I’m not interested in becoming PM: Rahul Gandhi


Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi on Tuesday said he was not interested in becoming the prime minister and wants to focus on his party instead.

u8_RAHUL-GANDHI-001.jpg.pagespeed.ce.jrOZLzrVO1

“The party is my priority. I believe in long-term politics,” Gandhi was quoted by TV channels as saying in Delhi.

“I am not interested in becoming the prime minister,” he was quoted as saying.

Gandhi, who is the second-in-command in the Congress, told reporters there was a need to end the “high command culture” in the party.

The Congress party has not announced a prime ministerial candidate for the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, but Gandhi is a clear favourite.

Gandhi has been working on improving the party’s grasroots and has convened a meeting of all general secretaries and central leaders in charge of states on March 6.

WIll work on plan to correct mistakes we have made: Sonia Gandhi


Acknowledging “mistakes” in the just concluded Assembly elections, Congress President Sonia Gandhi on Wednesday indicated that the party would work out a plan to correct them.

“This is something we will have to discuss within and decide. We have to sit down and look at the situation and results in every state and then together work out a plan to correct the mistakes that we have made,” Gandhi said.

She was talking to reporters at the AICC headquarters here after reviewing the party’s performance in her one to one meeting with Congress office bearers.

“Every election is a lesson for us. Whether we win or lose, every election has a lesson for us,” she said.

To a volley of questions on the reasons that led to the party’s defeat in UP, Punjab and Goa, Gandhi admitted that “wrong choice of candidates” is also one among the many reasons.

“Many voters from Goa were unhappy with us and they voted against us,” Gandhi said. There is a view in the party that controversies surrounding the issue of illegal mining and the allegations against its Chief Minister Digambar Kamat was one reason why the party lost there.

While admitting that wrong choice of candidates resulted in setting up rebel candidates in many constituencies that led to the defeat of official party nominees, she said, “We did have better hopes for Punjab.”

To a question on whether it was lack of leaders that damaged party in these elections, a smiling Gandhi said, “rather than lack of leadership, too many leaders is perhaps our problem.”

Agency: PTI

Gandhiji Baptized, Hindus Shocked


Gandhi

Mahatma Gandhi has been baptised in proxy by a US church, drawing sharp reaction from his grandson and others.

Gandhi was baptised by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS), headquartered in Salt Lake City in Utah on March 27, 1996; the confirmation of which was completed on November 17, 2007 at Sao Paulo Brazil Temple, according to researcher Helen Radkey.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) is more popularly known as Mormon Church, one of the fastest growing churches in the US.

Radkey, who has now been excommunicated by the Mormons , made the revelation in an e-mail to Nevada-based Hindu activist, Rajan Zed.

In the email, Radkey, who is from Salt Lake City, said she viewed the record on baptism of Gandhi on February 16 but it had since disappeared and was no longer available in the database of the church.

It was unusual for a record to vanish, said Radkey, who of late has been in news because of bringing out in the public similar unknown facts and secrets of the Mormon Church.

“I have not come across other Indian leaders baptised by Mormons. My copies of the Gandhi record are dated February 16, 2012. The record disappeared shortly after that date. I assume Mormons did not want others to know about Gandhi’s baptism,” she said.

Arun Gandhi, a grandson of Gandhi who lives in Up State New York, told The Huffington Post that he was “surprised” to hear about the posthumous baptism. “It bothers me in the sense that people are doing something when a person is dead and gone and there is nobody to answer for that person. That’s not the right thing to do,” he was quoted as saying.

Arun, who teaches nonviolence in the US, noted that his grandfather was against proselytizing of any kind, whether it involved Hindus or others.

“He thought people must decide for themselves which religion they want to follow and they should follow that religion. It’s not up to others to force them. He was respectful of all the religions.” Suhag Shukla of Washington-based Hindu America Foundation said, “The proxy baptism of Gandhi is deeply offensive, not only to Gandhi’s legacy as a devout Hindu, but to Hindus world over.”

Source: IANS

India, the land of nonviolence


40 Million Guns, India 2nd Only to U.S. in Gun Ownership

India, the land of nonviolence, is no more a gun-shy nation as the country is now second in gun ownership in the world with more than 40 million guns. Rising incomes have made high-end weapons a new form of bling in the traditional peace-loving nation and the bitter memories of never-ending terrorist/Maoist attacks warrant them to be armed, writes Mark Magnier of Los Angeles Times.

