WHY I KILLED GANDHI?NATHURAM GODSE’S STATEMENT IN THE COURT

Born in a devotional Brahmin family, I instinctively came to revere Hindu religion, Hindu history and Hindu culture. I had, therefore, been intensely proud of Hinduism as a whole. As I grew up, I developed a tendency to free thinking unfettered by any superstitious allegiance to any isms, political or religious. That is why I worked actively for the eradication of untouchability and the caste system based on birth alone. I openly joined anti-caste movements and maintained that all Hindus were of equal status as to rights, social and religious and should be considered high or low on merit alone and not through the accident of birth in a particular caste or profession. I used publicly to take part in organized anti-caste dinners in which thousands of Hindus, Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, Chamars and Bhangis participated. We broke the caste rules and dined in the company of each other. I have read the speeches and writings of Dadabhai Nairoji, Vivekanand, Gokhale, Tilak, along with the books of ancient and modern history of India and some prominent countries like England, France, America and’ Russia. Moreover, I studied the tenets of Socialism and Marxism. But above all I studied very closely whatever Veer Savarkar and Gandhiji had written and spoken, as to my mind these two ideologies have contributed more to the moulding of the thought and action of the Indian people during the last thirty years or so, than any other single factor has done.

All this reading and thinking led me to believe it was my first duty to serve Hindudom and Hindus both as a patriot and as a world citizen. To secure the freedom and to safeguard the just interests of some thirty crores (300 million) of Hindus would automatically constitute the freedom and the well-being of all India, one fifth of human race. This conviction led me naturally to devote myself to the Hindu Sanghtanist ideology and programme, which alone, I came to believe, could win and preserve the national independence of Hindustan, my Motherland, and enable her to render true service to humanity as well.

Since the year 1920, that is, after the demise of Lokamanya Tilak, Gandhiji’s influence in the Congress first increased and then became supreme. His activities for public awakening were phenomenal in their intensity and were reinforced by the slogan of truth and non-violence, which he paraded ostentatiously before the country. No sensible or enlightened person could object to those slogans. In fact, there is nothing new or original in them. They are implicit in every constitutional public movement. But it is nothing but a mere dream if you imagine that the bulk of mankind is, or can ever become, capable of scrupulous adherence to these lofty principles in its normal life from day to day. In fact, honour, duty and love of one’s own kith and kin and country might often compel us to disregard non-violence and to use force. I could never conceive that an armed resistance to an aggression is unjust. I would consider it a religious and moral duty to resist and, if possible, to overpower such an enemy by use of force. [In the Ramayana] Rama killed Ravana in a tumultuous fight and relieved Sita. [In the Mahabharata], Krishna killed Kansa to end his wickedness; and Arjuna had to fight and slay quite a number of his friends and relations including the revered Bhishma because the latter was on the side of the aggressor. It is my firm belief that in dubbing Rama, Krishna and Arjuna as guilty of violence, the Mahatma betrayed a total ignorance of the springs of human action.

In more recent history, it was the heroic fight put up by Chhatrapati Shivaji that first checked and eventually destroyed the Muslim tyranny in India. It was absolutely essentially for Shivaji to overpower and kill an aggressive Afzal Khan, failing which he would have lost his own life. In condemning history’s towering warriors like Shivaji, Rana Pratap and Guru Gobind Singh as misguided patriots, Gandhiji has merely exposed his self-conceit. He was, paradoxical, as it may appear, a violent pacifist who brought untold calamities on the country in the name of truth and non-violence, while Rana Pratap, Shivaji and the Guru will remain enshrined in the hearts of their countrymen forever for the freedom they brought to them.

