10th February 1949 . He was sentenced to death. An appeal to the Punjab High Court, then in session at Simla, did not find favour and the sentence was upheld. The statement that you are about to read is the last made by Godse before the Court on the 5th of May 1949 . Such was the power and eloquence of this statement that one of the judges, G.. D. Khosla, later wrote, “I have, however, no doudt that had the audience of that day been constituted into a jury and entrusted with the task of deciding Godse’s appeal, they would have brought a verdict of ‘not Guilty’ by an overwhelming majority” 

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.


 The flip side of Mahatma Gandhi:

Reasons for killing Mahatma Gandhi:
During the trial justice Khosla had allowed Nathuram Godse
the killer of Gandhi to read his own confession in the court.
However the Indian government had banned the confession of Nathuram.
Nathuram’s brother Gopal Godse fought a 60 years legal battle
after which the Supreme Court removed the ban.

When I was about eight, I decided that the most wonderful thing, next to a human being, was a book. 

God always gives His best to those who leave the choice with Him  Jim Elliot

Rare photographs from the past

Coimbatore Railway Station of the British Empire! 

Description: Description: Description: cid:1.2986684418@web161404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com

The 1933 Nagarkovil to Tirunelveli Bus 

Description: Description: Description: cid:2.2986684418@web161404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com

1925 Courtallm Falls. Alas! Now you cannot view the same. Only Shops, Shops & Shops! 

Description: Description: Description: cid:3.2986684418@web161404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com

1932 Suchindram Temple : Sri Sthanumalayswami & a 22ft Anjaneyar 

Description: Description: Description: cid:4.2986684418@web161404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com

1925 Kanyakumari the view with the Kumari Amman Temple 

Description: Description: Description:

1930 Anantha Padmsnabha Swamy Temple, Trivandrum 

Description: Description: Description: cid:6.2986684418@web161404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com

1925 Rameswaram Temple Tower : Ramanathaswamy Temple 

Description: Description: Description: cid:7.2986684418@web161404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com

1925 the Biggest, longest Rameswaram Temple Corridor 

Description: Description: Description: cid:8.2986684418@web161404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com

1925 Thiruchengode Hills : Kodimada-chenkunroor Ardhanareeswarar 

Description: Description: Description: cid:9.2986684418@web161404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com

1932 Bus 

Description: Description: Description:

Golden Lily Tank with the North Mottai Gopuram : Madurai 

Description: Description: Description: cid:11.2986684418@web161404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com

The Kumbakonam Mahamakham Festival 

Description: Description: Description: cid:12.2986684418@web161404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com

 Description: Description: cid:13.2986684418@web161404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com

The Sri Nagarajar Temple Nagarcoil 

Description: Description: Description: cid:14.2986684418@web161404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com

The Sri Ranganathaswamy Temple , Srirangam 

Description: Description: Description: cid:15.2986684418@web161404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com

The Raja Gopuram of Sri Rangam on which the present Tower was built 

Description: Description: Description: cid:16.2986684418@web161404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com

Sri Rangam 

Description: Description: Description: cid:18.2986684418@web161404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com

Tanjavur Periya Kovil : Sri Brihadeeswarar 

Description: Description: Description: cid:18.2986684418@web161404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com

The Majestic Thiruvannamalai Temple : Sri Arunachaleswarar 

Description: Description: Description: cid:19.2986684418@web161404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com

Thiruvannamalai Temple Mandapam 

Description: Description: Description: cid:20.2986684418@web161404.mail.bf1.yahoo.com