Indians seems to have left the idea of nonviolence long back and are increasingly worried about their security in this era of violence. “This forgiveness-peace idea will only make Pakistanis think we’re soft targets. All that Gandhi stuff is for tourists,” the article quoted, Raja K.S. Sidhu, a native of north India who owns a Luger, a German World War II-era pistol.

Acquiring a gun license is not so easy in India; however, regardless the strict controls on weapons, Indian own nearly 40 million (4 Crores) guns, second highest in the world after United States which owns around 270 million guns. While the number does look big for India where the gun culture has never been so profoundly prevalent as in U.S., the rate of private gun ownership in India is just 3.36 firearms per 100 people in India while its 88.8 in the United States. The number of guns should be seen in the context of the population in each country and the rate of guns per population in India and China (which also has around 40 million guns) is not alarming at all. According to gunpolicy.org, Pakistan has around 18, 000,000 guns, Russia 12, 750,000, United Kingdom 4,060,000 and Australia has 3,050,000 guns. Though India is ranked second in 178 countries in the number of privately owned guns, the disparity is quite evident in the fact that the country is ranked at 110 in a comparison of the rate of private gun ownership.

Shockingly, out of 40 million guns in the country, only 6,300,000 are registered guns and the rate of registered firearms per 100 people in India is 0.53. It’s practically impossible to count the exact number of unlawfully held guns; however, estimates suggest that there are around 33,700,000 nonregistered guns in India, which is 2.83 illicit firearms per 100 people.

According to the data provided by India’s National Crimes Records Bureau, there were around 80,000 violations of Arms Act in 2009 such as making and transporting illegal weapons, which is an 8 percent increase from 2007, Magnier writes. While there is an increase in the number of Indians buying firearms, most of homicides in the country remains to involve knives and other weapons, and guns account for just 14 percent of killings. Comparing the rate of violence in India and the United States, the homicides rate is 2.78 per 100,000 people in India while its 4.96 per 100,000 in the U.S.

Only a valid licensee is permitted to manufacture small arms, ammunition or related components in India and the country is ranked ‘medium’ in a classification of the world’s small, medium and major firearm manufacturers, reveals gunpolicy.org. However, the prevalence of illegal ‘home-made’ firearm manufacture is very high in India. The annual value of small arms and ammunition exports from India is reported to be at $12,851,45923. India is categorized as minor in a comparison made of the world’s major/mid-level/minor/unknown small arms exporters.

The gun lovers in the country demand that people needs better access to firearms for its low police-to-population ratio (142.69 police personnel for every 1 lakh population), one of world’s worst.

Gandhi’s Girls


Gandhi’s Girls

India, 1942: In the end, the political demise of Mohandas Gandhi came with stunning speed. Until last week, he was the reversed Mahatma–the Great Soul– leader of 400 million Indians in the drive for independence from British colonial rule. With the election of the Labour Government in Britain increasingly likely, chances never seemed brighter for the free India that Gandhi had sought for so long.

But by week’s end, in the wake of newspaper accounts of Gandhi’s sexual peccadilloes, bizarre personal habits and mind-bending cult practices, his career–and perhaps Indian nationalism –lay in ruins. Those closest to Gandhi likened it to a Greek tragedy, a giant cut down by his own hands. “Gandhi’s personal life was a political time bomb waiting to explode,’ said one distraught associate. “Now it’s finally blown up in our faces.’

Ironically, Gandhi set the stage for his demise through his own pronouncements on sex. His obsession began in 1885 when he learned of his father’s death while in bed with his wife. By 1906, he had taken a much celebrated vow of celibacy. An extraordinary commitment, but even then Gandhi was angling for moral loopholes. “If for want of physical enjoyment,’ he wrote, “the mind wallows in thoughts of enjoyment, then it is legitimate to satisfy the hungers of the body.’ For years, supporters now admit, Gandhi had pushed the outer limits of propriety. “The man in the loin cloth, it seems, has thought a good deal about loins,’ said one observer.

After years of such rumors, it was the specific nature of the latest charges, followed by other damaging revelations, that undermined his political base. The shock waves were felt throughout the British empire–and new questions were raised about how relevant a politician’s character was to his work, and whether in the case of Gandhi, the Fourth Estate went too far.

A Spiritual Experience? The trouble began a week ago when the New Delhi Herald published a front page story reporting that Gandhi had spent the weekend with five attractive young women–aides in his nonviolent campaign–at his ashram in Sevegram. Meanwhile, his wife Kasturbai was 2,000 miles away at their mountain retreat in Kashmir recuperating from an illness.

