Why I Killed Gandhi by Nathuram Vinayak Godse- must read


this may be a repeat but read on the occasion of Gandhi Jayanti

 

Subject: WHY I KILLED GANDHI by NATHURAM VINAYAK GODSE

Gandhiji’s assassin, Nathuram Godse’s Final Address to the Court.

WHY I KILLED GANDHI - Nathuram Godse's Final Address to the Court.WHY I KILLED GANDHI – 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 May 27, 1948 and concluded on February 10, 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 May 5, 1949.

Such was the power and eloquence of this statement that one of the judges, G. D. Khosla, later wrote, “I have, however, no doubt 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”

WHY I KILLED GANDHI

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 RSS wing of 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 Ravana, Chanakiya, 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 relationsincluding 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.

 

Interesting – Why am I a Hindu ?


A Hindu was flying from JFK New York Airport to SFO San Francisco Airport CA to attend a meeting at Monterey, CA.

An American girl was sitting on the right side, near window seat. It indeed was a long journey – it would take nearly seven hours.

He was surprised to see the young girl reading a Bible unusual of young Americans. After some time she smiled and we had few acquaintances talk.He told her that I am from India

Then suddenly the girl asked: ‘What’s your faith?’ ‘What?’ He didn’t understand the question.

‘I mean, what’s your religion? Are you a Christian? Or a Muslim?’

‘No!’ He replied, ‘He am neither Christian nor Muslim’.

Apparently she appeared shocked to listen to that. ‘Then who are you?’ “I am a Hindu”, He said.

She looked at him as if she was seeing a caged animal. She could not understand what He was talking about.

A common man in Europe or US knows about Christianity and Islam, as they are the leading religions of the world today.

But a Hindu, what?

He explained to her – I am born to a Hindu father and Hindu mother. Therefore, I am a Hindu by birth.

‘Who is your prophet?’ she asked.

‘We don’t have a prophet,’ He replied.

‘What’s your Holy Book?’

‘We don’t have a single Holy Book, but we have hundreds and thousands of philosophical and sacred scriptures,’
He replied.

‘Oh, come on at least tell me who is your God?’

‘What do you mean by that?’

‘Like we have Jesus and Muslims have Allah – don’t you have a God?’

He thought for a moment. Muslims and Christians believe one God (Male God) who created the world and takes an interest in the humans who inhabit it. Her mind is conditioned with that kind of belief.

According to her (or anybody who doesn’t know about Hinduism), a religion needs to have one Prophet, one Holy book and one God. The mind is so conditioned and rigidly narrowed down to such a notion that anything else is not acceptable. He understood her perception and concept about faith. You can’t compare Hinduism with any of the present leading religions where you have to believe in one concept of God.

He tried to explain to her: ‘You can believe in one God and he can be a Hindu. You may believe in multiple deities and still you can be a Hindu. What’s more – you may not believe in God at all, still you can be a Hindu. An Atheist can also be a Hindu.’

This sounded very crazy to her. She couldn’t imagine a religion so unorganized, still surviving for thousands of years, even after onslaught from foreign forces.

‘I don’t understand but it seems very interesting. Are you religious?’

What can He tell to this American girl?

He said: ‘I do not go to Temple regularly. I do not make any regular rituals. I have learned some of the rituals in my younger days. I still enjoy doing it sometimes’.

‘Enjoy? Are you not afraid of God?’

‘God is a friend. No- I am not afraid of God. Nobody has made any compulsions on me to perform these rituals regularly.’

She thought for a while and then asked: ‘Have you ever thought of converting to any other religion?’

‘Why should I? Even if I challenge some of the rituals and faith in Hinduism, nobody can convert me from Hinduism. Because, being a Hindu allows me to think independently and objectively, without conditioning. I remain as a Hindu never by force, but choice.’ He told her that Hinduism is not a religion, but a set of beliefs and practices. It is not a religion like Christianity or Islam because it is not founded by any one person or does not have an organized controlling body like the Church or the Order, I added. There is no institution or authority..

‘So, you don’t believe in God?’ she wanted everything in black and white.

‘I didn’t say that. I do not discard the divine reality. Our scripture, or Sruthis or Smrithis – Vedas and Upanishads or the Gita – say God might be there or he might not be there. But we pray to that supreme abstract authority (Para Brahma) that is the creator of this universe.’

‘Why can’t you believe in one personal God?’

‘We have a concept – abstract – not a personal god. The concept or notion of a personal God, hiding behind the clouds of secrecy, telling us irrational stories through few men whom he sends as messengers, demanding us to worship him or punish us, does not make sense. I don’t think that God is as silly as an autocratic emperor who wants others to respect him or fear him.’ He told her that such notions are just fancies of less educated human imagination and fallacies, adding that generally ethnic religious practitioners in Hinduism believe in personal Gods. The entry level Hinduism has over-whelming superstitions too. The philosophical side of Hinduism negates all superstitions.

‘Good that you agree God might exist. You told that you pray. What is your prayer then?’

‘Loka Samastha Sukino Bhavantu. Om Shanti, Shanti, Shanti,’
लोका समस्ता सुखिनो भवन्तु !!! ॐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः !!!

‘Funny,’ she laughed, ‘What does it mean?’

‘May all the beings in all the worlds be happy. Let there be Peace, Peace,and Peace every where.’

‘Hmm ..very interesting. I want to learn more about this religion. It is so democratic, broad-minded and free’ she exclaimed.

‘The fact is Hinduism is a religion of the individual, for the individual and by the individual with its roots in the Vedas and the Bhagavad-Gita. It is all about an individual approaching a personal God in an individual way according to his temperament and inner evolution – it is as simple as that.’