The accumulating provocation of thirty-two years, culminating in his last pro-Muslim fast, at last goaded me to the conclusion that the existence of Gandhi should be brought to an end immediately. Gandhi had done very well in South Africa to uphold the rights and well-being of the Indian community there. But when he finally returned to India he developed a subjective mentality under which he alone was to be the final judge of what was right or wrong. If the country wanted his leadership, it had to accept his infallibility; if it did not, he would stand aloof from the Congress and carry on his own way. Against such an attitude there can be no halfway house. Either Congress had to surrender its will to his and had to be content with playing second fiddle to all his eccentricity, whimsicality, metaphysics and primitive vision, or it had to carry on without him. He alone was the Judge of everyone and everything; he was the master brain guiding the civil disobedience movement; no other could know the technique of that movement. He alone knew when to begin and when to withdraw it. The movement might succeed or fail, it might bring untold disaster and political reverses but that could make no difference to the Mahatma’s infallibility. ‘A Satyagrahi can never fail’ was his formula for declaring his own infallibility and nobody except himself knew what a Satyagrahi is.

Thus, the Mahatma became the judge and jury in his own cause. These childish insanities and obstinacies, coupled with a most severe austerity of life, ceaseless work and lofty character made Gandhi formidable and irresistible. Many people thought that his politics were irrational but they had either to withdraw from the Congress or place their intelligence at his feet to do with, as he liked. In a position of such absolute irresponsibility, Gandhi was guilty of blunder after blunder, failure after failure, disaster after disaster.

Gandhi’s pro-Muslim policy is blatantly in his perverse attitude on the question of the national language of India. It is quite obvious that Hindi has the most prior claim to be accepted as the premier language. In the beginning of his career in India, Gandhi gave a great impetus to Hindi but as he found that the Muslims did not like it, he became a champion of what is called Hindustani. Everybody in India knows that there is no language called Hindustani; it has no grammar; it has no vocabulary. It is a mere dialect; it is spoken, but not written. It is a bastard tongue and crossbreed between Hindi and Urdu, and not even the Mahatma’s sophistry could make it popular. But in his desire to please the Muslims he insisted that Hindustani alone should be the national language of India. His blind followers, of course, supported him and the so-called hybrid language began to be used. The charm and purity of the Hindi language was to be prostituted to please the Muslims. All his experiments were at the expense of the Hindus.

From August 1946, onwards the private armies of the Muslim League began a massacre of the Hindus. The then Viceroy, Lord Wavell, though distressed at what was happening, would not use his powers under the Government of India Act of 1935 to prevent the rape, murder and arson. The Hindu blood began to flow from Bengal to Karachi with some retaliation by the Hindus. The Interim Government formed in September was sabotaged by its Muslim League member’s right from its inception, but the more they became disloyal and treasonable to the government of which they were a part, the greater was Gandhi’s infatuation for them. Lord Wavell had to resign as he could not bring about a settlement and he was succeeded by Lord Mountbatten. King Log was followed by King Stork.

The Congress, which had boasted of its nationalism and socialism, secretly accepted Pakistan literally at the point of the bayonet and abjectly surrendered to Jinnah. India was vivisected and one-third of the Indian Territory became foreign land to us from August 15, 1947. Lord Mountbatten came to be described in Congress circles as the greatest Viceroy and Governor-General this country ever had. The official date for handing over power was fixed for June 30, 1948, but Mountbatten with his ruthless surgery gave us a gift of vivisected India ten months in advance. This is what Gandhi had achieved after thirty years of undisputed dictatorship and this is what Congress party calls ‘freedom’ and ‘peaceful transfer of power’. The Hindu-Muslim unity bubble was finally burst and a theocratic state was established with the consent of Nehru and his crowd and they have called ‘freedom won by them with sacrifice’ – whose sacrifice? When top leaders of Congress, with the consent of Gandhi, divided and tore the country – which we consider a deity of worship – my mind was filled with direful anger.

One of the conditions imposed by Gandhi for his breaking of the fast unto death related to the mosques in Delhi occupied by the Hindu refugees. But when Hindus in Pakistan were subjected to violent attacks he did not so much as utter a single word to protest and censure the Pakistan Government or the Muslims concerned. Gandhi was shrewd enough to know that while undertaking a fast unto death, had he imposed for its break some condition on the Muslims in Pakistan, there would have been found hardly any Muslims who could have shown some grief if the fast had ended in his death. It was for this reason that he purposely avoided imposing any condition on the Muslims. He was fully aware of from the experience that Jinnah was not at all perturbed or influenced by his fast and the Muslim League hardly attached any value to the inner voice of Gandhi.

