Musings about the Indian ‘DemoNcracy’
Pretender to the Indian Prime minister’s ‘throne’ Rahul ‘Gandhi’ while boasting about his family’s contributions to India forgot about his family’s role in the June 1984 attack on Darbar Sahib Amritsar & mass murder of thousands of Sikhs in the November 1984 state-supervised pogrom
Dr. Manmohan Singh, a Sikh, has the audacity to say publicly that the son of the mass murderer of Sikhs, the effeminate unread bachelor, Rahul Gandy, is India’s future!
Washington, D.C., Wednesday, April 25, 2007 - India, what a ‘demoNcracy’ – and the sycophancy that prevails in the politics of India’s ruling party makes one puke?Addressing an Utter Pradesh election rally, held recently in Bijnore, his first election speech during the ongoing assembly polls in that state, India’s current (appointed) Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, a Sikh, diminished his own reputation and shamed and disgusted the world’s 25 million proud Sikhs, when he broke all records of sycophancy in Indian politics. Manmohan Singh justified Rahul Gandhi’s recent boastful remarks about his Nehru family’s, exclusive post and pre-partition, achievements, in the service of India. (> http://www.thehindu.com/2007/04/17/stories/2007041703051200.htm < and > http://www.thehindu.com/2007/03/20/stories/2007032015570300.htm <)
It is no secret that India is a corrupt dynastic oligarchy - founded by India’s first Prime minister, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. Dr. Manmohan Singh had the audacity to tell the audience in Uttar Pradesh that the scion of that ‘Nehru’ dynasty, Rahul ‘Gandhi’, (the effeminate, 37 year old bachelor half/ Italian and half/literate son of the late Prime minister Rajiv ‘Gandhi’, who ordered the November 1984 mass murder of thousands of innocent Sikhs in India) is ‘their future prime minister’ and that, “he is sweating it out for you and should get your vote.”
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, undeterred by the public criticism of Rahul Gandhi's numerous irresponsible and boastful remarks made recently about his family’s achievements, has gone to the extent of describing his party's ‘crown prince’, Rahul ‘Gandhi’, as India’s future Prime minister. Although it is a known fact that Manmohan Singh owes his premiership to a politically shrewd move by Sonia Gandhi, the Italian widow of a dead prime minister, but should a man of Manmohan’s educational qualifications, ethnicity and so-called integrity, go down on all fours in competing with others in the dynastic Congress party, in his practice of sycophancy? Manmohan Singh has even said that P.V. Narasimha Rao, under whose supervision as a federal minister thousands of Sikhs were murdered in Delhi – after a ‘wink and a nod’ from Rajiv Gandhi - in the November 1984 pogrom in Delhi) was ‘a sanyasi in poiltics’. (> http://www.thehindu.com/2007/04/01/stories/2007040101840900.htm <)
The exploitation for political gain and use of India’s founding father’s last name ‘Gandhi’ by the children of the Italian widow of Rajiv, Sonia Mainou, is not just happenstance but a deliberate act – and a scandal. This drama has been (and is being) enacted, since 1942 when, Rahul’s grandmother Indira Priyadarshani Nehru, (the only daughter of a prominent Brahmin politician of the Congress party, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru) married a Parsi, Feroze Gandy, whom she had met in Europe. That marriage outside the caste was a shameful scandal for the Brahmin caste dominated Congress Party leadership and for her Brahmin father. In order to save the public face of the Nehru family, in a caste-ridden society like India, Feroze Gandy was made to start using the last name of India’s founding father Gandhi instead of Gandy as they knew that the gullible and ‘unwashed’ Indian electorate will be dazzled by the ‘mythological’ resonance of the Gandhi name with India’s founding father M. K. Gandhi. (> http://www.thehindu.com/2004/04/09/stories/2004040904261400.htm <)
It is obvious that Indira ‘Gandhi’ & family, have done their homework and have long understood the aura of impressive names. In the Indian movie world, as everyone knows, some actors adopt new labels of convenience. The name of the very popular Dilip Kumar comes to mind. Would he have enjoyed a different sort of career as Yusuf Khan, the name he abandoned as he made his way upwards in Bollywood. Hollywood stars too have been changing their names for decades — the macho cowboy John Wayne was born Marion Michael Morrison and the sultry Marilyn Monroe was legally baptized with the far too homely name of Norma Jean Mortenson. More recently, Bernie Schwartz took on the more glamorous name, Tony Curtis. Woody Allen (was born Allen Konigsberg), Dean Martin (Dino Crocetti), Fred Astaire (Frederick Austerlitz) and Cary Grant (Archibald Leach).
It is worth noting here that members of India’s small Parsi community, (fire-worshipping immigrants from Iran), during the British Colonial rule, have been sometimes adopting Gujrati surnames at birth which reflected their family profession, among other things, like Mistry, Daruwala, Toddywala, Engineer, etc. One wonders, whether, Indira’s Parsi husband, Feroze, had he been a Toddywalla or a Mistry rather than a Gandy, which was improved to Gandhi, might India's political history have been different? Perhaps yes.
Another aspect of the Rahul Gandhi family’s big fraud on the Indian people is about that family’s level of education. It is a fact that not a single person from India’s ruling dynasty (Indira, Rajiv, Sanjay, Rahul or Sonia) has completed a college degree course in the past eighty years since Pandit Nehru graduated from a British university in the early 1900’s. This in a country where even a university graduate has diffithe unread culty locating a clerical job. The educational background of ‘Crown Prince’ Rahul Gandhi – the future’prime minister’ - is an international mystery. The Congress(I) party office has avoided releasing a `CV' of Rahul as of date, but media reports say (see article in the prestigious FRONTLINE News-magazine (> http://www.flonnet.com/fl2108/stories/20040423004503400.htm <) and we quote verbatim from it, that in his, “institution-hopping history Rahul has not stuck through any academic degree course in any school or university. While Rahul Gandhi did not have the grades to make it to Delhi's St. Stephens College, he was admitted in the sports quota for his shooting skills. His contemporaries at college remember him as a low-profile, reserved person. Said Upinder Singh, who currently heads the college's History department: ‘His stint at St. Stephens was too brief to judge his academic merit.’ Later, Rahul Gandhi shifted to Harvard University in the United States. According to the Harvard alumni records, he attended that school between 1990 and 1993 (which makes him an exact contemporary of Jyotiraditya Scindia there), lived off campus and never managed to get a degree there. However, Jairam Ramesh claims that he transferred to another school in Massachusetts because of ‘security concerns’, and completed his Bachelors degree. While media reports claim that Rahul Gandhi is not listed on the college database, Ramesh asserts that "in 1995, he got an M.Phil. in the economics of developing countries from Trinity College, Cambridge. After that Rahul Gandhi joined the London office of Monitor, a leading consultancy firm set up by Michael Porter of the Harvard Business School, where he is reported to have worked in projects relating to technology and communication. On his return to India, over a year ago, he set up his own consultancy firm in Mumbai.” End quote. Other media reports claim that Rahul Gandhi has also claimed that he got an M.Phil from a university in Florida but no university there, or in Britain, has a record of it. It is the same phony story about Sonia Maino Gandhi’s so-called degree from Cambridge university where she was employed as a waitress in a restaurant in that town when she met Rajiv Gandhi. She never studied in Cambridge university. Rajiv ‘Gandhi’ too like his mother Indira ‘Gandhi’ could never establish his educational qualifications. Some ‘Gandhi family! Some future Prime Minister Rahul Gandhi!
It is obvious the ambitious ‘family’, and its loyal friends, like Dr. Manmohan Singh, think that the gullible Indian public can be conned into accepting unread and effeminate Rahul’s rule in the future like they accepted unread Rajiv and Indira in the past. These sychophants seem to have forgotten that times are changing. In a democratic system, political leaders rise from the grassroots; they are not born as a result of dynastic politics or a feudal mentality or a ‘Gandhi’ name.
As far as the 25 million strong Sikh nation (3 million free in the diaspora) is concerned, this Nehru family’s 46-years-long rule has only brought poverty, death and destruction to the 22 million Sikhs ever since they were made captive in Indian occupied Punjab, in 1947, when Colonial Britain quit South Asia in haste and passed on the instruments of state power to an evil nexus of the crafty Brahmin and the usurious Bania. This condition of Sikh captivity will not last for long as the 22 million captive Sikhs are born to be free. Raj Karayga Khalsa!