Escorting them was Gandhi’s aide, the movie star-handsome Jawaharlal Nehru. With his urbane charm and stylish taste in jackets, Nehru never had any pretense to celibacy. (His intimacies with Lady Mountbatten are infamous.) Campaign insiders said that they had long been alarmed by Gandhi’s ties to Nehru, and several suggested their time together be cut back. “We told him to dump Nehru,’ said one aide. “But the old man would just sit there and smile. He didn’t see the storm coming.’

It was advice Gandhi must now wish he had heeded. New Delhi Herald reporters and photographers were hiding in nearby bushes, guarding both the front and rear entrances. Except for a breath of fresh air at 3 A.M., the women had spent the entire night with the erstwhile spiritual leader. If the chronology was indicting, the photographs were positively damning. Wielding telephoto lenses, the Herald photographers snapped shots that seem sure to snuff out a political career. The scene: Gandhi and his cabal sprawled on his rope bed– naked.

Late Sunday morning, a weary Gandhi finally spotted the Herald reporters and confronted them. The women were only there as an experiment in self-restraint, he insisted, and nothing sexual transpired between them. “True brachmacharya (celibacy) is this: one who, by constant-attendance upon God, has become capable of lying naked with naked women, however beautiful they may be, without being in any manner whatsoever sexually excited. I have done nothing wrong,’ Gandhi insisted.

The Indian public wasn’t buying it. His explanations had become the issue of the campaign, according to a poll taken two days after the Herald story broke. Only 34 percent of those questioned believed Gandhi’s claim that he hadn’t had sexual relations with the women–and a scant 16 percent believed he hadn’t been sexually excited. A mere 26 percent claimed to be disturbed by the incident itself; what bothered them, said 75 percent of India’s citizens, was the appearance of hypocrisy.

But the questions kept coming. Every stop on his campaign swing turned into a media circus. A protest march in Dandi was cut short by a throng of reporters, barraging Gandhi with questions about his sexual self-control. A new low in political discourse may have been reached when a reporter for the Bombay Post asked during a sit-in, “Did you get an erection last weekend?’ Although Gandhi was well within his rights when he responded, “I don’t have to answer that,’ some observers felt that the appearance of evasiveness further eroded his credibility.

Matters were only made worse when the Herald was widely rumored to be on the verge of publishing more damaging photos–of nothing less than unmistakable signs of Gandhi’s physical excitement. When a pack of enterprising reporters caught up with her at her sickbed, Mrs. Gandhi stuck by her man. She told them: “Honestly, if Mahatma told me that nothing happened, then nothing happened.’

More Revelations: Still, by week’s end, the prospects for Gandhi’s political recovery looked grim, despite his denials and counter-attacks. In the next few days, there were other newspaper accounts of Gandhi’s celibacy experiments. The Bombay Post ran an insiders’ account of life in Gandhi’s ashram. Contrary to the image he had cultivated of a gentle, loving soul, the two-part series, “The Dark Side of Gandhi,’ detailed the brutal regimen imposed on his followers. His 100-plus disciples, forced to live in primitive mud and bamboo huts, were awakened daily at a A.M. to eat nothing but a few crumbs of unseasoned vegetarian gruel and dry wheat. Weakened, they were subjected to long harangues on arcane religious topics. Eyewitness accounts were gruesome. “We had to spend hours on our knees chanting prayers and spinning cotton,’ said one American follower who defected. “We were like zombies.’ Cult experts say Gandhi had dozens of ingenious schemes to weaken his followers’ ties to their families and strengthen his control over them. Their secret name for their leader: “Bapu,’ or father.

The Post story was the final straw. In his political death throes, Gandhi made a dramatic appearance before his supporters–and stopped just short of abandoning his campaign for a free India. “I intended, in all honesty, to come to you this sunrise and tell you that I was leaving the cause. But, then, after tossing and turning all night, as I have through this ordeal, I woke up and said, “Heck, my goodness, no.”

Instead, Gandhi with his back against the proverbial wall reached deep into his bag of tricks and, like a cat with nine lives, pulled yet another rabbit from his hat: a hunger strike. Over the course of a fifty-year career, Gandhi had turned this familiar strategy into a crowd pleaser that could move the masses or pummel an Empire. “Under certain circumstances, fasting is the one weapon God has given us for use in times of utter helplessness,’ said Gandhi defiantly.

