History Of Bengal

12-08-2005, 12:32 AM

both the last 2 posts harp upon sad chapters/aspects of indian history.

1) lack of willingness and common sense to unite under the marathas - the most powerful indians at the time of muslim invasions

2) the tremendous damage done to the indian psyche by the utopian concept called buddhism. buddhism is great in a world free of turks, huns, germanics and other barbarians. its good for nothing when your life is under threat.

do others agree with me that askoha's taking to buddhism and the subsequent rise of buddhism is one of the turning points of indian history?

12-11-2005, 01:01 PM

Why Bengalis took to Communism. To find out the reason one has to see the pressure of population on the State of West Bengal since 1947. The State had to receive several million refugees from East Pakistan and later from Bangladesh. The assistance given by the Centre was not adequate and the plan for their rehabilitation on a all India basis never got implemented. It in the process destroyed the social fibre of the rural districts of West Bengal. The original inhabitants of the State become a minority and the decision making came in the hand of the refugees. They had nothing to loose and consequently they easily fell in the trap of the Communists. Luckly, there was no total revolution in the State as on coming to power the Communist leaders soon picked up the capitalist way of life and endulged in all the vices associated with the system..

12-11-2005, 02:33 PM

QUOTE(Ravish @ Dec 11 2005, 01:01 PM)nd the plan for their rehabilitation on a all India basis never got implemented. .
[right][snapback]42876[/snapback][/right]

yes.

wanted to point out that for some reason bengalis find it difficult to assimilate with the greater hindi speaking population (they have a presence in delhi, varanasi, and a bit in lucknow and allahbad).

i mean punjabis also lost half their land and sindhis all of theirs. yet they could spread all over india and punjab never got engulfed by immigrants - cos punjabis can adopt to all places (even outside india) and so the LAND OF PUNJAB did not have to bear the whole burden. not so unfortunately in bengal.

beside the division of bengal by the brits was clinical and cruel - they kept calcutta on one side and the whole hinterland on the other. they wanted to neuter bengal as a force and that they did. bengal bore the brunt of the colonial looting and also bangladesh was basically a "colony" of pakistan till 71. the fall out of all of that is the waves of refugees.

i agree with all of your post.

Mitra · 12-11-2005, 10:53 PM

Mudy,
You mistake the context of the Battle of Plassey. Nawab Siraj-ud-daulah was a widely hated muslim tyrant and was also a noted debauch. Also the Nawabs of Bengal (Murshidabad) had always vaunted and publicised their Turani origins - which apparently puts them above native Indians. So for the people of Bengal it was one foreigner against another. Why on earth should the Hindus unite behind a muslim tyrant? As a matter of fact all the Hindu rajas and big Zamindars rallied behind the British as a mode of deliverence from the Nawab. Their haunch later proved correct. The Brits no doubt stole a lot more money but they never indulged in the kind of atrocities and depredations the Muslim Nawab used to commit. If you also read the contemporary history and 'Ananda Math' carefully you'll see that the famous Sanyasi Rebellion of the 1780's were against the Puppet Nawab of Bengal - Mir Zafar Ali Khan (Siraj's successor propped up by the British) and his policy of farming out the collection of State taxes to private collectors. The British got involved only at the last stage.

12-12-2005, 12:21 AM

Dear Ben Ami The exposure of Bengali people to English education system has brought in many benefits both in British time as well as in post independent India. The English educated Indians made valuable contribution in Indian Renaissance as well as in providing good administrators as clerks to the British administration. In later years they provided leadership to the freedom movement. In providing the leadership, some of them had divergent views than that of Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. This resulted in the gradual dislike of the Bengali leaders by a dominant section of the Congress. After the demise of B.C.Roy, no Congress leader was left who was capable of having his powerful voice heard in Delhi. It ultimately culminated in Bengal loosing its rightful place in the decision making process in Delhi Durbar. In later years, a few Bengal leaders have held the post of Cabinet Minister in important Ministries but they have not been able to contribute much to the development of West Bengal.

12-12-2005, 01:30 AM

yes. when gandhi and nehru ganged up on netaji - basically up-bihar-rajasthan and mp ganged up on bengal.

bengalis can never connect with the gandhi-nehru highjacked congress.

and now that they have become commie since 77, they have become ever more divorced from the centre.

if bengal doesnt contribute minister at the centre - its good news now. we dont want what happened to bengal (deindustrialisation) to be repeated at the centre.

unfortunately for the land that single handedly produced almost half the original leaders of the congress - now not a single congress leader emerges from that state anymore - such has been the clinical hammering of all opposition by the cpim. and MB is nothing like a surendra nath bannerjee.

the saving grace is that - after being shunted out of the equation by gandhi and nehru - the antidote of the anglo-socialistic party called the congress has also come from a bengali and was founded in calcutta.

12-12-2005, 01:53 AM

QUOTE(ben_ami @ Dec 12 2005, 01:30 AM)yes. when gandhi and nehru ganged up on netaji -

This could be partly true, I think it was Nehru than Gandhi who against Netaji. Gandhi had said of Netaji "a patriot of patriots'. Netaji is as much reverred outside Bengal as inside of it.

basically up-bihar-rajasthan and mp ganged up on bengal.

It is unfair to brand the whole state against Bengal. You cannot blame whole population because of political scounderals.That is a typical mis informationÂ played by successive state govts.

bengalis can never connect with the gandhi-nehru highjacked congress.

I think there has always been a feeling of vicitmization in Bengal. Some of which could be true but most of it is self fulfilling prophecy.

and now that they have become commie since 77, they have become ever more divorced from the centre.

' danger comesÂ politicians playing upon this vicitimization syndrome and begining ULFAization of Bengal'

if bengal doesnt contribute minister at the centre - its good news now. we dont want what happened to bengal (deindustrialisation) to be repeated at the centre.

'the lever of centre is in the hands of leftists'.

unfortunately for the land that single handedly produced almost half the origina
l leaders of the congress - now not a single congress leader emerges from that state anymore - such has been the clinical hammering of all opposition by the cpim. and MB is nothing like a surendra nath bannerjee.