Gandhi is being referred to as the Father of the Nation. But if that is so, he had failed his paternal duty inasmuch as he has acted very treacherously to the nation by his consenting to the partitioning of it. I stoutly maintain that Gandhi has failed in his duty. He has proved to be the Father of Pakistan. His inner-voice, his spiritual power and his doctrine of non-violence of which so much is made of, all crumbled before Jinnah’s iron will and proved to be powerless.

Briefly speaking, I thought to myself and foresaw I shall be totally ruined, and the only thing I could expect from the people would be nothing but hatred and that I shall have lost all my honour, even more valuable than my life, if I were to kill Gandhiji. But at the same time I felt that the Indian politics in the absence of Gandhiji would surely be proved practical, able to retaliate, and would be powerful with armed forces. No doubt, my own future would be totally ruined, but the nation would be saved from the inroads of Pakistan. People may even call me and dub me as devoid of any sense or foolish, but the nation would be free to follow the course founded on the reason which I consider to be necessary for sound nation-building. After having fully considered the question, I took the final decision in the matter, but I did not speak about it to anyone whatsoever. I took courage in both my hands and I did fire the shots at Gandhiji on 30 January 1948, on the prayer-grounds of Birla House.

I do say that my shots were fired at the person whose policy and action had brought rack, ruin, and destruction to millions of Hindus. There was no legal machinery by which such an offender could be brought to book and for this reason, I fired those fatal shots.

I bear no ill will towards anyone individually but I do say that I had no respect for the present government owing to their policy, which was unfairly favourable towards the Muslims. But at the same time I could clearly see that the policy was entirely due to the presence of Gandhi. I have to say with great regret that Prime Minister Nehru quite forgets that his preachings and deeds are at times at variances with each other when he talks about India as a secular state in season and out of season, because it is significant to note that Nehru has played a leading role in the establishment of the theocratic state of Pakistan, and his job was made easier by Gandhi’s persistent policy of appeasement towards the Muslims.

I now stand before the court to accept the full share of my responsibility for what I have done and the judge would, of course, pass against me such orders of sentence as may be considered proper. But I would like to add that I do not desire any mercy to be shown to me, nor do I wish that anyone else should beg for mercy on my behalf. My confidence about the moral side of my action has not been shaken even by the criticism levelled against it on all sides. I have no doubt that honest writers of history will weigh my act and find the true value thereof some day in future.

-NATHURAM GODSE

WHO OWNS OUR MEDIA?

Ever wondered why our “SECULAR” media is so anti-Hindu but openly favours hypocritical pseudo-secularist congress,Christians missionaries,muslims and Marxists.

The answer lies in the ownership of our “INDIAN” media.It will shock you to the core of your heart.

Here are some of the facts about our GREAT “SECULAR” AND “IMPARTIAL” Media.

It is funded by Gospel of Charity in spain.It supports communists.

Recently it has developed a soft corner towards Pakistan because Musharraf has allowed only this channel to be aired in Pakistan.Burkha Haseeb dutt gets very warm welcome in Pakistan and she is making very frequent visits to Pakistan.

Prannoy Roy will forever be remembered in the annals of Indian journalism for his audacity to suggest Bharat Ratna to jehadi M F Hussain for painting Bharat Mata nude. Naturally, the Gujarati office of NDTV was ransacked and it forced our James Roy on the backfoot.

Nevertheless, his TV channel is there to shame India whenever the situation is right. His channel covered the Mumbai Taj terror activity when it should have been the TV’s official policy to allow the Army to do its work silently and effectively. He made it a public affair allowing the ISI-backed terrorists to kill more people. When a blogger objected to this silly coverage, he was made to shut up with threats from this giant media conglomerate.

