Wednesday, March 23, 2022

Rape, Killings, Murder, and Betrayal with Kashmiri Hindus



These exhortations urged the faithful to give a final push to the Kafir in order to ring in the true Islamic order. These slogans were mixed with precise and unambiguous threats to Pandits. They were presented with three choices — Ralive, Tsaliv ya Galive (convert to Islam, leave the place or prish). Tens of thousands of Kashmiri Muslims poured into the streets of the Valley, shouting  ‘death to India’ and death to Kafirs.



The Pandits could see the writing on the wall. If they were lucky enough to see the night through, they would have to vacate the place before they met the same fate as Tikka Lal Taploo and many others. The Seventh Exodus was surely staring them in the face. By morning, it became apparent to Pandits that Kashmiri Muslims had decided to throw them out from the Valley. Broadcasting vicious Jehadi sermons and revolutionary songs, interspersed with blood curdling shouts and shrieks, threatening Kshmiri Pandis with dire consequences, became a routine ‘Mantra’ of the Muslims of the Valley, to force them to flee from Kashmir. Some of the slogans used were:


“Zalimo, O Kafiro, Kashmir harmara chod do”.


(O! Merciless, O! Kafirs leave our Kashmir)

“Kashmir mein agar rehna hai, Allah-ho-Akbar kahna hoga”

(Any one wanting to live in Kashmir will have to convert to Islam)

La Sharqia la gharbia, Islamia! Islamia!

From East to West, there will be only Islam

“Musalmano jago, Kafiro bhago”,

(O! Muslims, Arise, O! Kafirs, scoot)

“Islam hamara maqsad hai, Quran hamara dastur hai, jehad hamara Rasta hai”

(Islam is our objective, Q’uran is our constitution, Jehad is our way of our life)

“Kashmir banega Pakistan”

(Kashmir will become Pakistan)

“Kashir banawon Pakistan, Bataw varaie, Batneiw saan”

(We will turn Kashmir into Pakistan alongwith Kashmiri Pandit women, but without their men folk)


“Pakistan se kya Rishta? La Ilah-e- Illalah”


(Islam defines our relationship with Pakistan)

Dil mein rakho Allah ka khauf; Hath mein rakho Kalashnikov.

(With fear of Allah ruling your hearts, wield a Kalashnikov)

“Yahan kya chalega, Nizam-e- Mustafa”

(We want to be ruled under Shari’ah)

“People’s League ka kya paigam, Fateh, Azadi aur Islam”

(“What is the message of People’s League? Victory, Freedom and Islam.”)

Wall posters in fairly large letters, proclaiming Kashmir as ‘Islamic Republic of Kashmir’, became a com*mon sight in the entir Valley. So were the big and prominent advertisements in local dailies, proclaiming their intent:

‘Aim of the present struggle is the supremacy of Islam in Kashmir, in all walks of life and nothing else. Any one who puts a hurdle in our way will be annihilated’.

Press release of Hizb-ul-Mujahideen (HM) published in the morning edition of Urdu Daily ‘Aftab’ of April, 01, 1990.


‘Kashmiri Pandits responsible for duress against Muslims should leave the Valley within two days’.

Head lines of Urdu Daily, Al Safa, of April, 14, 1990.

‘With Kalashnikov in one hand and Quran in the other the Mujahids would openly roam the streets singing the Tarana-e- Kashmir.’


1. RESIGNATION OF JOGENDRA NATH MANDAL, MINISTER FOR LAW AND LABOUR, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN: Part 1 (http://thoughtcrackers.blogspot.com/2020/11/resignation-of-jogendra-nath-mandal.html

2. Kashmir : A Political Game-1930-1960(Part-1):History, Conflict, India, Pakistan, Kashmiris, Separatist, Information War, Possible Solution (http://thoughtcrackers.blogspot.com/2016/09/kashmir-political-game-1930-1960part.html

3. Kashmir : A Political Game-1930-1960(Part-2):History, Conflict, India, Pakistan, Kashmiris, Separatist, Information War, Possible Solution (http://thoughtcrackers.blogspot.com/2016/09/kashmir-political-game-1930-1960part_15.html)

ISIS Wahhabis in India,Kashmir: The Destruction, Kashmir Series: part 4 2000-2014 (http://thoughtcrackers.blogspot.com/search?q=Wahhabis+)

4. Islamic Terrorism and Genocide of Kashmiri Pandits (http://ikashmir.net/history/genocide.html).

5. Atrocities in Kashmir (http://ikashmir.net/atrocities/index.html)

Since 1990, planned and organized secessionist-terrorism has brutalized Kashmir, the valley of peace and exquisite beauty. Systematic efforts have been made to destroy its syncretic culture, traditions, and heritage, by an orgy of mindless violence fueled by religious fanaticism and extremism, aided and abetted from across India's borders.

