Raid on “Amnesty International” – An NGO that is manufacturing Atrocity Literature in India

Republished on 26 October 2018: originally published on 2 September 2015.

[ Note: The Indian offices of “Amnesty International” have been raided on 25 October 2018 by the law enforcement authorities for the violation of Indian law relating to accepting foreign donations / contributions by NGOs and spending that money ONLY ON THE DECLARED purpose for which money was received. It has become necessary and relevant today to inform Indian citizens about what this Amnesty International is doing in India.]

By : Mallikapatllola

When there is no atrocity to whip up outrage, Amnesty International in India manufactures one.

Amnesty India report made sensational claims about two dalit girls sentenced to rape by an un elected council of upper caste men, because their brother eloped with a higher caste woman. This horrible diktat was supposed to have been issued by village council in UP’s Baghpat region.

This story was picked up by British Media and it went viral. The Independent of UK wrote 2 stories about this on its front page.

And a petition put up by Amnesty International was signed by 260,000+ people. It was also reported in Time, Russia Today and in Telegraph on Sept 3, 2015.

Reuters today Sept 3, 2015 reported that “The village council is actually more than 80 percent female and headed by a woman who, like the sisters, is from the bottom of the caste hierarchy.”

The Dalit woman chief denied having any meeting on these girls and said that there was no order at all. And the Police Superindent Sharad Sachan said that there was no evidence of any such order being issued.

Note that none of our Media wallas deemed to find facts on ground and instead this slander was repeated later in Indian news papers even though the place is close to Delhi.

After adding to the narrative of the high caste rapist Indian male stereotype, Amnesty said that it did not investigate the case nor did it visit the village.

Still they plan to continue the petition. “Gopika Bashi, women’s rights campaigner at Amnesty International India, said that despite the doubts cast over the story there were no plans to withdraw its petition”. With likes of Aakar Patel heading Amnesty International India, it is not surprising to see these kinds of hit jobs.

However, will it be possible for a lawyer to sue Amnesty for slander and defamation on behalf of the Village? This village is in UP’s Bhagpat region.

Bagha Jatin – an alternative ‘Father of Nation’

Republished on 26 October 2018: First published on 12 September 2018

Image result for images of bagha jatin

By:    L. W. C.        

 Had Bagha Jatin been an Englishman, his statue would be next to Lord Nelson’s at Trafalgar Square”,  said Charles Tegart, the British officer who tracked him down near Balasore, after he put up a heroic resistance for 75 minutes. Such was the admiration he evoked at the hands of his enemy.

Bagha Jatin was born as Jatindranath Mukherji, at Kustia now in Bangladesh, the ancestral land of Rabindranath Tagore, on December 8, 1879 to Sharat Shashi and Umeschandra Mukherji. Losing his father early, he was brought up by his mother, a gifted poetess herself. Growing up to be a strapping young lad, Jatin was known for his physical strength, as well as being a gifted actor, especially in playing roles of Pauranic characters like Prahalad, Hanuman, Dhruv etc. Driven by a nationalist fervor, he used the drama to spread nationalism.

Finishing his studies from Krishnanagar, Jatin joined the Kolkata Central College (now named after Khudiram Bose) to study Fine Arts in 1895. It was here he came in touch with Swami Vivekananda, who influenced his ideology, and he became one of Swamiji’s most ardent devotees. Jatin was one among the youth volunteers whom Swamiji desired with “muscles of iron and nerves of steel”, and played an active role in assisting the poor and needy, especially during floods and famines. He proved himself to be a good leader and organizer. Jatin actively assisted Bhagini Nivedita, in her service missions and also learnt wrestling. Fed up with the English education system, he began to write regularly, showcasing the British exploitation of India and the need to have an Indian National Army.

In 1900, he was married to Indubala Banerji of Kumarkhali, and had 4 children. However, when he lost his elder son Atindra, he went on a pilgrimage to Haridwar, where he found inner peace. Returning to his native village, Jatin had that encounter with the tiger, when searching for a notorious man eating leopard. He managed to kill the tiger with a khukhri, but not before being severaly wounded himself. The surgeon Lt. Col. Suresh Sarbadhikari, who treated him, and removed the tiger nails from his body, published an article, impressed by his bravery. And that is when he got the title “Bagha” Jatin, that also became his more popular name.

Jatin played a vital role in setting up one of the branches of Anushilan Samiti, at Dhaka, where he met Sri Aurobindo in 1903, and decided to collaborate with him. He played a key role in spreading both Anushilan Samiti as well as Jugantar through out Bengal.  During a processession of the Prince of Wales in Kolkata in 1905, Jatin assaulted a group of English soldiers, who were misbehaving with the Indian ladies, drawing attention of the higher ups.