NDTV Editors (Ms. Barkha Haseeb Dutt) had served legal notices to a number of bloggers, who allegedly had come down heavily on NDTV for “breaking every rule of ethical journalism in reporting the Mumbai mayhem.” through one of his blog posts. Many Indian Bloggers have expressed their sharp dissatisfaction towards NDTV and Barkha Dutt for attempting to censor their right to Freedom of speech by way of such legal actions. NDTV’s reports on Naxalite Violence in Dantewada have been found to be factually incorrect and naive by some observers.-wikipedia

A recurring criticism is that NDTV is propaganda machine of Indian National Congress with its close links to senior party members,and that it is anti-Hindu. It often publishes news against the principle opposition party the BJP and Hindu organisations such as the RSS. It is alleged that NDTV is also funded by Christian missionary organisations-wikepedia

 Gujarat riots which took place in 2002 where Hindus were burnt alive. Rajdeep Sardesai and Barkha Haseeb Dutt were working for NDTV at that time got around 5 Million Dollars from Saudi Arabia to cover only Muslim victims, which they did very faithfully… Not a single Hindu family was interviewed or shown on TV whose near and dear ones had been burnt alive, it is reported.

 BurkhaHaseeb Dutt,not Barkha Dutt for the simple reason that she defended a Muslim woman’s so-called right to wear burqah in Colllege.  We call her Hitler for threatening a poor blogger Abhijit Kunte with dire consequences when he pointed out her “shoddy” journalism while she covered the Mumbai Taj terrorist strikes as if it was an IPL tournament.The Indian Navy Chief Admiral Suresh Mehta had insinuated that she may have compromised the security of the troops by giving away troop locations

She stage manages talks in such a manner that pro-Hindu speakers are shown in poor light. When somebody from the VHP or BJP steps in to defend Hinduism, she interrupts them and gives the chance to Mullahs/evangelists/commies to speak out against them. When the Hindu defenders present a valid point, a break is ordered.  Questions are framed in such a manner as to insinuate that Hindus are terrorists. Besides, she does not interview.  She interrogates.  She does not allow the interviewee to talk.  She does a filibuster.

Then she goes on some shrill rhetoric’s to appease peaceful Muslim friend.Recently she wrote a piece stating that December 6 was a sad day for India. Now who is Burkah Haseeb Dutt to speak for India.  .

Burkha Haseeb Dutt is a sample case of anti-Hindu television anchors in.

If you think India Today is a magazine for India and Indians, you can’t be more than mistaken.  Today, it is just a lifestyle magazine jumping into the pseudosecular bandwagon.

It used to be the only national weekly who supported BJP but has now bought by NDTV.Since then the tone of the magazine has changed drastically and turned into Hindu bashing.

Times group is owned by Bennet & Coleman.”World Christian Council”does 80% of the funding,and an Englishman and an Italian equally share balance of 20%

Al-Qaeda has no need for PR in India.  It has Times of India to do the cover-up. Its former Editor Dileep Padgaonkar had said that TOI Editor’s post is powerful next only after PM’s post.  He was kicked out soon after.

The Italian Robertio Mindo.who has 10% stake in Times Group is a close relative of ANTONIO MIONO alias SONIA GANDHI.

This is 100% funded by SOUTHERN BAPTIST CHURCH with branches in all over the world with HQ in US.The church annually allocates $800 million for promotion of its channels. Its Indian head is Rajdeep Sardesai and his wife Sagrika Ghosh.

Rajdeep Sardesai is a Brahmin-turned-brahmin-baiter. Born to a Gaud Saraswat Brahmin (cricketer Dilip Sardesai) and a Sociology professor, he turned to journalism in the year 1994 after education in Oxford.

When in NDTV, he focussed on Gujarat riots as if Hindus were criminals — forgetting the Isamic terrorism of Godhra.He tried his best to project Narendra Modi as a criminal and even lobbied with other journos to get Modi extradicted for crimes of genocide. It is another matter that the US/Europe axis is fully aware of Islamic terrorism and care two hoots for such a silly proposal.

Rajdeep later left NDTV following a tussle with Roy over poor salary (he was supposed to be the fifth highest-paid NDTV guy) and was piqued when the report was made public.

Rajdeep now heads CNN-IBN and is still high on his “anti-Hindu” character. His face went pink with embarassment when Modi scored massive win in Gujarat.

It was Bharat’s victory over India and let us hope that Bharat wins forever after all you can’t stop an idea whose time has come.

.

Conversion is in their core.No wonder CNN-IBN supports Christian conversions.