‘How does anybody convert to Hinduism?’

‘Nobody can convert you to Hinduism, because it is not a religion, but it is a Culture, a way of leaving life, a set of beliefs and practices. Everything is acceptable in Hinduism because there is no single Authority or Organization either to accept you or to reject you or to oppose you on behalf of Hinduism.’

He told her – if you look for meaning in life, don’t look for it in religions; don’t go from one cult to another or from one Guru to the next.

For a real seeker, He told her, the Bible itself gives guidelines when it says ‘ Kingdom of God is within you.’ I reminded her of Christ’s teaching about the love that we have for each other. That is where you can find the meaning of life.

Loving each and every creation of the God is absolute and real. ‘Isavasyam idam sarvam’ Isam (the God) is present (inhabits) here everywhere – nothing exists separate from the God, because God is present everywhere. Respect every living being and non-living things as God. That’s what Hinduism teaches you.

Hinduism is referred to as Sanathana Dharma, the eternal faith. It is based on the practice of Dharma, the code of life. The most important aspect of Hinduism is being truthful to oneself. Hinduism has no monopoly on ideas. It is open to all. Hindus believe in one God (not a personal one) expressed in different forms. For them, God is timeless and formless entity.

Ancestors of today’s Hindus believe in eternal truths and cosmic laws and these truths are opened to anyone who seeks them. But there is a section of Hindus who are either superstitious or turned fanatic to make this an organized religion like others. The British coin the word ‘Hindu’ and considered it as a religion.

He said: ‘Religions have become an MLM (multi-level- marketing) industry that has been trying to expand the market share by conversion. The biggest business in today’s world is Spirituality. Hinduism is no exception’

He said “I am a Hindu primarily because it professes Non-violence – ‘Ahimsa Paramo Dharma’ means – Non violence is the highest duty. I am a Hindu because it doesn’t condition my mind with any faith system.

A man/woman who changes his/her birth religion to another religion is a fake and does not value his/her morals, culture and values in life.

Hinduism is the original rather a natural yet a logical and satisfying spiritual, personal and a scientific way of leaving a life..

 

__._,_.___

Mahatma Myth or Human


 

Just look back in history, try to do some research and finding out the real truth and not what we have been brain washed by the Congress and the British/western Media. the following is not my opinion but is an excerpt of what I had received in my mail from one of my friends. We tend to idolise and immortalise people because we do not know the truth  and believe in what is served to us as truth. We feel betrayed and cheated when we are duped by cunning selfish politicians and even our own friends and relatives that we tend to lose faith in our own self.

this post is not intended to hurt any one;s sentiments or feelings. readers are advised to use their own discretion and choice.

 

Most of the Indians are tom fools. Since they have lived many thousand
years under Islamic kingdom
and British kingdom the slave mentality has been imprinted in their
mind and soul.Even today they worship the white skin people.One
example is Sonia Gandhi. This slave mentality force them to worship
Gandhi and Nehru. Both were bloody womanizers. Gandhi was number one
womanizer. If you read his”my experiments with truth”(sathiya Sothanai) you would understand this fact. Even in his old age he slept naked with few young ladies.How could
you term this action.What was the physiological, mental and sexual
feelings of those young ladies. Have you ever thought about the sexual
urge or feelings of those young ladies when they slept by the side of
a naked man.You Indians may say that those young ladies were gifted
souls to slept with Mahathma.What a hypocrisy. How could you call him
as Mahathma. It is pure bullshit. When Britain became pauper state after the second world war they could
not maintain their administration in the Indian subcontinent. To run
their rule they need huge amount of money. Who is going to pay for
their army? Who is going to pay for all their staffs? They need some
country to rescue them from this financial bankruptcy. USA was the
only country came to them to provided aid if they accept U.S.Dollar as
International currency dropping the Sterling Pound from that position.
British Govt.agreed and accepted their aid. Thereby US Dollar become
international currency to trade in the World Bank and IMF.
Due to their insolvency Britain wanted to get rid of all his colony.
That was the main reason UK granted
independence to India, Burma, Malaysia and Srilanka.
Gandhi’s Sathiyag Graha has nothing to do with India’s
Independence.Since British implanted Gandhi
and Nehru in the Indian Congress to manipulate India’s affair after
Independence they gave Gandhi’s
satiya Graha as scapegoat for granting Independence. Media and the
congress party did a huge
propaganda to this effect. India’s present mess due to Gandhi and
Nehru’s policy of islamic appeasement.
Nehru has done nothing to improve the condition of the poor. His main
aim was to be a world leader.
Kashmir was a creation of Nehru for his own ambition to become India’s
Prim minister. If Kashmir join
Pakistan he cannot become India’s Prim Minister.
There is no pure blood in most of the Indians. Muslim blood run in
their vein. Even some Brahmin are included in this list. These are
facts but unpalatable to accept by the majority.

 
here is rejoinder/reply to the above post by on of the readers
 
Dear Mr.Mahesh,

So you are an Intelligent Indian isn’t it? and all else are fools?

Quote
Gandhi was number one womanizer. If you read his”my
experiments with truth”(sathiya Sothanai) you would understand this fact.
Even in his old age he slept naked with few young ladies.How could
you term this action.What was the physiological, mental and sexual
feelings of those young ladies. Have you ever thought about the sexual
urge or feelings of those young ladies when they slept by the side of
a naked man.
Unquote

I have read My experiments with Truth for several times since 13 years
of my age. Toady I am 43 and read both in Tamil and English.

