Posts Tagged ‘Indira Gandhi’



Major General G. D. Bakshi has shown his terrible reactive anger on the above conclusion. He says with evidence that it was not Mahatma Gandhi who brought freedom for India but it was Subhash Chandra Bose who brought the freedom for India.

It is difficult to understand as to why does Major General G. D. Bakshi put Gandhi and Subhash against each other?

Image result for images of quit india movement

To have a difference of opinion between two persons is natural. Both the persons could be correct under their logic. Whose logic is true and whose logic was wrong depends upon a lot of prevailing factors at that time. The point is whether the persons are sincere on their thoughts and actions or not? Yes. Subhash was sincere in his thoughts. Gandhi was also sincere in his thoughts. There was no confusion between them. Both the great persons had respect for each other.

So far I deeply felt that Gandhians have most respect for Subhas Chandra Bose. But unfortunately some ill-informed persons who deliberately does not read Gandhi, put Gandhi as an enemy of Subhash Chandra Bose.


A political party is supposed to have its principles and line of actions in concurrence with its principles. Congress had decided to proceed with freedom struggle on the line of non-violence. The activities of Subhash had generated a doubt on his faith towards principle of non-violence. Thereby MK Gandhi had put a candidate against Subhash in party’s presidential election. This is permissible in every Democratic Party. There is nothing wrong in it. There is no reason that every election should go uncontested. G. D. Bakshi should understand this.

Subhash won the election. Gandhi congratulated Subhash Chandra Bose. He advised him to select his own working committee members. He also accepted that the victory of Subhash was his defeat. He said that since the elected working body members are committed to non-violence and the elected president’s integrity on the party’s principle is not beyond doubt, the elected working committee members should resign. All the members of central working committee resigned. Gandhi was an ordinary citizen. He was not even an ordinary member of the Congress. It was up to the members of working committee to resign or not to resign. How Gandhi can be prevented for his expression of his opinion?


She had no majority in working committee when her suggested person was rejected by the other members of working committee. She called an extraordinary meeting without the permission of the then party president, though there was no justification for calling emergency general body meeting because the general body meeting was due in next few months. Prime Mister is not supreme in his party. Working Committee is the supreme in a party.

Indira Gandhi prepared bogus lists of provincial members and the delegates were sent to general body meeting. The delegates dismissed all existing members of central working committee and a new working committee was formed and a new president was elected. Consequently Indira’s process of calling for general body meeting and conducting party’s election was challenged in the SC. Meanwhile general elections were conducted and the Congress of Indira won the election, and because she had majority elected members on her side, her party was recognized as the original Congress by the Supreme Court.

This was absolutely a wrong judgement.


Now suppose Congress (O) would have not been dissolved in 1977. And it would have remained as a part of Janata Party, and suppose now had it been a major part of BJP lead alliance, and had acquired more than 50 seats in Lok Sabha, then what would remain the value of the verdict of the SUPREME COURT ?

Now Congress (Indira or Nehruvian) has only 45 seats in L.S. Would the decision of SUPREME COURT could be reversed? Yes. It has to be reversed to maintain the spirit of the judgement of the Supreme Court. This way the then SUPREME COURT’s decision was ridiculous. This situation was pointed out by Piloo Modi a prominent leader of Congress (O).


Now let us examine the Case of Subhash Chandra Bose for academic reason. Suppose Subhash would have taken a risk. And he would have called general body meeting. He could have done this lawfully, unlike Indira Gandhi, because here, Subhash was already the president of the party. Subhash could have tried to take full confidence of the members of Congress. But he did not acted like that. Viz. Calling of emergency general body meeting.

There were two reasons. First, that working committee members were likely to get re-elected. Subhash Chandra Bose could have NOT been in position to get new working committee members of his choice get elected, and he could have been put to a situation to not take decisions at his choice and will.  This is because all the decisions in working committee are taken by the majority of the members. Second. Subhash was not ready to give a chance to public to feel that he was hungry of power.           


What does Major General Bakshi quotes in support of the freedom brought by Mahatma Gandhi? And how he disapprove the same?

He quotes a song title of Ramachandra Narayanji Dwivedi alias Pradeepji (प्रदीपजी).

Pradeepji was a great poet of the time. He had glorified even Subhash too, in his many poems.

But here Major General G. D. Bakshi quotes


दे  दी हमें आज़ादी बिना खडग बिना ढाल,

साबरमतीके संत तूने कर दिया कमाल.

On this he shouts and tells in very loud voice, THIS IS VERY WRONG. He further shouts;

Quit India

“Gandhi’s movement was totally failed. All the leaders had confirmed that the struggle of Congress for independence was failed. Quit India movement was failed. British government was determined to make it failed. British arrested all the leaders of Congress and thrown them into jails for indefinite period. All the leaders were tired and all of them were frustrated.”

Then he narrates the glory of Subhash Chandra Bose.

There is nothing wrong in glorifying Subhash Chandra Bose for the path he chose to achieve the freedom. Subhash Chandra Bose is worth to get the glory. Nobody have and nobody can have any objection to it.


Is it a burning issue to simply prove the negation on the Gandhi’s “quit India movement’ and it had no role in toto, in bringing the freedom for India?

Simply some poet has written a poem and he said the Gandhi’s war with the weapon of non-violence was victorious. “QED” added by Major General G. D. Bakshi and then he rejects it.


