(This is a reprint from NewsBred).
Should we start with the message or the messenger?
Let’s begin with the messenger first. I bet none of you know who are 49 signatories who have written to Prime Minister Narendra Modi on minority lynchings. It’s not in your newspapers nor in established magazines such as Outlook and India Today.
Just a coincidence? Or a plot?
I somehow dug up the list of 49 eminent personalities. Over 40 are from the state of West Bengal, including Aparna Sen and Goutam Ghose who have been questioned by CBI on Ponzi schemes. The rest, such as Shobha Mudgal, Ramachandra Guha, Adoori Gopalakrishnan, Anurag Kashyap and Mani Ratnam are known Leftists. Madam Mamata Banerjee has come out in support of this letter though your newspaper wouldn’t have mentioned it. Telegraph India? The known Leftist rag from Kolkata? Oh, you must look for its Epaper today. Or curl up your lips by looking at this image of their front page below.
I am not “rubbishing” the messenger to “kill” the message. Human lives are above ideology. Blood has no religion. Not for these worthies though. They could only see Muslim blood. Or they would have followed Anand Ranganathan or Swati Goel Sharma and known of hundreds of cases against Hindus and Dalits; or educated themselves on the pieces from OpIndia which lists 50 hate-crimes by Muslims in recent times; and a dozen “incidents” against Muslims which turned out to be fake.
Yet, they are quoting factcheker.in as their source when the website is epitome of lies, mischief and propaganda. They have a problem with the word “urban naxals” (made famous by Vivek Ranjan Aghinotri) who they view as “dissenter” but the nation as “subversive” and a threat to India’s sovereignty. They view “Jai Shri Ram” as a “war cry” but Islamic terrorists blowing themselves up with “Allah O Akbar” on the lips is our sheer imagination.
Yet, these worthies deserve our time. Just to exhibit how the “Deep State” works. Let me list 10 questions which must prod the conscience of neutral Indian citizens:
- Why we don’t have the list of 49 in public domain?
- Why the headlines have tried to give it a Pan-Indian intellectual “uprising” hiding its essentially Bengali flavour?
- Why this discourse omits crimes against the Hindus?
- Why known Hindu intellectuals—Rajiv Malhotra, Subhash Kak, David Frawley, Dr Koenrad Elst, Francois Gautier–are never invited in Express Adda or TV debates?
- Could you remember anyone of them reacting to vandalizing of Durga Maa Temple in the heart of Capital recently?
- Why politicians such as Arvind Kejriwal, Rahul Gandhi, Sitaram Yechury, Mamata Banerjee or Yadavs are never outraged at the crimes against the Hindus
- Are NGOs a part of this nexus? At 31 lakhs, the NGOs in our counry are double the number of schools; 250 times the number of government hospitals. We have one NGO for 400 people as against one policeman for 709 persons.
- Where were these intellectuals, newspapers and politicians and NGOs when crimes against Muslims and Dalits were far worse in UPA’s 10 years than it has been in Modi’s five-plus?
- And if these intellectuals, newspapers, politicians and NGOs are working in complete sync, ensuring what we read and what we don’t; what stops us from terming them as a “Deep State” within India?
- And if this “Deep State” exists, it just can’t be ideology. (More so when Left is as good as politically over in India). Who does this “Deep State” belong to? CIA? Saudi money? Commie funds? Or all of them put together? Or deep pockets of imperialism masquerading as Liberal Order?
The dangers are obvious. As the divide between Hindus and Muslims grow deeper; the spin-off could begin with lives lost or India divided, 1947 revisited. With people at war, India would get terminally weak. Those plotting it would be happy beyond words. Those who want Hinduism crushed would be over the moon.
Hindus of course can’t match them in propaganda. They are deep-rooted: The “Deep State: have their artistes, intellectuals, historians and media planted everywhere around us. They have a ready audience at home and abroad. The narrative would stay with them in foreseeable future. This has been a project of decades. The monster can’t be slayed overnight.
Sure it needs response. An organized response. Democracy is one tool which has rolled these worthies into the ground. But we are putting too many eggs in one basket. Democracy can be subverted (Why do you think they cry so much on EVMs?). We have also seen how technological giants, such as Google, Twitter, Amazon etc promote such Break-India forces. Our culture is still a binding force but when “Jai Shri Ram” is turned into an abuse, it’s only a matter of time before it implodes. India is young and they are easily brain-washed (All those with teenagers at home would identify with this issue).
Frankly, Hindus need a George Soros to combat these forces. Those who don’t know him, should do it now. He fronts Liberal Order; Hindus need one of their own. It’s unlikely BJP or RSS would be of much help in terms of funds or a commitment for decades. But Hindus would be increasingly under siege and only an organized structure, and not stray organic counter-voices, could set them free.
Most now know that the Indian history we read is fabricated. It’s been a handiwork of Nehruvian academicians and Marxist scholars who fear the revival of Hinduism in a largely Hindu country. A nation without identity is easier to manipulate and confuse than the one conscious of its identity. Hinduism is older to Islam and Christianity by thousands of years but it’s in the interest of both monotheist religions to obliterate the only Pagan religion still going strong. Thus money pours in from foreign shores in the form of NGOs and aids to Masjids. Within India, not as much judiciary as media, do the damage. The goal is to keep India apart from its soul.
The revisionism of India’s history books has gained ground in recent decades. Among many such soldiers of truth is Francois Gautier, a foreign French journalist who loved India so much that he stayed put in this country since 1971. Among his many books is “A History Of India As It Happened: Not as it has been written” which is in circulation for a few years now but is worth every second of yours.
The compass of the book is huge even though in terms of pages it doesn’t count more than 236 pages. It picks up threads from the very beginning to right up to the Narendra Modi era which suggests a rather fleeting, and not reflective, approach by the author though perfectly justified if the attempt is aimed at initiating the innocents to truth, and not lose them by a dense exposition.
Though the insight into our times is no less interesting—for instance Mother Teresa’s mission was to convert India to Christianity (Did she ever say a good thing about Hinduism?) – this review would restrict itself to four epochs of India’s history which has been mutilated by Nehruvian-Marxist forces.
INDIA IN PRE-ISLAMIC ERA
Surely this was the most glorious spell of India’s history much of which has been distorted, buried or mocked at as unscientific—we all are witness to the derision our newspapers reserve for Science Congress where our glorious past is elucidated. So let’s dive straightaway into it.
American mathematician A. Seindenberg has conclusively shown that the ancient Vedic mathematics, Sulbasturas, have inspired all the mathematic sciences of the antique world—from Babylonia to Egypt to Greece. Western world traces all its culture, heritage, philosophy etc to Greek world whose religion was definitely pagan and deeply inspired by Hindu practices.
Interestingly, till the 19th century, Europe acknowledged the supremacy of Hinduism as the fountain of all wisdom which shaped humanity. But once colonization gained roots and Christian missionaries spread far and wide, they couldn’t have accepted India as the land of eternal wisdom for their propagated mission was to civilize the barbarians. How could they admit that their very culture was derived from these savages? How could missionaries accept that their own religion was influenced by these very heathens?
The author presents various evidences that the study of India’s culture, history and philosophy was the flavour of Europe’s schools and universities till the 19th century.
Anquetil-Duperron had translated the Upanishads in 1801; Eugene Burnouf published in 1844 an “introduction to Indian Buddhism”; in Paris was created the first chair of Sanskrit. Famous writers and philosophers such as Edgar Quinet, Ernest Renan, Hippolyte Taine or Charles Renouvier were teaching Indian philosophy in academic institutions. The remarkable historian Michelet wrote: “From India comes a torrent of light, a river of Right and Reason.”
Famous Indianist Jean Herbert reminds us that “many centuries before us, India had devised most of the philosophical systems which Europe experienced with later…Egypt and Greece owe India their wisdom.”
