RE:Lessons from history
by GS on Jun 24, 2007 12:35 PM Permalink
Shaukat you are right! One more thing to be pin-pointed is though people think Jinnah was wrong, but he was not! Surprising right? But if you study the History deeply you will come to know that he was a good follower of GITA. Nehru played the bloody politics as he was sure that if Jinnah becomes the PM then he will have to take away his fate for the next janam! It was Nehru and not Jinnah, who was responsible for division! Jinnah was made a scape-goat just because he was talking openly but he never had the intention of division. His words were misinterpreted and Nehru was the man of exploitation. Jinnah had just one daughter who was married to a Parsi, so family-wise he had no interest in religion. I know Hindus hate Jinnah but the moment they come to know of the reality they will actually come to know who was responsible for Division. Nehru was the one and Gandhi the second! Gandhi went by the words of Nehru. Nehru by no stretch of imagination was as good as Vallabhbhai Patel, then why was the later not offered the PM post? Because Nehru was the main culprit. He was not interested in running the country, he was interested in his own selfish motives. If possible, I would like to have your email addresses so that I can send you some information about Nehru and his family! With all the best wishes to all the readers, I would like to once again state that I do not believe in spreading hatred. My words were only to bring the reality to light. Warm regards ...
RE:Lessons from history
by Vishwamitra Singh on Jun 24, 2007 12:55 PM Permalink
could you please send the material to me at vishwamitrasingh@rediffmail.com
RE:Lessons from history
by Vinay Gupta on Jun 24, 2007 12:41 PM Permalink
GS, your remarks about Nhru are 100% correct. In fact Gandhi told Patel that if nehru is not made PM at this point of time then he will break the congrss. Whole congress was in favour of Patel otherwise
RE:Lessons from history
by Vinay Gupta on Jun 24, 2007 12:32 PM Permalink
Lesson from the historyis differnt than what you have said. It was not the muslim of Punjab but Muslims of UP and Bihar who suported muslim League in 1947. If you read Abdul Kalam book "India wins freedom" then you come to know that Kalam was opposing the partition bcoz as per him partion shall make muslims very weak in Indian subcontinent.
With undivided India their clout in the policy making shall be enormous. He has given the calculation in great deatil as o how many seat in assembly can be won by muslim and in how many they will have the final say!
So basicaly for muslims all the caculation was politically motivated . None was driven with the nationalistic ferver.
( please read "India wins freedom") So lesson is " donot carried away by sophism and read the history carfully and donot repeat the mistakes