Along with Barindra Ghose, one of the founding members of Jugantar, Jatin set up a bomb factory near Deoghar (now in Jharkhand), while Barindra did the same at Maniktala. He also began to set up a loose network of sleeper cells, to spread the revolutionary activities. He simultaneously developed a loose network of autonomous sleeper cells, which organized relief missions, welfare activities, as well as religious congregations like the Kumbh Mela, and celebrate the birth anniversaries of Ramakrishna Paramhansa and Swami Vivekananda annually.  By now he was fully under British surveillance, who saw him as one of the biggest threats. Soon he began to spread his activities, setting up branches of the Anushilan Samiti in Darjeeling and Siliguri, apart from being noted for his regular fisticuffs with the British officers.

One such clash led to legal proceedings, and when warned by the Magistrate to behave, Jatin shot back, stating he would not hesitate to do so again for the rights of his fellow Indians. When the British cracked down on the conspirators of the Alipore Bomb Case, Jatin was one of those who managed to get away. He soon filled up the leadership vacuum, taking over the Jugantar Party and began to set up it’s units all over Bengal, as well as in Odisha and Eastern UP. When the British government struck back with a series of repressive measures, to suppress the revolutionaries, Jatin hit back with a series of actions, most conducted in top secrecy. Assasination attempts were made on the Lt. Governor of Bengal in 1908.

finally on January 27, 1910, Jatin was arrested in connection with the assasination of prosecutor Ashutosh Biswas, and DSP Samsul Alam, but released. Only to be arrested again in connection with the Howrah-Sibpur conspiracy case, along with 46 others. Jatin was charged with waging war against the Empror, as well as instigating Indian soldiers in the Army to revolt, in the style of 1857. however, the case failed due to lack of proper evidence and in the meantime, he also made good contacts with other fellow revolutionaries in prison. On his release from prison in 1911, Jatin temporarily suspended his revolutionary activities for some time. Having lost his job, he left Kolkata and started doing contracts on the Jessore-Jhenaidah railway line, that gave him ample time to revitalize the units in Bengal.

Going on a pilgrimage to Haridwar, Vrindawan he got in touch with Swami Niralamba, an ex revolutionary Jatindra Nath Banerji, who took up Sanyas. He soon coordinated with Ras Bihari Bose, and Lala Hardayal in spreading the revolutionary work in the Northern part of India. On his return to Kolkata, he reorganized Jugantar, continuing his relief activities, especially during the devastating Damodar river floods, in Midnapore, Burdwan districts. Ras Bihari too joined him around that time, calling him a real leader of men.

Soon Ras Bihari along with Jatin, began to plan a 1857 kind of revolt, negotiation with disaffected Indian army officers at Fort William in Kolkata, the nerve center of the British Indian army then.

Jatin’s fame had spread abroad too, and expat Indian revolutionaries in US, Europe were inspired by him. His emissary Taraknath Das, along with Guran Ditt Kumar was already organizing evening schools for Indian immigrants on the West Coast of US and Canada.  These Indian immigrants on the West Coast were primarily migrant Hindus and Sikh workers spread across Seattle, Portland, Vancouver, San Francisco. Apart from teaching them simple English, they were made aware of their rights, and the message of nationalism. Lala Hardayal meanwhile resigned from his teaching job at University of California, Barkley in 1913, and travelling along the West Coast, openly exhorted the Indian migrant workers to revolt against the British rule.

Lala Hardayal founded the Ghadr Party in US, made up primarily of Sikh and Hindu Panjabi emigrants in the West Coast of US, Canada and soon became one of the key players in the Indian revolutionary movement, and later was associated with Savarkar too. When World War I, broke out in September 1914, the Berlin Committee was formed by Virendranath Chattopapdhyaya that included members of the Ghadr party too. It’s aim was to foment an 1857 style uprising in India. With the British engaged in the War, it was felt this was the best time to stir up an 1857 style armed uprising. The German Government supported the mission with arms, ammunition and funds, while a large number of Ghadr party members too began to leave for India.

It was Jatin who carried out the entire mission, leading the Jugantar, while Ras Bihari Bose began to execute the plan in UP and Punjab. Called as the German plot or Hindu-German conspiracy, he began to raise funds organizing a series of armed robberies, using taxicabs. With police surveillance intensifying, Jugantar members urged Jatin to shift to a safer spot like Balasore on the Odisha coast, which was also the entry point for German arms into India. He went into hiding at a small village Kaptipada in Mayurbhanj district.

Jatin sent one of his close associates Naren Bhattacharya, who would later become more well known as M. N. Roy, the founder of the Communist party in India, to make a deal with the Germans regarding financial aid and arms.  However a group pf Czech revolutionaries, who had infiltrated the network, uncovered Jatin’s plans, and soon the information was leaked out to the higher authorities in Britain and US. Also it was aided by some of the Indian associates, who acted as spies for the British.

The British sealed off the Eastern coast of India from Chitgong to Gopalpur, as well as the entire Gangetic delta. The British also raided Harry and Sons, which Jatin had set up as a front, for smuggling in the arms, and soon traced his location to Kaptipada village. Jatin was hiding at Kaptipada, with his fellow companians, Chittapriya Ray Chaudhari, Manoranjan Sengupta. He was advised to flee from the place, however his insistence on getting 2 more companions of his Niren and Jatish, caused a delay.