Why haven’t you tried to paste the exact extract from “My experiments
with Truth” for this allegation?

Let it be truth, but who told this truth? the same Mahatma. One need
to have courage to reveal his sexual appetite. While teaching in AMET
University, most of my colleagues were above 60s, and they watch Porno
in office time and they don’t teach in class room just chat and
discuss and come back. No interest in academic, their only interest is
on watching porno and gossiping.

Ask any females, they will tell you the truth, it is far better to
believe a young man then a old man.

Quote
There is no pure blood in most of the Indians. Muslim blood run in
their vein. Even some Brahmin are included in this list.
Unquote

What blood is running in your body? I know only of A, A+, AB+, O, O+
etc in blood group, and for the first time I come to know pure blood,
Indian blood and muslim blood?

Quote
Mahathma.What a hypocrisy. How could you call him as Mahathma. It is
pure bullshit.
Unquote

So you like to be called as Mahatma isn’t it?, always spoken truth,
and honest in every action, not even accepted any gifts whatever of
the worth, fasted for weeks for social cause, sacrificed rich
clothing, treated all equal, no (wealth)security provided to own
children, even forced wife to wash common toilets for the benefit of
public.

Sir, I don’t know you will realise or not about papa karma or punya
karma palan, or at least you can believe in “for every action, there
will be equivalent opposite action”. So abusing the great Mahatma like
this you may incur papa karma palan, so better be watchful of your
thought.

In this topic I have already wrote a mail, please read that.

Talking about past events and using ifs and buts is like what if my
Mother had mustache? Nothing can be redone about past, it is out of
ego, a drive for indetification one talk about past and find fault in
the past events. All events are supposed to happen as it is, even the
present moment will happen on its own, nothing the ego can do about
it. It is most stupidity to think I can do. All doing is by that very
god. Like a movie it is already directed by director and shown you
only to watch and not for any alteration, like wise our past, present
and future is all already directed by the god, we the consciouness
only need to watch.

Get out of this illusion to immerse in past, look at the present, and
be in the present, will keep you in joyful state.

Understand Bhagavad Gita properly.

After reading My experiments with Truth, in which Mahatma writes that
he reads Bhagavad gita every day and whenever he is in trouble some
phase, he reads Bhagavad gita and finds right answer from it. So on
reading these words I was inspired to read Bhagavad gita.

Osho and Ramana Maharishi have appreciated Mahatma for his sincerity
and honesty, what else is required. Ramana Maharishi is that god
himself, who cried on knowing Mahatma dead, such great soul is
Mahatma.

Whoever talk ill of him incur sin or that illness is inside him, he
sees himself, like the one who sees all blue when he wore blue glass.

Try to be honest at least to yourself.


Thanks and best regards
J.Suresh

 
PS:  As 65% of the population in our country is less than 35 year old, it is our duty bring to light about all the myths.

 

 

US and the Forgotten Genocide


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/30/opinion/nixon-and-kissingers-forgotten-shame.html

The New York Times

September 29, 2013

Nixon and Kissinger’s Forgotten Shame

By GARY J. BASS

PRINCETON, N.J. — BANGLADESH is in fresh turmoil. On Sept. 17, its Supreme Court decided that Abdul Quader Mollah, a leading Islamist politician, should be hanged for war crimes committed during the country’s 1971 war of independence from Pakistan. When he was given a life sentence by a Bangladeshi war-crimes tribunal back in February, tens of thousands of Bangladeshis took to the streets demanding his execution. Since then, more than a hundred people have died in protests and counterprotests.

This may sound remote or irrelevant to Americans, but the unrest has much to do with the United States. Some of Bangladesh’s current problems stem from its traumatic birth in 1971 — when President Richard M. Nixon and Henry A. Kissinger, his national security adviser, vigorously supported the killers and tormentors of a generation of Bangladeshis.

From the partition of the Indian subcontinent in 1947, Pakistan was created as a unified Muslim nation with a bizarrely divided geography: dominant West Pakistan (now simply Pakistan) was separated from downtrodden East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) by a thousand miles of hostile India. Pakistanis joked that their bifurcated country was united by Islam and Pakistan International Airlines. This strange arrangement held until 1970, when Bengali nationalists in East Pakistan triumphed in nationwide elections. The ruling military government, based in West Pakistan, feared losing its grip.

So on March 25, 1971, the Pakistani Army launched a devastating crackdown on the rebellious Bengalis in the east. Midway through the bloodshed, both the C.I.A. and the State Department conservatively estimated that about 200,000 people had died (the Bangladeshi government figure is much higher, at three million). As many as 10 million Bengali refugees fled across the border into India, where they died in droves in wretched refugee camps.

As recently declassified documents and White House tapes show, Nixon and Kissinger stood stoutly behind Pakistan’s generals, supporting the murderous regime at many of the most crucial moments. This largely overlooked horror ranks among the darkest chapters in the entire cold war.

Of course, no country, not even the United States, can prevent massacres everywhere in the world — but this was a close American ally, which prized its warm relationship with the United States and used American weapons and military supplies against its own people.

Nixon and Kissinger barely tried to exert leverage over Pakistan’s military government. In the pivotal days before the crackdown began on March 25, they consciously decided not to warn the Pakistani generals against opening fire on their population. They did not press for respecting the election results, nor did they prod the military to cut a power-sharing deal with the Bengali leadership. They did not offer warnings or impose conditions that might have dissuaded the Pakistani junta from atrocities. Nor did they threaten the loss of American military or economic support after the slaughter began.