Related image

Image result for images of quit india movement

Major General G. D. Bakshi was born in 1950. No person can have first-hand information when he was not available at the time and at the spot where and when event/s occurred. He does not know what was the atmosphere prevailing at that time.


My information after reading Gandhi and others observations and feelings;

(1) Cripps mission was failed because it had pre-conditions that the limited freedom would be considered only after the World War II finished.

(2) Gandhi’s opposition led the Indian National Congress to reject the British offer.

(3) Cripps’ modification of the original British offer, which provided for no real transfer of power.

(4) Behind-the-scenes efforts of the Viceroy and Secretary of State for India to sabotage the mission.

(5) Gandhi was of the opinion that it was simply a trap. Gandhi believed this, on the basis of past experience of World War-I, when the British had strengthened the slavery rules, disregarding its previous commitments. 

Impact of Cripps Mission.

Image result for images of quit india movement

The long-term significance of the Cripps Mission really became apparent only in the aftermath of the war, as troops were demobilized and sent back home.

(1) As for the “quit India” could get launched, all the leaders were arrested. Not only leaders but a lot public figures were also arrested.

(2) Some of the leaders who were supporters of “Quit India movement” went underground. These were beyond the control of British.

(3)  It was asked by Mahatma Gandhi that there would be full scope of mass arrests, and thereby every person had to continue his fight for freedom in his own leadership.

(4) Since there was no leader to guide the people, wide spread violence had occurred. The British Government was not able to control the violence. MK Gandhi said, it was the failure of British, as it had no faith in non-violence.      

But the Quit India movement was not a dismal failure; rather the movement of 1942 gave the death blow to the British rule. India’s march towards freedom was hastened. This movement sparked off an aggressive national consciousness. Many people sacrificed their careers, property and even lives. Many freedom fighters’ families’ lives were paralyzed because earning members were arrested.

Image result for images of quit india movement

It can be a failure of both the ways. The way that Subhash chose, and the way that Gandhi chose.

Mass awareness decides the fate of Government. Mass awareness had generated the revolt of Indian Navy.

Aurabindo Ghosh was of the opinion that if all people of India would deeply think with their strength of inner conscious for the freedom of India that force would act on British conscious to decide to leave India.

Even Churchill recognized that there could be no retraction of the offer of independence which Cripps had made, but by the end of the war, Churchill was out of power and could do nothing but watch as the new Labor government gave India independence. This confidence that the British would soon leave was reflected in the readiness with which Congress politicians stood in the elections of 1945–1946 and formed provincial governments.


We should not forget that “A human fights with another human” cannot be a supportive to the eternal truth for mankind, and it could not be advisable to follow it. Even this principle applies to ecological balance of the mother Earth, then how could it not be applied to human?


Yes the conditions are; Are you democratic? Do you have respect for each other, list out injustice, communicate, be logical, do peaceful protest, while protesting continue communication…

Mahatma Gandhi believed that protest with non-violence against British Government was suitable and it can work. Probably Major General G. D. Bakshi has not read the principles of non-violent protest … e.g. public participation at a large, awareness at a large, dialogue, stepping up, protests with responsibilities, strike, hunger strike, hunger strike on to death, civil disobedience, do not go on bails, be ready for punishment, prison, self-improvement while in prison and all the time be ready for dialogue.


Remember MK Gandhi is dead. Hindu Maha Sabha is dead. But Nehruvian Congress is alive. Communists are alive.

Who remembers Captain Lakshmi?

She was Presidential Candidate in 2002. She suffered only because she was a member of communist party. Otherwise she was a great lady.

All Non-Congress parties had supported British Government baring Indian National Army of Subhash. But the position of Subhash had become awkward when Russia supported British against Germany. There was a lot of diversity among the leaders of Indian National army.

Now let us not blame anybody or let us not abuse any freedom fighter and let us not put them against each other. They were all gallant gentlemen and gallant women who had sacrifice their lives.


There are two types of courage. One is Physical courage and the other is moral courage. One has not to select option. It is natural. But few people have both. Gandhi had both. He was ready to die for his principles. Subhash had also both the courage. Both died on unnatural death. There were others too on both the sides. Let us not devaluate them to satisfy our ego of righteousness.

WHO WAS HE?     

Who fought for democracy against Indira Gandhi when she imposed emergency to save her own chair for which she was disqualified? This was the exhibition of her craze of power.

It was Jai Prakash Narayan who led the people of India and he integrated all political parties. Who was he? He was veteran Gandhian. But he was not alone. He took people with him. Indira Gandhi was miserably defeated in election. She herself was defeated by 55000 votes. But the dream of Jai Prakash Narayan was vanished under his own eyes. He was a failure. So what?

Political Gandhi is a small element. Gandhi had struggled a lot. Gandhi and Self-reliance, Gandhi and Swadeshi, Gandhi and appropriate Technology, Gandhi and Cleanliness, Gandhi and naturopathy, Gandhi and health, Gandhi and duties of peoples representatives inclusive of Governors and President, Gandhi and Civic Sense, Gandhi and Hindu Religion, Gandhi and religious conversion, Gandhi and democracy inclusive of Ram-Rajya, Gandhi and inter relation between Bureaucracy and people. Gandhi and education…. All these are put together, Gandhi is a very big entity of India. Major General G.D. Bakshi should read “Collected works of Mahatma Gandhi”, or at least “Gandhi in Delhi” which is the daily diary of Mahatma Gandhi of his last 3 months in Delhi.