That delay was enough for the police to reach Kaptipada, with a large contingent, along with an army unit from Chandbali, cutting off all escape routes for Jatin and his fellow associates. They were trapped from all sides.  For two days, Jatin along with his companians fled through the thick forests of Mayurbhanj, before reaching Balasore station. However tempted by the reward for capture of the five “bandits” announced by the British, the local villagers, informed the police.

Finally on September 9, 1915, Jatin and his associates took up position in a small trench at Chashakhand near Balasore. Inspite of Chittapriya, asking him to flee, Jatin refused to abandon his companions and fought back against the British. For 75 minutes, Jatin and his 4 associates armed with just Mauser pistols, held out against a much larger fully armed police contingent, inflicting heavy casualties on them. It was one of the most heroic resistance ever, as Jatin fought to the end like a tiger. Chittapriya died in the firing, Jatin was severely wounded, while Manoranjan and Niren ran out of ammunition and were captured. And the tiger, Bagha Jatin himself was severely wounded, taken to the Government hospital in Balasore.

On September 10, 1915, the man who fought and killed a tiger with bare hands, Jatindranath Mukherji, aka Bagha Jatin was no more, dying of the bullet wounds he received. Truly a tiger, who fought till the end, gave sleepless nights to the Indian enemy – the British. His heroic resistance to the end won the admiration of Charles Tegart the British intelligence officer, who led the capture. “Though I had to do my duty, I have a great admiration for him. He died in an open fight.” Salute and respect to you, Jatin Bagha, truly a hero. Charles Tegart also claimed that had Bagha Jatin been an Englishman, his statue would be right up there along with Lord Nelson’s in Trafalgar Square. Unfortunately in our country, not many even know about him, except in Bengal and Odisha.

I could not forget the injunction of the only man I ever obeyed almost blindly, Jatin Da’s heroic death must be avenged. But in the meantime I had come to realise that I admired Jatin Da because he personified, perhaps without himself knowing it, the best of mankind,” said M. N. Roy.

Bagha Jatin’s ideals were inspired by Swami Vivekananda, he was truly the youngster with muscles of iron and nerves of steel, whom Swamiji wanted. “Amra morbo, jagat jagbe” – that is, “We shall die to awaken the nation”. And he indeed did that, his heroic fight was an inspiration to many brave sons and daughters of India who fought for her independence. It were revolutionaries, like Jatin Bagha, who made the British dreadful of another specter of 1857 and ultimately made them decide on their own to leave India in their own interest. There is no iota of doubt that in fact it were these Indian revolutionaries who made India free and the contrary claims are intentional falsifications of history.   

Shockwaves Over the Cold-blooded Murder of Saudi Journalist

By: Parmanand Pandey, Advocate, Supreme Court (Secretary General, IPC)

Cold blooded and brutal killing of a Saudi journalist Jamaal Khashoggi by the Saudi Arabian Authorities inside its embassy in Istanbul (Turkey) has on 2nd October sent shock waves across the world. The Saudi authorities firstly expressed their ignorance about his whereabouts and after two weeks of ping-pong, they accepted that he has been killed by a gang of goons. Now it has become clear that he was killed at the instance of the Sultan of Saudi Arabia. Who was Jamaal Khashoggi and why his death has escalated tension in many countries? some counties have already announced their decision of not having any negotiation with Saudi Arabia after they have come to know that Jamal was physically annihilated by the Saudi government at the instance of the present king.

Jamal was a Saudi journalist. He enjoyed top positions in Saudi Arabia’s media houses but recently got himself relocated to America and a regular contributor to the Washington Post. Sixty years old Khashoggi was going to marry very soon as he had gone to the Saudi embassy in Istanbul to collect the papers of divorce from his first wife.

Khashoggi belonged to the rich, and influential family of ‘who is who’ of Saudi Arabia. He was the nephew of Adnan Khashoggi, the notorious arms dealer of the world. He was the cousin of Dodi Fayed, who was flirting with Princess Diana, the wife of Prince Charles. Both of them were killed in a car accident in Paris. Dodi Fayed had even claimed before his death that Princess Diana was pregnant with his child. Jamal Khashoggi was born in Medina. His grandfather Mohammed Khashoggi was of Turkish origin but after his marriage with a Saudi woman, he settled in Medina and became the personal physician of Abdul Aziz Al-Saud, the royal descendant of Al-Saud, the founder of the Kingdome of Saudi Arabia.

Jamal Khashoggi had his elementary and secondary education in Saudi Arabia but obtained the degree in Business Administration from the Indiana State University of the USA. He started his journalistic career in 1983 and worked with many newspapers. He was the foreign correspondent of Saudi newspapers in many countries like Afghanistan, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan in the Middle-East, and in 2003 he became the Editor-in-Chief of the Saudi Arabian daily Al-Watan for a short period.

He was fired from the post of the Editor-in-Chief within few months because he had allowed a columnist to criticise the Wahabi School of Islam. His criticism to the radical Wahabi School of Islam brought reputation to him of a liberal and progressive journalist in the western countries. However, the fundamentalist Islamic forces became fiercely hostile toward him.

