The hypocrisy of intellectually and ideologically debauched Congressmen and the degenerate Congress party can be clearly seen in the disgraceful statement issued by the Party spokesman Abhishek Singhvi who has fully endorsed Union HRD Minister Arjun Singh's views to the effect that the direction issued by his Ministry to educational institutions on recitation of 'Vande Mataram' in educational institutions is not mandatory but 'voluntary in nature' and any community is free to recite it or not. Abhishek Singhvi has declared: 'Congress party and the country is proud of the national song 'Vande Mataram' which had electrified our freedom fighters and who made umpteen sacrifices....Even then if a community or group feels otherwise, they are free to recite it or not. We agree with the Union Minister Arjun Singh in this regard'.

In order to put an end to the controversy over a central directive for the recitation of the Vande Mataram song in schools on 7 September 2006, Arjun Singh said on Sunday while addressing a minority academic institution in Varanasi that it was not mandatory. According to him, the recitation of the song is aimed at paying tributes to freedom fighters and martyrs. Arjun Singh is talking in multiple voices. It is clear from his declared views that singing our sacred National Song of Vande Mataram is optional, voluntary and non-mandatory.

The problems we are facing from some of the leading anti-national Muslims today started with Gandhiji's unconditional support for the Khilafat Movement in 1920-21. Achyuth Patwardhan, one of the Socialist stalwarts in the Congress, has given a remarkably candid and self critical analysis of the Congress Party vis-a-vis Khilafat: 'It is, however, useful to recognize our share of this error of misdirection. To begin with, I am convinced that looking back upon the course of development of the freedom movement, THE 'HIMALAYAN ERROR' of Gandhiji's leadership was the support he extended on behalf of the Congress and the Indian people to the Khilafat Movement at the end of the World War I. This has proved to be a disastrous error which has brought in its wake a series of harmful consequences. On merits, it was a thoroughly reactionary step. The Khilafat was totally unworthy of support of the Progressive Muslims. Kemel Pasha established this solid fact by abolition of the Khilafat. The abolition of the Khilafat was widely welcomed by enlightened Muslim opinion the world over and Kemel was an undoubted hero of all young Muslims straining against Imperialist domination. But apart from the fact that Khilafat was an unworthy reactionary cause, Mahatma Gandhi had to align himself with a sectarian revivalist Muslim Leadership of clerics and maulvis. He was thus unwittingly responsible for jettisoning sane, secular, modernist leadership among the Muslims of India and foisting upon the Indian Muslims a theocratic orthodoxy of the Maulvis.

Maulana Mohammed Ali's speeches read today appear strangely incoherent and out of tune with the spirit of secular political freedom. The Congress Movement which released the forces of religious liberalism and reform among the Hindus, and evoked a rational scientific outlook, placed the Muslims of India under the spell of orthodoxy and religious superstition by their support to the Khilafat leadership. Rationalist leaders like Jinnah were rebuffed by this attitude of Congress and Gandhi. This is the background of the psychological rift between Congress and the Muslim League'.
Dr Anne Besant another Congress President also spoke about the folly of the Congress Khilafat Policy when she said: 'Since the Khilafat agitation, things have changed and it has been one of the many injuries inflicted on India by the encouragement of the Khilafat crusade, that the inner Muslim feeling of hatred against 'unbelievers' has sprung up, naked and unashamed, as in years gone by'.

Gopalakrishna Gokhale, another stalwart Congress leader said: 'The seven crores of Muslims here have become more or less hostile to our national aspirations'.

Many great Hindu leaders of the time like Swami Shraddhananda were greatly perturbed by Mahatma Gandhi's blind and foolish support for violent Muslim intransigence. Men like Ali Brothers, with known Pan-Islamic loyalty, were repeatedly proclaiming on the public platform from 1921 to 24 that in the event of the British either out of sheer exhaustion or disgust, the integrity of India could be safeguarded only by the 'compassionate' Muslims with their spiritual belief in International brotherhood. For, they alone could secure the sympathy and support of their trustworthy co-religionists residing beyond the North-Western border. It was in accordance with this conviction and strategy that Muslim leaders including those in the Congress were clamouring for greater recruitment of the hilly people of North-Western Province to the Indian army. All the top ranking Hindu leaders of that time like C.R. Das, Lala Lajpat Rai and Surendranath Banerjee saw the mortal danger that lay ahead in this dastardly anti-national plan of the Muslims. Lala Lajpat Rai wrote a prophetic letter to C R Das in 1924: 'I am not afraid of seven crores of Muslims of Hindustan but I think the seven crores of Hindustan plus the armed marauders of Afghanistan, Central Asia, Arabia, Mesopotamia and Turkey will be irresistible. I do honestly and sincerely believe in the necessity or desirability of Hindu-Muslim Unity. I am also fully prepared to trust the Muslim leaders, but what about the injunctions of the Quran and the Hadis? The Muslim leaders cannot override them. Are we then doomed? I hope not. I hope your learned mind and wise head will find some way out of this difficulty.'