Related image

Shirish Mohanlal Dave

Read Full Post »

Who is more guilty? Navaz Sharif or Man Mohan Singh.One can serve the nation at its

best when the person occupies a power post. The best post is the post of Prime Minister. One has to struggle to occupy this post.

Navaz Sharif

Navaz Sharif is the Prime Minister of Pakistan. He has been committed to serve his nation. He has put all his efforts in politics. He is in politics since more than 30 years. During this period, he has been come up of his own efforts from a small party worker through a Chief Minister of a state and then the Prime Minister. He has also faced vindictance as and when Pakistan had been remained under marshal law. Navaz Sharif is not equivelantly illiterate like our white Rabdi Devi of India (Sonia Gandhi) and brown Rabdi Devi of Bihar. Navaz Sharif is a law graduate. He had struggled a lot.


But in India, the situation is not like that. There were many PMs who put no effort and became Prime Minister. Among them are, Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi and Man Mohan Singh. Indira Gandhi had become Prime Minister under Kamraj Plan which was executed by JL Nehru to make his daughter to pave a road to PM-ship. Rajiv Gandhi was sworn in as the PM by the then President of India viz. Zail Singh. This Zail Singh once upon a time, had declared that he is so much so committed to the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi that if Indira Gandhi asked him to broom he was ready to broom. This President invited Rajiv Gandhi, (son of Indira Gandhi who, held the PM post just before she was murdered) with a taken for granted the post facto proposal, the post facto candidature and the post facto approval of the Indian Nehruvian Congress parliamentary party. The post facto approval in deciding the leader of the parliament is constitutional or unconstitutional is a matter of research.

Consequent to the death of Rajiv Gandhi, and under the parliamentary elections Indian Nehruvian Congress, could not get a majority. Sonia should have been made leader of the new parliament. But she was in a vivid mind. There was no unanemousy and Narasinha Rao was made the PM of an alliance lead by Indian Nehruvian Congress. Narsinha Rao acted efficiently but the efficiency pinched Indian National Congress. Sonia Gandhi was not holding any recognised power post in the then Indian Nehruvian Congress Party. Sonia Gandhi when she came out of sadness of her husband’s death, she was to be posted as the PM as per the dynastic tradition of Indian Nehruvian Congress, since the Number One power post was the Post of PM.

But why Narsinha Rao was selected as the leader of the house? As per the theory of probability and because when Narsinha Rao had been selected as the leader of the house Sonia Gandhi was post-less.

The post of Indian Nehruvian Congress President post was held by Sitaram Kesri. He was not ready to quit. Sitaram Kesri physically  made unseated from the chair of Indian Nehruvian Congress. One must know that to prepare such a conspiracy or a procedure or an exercise to throw Sitaram Kesri out, was to be worked out. To create an atmosphere and to put the rein of the party in the hands of Sonia Gandhi was not a short time project. Hence under this situation Narsinha Rao could capture the post of PM.

Narasinha Rao was a senior and an experienced leader in politics. He started to ignore Nehruvian policies. This was against the tradition of Indian Nehruvian Congress. But was not possible to make Narsinha Rao unseated from the chair.


Those who knows the politics within the Indian Nehruvian Congress party, the Number One Power Post has to be reserved for a progeny of Nehruvian Dynasty. Though Narasinha Rao was an efficient PM, the efficiency of Narasinha Rao was not purcolated. The changes were not known to the bottom level voters. Hence the Indian Nehruvian Congress lost the majority in the succeeding general elections.

The BJP alliance  got a very thin majority. Indian Nehruvian Congress is a party run by coterie committed to a progeny of Nehruvian. This coterie decided that Number One power post inveriably should be held by Nehruvian and Nehruvian only. Nehruvian means, a faithful Nehruvian to the preceded Nehruvian PM. No chance should be taken to install any body else who is not a progeny of Nehruvian dynasty.


Parliamentary elections conducted in 2004, Indian Nehruvian Congress party became the largest party with its allied parties. Besides this, some other  parties having the similar culture were also ready and eager to support Indian Nehruvian Congress party. This alliance was termed as United Progressive Alliance (UPA). This UPA anonymously selected  Sonia Gandhi as the leader selected as the leader. Sonia went to the then President with the list of the MPs and the proof as she was supported by them. But under the Indian Constitution by default Sonia was not a qualified candidate for PM ship. This point was raised by Subrahmanian Swami and the then President of India APJ Abdul Kalam asked Sonia Gandhi to clarify.

Such question was beyond the capacity of the brain power of Sonia Gandhi. She came back to the coterie. The coterie was not ready to take any risk. Coterie searched out for an obedient MP. The coterie picked up Man Mohan Singh.


This Man Mohan Singh was two step ahead of Zail Singh so far “obedience” and the “commitment” to Nehruvian (Sonia Gandhi) is concern.

Though Man Mohan Singh knows very well that:

“India is a democratic country,

“The democracy is deeply rooted in India,

“India  had overthrown with in 18 moths the person who was autocrat,

“India may be poor …  India may be not that literate like France … but India had defeated the sitting PM and her coterie along with her party by more than half a lakhs votes in the elections,

“The democracy in India is more than 10000 years old,

“The people of India have also uprooted empires and the kings.

Despite of this, Man Mohan allowed him self to govern my extra-constitutional power centre viz. Sonia Gandhi and her coterie.


Is it that Man Mohan was being black mailed for having his black money in foreign banks and the matter was known to Nehruvians?