6. Kashmir Historical Documents (http://ikashmir.net/historicaldocuments/index.html)

7. Terrorist Role of Pakistan (http://ikashmir.net/pakistan/index.html)

8. Yasin Malik BBC Hard Talk Interview (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uif0fuaEX6o&t=875s)

9. Reporting from Kashmir, 1989 to 1994 - Part 1 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vb34Ap2muJI&t=514s)

10. Reporting from Kashmir, 1989 to 1994 - Part 2

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuBfzbD7lXE)

11. Reporting from Kashmir, 1989 to 1994 - Part 3

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtYpdjtDx7o)

12. Ex-Governor - J&K, Jagmohan on Mirwaiz Maulvi Farooq incident | Archival footage

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKiRSKpAJUU

13. Bitta Karate speaks: 1989 Rubaiya Sayeed's kidnap and the events in Kashmir thereafter

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VsDhlCBCD7Q&t=39s)

14. Exodus of Hindu Kashmiri Pandits from Srinagar valley

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tXX7caN2tU)

15. Militants target Sikhs in Kashmir (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8U52PQRuS4)

16. Tourists abduction in Jammu and Kashmir in 1995 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGeeTB3BrO0)

17. When Chittisinghpura was struck - 35 Sikh martyrs | Jammu and Kashmir - Part 1

18. Viral video of Lashkar-e-Taiba training camp in PoK exposes Pakistan's lies

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrXksGMaCl0)

19. Republic TV Accesses Exclusive Pictures Of Pakistan's Terror Training Camp In PoK

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqAjdtk1LpU)

20. Watch: Pak terrorist caught in Afghanistan, was training for violence in J&K

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWFEgExQHlw)

21. Pak Terror Training Camp In PoK | Caught On Camera (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLL9oP1RmvA)

22.

Online Terror Training Video Exposes Pakistan's Role In Jammu & Kashmir Terror Attacks

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1fAc7gRQHY) 


Kashmir show my earlier comments. these islamist want to use Human rights against Us as a weapon. For these Murders , everything can be a weapon of Implementing Shria Law. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djmCdpCvFt8 (Killing and raping of Kashmiri Hindus.mp4) Kashmiri Hindus (Pandits) are in exile since early 1990 after Islamic religious fundamentalists in the valley of Kashmir took to armed subversion and terrorism and drove them out of their centuries old habitat. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=709YisIVM2Q (Shocking, Tragic and Horrible untold story of Kashmiri Hindus) http://www.panunkashmir.org https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoXEDqVaE0s (Who RAPES,who KILLS,who TORTURES in Kashmir ???...see real PROOFS) http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldse…/specials/1246_land/page9.shtml (Displaced Kashmiri Pandit women pray for peace and an early return home at an annual Hindu festival) http://www.indiandefencereview.com/…/kashmiri-pandits-offe…/( Kashmiri Pandits offered three choices by Radical Islamists) http://ikashmir.net/history/genocide.html (Islamic Terrorism and Genocide of Kashmiri Pandits). https://kashmirblogs.wordpress.com/genocide-of-kashmiri-pa…/ (Kashmir blogs-Truth about Kashmir-" Kashmir blog"") https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5WFD_bzplI (killing kafir Kashmiri pandits pt2) Kashmiri movement is nothing but a movement of Islamic state where people don’t want jobs, health care system, good rods or modern Infrastructure. They just want to become a part of ISLAMIC Pakistan (a terrorist manufacturer country). These fundamentally Islamist will want to do same with French people what they did with Kashmiri Pundits: It is first example where Hindu majority India has seen killings of Hindus: (ISIS, Pakistan flags waved in Srinagar, police registers FIR) http://indianexpress.com/…/flags-of-isis-pakistan-hoisted-…/( http://www.news18.com/…/after-pakistan-flags-separatist-sup… (After Pakistani flags, separatists wave ISIS flags in Kashmir) http://zeenews.india.com/…/pak-isis-flags-raised-in-kashmir… (Pak, ISIS flags raised in Kashmir during protests over killing of separatist activist) http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/…/articlesh…/44831687.cms (ISIS flag in Kashmir valley worries Army) http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/…/articlesh…/44857740.cms (Protesters again display ISIS flags in Kashmir valley) http://www.bharatniti.in/…/isis-flags-in-kashmir-separat…/63 (ISIS flags in Kashmir: Separatists' new strategy?) http://newsworldindia.in/…/protestors-displayed-isis…/53819/ (After Pakistani Flags, ISIS Flags Waved In Kashmir This Time) JKLF leader, Bitta Karate Confessed To Killing 20 Kashmiri Pandits:

Photos Of Jaish Camp Show Hall Where Terrorists Trained, Ammo Storage

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hz5kSqX8Mo

Exclusive Pictures Of Pakistan's Terror Training Camp In PoK

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqAjdtk1LpU

Pakistan treats PoK as a terror launch pad claims PoK leader Kashmiri 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imHAQVOoz3I

Asi gachi Pakistan, Bata ros ta batanev san. meaning (We want Pakistan, with Kashmiri Hindu women and without their men-folk). -Raliv, Galiv Ya Chaliv (Convert, die or escape) replaced the sounds of evening Azaan (prayers) from majority of mosques in the valley of Kashmir.











Thursday, March 17, 2022

Jagmohan's letter to Rajiv Gandhi on Kashmir: Potatoes one day, the Pope the next

 A ‘Letter to Mr Rajiv Gandhi’, (former Prime Minister) written by Jagmohan, twice Governor of Jammu and Kashmir, on April 20, 1990.

Dear Shri Rajiv Gandhi,

You have virtually forced me to write this open letter to you. For, all along I have persistently tried to keep myself away from party politics and to use whatever little talent and energy I might have to do some creative and constructive work, as was done recently in regard to the management and improvement of Mata Vaishno Devi shrine complex and to help in bringing about a sort of cultural renaissance without which our fast decaying institutions cannot be nursed back to health. At the moment, the nobler purposes of these institutions, be they in the sphere of executive, legislature or judiciary etc. have been sapped and the soul of justice and truth sucked out of them by the politics of expediency.