No one doubts that Gandhi can go weeks on end without even a drop of chutney. But political analysts are doubtful that the man, once dubbed “Mr. Hunger Strike,’ could make this latest gambit work. “Gandhi represents the politics of the past,’ said Patreek Chardeli. “A new generation of Indians wants vital, robust leadership. I don’t think a starving old man is well positioned to do it.’ More ominously, other pundits said the political damage was too much to contain– even with a high-profile play for sympathy. Davidahr Garthati, the media consultant credited with Gandhi’s decision to abandon the suit and tie of his early barrister days and “go native’ instead, was equally pessimistic. Garthati noted, “His celibacy shtick was crucial to the saint image he’d cultivated for all these years. The non-violence thing, the spinning wheels, the fasting–that was brilliant. But his celibacy really set him apart, made him genuinely holy. Without it, he’s just another pacifist do-gooder.’

Political opponents moved quickly to capitalize on the gaffe. Columnist Robert Novakilli, a longtime Gandhi critic, lambasted Gandhi’s hijinks from his nationally broadcast McRajan Group. “The real perversion is Gandhi’s political agenda. For years, he and his pacifist pals have had two things in mind: tinkering with the salt tax and cozying up to Stalin.’ And his most formidable rival, Moslem leader Muhammed Ali Jinnah, sought to subtly position himself to pick up Gandhi’s fleeing supporters. “Family life has always been sacred to me,’ he told reporters, standing outside his family’s mosque with his wife and daughter. “I don’t think it’s my place to comment on the controversy surrounding some of those in the public eye. It’s up to the Indian people to judge for themselves.’

And their judgment seemed harsh. Within a matter of days, the squalid controversy over Gandhi’s private parts turned him from a national hero into a laughingstock. On his nightly radio program, comedian Charu Carson quipped, “Well, at least we know the Mahatma is big enough for the job of running India.’ He added, to more laughter, “I guess he was really meditating his brains out this weekend.’ Editorial cartoonists had a field day, as a bulging loin cloth quickly became the Mahatma’s new trademark.

In the next few days more revelations came trickling out about other celibacy “experiments’ he had been conducting since his forties, including one report of a pleasure trip down the Ganges with Nehru and two female assistants on the awkwardly named Holy Cow. The Post also revealed that at the end of each day, he had one of his attractive, young female disciples administer an enema, which he insisted was for “health’ and “cleansing’ purposes. “Gandhi gives as much as he takes– even to total strangers,’ said one Gandhi aide.

New Ground rules: Gandhi’s sudden demise triggered an orgy of self-examination in the media. Did the press go too far? “At first, I agonized over whether we should risk tarnishing a great man’s reputation with close-up photos of naked women and speculation about his sex life,’ said Ved

Fiedleraba, who led the Herald stakeout. “But then I realized that the public had a right to know.’ Fiedleraba reasoned that if there was the slightest possibility that Gandhi was lying about his celibacy, then that raised serious questions about his candor and his ability to negotiate with foreign leaders were India ever to become independent. “So, naturally, it was my moral obligation to set up camp outside his bedroom.’

Clearly, the ground rules have changed. Historically, the press has had a gentlemen’s agreement with India’s rulers. When Viceroy Lord Lillybottom himself brought a bevy of beauties to the Taj Mahal, the muckrakers of Madras looked the other way. But with the rise of Indian Nationalism and the decline of British sea power, the mores of Indian society have been loosened–and so have those of the press. Today, nothing is off limits, even enemas. Many wondered what’s next: asking Jinnah whether he had violated the Koran’s strictures against amorous relations with pigs or other unholy animals? But for now it was Gandhi who was caught in this whirlwind. This smiling man, from a more polite age, seemed oblivious to the new rules of his beloved India.

Whatever the press’s ultimate responsibility, the longstanding doubts over Gandhi’s character left India’s nationalist movement in disarray. Behind the scenes, some Congress party operatives were privately relieved. “We feel betrayed,’ said one. “Gandhi promised he would remain celibate, at least until India achieved independence. Now that he’s gone, at least we can move on.’

Ultimately, Gandhi’s fate hinged on those questions of character, rather than any moral revulsion. In her essay “Gandhi’s Women Problem, Women’s Gandhi Problem,’ Sukai Lessardai voiced the concerns of many women wary of Gandhi’s apparent philandering. “Whether or not he was celibate, his need to prove his spiritual manhood by lying with five naked women is an affront to the dignity and equality of women everywhere.’ And as Willmed Schneidermanai of the Indian Enterprise Institute points out, “It’s not so much the fact that he slept with these women or regularly indulged in enemas; it’s that he showed such bad judgment in doing so. I think this raises serious questions about Gandhi’s self-discipline and insensitivity to the appearances of impropriety –and finally about Gandhi’s ability to lead a successful non-violent movement.’