It is run by an Australian,who is supported by St.Peters Pontificial Church Melbourn.

Rupert Murdoch is an international media magnate who has his presence in India through STAR Plus.

This channel will do anything for TRP ratings including spoiling relationship between spouses.

Sach ka Saamna — in the guise of confronting truth — encourages couples to speak about their extra-marital affairs. It  made several wonder whether it is Sex ka Saamna.

This channel claims its monopoly on truth with its farcical polygraphy machine.

This channel is another conversion sympathizer.

This has been recently taken over by Joshua Society based in BERNE,Switzerland.

N.RAM -A card-holding member of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) who had been to China and occupied-Tibet at least fifteen times in junkets mostly arranged by the Chinese Embassy in New Delhi, N Ram is also the mastermind behind ‘India-China Association of Journalists’, an embassy-sponsored organisation specialising in arranging pleasure trips for Indian journalists. This new strategy of Beijing has already won the hearts of some of our best journalists.

Ironically it is only when the Tamil Nadu Police entered The Hindu office premises in Chennai, N Ram who calls the killing of a million Tibetans by China’s occupying forces ‘a myth’, got enlightened about freedom.

Can there be any bigger deception?They are doing anti-Hindu activities under the name “THE HINDU”

It is owned by a Saudi Arabian Company with its Chief Editor M.J.AKBAR

It is the same Saudi Arabia which is the biggest supporter of terrorism and exporter of Wahhbism which believes in Islamic supremacy and suppression of non-Muslims.

M J Akbar is the modern day equivalent of Mohammed Ali Jinnah. He is liberal when inebriated.  When sober, he chantsAllah-o-Akbar.His skewed analysis of the Hindu-Muslim situation in India is not just distorted.  It is atrocious. In his historic quote, he says that 9 out of 10 Hindus are peaceful and tolerant or else Muslims would have been wiped out in India.

Now let us examine his quote further.  If one out of ten Hindu is cruel and intolerant, that means there are atleast 8 crore intolerant Hindus in India.In our analysis, if there were 8 crore intolerant Hindus in India, there would have been an ethnic cleansing of Muslims in India.

Akbar never dares to speak about the “jehadi” side of Islam (convert or kill.He obfuscates and dithers on the mode of Islam as a religion of peace and brotherhood.As for his personal life, it is somewhat Jinnah-like-Un-Islamic when it comes to a passion for scotch.As far as his journalism is concerned, the less said the better.

He reduced Indian journalism to bare bellies of urban belles.His Asian Age was nothing but pornography of Indian Journalism.Now you need not buy porn literature.  All you need to do is buy Indian daily newspapers.  Three cheers to MJ for that.

 

Owned by Birla Group, but hands have changed since Shobana Bhartiya took over. Presently it is working in Collaboration with Times Group

Vinod Sharma  man who claims he is a senior journalist, is nothing but one of the biggest tattoos of the congress party. He is a secular idiot,who lacks even the intelligence to understand  the points he is trying to make (that about justice being there for everyone and not selective) applies solely or at least primarily to the congress party which is massively guilty of this. So, he  doesn’t even realize the people he is trying to defend (congress leaders) are the ones truly guilty of what he is trying to accuse others of.Most shameless person,who wish to be awarded with entry in Rajyasabha by congress. 

And the real sad part is that such people are considered good 
journalist in our country. We have reached such a pathetic state that 
we consider such useless idiots who can’t even understand their own 
arguments good newspersons. What a sorry state of affairs. No wonder 
Kalmadi and A. RAJA and others have made thousands of crores and tomorrow someone else will make thousands of crores and if these corrupt people happen to be of the congress party people like Vinod Sharma will defend them and divert the attention of the public from the real issues.

Divided into two groups. The Indian Express and the New Indian Express (southern edition) ACTS Christian Ministries have major stake in the Indian Express and latter is still with the Indian counterpart.

Regarding Shekhar Gupta — the Chief Editor — of Indian Express, it is less said the better.

 He is a lobbyist with a difference.  Does the regular pseudo-secular somersaults with elan.

 Joined Indian Express as a Correspondent and went on to be its chief — as its owners seemed to be a divided house.