Nixon and Kissinger were not just motivated by dispassionate realpolitik, weighing Pakistan’s help with the secret opening to China or India’s pro-Soviet leanings. The White House tapes capture their emotional rage, going far beyond Nixon’s habitual vulgarity. In the Oval Office, Nixon told Kissinger that the Indians needed “a mass famine.” Kissinger sneered at people who “bleed” for “the dying Bengalis.”

They were unmoved by the suffering of Bengalis, despite detailed reporting about the killing from Archer K. Blood, the brave United States consul general in East Pakistan. Nor did Nixon and Kissinger waver when Kenneth B. Keating, a former Republican senator from New York then serving as the American ambassador to India, personally confronted them in the Oval Office about “a matter of genocide” that targeted the Hindu minority among the Bengalis.

After Mr. Blood’s consulate sent an extraordinary cable formally dissenting from American policy, decrying what it called genocide, Nixon and Kissinger ousted Mr. Blood from his post in East Pakistan. Kissinger privately scorned Mr. Blood as “this maniac”; Nixon called Mr. Keating “a traitor.”

India was secretly sponsoring a Bengali insurgency in East Pakistan, and the violence ended only after India and Pakistan went to war in December 1971, with the Indian Army swiftly securing an independent Bangladesh. Economic development and political progress were always going to be difficult there. But Bangladesh’s situation was made tougher by the devastation: lost lives, wrecked infrastructure and radicalized politics.

Bangladesh, despite its recent economic growth, is a haunted country. Part of the tumult centers on the fate of defendants like Abdul Quader Mollah, who face judgment in a series of national war crimes trials for atrocities committed in 1971 by local collaborators with West Pakistan. These trials are popular, but the court has often failed to meet fair standards of due process. Its proceedings have ensnared members of the largest Islamist political party, Jamaat-e-Islami, which is aligned with the main political rival of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.

It will be up to Bangladeshis to fix their country’s rancorous politics, but their task was made harder from the outset by Nixon and Kissinger’s callousness. The legacy of 1971 still stains the reputation of the United States in India as well. If an apology from Kissinger is too much to expect, Americans ought at least to remember what he and Nixon did in those terrible days.

Gary J. Bass, a professor of politics and international affairs at Princeton, is the author, most recently, of “The Blood Telegram: Nixon, Kissinger, and a Forgotten Genocide.”


S. Kalyanaraman

__._,_.___


0001.gif

om2.gif
h.gifa.gifr.gifi.gifh.gifa.gifr.gifa.gifn.gif      k.gif
) hari krishnamurthy K. HARIHARAN)”

Modi storm in Delhi, tremors in the country


Modi blows Ananta Vijaya

By Sandhya Jain on September 29, 2013
Modi blows Ananta Vijaya
Narendra Modi today blew the Ananta Vijaya, conch shell of Prince Yudhisthira, to announce his march on Delhi as future ruler, though he promised, with Caesar-like modesty, that he would not be king (main nath nahin hoon, das hoon). Castigating the Prime Minister for weakness in projecting India’s power and dignity abroad, the Congress’ anointed heir for upstart behaviour vis-á-vis the Head of Government, and Indian journalists for pusillanimity before the Pakistan Prime Minister whilst part of the Prime Ministerial delegation to New York, the Gujarat Chief Minister made it clear that nationalism would be non-negotiable under his reign.
At a mammoth, five plus lakh strong, rally organised by the Delhi unit of the Bharatiya Janata Party to launch the party’s campaign for the Assembly election in November, Modi mostly skirted Delhi-centric issues and reserved his fire for the Gandhi family and the political culture it represents. He displayed canny constitutional propriety by supporting the beleaguered Prime Minister against attacks on his person and office, while berating him for weakness.
The Prime Minister recently met the US President in Washington, but instead of showcasing India as a youthful nation and ancient civilisation, he told Barack Obama that India is a poor country. He sounded like film-makers who market India’s poverty abroad and collect awards. Was the Prime Minister talking about poverty which Rahul Gandhi called a “state of mind” or the real poverty of our back lanes, Modi asked.
Claiming the nation fears the outcome of Manmohan Singh’s meeting with the Pakistan Prime Minister, Modi said he was hurt when Nawaz Sharif called Indian and Pakistani journalists for breakfast and called the Indian Prime Minister a “dehati aurat” (village woman) for complaining about terrorism from Pakistani soil (which on September 26 took 12 Indian lives in two incidents at Kathua and Samba in Jammu & Kashmir). India, he thundered, will not tolerate this insult to the nation and the Prime Minister, “whatever our internal differences may be”. Nawaz Sharif could have the temerity to speak like this about Manmohan Singh, who is senior to him even in age, because the Congress vice-president has, in village parlance, “Pradhan Mantri ki pagdi uchaal di hai” (insulted him) and that is a sin (paap).
Modi challenged Indian mediapersons present to explain why they did not walk out when the Prime Minister was thus insulted. A possible reason could be that the Indian media, which the Vajpayee Government hosted at Agra, snuggled up to then President Parvez Musharraf when he made equally outrageous comments about Jammu & Kashmir. Modi has signalled an end to tolerance of such malfeasance by the media.
The BJP’s prime ministerial hopeful said the Indian people sincerely hope Manmohan Singh will show Nawaz Sharif his place and ask when Pakistan-occupied Kashmir will be returned to India, talk about terrorism and the constant killing of our jawans, and particularly try to bring back the severed head of our jawan whose mother and widow are still weeping.
The great dilemma before the nation today is between parivar shahi and lok shahi; the battle is to decide if India will run according to the Constitution (samvidhan) or the whim of the shehzade (Rahul Gandhi). Can the UPA allies answer this question – whom would they like to work under? Modi reminded his audience that when the Supreme Court decision on debarring convicted leaders came, the BJP supported it and made its stand clear at the all party meeting and in the meeting with the President. Disapproving of the manner in which Rahul Gandhi junked his own party-led Government’s Ordinance to save convicted legislators, the Gujarat strongman said that in both the Delhi and the 2014 general elections, it was time to get rid of the Dirty Team and bring in the Dream Team.
If one were to search for the signature theme of Narendra Modi’s Operation Red Fort, it would be “mujhe vishwas hai” (I have confidence), a far cry from the inane mumblings of a leader who thought India was nothing and had to be made something — “humme Bharat ko banana hai” (we have to make India this or that). In less than a decade, he pointed out, India will celebrate 75 years of freedom (Amrut Mahotsav) and we must decide what heights we want to scale by then. The UPA, he charged, has no vision at all, and every successive Budget has hovered around sensex up or down, income tax up or down, import relief, with no grand picture.
Armed as always with statistics to prove his points, Modi said the UPA brags only about achievements made by State Governments, but its own performance is dismal. The Railways in 1980 had 61,000 km tracks and 31 years later only 3,000 km of lines have been added, whereas China in the same period added 11,000 km of railway tracks from a baseline 50,000 km and their speed and quality equals Japan.
The UPA in an affidavit before the Supreme Court admitted that the NDA in six years added 24,000 km of roads to the national highways but UPA in nine years has added only 16000 km. The Aviation sector in the past seven years has seen unprecedented corruption, losses of Rs 53,000 crore and a debt of Rs 1 lakh crore; but it gave a package of Rs 30,000 crore to the private airlines. Delhi is starved for power and stations that can generate 20,000 MW are ready but non-functional because the regime has failed to allot gas and coal and set up transmission lines, because without money no file is signed.
Striking a personal note, Narendra Modi said it is India’s greatness that a boy who used to sell tea in train cabins to make ends meet has today been elevated by the people to this stage. As the crowds went hysterical, he said, “I never dreamt to be a ruler, I am a sevak”. He exhorted them to “see my past and see my work” and “trust my promise that neither Narendra Modi nor the BJP will ever destroy your trust, let you down; we will live for your dreams, that is our mission”.

He lambasted the dysfunctional regimes in Delhi where the Chief Minister accepts no responsibility for anything that goes wrong, including the safety of young girls, and New Delhi which is paralysed between the Government and the Mother-Son rule. The UPA is drowning in corruption, but remains addicted to “Gandhi-chaap”, the high denomination notes which are being collected in the tonnes. The nation, he concluded, is yearning for Su-raaj, good governance.

http://www.niticentral.com/2013/09/29/modi-blows-ananta-vijaya-139350.html


S. Kalyanaraman

 

 

Narendra Modi speech at Trichy


Subject: [TamilBJP] திருச்சியில் நரேந்திர மோதி உரை: ஒரு பார்வை
Live Video here
திரு. நரேந்திர மோதி திருச்சியில் உரையாற்றி முடித்து விட்டார். சம்பிரதாயமாக தமிழில் ஆரம்பித்து, பிறகு ஹிந்தியில் மிக உணர்ச்சிகரமாக பேசினார். நடுவில் சில பகுதிகள் மட்டும் ஆங்கிலத்தில் இருந்தன. இயல்பாகவே மிகச் சிறந்த பேச்சாளர் மோதி. இந்த உரையும் அதற்கு விதிவிலக்கல்ல. தமிழக பாஜக தலைவர் ஹெச்.ராஜா நன்றாகவே மொழியாக்கம் செய்தார். ஆனால் மோதியின் குரலில் இருந்த உணர்ச்சிகள், ஏற்ற இறக்கங்கள் ஆகியவை ராஜாவின் மென்குரல் பேச்சில் கொஞ்சம் நீர்த்து விட்டன என்று தான் சொல்ல வேண்டும்.
 
தொடக்கத்தில் இன்று பாகிஸ்தான் பயங்கரவாதிகளின் தாக்குதலுக்குப் பலியான நமது ராணுவ வீரர்களுக்கு அஞ்சலி செலுத்தும் வகையில் இரண்டு நிமிடம் உட்கார்ந்த இடத்தில் உட்கார்ந்த படியே மௌனம் அனுஷ்டிக்கக் கோரினார் மோதி.  பேச்சை ஆரம்பிப்பதற்கு முன்,  அலைபாயும், கூச்சல் போடும் கூட்டத்தை அமைதிப் படுத்தி தன் நிலைக்குக் கொண்டு வந்து பேச்சில் கவனம் குவிக்கவும் இது உதவியது. பேசப் போகிற விஷயம் கைதட்டலுக்கானது மட்டுமல்ல, கவனத்திற்கானது என்று அறிவிப்பது போலிருந்தது இது.
 
modi_trichy”கம்பனும் வள்ளுவனும் பாரதியும் பிறந்த தமிழ் மண்ணிற்கு வருகை தருவதை மதிப்புக்குரிய விஷயமாகக் கருதுகிறேன். தமிழ் மக்களிடம் மூன்று நல்ல குணங்கள் உண்டு – கடும் உழைப்பு, சிரத்தை, ராஜகம்பீரம் & விசுவாசம் (royal & loyal). தமிழகத்தின் பொருட்கள் தேசிய, உலக சந்தைகளில் தரம் வாய்ந்தவையாக உள்ளன. தமிழ் மக்களின் உழைப்பினால் தமிழ்நாடு இந்தியாவின் சிறந்த மாநிலங்களில் ஒன்றாகத் திகழ்கிறது, தமிழ் மிகவும் பழமையும் பெருமையும் வாய்ந்த மொழி” – இவ்வாறு தமிழ்ப் பண்பாட்டுக்கும் மக்களுக்கும் புகழாரம் சூட்டித் தனது உரையைத் தொடங்கினார்.
 
அடுத்து, குஜராத்துக்கும் தமிழகத்துக்கும் இடையே உள்ள உறவுகளை, ஒற்றுமைகளைப் பட்டியலிட்டார். ”இரண்டும் கடற்கரைகள் கொண்ட மாநிலங்கள். பருத்தியை அதிகமாக விளைவிக்கிறது குஜராத், அதைப் பெருமளவு நுகர்ந்து ஆடையாக நெய்கிறது தமிழகம். குஜராத்தி காந்தியின் மனசாட்சியாக தமிழகத்தின் ராஜாஜி இருந்தார்.  தமிழ் மக்கள் குஜராத்திற்குப் புலம்பெயர்ந்து அதன் வளர்ச்சிக்கு உதவுவது போலவே, சௌராஷ்டிரர்களான குஜராத்திகள் தமிழ்நாட்டில் பல காலமாக இருக்கிறார்கள்.  பாலில் சர்க்கரை கலந்தது போன்ற இனிய உறவு அது. இங்கு சென்னையில் குஜராத்திகள் அதிகமாக வசிக்கும் சௌகார்பேட்டை போல  குஜராத்தில் தமிழர்கள் அதிகமாக வசிக்கும் மணிநகர். எனது சட்டசபைத் தொகுதி அது. அங்குள்ள தமிழர்கள் தான் தொடர்ந்து வாக்களித்து என்னைத் தேர்ந்தெடுத்து வருகிறார்கள்” என்று  நெகிழ்ச்சியுடன் குறிப்பிட்டார்.
 
இது ஒரு சாதாரண அரசியல்வாதி பேசும் பேச்சல்ல. இந்த தேசத்தின் மீது, மண்ணின் மீது, காலகாலமாக இருந்து வரும் அதன் சமூக, கலாசார பந்தங்களின் மீது ஆழமான பிடிப்பும், அன்பும் கொண்ட ஒருவரின் பேச்சு. எண்ணமும், செயலும் எல்லாம் இந்த தேசத்தை ஒற்றுமைப் படுத்துவதற்காகவே, இந்த தேசமக்களின் நல்வாழ்விற்காகவே இயங்கும் ஒரு தேசபக்தனின் பேச்சு. எத்தனை உரை எழுத்தாளர்களை வைத்துக் கொண்டாலும் காங்கிரசின் முட்டாள் இளவரனிடம் இருந்தோ, அல்லது மற்ற  சுயநல அரசியல்வியாதிகளின் வாயிலிருந்தோ இப்படி ஒரு பேச்சு சுட்டுப் போட்டாலும் வராது.
 
குஜராத்தின் மீனவர்களை பாகிஸ்தான் பிடித்துச் சென்று சித்ரவதை செய்வதையும், தமிழக மீனவர்களை இலங்கை அதே போன்று செய்வதையும் குறித்து அடுத்துப் பேசினார்.. இந்த நாடுகள் இப்படித் துளிர்த்துப் போய் விட்டதற்கு இடையே உள்ள கடல் நீர் காரணமல்ல,  தில்லியில் உள்ள பலவீனமான அரசும் அதன் கொள்கைகளுமே காரணம்.  இலங்கை அரசு தமிழக மீனவர்களைக் கொல்கிறது. பாகிஸ்தானிய ராணுவம் நமது ராணுவ வீரர்களைக் கொல்கிறது.. பயங்கரவாதம் அபபவியான பொதுமக்களைக் கொல்கிறது, பூடான், இலங்கை, நேபாளம் போன்ற சிறிய நாடுகள் கூட இந்தியாவை மதிப்பதில்லை. இதற்கெல்லாம் காரணமான அந்த பலவீனமான அரசை அகற்ற வேண்டும் – என்று முழங்கினார்.
 
அமெரிக்கா தனது மண்ணில் அநியாயமாக உளவறிந்து வருவதை அறிந்து, அந்த நாட்டுடனான ராஜரீக தொடர்புகள் அனைத்தையும் பிரேசில் துண்டிக்கிறது. தனது நாட்டின் தேசதுரோகியான ஸ்னோடன் என்பவருக்கு ரஷ்யா அடைக்கலம் கொடுத்ததால், தனது ரஷ்யப் பயணத்தையே அமெரிக்க அதிபர் ஒபாமா ரத்து செய்தார். இதிலிருந்து நாம் என்ன பாடம் கற்றோம்? நமது பிரதமரோ பயங்கரச் செயல்கள் நடந்து கொண்டிருக்கும் போதும் கூட தொடர்ந்து பாகிஸ்தானிய அரசுடன் பேச்சுவார்த்தை நடத்திக் கொண்டிருக்கிறார், அதன் அரசியல் தலைவர்களூடன் உட்கார்ந்து சிக்கன் பிரியாணி சாப்பிட்டுக் கொண்டிருக்கிறார்..  இந்த செயலை நீங்கள் அங்கீகரிக்கிறீர்களா? என்று கூட்டத்தைப் பார்த்து கேட்டார்.  இல்லை என்று பெரும் எதிரொலி வந்தது.
 