Is it that Man Mohan was hungry of eminities  enjoyable  by PM?

Is it that because Man Mohan had a share in the money being collected through unauthorised channels by the UPA leaders?

Is it that Man Mohan was having joint ventures with Indian Nehruvian Congress and its cultural allies?

Is it that Man Mohan was happy with his post?

Is it that Man Mohan was ignorant of constitutional provisions and the duties and responsibilities of the Prime Minister?

Is it because Man Mohan was of the opinion that if he would not remain the PM, the army would take over the rein of power?

During the UPA rule, India had become a bankrupt country. Indian Defence had become weak and it had left with meagre quantum of spare parts. Internationally, India had become an isolated nation.


One must know that Man Mohan failed to resign and protected all of the thieves of Indian Nehruvian Congress party and its cultural allies.

He gave liberty to take decision to A. Raja in making money through unauthorised channels and allowed them to do cognizible offences.

As per Indian Constitution, Prime Minister is responsible for all the shortcomings and the gains of every portfolios. Whereas the minister is responsible for only of his own portfolio.

If a person fails in his responsibility, he has to be punished by the PM. If the PM does not punish a minister who failed in its responsibilities, then the PM has to be punished.

Man Mohan as per the Indian Constitution cannot delegate full power inclusive of arbitrary power to any of his ministers.

No body in a democratic government can enjoy arbitrary power.

In a democratic government all powers are discretionary power. Every authority has to convince its self with valid reasons. The Powers of the PM are the delegated powers by the President. The delegated powers cannot be further delegated as per the constitution. Man Mohan must be aware of this constitutional and lawful provisions.

Now look at the Coal Gate Scam. The PM himself was holding the ministry of Coal. The auction of coal mines was a fraud. Man Mohan Singh being a minister of coal, he was the first responsible person. But he did not resign and he was not prosecuted.

But for all these lawlessness, failing in duties Man Mohan Singh was spared on the plea that

“What to do? This fellow viz. Man Mohan Singh is a clean person. He has not earned a single penny out of these frauds and scams. Man Mohan should be spared. He is not only well educated but highly educated and highly qualified person. He had held many high level posts, not only in India but abroad too. Once upon a time he had held the highly important and honourable post of Governor of the Reserve Bank of India. Look at his innocent face. Such person cannot be held responsible for any fraud or scam. Yes, what shortcomings we have noticed, are due to the reason of his helplessness. He had been made helpless. It is not his fault. It is the fault of the “others”. Every body knows and at least media knows who are these “others”. But the agenda of media was not to pass any blame on these “Others”.


But Indian media is heavily active even out of proportion to pass blame on Navaz Sharif for his failure in administration. It is the matter of research as to why Zee News too, is overacting to pass blame on Navaz Sharif?

Navaz Sharif has come up of his own efforts. Pakistan has a very wide back ground of military rule. Just like in India when a person or organisation remains in power for a very long period, it becomes corrupted and developed vested interest. It produces, develops and controls many power centres. Similarly Military officers in Pakistan controls many centres of production of commodities, contractual agencies, education centres, trade centres and what not? It has very close links in political power centres, intelligence agency, beauraucracy, antisocial organisations, mafias, terrorists organisations etc… All these work jointly to maintain their vested interests.

If in India the leaders like Nitish Kumar can surrender to antisocial elements like Shahabuddin, then how Navaz Sharif can neglect joint nexus of Military, Intelligence agency, antisocial elements and terrorists organizations?

Is it that Navaz Sharif has no option?

Yes. Navaz Sharif has no option but to resign.

But what is about the consequences that would result to his resignation?

Besides this, is it really a good option for Pakistan? If a self made leader of an elected party under constitution, resigns, then the nexus made of extra constitutional authorities would take hold of the administration. Is it is not the fact that by passing blame fully on Navaz Sharif, we are inviting military rule in Pakistan? At present Pakistani military has not constitutional power, but if Navaz Sharif would resign, the nexus of Anti-social elements, intelligence agency and terrorists would get full power and free hand.


Once upon a time, on imposition of emergency by Nehruvian progeny Indira Gandhi, and when the Janata Front Government in Gujarat still was not toppled, one of the best parliamentarians, Piloo Modi gave an answer to a question asked to him.

The question was “what is wrong if the government works better in autocracy than in democracy?”

The reply of Piloo Modi was that “we can afford bad governance in democracy but we cannot afford so called good autocracy”.

We have seen that due to the frauds, scams and lies of Indian Nehruvian Congress and its allied leaders, we could defeat them and prosecute them. Because in democracy we have a substitute. But in autocracy we have no option to have a substitute.

To protect Navaz Sharif is hundred times better than to protect Man Mohan Singh. We can have a live hope for a better democracy in Pakistan. Man Mohan Singh opted to remain in power for his undisclosed interest and undisclosed treaty with Indian Nehruvian Congress.



Shirish Mohanlal Dave


Navaz Sharif, Man Mohan Singh, Sonia Gandhi, Indian Nehruvian Congress, Indira Gandhi, Nehruvian progeny, Number One Power post, Emergency, Piloo Modi, Afford democracy,

Read Full Post »



Is it that Kapi Sibbal is illiterate?

Three years back at the time of general elections campaign, Kapil Sibbal of Nehruvian Congress had announced that he would give “Akash Tablet” to all the youths at the rate of Rs. 3000/-.

Many youths had deposited money for “Akash”.