A terrible and gruesome fallout of the disastrous Khilafat experiment of Mahatma Gandhi was the Moplah Rebellion in Malabar District in 1921. According to the Report of the ENQUIRY COMMITTEE OF SERVANTS OF INDIA SOCIETY, the number of Hindus murdered by Moplah Muslims was 1500, the number of Hindus forcibly converted 20,000 and the value of property looted about Rs three crore. When the national and local leaders appealed to the virulently anti-Hindu Moplah Muslims in the name of Mahatma Gandhi to follow the ways of peace and non-violence, they replied bluntly with Islamic fervor: 'GANDHI IS A KAFIR, HOW CAN HE BE OUR LEADER?' Dr Anne Besant declared: 'The Moplah Muslim marauders murdered and plundered abundantly, killed or drove away all Hindus who would not apostatize. Somewhere about 100,000 people were driven from their homes with nothing but the clothes they had on, stripped of everything'. She also accused all the Khilafat religious preachers for all this terrible atrocities. J Campbell, chief of the Intelligence Department, Government of India, held the Khilafat leaders squarely responsible for inciting racial hatred resulting in Moplah carnage.

Despite the known magnitude of atrocities committed by the Muslim marauders during Moplah rebellion, the Congress Working Committee passed the following resolution: 'Whilst, however, condemning violence on the part of the Moplahs, the Working Committee desires it to be known that evidence in its possession shows that provocation beyond endurance was given to the Moplahs and that the reports published by and on behalf of the Government have given a one-sided and highly exaggerated account of the wrongs done by the Moplahs'. The Congress resolution put the number of conversions at just three as against 20,000 arrived at by the Enquiry Committee of the Servants of India Society of which Rt Hon Srinivasa Shastri was the President at that time. The Congress Party today also lives and functions in a self-chosen cave of demented pseudo-secular delusion!!!
How did the Muslim Leaders of the time respond to these over generous gestures of Congress Working Committee and 'MAHA KAFIR' Mahatma Gandhi? Hakim Hajmal Khan, the Congress President of the 1921 Session at Ahemdabad, while presiding over the Khilafat Conference in the same town, came out with this brazen declaration, with Gandhiji and all other kafirs sitting by his side on the dias, about the glorious future awaiting the Pan-Islamic Empire: 'India on the one side and Asia Minor on the other are but two extreme links on a chain of future Islamic Federation, which are gradually but surely joining together all intermediate States in one great system'.

The eruption of Muslim communal frenzy in the form of Moplah uprising in Malabar and other riots all over the country played a key role in removing the blinkers from the eyes of many Hindu leaders in 1921. Deshbandhu Chittaranjan Das (1870-1925), President of the Gaya session in 1922 declared with conviction: 'Hindu Muslim Unity has ceased to be a pious dream. It has now become an impossibility'.

Rabindranath Tagore and CR Das were great friends. In 1924, Tagore's genuine fears about the divided loyalty of Muslims appeared in Times of India (18-4-1924): 'A very important factor which is making it almost impossible for Hindu-Muslim unity to become an accomplished fact is that the Muslims cannot confine their patriotism to any one country. I had frankly asked many Muslims whether, in the event of any Mohammedan power invading India, they would stand side by side with their Hindu neighbors to defend their common motherland, I was not satisfied with the reply I got from them. I can definitely state that such men as Mr. Mohammed Ali have declared that under no circumstances is it permissible for any Mohammden whatever be his country to stand against any Mohammadan'. Tagore was yet another superstitious KAFIR.

The Congress today is repeating the tragedy of Mahatma Gandhi and the political perfidy of the Congress Working Committee of 1921 by committing the same 'HIMALAYAN BLUNDER' of extending full support to compassionate and ever-gracious Muslims like Shahi Imam of Delhi's Jama Masjid Syed Ahmed Bukhari who are hell-bent on converting the whole of India into a Pan- Islamic Republic unlike the so-called 'secular' Jinnah who only wanted a few bits of India to be converted into Pakistan.    

– Continued

Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4