You and your friends like Dr. Farooq Abdullah are, however, bent upon painting a false picture before the nation with regard to Kashmir. Your senior party men like Shiv Shankar and N.K.P. Salve have, apparently at your behest, been using the forum of Parliament for building an atmosphere of prejudice against me. The former raked up a fourteen-year old incident of Turkman Gate and the latter a press interview, an interview that I never gave, to hurl a barrage of accusations of communalism against my person. 

Mani Shankar Iyer, too, has been dipping his poisonous darts in the columns of some magazines. I, however, chose to suffer in silence all the slings and arrows of this outrageous armoury of disinformation. Only rarely did I try to correct gross distortions by sending letters to the editors of newspapers and magazines. My intention was to remain content with a book, an academic and historic venture which, I believed, I owed to the nation and to history.

But the other day some friends showed to me press clippings of your comments in the election meetings in Rajasthan. That, I thought, was the limit. I realised that unless I checked your intentional distortions, you would spread false impression about me throughout the country during the course of your election campaign.

Need I remind you that from the beginning of 1988, I had started sending “Warning Signals” to you about the gathering storm in Kashmir? But you and the power wielders around you had neither the time, nor the inclination, nor the vision, to see these signals. They were so clear, so pointed, that to ignore them was to commit sins of true historical proportions.

To recapitulate and to serve as illustrations, I would refer to a few of these signals. In August 1988, after analysing the current and undercurrents, I had summed up the position thus: “The drum-beaters of parochialism and fundamentalism are working overtime. Subversion is on the increase. The shadows of events from across the border are lengthening. Lethal weapons have come in. More may be on the way”. 

In April 1989 I had desperately pleaded for immediate action. I said: “The situation is fast deteriorating. It has almost reached a point of no return. For the last five days there has been large-scale violence, arson, firing, hartals, casualties and what not. Things have truly fallen apart. Talking of the Irish crisis, British Prime Minister Disraeli had said: “It is potatoes one day and Pope the next.” Similar is the present position in Kashmir. Yesterday, it was Maqbool Butt; today it is Satanic Verses; Tomorrow it will be repression day and the day after it will be something else. The Chief Minister stands isolated. He has already fallen-politically as well as administratively; perhaps, only constitutional rites remain to be performed. His clutches are too soiled and rickety to support him. Personal aberrations have also eroded his public standing. The situation calls for effective intervention. Today may be timely, tomorrow may be too late”.

SUBVERSIONISTS SWELL

Again, in May, I expressed my growing anxiety: ‘What is still more worrying is that every victory of subversionists is swelling their ranks, and the animosity is being diverted against the central authorities.” But you chose not to do anything. Your inaction was mystifying. Equally mystifying was your reaction to my appointment for the second term. How could I suddenly become communal, anti-Muslim and what not?

When I resigned in July 1989 there was no rancour. You wanted me to fight as your party candidate for the South Delhi Lok Sabha seat. Since I had general revulsion for the type of politics which our country had, by and large, come to breed, I declined the offer. If you had any serious reservation about my accepting the offer of J&K Governorship for the second term, you could have adopted the straightforward course and apprised me of your views. I would have thought twice before going into a situation which had virtually reached a point of no return. There would have been no need for you to resort to false accusations.

May be you do not consider truth and consistency as virtues. May be you believe that the words inscribed on our national emblem — SatyamevaJayate — are mere words without meaning and significance for motivating the nation to proceed in the right direction and build a true and just India by true and just means.  Perhaps power is all that matters to you — power by whichever means and at whatever cost.

Congress displayed total mental surrender

With regard to the conditions prevailing before and after my arrival on the scene, you and your collaborators have been perverting reality. The truth is that before the imposition of Governor’s rule on January 19, 1990, there was a total mental surrender. Even prior to the day (December 8, 1989) of Dr. Rubaiya Sayeed’s kidnapping, when the eagle of terrorism swooped on the state with full fury, 1600 violent incidents, including 351 bomb blasts had taken place in eleven months. Then between January 1 and January 19, 1990, there were as many as 319 violent acts - 21 armed attacks, 114 bomb blasts, 112 arsons, and 72 incidents of mob violence.

You, perhaps, never cared to know that all the components of the power structure had been virtually taken over by the subversives. For example, when Shabir Ahmed Shah was arrested in September 1989 on the Intelligence Bureau’s tip-off, Srinagar Deputy Commissioner flatly refused to sign the warrant of detention. Anantnag Deputy Commissioner adopted the same attitude. The Advocate-General did not appear before the Court to represent the state case. He tried to pass on the responsibility to the Additional Advocate General and the Government council. They, too, did not appear.

Do you not remember what happened on the day of Lok Sabha poll in November 22, 1989 ? In a translating gesture, TV sets were placed near some of the polling booths with placards reading “anyone who will cast his vote will get this.” No one in the administration of Dr. Farooq Abdullah took any step to remove such symbols of defiance of authority.

Let me remind you that Sopore is the hometown of Gulam Rasool Kar, who was at that time a Cabinet Minister in the State Government. It is also the home town of the Chairman of the Legislative Council, Habibullah, and also of the former National Conference MP and Cabinet Minister, Abdul Shah Vakil. Yet only five votes were cast in Sopore town. In Pattan, an area supposedly under the influence of Iftikar Hussain Ansari, the then Congress (I) Minister, not a single vote was cast. Such was the commitment and standing of your leaders and collaborators in the State. And you still thought that subversion and terrorism could be fought with such political and administrative instruments.