Nehruvian Congress came to power again in 2009. The days have been passed, the weeks have been passed, moths have been passed and years are passing. Now a time has come that again the general elections have become due (at any time), but no “Akash” had come down to meet the youths on the earth. Narendra Modi pointed out this fraudulent promise of Nehruvian Congress leader in one of his lectures.

Narendra Modi further said that Nehruvian Congress has a habit and culture to give false promises. It gives false promises not to only to common men, but it gives false promises to youths too. Such type of practice, generates bad moral values in youths. This is dangerous for a nation.

In reply to this Kapi Sibbal forwarded one Akash Tablet to Modi, instead of fulfilling the promises given to the youths of Delhi. Kapi Sibbal further abused Narendra Modi, and asked him to be a cultured leader. This means that to point out the false promises of Nehruvians, is a bad culture and to make a false and fraudulent promises is a good culture according to Nehruvian Congress culture.


JL Nehru had taken an oath in 1963 before the Indian parliament that he would not take rest till he would re-capture the land snatched by China during the war in 1962. Now if Narendra Modi would point out this point, the Nehruvian Congress would forward a photo of lost land to Narendra Modi and further it would ask Narendra Modi to be educated and cultured.


If Narendra Modi would point out the oath taken by Nehruvian Progeny Indira Gandhi of “I will remove the poverty” in 1969, then Nehruvian Congress leaders would send Rs.60/- (the daily wage of NAREGA) to Narendra Modi, and ask him to be a cultured person.


If Narendra Modi would point out the promise recalled before a foreign news channel by  Indira Gandhi in 1970 that all the infiltrators came from Pakistan will be sent back to their country, the Nehruvian Congress leaders would send some Bangladeshi Muslims to Gandhinagar and further the would ask Narendra Modi to be educated and cultured.


Recall the statement of Nehruvian Congress ruling Cabinet made during the pre-India Pak war period of 1971 that “India will not give return the land won by India if any war is imposed on India by Pakistan”, and after winning the war with the great braveness of Indian soldiers, it was announced by the Indira Gandhian Cabinet that Pakistan will have to sign a package deal and will have to meet the demands as under:


What was the PACKAGE DEAL”?

Reimbursement of all the expenses incurred by India due to this war on India imposed by Pakistan,

Return of the land of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, so that the Issue of Kashmir ends up,

Take back the all the infiltrators and refugees came from Pakistan in India,

Settlement of property cases of Hindu refugees came to India from Pakistan in 1947-48,

Deportation of anti-social elements that had committed crimes in India and taken shelter in Pakistan,

All the fishermen and whatsoever Indian prisoners available in Pakistan jails will have to be released,  

“No war pact” with India,

No hatred and propaganda against India in Pakistan,



Unless Pakistan signs this pact, then only the Prisoners of War (90000 soldiers who were fed by India with due respect from 1971 to 1972) and the land won by India during the war would be returned to Pakistan.


But what has been happened in Simla pack?

No gain for India,

Indira Gandhi returned all the POW i.e.  90000 soldiers,

Indira Gandhi returned all the land pieces that had won by Indian soldiers,

Indira Gandhi also returned the land piece of POK (Pakistan Occupied Kashmir) on which India had the claim,


On the other hand Pakistan released no Indian soldier. They are still with Pakistan, in 400+ numbers, in Pakistan Jail.


Now if Narendra Modi points out this fraud of progeny and party viz Nehruvian Congress, Kapi Sibbal or any damn leader would ask Narendra Modi to be educated and to behave with good culture.


It is not a surprise so far Nehruvian Congress leader and their allies are concerned. They have possessed all the evils available in the world. You can write a bigger book than the epic Mahabharat. Nehruvians and their party leaders can abuse any leader howsoever he may be great and popular among learned and common, if he/she opposes a Nehruvian and its party, they will abuse him/her without any logic and sense. They have spared none. They can do any damn thing to hide their evils and divert the mind of common mass by talking irrelevant and baseless.


Shirish Mohanlal Dave

Tags: Narendra Modi, Akash tablet, Kapi, Kapil, Sibbal, Nehruvian, Youth, election campaign, false, fraud, promise, Simla pact, Indira

Read Full Post »

Fate of undivided India is guesswork

Fate of undivided India is guesswork


There are many columnists and TV anchors that can be identified by the nationalist Hindus, as pseudo secular. Now it is high time to recognise them as anti-national and fix responsibility for their contribution in creating havoc in India.

It is generally observed with Nehruvian Congress leaders that they had always created a havoc and lawlessness in their every term, irrespective of their absolute strength in parliament. Their created havoc and or issues have disturbed the normal lives of Indian citizens. They have not cared to see that their actions could create either an immediate harmful effect or anarchy in time to come. Such non-actions, fraudulent actions and or mal actions were not only because of any challenge they had to face to maintain their power. Many times this caused out of their ego and whims.

JL Nehru had adopted a biased foreign policy. This was due to his short-sight and lack of wisdom. He surrendered to second world’s political ideology.

In doing so JL Nehru had recognised the sovereignty of China on Tibet, despite of warning of Sardar Patel. Further he had wilfully misguided the Parliament on Chinese military intrusion and infiltration on Line of Control. The Chinese attack had created havoc in Indian economy leave aside the loss of land worth 60,000 square miles.

JL Nehru’s oath on regaining the lost land was fake and fraudulent.


