Indo-UK News and Discussion - April 2013

[Kashi]

Apparently ST's speech got covered in the PeePeeSee. Please to read through comment section for daily dose of humour.

The contents of this article must be archived and put as a sticky somewhere on BRF- at least on the first page of the Indo-UK thread ala the STFU thread..

An apt summary of the horrors of British subjugation of India.

Indian economy

At the beginning of the 18th Century, India's share of the world economy was 23%, as large as all of Europe put together. By the time the British departed India, it had dropped to less than 4%.

The reason was simple: India was governed for the benefit of Britain. Britain's rise for 200 years was financed by its depredations in India.

By the end of the 19th Century, India was Britain's biggest cash-cow, the world's biggest purchaser of British exports and the source of highly paid employment for British civil servants - all at India's own expense. We literally paid for our own oppression.

De-industrialisation of India

Britain's Industrial Revolution was built on the de-industrialisation of India - the destruction of Indian textiles and their replacement by manufacturing in England, using Indian raw material and exporting the finished products back to India and the rest of the world.

The handloom weavers of Bengal had produced and exported some of the world's most desirable fabrics, especially cheap but fine muslins, some light as "woven air".

Britain's response was to cut off the thumbs of Bengali weavers, break their looms and impose duties and tariffs on Indian cloth, while flooding India and the world with cheaper fabric from the new satanic steam mills of Britain.

Weavers became beggars, manufacturing collapsed; the population of Dhaka, which was once the great centre of muslin production, fell by 90%.

So instead of a great exporter of finished products, India became an importer of British ones, while its share of world exports fell from 27% to 2%.

'Clive of India'

Colonialists like Robert Clive bought their "rotten boroughs" in England with the proceeds of their loot in India (loot, by the way, was a Hindi word they took into their dictionaries as well as their habits), while publicly marvelling at their own self-restraint in not stealing even more than they did.

And the British had the gall to call him "Clive of India", as if he belonged to the country, when all he really did was to ensure that much of the country belonged to him.

Bengal famine

As Britain ruthlessly exploited India, between 15 and 29 million Indians died tragically unnecessary deaths from starvation.
Four million Bengalis died in the Great Bengal Famine of 1943

The last large-scale famine to take place in India was under British rule; none has taken place since, since free democracies don't let their people starve to death.

Some four million Bengalis died in the Great Bengal Famine of 1943 after Winston Churchill deliberately ordered the diversion of food from starving Indian civilians to well-supplied British soldiers and European stockpiles.

"The starvation of anyway underfed Bengalis is less serious than that of sturdy Greeks," he argued.

When officers of conscience pointed out in a telegram to the prime minister the scale of the tragedy caused by his decisions, Mr Churchill's only response was to ask peevishly "Why hasn't Gandhi died yet?"

Myth of 'enlightened despotism'

British imperialism had long justified itself with the pretence that it was enlightened despotism, conducted for the benefit of the governed. Mr Churchill's inhumane conduct in 1943 gave the lie to this myth.

But it had been battered for two centuries already: British imperialism had triumphed not just by conquest and deception on a grand scale, but by blowing rebels to bits from the mouths of cannons, massacring unarmed protesters at Jallianwala Bagh and upholding iniquity through institutionalised racism.

No Indian in the colonial era was ever allowed to feel British; he was always a subject, never a citizen.

Indian railways

The construction of the Indian Railways is often pointed to as a benefit of British rule, ignoring the obvious fact that many countries have built railways without having to be colonised to do so.

Nor were the railways laid to serve the Indian public. They were intended to help the British get around, and above all to carry Indian raw materials to the ports to be shipped to Britain.

The movement of people was incidental except when it served colonial interests; no effort was made to ensure that supply matched demand for mass transport.

In fact the Indian Railways were a big British colonial scam.

British shareholders made absurd amounts of money by investing in the railways, where the government guaranteed extravagant returns on capital, paid for by Indian taxes.

Thanks to British rapacity, a mile of Indian railways cost double that of a mile in Canada and Australia.

It was a splendid racket for the British, who made all the profits, controlled the technology and supplied all the equipment, which meant once again that the benefits went out of India.

It was a scheme described at the time as "private enterprise at public risk". Private British enterprise, public Indian risk.

British aid

In recent years, even as the reparations debate has been growing louder, British politicians have in fact been wondering whether countries like India should even receive basic economic aid at the expense of the British taxpayer.

To begin with, the aid received is 0.4%, which is less than half of 1% of India's GDP.

British aid, which is far from the amounts a reparation debate would throw up, is only a fraction of India's fertiliser subsidy to farmers, which may be an appropriate metaphor for this argument.

Britons may see our love of cricket or the English language, or even parliamentary democracy, conjuring up memories of the Raj as in television series like Indian Summers, with Simla, and garden parties, and gentile Indians.

For many Indians, however, it is a history of loot, massacres, bloodshed, of the banishing of the last Mughal emperor on a bullock cart to Burma.

Indian soldiers in world wars

India contributed more soldiers to British forces fighting the First World War than Australia, Canada, New Zealand and South Africa combined.

Despite suffering recession, poverty and an influenza epidemic, India's contributions in cash and materiel amount to £8bn ($12bn) in today's money.

Two and a half million Indians also fought for British forces in the Second World War, by the end of which £1.25bn of Britain's total £3bn war debt was owed to India, which was merely the tip of the iceberg that was colonial exploitation.

It still hasn't been paid.

'Maybe Britain could kindly return the Koh-i-Noor diamond'

What's important is not the quantum of reparations that Britain should pay, but the principle of atonement.

Two hundred years of injustice cannot be compensated for with any specific amount.

I, for one, would be happy to accept a symbolic pound a year for the next two hundred years, as a token of apology.

And maybe Britain could kindly return the Koh-i-Noor diamond to the country it was taken from!

[Karthik S]

Good sir, MKG got us freedom and had a following numbering into 100s of millions (India's population at that time was ~of 330 million or so). Several bright college students, had they finished their studies, would have fit right into English invented babucracy, sacrificed their future and threw their lot with Mahatma and his dream of a free India. In the final analysis, our Pandit Nehru, whatever his personal shortcomings - ego, suuposed libido, elitism etc. - were, was a person who was good and had the best interests of India in his heart. He was first among equals - Rajaji, Sardar Patel, Babu Rajendra Prasad, S. Radhakrishnan, Maulana Azad from the treasury benches and the opposition leaders. They together put what was then a sorry third world impoverished former colony on a road of prosperity.

That honor in major part, if not entirely, should go to SCB and his troops sir. Try to google and look up in youtube, you'll find many proofs of that.

[Multatuli]

vayu tuvan ji, I do not think of Shashi Tharoor as "The knight in shining armor to the rescue of our fair Bharat mata" for a even a fraction of a second. My assessment of him is that he is motivated by personal ambition rather than service to Bharat Mata, as Sri Narendra Modi is.

But why bicker about the credentials of the messenger when the message is to the point and delivered in an effective manner? Aren't we shooting ourselves in the foot?