 This man is well-known for his Nelson news and views.  Sees only one sides of things.  That is the quality that you need to posses in order be a journalist in India.

ASK YOURSELF

People like Rajdeep Sardesai,Burkah Dutt and Prannoy Roy are anti-Indian agents in disguise.They are worse than JIHADIS.

Where do you think their loyalty lies? Why will they bite the hand that feeds them? Do they have the guts and motive to present a fair viewpoint.

YOU DECIDE

Decide for yourself if the owners of the Indian media are here for our betterment and enlghtment or brainwashing, poisoning and destruction of our culture,religion and heritage.

 Is this the media of the common man of the India or is it just propaganda machinery of Christian missionaries and ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALIST

Our poor friends in Indian Media have fallen on such a bad time that they have to collaborate, distort and create nonsensical drama to improve their TRP ratings.

Just before Gujarat election, Aaj Tak went on full blast.Deepak Chaurasia — ace anchor — said it was a scoop of the century. But it fell flat in no time as all they could have was drunk TV footage.

Narendra Modi scripted the win of the century.

The Indian media is bent on maligning Hindus.  It is projecting terror on peaceful Hindus while condoning Islamic terrorism and hailing Islam as a religion of peace and brotherhood.  While the media ignores our friendly neighborhood Islamic terrorists, it goes out of its way to indict Sadhvi Pragya and Swami ASEEMANAND.

We now have to understand why the media villifies the peaceful Hindus and cowers before Islamic barbarians.

Vinod Mehta was the Editor of a girlie-magazine called Debonair with a bare-chested woman as the centre spread always.One day, this Mehta did not find anybody to do his bare-chested centre-spread.

So he told his North-East girlfriend to bare her chest for the Debonaire centre spread.Such is the stuff of which our Outlook Editor is made of — the ideal Sri Ram of pseudosecular journalism in India.As usual, he lends his voice to Kashmir separatism, anti-Hinduism and porn legacies of LGBT and incest.Useless character, he calls himself a fugitive Editor. In a single word, he is a man who deserves to be kicked where it hurts most.

He is most famous for lending his magazine to anti-India causes.

He is quite consistent in his pro-minority approach and has openly admitted his pseudosecular character.

On the flip-side, his magazine is quite an attractive and informative read. But you can’t take it seriously. Fashion, lifestyle and prostitution beats are very well covered.

However, when it comes to a serious analysis, it is nothing but a dud.

Let me just give two examples of recent times.  When The Hindu published the cartoon of Prophet Mohammed, Muslims blew a short fuse and made the newspaper apologize.  However, the same apology is not forthcoming when M F Hussain paints Bharat Mata nude.  It is as if Islamic sentiments are Kosher and Hindu sentiments can be played away as “Freedom of Expression” and “artistic licence”.

Take the famous case of Godhra and Gujarat riots.  The media highlights Gujarat riots (Hindu retaliation), while it ignores Godhra and even tries to justify it by cooking a story that Ram Sewaks had tried to the abduct the daughter of an Islamic vendor.

From the very pattern of lies, it is obvious that the media magnifies Hindu retaliatory violence and tries to justify unprovoked unlateral Islamic terror.

That is the thought pattern of the cowardly Indian media.  The more you try to appease them, the more they will malign you.  Kick them where it hurts most and they will fall in place.  And then they will say, “Hinduism is a noble religion”.  That is possible only when the Hindus kick them where it hurts most. So the logic is clear.  Be Islamic when it comes to confronting the media.  They will come out with a front-page apology.  If you try to clarify things with them, they will shame you more. Even a Foreign Correspondent of a respectable foreign media uttered the same.  ”It is very easy to deal with Indian media.  Just break a few bones in their body and they will come begging before you”. What being said  is not provactory but practical.  In Gujarat, the NDTV office was damaged.  In Maharashtra, the Shiva Sena men ransacked IBN office.  Now they will go slow in condemning “Hindu terror”.  If you had kicked these media persons with real gusto, they would have by now started proclaiming that Hinduism is a real religion of peace and brotherhood indeed .So three cheers to our cowardly Indian media.  They are paper tigers only..