I thought SS Ray was quite influential.......during Naxalite movement...still remember bombs going on main streets of Kol.

the saving grace is that - after being shunted out of the equation by gandhi and nehru - the antidote of the anglo-socialistic party called the congress has also come from a bengali and was founded in calcutta.

yup SP Mukherjee ........
[right][snapback]42934[/snapback][/right]

12-12-2005, 02:06 AM

yes gandhi was not so much opposed to netaji as he was to himsha (as he saw netaji's revolutionary approach).

nehru of course saw him as a major hurdle towards getting to the throne.

when i said up-bihar-mp ganged upon - i meant to say nehru's managing to shunt netaji meant up-bihar-mp managed to shunt bengal. for some reason the hindi belt connects greatly with gandhi and worships the nehru family. meanwhile netaji is the greatest son of bengal.

that is the feeling of victimisation. the gandhi-nehru-fication of congress and shunting of the people who produced much much more than their fair share of congress leaders.

well jyoti basu is gone. so ulfa-type ideology is never going to take place. i dont believe breakaway tendencies ever existed in bengal. thats just a idea doing the grapevine in the rest of india. want to see break away tendency see north east or punjab.

yes the lever is still in the hand of leftists - nehru had an infatuation with soviet russia.

naxhalism has been thrown out of bengal. and that was 71. commie at writers building happened in 77 odd.

and yes s.p mukherjee - bengal saved the best for the last lol.

01-23-2006, 09:10 AM

for a moment i thought that Netaji falls under "misc topics" section of this forum and doesnt merit an exclusive thread, whilst dubious dudes like ambedkar have entire threads dedicated to them !!

but extremely interesting, esp your first link.

i am taking the liberty to c/p it here too.

British Foreign Office ordered Netajiâs murderâ

Sunday, 14 August , 2005, 20:23

Kolkata: Adding a new twist to the mysteries surrounding the life and disappearance of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, an Irish scholar on Sunday claimed that British Foreign Office had ordered the assassination of the great leader in March, 1941 during his great escape from India.

According to Prof Eunan OHalpin of Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland, the British Foreign Office ordered assassination of Netaji in March, 1941, and reconfirmed the order in June that year.

Learning from a decode of an Italian telegram on February 27, 1941, that Subhas Bose might be in Kabul, the British Foreign Office asked the British minister there if he had any local clue in confirmation, OHalpin, a professor of history, said while delivering the Sisir Kumar Bose lecture at the Netaji Research Bureau in Kolkata.

He said on March 7, the British Special Operations Executive, formed in 1940 for sabotage, underground propaganda and other clandestine activities, informed its representatives in Istanbul and Cairo that Bose was understood to be travelling from Afghanistan to Germany via Iran, Iraq and Turkey.

OHalpin handed over documentary evidences in support of his claims to NRB chairperson Krishna Bose.

http://headlines.sify.com/news/fullstory...ji~mystery

(i have more info about his "mysterious dissappearence" - let me search in my mailbox.)

oh and i have some pics of him meeting Rommel and co in germany. how do i post pics here??

01-23-2006, 09:24 AM

QUOTE(jyothibasu @ Jan 6 2006, 06:53 PM)-- earlier posts deleted (Admin) --

The same Indhira was hailed by sudarsan as the best PM of India. If she is regarded as the best one surpassing Bajapai by none other than the supreme pontif of Hindutwa, what is the fuss about unscrupulous and unbeliveable allegations about her.
[right][snapback]44382[/snapback][/right]


yeah.... i know where that spelling is comming from...sherlock holmes was right... jyotHi basu is not jyoti basu.

01-25-2006, 07:42 PM

Following Dharma is Hinduism/Jainism/Buddhism. No set of laws in Hindu Dharma (other than the Dharma itself of course).

yes.

so there is no way one can be a better or worse hindu, no way one can be a more correct or less correct hindu.

why even try to villify netaji from a un-necessary dharmic reference frame.

netaji carried out his dharma/duty better than 99.9% indians.

QUOTEtheocratical hindu central commandDon't know that there was such a thing.
QUOTEand then ... free of a theocratical hindu central command.So what exactly does this mean? Pax Americana? Go with the flow of progress (whatever's fashionable), calling it Hindu Dharma so you get popular support? It's not the Hindu religion at all.
More importantly what is it you want to change - what do you identify as a theocratical Hindu central command? You've obviously identified this as a problem, but there is no central command. This is not Islam, Christianity or Marxism as you yourself admitted. So I'm really curious what you are referring to here.

i am referring to this dharmic reference frame from which you have started judging all and sundry. thats the sort of theocratical hindu central control system we could do without, unless we want to become a hindu soudi arabia.

QUOTEindian people who do their duty follow their dharma (duty).And not being able to distinguish right action/duty from wrong is known as adharma.

yes.

netaji managed to distinguish right from wrong just fine.

he knew it was more right to help india become independent with help from hitler, than to NOT do a thing to make india indipendent while maintaining their distance from hitler.
the same way it was more correct for arjun to kill the kuravas than to not kill them.

not that patriots need to be judged from a point of view of dharma or other irrelevant reference frames. the only one that applies to him is of patriotism - where is towers above them all.

So what's the source (book, sloka, whatever you've learnt from your Hindu environment) which helps you decide what is dharma and what is not? Do you randomly decide that what your mind tells you to do is dharma? Then everyone in the world follows dharma. Why oppose the commies/Muslims/Christians/imperialists when they attack Hindus? They're following their "duty" (which you've equated with dharma).
If you refer to humanism as being your guide to duty, then that's a different matter. But it still isn't Hindu Dharma.

if i believe that god is a cowboy, then than becomes part of the hindu dharma.
if 10 million indians believed in that we would have cowboy festivals in hinduism.
and its not me that equated duty with dharma. it just so happens that dharma means duty.

and for the n'th time - religion is irellevant while discussing freedom fighters. you best take such arguements to the RK mission or to mathura where there will be many takers for such tangential arguements.

QUOTEhinduism isnt a religion (as the abrahamics understand it) - its a way of life, and of the people, by the people and for the people. It is a way of life, but it is the way of life our ancestors had and improved upon. Your suggestions don't seem to be improvements. The people didn't invent it ("by the people") but the ancient rishis were great Yogis who gleaned universal truths and passed them on for the betterment of humanity. To forget and bypass all of that and call whatever goes "Hinduism" isn't Hinduism at all.

your opinions on hinduism is a valid or invalid as anyone else's - cso hinduism is a bell curve of the religious beliefs of 1 billion[people.

btw, you seem more devout than patriotic. i have no time for sanya-sins.

QUOTEmugging slokas... doesn't help. you seem to lok at hinduism as a set of laws to be followed. You know nothing about me.

and dont want to either.

And these statements seem to indicate you know little of Hinduism too. I suggest you read the Gita and the Upanishads. If that doesn't interest you, read the Dhammapada (Buddhist) or any Jain scriptures in English translation. Or the Tao teh Ching. Some of this is bound to interest you. If nothing appeals to you, look at Bertrand Russell or some other western atheist/agnostic authors (I don't think Thomas Paine et al's Deism will appeal to you, because it involves a God).

i could do without advice from you on religion, that to on a netaji thread

QUOTEand firstly i'd want india to be free - and then free from islam, marzists and free from lunatic analogies and free of a theocratical hindu central command. (Assuming "free from Christianity" is included somewhere in there)
And then....? Pax Americana, sorry Pax Indiana?

no just a free india.

can you never ever manage to read betwen the lines and get the subtext??

By the way, if you get the India you want, quite a few Hindus will want to seccede.

i am sure you will be one of them. not that i will mind.

It's no Hinduism we know, nor an India we want. It's odd that at some point you accused me of being a greater evil than any of the 3 ideologies threatening India. And yet, the more you post, the more I get the feeling that you are not quite certain what Hindu Dharma is and what it isn't.

it isnt anything one can pin point, or define.

- If you want an atheist country, one that is proud of a historic "Hindu culture and thought" (but which is nevertheless confined to history), fine. Say that then.

when did i say i want an atheist country??
i am just an agnostic - i dont know for sure if there is a god nor know for sure if there isnt any.

- If you want to just exist with your wife and children and coexist with others, fine.

let me get hold of a wife first. i'd like to marry a blue eyed pagan... better than a starry eyed hindu.

but even it it wasnt fine with you - i dont give a cat/rat's ass

I guess that's a form of Hinduism... and Deism... and many other religions.
- But if you want to guide the country down a path that is beyond anything that is familiar or acceptable to the part of the Indian population that does follow Dharma, then know that it is not Hinduism you are following.

thanks socrates for al that advice. really apt on a netaji thread

QUOTEi always thought hinduism ws something that followed the peope of india, cos its the bell curve of all our existing religious belief. So I guess if we all became Christians - then Christianity is Hinduism. "Whatever we do, whatever we become - it's Hinduism." Interesting concept, but it's wrong.
It is supposed to be: as long as we follow and are guided by the Eternal Dharma, what we do and become adds to the evolution of Hinduism.

nope. christianity is not native to the people of india. its an imported concept. not home grown.

hinduism is the bell curve all the surviving hime grown religious beliefs of indians.

QUOTEi am not a religious person, just a proud hindu, not a pious hindu. You're a proud Indian who prefers Hinduism to Christianity/Marxism/Islam. If born a Buddhist or Jain you would identify yourself as a "proud Jain/Buddhist and proud Indian". Or would you have gone out of your way to convert to the mainstream Hindu Dharma?

well i am glad i am not a jain or buddhist - no offense intended - just that i my religion to be who i am not what i believe or folow. in fact i dont like to follow anything but my own call. hence i am a pukka hindu.

FINALLY ONE LAST REQUEST - ITS BAD ENOUGH THAT YOU DID YOUR LEVEL BEST TO CLUB NETAJI WITH THE HITLERS AND OTHER VILLAINS - THAT TOO ON JAN 23RD - HIS BIRTHDAY. NOW FOR HEAVENS SAKE AT LEAST STICK TO THE TOPIC AND DONT BRING DHARMA, MICKEY MOUSE, KAMA SUTRA AND CRICKET INTO THIS THREAD. IF YOU WANT TO TALK DHARMA AND WHATS HINDUISM AND WHATS NOT, THERE ARE PLENTY OF THREADS ON THAT - THIS ONE IS ABOUT NETAJI, ABOUT INDIAS FREEDOM MOVEMANT AND RELATED TOPICS.

01-29-2006, 02:19 AM

http://www.yorozubp.com/netaji/75birthday/dhillon.htm

THE LAST STRAW THAT BROKE THE BACK
ãOF THE BRITISH EMPIRE
By : Col. C. S. Dhillon, I.N.A

The contributor of this article Shri Dhillon is one of the heroes of the Redfort Trial. Shri Dhillon joined the Indian Army as a sepoy in 1933. He was commissioned in 1939 and attached to l/14 Punjab Regiment. When the 2nd World War broke out his regiment was in the front fighting with Japanese in Singapore. After the fall of Singapore his regiment joined the surrender to the victorious Japanese Army. With the formation of Indian National Army by Mohon Singh as G.O.C. Shri Dhillon also joined him. When Netaji took over the charge of the Indian National Army as Supreme Commander Shri Dhillon was appointed as the Commander of the 4th Grla. Regt. (Nehru Brigade While fighting against the British in Burma, Commander Dhillbn was captured by the British along with the Divisional Commander Gen. Shahnawaz Khan and Col. P. K. Sahgal and put into trial at Redfort, Delhi in July 1945 for waging war against the King.
. . . . . . Editor,

IT IS DIFFICULT to realize in these days of power politics and of the merry game of plucking the golden spoils of office by fair and foul means that hardly a quarter of a century ago we were an enslaved people. The British were our masters completely and entirely. Their might had the sway over land and on sea all the world over. So powerful was the Royal Navy that it was said. "Britannia rules the waves" and she did. One of the pet questions in Geography used to be to show and prove why the Sun never set on the British Empire. In schools children were made to admire the British ways and sing songs of their glory. We used to pray for a happy, glorious and victorious life of the British Sovereign "Long to reign over us." And yet the tallest amongst us were behind bars of the British Jails. The British Government was entrenched behind the Army, the Police and the Administrative Services. Surprisingly there was no dearth of people who really recognized the British Raj as a dispensation of the Providence. Others took it with that resignation which is one of our national characteristics. Late in the nineteenth century it required people as great as Swami Vivekananda and the like to awaken our national conscience and restore our spirit.

The story of the Indian Freedom Fight is indeed fascinating. It covers more than a century of continuous struggle unparallel in heroism and self-sacrifice as well as in forms of weapons, strategy, tactics and areas. It was at times spiritual, at times terroristic, at times peaceful, at times violent, at times non-violent, at times within the country or in a part of it, yet at times without and at times in many forms, at a time and all over the sub-continent as well as in other continents. The last straw however to break the British back was in the form of the Indian National Army of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose. Carrying the Tricolor Flag with the emblem of the Leaping Tiger on it and with the slogan, "Chalo Delhi" ( on to Delhi ) on the lips, from the battlefields of Asia and of Europe, it burst out on the Indian scene like an avalanche overwhelming all and everyone causing a revolutionary and emotional upheaval turning and churning the very depths of the national soul, sparing not even the Indian Armed Forces of the British the very means of keeping India enslaved. They recovered their national conscience. The soul of India became free. The people could no longer tolerate the foreign Rule. The climax came with the Naval uprising in Bombay. The days of Military and Police Raj were over. It could hold no more.

The story of the I.N.A. is a legend in itself. Its historical evidence shows that never, never in the long history of man and war did a people in exile raise an army so big in order to liberate their country from a foreign rule.

In this historic struggle, the part played by the Indians overseas can never be appreciated enough. It was entirely due to these Indians that the Provisional Government of Free India could attain the status of a duly organized, recognized and a belligerent Government enjoying the allegiance of two million people. These Indians were the State with Indian Independence League as the Executive of that State and the I.N.A. as its Army of Liberation.

The Provisional Government of Free India was proclaimed on 2lst October 1943 having all the requisites of a Government. It had a Cabinet headed by Netaji as the Head of the State, The Prime Minister and the Minister for War and Foreign Affairs.

Colonel Doctor Lakshmi ( then captain ) was the Minister in charge of Women's Organization. She held this portfolio over and above her Command of the legendary Rani Jhansi Regiment of a Brigade's strength. Dr. Lakshmi one of the most popular and prosperous Gynecologist in Singapore had to give up her fabulous practice to be in uniform and to undergo all the hardships a combatant has to go through in a war.
Mr. S. A. Ayer held the portfolio of Broadcasting and Publicity
Lt. Col. A. C. Chatterji ( later Maj . General ) was Finance Minister
The Armed Forces were represented by Lieut. Col.Aziz Ahmed (later Maj. General ),
Lieut Col. N. S . Bhagat ( later Colonel ),
Lt. Col. J. K. Bhonsle ( later Maj. General & Chief of the General Staff ),
Lt. Colonel Guizara Singh ( later Colonel ),
Lt. Col. M.Z. Kiani ( later Maj. General ).
Lt. Col. A. D. Loganathan ( later Maj. General ),
Lt. Col. Ehsan Qadir ( later Colonel ),
Lt. Col. Shahnawaz Khan ( later Maj. General ),
Mr. A.N. Sahay was Secretary with ministerial rank
Messers Karim Ghani Debnath Das, D.M. Khan, A. Yellapa, J. Thivy and Sirdar Isher Singh were Advisorsiand
Shri A. N. Sarkar was the Legal Advisor ( all with ministerial rank )

Shri Rash Behari Bose-the very incarnation of service and sacrifice-having vacated the Presidentship of the Indian Independence League and all its offices to make room for the younger Leader Netaji Subhas to come and to take over so as to lead according to his genius stepped aside. Netaji requested him to be the Supreme Advisor. The Senior Leader accepted the post with grace which has been conspicuously absent during the past-Independence era.

I have confined myself in naming the personalities who were fortunate in being ministers on Netaji's Cabinet and took oath on its formation. I cannot help mentioning again the name of General Loganathan. As I write these lines. I recall his tall inspiring personality full of courage, spirit of sacrifice, wit. Humor and the never failing sense of duty. This great man inspite of his ill health accepted to do the most difficult job, the Governership of Andamans and Nicobar Islands which having been annexed to the Provisional Government had been renamed "Shaheed" and "Sawaraj" respectively. Though ill health and non-co-operation by the Japanese Forces of Occupation made his job more and more difficult, yet he stood it out. Again he had to act as the G.O.C. Burma Command after Netaji's departure from Rangoon. With the INA Contingent about 6,000 strong he manned the Burmese Capital in the absence of any other Police force or troops during the period between the departure of the Japanese and the arrival of the British. And he was successful in maintaining law and order to the extent that there was not a single case of decoity or of loot during that period-24th April to 4th May 1945. Throughout the difficult stages of the INA, whether it was its formation or the crisis in it, or the move to the battlefields or the withdrawal, this old man held the fort like a Knight from the medieval ages. He was affectionately called "Uncle" by all those who were fortunate enough to approach him. In return the old man would call us all "Uncle" irrespective of the age. While in captivity in the Red Fort he was suffering very badly from an ulcer in the stomach, yet he seldom let us know the agony he was passing through. I remember the day, General Shah Nawaz Khan, Colonel Sahgal and I were given our Charge Sheets. Overwhelmed with the joy of being one of the first to be tried in the Red Fort on which once we intended to hoist the Tricolor. Like a child I ran to General Loganathan who was lying in an old sagging cot. I shouted. "Uncle ! Uncle ! I am going to be senior to you now. We are going to be tried first and shall die first. look ! Here is the Charge Sheet of waging war against the King". That day General Loganathan was not well. Forgetting his pains with an effort slowly, very slowly clinching the cherpoy with both hands he set up. Got hold of the Charge Sheet and started reading it to himself as reverently I looked on. As he read through it big tears rolled down from his eyes on to the sunken cheeks and with choked voice he shouted, "No, no, no my son, they can't do that to you when I am living. I being the senior most amongst you, I must be responsible for all what you did. I must be tried and punished first. I must die earlier not to see you suffer". It was this very ulcer developed during the I. N. A. days which was responsible for his early death - a martyrdom on the altar of the Indian Freedom.

Logistics of the INA in action are awe-inspiring. It had to operate under ever-increasing difficulties and against fearful odds. Wireless Communication was a rare luxury. We normally had to use runners or at times a dispatch rider on a motorcycle to carry messages to and fro. Often our only means of transport was the good old bullock cart. It was more difficult to find a cover from fire for the oxen than for the men. When they got killed or ran away because of the battle noise, our backs carried the pack and that would be only belongings or rations in the world. Once we hired a cart with a stubborn pair of bullocks. They were too difficult to be controlled. General Shah Nawas Khan personally tried to drive the cart. The pair ran away with the cart and the Divional Commander ( Maj. General Shah Nawaz Khan ) on it. The owner of the cart had jumped off but the Commander would not give in. The situation became worse as an enemy aircraft appeared overhead. Inspite of his own predicament Shah Nawaz shouted to us to take cover while he was having the dangerous ride up and down a dry riverbank. It was after a good half an hour that we could retrieve him and that too luckily intact. The athlete in him saved us our Commander.

We had a few supporting weapons, but at times lack of ammunition prohibited their use. On 13th February 1945 during my round of the different units of the 4th Guerrilla Regiment ( the Nehru Brigade ) as I visited No. 1 Battalion posted at Naynngu to oppose the British crossing of Irrawaddy, I learnt that the Battalion had eight machine guns with only two belts of ammunition each. I ordered four of the guns to be thrown into the River to make more ammunition available for the remaining four guns so that the duration of the fire could last a bit longer. It worked. On the following day the assault Crossing of the River by the South Lancashire Regiment failed. They suffered heavy casualties and were compelled to withdraw under the cover of the Artillery and the Aircraft. The object of this article is not to narrate the Battle of Nyanngu and Pagan, that the author may do at some later date. It may suffice here to submit that the odds were of an odd nature and yet we could fight an obviously last battle against the forces of one of the greatest Generals of the War-Field-Marshal Sir William Slim.

Now when the din of the battle is twenty-six years away. I cannot help asking myself. "What was our strength ?

Undoubtedly, Netaji's personality was our greatest strength which could sustain us inspite of our deficiencies in numbers. weapons and resources. I remember an after dinner conversation with him in August 1944 after Imphal had been lost to us. As he was reviewing the war situation, I asked him that as war appeared to have been lost to us and to our allies and we had little hope of taking over the offensive again, what exactly was left for us to fight or what were we fighting for. Netaji's reply was quick, "To pay the price of India's liberty". He further elaborated his point and I was surprised at his frankness and clarity of vision. Little has happened ever since, on the political stages of India, Asia and Europe, which he could not foresee and foretell. He had a very good memory, seven months later in a letter from Rangoon dated 21st March 1945 to me, when I was fighting on the front, he repeated the same concept thus :
"Whatever happens to us individually in the course of this heroic struggle, there is no power on earth that can keep India enslaved any longer. Whether we live and work or whether we die fighting, we must, under all circumstances have complete confidence that the cause for which we are striving is bound to triumph. It is the finger of God that is pointing the way towards India's freedom. We have only to do our duty and to pay the price of India's liberty. Our hearts are with you and with all who are with you in the present struggle which is paving the way to our national salvation. Please convey my warmest greetings to all the officers and men under you and accept same yourself.
JAl-HIND. Subhas Chandra Bose."

The letter was worth more than a reinforcement of a hundred guns. It did put a new life into me and into all those who were with me. It is human to be appreciated and human to appreciate.

Netaji was indeed magnanimous. he raised us from the dust to serve the national cause in an unprecedental way. Colonel Shaukat Hayat Malik formerly of the Bahawalpur State Forces earned the decoration of 'Sardar e-Jung' while commanding Bahadur Group ( Special Task Brigade ) in the Manipur Sector. With the help of Manipurians like Shri Koireng Singh and others who were members of the INA, he hoisted the Tricolour for the first time on the Indian Soil at Moirang after having liberated it from the British. Moirang, situated on the banks of the beautiful Loktak Lake has been a center of the cultural and political activities of the area. The spot chosen for hoisting the Tricolor was considered auspicious and sacred by the people because of its local historical background. Bald, thin. tall like a pole standing seven feet high Colonel Malik was great for all the three Ws-. While always victorious against the first two the third one often saw him flat before the end of many a party. "Netaji. Netaji, Netaji my foot, I ( pointing to himself ) hoisted the Tricolour at Moirang in the State of Manipur," shouted Colonel Malik thumping his foot on the floor. The occasion was a State Banquet given in his honor of other Commanders who had fought before the rains in 1944. Netaji heard Col. Malik's outburst with a smile as if nothing had happened, he continued entertaining and talking to the foreign dignitaries including Dr. Ba Maw the Burmese President, present at the function. Colonel Habibur-Rehman the Assistant Chief of the General Staff however quietly got Malik whisked off to a waiting staff car which took the hero to his Bungalow and to the bed. Early next morning as Col. Malik got up, he recalled the previous night's happening. Hurriedly he dressed up and made straight for the Netaji Bhawan. It was very early in the day but Netaji was already on his desk. On arrival, Col. Malik asked the ADC Captain Shamsher Singh to report to Netaji that Col. Malik requested for an urgent interview. Immediately he has called in. Salutations over, Col. Malik took out his revolver and presenting it to Netaji said, "I do not deserve to live for a day after what I did last night. But I do not wish to commit a suicide and go to hell. I request you, Sir to shoot me so that I may take the punishment but at the same time may go to heaven because of your sacred hands". Affectionately Netaji patted him on the back and said, "Shaukat you have been too long under stress and strain. What you need is a rest and a holiday". A few days after, as I landed at Mingladon Air Port along with Col. S. M. Hussain having flown from Bangkok by Netaji's personal eleven-seater aircraft-AZAD HIND- I found Col. Malik waiting in the lounge. As we wished each other he took me aside and showed his pockets bulging with Currency Notes. He said, "Do you know who gave me this money ? Netaji. He has given me fifteen days leave to take a holiday in Bangkok. This plane has specially come to take me". Handing me a couple of hundred rupee notes he said, "You are new to Rangoon, you may need some money. Take it". Inspite of my refusal he put the money into my pocket and hurried away to the waiting plane. What would not Col. Malik do for such a considerate Leader.

Being' a regular soldier, it was natural that I should try to determine the soldier and the commander in Netaji. Once in a battle report, I had mentioned the next likely place where I expected the enemy. I was 500 miles away from Netaji. He sent me a small note scribbled in his own hand suggesting an alternative map reference and advising me to watch the spot for the enemy's next move. When I received his message, I was already fighting the enemy at the spot Netaji had cautioned me to look for.

Given better means of communications, resources and weapons our story might have been a different one. Yet even in defeat, destiny wanted us to play a role the memories of which shall linger as long as India lives.

The I.N.A. apart from serving India as it did, has undoubtedly been also the fore-runner of a freedom movement all over the Asian and African countries. Shri Bhula Bhai Desai had appropriately said during the opening of his Defence Address in the First I.N.A. Trial in the Red Fort of Delhi that, "What is on trial before the court now is the right to wage war with immunity on part of a subject race for their liberation." Is it not so that the age of a liberation of subject races started thence onward, destroying all forms of Empires and Imperialism !

It is indeed unfortunate that inspite of our fighting for a free and united India, the powers to be cut up our divine Motherland into pieces. But having accepted the fact, today it behaves us that in the name of God, in the name of Netaji Subhas, in the name of our Dead Heroes and in the name of bygone and future Generations, we try our best to keep our people and country united. Netaji used to recite to himself a quatrain of Kipling, replacing in it India for England. This noble exhortation while an aspiration of Netaji's soul is the vital need of India today. It runs thus :

There is but one task for all
One life for each to give
What stands if freedom fall
Who dies if England live ? ( Read India for England).

Dated, 1st January 1971
JAI HIND

01-29-2006, 02:38 AM

Probably the most distinguished historian to highlight Boseâs real contribution was the late R.C. Majumdar. In his monumental, three-volume History of the Freedom Movement in India (which the Congress-led by Maulana Azad tried to suppress), Majumdar provided the following extraordinary information:

âIt seldom falls to the lot of a historian to have his views, differing radically from those generally accepted without demur, confirmed by such an unimpeachable authority. As far back as 1948 I wrote in an article that the contribution made by Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose towards the achievement of freedom in 1947 was no less, and perhaps, far more important than that of Mahatma Gandhiâ¦â The âunimpeachable authorityâ he cited happens to be Clement Attlee, the Prime Minister of Britain at the time of Indiaâs Independence. As this is of fundamental importance, and Majumdarâs conclusion so greatly at variance with conventional history, it is worth placing it on record. (See Volume III, pp. 609-10). When B.P. Chakravarti was acting as Governor of West Bengal, Lord Attlee visited India and stayed as his guest for three days at the Raj Bhavan. Chakravarti asked Attlee about the real grounds for granting Independence to India. Specifically, his question was, when the Quit India movement lay in ruins years before 1947, what was the need for the British to leave in such a hurry. Attleeâs response is most illuminating and important for history. Here is the Governorâs account of what Attlee told him:

âIn reply Attlee cited several reasons, the most important were the activities of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose which weakened the very foundation of the attachment of the Indian land and naval forces to the British Government. Towards the end, I asked Lord Attlee about the extent to which the British decision to quit India was influenced by Gandhiâs activities. On hearing this question Attleeâs lips widened in a smile of disdain and he uttered, slowly, putting emphasis on each single letter mi-ni-mal.â

This âunimpeachableâ truth will come as a shock to most Indians brought up to believe that the Congress movement driven by the âspiritual forceâ of Mahatma Gandhi forced the British to leave India. But both the evidence and the logic of history are against this beautiful but childish fantasy; it was the fear of mutiny by the Indian armed forces-and not any âspiritual forceâ- that forced the issue of freedom. The British saw that the sooner they left India the better for themselves, for, at the end of the war, India had some three million men under arms. Majumdar had reached the same conclusion years earlier, as far back as 1948 as he records. The most dramatic event after the end of World War II was the INA Trials at the Red Fortânot any movement by Gandhi or Nehru. This led directly to the mutiny of the naval ratings, which, more than anything, helped the British make up their minds to leave India in a hurry. They sensed that it was only a matter of time before the spirit spread to other sections of the armed forces and the rest of the Government. None of this would have happened without Subhas Bose and the INA.

The crucial point to note is that thanks to Subhas Boseâs activities and the INA, the Armed Forces began to see themselves as defenders of India rather than upholders of the British Empire. This, more than anything else, was what led to Indiaâs freedom. This is also the reason why the British Empire disappeared from the face of the earth within an astonishingly short space of twenty years. Indian soldiers, who were the main prop of the Empire, were no longer willing to fight to hold the Empire together.

All this raises a fundamental question: did Nehru commit these colossal policy blunders because of his idealism, or was he influenced by the knowledge that Chinaâs ally Soviet Union still held Subhas Bose in captivity who may be released any time? As Sandhya Jain puts it: âSince it is nobodyâs case that the Congress would have suffered Nehru if Netaji were still alive, the former would logically have had to pay a price for such stupendous assistance. We will have to look very closely at the long road from August 15, 1947 as we seek the answers to these questionsâ. In other words, was India being made to pay for Nehruâs ambition to be Prime Minister, which was only possible as long as Subhas Bose was away from the scene?

Finding answers to these questions calls for full access to the records of the period. Scholars have found that important records in the Nehru Library and even the National Archives are not available to them without the permission of the âdynastyâ, which means they are unavailable. As long as this situation prevails, with information coming in bits and pieces, there will be no end to conspiracy theories. These are state papersânot family property. The Government should help clear the air by releasing the Nehru papers to the public. It is also in the interests of the members of the dynasty.

01-30-2006, 12:52 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal

bengal was more buddhist that i ever knew !!

Bharatvarsh · (This post was last modified: 01-31-2006, 07:44 AM by Bharatvarsh.)

QUOTEhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal

bengal was more buddhist that i ever knew !! 
And that was one of the reasons for so many conversions, the areas on the Western frontier (Afghanistan, Sindh etc were also Buddhist) and they all became rapidly islamisised, Bengal in the Western part was Hindu and had strong jati structure, the Eastern part was more of a mixture with Buddhists predominating I think, Tathagatha Roy discusses this in his online book on the ethnic cleansing of East Bengali Hindus:
QUOTEBy some quirk of demography, West Bengal was Hindu-majority while East and North Bengal were Muslim-majority. This is quite paradoxical, if one considers the balance between the two religions in the South Asian subcontinent. If one travelled from West to East along the vast land mass known as Indo-Gangetic plain (Aryavarta) in those pre-partition days, when there were some Hindus and some Muslims in every part of the plain, one would have observed that the proportion of Muslims in the population would go on reducing as one went east. Thus, the North-West Frontier Province, Baluchistan and Sind were overwhelmingly Muslim ; Punjab was balanced, with a Muslim majority tapering off as one went from Attock to Ambala, west to east within the province ; and the United Provinces and Bihar were overwhelmingly Hindu. Then how is it that suddenly the pattern reversed itself in East and North Bengal, and then again fell into place in the easternmost province of British India, namely Assam? This question had perplexed Syed Mujtabaa Ali[14] who had come to the conclusion that this was due to the arrival of Arab traders in the coastal towns of East Bengal, in the Chittagong-Barisal stretch who had settled down and brought and spread their faith in much the same way as they did in the Malabar region of present-day Kerala, or in Malaysia or Indonesia. Annada Sankar Ray[15] writes in his Jukto Bonger Sriti (Memoirs of United Bengal)[16] that a tradition existed in Chittagong of writing Bangla in Arabic script. He attributes it to maritime trade relations between Chittagong and Arabia from the pre-Islamic period.

The theory of Islam being spread by this trade-and-contact route, rather than by the conquest-and-conversion route, is plausible, and also attractive, but is probably not correct. Plausible, because a similar phenomenon was noticed in the case of a number of Portuguese who had settled down in those parts, and had created Roman Catholic pockets. Buddhadeb Bose[17] writes in the first part of his autobiography Amar Chhelebela (Bengali) that he had seen a person of almost pure Portuguese blood in the coastal town of Noakhali in the 1920s who spoke the usual Noakhali dialect. Gopal Haldar, in his reminiscences[18] of pre-partition Noakhali mentions two villages adjoining Noakhali townÂ called Shahebghata (literally, wharf of the Europeans) and Ezbelia (Isabella?), inhabited by ordinary-looking folk but of the Catholic faith, and with names like Gonsalves and Fernandes. This theory, on the other hand, is probably not correct, because firstly, it cannot explain how faraway places inÂ North Bengal, such as Rangpur and Dinajpur became Muslim-majority, while places more accessible on the riverine route, such as Lower Assam, did not ; also why the Portuguese, who were no less proselytizers thanÂ the Arabs, could not spread their faith. Finally, the theory is probably not correct because there is a better explanation.

That explanation is that this region, along with large parts of the rest of India and places as far west and north as modern-day Afghanistan and Xinjiang, had become entirely Buddhist, and by the sixth century or so this Buddhism had also become adulterated with diverse forms of animism, occult practices, promiscuity, and the like, something in the nature of what is known in Hinduism as vamachara, and had degenerated into a loose faith. The great Acharya Sankara set out on foot from faraway Kerala to set right this state of affairs and in a life of only 32 years got the country firmly back to the Hindu fold. It is possible that the Acharya could not reach the eastern parts of Bengal because of the relative inaccessibility of the delta.Â In fact the delta of Eastern Bengal was known in legend as Pandavavarjita Desha -- the land that even the Pandavas avoided[19]. The population therefore remained Buddhist-Animist, and easily converted to Islam when the marauders from the west came to Bengal. Extensive ruins of Buddhist monasteries are found at Paharpur and Mahasthangarh in the northern parts of present-day Bangladesh. The Buddhist priest Dipankar Srigyan had set out from a village called Bajrajogini near Dacca to convertÂ the whole of Tibet to Buddhism. Till today Hindu Bengalis, when they choose to be abusive, refer to Muslims by the term Neray (a diminutive of Naraa, meaning shaven-headed). And a lot of Bengali Muslims do tonsure their heads, which is believed to be a custom inherited by them from the Buddhist viharas (monasteries) which their ancestors atttended. All these bear eloquent testimony to the hold of Buddhism in East Bengal.Â

Assam, on the other hand, remained Hindu and did not convert to Islam because of the preachings of the great Vaishnavite guru Shankara Deva (not the same as the sage of the same name from Kerala) who gave a firm faith within the Hindu fold to the Assamese. In fact the Ahoms, who came from Thailand to settle in and rule Upper Assam, embraced Hinduism and remained Hindu.

The Muslims of East Bengal are therefore, in all probability, converts mostly from Buddhism-Animism and not from Hinduism. This view is also held by the eminent historian Vincent Smith[20], among others. The argument finds great support from the fact that Buddhism has yielded elsewhere, as it did in East Bengal, much more easily to Islam than Sanatan (Orthodox) Hinduism. Thus once-Buddhist Afghanistan and Xinjiang eventually became totally Muslim, while Hindu India did not. Similarly, Buddhist East Bengal became Muslim-majority, while lands to the west, which had become Hindu under the influence of Sankara remained Hindu.

Ashok Mitra[21] of the Indian Civil Service[22] has advanced a very different theory[23] which he attributes to his Gurus in Anthropology and Demography, respectively Jatindra Mohan Datta and Sailendra Nath Sengupta[24]. According to him these two gentlemen worked out the total number of Muslims and Christians that had come to India from outside upto the 17th century. They then extrapolated this figure to 1951 using the prevailing rate of increase in population. Deducting the result from the total number of Muslims in India and Pakistan they came to the conclusion, among others, that ninety-five percent of the Bengali Muslims had been Hindus in the last, that is the nineteenth century. This is very interesting, but leads to a number of total absurdities. First, it is inconceivable that the number of Hindus converting to Islam would be more in the British age than in the Moghul or Nawabi age. There were several incentives to convert during those earlier ages, while there were only disincentives during the British times, at least upto the beginning of this century. Secondly any estimate of the total number of Muslims who entered India might be made, if at all, with some difficulty, but to estimate how many of them entered Bengal seems impossible. How they surmounted this obstacle is not mentioned in Ashok Mitraâs book. Thirdly, this theory does not explain the anomaly of sudden increase in Muslim population in East Bengal as one goes from West to East.. Lastly, it presupposes that the rate of growth of population is the same among Hindus and Muslims whereas in fact it is not so ; the latter was always more than the former. Ashok Mitra does not endorse the conclusions of his Gurus, but cites them without comment. Neither Syed Mujtabaa Ali nor Annada Sankar Ray are confident that their views are correct or even supported by a substantial historical school.

M.R.Akhtar Mukul, a prominent present-day Bangladeshi intellectual, has tried an explanation in his book 'Purbapurusher Sandhane' (in Bangla, meaning 'In Search of Our Ancestors') [25]. In this book also he has supported the contention that the Muslims of East and North Bengal are mostly converts from Buddhists. He has commented upon the absence of recorded history of Bengalis in the period between the decline of Buddhism in India and the coming of Sufi[26] saints to Bengal. Finally he has also concluded that the simple appeal of the Sufis, who preached a form of Islam in which Allah, the Muslim God, was looked upon as an object of love rather than fear, proved to be irresistible to the massses of Eastern Bengal. These masses, according to him, were at the lower end of the caste spectrum under the Brahminical hierarchy, and were an oppressed lot. They eagerly embraced the egalitarianism of Islam, and that is how Eastern Bengal became Muslim majority.

While the theory is basically in tune with the likely theory postulated earlier, Mukul has not been explicit as to whether the masses first converted from Buddhism to Hinduism, and then to Islam or directly from Buddhism to Islam. His emphasis on the presumed Brahminical oppression suggests the first, while in all probability the second is what had actually happened. In his analysis as well as the interview that this author had with him (see Chapter 10) Mukul had also betrayed a strong dislike for Hinduism, or what he calls the 'Brahminical religion'. From the the annihilation of Buddhism in the plains of India (which has been referred to earlier in connection with the travels of Acharya Sankara) he has conjectured that Buddhists were also annihilated all over India, without revealing any basis for such a presumption, and without taking any account of the fact that ruins of Buddhist shrines, like Mahasthangarh in North Bengal or Nalanda in Bihar, had existed through the Hindu period, to this day without being vandalised. And last of all, his theory does not explain why what happened in Eastern Bengal did not happen in western part of Bengal, Magadh or Mithila regions (now parts of the Indian state of Bihar) or Avadh, Tirhut, or Rohilkhand (now parts of the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh) - after all the Sufis could not have reached Eastern Bengal without passing through these regions, and there is no reason why the Sufis would not have tried their proselytisation in these parts. What, then, is the reason why the people responded to the Sufis in Eastern Bengal while they did not do so in such large numbers in Western Bengal, Magadh, Mithila, Avadh or Rohilkhand? The only plausible reason appears to be the extremely tenacious hold of Sanatan Dharma, as opposed to the looseness of the Buddhist-animist faith.

It appears that the subject has not been adequately researched. It is doubtless a very interesting topic of demographic research but the results, whatever they may be, may cause trouble, which may explain the reluctance to research.Â Â Â Â

http://www.bengalvoice.com/uproot_chapter1.htm
We see this phenomenon even today, the tribals in the North East whose religious practices would probably be classified as animism have been rapidly xtianised, on the other hand states with substantial Hindu influence in the North East have remained so, examples being Assam, Tripura (has a large Bengali migrant population), Manipur (outer districts have been Christianised, these are probably tribal dominated).

01-31-2006, 08:44 AM

tripura doesnt have a bengali migrant population - it was always part of bengal. but since it was on the other side, it couldnt be clubbed into hindu west bengal and we had t have the muslim bangladesh sandwiched in the middle.

but i see your (and the quoted author's) point about how hindus continued to be hindus while the buddhists fell for the sufi hogwash and of late the mongoloid tribals are falling for the X-tian canards in toto.

02-22-2006, 06:44 AM

QUOTE(jayshastri @ Feb 20 2006, 08:26 AM)
QUOTE(acharya @ Oct 31 2003, 12:33 AM)
3 Million Dead in Artificial Famine in Bengal
By Sutapas

shown in the 1997 Channel 4 Secret History programme The Forgotten Famine.

The people who made that documantry are out of business. channel 4 does not plan to broadcast this documantry again. and they don't plan to make it availaible on dvd/vhs either. but here it is.
(the files won't stay on this link for long so anyone intersted after that, u know what to do)
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=WJS8YPF4

02-22-2006, 04:12 PM

The original inhabitants of Tripura are not Bengali. It was a small kingdom which later became a Princly State under British sezurnity. The present Bangali population comprises those who migrated from East Bengal into Tripura during the British time. Sunsequently, a large number of Hindu Bengali refugees croses into tripura from East Pakistan and in later years from Bangladesh.

02-23-2006, 07:25 PM

fwd.. relevant portions onleee..

Udayan Namboodri's "Bengal's Night without end". 
Published by India First Foundation, G-3,
Dhawandeep Building, #6, Jantar-mantar road,
New Delhi - 110 00. Phone: 011-2-334 8442, - 8443.

"The book is just out.

.....Udayan names ppl and politicians who have made W Bengal the terrorist state that it is and that makes the critical difference. The ugly face of communism and the details of how they brought abt 'land reforms' is as brutal as the manner in which the soviet union delat with the kulaks. as i said, a must read. the first definitive book abt the secretive state of W Bengal."

03-19-2006, 02:17 AM

QUOTE(Ravish @ Feb 22 2006, 04:12 PM)The original inhabitants of Tripura are not Bengali. It was a small kingdom which later became a Princly State under British sezurnity. The present Bangali population comprises those who migrated from East Bengal into Tripura during the British time. Sunsequently, a large number of Hindu Bengali refugees croses into tripura from East Pakistan and in later years from Bangladesh.
[right][snapback]47106[/snapback][/right]


i thought it was always bengali, since Tripura had a Bengali "Raja" (one of the many princely states of india) going back to pre-british days, by a long time.

Login




Remember me Lost Password?