You can smell the decisive attitude and roll of JL Nehru, in dividing people through the method adopted by him while dividing Bombay Province. He created hatred among different people of different languages in 1955 by mishandling the same to achieve his goal of power.

Even you can look at the formation of NEFA (North East Frontier Associate) state instead of seven states based on their languages. NEFA got divided on the criteria based on languages, only when the situation became alarming. By the time of this reformation of NEFA enough harm was made to the nation.

During this time a feeling of Anti-Indian was already established in the local people of NEFA. By virtue of the delay in the formation of these states the feelings of anti-Indian went to such an extent that they adopted Roman Script for their own language. This script is quite a defective script for Indian languages, but because local population was adequately converted into Christianity, they found no difficulty in adopting the foreign script. Earlier it was the Bengali script for their own language. It is very common among non-Hindus, all over India, to act as a foreigner in their own country where they and their forefathers took birth.


The mentality and approach of JL Nehru and his daughter (who are till on this date are beloved god and goddess of Nehruvian Congress) was similar. Nehru and his daughter were never serious about the inhuman act of Pakistan Government on Hindus in Pakistan.

Hindus were being driven out by the government of East and West Pakistan during the nineteen fifties and sixties. In fact in 1954 Suharavrdi  Noon had offered to settle the cases of migrated Hindus from Pakistan to India. He had also offered a welcome back to Pakistan. Not only this, but soon after that the President of Pakistan viz. Iskandar Mirza had offered to have a Federal Union of India and Pakistan. Off course, Jinna too had agreed to this arrangement. Why Sardar Patel and Nehru both had rejected it is a different issue. Both these leaders viz Sardar Patel and JL Nehru had different reasons on rejection of the proposal of Federal Union. For Sardar Patel it was a pre-mature suggestion, for JL it was an issue linked with his supremacy in power politics.

It was a matter of surprise as to why the RSS leaders did not agitate though they are and were always active to pass blame on MK Gandhi for the division of India, when Iskandar Mirza proposed Union Federation in 1954? Leave this matter aside for the time being as this is not our subject matter here.

However it was a very good opportunity for Nehru to unite India and Pakistan under Federal Union with proper treaty. Nehru rejected it out rightly in 1954 also, without discussing it with public and without discussing it with his party leaders.

The leaders of RSS also kept mum. They did not agitate against the decision of JL Nehru. According to the own logic of RSS, it was a cognizable offense. This is because  they already had a habit and still the same is possessed that MK Gandhi was responsible for the partition of India. Why MK Gandhi did not go on fast onto death.

Nobody can understand why RSS leaders did not go on fast onto death. Who had prevented them? Who had prevented them to not kill Jinna who only wanted partition?

As for Iskandar Mirza the President of Pakistan in 1954, when proposed for Union Federation, Vinoba Bhave welcomed the proposal of Federal Union. JL Nehru bluntly rejected. RSS kept mum and remain inactive


Though it is a matter of guesswork or research as to how much harmony the Federal Union might have created under undivided India or under Federal Union of India and Pakistan. But those who think themselves secular and also those who want to abuse MK Gandhi both should have come forward to welcome the proposal of Iskandar Mirza and Ayub Khan.


Our one of the prominent so-called secular but to many he is pseudo secular, has once again exhibited his hypocrisy to defend his “world of pseudo secular media”.

The columnists cum Chief Editor IBN 18 Network, has made several discoveries. He has gone back to the beginning of the twentieth century to defend the rights of Muslims.

Now let us look at the approach of the pseudo secular, on minorities in general and on the episode of Assam in particular.



While analyzing any event, avoid the word “Muslim infiltrators” as far as possible. Make use of the word “Muslims” instead of “Muslim infiltrators”


Generalize the violence where the root cause are Muslims. E.g. “… the violent conflict between Muslims and local people has a long history … hence look at these riots with this background…” (But do not apply this logic to Hindu – Muslim riots elsewhere, especially to the riots of Gujarat in 2002)


Avoid comparison. E.g. “… it is not only Bodo-s who have lost homes and land. Muslims too have lost homes and land…” (Avoid the history as to how the Muslim infiltrators occupied the land and houses in Assam).


The root cause of riots in Assam is not deniable because this has highlighted the headlines in many newspapers. But you can minimize or marginalize the root cause.

The root cause is the infiltration of Muslims of Bangladesh. Then tell, the infiltration alias migrations are as old as hundred and ten years. It was a practice initiated right from the early twentieth century. Laborers used to go to North East from Bengal.

This is a wonderful logic of this Editor in Chief IBM 18. It is a matter of research as to why the editor has not gone back to the period of Aryan Invasion. As per Aryan Invasion Theory IAT, Aryans are outsiders. The idea and conspiracy behind the promotion of AIT was to instigate tribal people to get converted to Christianity… “See… India has been attacked and invaded by many. The Aryans are outsiders. They attacked you from North. They made you slaves and backward. They were not the last and least. Hoons and Shakas too had invaded India. Lastly Muslims also invaded India. Now we Europeans have invaded India. We are proving superior. Aryans came early. We came late. This is the only difference. The former have suppressed and neglected you. We will take care of you provided … provided you adopt Christianity.

These are all fake arguments. DNA does not support this hypothesis. But there is an intellectual invasion on these pseudo secular and many others. Leave aside this point. It is not a subject matter.

Why does the IBN Chief avoid the ground situation?