Now the question is: Whither India? In his stead, there are other leaders who could possibly win independence for India–the Moslem Jinnah, or even Vallabhaai Patel–but neither has the stature and name recognition of a Gandhi. Non-violent disobedience seems a memory now. And nationalism itself is on the backburner. As the likely next Viceroy of the Raj, Lord Louis Mountbatten, points out, “If an entire nation could be led down the primrose path by this charlatan and hypocrite, the Indian people are not yet ready for independence.’ Wise heads in India and Britain agreed, and with Gandhi’s political demise, a tumultuous chapter in India’s history closes, and calmer times lie ahead.

-Gandhi’s girls – sex scandal Washington Monthly, July-August, 1987 by Art Levine

A Six-Decade-Old FIR Pays Homage to Gandhi


It is a reminder of one of the saddest dates of Indian history — Jan 30, 1948, when Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated. More than sixty years later, the first information report (FIR) of the incident has been displayed in a police station here “as a homage” to the father of the nation.

The person behind the find is Madan Gopal, the station house officer (SHO) of Tughlaq Road police station in central Delhi.

The FIR, originally written in Urdu, has been translated in Hindi, laminated and framed.

Both the original report and its Hindi translation have been put up on display at the station.

“This is our way to pay homage to him,” a senior police officer at the station said, not wishing to be named.

“All the credit for this job goes to our SHO (Gopal),” he added.

The FIR No.68, registered at 9.45 p.m., was lodged by an eyewitness Nand Lal Mehta.

According to Mehta, Gandhi left his chamber at 5.10 p.m. for prayers and was walking across Birla House lawns in central Delhi with the support of Abha Behn and Kumari Behn. Two more girls and an aide, Brij Kishan Chandi, were walking alongside him.

“Just as Gandhi approached the prayer hall, a man Narayan Vinayak Godse, fired at him from a distance of two to three feet. The three rounds hit Gandhi in his stomach and chest as he fell to the ground mumbling ‘Hey Ram‘,” said the FIR.

The attacker, who was later identified as Nathuram Vinayak Godse, was caught on the spot and a case of murder under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was registered.

The officer added that there may be some more such interesting reports present in the station.

“It is a historic station and there may be some more of such reports involving luminaries or politicians in our records, but we will have to sift through them,” he added.

How India got its Independence – The Real Story


Utpal Dutt, the actor who played comedian in one of most memorable role in Hindi Cinema in Golmaal, was arrested on December 27, 1965 by the Government of West Bengal under the Preventive Detention Act. The Government of Bengal and India feared he was “subversive”. Why? Because he wrote a play called “Kallol” (Sound of Waves) on an important chapter of Indian Freedom that is never mentioned in any official History book. The Royal Indian Navy Mutiny (or Naval Uprising) of 1946.

The Beginning

British were in trouble in 1946. Indians in the Armed forces were no longer trust worthy. The mutiny, that no one in our generation has ever heard of, did to the British colonization, what no other action could have done in the long struggle of 250 years.

Said Sir Stafford Cripps, intervening in the debate on the motion to grant Indian Indepence in the British House of Commons in 1947 (‘The Freedom Struggle and the Dravidian Movement’ by P.Ramamurti, Orient Longman, 1987)

…The Indian Army in India is not obeying the British officers. We have recruited our workers for the war; they have been demobilised after the war. They are required to repair the factories damaged by Hitler’s bombers. Moreover, they want to join their kith and kin after five and a half years of separation. Their kith and kin also want to join them. In these conditions if we have to rule India for a long time, we have to keep a permanent British army for a long time in a vast country of four hundred millions. We have no such army….”

In August 1945, Subhash Bose had reportedly died, while he collaborated with the Japanese and Hitler to fight the British. After the Second World War was over, three of the top officers of the Indian National Army (INA) – General Shah Nawaz Khan (Muslim), Colonel Prem Sehgal (Hindu) and Colonel Gurbaksh Singh Dhillon (Sikh) were put on trial at the Red Fort in Delhi. Their crime: “waging war against the King Emperor”

While Nehru was busy “defending” the three; he (Nehru), Gandhi, Mohd. Ali Jinnah, and Maulana Abul Kalam Azad had come to a secret pact that if Subhash Bose was to enter India (as many knew he hadn’t died in 1945), he would be handed over and charged.