But what made the Saudi Government angry with Jamal Khashoggi? A person who was the Media Advisor to the Prince, how could he become such a bitter enemy of the King that the Saudi Arabia’s present dispensation wanted to physically kill him? After his relocation to the USA Khashoggi made blistering attacks on Saudi regime for its policies particularly its blockade of Qatar. He was also against the Saudi regime for having a dispute with Lebanon and Canada.  The Crown Prince was vehemently criticised for his crackdown on dissent and media in the country. However, he had vociferously supported some of the reforms undertaken by the Prince like allowing women to drive. He was highly critical of the arrest of some of the leading Women Rights Activists. Khashoggi had expressed his displeasure with the Prince for waging war on a poor country like Yemen but, strangely he was never in favour of peace with Israel. He had said many times in his commentary in the newspapers that ‘the longer this cruel war lasts in Yemen the more the damage will be. The people of Yemen are busy in fighting poverty, cholera and water scarcity and rebuilding their country. Therefore, the Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman must bring an end to the violence”.

Saudi Arabia was, at first place, not ready to accept the death of Jamal Khashoggi but now it has been accepted by the Sultan that he was killed by some gangsters. The admission after many days of emphatic denials by the Gulf kingdom has come after Donald Trump threatened to impose sanctions if it was proved that the journalist was killed. But we find volte-face of Donald Trump, who says he cannot jettison more than 500 billion dollars of arms trade with Saudi Arabia because that will render lakhs of Americans jobless. So, for him, it is ‘America first’ rather than the protection of human rights of even the most influential journalist, who was associated with the newspaper of his own country. In order to cover up the tragic death of the journalist, the King (Sultan) has sacked Deputy Intelligence chief Ahmad al-Assiri and Royal Court Media Advisor Saud al-Qahtani, both are the top aides to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who has faced mounting pressure on the Khashoggi affair.

Saudi Attorney General Sheikh Saud al-Mojeb said Khashoggi died after “discussions” at the consulate devolved into an altercation, without disclosing any details on the whereabouts of his body. The government of Turkey, on the other hand, says that it was not only the cold-blooded murder of the journalist but his body was chopped off in many pieces, stuffed in a bag to be thrown at an unknown place. The Attorney General unabashedly says that the “preliminary investigations… revealed that the discussions that took place between him (Jama Khashoggi) and the persons who met him at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul led to a brawl and a fist fight which led to his death, may his soul rest in peace,” this shows the duplicity of Saudi Arabia.

Shrouded in mystery

Now it is clear that Khashoggi had to pay the price of his being the critic of the Islamic Petro-state’s powerful Crown Prince. His disappearance had initially been shrouded in mystery and that triggered an international crisis, with Turkish officials accusing Saudi Arabia of a state-sponsored killing and dismembering his body. Saudi Arabia says that all18 people, Saudi nationals, have been detained in connection to the probe. The Saudi king also ordered the setting up of the ministerial committee under the chairmanship of the crown prince, widely known as MBS, to restructure the kingdom’s intelligence agency and “define its powers accurately”.

The controversy has put the kingdom — for decades a key Western ally and bulwark against Iran in the Middle East — under unprecedented pressure to offer an explanation to take the heat off its rulers. It evolved into a major crisis for Prince Mohammed, a Trump administration favourite who has portrayed himself as a modernising Arab reformer, but whose image and even position at home could now be gravely undermined.

Threat of sanctions

Shortly before Riyadh confirmed that Khashoggi had been killed, Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Saudi King Salman agreed in telephone talks to continue cooperation in the investigation into the Khashoggi affair.Mr. Erdogan and King Salman “emphasised the importance of continuing to work together with complete cooperation”.

The Khashoggi mystery is proving hard to solve not because it is such a tough case to crack, but because the known facts are too simple to reach anything other than a damning conclusion. When Khashoggi entered the Saudi consulate, he was walking into a trap set by the same team whose members arrived on private jets from Riyadh the previous night. When Khashoggi visited the Saudi embassy in Istanbul on 27 September to get the official divorce papers of his previous marriage, he was asked to come on 2 October and collect the papers.  Khashoggi entered the embassy on 2 October but was never seen again. But these Saudis returned home less than 24 hours after touching down in Istanbul. The obvious but grisly conclusion is that the Saudis dismembered the dissident journalist and transported his remains in small packages back to the Kingdom. The latest facts revealed by the Turkish investigation – and publicly announced by the authorities in Istanbul – are that Khasogi’s body was cut into pieces and thrown into the well located in the garden to the residence of Consul General of Saudi Arabia in Istanbul. These body parts have  now been recovered. It is suspected by Turkey that his fingers were cut off and sent as ‘trophy’ to the Crown Prince in Saudi Arabia.

A single citizen’s disappearance, though, has raised a host of thorny issues putting in question billions of dollars of arms deals, energy supply and Saudi cooperation in America’s Middle East strategy, especially against Iran and with Israel.

The gory, gruesome and ghastly details of the last few moments in the life of Saudi Arabian journalist Jamal Khashoggi, as reported in the government-controlled Turkish media, have reaffirmed the continuing validity of the universal truth: the pen is mightier than the sword. But the regime felt so threatened by Khashoggi’s dissident and heretical views that it felt compelled to liquidate him.

