എന്‍ എസ് എസ് ആരുടേയും പാട്ടപ്പരമ്പില്‍ കിടക്കുന്നവരല്ല എന്ന് സുകുമാരന്‍ നായര്‍. -
മൂക്കിനു താഴെ കിടക്കുന്ന ചെങ്ങന്നൂരിലെ എമ്മല്ലെ പോലും താക്കീതിന്റെ സ്വരത്തില്‍ കുറ്റപെടുത്താന്‍ തുടങ്ങി. സുകുമാരന്‍ നായര്‍ സ്വന്തം നില അറിയേണ്ട സമയം അതിക്രമിച്ചു.
ശബരിമല തന്ത്രി, ഗുരുവായൂര്‍ തന്ത്രി, തിരുവതാം കൂര്‍ മഹാരാജാവ്, തുടങ്ങിയവര്‍ മുതല്‍ എസ് എന്‍ ഡീ പീ, പുലയര്‍ മഹാസഭ, മലയാള ബ്രാഹ്മണ സഭ തുടങ്ങി നൂറോളം സങ്കടനകള്‍ ഒരുമിച്ചു ഹിന്ദു ഐക്യത്തിന് വേണ്ടി മുന്നിട്ടു ഇറങ്ങിയപ്പോള്‍ അതിനു തുരംഗം വച്ച ചരിത്രമാണ്‌ സുകുമാരന്‍ നായര്‍ക്ക് ഉള്ളത്. വെള്ളാപ്പള്ളിയും ഒരുമിച്ചു അന്ന് ഹിന്ദു ഐക്യത്തിന് ശ്രമിച്ചിരുന്നു എങ്കില്‍ കേരളത്തിന്റെ രാഷ്ട്രീയ ചിത്രം തന്നെ മാറിപോകുമായിരുന്നു. ആ സുവര്‍ണ അവസരം കളഞ്ഞു കുളിച്ചിട്ടു ഇപ്പോള്‍ കരയോഗത്തിന്റെ തിണ്ണയില്‍ കേറി നിന്ന് കുറച്ചിട്ട് ഒരു കാര്യവുമില്ല.
Sunday, April 22, 2012
Monday, April 2, 2012
The story behind Hindu Kush
Mahmud of Ghori defeated Prithviraj Chauhan in the battle of Tarain (Taraori) in 1192. He then gauged out the eyes of Prithviraj Chauhan, blinding him; after which he had him dragged by a horse. Along with Prithviraj, the army of Mahmud of Ghori enslaved about 50,000 soldiers and their wives and children as part of the war booty. These captives were dragged across the battle field of Tarain (Taraori), present day Haryana, through the plains of Pakistan and over the hills into Afghanistan into the capital city of Ghori. Most Hindu captives did not survive this perilous and inhuman journey over the mountains.To constantly remind Hindus of this crushing defeat and the misery that they went through, this mountain range was named Hindu Kush by the Afghan rulers.
Source: Hindu Tolerance.. Over The Ages
Jai Hind
Why Did the British Leave In Such Great Hurry in August 1947?
It is commonly believed that it was the Congress
Party through its various movements like the Quit India Movement of 1942 that brought
freedom to India. This fails to explain the fact that the British granted
independence only in 1947 while the Quit India Movement had collapsed by the
end of 1942. The question that naturally arises is- why did the British leave
in such great hurry in August 1947? The answer was provided by Prime Minister
Clement Attlee, the man who made the decision to grant independence to India.
When B.P. Chakravarti was acting as Governor of
West Bengal, Lord Attlee visited India and stayed as his guest for three days
at the Raj Bhavan. Chakravarti asked Attlee about the real grounds for granting
independence to India. Specifically, his question was, when the Quit India
movement lay in ruins years before 1947, where was the need for the British to
leave in such a hurry. Attlee’s response is most illuminating and important for
history.
Here is what Attlee told him: In reply Attlee cited
several reasons, the most important were the activities of Netaji Subash
Chandra Bose which weakened the very foundation of the attachment of the Indian
land and naval forces to the British Government. Towards the end, I asked Lord Attlee
about the extent to which the British decision to quit India was influenced by
Gandhi’s activities. On hearing this question Attlee’s lips widened in a smile
of disdain and he uttered, slowly, putting emphasis on each single letter – “mi-ni-mal.”
(Emphasis added.)
The crucial point to note is that thanks to Subash
Chandra Bose’s activities, the Indian Armed Forces began to see themselves as defenders
of India rather than of the British Empire. This, more than anything else, was
what led to India’s freedom. This is also the reason why the British Empire
disappeared from the face of the earth within an astonishingly short space of
twenty years.
Indian soldiers, who were the main prop of the
Empire, were no longer willing to fight for the British. What influenced the
British decision was mutiny of the Indian Navy following the INA trials in
1946. While the British wanted to try Subash Chandra Bose’s INA as traitors,
Indian soldiers saw them as nationalists and patriots. This scared the British.
They decided to get out in a hurry.
(Attlee repeated his argument on at least two other
occasions, including once in the House of Commons. During a debate in the House
of Commons, he told Churchill that he would agree to the latter’s suggestion of
holding on to India if he could guarantee the loyalty of the Indian armed
forces. Churchill had no reply. The Labour Prime Minister was as much an
imperialist as Churchill, but more pragmatic, prepared to see the writing on
the wall.)
This will come as a shock to most Indians brought
up to believe that the Congress movement driven by the ‘spiritual force’ of Mahatma
Gandhi forced the British to leave India. But both evidence and the logic of
history are against this beautiful but childish fantasy. It was the fear of
mutiny by the Indian armed forces – and not any ‘spiritual force’ – that forced
the issue of freedom.