As for the whites in Europe/the West: I have no illusions about them, they are a totally fallen people, civilization to them means shaving one’s self every day (or wearing a tie), ethics means using after shave (after a shave), morality means using a perfume. That is the depth of their civilization!

Yes friends, that is what I have learned from reading the news, a bit of history and my personal interactions with Europeans.

And I really do understand that to create the image of being liberal, broad-minded, tolerant, self-critical, ethical and of course civilized, they (the white West), occasionally allow discussions on their colonial past (or their other criminal endeavors, like slavery) but always *within a certain bandwith*. And they may even allow a person like Shashi Tharoor to chastise them (tell them the truth). But why attack Shashi Tharoor in the nasty way you did when he really did agood job in his speech? It's totally counter productive, we truly are our own worst enemy at times.

Now look what this discussion has turned into. We question Shashi Tharoor, we fight petty battles among ourselves. This is my last response on this matter.

[Varoon Shekhar]

"But why bicker about the credentials of the messenger when the message is to the point and delivered in an effective manner?"

Well said! There is actually a vocal tribe( probably not very large, and including a few subcontinentals) that maintains that Britain was not making much money from India, at least in the 1930's and 1940's, if not earlier. Britain may even have been losing, and many of them were supposedly anxious to exit the colony.

Shashi Tharoor lays it bare just how valuable in an holistic sense, India was to the UK, as a market for its goods, as a source of raw materials, a supply of cheap labour, a source of employment to tens of thousands of Britishers, and of course, a supplier of hundreds of thousands of soldiers for wars near or far from Indian soil.

[Rahul M]

Consider that the none of the so-called father of nation or founders of the nation even articulated a fraction of what Tharoor did. The father of the nation MKG and first iconic PM of India actually recruited the troops for them; they got arranged for one million Indians to fight someone else, their slave masters war and got 100,000 killed. Did they even talk about the British-induced famines in India? Considering that, ST has done outstanding.

Good sir, MKG got us freedom ...........

did he ?

[Vayutuvan]

Yes, he did. Alternative names with supporting evidence would be edifying.

[SanjayC]

Yes, he did. Alternative names with supporting evidence would be edifying.

Please make a beginning by reading this: http://www.amazon.in/Gandhi-Sublime-Fai ... 8129100932

[Lisa]

How the UK was build ie how much foreign aid the UK got!

Britain's Forgotten Slave Owners

Profit and Loss
Britain's Forgotten Slave Owners Episode 1 of 2

"In 1834 Britain abolished slavery, a defining and celebrated moment in our national history. What has been largely forgotten is that abolition came at a price. The government of the day took the extraordinary step of compensating the slave owners for loss of their 'property', as Britain's slave owners were paid £17bn in today's money, whilst the slaves received nothing.

For nearly 200 years, the meticulous records that detail this story have lain in the archives virtually unexamined - until now. In an exclusive partnership with University College London, historian David Olusoga uncovers Britain's forgotten slave owners. Forensically examining the compensation records, he discovers the range of people who owned slaves and the scale of the slavery business.

What the records reveal is that the slave owners were not just the super-rich. They were widows, clergymen and shopkeepers - ordinary members of the middle-classes who exploited slave labour in distant lands. Yet many of them never looked a slave in the eye or experienced the brutal realities of plantation life.

In Barbados, David traces how Britain's slave economy emerged in the 17th century from just a few pioneering plantation owners. As David explores the systemic violence of slavery, in Jamaica he is introduced to some of the brutal tools used to terrorise the slaves and reads from the sadistic diaries of a notorious British slave owner. Elsewhere, on a visit to the spectacularly opulent Harewood House in Yorkshire, he glimpses how the slave owners' wealth seeped into every corner of Britain.

Finally, amongst the vast slave registers that record all 800,000 men, women and children in British hands at the point of abolition, David counts the tragic human cost of this chapter in our nation's history."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b062nqpd

[rgosain]

In recent months there has been some grit in the UK-India relationship thanks to the BBC-Udwin documentary and more importantly the Greenpeace lady prostituting and prostrating herself before the UK parliament for a tourist visa.

A decade ago MMS was singing paens to the empire at the same venue, so what has caused this complete turnaround by ST, after all what he has said is common knowledge to all on BR. What he as a former UN undersecretary and the front-runner for the Sec-Gen for the UN is implying to the Oxford Union is that the UK's position on the Security Council is predicated on its role as a colonial power 70 years ago and it is time to move on. ST was in favour of security council expansion, but in recent years has been suggesting that the UK and France should vacate their seats.

ST was the front-runner for the Sce-Gen position until the UK and the USA foisted Ban-Ki Moon as a spoiler candidate. I declare an interest here because I met him at the Commonwealth conference in Trinidad, where he had attended a function at the University in honour of Brian Lara, the finest batsman of the generation. As the drinks flowed he made a suggestion that Caribbean nations should link the issue of reparations with climate change after all they had all been locked out of the industrial revolution thanks to the fruits of colonial rule and slavery. According to him, India's cummulated CO2 emission are lower than that of the UK due to India being locked out of the industrial revolution. Had that not been the case, India's population would have peaked earlier, together with CO2 emissions

[member_28638]

The thieving Anglos

Whenever they invade another nation they often take everything of value. They take artefacts and often dismantle or destroy that nations culture. Sometimes they deliberately destroy all traces of that nation's existence. Is this not an act of pure evil?

Example:

In 1810, a total of 56 sculpted friezes, depicting gods, men and monsters, were removed from the Parthenon in Athens by British ambassador Lord Elgin.

They were brought to Britain and housed in the British Museum where they have remained.

Repeated calls for the return of the Elgin Marbles to their homeland have fallen on deaf ears, with the British Museum adamant they should remain in a place where they can be seen by international visitors.

To facilitate transport, the column capital of the Parthenon, the Erechtheum cornice and many metopes and slabs were sawn and sliced into smaller sections. One shipload of marbles on board the British brig Mentor was caught in a storm off Cape Matapan and sank near Kythera, but was salvaged at the Earl's expense; it took two years to bring them to the surface.

While the artifacts held in London, unlike those remaining on the Parthenon, have been saved from the hazards of pollution, neglect, and war, they have also been irrevocably damaged by the unauthorized "cleaning" methods employed by British Museum staff in the 1930s, who were dismissed when this was discovered. Acting under the erroneous belief that the marbles were originally bright white, the marbles were cleaned with copper tools and caustics, causing serious damage and altering the marbles' colouring. (The Pentelicon marble on which the carvings were made naturally acquires a tan colour similar to honey when exposed to air.) In addition, the process scraped away all traces of surface colouring that the marbles originally held.

Example:

Arabs want ancient artefacts back

The final statement from the conference urged all foreign governments to return Arab antiquities.

It said this applied in the first place to objects of particular symbolic significance, such as the Rosetta Stone in the British Museum and the more than 3,000-year old bust of Queen Nefertiti, now in Berlin.

The Rosetta Stone was crucial in the early deciphering of hieroglyphics. It was found in Egypt by the French in 1799, but later fell into British hands.

"The way the Rosetta Stone was taken from Egypt by France was illegal, and the way it ended up in the British museum was also illegal," said Mr Abou-Alfoutouh.

Ancient Egyptian sphinxes now kept by the Louvre in Paris
"We think it's no less important than the three pyramids of Egypt or the Sphinx."

Example:

Aboriginals in Australia have seized bark etchings while on loan from two British museums. The Dja Dja Wurrung tribe have accused the British museums of 'colonial arrogance'. But the British Museum and Royal Botanical Gardens have said they are committed to preserve collections for the benefit of the worldwide public and for future generations.

Example:

Looted Iraqi artefacts 'found in London'

Artefacts looted from the Baghdad museum following the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime have been recovered in London, police have confirmed for the first time.

The discovery of the items follows enduring images from the museum of smashed display cases, empty vaults and crying staff, when reporters gained access for the first time.

...

Other important archaeological sites were also ransacked across Iraq, historically known as Mesopotamia and seen as the birth place of modern civilisation.

Example:

Nigeria is calling for the Benin bronzes to be returned

The bronze plaques were seized by the British in 1897 when they took over the kingdom of Benin, now south-west Nigeria.

Most of the plaques sold by the museum have been bought by Nigeria, says a 1972 report which has only now been declassified.

The Nigerian Government has called several times for all the 700 bronze plaques to be returned.

[member_28638]

Ancient Monuments

Perhaps the least known aspect of the colonial legacy is the early British attitude towards India's historic monuments and the extend of vandalism that took place. Instead, there is this pervasive myth of the Britisher as an unbiased "protector of the nation's historic legacy".

R.Nath in his 'History of Decorative Art in Mughal Architecture' records that scores of gardens, tombs and palaces that once adorned the suburbs of Sikandra at Agra were sold out or auctioned. "Relics of the glorious age of the Mughals were either destroyed or converted beyond recognition..". "Out of 270 beautiful monuments which existed at Agra alone, before its capture by Lake in 1803, hardly 40 have survived".

In the same vein, David Carroll (in 'Taj Mahal') observes: " The forts in Agra and Delhi were commandeered at the beginning of the nineteenth century and turned into military garrisons. Marble reliefs were torn down, gardens were trampled, and lines of ugly barracks, still standing today, were installed in their stead. In the Delhi fort, the Hall of Public Audience was made into an arsenal and the arches of the outer colonnades were bricked over or replaced with rectangular wooden windows."

The Mughal fort at Allahabad (one of Akbar's favorite) experienced a fate far worse. Virtually nothing of architectural significance is to be seen in the barracks that now make up the fort. The Deccan fort at Ahmednagar was also converted into barracks. Now, only its outer walls can hint at its former magnificence.

Shockingly, even the Taj Mahal was not spared. David Carroll reports: "..By the nineteenth century, its grounds were a favorite trysting place for young Englishmen and their ladies. Open-air balls were held on the marble terrace in front of the main door, and there, beneath Shah Jahan"s lotus dome, brass bands um-pah-pahed and lords and ladies danced the quadrille. The minarets became a popular site for suicide leaps, and the mosques on either side of the Taj were rented out as bungalows to honeymooners. The gardens of the Taj were especially popular for open-air frolics....."

"At an earlier date, when picnic parties were held in the garden of the Taj, related Lord Curzon, a governor general in the early twentieth century, "it was not an uncommon thing for the revellers to arm themselves with hammer and chisel, with which they wiled away the afternoon by chipping out fragments of agate and carnelian from the cenotaphs of the Emperor and his lamented Queen." The Taj became a place where one could drink in private, and its parks were often strewn with the figures of inebriated British soldiers..."

Lord William Bentinck, (governor general of Bengal 1828-33, and later first governor general of all India), went so far as to announce plans to demolish the best Mogul monuments in Agra and Delhi and remove their marble facades. These were to be shipped to London, where they would be broken up and sold to members of the British aristocracy. Several of Shahjahan's pavilions in the Red Fort at Delhi were indeed stripped to the brick, and the marble was shipped off to England (part of this shipment included pieces for King George IV himself). Plans to dismantle the Taj Mahal were in place, and wrecking machinery was moved into the garden grounds. Just as the demolition work was to begin, news from London indicated that the first auction had not been a success, and that all further sales were cancelled -- it would not be worth the money to tear down the Taj Mahal.

Thus the Taj Mahal was spared, and so too, was the reputation of the British as "Protectors of India's Historic Legacy" ! That innumerable other monuments were destroyed, or left to rack and ruin is a story that has yet to get beyond the specialists in the field.

[Rahul M]

Yes, he did. Alternative names with supporting evidence would be edifying.

brits left because the one tool they relied upon to lord over millions of Indians with a handful of brits was having 2nd thoughts about loyalty to the brits.
I am talking about the british Indian military of course.

consider the following events :
1945 - brits emerged battered and weakened but on the winning side, requiring massive resources to rebuild.
never did the brits declare anytime post WWII that they were going to leave India. if you think that was due to change of policy of britain due to labour coming into power, well atlee became PM in 1945 itself, it wasn't until 1947 that he declared that they were going to leave India.

so what happened to precipitate that decision ? not the fatigue of WWII, as the gap between the 2 events is too much to posit one as a direct cause of the other. it's not that britain had truly given up colonialism either. for they continued to fight for colonialism well into the 50's (malaysia, kenya 'mau mau')

was it gandhi as the NCERT history books and sundry hagiographers tell us ??
gandhi's last major movement against the brits was in 1942, which was crushed quite effectively and had little or no remnants in 1947. for the five whole years preceding independence, the most important thing nehru had done in public life was defend INA soldiers under trial by the brits for treachery. the little fact is interesting because it is indicative of what really inspired the masses at the time, so much so that even nehru, a barrister in name only found it politically expedient to come out of his professional ennui to stand counsel for people who had flocked to the banner of his lifelong rival.

so what happened between end of WWII in 1945 and Feb' 1947 when they declared that they wanted to leave India ?

let me fill you in on a little event called https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Indian_Navy_mutiny

nor was it one event of sporadic violence, as the impression conveyed by the wiki article. there were more than 500 incidences of rebellion, big and small in the RIN, BIA and RIAF. enough to convince the brits that the 'reins' of the 'jewel in the british crown' was no longer under their control.
see for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Ind ... the_revolt

another article I found with some cursory googling http://www.tribuneindia.com/2006/200602 ... /main2.htm
is it any wonder, one year after that event, almost to the day, the brits declared their intention of leaving India ?

so what was gandhi and co's role in all this ? why, he convinced the brits that it was either him (his chosen men that is) -- the 'play by the book' rational people whom the brits could work with or the revolutionaries would eventually violently kick them out.
transferring power to the congress was an H&D saving exit which the brits gratefully grabbed with both hands.
gandhi did many great things, keeping the freedom movement together and giving it a national character, for instance. but 'give us indepence' he didn't.

for that we owe the completely irrational and fearless men and women who were influenced by Bose to bet their life and limb to oppose the brits' rule and successfully convinced the colonialists of the futility of trying to control India any more. gandhi and co' were simply folk who were at the right place at the right time to reap the benefits of that conviction in british colonial hearts.

[Yayavar]

Good sir, MKG got us freedom ...........

did he ?

It was a long process but he did lead the primary effort for the longest time. SCB and the INA may finally have tipped the Angrez hand.

Consider that the none of the so-called father of nation or founders of the nation even articulated a fraction of what Tharoor did. The father of the nation MKG and first iconic PM of India actually recruited the troops for them; they got arranged for one million Indians to fight someone else, their slave masters war and got 100,000 killed. Did they even talk about the British-induced famines in India? Considering that, ST has done outstanding.

Who did not recruit? Savarkar did too. The idea in WW1 was equality and greater say. By WW2 many felt independence was round the corner and one would need skilled military personnel (with war experience) in an independent India.

[Vayutuvan]

I think we are going a little OT here - topic is more suitable for Gandhi thread. One final thought - I never said others did not work toward gaining complete swaraj for bhArat. MKG way, SCB way, and mutiny AKA 1857 redux are not pair wise mutually exclusive. That said, most people (due to hindu/indic creed of non-violence of om shanti shanti shanti hi ?) threw their support behind MKG's methods of civil disobedience and satyAgraha. SCB did fail didn't he? So did Chandrashekhar Azad and Bhagat Singh. Gandhi's methods survived with a majority support.

While MKG had a soft corner for xtianity and islam, he was a hindu till his last breath of "hey ram". If some want to ascribed that to hagiography, then I withdraw from the discussion with regret. Otherwise let us take it to MKG thread. I will post as time permits.

[Yayavar]

Vayu Tuvan I agree with your earlier comment and with the above one. Totally agree with you that this is not hagiography at all though somehow it is the vocal opinion on MKG thread.

Added later: much of the criticism we read/discuss is post facto ... would folk criticise SCB for what happened to Forward Block post independence?

[SaraLax]

SPIEGEL Interview with Julian Assange: 'We Are Drowning in Material'

SPIEGEL: Do you see a potential blackmail situation?

Assange: They wouldn't leak transcripts of tapped phone calls as that would draw focus to the spying itself. The way intelligence services launder intercepts is to extract the facts expressed during conversations; for example to say to their contacts in the media, "I think you should look into this connection between this politician and that person, what they did on that particular day."

SPIEGEL: Have you got a documented example in which this sort of tactic has been used?

Assange: We haven't published one yet about a German politician, but there are examples of prominent Muslims in different countries about whom it was leaked that they had been browsing p0rn. Blackmail or representational destruction from intercepts is part of the repertoire used.

SPIEGEL: Who uses these methods?

Assange: The British GCHQ has its own department for such methods called JTRIG. They include blackmail, fabricating videos, fabricating SMS texts in bulk, even creating fake businesses with the same names as real businesses the United Kingdom wants to marginalize in some region of the world, and encouraging people to order from the fake business and selling them inferior products, so that the business gets a bad reputation. That sounds like a lunatic conspiracy theory, but it is concretely documented in the GCHQ material allegedly provided by Edward Snowden.

[Mukesh.Kumar]

I am talking about the british Indian military of course.

Ok, I am going to go out on a limb and posit an alternate theory taking off from RahulM's post. The real factors for the departure of the British were two, as following:

1) The British left India, as RahulM puts it only when they realized that Indian officers and ranks of the police and military could not be relied upon. Even at the height of British power in India, as a % of population, the Brits were miniscule. Their power was exercised and maintained through the support of a section of the population (military and police) who saw it beneficial to do so. Probably the isolation of the ICS and military ranks from the rest of the population, through exclusive housing facilities, better pay, etc, something that to a certain extent was followed even in Independent India. The ICS, IPS and the Indian military were aspirational jobs which attracted some of the best minds in the country. MKG and the Congress for majority of India, and later the Jinnah and his ML were suborned, knowingly or unknowingly as 'useful idiots' who could be used to relieve the pressure in the system from ordinary people's frustrations.

2) So what changed the basis of this symbiotic relationship?

To my mind the easiest analogy that comes to explain the phennomenon of India's best and brightest answering the call of the ICS, IPS and BIA is the same thing we witness when we see IITians and IIMers taking up roles with IBM's and PepsiCo's of the world (please do not misinterpret this as maligning someone, I myself am an example of a MBA grad who ended up joining a foreign MNC). The reasoning maybe something like this- These companies with their brands and technology are almost invincible, rather than work at Khadi Gramadyog- which is anyway unlikely to survive, let me join this place. At least my family interests and personal growth are taken care of. So maybe the reason that so many of our grandparents generation initially went to serve British interests. Thus, perceived British invincibility and secure career prospects served as the cornerstones of attractiveness to serving the British rule in India. Even today you ask any fauji, he first fights for his paltan and then for the country. Nationalism, per se was not the primary reason for this change in heart of the British civil and military officers.

2a) Proximate reason: Aura of British invincibility coming down- British invincibility, and with it the inviolability of a world ruled by the British, took a beating with the almost concurrent happening of two events. First with the success of alternative ideologies and narratives (Bolshevik revolution in Russia, Japan coming to promise, reverses in WWII) chipped away at the foundation of British invincibility and the British path being the only path. But this was not enough, because Indian soldiers had seen British failures in battle in WWI (Mesopotamia, Europe, Turkey, Egypt), in the Boer War, Sudan, etc. Why, even the Bengali poet Kazi Nazrul Islam had written about it. So what was the second possible reason? The second possible reason to my mind (and this can be a separate research objective) was increase in communication (explosion of radio, telegraph, newspapers, international travel) that made the difference in spreading the idea around WWII. These two reasons were the

2b) Ultimate reason: Realization in the Indian military that the deal from the British was not so good- The ultimate reason at the start was not Nationalism, but self interest. If it had been nationalism or a feeling of unfairness being done to others, then we would neither have Indian police officers complicit in the persecution of Khudiram Bose, Bhagat Singh, nor would we Jalianwala Bagh. People may have struggled with their conscience, but settled for a Faustian bargain thinking of family and with the thought "Alone what can I do?"

The true rise of nationalism in the majority of the Indian armed forces started from self interest. While fighting in Europe, N.Africa, S.E. Asia, Indian soldiers realized that they could do as much as their European officers. Yet they continued to be discriminated against in terms of pay and facilities ( Can't find the reference but I remember coming across an article that did have stats on Indian officers being paid 1/16th of their European/ ANZAC compatriots). The searching for reason as to why when the acid test of battle proved to them that they were in no way inferior, would have seeded the idea of discrimination based on nationalism.In fact a parallel analogy can be observed from the role played by erstwhile members of the KAR in Kenya for independence Factors which blew this tiny spark into a wildfire of nationalism were communication which spread the idea, a feeling of solidarity across the armed forces (no one was acting alone) and the exploits of the INA, who by their existence itself, had won a symbolic victory for the cause.

Thus, though spanned by a sense of individual interests being hurt/ pay discrimination against Indians in the armed forces, the fire of nationalism reached new levels. And it was when this new front opened against the war sapped British, that they realized that the optimal strategy would be to leave India at a time when they could still have a modicum of control via their puppets within the INC and Jinnah.

I know this is a very cynical way of looking at Independence, but only if we investigate all possibilities and question facts, will we have a true picture of our nation, which is the premise for building a strong nation. I would welcome inputs from other forumers if they have facts which either bolster or weaken the above line of reasoning.

[Philip]

Attaboy Modi! Super-M is de man to call a spade a spade!
Greece has called for Germany to pay WW2 war reps. It has paid for Israel's Dolphin class N-capable subs. Why can't Gt.Britain compensate India as well?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/
India's prime minister endorses call for Britain to pay reparations for colonial rule
Narendra Modi supports impassioned Shashi Tharoor’s call for colonial ruler Britain to make reparations to India

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... -rule.html

By Barney Henderson
24 Jul 2015

India’s prime minister has praised an opposition MP who made an impassioned appeal for Britain to pay reparations for 200 years of colonial rule.

Narendra Modi said Shashi Tharoor’s speech at the Oxford Union, which was posted online last week, “reflected the feelings of patriotic Indians” and that he said “the right things at the right place”.

Mr Tharoor, a Congress MP, writer and former UN under-secretary general, said that “Britain’s rise for 200 years was financed by its depredations in India”

“We paid for our own oppression,” he said “It’s a bit rich to impress, maim, kill, torture and repress and then celebrate democracy at the end of it.”

Shashi Tharoor’s makes his speech at the Oxford Union

“India's share of the world economy when Britain arrived on its shores was 23 per cent. By the time the British left it was down to below four per cent," Tharoor said in the May 28 debate.

"Why? Simply because India had been governed for the benefit of Britain.”

Mr Tharoor added that Indians had "literally paid for our own oppression," as by the end of the 19th century they were the world's biggest purchasers of British goods as well as providing employment for highly paid civil servants.

“In fact, Britain’s industrial revolution was actually premised upon the de-industrialisation of India,” he said.

• David Cameron: Britain caused many of the world's problems

The 15-minute speech has been viewed more than 1.5 million times on YouTube and was widely praised by the Indian press.

Mr Modi responded to the speech earlier this week, saying: "Tharoor's speech reflected the feelings of patriotic Indians on the issue and showed what impression one can leave with effective arguments by saying the right things at the right place."

Mr Tharoor, who has often been criticised by Congress president Sonia Gandhi for praising Mr Modi and his initiatives, also called on Britain to apologise for colonial rule.

"As far as I am concerned, the ability to acknowledge a wrong that has been done, to simply say sorry, will go a far, far, far longer way than some percentage of GDP in the form of aid," he said.

"What is required, it seems to me, is accepting the principle that reparations are owed."

Mr Modi, however, did not say whether he backed Mr Tharoor's demand for an apology. The British High Commission in Delhi declined to comment.
Mr Modi is due to visit Britain later this year. The dates of the trip have yet to be finalised.

Many in India want Britain to make amends for the wrongs committed during its colonial rule. *YOU BET!

David Cameron had to face severe criticism during his last trip to India for not apologising for the 1919 Jallianwala Bagh massacre in Amritsar, where hundreds of non-violent pro-independence protesters were shot dead at the behest of Colonel Reginald Dyer.

The Prime Minister expressed regret for the massacre during a visit to Amritsar in 2013 and laid a wreath at a memorial, but Indian critics said it was not enough.

[Philip]

"Lord Coke of Tarts"! The Lord chairman of the body that upholds standards of behaviour among peers!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... tutes.html

Lord Sewel 'filmed snorting cocaine with two prostitutes'

Career of Deputy Speaker of House of Lords appears in tatters amid claims he took Class A drug at sex party with £200-a-night prostitutes

Lord Sewel, Deputy Speaker of the Lords, and The Sun on Sunday front page
By Danny Boyle
26 Jul 2015

A married peer who oversees standards in the House of Lords has been pictured allegedly taking cocaine with two prostitutes.

The career of Lord Sewel, a Deputy Speaker of the Lords, appeared to be in tatters on Sunday amid claims he took the Class A drug at a sex party.

Baron John Sewel, an ex-ally of former Prime Minister Tony Blair, was said to have been caught on video telling the £200-a-night prostitutes that he wanted to "be led astray".

In footage published by The Sun on Sunday, the 69-year-old cross-bench peer is said to have stripped naked in front of the pair in his flat near Westminster last week.

Hunched over a table, the former Labour minister for Agriculture, Environment and Fisheries is pictured with a rolled-up bank note in his hand as he appears to snort white powder.

The peer, who is married to Lady Jennifer, is seen in the footage with his wedding ring on show.

One of the escorts is said to have told Lord Sewel: "You're such a party animal!", before he allegedly replied: "I know. Disgusting, isn't it?"

He is alleged to have snorted three lines of cocaine during the 45-minute session.
Lord Sewel speaking in the House of Lords

Lord Sewel, a former senior vice principal of Aberdeen University, is paid £84,525 as chairman of the Lords' Privileges and Conduct Committee - the body that upholds standards of behaviour among peers.

Earlier this month, he wrote a blog for the Huffington Post website in which he spoke about the House of Lords' new powers to banish peers who breach the code of conduct.

"The actions of a few damage our reputation," wrote Lord Sewel. "Scandals make good headlines.

"All Members now sign a declaration to obey the code and the seven principles of public life. The requirement that Members must always act on their personal honour has been reinforced.

"No system of regulation can be perfect, but the House of Lords has come a long way since 2010 in improving its regulation of its Members and punishing the small number who misbehave. Today's new sanctions strengthen the regime further."

Lord Sewel declined to comment to the Sun on Sunday about the footage said to have been filmed at his flat in Dolphin Square.

[Philip]

Lord Sewage of Coke---latest news.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 17678.html
Lord Sewel 'drugs' video: Peer pictured in orange bra and leather jacket calls David Cameron the 'most superficial Prime Minister ever'

A peer who was secretly filmed allegedly snorting drugs off a sex worker’s breasts has been urged to resign from the House of Lords.

Lord John Sewel, who was previously a minister in Tony Blair’s government, stepped down from his position as deputy speaker and Chairman of Committees after a video purporting to show him taking drugs with two women was published by the Sun on Sunday.

In further pictures published by the Sun on Monday, he is shown smoking a cigarette in an orange bra and a leather jacket.

It emerged that he also attacked the Prime Minister and the Mayor of London in the video calling David Cameron "the most superficial Prime Minister ever" and Boris Johnson "a public school a***hole".

But he didn't hold back his fire for members of his own party, calling the Labour leadership election "a f***ing mess."

He called Jeremy Corbyn a "useless...romantic left wing idiot" and said Andy Burnham was insincere and would "go whichever way the wind blows".

Yvetter Cooper and Liz Kendall were simarily branded "not strong" and "naive" respectively.

He even criticised his former boss and friend Tony Blair who he blames for Labour's current problems

He said the party went to war in Iraq because of "a love affair" between Blair and "awful" President George W. Bush.

He is now facing calls to retire from the chamber completely before being expelled.

Lord Sewel, who has resigned as Lords Deputy Speaker after The Sun on Sunday published video of him allegedly taking drugs with prostitutes, sources at the House of Lords said. Lord Sewel, who has resigned as Lords Deputy Speaker after The Sun on Sunday published video of him allegedly taking drugs with prostitutes, sources at the House of Lords said.

Baroness Frances D’Souza, the Lord Speaker, said in a statement that she found the married peer’s behaviour “shocking and unacceptable” and would refer it to the Metropolitan Police.

Lady D'Souza said: “Lord Sewel has this morning resigned as chairman of committees.

“The House of Lords will continue to uphold standards in public life and will not tolerate departure from these standards.

"These serious allegations will be referred to the House of Lords Commissioner for Standards and the Metropolitan Police for investigation as a matter of urgency."

Read More: • Lord Sewel quits as Deputy Speaker of House of Lords and faces police investigation following drugs and sex workers claims

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... party.html

Xcpts:

Lord Sewel of Gilcomstoun, 69, is said to have been recorded branding David Cameron "the most facile, superficial prime minister there's ever been" during the session with two £200-a-night prostitutes at his Dolphin Square flat in Westminster.

He reportedly said: "He just shoots from the hip. He is false. He makes one-off commitments and cannot deliver."

• Profile: Lord Sewel and the 'Sewel Motion'

He labelled Mayor of London Boris Johnson "a joke" and a "public school upper class twit", adding: "He plays well in London because they like a cheeky chappie.

"Can you present Boris Johnson in Preston, in Burnley, in Manchester? No, they just think he's an a---hole."

Lord Sewel, who was responsible for upholding standards in the Lords, also described Scottish MP Alex Salmond as a "silly, pompous prat", according to footage obtained by The Sun.

Asked by one of the women, whose voice is disguised, about former Labour prime minister Tony Blair's decision to go to war in Iraq, Lord Sewel said the former party leader did so "because he fell in love with George Bush".

He claimed Blair's wife, Cherie, was "obsessed with money".

A bottle of what appears to be vodka sits on the table while Lord Sewel drinks from a glass at various points during his conversation with the women.

The Sun also reports that Lord Sewel said the Labour leadership race was "in a f---ing mess".

Lord Sewel at the House of Lords

He is said to have called Jeremy Corbyn "useless" and "a romantic idiot" and claimed Andy Burnham has been "terribly contradictory" and "goes whichever way the wind is blowing".

He said Yvette Cooper was "OK but not strong" and appeared to forget Liz Kendall's name, describing her as "a Blair supporter who is just too naive".

The one politician Lord Sewel did say something positive about was George Osborne, the Chancellor, who he described as a "very, very consummate politician" who would one day be prime minister.

[jaladipc]

And a bunch of blood sucking brits believe that they shouldn't pay reparations to India for the colonial rule. Should we remind that, the life they are having today is due to the robbery from India?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... -rule.html

[svinayak]

[youtube]f7CW7S0zxv4&feature[/youtube]

First he needs to teach the same subject for Indians in India

He is trying the soften the crime and role of the Imperial Raj

He is just an agent of the British

[Rahul M]

gandhi 'gave' us independence ? Shri Ajit Doval disagrees.



what he says is virtually identical to what I wrote earlier in the thread.

start from 2:00

[Yayavar]

Rahul: that INA and the mutinies were the immediate trigger has not been disputed, just the implication that Gandhi was not a prime mover in the fight for independence.

[Philip]

It was the combination,"good cop,bad cop" that completely befuddled the British. Priding themselves about "fair play","justice",blah,blah,they couldn't deal with Gandhi and the non-violent freedom struggle on the one hand,and the revolt led by Netaji on the other. In the eyes of the world,they were tyrants for their violent treatment of non-violent Indians battling for freedom. As SS said in his clip,Netaji's INA also told them to pack up asap before they would be swept away in a tidal wave of bloodshed,that would electrify the other British colonies to follow suit!

We need to celebrate the INA and Netaji in far grander manner,as we are now celebrating the other wars of Independence,like '65,etc.A national museum should be dedicated to the INA and Netaji with as much fanfare and thanks from the nation,just as we've honoured Gandhi and Nehru with their memorials and museums.There should be Netaji/INA Foundation centre in every state capital.

[sampat]

waiting for Article on Aid to India and poor students in Britain.

Sugar Daddy, Sugar baby

[quote]Wanted: Rich man to give poor student better life. Must provide cash allowance, luxury holidays and designer goods in return for.....?
Emma Jane Kirby meets the young British women funding themselves through university by dating rich older men via websites. And asks - who is exploiting who?

She meets those who sees sugar dating as the perfect transactional relationship in which both parties get exactly what they want including those at some of England's top Russell Group Universities. People like the student who had two sugar daddies at University so that she could fully concentrate on her studies and achieve a First Class degree. Her Mum didn't just know about it, she approved, calling it a " great, great solution" to the family's financial problems.

And we meet Sugar Daddies, to get their point of view:

" I pay my current sugar baby £2,000 a month plus £1,000 shopping allowance. Do I want sex as part of my arrangement? Yes, of course.....Expectations go both ways."/quote]

[Philip]

Great Paedolhile empire! Paedo PM Heath?

"Bachelor Boy" Ted Heath has now been "outed" in this latest shocking disclosure of Britain's paedo past,where the very top figures in the establishment were blatantly protected by the police,etc.

http://www.independent.co.uk/
Former Prime Minister Edward Heath 'accused of child sex abuse' in the 1990s, admit police
Edward Heath 'child sex abuse claims': Full statement by the IPCC

The force is accused of not pursing a case against former Prime Minister Edward Heath
Caroline Mortimer
Monday 03 August 2015

The handling of a child sex abuse claim by Wiltshire Police involving former prime minister Sir Edward Heath is to be investigated by watchdogs.

The force is to be probed after allegations made by a retired senior officer were referred to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC):

This is the IPCC statement on the inquiry in full:

"The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) is to investigate allegations concerning Wiltshire Police’s handling of an alleged claim of child sexual abuse made in the 1990s.

"It is alleged that a criminal prosecution was not pursued, when a person threatened to expose that Sir Edward Heath may have been involved in offences concerning children. In addition to this allegation, the IPCC will examine whether Wiltshire Police subsequently took any steps to investigate these claims.

"The allegations were referred to the IPCC by Wiltshire Police following allegations made by a retired senior officer."

[Philip]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/cr ... 37142.html

Ted Heath child sex abuse claims: Footage shows Tory whip saying government could cover up scandals involving MPs and 'small boys'

Tim Fortescue said in 1995: 'We would do anything we could to help - for brownie points'
Adam Withnall
A senior whip in the government of the former Tory Prime Minister Sir Edward Heath boasted that he helped Westminster politicians at the time avoid being exposed for “scandals involving small boys”.

Tim Fortescue, a whip under Heath between 1970 and 1973, spoke to the BBC for a documentary entitled “Westminster’s Secret Service”, in which he said the Prime Minister’s Chief Whip kept a little black “dirt book” of MPs’ secrets to maintain political control.

Heath has this week been named as the subject of claims of child sex abuse, made in the 1990s, and the independent police watchdog has launched a probe in to Wiltshire Police’s handling of the accusations.

Fortescue, who died in 2008 aged 92, was a Tory MP for eight years until 1974. The footage of him speaking to the BBC in 1995 emerged last year as the Westminster child abuse scandal came to light.

Then, Fortescue said problems involving members “might be debt, or it might be a scandal involving small boys”.

“They would come and ask if we could help,” Fortescue said. “And if we could we did, and we would do everything we could, because we could store up brownie points.

“That’s one of the reasons we would get a chap out of trouble – because he’d then be ours forever-more.”

Watch the full footage below:(video clip)

Heath, who died 10 years ago, has been accused of raping a 12-year-old boy in his Mayfair flat in 1961. In an interview with The Mirror, the alleged victim, now in his 60s, claimed he was picked up while hitchhiking.

Wiltshire Police has appealed for potential victims of Sir Edward to come forward, after launching an inquiry on the back of allegations made by a retired senior officer.

An IPCC spokesman said it will investigate allegations concerning the force's handling of an "alleged claim of child sexual abuse made in the 1990s".

He added: "It is alleged that a criminal prosecution was not pursued when a person threatened to expose that Sir Edward Heath may have been involved in offences concerning children.

In a statement, the Sir Edward Heath Charitable Foundation has said: "We welcome the investigation by Wiltshire Police, which we wholeheartedly believe will clear Sir Edward's name and we will co-operate fully with the police in their inquiries."

[krithivas]

^^ Leslie Udwin as usual will be deeply researching some imagined abuse in a non existent country while the trash and filth piled up in her backyard is burning.

[Gus]

more coming out of david heath...looks really ugly..

fcuking brishits...

http://www.wsj.com/articles/more-allega ... 1438719482

and one of the comment

It started with the Church and Boy Scouts, then it has spread into the entertainment industry and now it appears to be leaking into the world of politics. However, if it is anything like the US, the organization that has by far the largest number of child sex abuse allegations against it is the US Juvenile Detention System. In 2007, the good folks of Texas had to shut down two Juvie facilities because they were openly operating as pedophile rental agencies offering an endless supply of kids. In 2012, the entire US Juvie system earned the unenviable record that they had more allegation of child abuse, sexual and physical, against them in a single month than the US Catholic Church had acquired , in total, in the previous 10 years!

So, I would encourage people in the UK to be very concerned when it is left to the police to police themselves in these types of matters.

and these are our moral betters to be emulated according to some of our idiots..

[Philip]

Chicken's coming home to roost!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 39020.html

Jeremy Corbyn: Tony Blair could face war crimes trial over 'illegal Iraq invasion'

Labour leadership favourite warns former PM ahead of the impending Chilcot inquiry report
Henry Austin

Tony Blair could be made to stand trial for war crimes, according to the current Labour leadership contender Jeremy Corbyn.

The veteran left winger said the former prime minister was reaching the point when he was going to have to deal with the consequences of his actions with the coming Chilcot inquiry report.

“I think it was an illegal war,” he said in an interview with BBC2's Newsnight adding that former UN secretary general had confirmed that. “Therefore he (Blair) has to explain that,” Corbyn said.

“We went into a war that was catastrophic, that was illegal, that cost us a lot of money, that lost a lot of lives,” he added. “The consequences are still played out with migrant deaths in the Mediterranean, refugees all over the region,” he said.

Pressed on whether Mr Blair should be charged with war crimes, he said: “If he's committed a war crime, yes. Everyone who's committed a war crime should be.”

However, he admitted he didn’t know whether Blair would be tried, although he said it might be possible.

His remarks are likely to infuriate Mr Blair's supporters in the party while once again highlighting the deep divisions that remain over the most controversial decision of his premiership.

Blair recently attacked Corbyn’s platform as “old fashioned” and claimed he was the “Tory preference” to lead Labour.

The former Prime Minister also claimed a ”traditional leftist position“ was not the way to win a general election, despite growing support for the Islington North MP.

Amidst a growing surge of support for Corbyn, former Home Secretary Alan Johnson also claimed that the Labour Party should “end the madness” and elect Yvette Cooper.

Describing Corbyn as “cheerfully disloyal” he said in an article for The Guardian that she has “the intellect, the experience and the inner steel” to succeed.

[Philip]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... quiry.html

Sir Edward Heath: The Filipino brothel keeper who sparked child sex abuse inquiry

Myra Ling-Ling Forde is alleged to have had prosecution dropped after threatening to expose former Prime Minister as a paedophile.

Myra Ling-Ling Forde and Sir Edward Heath
By Martin Evans, Crime Correspondent, Tom Whitehead and Lucy Clarke-Billings
04 Aug 2015

The woman at the centre of the Sir Edward Heath child abuse storm can be revealed as a Filipino prostitute, who ran a brothel just a mile from the late Prime Minister’s former home in Salisbury.

Myra Ling-Ling Forde, 67, has twice been jailed for operating as a madam out of her terraced property in the Wiltshire town where Sir Edward made his home after leaving office.

But in the early 1990s it is alleged she had a prosecution dropped after threatening to expose Sir Edward as a paedophile.

Sir Edward Heath at the Conservative Party Conference, 1990 (Rex)

A retired senior detective from the force came forward last year to allege that his colleagues quietly dropped a trial against twice married Forde in order to protect the reputation of the former Tory leader.

That allegation is now the subject of an Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) investigation, but Wiltshire Police have also appealed for any potential victims of Sir Edward to come forward.

Myra Ling-Ling Forde ran a brothel close to Arundells, Sir Edward's residence in Salisbury

Sources close to the investigation confirmed that Forde was the person who had made the original allegations against Sir Edward.

Despite claims that she had used threats against Sir Edward to avoid prosecution in the early 1990s, she was successfully convicted in 1995 of running a brothel full of underage girls from her Salisbury property.

A court heard how she trained runaway children as call girls, often picking up youngsters who were in the care system.

Sir Edward Heath pictured in 1981 (Getty)

Winchester Crown Court heard how one 13-year-old girl would go straight from school to the brothel, which was advertised as The Oriental Massage Parlour, where she would sell her body to clients.

Another 15-year-old told the authorities how she had sex with five men at once and lost count of the number of times she sold herself for sex while under Forde's control.

Myra Ling-Ling Forde

The court heard that Forde became a prostitute herself in the early 1990s after falling behind on her mortgage repayments, but she denied recruiting youngsters for the trade.

After getting out of prison, she returned home to Meadow Road in Salisbury, but then in 2009 was once again arrested on suspicion of running a brothel.

She was caught when neighbours in the quiet, respectable street complained about her activities.

In December 2009 she pleaded guilty to inciting prostitution and perverting the course of justice and was sentenced to five years in prison. She was also ordered to pay back £25,000 under the Proceeds of Crime Act.

Speaking from her home in London Forde’s sister, Mia Pablico, said she did not know where she was now living, but said she “knew a lot of politicians”.

Asked if she ever mentioned the name Ted Heath, she said: "That's not for me to say. You'd have to ask her."

She added: “I know what she did in Salisbury and she knew a lot of politicians and celebrities because of it.”

It is understood Forde moved out of her Kilburn home a couple of weeks ago because the block of flats is about to be demolished. Until recently, she had been dog sitting.

Allegations against Sir Edward, including claims that he raped a 12-year-old boy in London in the 1960s, are now being investigated by the Metropolitan Police.

Jersey Police have also confirmed that the former Prime Minister’s name has been linked to its investigation into abuse at the Haut de la Garenne.

The former Tory leader, who rose from humble origins to the highest office in the land, is now at the centre of five separate police investigations.

As well as the probe by the Wiltshire Force, Kent Police, where he was an MP for more than 50-years said they were looking at allegations against him, dating back to the 1960s.

The States of Jersey Police (SoJP) also confirmed the former Prime Minister featured in Operation Whistle, an inquiry in to alleged historical abuse on the island, which also involves Jimmy Savile.

While the Metropolitan Police refused to comment, it is understood Sir Edward is being looked at as part of Operation Midland, a Scotland Yard inquiry into claims a VIP paedophile ring operated in the 1970s and 1980s.

Meanwhile a man claimed he was raped at the age of 12 by the former PM.

Sir Edward Heath takes tea in the garden of his home in Salisbury, 1989 (Reuters)

The alleged victim, now aged in his 60s, has claimed he reported being sexually assaulted by the Conservative MP in 1961, but was branded "a liar and a fantasist".

In another development a man, named only as Nick to protect his identity, told the Exaro website, that Heath was one of a number of prominent men who abused him when he was a child.

He claimed he was regularly abused by a group of VIPs who operated out of the Dolphin Square apartment complex close to the Houses of Parliament.

He said: “For me personally, it is a relief to see finally Edward Heath’s name mentioned publicly. As a core member of the group of men that hurt me and others, it is important that his name is out there now and I hope that it will encourage others to come forward.”

Meanwhile the Wiltshire Force, which on Monday had appealed for any potential victims to come forward, said it had received a steady stream of calls during the day and they were working to establish the credibility of a number of allegations.

But friends and former colleagues of Sir Edward attacked the way his memory was being besmirched, without the existence of hard evidence.

Edward Heath at his flat in Albany, London, 1969 (PA)

The Sir Edward Heath Charitable Foundation said: "We wholeheartedly believe will clear Sir Edward's name and we will co-operate fully with the police in their inquiries."

Former Conservative MP Brian Binley, who worked in Sir Edward's office for a period of time, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "I find it very difficult to believe from the Ted Heath that I knew.

"There are many unanswered questions here and I don't think it would be right and fair to jump to conclusions about a man who served his country with dignity and with care, who was a considerable intellect, loved his music.

"We must be very careful. It's easy to smear people not around."

Sir Edward, who led the Conservative government between 1970 and 1974, never married and was famously reticent about his private life.

He died in 2005 aged 89.

[member_28638]

Pedophile Sons of England once described:

"They are despicable, horrible, nasty individuals who preyed on vulnerable young children”

-- Det Insp Simon Snell (Devon and Cornwall Police)

ANGLO Paedophile ring 'abused at least 30 girls'

A third man involved in a paedophile ring which police say abused dozens of girls has been convicted of sex crimes.

James Machin was found guilty at Truro Crown Court of 10 sex offences relating to girls under 13. Two others were convicted of sex abuse charges in 2008.

Police described the abuse by the men in the Camborne area, found in a three-year investigation, as "horrific". One victim was five years old.

Inquiries began in December 2007 after a victim's parent raised concerns.

============================

THERE IS A DEEP INGRAINED SICKNESS OF THESE PEOPLE!
It's almost as if there is something genetically wrong with these freaks!

They have turned Thailand, Philippines, and most poorer nations their private brothels where they abuse little children at will. Their famous sex tours to these countries are well documented.

Why does the UN not speak out against these uncivilized, uncultured barbaric savages?

[sanjaykumar]

There is much decency in England but I do admit it is distressing to see so much corruption, predators and those who systematically cover up.

[surinder]

Regarding the audience in the University talk of ST: Forget about moving the UK government or the Koh-i-Noor, can they move their University to return stolen artefacts? Can they even agree to the idea that it should be?

UK universities are recipients of the loot. I chanced upon the Bhakshali manuscripts on Mathematics from Takshashila whcih the Brits conveniently moved over to some university in UK. Can they be returned?

You see, claps are cheap. No student body would hold a demonstration to return that loot.

[surinder]

Regarding reasons for UK leaving India. One reason ignored is the US contribution to India's independence. US president FDR made it a precondition to join WW2 that UK will leave the colonies. Churchill fretted and fumed, but he needed the US badly. So badly that he asked his daughter-in-law to have an affair with an American to influence FDR. After WW2, mass decolonization happened due to US. For a short period of time, Netherlands refused to leave Indonesia, prompting US to withold Marshall aid. Without Marshall aid, they were bankcorrupt. UK's b@11s squeezed to leave. Other reasons are valid too, but this is a reason Congress/Nehru who hated the US did not want us to know.

[Singha]

i think US suffered from no love of india or a particular attachment to dharmic ideas , they just wanted the weak and war-bankrupt france and UK to vacate the colonies so that as the new global hegemon it could take over before the soviets (a nonentity of a naval and trading power vs the US even then) could get their claws in.

in the middle east, US moved in to control the place once the anglo-french duo limped out. they did try to stage a comeback with the suez canal invasion ... but the backlash from the US was severe and they finally went home. the saudis and iranians moved from being british vassals to staunch american all-lies pumped full of high grade arms.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Cris ... ion_Revise
Vice President Richard Nixon later explained: "We couldn't on one hand, complain about the Soviets intervening in Hungary and, on the other hand, approve of the British and the French picking that particular time to intervene against Nasser".[284] Beyond that, it was Eisenhower's belief that if the United States were seen to acquiesce in the attack on Egypt, that the resulting backlash in the Arab world might win the Arabs over to the Soviet Union

[arun]

X Posted from the STFUP thread.

India to boycott Commonwealth Parliamentary Union meeting in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan as the Islamic Republic did not send an invitation to Jammu and Kashmir Speaker to attend the Inter Parliamentary Union meeting.

A good move only missing the appellation excellent because of the pointlessness of the Commonwealth not going beyond providing the UK a blow job for the ego as colonial overlords enslaving at one point in time.

Better yet would be for Indian to ensure that not a single Commonwealth meeting is held in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, now or in the future, period.

And even better yet would be for India to exit this anachronistic monument to the Christist occupation and colonisation of our country India, the Commonwealth as India has no business fostering UK's pretensions :

India to boycott Commonwealth Parliamentary Union meeting in Pakistan : This follows Pakistan not sending an invitation to Jammu and Kashmir Speaker to the Inter Parliamentary Union meeting

[disha]

^How much bet that BBC Leslie Udwin has been sexually abused by Bri$hit politicos and assorted "Sirs" from the Bri$hit elite!

[sanjaykumar]

She's not male-only looks it.