The murder of not many journalists has been taken so seriously by the world authorities as the murder of Khashoggi as many developed countries are going to take action against Saudi Arabia. Hopefully, other governments, which have belief in democracy, will also take lessons from this case and ensure the safety of such journalists as are critical to the powers that be.

Making Democracy Work Better in India

By: Shreepal Singh

1. Man is by nature creative, provided he is allowed freedom. His creativity has no limits. A multitude of humans can create wonders and achieve glorious things beyond imagination. Population is an asset, provided people are free, intelligent and not obsessed with religious fanaticism. In religious fanaticism, human energy and creativity are diverted to an objective that is destructive.
2. Man is an animal by nature, mostly driven by instincts, unless he is put in restraint by his own discretion, personal psychology, social norms or the fear of law.
3. All individuals are not equal in the matters of their education, intellectual capacity, psychological inclinations, economic circumstances and the amount of wealth one has. Always there are some who are more educated, wealthy and capable than others.
4. We live in groups, which we call society. In society, people live together and depend on each other in almost all matters that are crucial for their individual life.
5. These separate groups are formed in society because of their sharing of common concerns based on their common ethnicity, religion, political ideology or economic circumstances etc. These groups in their common conduct behave with other similar groups, just as individual persons behave with one another. These groups too compete and struggle with each other to protect and safeguard their collective interests. Just like an individual is actuated in his conduct by his basic instincts of survival, dominance etc., so does a group do in its relation to other groups in society. Because of this social behaviour, these groups based on caste, ethnicity, religion, region, economic interests or political ideology have their own peculiar sensitivities, priorities and preferences.
6. In our liberal democratic system, we grant under our Constitution an equal right and freedom to every citizen to carry on trade, profession or business according to one’s likings. But the hard reality is that every citizen is not equal in the matters of one’s education, intelligence, capability, economic circumstances and wealth. Because of these differences among individuals, every citizen is not equal in taking the advantage of equal rights and freedom granted by our Constitution.
7. The facts that these equal rights and freedom are allowed to us by our Constitution and that every citizen is not equal in the matters of education, intelligence, capability, economic circumstances and wealth, a situation arises in our society where a few who are in advantageous position on this aspect of equal rights and freedom become more powerful and wealthy in comparison to those who do not have these advantages in equal measure. This is the starting point – the fountainhead – of the distortion of our liberal democracy.
8. The essence of liberal democracy is that here in this political economic system every citizen has an equal amount of rights and freedom and all these citizens – that is, people – rule themselves, which is beautifully paraphrased as, ‘The rule of the people, for the people, by the people’. Here we come from the people’s equal rights and freedom to the people’s right to rule themselves and the issue of the distortion of democracy.

9. In our liberal democracy, people rule themselves. But they do not – and can not – rule themselves in person; people rule through their representatives. What a beautiful idea that in ruling ourselves we, that is ‘We the people’, can have our ‘representatives’! This idea is an invention of our liberal democracy. So in our democracy, we elect our representatives, who rule on our behalf. Here does onset the distortion of democracy.

10. This distortion comes in three ways. Firstly, in our liberal democracy, representing others – that is, representing people – becomes a business in itself. The spirit of democracy does not allow that it should be the life-long business or profession of some individuals to represent others. But in reality, in our democracy it is a business, it is the whole time business and it is the exclusive business of some persons. They do nothing in their life but to represent the will of others. This is the first distortion of democracy.

11. Then, this democracy is faced with the most important aspect of its life: How to ensure that the will of people is really represented through their representatives. This is made possible by a Constitutional provision guaranteeing the equal right of all to elect or get elected to the governing body by the periodical elections. Here every citizen has an equal opportunity to elect. But to get elected he needs to fulfil one additional precondition: He or she needs to earn a public perception about him or her – he or she needs to grow as a well-known brand. In the society, persons who themselves belong to that class who have got an advantage in terms of their economic circumstances and wealth, more often enjoy a lesser positive public perception than those persons who belong to that class who are so disadvantaged. In democracy, public perception can make or unmake a person in the matter of getting elected to the governing body. Cultivation of public perception with the help of wealth, which is not equally available to all citizens, is the second distortion of our liberal democracy.