How can you justify the infiltration when the nations are different? In early 20Th Century Indians had a lawful liberty to go to Burma, Oman, South Africa, and many other countries without a passport and VISA. Even we had a right to go to UK. But since 1947 these are all separate nations. Even UK will not permit you to enter without a passport and VISA. There is no country in the world that would allow other nationals in their country and or would regularize large scale infiltrators.



What had been done by Burma? Burma mercilessly drove out people of Indian origin from their country in the early fifties. What to talk about Burma! Pakistan itself had executed massacre in 1947-48 to drive Hindus out of East and West Pakistan. This flow of Hindus did not stop even in the fifties and sixties.

In the late sixties the East Bengal started driving out even Non-Bengali Muslims too, in a very large scale. This was mainly because these Muslims were not supporting the Bangladesh movement. These Muslim infiltrators were numbered in one crore. It had paralyzed the normal life of West Bengal and then that of NorthEastState of India. This had become an international issue.

Indira Gandhi had taken an oath that these infiltrators would be driven out and sent back at any cost. But she willfully failed to do so, to promote her vote politics. The flow of infiltrators is still continuing. These infiltrators are now of the order of five crores and they are spread all over India. This has covered major cities of Maharashtra and Gujarat too besides other states.

The involvement of terrorists in these infiltrators cannot be ruled out. This can be judged from the recent demonstration staged by them in Mumbai against riots in Assam. Is it not a matter of research as to why none of the Muslim and none of the pseudo secular entities made any noise to take care of the Hindu voice? They have neither agitated nor demonstrated for natural rights of Hindu, despite of the massacre of Hindus in Kashmir. Not only have this, but none of them ever bothered to highlight the Hindus’ right to get reinstated in Kashmir to their home in Kashmir.


One cannot generalize the infiltration and marginalize the infiltrations when the infiltration is involved with national insecurity and it paralyses the normal life of citizens. The citizens are victims of bad and malfunctioning of government. They live in miserable condition.


If there are riots and if you do not make a mention of 2002 riots of Godhra After Math, you are not qualified for becoming secular. Similarly the aforesaid columnist has to show that he is a qualified analyst on politics, he says “whenever we criticize the riots of 2002 Gujarat, we are asked to also recall the massacre of 1984. By this way the fundamentalists want to defend the Gujarat riots. You cannot defend one riot by quoting some other riots.”

This argument looks beautiful and the columnist tries to indicate how much sensitive he is about human suffering.

He conveniently forgets that Narendra Modi had controlled the riots in three days and much more Hindus were killed during police fire. Narendra Modi’s government, within no time had re-instated the Muslims in their original home. Whereas in case of Hindus of  J & K, the J&K government and Nehruvian Congress governments have been miserably and willfully failed, and failing continues till date. In fact this is a continuous riot on Hindus.


Why are you not showing your sensitiveness on those humans who are not infiltrators but they are deserted in their own country? E.g. Hindus of Kashmir and Assam.

It is not the duty of victimized people to carry the responsibility of rehabilitation of infiltrators of another country. Infiltrators are infiltrators. They have no rights. If some body occupies my house and if my government fails to protect my rights I have the liberty to kill the tracepassers if he does not leave my house peacefully. I have to act; I have to act violently to see my security. This is what the law of the land says.

Who are these infiltrators? These are the same infiltrators who fraudulently got citizenship under the soft corner of Nehruvian Government.

These are the same infiltrators, who forcibly occupied land and property in India.

These are the same infiltrators, who is turning the sons of the soil into the minority.

These are the same infiltrators who are trying to dominate the sons of the soil.

These are the same infiltrators who have gained a separate nation because they themselves are separate civilisation as per their belief.

This is on the record of recent history.


Shirish Mohanlal Dave




Tags: Nehruvian, JL Nehru, Indira Gandhi, Jinna, Uskandar Mirza, Ayub Khan, Vinoba Bhave, RSS, fundamentalist, terrorists, infiltrators, Assam, Bodo, Muslims, Hindus

Read Full Post »


Hello Governor

Hello Governor

Let us go through some of the actions of Nehruvian Congress Private Limited and its purpose behind those actions.

It is very common among Nehruvians in India to act under disguise of public interest or in the interest of poor people but to have some different purpose behind that action.

Jawaharlal Nehru

1948: Case of Kashmir taken to UNO by Nehru and accepted the date of report to UNO as LOC with an intention (purpose) to show his out of proportion respect towards UNO. In fact it was a political blunder because Nehru had no wisdom and foresight.

1950: Founded Non-alliance Movement with an aim to show the First world (NATO countries) that military alliance is not the solution for world peace. But indirectly it was unregistered alliance with Second World (Communist countries Russia and China)

1952: Accepted sovereignty of China on Tibet. To show the Communist countries Russia and China that he was more aligned to socialism than human rights. Internally he wanted backing of Russia and China against the influence of USA and others.


1952: Puch-sheel treaty with China, to show the world that he loved peace and has soft corner for Buddhism (the vote-bank of Ambedkar).


1953-1962: Non-action on Chinese military infiltration and denial before parliament of India on any Chinese  infiltration in India. To show Russia that he had soft corner towards China and how much faith the people of India had in him despite of his blunders. It cannot be ruled out that he wanted political assistance from Russia in playing political unfair tactics with people of India.


1962: Nehru said “enemy has betrayed us on his Defeat against China due to neglecting security of borders. This statement was made to misguide the people of India to show that he was innocent. When Nehru was asked that when the forward movement of China in India would get stopped? Nehru replied “where and when we would stop them by our strength”. But China had captured 30000 square miles additional land more than what it had claimed in Indian land. China made cease fire of his own and gave back the additional seized land of 30000 square miles out of 92000/- square miles of total seized land.


1963: Nehru took oath “we will not take rest until we recapture the lost land of mother India”. The purpose was to show his sincerity towards mother India. In fact Nehru was a fraud and he made fraudulent statement. He and his progenies knew very well that the lost land was never going to be recaptured.




1963: Kamraj Plan: Nehru spelled purpose to strengthen the party by utilising services of senior leaders. Internally his purpose was to remove Morarji Desai who was his number one opponent.


Indira Gandhi:

Removal of privy-purses of Kings: This was with a view to show that she was socialistic. In fact the privy-purses were in accordance to the agreement signed with them when they handed over their kingdoms to independent India. The annual payment was to getting reduced to end up to zero in due course. However Indira wanted to show her promptness and militancy on establishing socialism to remove poverty.


Nationalisation of 14 leading private banks: Morarji Desai had introduced socialisation of banking. The RBI controls the policy of advances. Hence Morarji Desai was on right path. But Indira Gandhi wanted to spoil the bank employees for her political benefit. Nationalisation of Banks spoiled the administration of all these banks. Banks’ money got utilised for granting no-return loan as per the unwritten understanding. Like this the purpose was in no way effective to remove poverty or to uplift poor mass, but to share loan amount among managers (not always), recommending authority of loan (viz. Nehruvian Congress local leaders) and the borrowers. 1968 to 1984 of further rule of Indira Gandhi no poverty had been removed.


Remove Poverty was a fraud

Remove Poverty was a fraud

Emergency: Indira declared emergency under the plea that her opponents instigating people to revolt against government and there was bulk indiscipline. But in reality her purpose was to retain her power and PM-ship.


Weak deal with Union Carbide: to make India self sufficient on pesticides. In fact under table deal cannot be ruled out as it is a practice of western industrialists to establish such hazardous production units in poor countries so that they can fool the local governments in case of hazard by way of executing defective agreement with purchasable government like Nehruvian Congress of India Private Limited.


Indira had no wisdom to see what could happen consequent to Simla Pact

Indira had no wisdom to see what could happen consequent to Simla Pact

Simla Pact: Bhutto said If I would solve all the problems and issues with India and agree to any such pact, I would be killed in Pakistan, and the agreement would not have any meaning. Indira Gandhi agreed to this as reported by Indira and no issue or problem was solved and converted victory into defeat. Further reality was so-called weak pact had also been made useless, as otherwise also Bhutto had been killed by the successive government of Pakistan. It cannot be ruled out that there could be an undertable deal with Bhutto by Indira Gandhi.

Rajiv Gandhi 

Deal with Ceylon: The aim was to have good relation with Ceylon. But it was complete avoidance of the interest of Tamilians in Ceylon. It was a blunder. Can you imagine that Pakistan would send its military in Kashmir to kill Muslim terrorists?


Every body has to make Nehruvian Congress comfortable in a deal

Every body has to make Nehruvian Congress comfortable in a deal

Boffors tanks: To make India stronger in military. We know the fact.


Anderson of Union Carbide: Rajiv said he would come back whenever we call him under investigation. It was a fraudulent statement. Under table deal cannot be ruled out for giving an easy pass to Anderson.


Man Mohan and Sonia Gandhi:


Harshad Mehta security scam: Man Mohan the then Finance Minister announced that he would take suitable corrective step such that security scam would not get repeated. The purpose was to show to the public that they were innocent. He said it was the fault of system. In fact the designers of the system were themselves. Man Mohan had made several phones to pressurise the then Income Tax Commissioner Vishvabandhu Gupta not to take action.


Though Man Mohan was FM at that time, when he became PM, Satyam scam took place.


Ravan Lila at Ram Lila Maidan: Nehruvian Government says law was taking its own course. In fact the police authority said, it was a political decision.


Jan Lok Pal Bill: Nehruvian Cong leaders say Parliament is supreme and government wants strong Lokpal. In fact the Civil Society was formed in consultation with government and Nehruvian Congress never wanted a strong Lokpal. Nehruvian Congress never tried to discuss on the merits. Arun Jetley had never been replied to the points.


Similar are the cases of Black-red money, Printing of currency notes by RBI, Distribution of Fake currency notes by RBI, Statements related with deportation of Daud, curtailing the scope of RTI act. EVM … there is no end. We can write a bigger book than Maha Bharat on the frauds, scams, scandals and blunders Nehruvians and Nehruvian Congress together with their allies.




Governor appoints Lok Pal in Gujarat: Nehruvian Congress says we are sincerely on Lok Pal. Chronology says the issue has been made political by Nehruvian Congress. Governor and opposition party (Nehruvian Congress of India Private Limited) in Gujarat in joint venture rejected the proposal of ruling party (BJP Gujarat), without any merits and convincing reason. The HC has not gone through the political aspect and aims of Nehruvian Congress. Purpose behind the action is important. The purpose cannot be set aside in jurisprudent.

Do they want to scrap the state government? Let us rent out the State Assembly building.


Shirish Mohanlal Dave



Nehruvian, Purpose, Action, Power, Politics, Jawahar, Indira, Man Mohan, FM, PM, Governor, Gujarat, State Assembly, Rent out

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: