Yayavar wrote: ↑05 Jul 2025 04:27
@Vayu A 24 year old clerk, narrowly focused on his own ilk, wrote a prejudiced letter. No doubt about it. He even used AIT to plead equivalence to the Anglos.
I am suggesting that the words of the 24 year old rookie clerk do not define him. Are there later statements?
Yayavar ji,
The point being made is that ghundhy agreed with and endorsed his views, the rest is mere window dressing
He implied that Indians were higher than the kaffirs and lower than the britshits, and ghundhy endorsed those deeply racist views unreservedly
why did he poke his unwanted nose into the khilafat movement and how did that stooopidity help the beleaguered majority who were anyway being oppressed by the jihadis and the britshits. WHO were the ungrateful scum that it did benefit and why was he so keen to do so when he was told by so many of his well wishers to drop the matter and move on
when ghundhy was booted out of the first class compartment in south africa, do you know what he did thereafter. ..... ...
do you know why he is called the "stretcher bearer of the empire" in so many quarters
India existed aeons before ghundy was born, so it did not need a "father", so which country was he the najais father of and the only one birthed during his lifetime was on the eastern and western wings of India
And finally, what are you talking about when the AIT is still being "taught" in India, despite being universally acknowledged as a fraudulent and self serving theory designed by britshit imperialist scum to validate, and vindicate their presence in India and to justify the concept of the superior race and defend their right to over India.
Why did he suddenly move back to India, (or was he transplanted by his venomous and cunning masters with devious and malevolent intent) and how did he so suddenly bloom in the political arena of those days, especially when there were already far better leaders than himself handling the freedom struggle quite well
Ye kis khet ki mooli tha
Ghundhy never differed with this view, neither in his writings nor his public expositions where all he did was glorify the jihadis, and his colonial masters, and constantly demonize the majority. Who was he to agree to Indian soldiers fighting for the britshits in both the world wars, where many many tens of thousands died for a country that wasn't theirs and didn't "have a dog in the fight"
did he even once mention the dead and wounded, the very people he had callously sent out to die, without even asking them if they wanted to go, all for his petty political gains.
Did he get us freedom or did he simply grab the victory that was crafted and carved out by subsash chandra bose and his INA, where the britshits ran scared, petrified of the violence that would have been unleashed on them, had matters gotten out of hand after the Naval mutiny gave them a taste of what was to come if they stayed on
So, what exactly was his role and who benefited most of all.
It certainly wasn't India
It's always the "Cui bono?" analysis which leads you to the truth
Gandhi suggested to British Viceroy Lord Mountbatten that India’s unity (during partition) might be saved if Jinnah were made PM of India and India’s cabinet was made exclusively Muslim. Mountbatten, taken slightly aback, politely told the Mahatma he would think about it, knowing full well that he wouldn’t!!
- Excerpt from Sam Dalrymple’s ‘Shattered Lands: Five Partitions and the Making of Modern Asia’
This is while Gandhi kept a small statue of the three wise monkeys representing "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" and preached non-violence to Hindus!!
And, look where it got us finally: Saddled with a christian constitution in a Hindu Nation