12. However, in rare and exceptional circumstances, in our democracy some persons who may belong to (and represent the interests of) the disadvantaged poor may earn a better public perception and get elected. It may happen and do happen, though rarely. If it so happens, then such charismatic leader naturally tries to advance the interests of those to whom he or she belongs. And, if he does so, his positive public perception is rapidly multiplied and, in the same measure, the class of the advantaged lot get alarmed to the coming danger to their interests. Such people are intelligent, capable and wealthy. They use their money power and intelligence to divide the common electorates along the caste, ethnicity, religion or region lines so that the positive public perception of the charismatic leader, which happened to rule the country despite their money power, is nullified. This is the third distortion of liberal democracy.
13. However, a society that adopts this liberal democracy races faster in economic advancement in comparison to the society that does not adopt such liberal system. It is for this reason that the liberal democracies are more developed in the matter of science and technology, defence capabilities, wealth generation and achieving higher living standards for common citizens. All these achievements are of the crucial importance to humans living in groups.
14. The facts that all individuals are not equal in their capabilities, that human is basically an animal driven by his instincts, and that those who happen to be more capable become wealthy and powerful, inevitably create a situation in society where the less capable masses become victim of the exploitation at the hands of those who are more capable.
15. In liberal democracy, this freedom of everyone to act and right to reap the fruits of that act is reflected in its political institution of electoral democracy. However, in liberal democracy an unfair advantage of their wealth is always taken by those who happen to be more capable. They utilize their power of wealth to distort the institution of electoral democracy. They utilize their money power to help those politicians, who in fact protect their own economic interests  rather than those of the less capable  ones, who constitute the majority. This capable wealthy class of persons create conditions wherein the popular political leader in fact representing the interests of the less capable masses is projected in poor public image, so that he is not elected. They distort the democracy and do not allow the will of the majority reflected in the electoral results.
16. Though generally in the liberal democracy the will of the majority – who are less capable – is not truly reflected in the matter of democratic self governance, still this system is congenial to the fast paced economic development and progress of society.
17. To cure this deficiency, it is advisable to allow the more capable the freedom to act and the right to reap its fruits, but to put at the same time some restraint on them and stop them from unduly utilizing their wealth to distort the democracy.
18. The wisdom tells us that the fast economic progress must be made through our liberal democratic system. Wisdom also tells us that our democracy must not be distorted by the unfair use of money by anyone.
19. Given the human propensity to react to situation that causes pain and suffering, it is very easy for the less capable unfortunate poor to complain, cry, agitate and make revolution without offering an alternative pragmatic solution. But such agitations and revolutions do not provide any solution to the problem. Our world has seen many revolutions that attempted to solve this problem and failed. It is the liberal democracy only that is the best available way for us to achieve the needed fast economic progress of India. But this liberal democracy needs devising in a way that is better and works for India.
20. We suggest the following measures, which – if adopted in our country – would mitigate our problems to some extent:
21. Educate more those who are the uneducated, poor, less privileged and less capable – but who are in the majority in India – by carrying out a sustained vigorous awareness mass campaign directed at them. In this work, utilize the immense capacity of internet to the hilt to educate these ignorant masses.

22. The greatest tragedy that has been historically inflicted on India is that the governance of this country is done in English language, which is an alien language to 90% Indians. It is estimated that about 10% of Indians know and speak English. It is not the question of imposing a single language on a multilingual India. It is a question about the fact that 90% Indians are made ignorant – rather fooled – by those who rule over them, simply because they are governed in a language that 90% of them do not understand. To obviate this barrier, it is advisable to utilize the “translation technology” in every field of governance. It needs to be done under the force of law.  This technology is capable of translating “instantly  and in real time” all that material which is spoken or written by the governing institutions in English language into all local languages of India.
23. Frame a simple “Geo-political Awareness Test” relevant to Indian conditions and make it mandatory for everyone to qualify in this simple test to become eligible to cast vote in any election. This simple quiz must be framed to test in the Indian context the general awareness of our times, history, Geo-political position of India and national integrity.
24. Put a certain limit – say two – on the number of children one can have to be eligible to cast vote in any election beyond which number he or she would be barred from casting vote.
25. Make it mandatory for all citizens to work in defence forces for a certain period of time – say two years or so – to be eligible to cast vote in any election.
26. The motto of these prescriptions should be: “Let our democracy be the true rule of people. Let our people be informed, wise and intelligent. Let all Indians care for their well-being.”

Who was the First Prime Minister of Free India ? Correct the History !

Related material:

An assessment of Subhash Chandra Bose

Betrayal of Subhash Chandra Bose

Subhash Bose or Gandhi, who made British to leave India?

Subhash Bose after ‘airplane crash’

Bose did not die in airplane crash

Stalin seeks info about Bose after ‘airplane crash’

Bose – Correct the Indian history

By: Shreepal Singh

Who was the first Prime Minister of India – India that was made free from the yoke of British Imperialism, whatever size of the piece of land of that free India might have been?

Certainly, it was not Jawahar Lal Nehru. Let us correct the history for the posterity.

The first Prime Minister of India was Subhash Chandra Bose, fondly called by Indian people Netaji – that is, the Leader. Bose had announced the formation of Provisional Government of India on 21 October 1943.

Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose was a brilliant student and was selected to the Indian Civil Service (equivilent to today’s Indian Administrative Service) and was undergoing in that service as a probationer when he wrote the British authorities that he did not wish to continue with that service. It was a great sacrifice willingly made by him. His resignation letter is given here:

Bose proclaing the formation of the Provisional Government of Free India:

Proclamation of Provisional Government of India 

A cabinet of Ministers was duly formed, which was headed by Subhash Chandra Bose himself.