அடுத்து, காங்கிரஸ் அரசு ஏற்படுத்தியுள்ள பொருளாதார சீரழிவு குறித்து பேசினார்.
 
narendra-modi-trichy-295“இதே நிலை நீடித்தால் இன்னும் 5 ஆண்டுகள் நீடித்தால் இப்போது நல்ல வேலையில் இருக்கும் இளைஞர்கள் சாலையோரங்களில் பிச்சை எடுக்கும் நிலைக்குத் தள்ளப் படுவார்கள் என்று பொருளாதார நிபுணர்கள் கூறுவதை சுட்டிக்  காட்டினார். ”அரசின் தவறான கொள்கைகளால் தொழில்கள் அழிகின்றன.  பெரும் வணிக முதலைகளுக்கு உதவும் அரசு, சிறிய தொழில் முனைவர்கள் வாங்கிய கடனைத் திருப்பித் தர முடியாமல் போனால் அவர்களது பெயர்களை செய்தித் தாளில் விள்ம்பரப் படுத்தி அவர்களை அவமதித்து தற்கொலை வரை கொண்டு தள்ளுகிறது.  இந்தக் கொள்கைகள் மாற்றப்பட்டு  லட்சக்கணக்கான கோடிக்கணக்கான சிறீய தொழில்கள் வளர்க்கப் பட்டு அதன் மூலம் நமது இளைஞர்கள் மதிப்புக்குரிய வேலைவாய்ப்புகளைப் பெற்று வாழ்க்கையில் முன்னேற்றம் அடையும் வகையில் எங்களது அரசின் திட்டங்கள் இருக்கும்.
 
ஊழல் நமது பொதுவாழ்வை அழிக்கிறது. ஏழை மக்களைச் சென்று சேர வேண்டிய பணம் ஊழலில் வீணாகிறது. ஆதார் அட்டை என்ற திட்டம் குறித்த ஐயங்களை மூன்று வருடம் முன்பே நான் தெரிவித்தேன், அதே விஷயங்களை இப்போது உச்ச நீதிமன்றம் மத்திய அரசிடம் கேட்கிறது.  பண விரயம் மட்டுமல்ல, நாட்டின் பாதுகாப்பையே கேள்விக் குறியாக்கும் வகையில் இந்த ஆதார் அட்டை முறைகேடுகள் உள்ளன.
 
காங்கிரசின் அரசியல் எப்போதும் மக்களைப் பிளப்பதாக, பிரிப்பதாக இருக்கீறது. சாதி, மதம், கிராம – நகர வேறுபாடு என்று பல முனைகளில் தொடர்ந்து மக்களைப் பிரித்தாளும் கொள்கைகளை காங்கிரஸ் செயல்படுத்தி வருகீறது.  காங்கிரசைக் கலைக்க வேண்டும் என்று அன்று காந்தி சொன்னதை உண்மையாக்கும் வகையில் நாம் தேசத்திற்கு காங்கிரசிடமிருந்து விடுதலை அளிக்க வேண்டும்” என்றார்.
 
”இந்த மைதானம் நிறைந்து, அதற்குப் பின்னுள்ள பாலத்தைத் தாண்டியுள்ள மைதானமும் நிறையும் அளவுக்கு இளைஞர்களின் கூட்டம் இங்கு கூடியுள்ளது. அந்த இளைஞர்களை என்னால் பார்க்க முடியவில்லை.. மைதானம் சிறியது, அதில் இடமில்லாமல் போகலாம்., ஆனால் என் இதயத்தில் எப்போதும் உங்கள் அனைவருக்கும் இடம் உண்டு.
 
தமிழக அரசியலையும் தேசிய அரசியலையும் அறிந்தவர்கள் இளைஞர்களின் இந்தக் கூட்டத்தைப் பார்த்தே இங்கு எவ்வளவு பெரிய மாற்றம் நிகழ்ந்து கொண்டிருக்கீறது என்பதைக் காண முடியும், பல முறை தமிழ் நாட்டுக்கு வந்திருக்கிறேன்,. இது போன்ற ஒரு இளைஞர் பெருந்திரளை இது வரை கண்டதில்லை, இங்கு வந்த அனைவருக்கும், ஏற்பாடு செய்த இளைஞர் அணியினருக்கும் மிக மிக நன்றி.
 
நீங்கள் எங்கள் மீது நம்பிக்கை வைத்திருக்கிறீர்கள், அந்த நம்பிக்கையை ஒருபோதும் உடைக்க மாட்டோம் என்று உறுதியளிக்கிறேன். எங்களது சக்தி அனைத்தையும் உங்களது முன்னேற்றத்திற்காக, நாட்டின் வளர்ச்சிக்காக பயன்படுத்துவோம். நீங்கள் எனக்கும் பாஜகவுக்கும் புதிய நம்பிக்கையையும் வலிமை உணர்வையும் ஏற்படுத்தியுள்ளீர்கள். வந்தே மாதரம்” என்று கூறி உரையை நிறைவு செய்தார்.
 
இறுதியில் அனைவரும் முஷ்டிகளை உயர்த்தி வந்தே மாதரம் என்று முழங்கச் செய்தது சிலிர்ப்பூட்டுவதாக இருந்தது.
 