DEMORALISED POLICE

Around that point of time, when the police set-up was getting demoralised, when intelligence was fast drying up, when infiltrators in Services were bringing stories of subversive plans like TOPAC, your protégé Dr Farooq Abdullah was either going abroad or releasing 70 hardcore and highly motivated terrorists who were trained in the handling of dangerous weapons, who had contacts at the highest level in Pakistan occupied Kashmir, who knew all the devious routes of going to and returning from Pakistan and whose detention had been approved by the three-member advisory board presided over by the Chief Justice.

Their simultaneous release enabled them to occupy key positions in the network of subversion and terrorism and to complete the chain which took them again to Pakistan to bring arms to indulge in killings and kidnappings and other acts of terrorism. One of the released persons Mohd. Daud Khan of Ganderbal became the Deputy Commander-in-Chief of a terrorist outfit, Al-Bakar, and took a leading part in organising a force of 2,500 Kashmiri youths. Who is to be blamed for all the subsequent heinous crimes committed by these released 70 terrorists? I would leave this question to be answered by the people to whom you are talking about the “Jagmohan Factor.”

The truth supported by the preponderence of evidence is that before January 19, 1990, the terrorist had become the real ruler. The ground had been yielded to him to such an extent that it dominated the public mind. He could virtually swim like a fish in the sea. Would it matter if the sea was subsequently surrounded?

In your attempt to hide all your sins of omission and commission in Kashmir and as a part of your small politics which cannot go beyond dividing people and creating vote banks, you took special pains to demolish all regard and respect which the Kashmiri masses, including the Muslim youth, had developed for me during my first term from April 26, 1984, to July 12, 1989. Against all facts, unassailable evidence and your own precious pronouncements, you started labelling me as anti-Muslim.

May I, in this connection, also invite your attention to three of the important suggestions made in my book, Rebuilding Shahjahanabad: The Walled City of Delhi. One pertained to the creation of the green velvet between Jama Masjid and Red Fort; the second to the construction of a road linking Parliament House with the Jama Masjid complex, and the third to the setting up of a second Shahajhanabad in the Mata Sundawri road-Minto road complex, reflecting the synthetic culture of the city, its traditional as well as its modern texture. Could such suggestions, I ask you, come of an anti-Muslim mind?

MISUSING PARLIAMENT 

How you and your associates use the forum of Parliament to undermine my standing amongst the Kashmiri Muslims was evident from what N.KP. Salve, MP did in the Rajya Sabha on May 25, 1990.
Referring to the so called interview to the Bombay Weekly, THE CURRENT – an interview which I never gave - Salve chose wholly unjustified expressions; “There was a patent and palpable attitude of very disconcerting communal bias and, therefore, he (Governor) was happy under the garb of eliminating the terrorist, the saboteurs and the culprits, in eliminating the whole community as it were; now the Governor has himself given profuse and unabashed vent to his malicious malignity, hate and extreme dislike, branding every member of a particular community as a militant”.

I know Salve. I do not think that if left to himself he would have done what he did. Clearly, he was goaded to say something which was against his training and background. But the elementary precaution which any jurist, at least a jurist of Salve’s eminence would have taken, was to first check whether any such interview had been given by me, and if so, whether the remarks attributed to me were actually made. The unseemly haste was itself revealing. The issue was raised on May 25, while the weekly was dated May 26 June 2, 1990. You yourself rushed a letter to the President on May 25, on the basis of the interview that in reality did not exist. You explained that VP Singh had appointed a person with rabid communalist opinion as Governor. You also got your letter widely published on May 25.  

Article 370 skins the poor, helps parasites

You created a scene on March 7, 1990 at the time of the visit of the All Party Committee to Srinagar, and made it a point to convey to the people in 1986, that I wanted to have Article 370 abrogated. At that critical juncture, when I was fighting the forces of terrorism with my back to the wall and beginning to turn the corner after frustrating the sinister designs of the subversives from January 26, 1990 onwards, you thought it appropriate to cause hostility against me by tearing the facts out of context. Whether this act of yours was responsible or irresponsible, I would leave to the nation to decide.

What I had really pointed out in August-September 1986 was: ‘Article 370 is nothing but a breeding ground for the parasites at the heart of the paradise. It skins the poor. It deceives them with its mirage. It lines the pockets of the “power elites.” It fans the ego of the new sultans. In essence, it creates a land without justice, a land full of crudities and contradictions. It props up politics of deception, duplicity and demagogy.

It breeds the microbes of subversion. It keeps alive the unwholesome legacy of the two-nation theory. It suffocates the very idea of India and fogs the very vision of a great social and cultural crucible from Kashmir to Kanyakumari. It could be the epicentre of a violent earth-quake, the tremors of which would be felt all over the country with unforeseen consequences.

I had argued, ‘The fundamental aspect which has been lost sight of in the controversy for deletion or retention of Article 370 is its misuse. Over the years, it has become an instrument of exploitation in the hands of the ruling political elites and other vested interests in bureaucracy, business, judiciary and bar. Apart from the politicians, the richer classes have found it convenient to amass wealth and not allow healthy financial legislation to come to the State.

The provisions of the Wealth Tax, the Urban Land Ceiling Act, the Gift Tax etc, and other beneficial laws of the Union have not been allowed to be operated in the State under the cover of Article 370. The common people are prevented from realising that Article 370 is actually keeping them impoverished and denying them justice and also their due share in economic advancement.’

My stand was that the poor people of Kashmir had been exploited under the protective wall of Article 370 and that the correct position needed to be explained to them. I had made a number of suggestions in this regard and also in regard to the reform and reorganisation of the institutional framework. But all these were ignored. A great opportunity was missed.

Subsequent events have reinforced my views that Article 370 and it’s by-product, the separate Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir must go, not only because it is legally and constitutionally feasible to do so, but also because larger and more basic considerations of our past history and contemporary life require it. The Article merely facilitates the growth and continuation of corrupt oligarchies. It puts false notions in the minds of the youth. It gives rise to regional tensions and conflicts and even the autonomy assumed to be available is not attainable in practice.

The distinct personality and cultural identity of Kashmir can be safeguarded without this Article. It is socially regressive and causes situations in which women lose their right if they marry non-state subjects and persons staying for over 44 years in the State are denied elementary human and democratic rights. And, above all, it does not fit into the reality and requirement of India and its vast and varied span.

What India needs today is not petty sovereignty that would sap its spirit and aspirations and turn it into small “banana-republics” in the hands of ‘tin-pot dictators’, but a new social, political and cultural crucible in which values of truth and rectitude, of fairness and justice, and of compassion and catholicity, are melted, purified and moulded into a vigorous and vibrant set- up which provides real freedom, real democracy and real resurgence to all.

I must also point out that when other States in the Union ask for greater autonomy, they do not mean separation of identities. They really want decentralisation and devolution of power, so that administrative and development work is done speedily and the quality of service to the people improves. In Kashmir, the demand for retaining Article 370 with all its ‘pristine purity’, that is, without the alleged dilution that has taken place since 1953, stems from different motivation. It emanates from a clever strategy to remain away from the mainstream, to set up a separate fiefdom, to fly a separate flag, to have a Prime Minister rather than a Chief Minister, and Sadr-i-Riyasat instead of a Governor, and to secure greater power and patronage, not for the good of the masses, not for serving the cause of peace and progress or for attaining unity amidst diversity, but for serving the interests of ‘neo elites’, the ‘new Sheikhs.’

All those aspiring to be the custodians of the vote-banks continue to say that Article 370 is a matter of faith. But they do not proceed further. They do not ask themselves: What does this faith mean? What is its rationale? Would not bringing the State within the full framework of Indian Constitution give brighter lustre and sharper teeth to this faith and make it more just and meaningful?

In a similar strain, expressions like ‘historical necessity and ‘autonomy are talked about. What do these mean in practice? Does historical necessity mean that you include, on paper, Kashmir in the Indian Union by one hand at a huge cost and give it back, in practice, by another hand on the golden platter? And what does autonomy or so called pre-1953 or pre-1947 position imply? Would it not amount to the Kashmiri leadership say: ‘you will send and I will spend; you will have no say even if I build a corrupt and callous oligarchy and cause a situation in which Damocles’Sword of secession could be kept hanging on your head’

Tuesday, October 26, 2021

A Book Summary: EMINENT HISTORIANS Their technology, their line, their fraud by ARUN SHOURIE Part 3

 Please buy this book: 

Flipkart: https://www.flipkart.com/eminent-historians/p/itmeytznrckbgxrh

Good reads: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/651154.Eminent_Historians

Amazon: https://www.amazon.in/Eminent-Historians-Their-Technology-Fraud/dp/9351365913

The Historians

1. A characteristic concoction

2. Eminent entrepreneurs!

3. How to do it!

4. A fitting tribute

5. When cornered, cry ‘Petty’,

‘Personal’, ‘Uncivilized’

6. ‘…after selling himself in the flesh market’

3. How to do it!: 

..................Why, the most eminent of them all, ‘Responsibility for compiling the Arabic, Persian and Urdu inscriptions was accepted by Professor Irfan Habib on the request of the ICHR,’ the records state. How kind! Everyone was to work in an ‘honorary capacity’ – but in the special sense in which these worthies use the term ‘honorary’! Each of the two ‘Main Editors’, the ‘Editorial Committee’ of the project decided in its meeting on 20 September 1990, would be paid ‘an honorarium’ of Rs 5,000/- for every four months. The ‘General Editor’ too would be paid an honorarium of Rs 3,000/- for every four months. A very important rule that – never take money, take honoraria! The committee also decided, ‘Professor Shrimali may be allowed to purchase relevant books in connection with the work of the project if the books are not supplied to him by the ICHR within a reasonable time’ – a bit of honorariness which every scholar would lust after!.....................

........................Ramesh now deployed the next weapon: ask for more! Fools will always throw in good money after bad. He wrote back saying that for him to do the work, the Council should appoint three more scholars to assist him [so helpful was he that he specified the names of the three also!], that the Council should provide him with a computer assistant, and also with rented accommodation! The chairman wrote pointing out that already Rs 45,000 had been paid to Ramesh, that seven years had passed, and asked how much more time was required. Another year ‘may be required’ if the terms he had proposed were met, Ramesh answered! In despair, Settar turned to Irfan Habib and Sharma again and ‘appealed’ to them to help out – another tactic: subalterns block the pass; the only way the fellow can hope to proceed is by beseeching, and thereby getting in the debt of the principals! Sharma recalled that he had already dissociated himself from the project – vide the ‘beneficiaries’ spat. In any event, the  two met Settar, and agreed to submit – by now you would have guessed – a revised project each!...............And, never forget, if the ICHR takes any step to bring them to account, if it takes any step to hand over the project to anyone else, it is doing so because these eminent historians are secular, and the Council is now set upon saffronizing history!

4. A fitting tribute:

In his question V.N. Gadgil had asked the minister to state ‘whether several hundred manuscripts are either missing from the Council’s custody or are totally damaged; if so, what action the government has taken in the matter.’ In its written reply to the Rajya Sabha the ministry stated, ‘The ICHR has informed that a few manuscripts are reportedly either missing or have not been sent to the Press for certain reasons. The Council have intimated that it has initiated action to ascertain whether any manuscript has been lost or appropriated otherwise.’

Another rat: see how the case of manuscripts which were ‘missing’ had been clubbed with that of manuscripts which ‘have not been sent to the Press for certain reasons.’ And how the case of manuscripts which have been lost had been clubbed with that of manuscripts which have been ‘appropriated otherwise’.

..........The ICHR at last took a step closer to the truth. It wrote, Yes, the Annual Reports confirm that the manuscript prepared by Dr Saran was indeed received in the Council. By now I had learnt a vital fact. Dr Saran had died. His son-in-law had written to the Council in 1995. He had pointed out that the Annual Reports of the Council had themselves stated that the manuscript had been received by the ICHR, and had added, ‘As we understand, this project of my father-in-law was to be later published by the ICHR. We are not aware if this has indeed been done by the ICHR although nearly 20 years have elapsed since the translation was completed, but we have been extremely disturbed to hear stories to the effect that not only has someone else published the translation as his own work, but that this has been done by a member of the staff of the ICHR…’

.......The Publications Section had said the manuscript had never been forwarded to it. That left the section which was in a sense responsible for overseeing the project – the Medieval Unit. The deputy director in charge of this unit said that the manuscript was not traceable in his unit. Not satisfied with the reply, the then director had once again urged the deputy director, Medieval Unit, ‘to do his best efforts [sic] to trace out the manuscript’. But the friends, all entangled in those ‘interlocking webs of mutual complicity’, intervened. And the inquiry was killed. Guess who obtained a PhD from Rajasthan University in 1992 by submitting ‘an annotated English translation of Arif Qandhari’s Tarikh-i- Akbari’. Guess who has published the book in his name. The very same deputy director in charge of the ICHR’s Medieval Unit – Tasneem Ahmad!...............

..................Not just the needs of history, therefore, those of secularism, of unity based on a composite culture too fulfilled! The dignitary writing the Foreword? Irfan Habib himself – who, among other things, has been chairman of the ICHR twice, and a member five times! And don’t miss the description of India – just the composite culture and unity which it has taken a long process to create! The unity of course being nothing but a manifestation of, and totally dependent on, that composite culture! So, composite culture it is. The compliments duly returned: ‘The first and foremost [sic],’ writes Tasneem Ahmad, ‘I express my profound sense of gratitude, very personal regards and respects to Professor Irfan Habib, who encouraged and guided me at every stage of the work. In spite of his very pressing engagements and pre-occupation, he ungrudgingly spared his valuable time to examine with care every intricate problem, arising out [sic] during the course of work.’ The debt to another of these eminences not forgotten either: ‘My debt to my revered teacher,’ writes Tasneem Ahmad, ‘Professor Satish Chandra is incalculable. He took great pains in reading and correcting the work and his considered suggestions have paid me rich dividend.’ ‘Examining with care every problem arising out during the course of work’? Taking ‘great pains in reading and correcting the work’? Advancing ‘considered suggestions’ which ‘pay rich dividend’? – when the entire manuscript has been lifted word for word from the work of Dr Parmatma Saran!


A Book Summary: EMINENT HISTORIANS Their technology, their line, their fraud by ARUN SHOURIE Part 2 Eminent entrepreneurs!

Please buy this book: 

Flipkart: https://www.flipkart.com/eminent-historians/p/itmeytznrckbgxrh

Good reads: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/651154.Eminent_Historians

Amazon: https://www.amazon.in/Eminent-Historians-Their-Technology-Fraud/dp/9351365913

The Historians

1. A characteristic concoction

2. Eminent entrepreneurs!

3. How to do it!

4. A fitting tribute

5. When cornered, cry ‘Petty’,

‘Personal’, ‘Uncivilized’

6. ‘…after selling himself in the flesh market’

2. Eminent entrepreneurs!

...............‘This is an old charge which keeps surfacing now and then,’ wrote one of those ‘eminent historians’, K.N. Panikkar, in response to an article of mine – the charge that close to two crores had been spent on the ‘Towards Freedom’ project of the Indian Council of Historical Research, and little had been achieved. ‘About a year back Times of India carried a front page story on this. The historians had then clarified through a public statement published in several newspapers, that they have not drawn any money from the ICHR and that they worked for five years purely in an honorary capacity. When he [that is, me] gets the information from the ministry, if he does, that the editors have not taken any money, I would normally expect Shourie to tender a public apology. But given the intellectual honesty and cultural level reflected in his article, I do not think it would be forthcoming. The alternative of suing for defamation the likes of Shourie is below one’s dignity. But I do expect at least the ministry to make a public statement on the factual position.’ Strong stuff, and definitive, one would think. It turns out that on 17 July 1998, in answer to a question tabled in the Rajya Sabha, the ministry stated that only one part of the project had been completed and published since the original volume of Dr P.N. Chopra. This was the volume – in three parts – by Dr Partha Sarthi Gupta covering 1943–44. In answer to another question, the ministry reported that ‘After publication of the volume he was paid an honorarium of Rs 25,000/- in September 1997.’ Dr Partha Sarthi Gupta, in other words, was the one editor who had completed the work which he had undertaken. For that he had been paid Rs 25,000. The others had not completed the work they had undertaken, they had therefore not been paid the Rs 25,000 which were to be paid to them only when their volumes were completed and published. That is how our friend was proclaiming that they had been toiling as social workers – we have been working in an honorary capacity, we have not taken a penny!

How many staff members and research assistants were used by these scholars? I inquired. What amounts were spent on them? What is the status of the volumes the scholars were to produce? I inquired. The answers of the ICHR for the period 1988–89 to 1997–98:


The moral is plain: do not rely on governments, do not rely on governmental institutions for national tasks; individuals, small groups dedicated to the country – they alone can do them for the country.

...........Later I learnt that the Rs 75,000/- which had been allotted to this ‘eminent historian’ for this project – ‘The Oral History Project’ – had been but a part, a small part of the total take. Bipan Chandra was given in addition rupees two lakh by the ICSSR and rupees four lakh through the Jawaharlal Nehru University. Neither institution received any manuscript in return. Actually this matter had become an issue when time came for this ‘eminent historian’ to retire from the JNU. The university, naturally, could not do without his eminence. A proposal was, therefore, put up to engage him again after retirement. The then registrar of the university pointed out that, according to the university’s rules, the retirement dues, etc., could not be settled, and a contract to engage Bipan Chandra again could not be entered into till the accounts for the four lakh had been submitted, and that Bipan Chandra had studiously neglected to furnish the accounts. No accounts came. The then vice chancellor papered over the matter. entered into till the accounts for the four lakh had been submitted, and that Bipan Chandra had studiously neglected to furnish the accounts. No accounts came. The then vice chancellor papered over the matter. As nothing but nothing had turned up in the ICHR in return for its grant, the second part of my query remained: what action had the ICHR taken in the matter? Eventually I was told, ‘No action has been initiated on this as Dr Bipan Chandra is stated to be still working on the project.’ That was the position nine years after his eminence had collected the money!........

...........commencing from page 16 of the Annual Report for 1973–1974, I wrote… The result? Eventually, the ministry conceded that such a project had indeed been undertaken. Nineteen volumes were to have been produced. The volumes were assigned to different scholars – our eminences as usual led the rest! Rs 12,000 were doled out for each volume. The result? Here, in the words of the ICHR, is a list of the period to be covered by the volume, the scholar to whom it was assigned, the money the scholar collected, and the result:

1. Before 1857: K. Rajayan: Rs 12,000; Submitted but not traceable.

2. 1857–1885: S.R. Mehrotra: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

3. 1885–1886: Bipan Chandra: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

4. 1896–98: Not assigned.

5. 1899–1902: B.R. Grover: Rs 12,000; Submitted and published.

6. 1902–1903: Not assigned.

7. 1903–1905: Not assigned.

8. 1905–1907: Sumit Sarkar: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

9. 1907–1909: Sumit Sarkar: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

10. 1910–1915: M.N. Das: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

11. 1915–1919: T.K. Ravindran: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

12. 1919–1920: V.N. Dutta: Rs 12,000; Submitted and published.

13. 1920–1922: Sita Ram Singh: Rs 12,000, Submitted, under production.

14. 1922–1924: Sreekumaran Nair: Rs 12,000; Submitted and published.

15. 1924–1926: Amba Prasad: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

16. 1927–1929: Bimal Prasad: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

17. 1930–1931: Bimal Prasad: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

18. 1932–1934: Bipan Chandra: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

19. 1934–1937: Gopal Krishna: Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

As you read the amounts, do remember that they were paid out in the mid-1970s, when they amounted to much, much more than they do in these days of scams.

.........What about the ‘Economic Data and Statistics Project,’ which was listed with such fanfare in the Annual Reports till some years ago? I asked. Six volumes were to be produced under it, the ICHR wrote. The authors, the subjects they were to cover in the volume assigned to them, the money which was paid to them, and the outcome, in the words of the ICHR, are as follows:

B.B. Chaudhuri: ‘Agriculture, Rent and Revenue’; Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

S. Bhattacharya: ‘Financial and Currency Policies’; Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

Surendra Gopal: ‘Trade (inland and foreign) in the 17th and 18th Centuries’; Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

Nilmoni Mukherjee: ‘Trade (inland and foreign) in 19th and 20th Centuries’; Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

A.K. Bagchi: ‘Indian Industries (1860–1939)’; Rs 12,000; Not submitted.

V.B. Singh: ‘Labour, Prices, and Wages (1914–45)’; Rs 12,000;

Submitted but not traceable. In a word, as against six volumes which were to have been published, not one has been published. The money having been disbursed, the project just disappeared from the radar screen!

The ICHR eventually disclosed that in fact authors were paid ‘a lump sum for translation rights’: Rs 1,000 per language per volume if the book was more than 200 pages, and Rs 500 per language per volume if the book was less than 200 pages. Hence, R.S. Sharma got a total of Rs 47,000 for his books; Bipan Chandra, Rs 14,000; Irfan Habib, Rs 11,000; Romila Thapar, Rs 12,000…. 


A Book Summary: EMINENT HISTORIANS Their technology, their line, their fraud by ARUN SHOURIE Part 1

 Please buy this book: 

Flipkart: https://www.flipkart.com/eminent-historians/p/itmeytznrckbgxrh

Good reads: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/651154.Eminent_Historians

Amazon: https://www.amazon.in/Eminent-Historians-Their-Technology-Fraud/dp/9351365913

The Historians

1. A characteristic concoction

2. Eminent entrepreneurs!

3. How to do it!

4. A fitting tribute

5. When cornered, cry ‘Petty’,

‘Personal’, ‘Uncivilized’

6. ‘…after selling himself in the flesh market’

A characteristic concoction:

............The next issue of the CPI(M) mouthpiece, Peoples Democracy, reproduced this editorial! And carried with it an article by one of the ringleaders, K.N. Panikkar. ‘Saffronisation of historical research,’ proclaimed the heading. Panikkar repeated the charge of the word ‘rational’ having been replaced by ‘national’. He added another: the Memorandum of Association of the ICHR mentions five objectives, he said, but the resolution put out by the saffron brigade mentions only two.

Thus, the charge rested on three bits of ‘evidence’, that the Memorandum of Association of the ICHR had been changed; second, that a word – ‘rational’ – in the resolution announcing the new members of the ICHR had been surreptitiously replaced by another word – ‘national’; third, that while the original Memorandum of Association had specified five objectives for the ICHR, the new resolution cut out three of these. Having been educated by The Hindu that the ‘nodal ministry’ for the matter was the Ministry of Human Resources Development, I rang up the secretary of that ministry. Has the Memorandum of Association of the ICHR been changed? I asked. No, he said. It has not been changed, he said. And then about the resolution announcing the new members. The allegation, you will recall, was that the aim which in the Memorandum of Association is, ‘to give a national direction to an objective and RATIONAL presentation and interpretation of history…’, had been altered in the resolution to read, ‘to give a national direction to an objective and NATIONAL presentation and interpretation of history….’ I have before me the statement of the Ministry of Human Resources Development [No. F. 30-28/86-U3] dated 6 October 1987, that is of eleven years ago. It gives the text of the resolution of the Government of India announcing the new members – announcing, among other things, that Irfan Habib is being appointed as chairman with retrospective effect from 9 September 1986. The corresponding expression in it is, ‘to give a national direction to an objective and NATIONAL presentation and interpretation of history….’ I have before me the statement of the Ministry of Human Resources Development [No. F. 30-13/89-U3] dated 15 May 1991. It gives the text of the resolution of the government of India announcing the new members – announcing, among other things, that Irfan Habib is being reappointed as chairman with retrospective effect from 12 March 1990. The corresponding expression in it is, ‘to give a national direction to an objective and NATIONAL presentation and interpretation of history…’ To test my hypothesis yet again, I looked for and obtained the immediately preceding statement of the ministry. It bore the number F. 30-3/94-U.3, and was dated 8 September 1994. Like the others, it furnished the members – announcing, among other things, that Ravinder Kumar, another ‘historian’ of the same hue, was being appointed as chairman with retrospective effect from 8 September 1990. The corresponding expression in it was, ‘to give a national direction to an objective and NATIONAL presentation and interpretation of history…’ That is how far I was able to get on my own. I requested the secretary of the ministry: could he please request someone to look up resolutions of the earlier years, and see whether they contained anything different? Could he help me trace when this ‘alteration’ got made? The secretary was able to trace resolutions going back up to 1978 – that is, twenty years. Each of them carried the very same words! The research of the secretary and his colleagues established that – to reproduce the word the secretary used – the whole mystery had arisen from a ‘typographical error’: some typist banging away on his typewriter some twenty-odd years ago typed ‘rational’ as ‘national’. As each typist, when asked to type out the subsequent resolution, copied the preceding one, that word continued to be typed as ‘national’ year after year. The leftists inferred no conspiracy. But, lo and behold, now that a BJP government was in power, inferring conspiracies – to use their favourite phrase – was a historical necessity. It was objective history! It was progressive methodology! I half expected them to put on their Sherlock Holmes caps again, and establish that the governments of Mrs Indira Gandhi, of Rajiv Gandhi, of V.P. Singh, of Narasimha Rao had all been in league with the RSS, and therefore parties to this grave conspiracy! I then rang up Vinod Mehta, the editor of Outlook and president of the Editors Guild of India. ‘But the reporter says she has the text and everything,’ he said. I narrated what I had found. He promised to check and get back to me. When we talked again he said he had sent me the text of the resolution. But that was the current one. My point had been that the ‘change’ on which Outlook had built its story had existed in all resolutions for at least twenty years. He said he would get back to me. He never did. Nor did senior journalists of two other publications that had built their stories on the fabrication, and who, after I requested them to ascertain the basis of their accounts, had promised to get back to me.......................................

............................Not only were these ‘historians’ the advisers of the Babri Masjid Action Committee, its advocates in the negotiations, they simultaneously issued all sorts of statements supporting the Babri Masjid Action Committee’s case – which was the ‘case’ they had themselves prepared! A well-practised technique, if I may say so: they are from a school in which members have made each other famous by applauding each other’s books and ‘theses’! And these very ‘historians’ are cited as witnesses in the pleadings filed by the Sunni Waqf Board in the courts which are considering the Ayodhya matter!


Their deceitful role in Ayodhya – which in the end harmed their clients more than anyone else – was just symptomatic. For fifty years this bunch has been suppressing facts and inventing lies. How concerned they pretend to be today about that objective of the ICHR – to promote objective and rational
research into events of our past! How does this concern square with the guidelines issued by their West Bengal government in 1989 which Outlook itself had quoted – ‘Muslim rule should never attract any criticism. Destruction of temples by Muslim rulers and invaders should not be mentioned?’ But incorporating their wholesale fabrications of the destruction of Buddhist viharas, about the non-existent ‘Aryan invasion’, that is mandatory – to question them is to be communal, chauvinist!
..........How is it that over twenty-five years persons from their school alone had been nominated to the ICHR? How come that Romila Thapar had been on the Council four times? Irfan Habib five times?Satish Chandra four times? S. Gopal three times?… The same pattern held for the post of chairman......
...........A much favoured device: when caught peddling a lie, insinuate that the other man is privileged! And that, as you are from the toiling masses, you cannot ascertain whether the facts he has stated are true. Therefore, what you stated must stand as fact. QED!.........