Unprecedentedly, these trials were very public. Due to the sympathy toward Netaji and the INA in general, there was an instant and large outpouring of passion and patriotism in Indians. These stories were being shared via wireless sets and through media in general on the ships, where the sailors who were being given bad treatment (lack of proper service facilties), got inspired to go out and join together in a strike and rebel against the government.

The Spread

The mutiny started on 18 February 1946 and by next evening a Naval Central Strike Committee was formed where Leading Signalman M.S Khan and Petty Officer Telegraphist Madan Singh were unanimously elected President and Vice-President respectively.

The spread of the Naval mutiny, which started in Bombay was complete – Karachi, Calcutta, Cochin and Vizag. 78 ships, 20 shore establishments and 20,000 sailors had been involved in the strike.

Seeing this Naval strike, the Bombay-ites did a one day general strike. Even the Royal Indian Air Force and local police forces joined in the other cities. The NCOs in the British Indian army openly ignored and defied the orders of the British superiors. In Madras and Pune, the Indian Army revolted in the British Garrisons.

Riots broke out all over the country. The mutineers were hoisting 3 flags – Indian National COngress, Muslim League and CPI. British people in cars were made to get off and shout “Jai Hind” by the mutineers. The Indian Tricolor was hoisted on many ships and establishments, by just the second day.

Such was the crisis that destroyers were gotten and stationed at the Gateway of India in Bombay to deal with the mutineers. Navies of Australia and Canada were also summoned.

The third day into this – the Royal Air Force flew an entire squadron of Bombers over Bombay Harbor to show support. Meanwhile the sailors had taken over HMIS Bahadur, Chamak and Himalaya and from the Royal Naval Anti-Aircraft School .

It was by that time that the decision to confront the Navy ratings was taken by the British and the sailors aboard the destroyer Hindustan were challenged. The sailors lost many lives and could not fight back much and in the process the ship Hindustan was destroyed.

Betrayal by Gandhi, Nehru, Jinnah and Azad

Despite the extensive public support and support from all the wings of the Armed forces – Army, Navy, Air force, and even police – apart from unanimous coming together of people across religious groups at a time when the religious situation had been made really bad due to Partition debate and passion, ALL the National Leaders not only did NOT support the Navy Mutineers and their supporters but instead condemned them.

They were leaderless, surely, but they had achieved what NO OTHER generation and group of Indians had achieved in 250 years – turn the Indian Armed forces personnel against their Masters. Subhash Bose had imagined this kind of situation. Little did he know that from the failure of his own Army, would arise a rebellion and a will to fight amongst the rank and file of Indian soldiers hitherto fighting dutifully for the British, often against their own countrymen, to strike back.

The Mainstream politicians – from Jinnah to Gandhi, to Nehru to Maulana Azad – ALL let these final Freedom fighters down. They just abandoned them and except for preaching they did nothing to help them.

In midst of one of most unprecedented religious tension in the sub-continent, this rebellion and its genesis was a Godsend to reinforce religious and class harmony, which was forged instantly WITHOUT any machination. Yet, it was squandered…. probably deliberately by all those who promised us peace and harmony.

These people – the so-called Mainstream politicians spearheaded by Gandhi were interested in only their hold of their masses.. to see themselves being upstaged by a bunch of young upstarts with romantic patriotism in their eyes was unnerving. (James L. Raj; Making and unmaking of British India. Abacus. 1997. p598) Show of fake “constitutional process” and “principles” was a good way to brush them aside despite all they had been able to do.

Real Reason for Independence

So what were the three things which convinced the British that India could not be governed by force anymore?

Subhash Bose, Indian National Army and the Royal Navy Uprising..

When Justice P.B. Chakrabarty, the Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court once asked the British PM Lord Clement Atlee – responsible for conceding India’s Independence, the all important question -

“what was the extent of Gandhi’s influence upon the British decision to quit India”

His response, with a smirk: “m-i-n-i-m-a-l!“

So, then why did they have to leave if the Quit India movement of 1942 had subsided and nothing major happened in the mainstream politics – then why did the British have to leave so suddenly in 1947??

Clement Atlee’s response:

Erosion of loyalty to the British Crown among the Indian army and navy personnel as a result of the military activities of Netaji

Such was the Congress party scared of the truth coming out that as late as 1965, a Marxist theater actor and writer Utpal Dutt was arrested for writing a passionate play on the VERY event that ensured India its Independence – the Royal Navy Uprising!

But as the story goes in our History books…….