Cabinet Ministers of Provisional Government of India headed by Bose

This free Indian Government was recognized by 11 countries as the legal and legitimate Government of India, which countries included Japan and Germany. This provisional government of India in exile had its operating headquarters in Singapore.

What are the normal tell-tale signs of a real government? The government must have a “Head” who may have his team to assist him in governance; the government must be “Sovereign”, that is, it must not be subject to any other state; the government must enjoy an international recognition, may be even by only one foreign nation; it must have a seat – a place – to operate from. In fact, these are the only requirements for a legal and legitimate government in the view of international law. However, the government of free India headed by Subhash Chandra Bose had more than these minimum requirements.

This first government of free India led by Subhash Chandra Bose at its head  had its own army with the combined strength of rank and file of about 60, 000.

Bose inspecting Indian National Army 

It had several regiments nicknamed “Rani Jhansi” and some other patriotic names.  It was called Azad Hind Fauz – that is, Indian National Army. This government had also got printed “Indian Passports”, which fact was testified by the deputy of Bose in his statement to the British (after he was captured by the British on the fall of Berlin in WW2).

Bose inspecting “Rani Jhansi” Regiment of Indian National Army

But it had the most important element of a government – a piece of land, under its control. The army of this government had launched an offensive against the British forces at Andaman and Nicobar island, defeated the enemy there, hoisted the Indian flag – Tiranga – at the main seat of power in that piece of Indian land and had flung open the gates of Cellular Jail, where mostly political prisoners – REAL freedom fighters, and not make make-believe freedom fighters – were incarcerated by the British. All these prisoners were liberated by the Indian National Army.

Bose inspecting Cellular Jail after liberating Indian territory of Andaman and Nicobar

Not only this Indian land – Andaman Nicobar – was liberated by the Indian National Army, this army entered the mainland India through Moreh point ( at Indo-Myanmar boarder) and fought the enemy at Kohima – where now a cemetray  of the killed British military officers lie. This battle was fought from 4 April to 22 June, 1944.

This battle at the hands of Indian National Army was judged the MOST FIERCE battle that the British forces had to face during the entire WW 2. It was so judged – voted – in a survey conducted by the British military authorities among those of their soldiers who had participated on different fronts in WW 2. This battle was dubbed by them as “Stalingrad of the East.” There are many individuals still alive – aged more than 100 years – who had participated in this battle and are able to tell what had happened in that battle. Out of the total strength of about 60,000 rank and file of the Indian National Army, about 26,000 had died fighting the enemy – the British forces! This is the price India had to pay – the price that forced the British to decide to leave India and go back to their home, England.

It is a common knowledge of WW 2 history that the most ferocious battle was fought at Stalingrad in the erstwhile USSR between the forces of Hitler and Joseph Stalin and the battle at Stalingrad was the turning point in the World War 2. Here for the first time the forces of Hitler were defeated and victorious Red Army of USSR started its march towards Berlin. Berlin – and with it Hitler – fell with the reach of Red Army there. One can very well imagine the significance of dubbing by the enemy its war with Indian National Army as the “Stalingrad of the East” !

On the crucial date commemorating their battle with Indian National Army, the British bigwig military officers even today come here to pay their homage to the fallen British soldiers. This cemetery displays an engraved stone that reads: “When you go home, remember that we died today for your tomorrow”.

No Indian having a common sense would doubt that Subhash Chandra Bose had fought for the freedom of India from slavery; that it was the only real way to fight with an enemy – the enemy who had enslaved a people not by openly fighting with them but by the deceitful tactics of “divide and rule”, plundred the wealth of this country by destroying its industries and artisons and emasculated its people by destroying their culture and education; and, that the enemy knew very well that it was a real fight, unlike those who flaunted the non-cooperation, civil disobedience and satyagrah as a fight against the British.

It was for this very reason – because he gave them a real and tough fight – that the enemy declared Subhash Chandra Bose a “War Criminal”, who – if found – was to be tried by them at the Nurenberg international tribunal set up for war criminals of WW 2.

See the hypocricy of the British imperialists in declaring Subhash Chandra Bose a war criminal ! It was their dibolical intention ! Hitler invaded Poland, England, Russia and a host of other foreign lands; Japan invaded Thailand, Manchuria, China, Singapore and several other countries of the Far East; and, Mussolini too attacked a number of foreign lands. But Bose invaded no foreign land whatsoever – he came with his force called Azad Hind Fauz to his own country. It was no invasion; it was no crime. Fighting for the freedom or independence of one’s own people is not a crime. There are many examples of such glorious act, for example, the US people had fought the British with arms under the leadership of George Washington; and, it was no crime.

The reason lies somewhere else. In fact, the enemy was dreadful that if Bose entered the mainland India with his force and gave a call to Indians to rise against the British, millions of Indians would join his Azad Hind Fauz. In that event, it was almost impossible for them to safely escape from India to England.