German philosopher Frederich Shlegel said that “ India is not only at the origin of everything, she is superior in everything, intellectually, religiously or politically—and even the Greek heritage seems to pale in comparison.”
Friedrich Nietzsche said: “Budhism and Brahminism are a hundred times deeper and more objective than Christianity.”
But late in the 19thth century, Europe became “Helleno-Centric” (Greece-centred). As per French philosopher and journalist Roger-Pol Droit, it was philosopher Friedrich Hegel who sowed its seeds: “Hegel didn’t discover the Greeks; he created them and made up for them a destiny and thoughts which they didn’t always have.”
India suffered greatly at the resultant manipulation of history. Aryan Invasion Theory was one such fall-out. It was depicted that migrants/invaders from Central Asia pushed the local populace of north-west India to south and gave India its’ language and culture, including Vedas. That they moved in around 1500 BC which is a blatant lie: If Vedas were as recent then how come Saraswati river, which disappeared in 2200 BC, is mentioned 50 times in Rig Veda?
Since Harappan Civilization is said to be flourishing in 3100-1900 BC, Rig Veda must be in existence by 4000 BC. The author doesn’t hold himself back: “Aryan Invasion Theory was imposed upon the subcontinent by its colonizers and is today kept alive by Nehruvian historians.”
For example in the “Dictionary of Philosophers” there is no mention of Buddhist philosopher Asanga whose work is as important as those of Aristotle. None of Asanga’s books are in Europe’s libraries even as Nietzsche’s letters to his mother when he was only six are treated as intellectual marvels!
A few historical facts which we are not told are worth mentioning. For instance, Chandragupta, who founded the Maurya dynasty came from a low caste (so much for India’s “reprehensible” caste system). His administrative set-up was so efficient that it was later retained by Muslims and even English. In true Indian traditions, Chandragupta renounced the world during his last years and lived as an anchorite at the feet of the Jain saint Bhadrabhau in Shravanabelagola, near Mysore.
Most wouldn’t know that the Bhakti movement was developed in South India during the Pallavas; India’s influence extended to Mecca where Shiva’s black lingam was worshipped by the Arabians.
A few things Hindu critics need to bear in mind: Brahmins may have been the biggest in the caste system but they were poor and didn’t seize political power; “democracy” was long in vogue –even the great Ashoka was defeated in his power tussle with his Council and had to practically abdicate; Indian sculpture was unique for its complete sense of ego-very few of India’s sculptural masterpieces are signed for instance; Hindus always worshipped at non-Hindu places, such as Melngani, the Christian place of pilgrimage of South India; or some Sufi shrine in Kashmir or Rajasthan.
ISLAM AND THE MUSLIM INVASION
The massacres of local populace by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger than the holocaust.
Babur killed hundreds of thousands of Hindus and razed thousands of temples. His ultimate goal was the destruction and the enslaving of the Hindus; Aurangzeb had the “satnamis of Alwar” massacred to the last one, leaving one entire region empty of human beings: Conquest of Afghanistan in 1000AD was followed by the wiping out of the entire Hindu population—or Hindu Kush (Slaughter of Hindus); Bahmani sultans in Central India made it a rule to kill 100,000 Hindus a year; In 1399, Teimur killed 100,000 Hindus in a single day (and an Indian Bollywood star still considers the name worthy of bestowing it on his son); the last Jihad against the Hindus was waged by the much glorified Tipu Sultan at the end of the 18th century.
As per renowned professor K.S. Lal, Hindu population declined by 80 million between 1000-1525AD.
And how Nehruvian and Marxists adherents view this barbarity?
This is Pt Jawaharlal Nehru: “Mahmud of Ghazni was in the first place a soldier and a brilliant soldier”. Amazing on a man who was proud of desecrating hundreds of temples and made it a duty to terrorize and humiliate pagans.
Historians Romila Thapar, Harbhans Mukhia and Bipin Chandra, once professors at the JNU, are also cited. Sample this from Thapar: “Aurganzeb’s supposed intolerance is little more than a hostile legend based on isolated acts…” Come on Thapar- How can one be so dishonest or so blind?
The author views the flight of Hindus from Kashmir; or of 26/11 in Mumbai as a reminder that the Mughal cry for the House of Islam in India is not over yet.
Along with misinformation—for example, that India had a wretched education system when in Madras alone there were 125,000 medical institutes before the Whites came—England’s colonization inflicted a terrible toll on lives, industry and culture in India.
Industrially, the British strangled the local industries. They finished products, such as textiles, which had made India famous and a power in the world. Instead, they turned them towards jute, cotton, tea, oil seeds, which Britain needed as raw materials for their home industries.
Britain employed cheap labour for their enterprises and didn’t care for the perishing traditional artisans. And let’s also not forget how English exported Indian labour all over the world in their colonies—whether to Sri Lanka, Fiji, South Africa or to the West Indies.
The author also points out the conversion aims of Christian missionaries. For example, International School of Kodaikanal, under the guise of religious studies, still tries to convert its students, most of whom are Indians.
Accordig to British records one million Indians died of famine between 1800-25; 4 million between 1825-50: 5 million in 1850-1875; and 15 million by 1875-1900.
The book hurtles along swiftly on the pre-independence era and make you chuckle under the breath. Till the 19th century, the Congress regarded British rule in India as “divine dispensation”; Quit India was not for India’s independence but because Gandhi refused to cooperate in the Second World War; For all his fight in South Africa, Gandhi achieved “second class citizenship” for the Indians; Islam’s political institutions were semi-barbaric; Sufism is a lift of Gnostics who lived in Persia and influenced by Vedanta; Nehru went for socialism when there was no class conflict in India.
The books asks some serious questions on Kashmir, and on a bigger scale on Islam.
Kashmir once was entirely made up of Hindus and Buddhists before they were converted by the invading Muslims six centuries ago. Even as recently as the advent of the 20th century, there were 25 per cent Hindus in the Kashmir valley. Today the last 350,000 Kashmiri Pandits are refugees in their own land. Author views it as a “much bigger ethnic cleansing than the one of Bosnian Muslims or the Albanians in Yugoslavia.”
There is reflection on so-called human rights violations in the Valley. “If India decides to keep Kashmir, it has to do so according to the rules set by the militants: violence, death and treachery are the order of the day. As for the possibility of referendum, the author foresees a situation where the likes of Farooq Abdullah and Ghulam Nabi Azad could come to power and then be “eliminated” by Jihads who would then hand over Kashmir to Pakistan. Not just Kashmir, but Punjab, Assam, Gorkhaland, Jharkhand and Tamil land all could go in the name of democracy and human rights.
As for Islam, why it’s mentioned as a Muslim-Hindu question when it’s plainly a Muslim obsession, their hatred of the Hindu pagans? The RSS and VHP have never killed anybody, never massacred anybody in the name of their God. It’s an irony that those Hindus whose ancestors were raped, slaved and killed are giving a cry on Islam’s behalf today after being converted to the religion. (Jinnah himself was a descendent of a Hindu, named Jinnahbhai).
There are some related questions too. Did Amnesty International, which question Indian state’s role in Kashmir, bother at all about the support given by the CIA to mujahiddins in Afghanistan and Pakistan? Do Pakistani or Bangladeshi bombers in Hyderabad or Mumbai could function with the help of India’s muslims?
Media is heavily censored. Hindus are killed in pogroms in Pakistan and Bangladesh (read Taslima Nasreen’s Lajja) but their deaths is not worth a tear; while Hindus are colonized, converted and killed, it’s they who are blamed and not those who did the heinous acts.
The final word must go Sri Aurobindo on Islam: “The Islamic culture hardly gave anything to the world which may be said to fundamental importance and typically its own Islamic culture was mainly borrowed from the others.”