சிறப்பான நிகழ்ச்சி.  அருமையான உரை. தனிப்பட்ட அளவில், மோதி இன்னும் சில விஷயங்களையும் பேசியிருக்கலாம் என்று எனக்குத் தோன்றியது. சேலம் ஆடிட்டர் ரமேஷ் உள்ளிட்ட தமிழக பாஜக தலைவர்கள் பயங்கரவாதிகளால் படுகொலை செய்யப் பட்டது குறித்து கட்டாயம் பேசப்பட்டிருக்க வேண்டும். பொன். ராதாகிருஷ்ணன் இலேசாக தன் பேச்சில் இதைச் சுட்டிக் காட்டினார்,  தமிழகத்தின் மின்சாரத் தட்டுப்பாடு,   இலங்கையில் தேர்தல் முடிந்த நிலையில் தமிழர்கள் மறுவாழ்வு குறித்த எதிர்பார்ப்புகள் ஆகிய விஷயங்கள் குறித்து ராஜ்நாத் சிங் பேசினார். அது போதாது. மோதியும் இந்த விஷயங்களைப் பேசியிருக்க வேண்டும்.
 
மொத்தத்தில் இது ஒரு மிக வெற்றிகரமான நிகழ்வு. மோதியின் திருச்சி விஜயம் கட்டாயம் தமிழக அரசியலில் ஒரு மாற்றத்தைக் கொண்டு வரும் என்றும், மோதி பிரதமராகப் போகும் வரலாற்றுத் தருணத்தில் தமிழகமும் தனக்குரிய பங்களிப்பை நல்கும் என்றும் நம்புவோம்.
 
நிகழ்ச்சியின் ஒளிப்பதிவை இந்த இணைப்புகளில் காணலாம்.

 

Fake encounters of the Financial Kind


 

Why has PC not answered Dr. Subramanian Swamy? Why is PC asking Finance Ministry to file defamation case against Dinamani.

SoniaG UPA, on the road to economy crash. Remove Rajan, RBI Governor — Dr. Subramanian Swamy
Indian economy in crisis. Nationalize bank accounts of Indian citizens in 70 countries. Confiscate P-Notes. — Dr. Subramanian Swamy
PC aggrieved. Centre files defamation case against Dinamani.

PC’s fake encounter with facts
Kishore Trivedi on September 23, 2013

PC’s fake encounter with facts
Arrogance blended with self-denial is a deadly cocktail and who better than our Finance Minister can demonstrate the after effects better! The fact that the Finance Minister and the UPA are living in a dream world was evident when he released a statement before going to the National Integration Council meeting, which questioned Narendra Modi’s claims of the economic growth under Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s NDA and the economic decline under the present UPA.
Chidambaram asked Modi not to stage ‘fake encounters’ with facts when the truth is that the Finance Minister is fooling the entire nation by giving half-baked facts and incomplete analysis. I ask the Finance Minister five questions that will puncture his attempt to mislead the people of India.
Question 1
 Can Chidambaram deny that when UPA took charge (he was Finance Minister even back then), the growth rate of India was 8.6 per cent? 
This was the result of a commendable effort of the Vajpayee Government considering the economic mess they inherited in 1998 and the severe economic sanctions by the world community in the aftermath of Pokhran. Placing India’s self respect first and backing it up by a grand vision, the Vajpayee Government left the economy at its peak with the growth rate of 8.6 per cent in 2004.
Question 2
Will Chidambaram also deny that the growth rate for 2012-2013, a year when he was Finance Minister, was barely five per cent?
It is alright to share year by year growth rate figures of the NDA rule Mr Finance Minister but did you bother to check the growth rate of the nation in the last year itself, which stood at a mere 4.98 per cent? How did Chidambaram forget this inconvenient but obvious truth right under his watch?
Question 3
Is Chidambaram aware of the Q4 figure for 2012-2013 and Q1 figure for 2013-2014?
It may be worthwhile to remind our Harvard educated Finance Minister that last quarter growth for 2012-2013 stood at 4.8 per cent and the figure dropped even lower during the first quarter of this year at 4.4 per cent. In fact, Narendra Modi was very kind not to mention the quarterly figures for this year this year, preferring to stick to the Q4 figures of last year, which are marginally better.
Question 4
Is Chidambaram aware of what economic think tanks and independent external agencies are saying about our economy?
It is not only the common man and woman or Narendra Modi that is rightly worried about the economy. Various national and international agencies of repute have expressed concern about the economic gloom prevalent across the nation? If he is not, I would love to enlighten the anti-encounter specialist Chidambaram.
Standard & Poor’s has said that the chances of India’s ratings downgrade look much higher compared to other emerging market economies. Further downgrade would even push it to ‘junk’ status. After the quarterly GDP growth at dismal 4.4 per cent, HSBC forecasted GDP growth for FY14 at just four per cent, a low not recorded since the 1990s. Bank of America went to the extent of saying that there is no hope the government can change things the way they are currently. According to the Reuters report, almost all global banks are skeptical about India’s growth prospects. Is this also the NDA’s doing?
Question 5
Does Chidambaram know where the NDA and UPA stand on job creation?
One of the factors that determine the performance of the Government is the opportunity it created for the people.
NSSO statistics (I presume they were not fudged by the NDA, Chidambaram) clearly suggest that the number of jobs created from 1999-2004 was 60.1 million whereas the figure between 2004-2011 is a poor 14.6 million (the figure for UPA 1, which PC calls the golden period growth is 2.7 million). These figures only speak for themselves!
Thus, instead of setting his own house in order the Finance Minister has done everything else under the sun. Few remember that the economic ruin of India began in 2008 thanks to mindless spending.
When the NDA came to power the growth rate was 4.8 per cent. Today we are yet again close to that figure in 2013 after a golden period starting from 1999, whose efforts were seen in the growth rate during 2003 and 2004.
Do we want to go back to 1997? And by the way, do you know who the Finance Minister that time was…

http://www.niticentral.com/2013/09/23/pcs-fake-encounter-with-facts-136593.html


S. Kalyanaraman

 

__._,_.___