The British saw that the sooner they left the
better for themselves, for, at the end of the war, India had some three million
men under arms. One would have to be extraordinarily dense – which the British
were not – to fail to see the writing on the wall. So, as the great historian
R.C. Majumdar wrote, Subash Bose with his INA campaigns probably contributed
more to Indian independence than Gandhi, Nehru and their movements. The result
of Subash Chandra Bose’s activities was the rise of the nationalist spirit in
the Indian Armed Forces. This is the reason why Nehru, after he became Prime
Minister, did everything possible to turn Bose into a non-person. He wanted no
rivals. This brings us to Mahatma Gandhi and his ill-fated Nonviolent
Non-Cooperation Movement. Most Indians have been made to believe that it was
the first of Gandhi’s movements for India’s freedom. This is completely false.
The Non-Cooperation Movement was for the restoration of the Sultan of Turkey as
the Caliph. This was known as the Khilafat Movement, launched by Indian Muslims,
led by Maulanas Mohamad Ali and Shaukat Ali. In fact, Gandhi postponed Tilak’s
Swaraj Resolution by nearly ten years in order to join the Khilafat. (Lokamanya
Tilak had died in 1920 and Gandhi and the Ali Brothers launched the Khilafat in
1921.
Gandhi even diverted a substantial part of the
Tilak Swaraj Fund to the Khilafat. Indian history books omit the fact that the
sole purpose of the Non-Cooperation Movement was the restoration of the Sultan
of Turkey.
Party through its various movements like the Quit India Movement of 1942 that brought
freedom to India. This fails to explain the fact that the British granted
independence only in 1947 while the Quit India Movement had collapsed by the
end of 1942. The question that naturally arises is- why did the British leave
in such great hurry in August 1947? The answer was provided by Prime Minister
Clement Attlee, the man who made the decision to grant independence to India.
When B.P. Chakravarti was acting as Governor of
West Bengal, Lord Attlee visited India and stayed as his guest for three days
at the Raj Bhavan. Chakravarti asked Attlee about the real grounds for granting
independence to India. Specifically, his question was, when the Quit India
movement lay in ruins years before 1947, where was the need for the British to
leave in such a hurry. Attlee’s response is most illuminating and important for
history.
Here is what Attlee told him: In reply Attlee cited
several reasons, the most important were the activities of Netaji Subash
Chandra Bose which weakened the very foundation of the attachment of the Indian
land and naval forces to the British Government. Towards the end, I asked Lord Attlee
about the extent to which the British decision to quit India was influenced by
Gandhi’s activities. On hearing this question Attlee’s lips widened in a smile
of disdain and he uttered, slowly, putting emphasis on each single letter – “mi-ni-mal.”
(Emphasis added.)
The crucial point to note is that thanks to Subash
Chandra Bose’s activities, the Indian Armed Forces began to see themselves as defenders
of India rather than of the British Empire. This, more than anything else, was
what led to India’s freedom. This is also the reason why the British Empire
disappeared from the face of the earth within an astonishingly short space of
twenty years.
Indian soldiers, who were the main prop of the
Empire, were no longer willing to fight for the British. What influenced the
British decision was mutiny of the Indian Navy following the INA trials in
1946. While the British wanted to try Subash Chandra Bose’s INA as traitors,
Indian soldiers saw them as nationalists and patriots. This scared the British.
They decided to get out in a hurry.
(Attlee repeated his argument on at least two other
occasions, including once in the House of Commons. During a debate in the House
of Commons, he told Churchill that he would agree to the latter’s suggestion of
holding on to India if he could guarantee the loyalty of the Indian armed
forces. Churchill had no reply. The Labour Prime Minister was as much an
imperialist as Churchill, but more pragmatic, prepared to see the writing on
the wall.)
This will come as a shock to most Indians brought
up to believe that the Congress movement driven by the ‘spiritual force’ of Mahatma
Gandhi forced the British to leave India. But both evidence and the logic of
history are against this beautiful but childish fantasy. It was the fear of
mutiny by the Indian armed forces – and not any ‘spiritual force’ – that forced
the issue of freedom.
The British saw that the sooner they left the
better for themselves, for, at the end of the war, India had some three million
men under arms. One would have to be extraordinarily dense – which the British
were not – to fail to see the writing on the wall. So, as the great historian
R.C. Majumdar wrote, Subash Bose with his INA campaigns probably contributed
more to Indian independence than Gandhi, Nehru and their movements. The result
of Subash Chandra Bose’s activities was the rise of the nationalist spirit in
the Indian Armed Forces. This is the reason why Nehru, after he became Prime
Minister, did everything possible to turn Bose into a non-person. He wanted no
rivals. This brings us to Mahatma Gandhi and his ill-fated Nonviolent
Non-Cooperation Movement. Most Indians have been made to believe that it was
the first of Gandhi’s movements for India’s freedom. This is completely false.
The Non-Cooperation Movement was for the restoration of the Sultan of Turkey as
the Caliph. This was known as the Khilafat Movement, launched by Indian Muslims,
led by Maulanas Mohamad Ali and Shaukat Ali. In fact, Gandhi postponed Tilak’s
Swaraj Resolution by nearly ten years in order to join the Khilafat. (Lokamanya
Tilak had died in 1920 and Gandhi and the Ali Brothers launched the Khilafat in
1921.
Gandhi even diverted a substantial part of the
Tilak Swaraj Fund to the Khilafat. Indian history books omit the fact that the
sole purpose of the Non-Cooperation Movement was the restoration of the Sultan
of Turkey.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)