It was this dread of Bose and his popularity among millions of Indians that the British (being a part of Allied Forces) declared Bose a “wanted war criminal”. It was a shame for the then political leadership of India – Congress under the leadership of Nrehru – that they did not lodge a protest to the British against such immoral act of labelling Bose a war criminal. Nehru was very active on many international burning issues. For exaple, on an appeal by Mao Tse Tung of China he had arranged to send in 1930’s a medical team of doctors under the leadership of Dr. Kotnees to nurse the wounded communist guerrilla fighters of Mao in Chinese civil war – his fight against Chang Kai Shek’s nationalist forces. Nehru could have – and should have – raised an international cry against the labelling of Bose by Britain (and its associate members of Allied Forces) as a war criminal. But he did not raise even an eye brow against such immoral branding of Bose.

It was a mistake committed in the past. Now, in our own time, it is a shame for India and Indian government that here there is no place  in free India for the fallen soldiers of Indian National Army “Who died, so that India is delivered from slavery”.

Provisional Government of India image gallery:






















videos about INA and Subhash Chandra Bose:

(1) National antham of Azad Hind

(2) Addressing Indians:

(3) Video giving objective analysis of how Bose created circumstances – internal and external – that forced the British to decide to leave India:

(4) Saga of INA and Bose: Part One

Saga of INA: Part Two

भष्टाचारी कौन और ईमानदार कौन ? खुद तय करें !

श्रीपाल सिंह

भारत में घमासान मचा हुआ है यह बताने के लिये कि इस देश में कौन सा नेता – नरेन्द्र मोदी या राहुल गान्धी – बेइमान है और कौन सा ईमानदार। जैसे – जैसे 2019 के चुनाव नजदीक आ रहे हैं, वैसे ही यह घमासान और तेज होता जा रहा है। राफेल और इसी तरह के बहुत से मुद्दे और सवाल उठाये जा रहे हैं। आम आदमी को कैसे पता चले कि कौन ईमानदार है और कौन बेइमान?

केवल एक तराजू है जो बता सकती है कि कौन क्या है। यह तराजू ऐसी है जो कभी गलत नही तौलती। इससे किसी की भी ईमानदारी और बेइमानी तौली जा सकती है। यह तराजू है:

“किसके घर – परिवार, सगे – सम्बधियों ने कितनी धन सम्पत्ती कमाई और कितनी अधिक मौज उडाई ?”

आऔ, इस तराजू पर राहुल गान्धी को तोलें और नरेन्द्र मोदी को तौलें।

इस वीडिओ को देखिये, तथ्यों का मिलान कीजिये और खुद फैसला कीजिये कि कौन ईमानदार है और कौन बेइमान।

आपका एक वोट बहुत मायने रखता है – यह बतायेगा कि आप ईमानदार के साथ खडे हैं की बेइमान के साथ। यह आपका एक वोट देश को – भारत देश को – बनायेगा या बिगाडेगा।

वीडिओ देखिये, फैसला करिये और भारत के हित मे वोट करिये !

Kumbh Mela: White Masters, Indian ‘Sepoys’ and Naivety of Yogi Adityanath !

By: Ganesh Arnaal
The sepoys are at it again. They have convinced a naive CM Yogi Adityanath to extend invitations to several Hindu phobic foreign Universities to research the upcoming Kumbh Mela.
“The ‘Letters of Invitation’ have been sent out to the Cambridge University, Columbia UniversityCornell University, Harvard University, MIT, Oxford University, Princeton University, Stanford University, University of Pennsylvania and Yale University, besides IIMs at Lucknow, Ahmedabad and Bangalore and TISS in Mumbai.”
A shudder runs down one’s spine when one reads the names of foreign universities. The modus operandi is as follows.
The sepoys bring their White handlers, who are senior professors in leading western universities. These professors and academics wear dhoti or saree and sport kumkum or bindi on their foreheads when they visit our leaders. They speak a smattering of Sanskrit and say how much they respect Indian culture and tradition.
That is all that is required for our leaders who lack any experience of how the suave and Janus faced academics, especially in the humanities operate.
They are not aware of the damage that writers starting with Paul Hacker, through Wendy Doniger, Gerald Larson, Michael Witzel and Sheldon Pollock have done to Indic traditions in the last 50 years.
Our leaders are easily enamoured by such ‘gora firangi’ professors taking such keen interest in our culture and tradition. They end up inviting these people with open arms not knowing the real agenda of their guests.
The Whites are past masters at rewarding us ‘natives’ for our hospitality. You see the goras used to give us baksheesh. CM Akhilesh Yadav was rewarded with an invitation to speak at Harvard after a highly successful Kumbh in 2013.
So the sepoys who have become advisors to CM Yogi Adityanath would have told him that after the success of Allahabad Kumbh, he would also get to speak at major world universities. They would have told him that he could become a world figure. He can have the distinction of speaking at prestigious universities which honour has eluded even PM Narendra Modi.
This is how the sordid saga of the white man ingratiating himself to our rulers, by using the good offices of the sepoys carries on to this day from the time the British set foot in India.
The question is: How did the other side infiltrate – through IAS, or petty moron politicians or was it directly at the CM level? This is simply disgusting!
Please have a look at this YouTube video and educate yourself how these Hindu phobics exploit the naivety of Indians, distort their ancient culture and paint them fools:

Previous Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: