Denial of Hindu History by Indian Gov't

[Guest guest]

WHY DO THE IDIAN/HINDU PEOPLES REFUSE TO ACCEPT THE SYSTEMATIC COVER-UP OF THEIR HISTROY BY INDIAN GOV'T ??? ====================================================== Hindu Kush means Hindu Slaughter

By Shrinandan Vyas

 

 

All the Encyclopedias and National Geographic agree that Hindu Kush region is a place of Hindu genocide (similar to Dakau and Auschwitz). All the references are given. Please feel free to verify them.

--

 

 

ABSTRACT

 

All Standard reference books agree that the name 'Hindu Kush' of the mountain range in Eastern Afganistan means 'Hindu Slaughter' or 'Hindu Killer'. History also reveals that until 1000 A.D. the area of Hindu Kush was a full part of Hindu cradle. More likely, the mountain range was deliberately named as 'Hindu Slaughter' by the Moslem conquerors, as a lesson to the future generations of Indians. However Indians in general, and Hindus in particular are completely oblivious to this tragic genocide. This article also looks into the reasons behind this ignorance.

 

21 References - (Mainly Encyclopedia Britannica & other reference books, National Geographic Magazines and standard history books).

 

INTRODUCTION

 

The Hindu Kush is a mountain system nearly 1000 miles long and 200 miles wide, running northeast to southwest, and dividing the Amu Darya River Valley and Indus River Valley. It stretches from the Pamir Plateau near Gilgit, to Iran. The Hindu Kush ranges mainly run thru Afganistan and Pakistan. It has over two dozen summits of more than 23,000 ft in height. Below the snowy peaks the mountains of Hindu Kush appear bare, stony and poor in vegetation. Historically, the passes across the Hindu Kush have been of great military significance, providing access to the northern plains of India. The Khyber Pass constitutes an important strategic gateway and offers a comparatively easy route to the plains of Punjab. Most foreign invaders, starting from Alexander the Great in 327 BC, to Timur Lane in 1398 AD, and from Mahmud of Ghazni, in 1001 AD, to Nader Shah in 1739 AD attacked Hindustan via the Khyber Pass and other passes in the Hindu Kush (1,2,3). The Greek chroniclers of Alexander the Great called Hindu Kush as Parapamisos or Paropanisos (4). The Hindu name of the Hindu Kush mountains was 'Paariyaatra Parvat'(5).

 

 

 

 

 

 

EARLY HISTORY OF HINDU KUSH REGION (UP TO 1000 AD)

 

History of Hindu Kush and Punjab shows that two major kingdoms of Gandhaar & Vaahic Pradesh (Balkh of Bactria) had their borders extending far beyond the Hindu Kush. Legend has it that the kingdom of Gandhaar was established by Taksha, grandson of Bharat of Ayodhya (6). Gandhaar's borders extended from Takshashila to Tashkent (corruption of 'Taksha Khand') in the present day Uzbekistan. In the later period, Mahabharat relates Gaandhaari as a princess of Gandhaar and her brother, Shakuni as a prince and later as Gandhaar's ruler.

 

In the well documented history, Emperor Chandragupt Maurya took charge of Vaahic Pradesh around 325 BC and then took over Magadh. Emperor Ashok's stone tablets with inscriptions in Greek and Aramaic are still found at Qandahar (corruption of Gandhaar?) and Laghman in eastern Afganistan(3). One such stone tablet, is shown in the PBS TV series 'Legacy with Mark Woods' in episode 3 titled 'India: The Spiritual Empire'. After the fall of Mauryan empire, Gandhaar was ruled by Greeks. However some of these Greek rulers had converted to Buddhism, such as Menander, known to Indian historians as Milinda, while some other Greeks became followers of Vishnav sects (Hinduism)(7). Recent excavations in Bactria have revealed a golden hoard which has among other things a figurine of a Greek goddess with a Hindu mark on its forehead (Bindi) showing the confluence of Hindu-Greek art (8). Later Shaka and KushaaN ruled Gandhaar and Vaahic Pradesh. KushaaN emperor Kanishka's empire stretched from Mathura to the Aral Sea (beyond the present day Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Krygzystan)(9).

 

Kanishaka was a Buddhist and under KushaaN influence Buddhism flourished in Gandhaar. Two giant sandstone Buddhas carved into the cliffs of Bamian (west of Kabul) date from the Kushan period. The larger Buddha (although defaced in later centuries by Moslem invaders) is about 175 ft tall (10,11). The Kushan empire declined by 450 AD. The Chinese traveller Hsuan-Tsang (Xuan-zang) travelled thru the region in 7 th century AD and visited many Buddhist religious centers (3) including Hadda, Ghazni, Qonduz, Bamian (3,10,11), Shotorak and Bagram. From the 5 th thru 9 th cenury AD Persian Sasanians and Hepthalites ruled Gandhaar. During their rule Gandhaar region was again influenced by Hinduism. The Hindu kings (Shahiya) were concentrated in the Kabul and Ghazni areas. The last Hindu Shahiya king of Kabul, Bhimapal was killed in 1026 AD. The heroic efforts of the Hindu Shahiya Kings to defend the northwestern gates of India against the invaders are described by even al-Biruni, the court historian of Mahmud of Ghazni (12). Some excavated sites of the period include a major Hindu Shahiya temple north of Kabul and a chapel that contains both Buddhist and Hindu images, indicating that there was a mingling of two religions (3).

 

Islamic invasions on Afganistan started in 642 AD, but over the next several centuries their effect was marginal and lasted only a short time after each raid. Cities surrendered only to rise in revolt and the hastily converted returned to their old religion (Hinduism or Buddhism) once the Moslem armies had passed (3).

 

THUS TILL THE YEAR 1000 AD AFGANISTAN WAS A FULL PART OF HINDU CRADLE.

 

 

 

--

 

 

HINDU KUSH AND THE HINDU GENOCIDE

 

Now Afganistan is a Moslem country. Logically, this means either one or more of the following must have happened:

 

a) original residents of Hindu Kush converted to Islam, or

b) they were slaughtered and the conquerors took over, or

c) they were driven out.

 

Encyclopedia Britannica (3) already informs us above about the resistance to conversion and frequent revolt against to the Moslem conqueror's rule from 8 th thru 11 th Century AD. The name 'Hindu Kush' itself tells us about the fate of the original residents of Gandhaar and Vaahic Pradesh during the later period of Moslem conquests, because HINDU KUSH in Persian MEANS HINDU SLAUGHTER (13) (as per Koenraad Elst in his book 'Ayodhya and After'). Let us look into what other standard references say about Hindu Kush.

 

Persian-English dictionary (14) indicates that the word 'Kush' is derived from the verb Kushtar - to slaughter or carnage. Kush is probably also related to the verb Koshtan meaning to kill. In Urdu, the word Khud-kushi means act of killing oneself (khud - self, Kushi- act of killing). Encyclopedia Americana comments on the Hindu Kush as follows: The name Hindu Kush means literally 'Kills the Hindu', a reminder of the days when (Hindu) SLAVES from Indian subcontinent died in harsh Afgan mountains while being transported to Moslem courts of Central Asia (15). The National Geographic Article 'West of Khyber Pass' informs that 'Generations of raiders brought captive Hindus past these peaks of perpetual snow. Such bitter journeys gave the range its name Hindu Kush - "Killer of Hindus"'(10). The World Book Encyclopedia informs that the name Kush, .. means Death ..(16). While Encyclopedia Britannica says 'The name Hindu Kush first appears in 1333 AD in the writings of Ibn Battutah, the medieval Berber traveller, who said the name meant 'Hindu Killer', a meaning still given by Afgan mountain dwellers who are traditional enemies of Indian plainsmen (i.e. Hindus)(2). However, later the Encyclopedia Britannica gives a negationist twist by adding that 'more likely the name is a corruption of Hindu-Koh meaning Hindu mountains'. This is unlikely, since the term Koh is used in its proper, uncorrupted form for the western portion of Hindu Kush, viz. Koh-i-Baba, for the region Swat Kohistan, and in the names of the three peaks of this range, viz. Koh-i-Langer, Koh-i-Bandakor, and Koh-i-Mondi. Thus to say that corruption of term Koh to Kush occurred only in case of Hindu Kush is merely an effort to fit in a deviant observation to a theory already proposed. In science, a theory is rejected if it does not agree with the observations, and not the other way around. Hence the latter negationist statement in the Encyclopedia Britannica must be rejected.

 

IT IS SIGNIFICANT THAT ONE OF THE FEW PLACE NAMES ON EARTH THAT REMINDS US NOT OF THE VICTORY OF THE WINNERS BUT RATHER THE SLAUGHTER OF THE LOSERS, CONCERNS A GENOCIDE OF HINDUS BY THE MOSLEMS (13).

 

Unlike the Jewish holocaust, the exact toll of the Hindu genocide suggested by the name Hindu Kush is not available. However the number is easily likely to be in millions. Few known historical figures can be used to justify this estimate. Encyclopedia Britannica informs that in December 1398 AD, Timur Lane ordered the execution of at least 50,000 captives before the battle for Delhi, .. and after the battle those inhabitants (of Delhi) not killed were removed (as slaves) (17), while other reference says that the number of captives butchered by Timur Lane's army was about 100,000 (18). Later on Encyclopedia Britannica mentions that the (secular?) Mughal emperor Akbar 'ordered the massacre of about 30,000 (captured) Rajput Hindus on February 24, 1568 AD, after the battle for Chitod' (19). Another reference indicates that this massacre of 30,000 Hindu peasants at Chitod is recorded by Abul Fazl, Akbar's court historian himself (20). These two 'one day' massacres are sufficient to provide a reference point for estimating the scale of Hindu genocide. The Afgan historian Khondamir records that during one of the many repeated invasions on the city of Herat in western Afganistan, 1,500,000 residents perished (11).

 

Since some of the Moslem conquerors took Indian plainsmen as slaves, a question comes : whatever happened to this slave population? The startling answer comes from New York Times (May-June 1993 issues). The Gypsies are wandering peoples in Europe. They have been persecuted in almost every country. Nazis killed 300,000 gypsies in the gas chambers. These Gypsies have been wandering around Central Asia and Europe since around the 12 th Century AD. Until now their country of origin could not be identified. Also their Language has had very little in common with the other European languages. Recent studies however show that their language is similar to Punjabi and to a lesser degree to Sanskrit. Thus the Gypsies most likely originated from the greater Punjab. The time frame of Gypsy wanderings also coincides early Islamic conquests hence most likely their ancestors were driven out of their homes in Punjab and taken as slaves over the Hindu Kush.

 

The theory of Gypsie origins in India was first proposed over two centuries ago. It is only recently theta linguistic and other proofs have been verified. Even the Gypsie leadership now accepts India as the country of their origin.

 

Thus it is evident that the mountain range was named as Hindu Kush as a reminder to the future Hindu generations of the slaughter and slavery of Hindus during the Moslem conquests.

 

 

 

--

 

 

DELIBERATE IGNORANCE ABOUT HINDU KUSH

 

If the name Hindu Kush relates such a horrible genocide of Hindus, why are Hindus ignorant about it? and why the Government of India does not teach them about Hindu Kush? The history and geography curriculums in Indian Schools barely even mention Hindu Kush. The horrors of the Jewish holocaust are taught not only in schools in Israel and USA, but also in Germany. Because both Germany and Israel consider the Jewish holocaust a 'dark chapter' in the history. The Indian Government instead of giving details of this 'dark chapter' in Indian history is busy in whitewash of Moslem atrocities and the Hindu holocaust. In 1982, the National Council of Educational Research and Training issued a directive for the rewriting of school texts. Among other things it stipulated that: 'Characterization of the medieval period as a time of conflict between Hindus and Moslems is forbidden'. Thus denial of history or Negationism has become India's official 'educational' policy (21).

 

Often the official governmental historians brush aside questions such as those that Hindu Kush raises. They argue that the British version is the product of their 'divide and rule' policy' hence their version is not necessarily true. However it must be remembered that the earliest reference of the name Hindu Kush and its literal meaning 'Hindu Killer' comes from Ibn Battutah in 1333 AD, and at that time British were nowhere on the Indian scene. Secondly, if the name indeed was a misnomer then the Afgans should have protested against such a barbaric name and the last 660 plus years should have been adequate for a change of name to a more 'civil' name. There has been no effort for such a change of name by the Afgans. On the contrary, when the Islamic fundamentalist regime of the Mujahadeens came to power in 1992, tens of thousands of Hindus and Sikhs from Kabul, became refugees, and had to pay steep ransom to enter into Pakistan without a visa.

 

In the last 46 years the Indian Government also has not even once demanded that the Afgan Government change such an insulting and barbaric name. But in July 1993, the Government of India asked the visiting Jerusalem Symphony Orchestra to change its name because the word Jerusalem in its name is offensive to Moslem Fundamentalists.

 

 

 

--

 

 

CONCLUSION

 

It is evident that Hindus from ancient India's (Hindustan's) border states such as Gandhaar and Vaahic Pradesh were massacred or taken as slaves by the Moslem invaders who named the region as Hindu Kush (or Hindu Slaughter,or Hindu Killer) to teach a lesson to the future Hindu generations of India. Unfortunately Hindus are not aware of this tragic history. The Indian government does not want the true history of Hindu Moslem conflicts during the medieval ages to be taught in schools. This policy of negationism is the cause behind the ignorance of Hindus about the Hindu Kush and the Hindu genocide.

 

 

 

--

 

 

COMMENTS & FUTURE WORK

 

Although in this article Hindu Kush has been referred to as Hindu slaughter, it is quite possible that it was really a Hindu and Buddhist slaughter. Since prior to Moslem invasions influence of Buddhism in Gandhaar and Vaahic Pradesh was considerable. Also as the huge 175 ft stone Buddhas of Bamian show, Buddhists were idol worshipers par excellence. Hence for Moslem invaders the Buddhists idol worshipers were equally deserving of punishment. It is also likely that Buddhism was considered an integral part of the Hindu pantheon and hence was not identified separately.

 

This article barely scratches the surface of the Hindu genocide, the true depth of which is as yet unknown. Readers are encouraged to find out the truth for themselves . Only when many readers search for the truth, the real magnitude of the Hindu genocide will be discovered.

 

 

 

--

 

 

REFERENCES

 

Encyclopedia Britannica, 15 th Ed, Vol.5, p.935, 1987

 

Encyclopedia Britannica, 15 th Ed, Vol.14, pp.238-240, 1987

 

Encyclopedia Britannica, 15 th Ed, Vol.13, pp.35-36, 1987

 

The Invasion of India by Alexander the Great (as described by Arrian, Q.Curtius, Diodoros, Plutarch & Justin), By J.W.McCrindle, Methuen & Co., London, p.38, 1969

 

Six Glorious Epochs of Indian History, by Veer Savarkar, Savarkar Prakashan, Bombay, 2nd Ed, p.206, 1985

 

Chanakya - a TV series by Doordarshan, India

 

Encyclopedia Britannica, 15 th Ed, Vol.21, pp.36-41, 1987

 

V.Sarianidi, National Geographic Magazine, Vol.177, No.3, p.57, March 1990

 

Hammond Historical Atlas of the World, pp. H4 & H10, 1993

 

W.O.Douglas, National Geographic Magazine, vol.114, No.1, pp.13-23, July 1958

 

T.J.Abercrombie, National Geographic Magazine, Vol.134, No.3, pp.318-325, Sept.1968

 

An Advanced History of India, by R.C.Majumdar, H.C.Raychaudhuri, K.Datta, 2nd Ed., MacMillan and Co, London, pp.182-83, 1965

 

Ayodhya and After, By Koenraad Elst, Voice of India Publication, p.278, 1991

 

A Practical Dictionary of the Persian Language, by J.A.Boyle, Luzac & Co., p.129, 1949

 

Encyclopedia Americana, Vol.14, p.206, 1993

 

The World Book Encyclopedia, Vol.19, p.237, 1990

 

Encyclopedia Britannica, 15 th Ed, Vol.21, pp. 54-55, 1987

 

An Advanced History of India, by R.C.Majumdar, H.C.Raychaudhuri, K.Datta, 2nd Ed., MacMillan and Co, London, pp.336-37, 1965

 

Encyclopedia Britannica, 15 th Ed, Vol.21, p.65, 1987

 

The Cambridge History of India, Vol.IV - The Mughul Period, by W.Haig & R.Burn, S.Chand & Co., New Delhi, pp. 98-99, 1963

 

Negationism in India, by Koenraad Elst, Voice of India Publ, 2nd Ed, pp.57-58, 1993

[Guest guest]

Get a life. Maybe Hindus don't know about it because it never happened. Islam spread further in a hundred years than Christianity did in a thousand. In order to validate your theory of forced conversion of the masses, you better demonstrate that the Muslims had vast armies and a great strategic advantage. I think you will fail. One of the primary lessons of Islam is that there is no compulsion in religion. Islam was spread by missionaries more than invasion. How else would it be possible to cover such terrain starting from ten thousand people in the dessert?

 

Get out of your bubble and have a look around.

 

[Guest guest]

And why are you quoting modern western accounts of this tragic event? Do you have no source of your own that you trust?

[Guest guest]

I am truly sorry to be the only visitor and critic of this bent account of history.

[krsna 3]

Hindu holocaust

08/13/03 04:53 PM Edit Reply

 

There have been many villains throughout the history of the many invasions and occupations of India. And many of the worst of these despots and murderers are today considered by many to have been "great leaders" of India's past. In an effort to appease the Muslim minority, some of the worst of the butchers of the Hindu people have been turned into national heroes, and the true heroes and defenders of the Indian people have been all but forgotten. Here we offer brief biographies of those who invaded, occupied and butchered Hindus throughout India. Some may argue that these were great rulers who contributed great things to Indian civilization, but we must always remember that Adolf Hitler also brought great efficiency to German government and made the trains run on time as well.

 

Mahmud of Gaznavi

(From the accounts of arikh-i-Yamini of Utbi the secretary of Mahmud of Gaznavi)

 

At Thaneshwar.

"The blood of the infidels flowed so copiously at Thanesar that the stream was discolored, not withstanding its purity, and people were unable to drink it. The Sultan returned with plunder which is impossible to count. Praise be to Allah for the honor he bestows on Islam and Muslims."

 

At Somnath

"The Muslims paid no regard to the booty till they had satiated themselves with the slaughter of the infidels and worshipers of sun and fire.... The number of infidels killed exceeded 50,000"

 

At Mathura

"The infidels...deserted the fort and tried to cross the foaming river...but many of them were slain, taken or drowned... Nearly fifty thousand men were killed."

 

Mahmud of Ghori

(from Hasan Nizami's Taj-ul-Maasir)

Kol (Modern Aligarh)

"Those of the horizon who were wise and acute were converted to Islam, but those who stood by their ancestoral faith were slain with the sword"

 

Kol (Modern Aligarh)

 

20,000 prisoners were taken and made slaves

'Three bastions were raised as high as heaven with their heads and their carcases became food for the beasts of prey

 

Kalinjar

50,000 prisoners were taken as slaves

Varnasi or Kasi (Benaras) :

Kamil-ut-Tawarikh of Ibn Asir records,

"The slaughter of Hindus (at Varanasi) was immense; none were spared except women and children,(who were taken into slavery) and the carnage of men went on until the earth was weary."

 

Sultan Firuz Shah Tughlaq

(from Insha-i-Mahry by Amud Din Abdullah bin Mahru)

Delhi: -a punishment in detail (from Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi)

 

"A report was brought to the Sultan than there was in Delhi an old Brahman who persisted in publicly performing the worship of idols in his house and that people of the city, both Muslims and Hindus used to resort to his house to worship the idol. The Brahman had constructed a wooden tablet which was covered within and without with paintings of demons and other objects. An order was accordingly given to the Brahman and was brought before Sultan.The true faith was declared to the Brahman and the right course pointed out. but he refused to accept it. A pile was risen on which the Kaffir with his hands and legs tied was thrown into and the wooden tablet on the top. The pile was lit at two places his head and his feet. The fire first reached him in the feet and drew from him a cry and then fire completley enveloped him. Behold Sultan for his strict adherence to law and rectitude."

 

Delhi : (after Hindus paid the toleration tax (zar-i zimmiya) and poll-tax(jizya) they were foolish enough to build their temples.so...) "Under divine guidance I (Sultan) destroyed these temples and I killed the leaders of these infedility and others I subjected to stripes and chastisement "

 

Gohana (Haryana):

"Some Hindus had erected a new idol-temple in the village of Kohana and the idolaters used to assemble there and perform their idolatrous rites. These people were seized and brought before me. I ordered that the perverse conduct of these leaders of this wickedness be punished by publicly abd that they should be put to deathe before the gate of the palace."

 

Jajnagar:(Expedition objectives as stated by Sultan: Source:Ainn-ul-Mulk)

 

massacring the unbelievers

 

demolishing their temples

 

hunting the elephants

 

getting a glimpse of their enchanting country

 

Orissa:'Sirat-i-Firoz Shahi' records his expedition with the following words:

"Nearly 100,000 men of Jajnagar had taken refuge with their women, children, kinsmen and relations The swordsmen of Islam turned the island into a basin of blood by the massacre of the unbelievers. Women with babies and pregnant ladies were haltered, manacled, fettered and enchained, and pressed as slaves into service in the house of every soldier."

 

The Jihads of Shihabuddin,

the Sultankalka of Ghur

 

Around 1140, the Islamized Turko-Mongol chiefs of the Shansabanid tribe occupied Ghor in Afghanistan. Initially it was a vassal of the Ghaznavid Sultans, but around 1130 it came into conflict with them, after one of the leading Shansabanid nobles was murdered by the Ghaznavid Sultan, Bahram. A ferocious war ensued between the Sultans of Ghor and Ghazni, till Alla-ud-din Ghori invaded Ghazni with his entire cavalry and wrested it from Bahram. Alla-ud-din sacked the Indian spoils that Mahmud had placed there, massacred the city’s population in a 7-day killing spree and subsequently burnt it down. The next Ghaznavid Sultan, Khushro Maliq was driven out of Afghanistan by a coalition of Oghuz Turks and the Ghorids in 1157, and the Oghuz took Ghazni. The sons of Alla-ud-din, Ghiyas-ud-din Mu’azz-ud-din Ghori and Shihab-ud-din Muhammad Ghori defeated the Oghuz and annexed Ghazni in 1174. Ghiyas-ud-din, crowned himself Sultan, and appointed his brother Sultankalka. Shihab-ud-din was assigned the task of extending the kingdom to the East and he naturally gravitated towards India. 13 bloody campaigns that ravaged Northern India followed:

 

• Early in 1175 he invaded Punjab and sacked and burned Uch...(1)

 

• In 1178 he advanced south and marched towards Gujarat, but here the Indians acted quickly and rallying under the western chAlukya king MUlarAja II routed the Islamic forces completely forcing him to retreat...(2)

 

• In 1179 Ghori sent a message to PrithivirAja chAhamAna to make common cause with him against the Chalukyas. Prithivaraj however, wise disregarding his foolish minister, kadambavAsa’s advise to make a common cause with Ghori, preemptively attacked NaDDula and reconquered it from the Moslems.

 

• Shihab recovered in 1180 and invaded Sindh and ravaged the population carrying away much loot...(3)

 

• Then Shihabuddin Muhammad, quickly followed it up in 1181 and 1184 with two invasions of Lavapura (Lahore) accompanied with much slaughter...(4+5)

 

• In 1186 he invaded the Ghaznavid occupied Punjab and defeated the Sultan Khushro Maliq and wrested Punjab...(6)

 

• 1188 The Ghur Sultankalka invaded the ChAhamAna kingdom and sacked the fort of Tabarhindah killing the Hindu male populace and raping the women. Hindu refugees flocked around Delhi alarming the ChAhamAnas...(7)

 

• 1191 PrithivirAj advanced to meet Shihabuddin’s raid and routed him in the great battle of Tarai. While the Muslims suffered a crushing defeat, the Indians failed to butcher them to man and allowed Shihab to get away unharmed. He fled back to Central Asia leaving Punjab completely undefended...(8)

 

• 1191 PrithivirAj attacked Tabarhindah and took it back from the Muslims. Here the biggest mistake of the Hindus was not to reconquer and arm Punjab suitably.

 

• 1192 Shihab returned and sacked Tabarhindah again. This was followed by the second battle of Tarai, the ChAhamAna army was crushed and Prithiviraj was captured and brutally tortured to death...(9)

 

• 1192 the Ghur Sultankalka made a second trust towards Ajayamerupura (Ajmer) and sacked it smashing Hindu temples and a Hindu university in course of this invasion. The Hindus captured in this expedition caused slave prices to fall to a few Dirhams in the Muslim markets...(10)

 

• 1193 The sultankalka invaded Kannauj and slew the GAhadwala king Jayachandra. He followed this up with an invasion of vArANsipura slaughtering Hindus with great savagery and desecrating the holy city...(11+12)

 

After this, his viceroy Kutub-ud-din (also his lover?) and the Turkish adventurer Ikhtiyaruddin Khalji furthered the violence of Islam in the land of Hind. Meanwhile Shihab’s brother died in Ghazna and he crowned himself Sultan and immediately launched himself into another Jihad on the infidels of Hindustan in 1206. The exact course of this campaign is not clear. While on the North-western reaches of the Sindhu, he was ambushed by the Khokar chiefs and shot down by an arrow...(13). Thus ended the carrier of the Moslem brigand who brought misery to the whole of northern India through his 13 invasions.

 

Aurangazeb (1658 C.E. - 1707 C.E.)

Aurangzeb considered himself "The Scourge Of The Kafirs" (non-believers) and closed Hindu schools and libraries. In his lifetime he destroyed more than 10,000 Hindu, Buddhist and Jam temples and often erected mosques in their stead.3 In 1669 in Agra he had hacked off the limbs of the recalcitrant Hindu King Gokla and in 1672 several thousand revolting Hindus were slaughtered in Mewat.

 

Maasi-i-Alamgiri

 

Issued general order to destroy all centers of Hindu learnings including Varnasi and destroyed the temple at Mathura and renamed it as Islamabad

In Khandela (rajastan) he killed 300 Hindus in one day for they resisted the destruction of their temple.

In Udaipur all Hindus of the town were killed as they vowed to defend the temple of Udaipur from destruction.

172 temples were destroyed in Udaipur.

66 temples were pulled down in Amber. All Hindu clerks were dismissed from the office of the Imperial empire.

In Pandhpur , Maharashtra, the Emperor ordered and executed the destruction of temple and butchering of cows within the temple.

Aurangazeb also tortured to death the disciples of Guru Tegh bahadur before his death and also killed Guru. Guru Tegh Bahadur - the pride of Hindustan was martyred for he spoke for the persecuted Hindus of Hindustan. Aurangazeb also killed Guru Gobind singh's two children aged less than ten by walling them alive for not accepting the choice of Islam. In Punjab Muslim governors killed hundreds of Sikh children and made Sikh women eat the flesh of their own killed children. Banda Bahadur another great Sikh martyr before being torturd to death was also made to eat the flesh of his own children killed before his eyes. Any Muslim bringing the head of a dead Sikh was also awarded money.

 

Zahiru'd-Din Muhammed Babur (1526 C.E. - 1520 C.E.)

Babur's Own Words on Killing Hindus:

For the sake of Islam I became a wanderer,

I battled infidels and Hindus,

I determined to become a maryr

Thank God I became a Killer of Non-Muslims!

 

From Baburnama, the Memoires of Babur Himself:

In AH 934 (2538 C.E.) I attacked Chanderi and by the grace of Allah captured it in a few hours. We got the infidels slaughtered and the place which had be Daru'l-Harb (nation of non-muslim) for years was made into a Daru'l-Islam (muslim nation).

 

Guru Nanak on Babur's atrocities:

Source:Rag Asa Guru Nanak Dev witnessed first hand the atrocities Babur committed on Hindus and recorded them in his poems. He says: Having attacked Khuraasaan, Babar terrified Hindustan. The Creator Himself does not take the blame, but has sent the Mugal as the messenger of death. There was so much slaughter that the people screamed. Didn't You feel compassion, Lord? pg (360)

 

On the condition of Hindu women in Babur's monster rule:

Those heads adorned with braided hair, with their parts painted with vermillion - those heads were shaved with scissors, and their throats were choked with dust.They lived in palatial mansions, but now, they cannot even sit near the palaces.... ropes were put around their necks, and their strings of pearls were broken. Their wealth and youthful beauty, which gave them so much pleasure, have now become their enemies. The order was given to the soldiers, who dishonored them, and carried them away. If it is pleasing to God's Will, He bestows greatness; if is pleases His Will, He bestows punishment pg(417-18)

 

On the nature of Mughal rule under Babur:

First, the tree puts down its roots, and then it spreads out its shade above. The kings are tigers, and their officials are dogs; they go out and awaken the sleeping people to harass them. The public servants inflict wounds with their nails. The dogs lick up the blood that is spilled. Source:Rag Malar, (pg.1288)

 

From an article by Dr. Harsh Narain on Muslim Testimony (Indian Express 2/26/90):

Since the establishment of Zahiru'd-Din Ghazi's rule, officers and religious leaders spread Islam vigorously desteroying the Hindu faith. We cleared the filth of Hinduism from Faizabad and Avadh.

 

Jahangir (1605 C.E. - 1628 C.E.)

Source: Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri

Though in the beginning of his rule Jahangir followed the humanistic rule of his father Akbar the great -the policy of sulehkul even issued a proclamation against the forcible conversion of Hindus to Islam, he revoked Akbar's orders that those who have been forcibly converted from Islam could return to Hinduism. He severely punished Kaukab, Sharif and Abdul Latif for showing inclination to Hinduism. He also prohibited the free inter-marriage customs between Hindus and Muslims in Kashmir. Hindus marrying Muslim girls and those who had already married were given a hoice between Islam and death. Many were killed.

 

Jahangir's torture of Guru Arjun Dev ji: Guru was imprisoned at Lahore fort. He was chained to a post in an open place exposed to the sun from morning to evening in the summer months of May to June. Below his feet a heap of sand was put which burnt like a furnace. Boiling water was poured on his naked body at intervals. His body was covered with blisters all over. In this agony Guru used to utter.

 

Tera Kiya Metha lage, naam padarath Nanak mange(whatever you ordain appears sweet. I supplicate for the gift of name)

 

The Guru was ordercd to be executed. In addition a fine of Rupees two lakhs was imposed on him. Some historians say that, as a measure of clemency at the intervention of Mian Mir, this fine was imposed in lieu of the sentence of death. The Sikhs offered to pay the fine themselves but the Guru forbade them to do so. He replied to the Emperor, "Whatever money I have is for the poor, the friendless and the stranger. If thou ask for money thou mayest take what I have; but if thou ask for it by way of fine, I shall not give thee even a Kaurz (penny)." The Guru accepted death by torture.

 

 

Shah Jahan (1658 C.E. - 1707 C.E.)

In 1632 Shah jahan ordered that all Hindu temples recently erected or in the course of construction should be razed to the ground. In Benares alone seventy six temples were destroyed. Christian churches at Agra and Lahore were demolished. In a manner befitting the Prophet he had ten thousand inhabitants executed by being "blown up with powder, drowned in water or burnt by fire". Four thousand were taken captive to Agra where they were tortured to try to convert them to Islam. Only a few apostacised, the remainder were trampled to death by elephants, except for the younger women who went to harems.

 

Shahjahan put enormous eonomic pressure on Hindus particularly peasents to become Muslims. The criminals too were forced to become Muslims.

 

Source: Badshah Nama, Qazinivi & Badshah Nama , Lahori

 

When Shuja was appointed as governor of Kabul he carried on a ruthless war in the Hindu territory beyond Indus...The sword of Islam yielded a rich crop of converts....Most of the women (to save their honour) burnt themselves to death. Those captured were distributed among Muslim Mansabdars.

 

Source: Manucci, Storia do Mogor vol-II p.451 & Travels of Frey Sebastian Manrique

 

Under Shahjahan peasents were compelled to sell their women and children to meet their revenue requirements....The peasents were carried off to various Markets and fairs to be sold with their poor unhappy wives carrying their small children crying and lamenting. According to Qaznivi Shahjagan had decreed they should be sold to Muslim lords.

 

 

General Reginal Dyer

Commander of Amritsar Massacre

 

Soon after Dyer's arrival, on the afternoon of April 13, 1919, some 10,000 or more unarmed men, women, and children gathered in Amritsar's Jallianwala Bagh (bagh, "garden"; but before 1919 it had become a public square) to attend a protest meeting, despite a ban on public assemblies. It was a Sunday, and many neighbouring village peasants also came to Amritsar to celebrate the Hindu Baisakhi Spring Festival. Dyer positioned his men at the sole, narrow passageway of the Bagh, which was otherwise entirely enclosed by the backs of abutted brick buildings. Giving no word of warning, he ordered 50 soldiers to fire into the gathering, and for 10 to 15 minutes 1,650 rounds of ammunition were unloaded into the screaming, terrified crowd, some of whom were trampled by those desperately trying to escape. According to official estimates, nearly 400 civilians were killed, and another 1,200 were left wounded with no medical attention. Dyer, who argued his action was necessary to produce a "moral and widespread effect," admitted that the firing would have continued had more ammunition been available.

 

The governor of the Punjab province supported the massacre at Amritsar and, on April 15, placed the entire province under martial law. Viceroy Chelmsford, however, characterized the action as "an error of judgment," and when Secretary of State Montagu learned of the slaughter, he appointed a commission of inquiry, headed by Lord Hunter. Although Dyer was subsequently relieved of his command, he returned a hero to many in Britain, especially conservatives, who presented him with a jeweled sword inscribed "Saviour of the Punjab."

 

The Jallianwala Bagh massacre turned millions of moderate Indians from patient and loyal supporters of the British raj into nationalists who would never again place trust in British "fair play." It thus marks the turning point for a majority of the Congress' supporters from moderate cooperation with the raj and its promised reforms to revolutionary noncooperation. Liberal Anglophile leaders, such as Jinnah, were soon to be displaced by the followers of Gandhi, who would launch, a year after that dreadful massacre, his first nationwide satyagraha ("devotion to truth") campaign as India's revolutionary response.

 

"It was a horrible duty to perform. But I think it was a merciful thing. I thought I should shoot well and shoot straight so that I or anybody else would not have had to shoot again.''

 

The words of Brigadier General Reginald Dyer himself -- the perpetrator of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre which left 379 dead and 1,500 injured in 1919.

 

Deposing before the Hunter commission inquiring into the shooting, General Dyer said his action was meant to punish the people if they disobeyed his orders. He thought from a military point of view, such an action would create a good impression in Punjab.

 

However, what was more damning was his statement, ''I think it quite possible that I could have dispersed the crowd without firing but they would have come back again and laughed, and I would have made, what I consider, a fool of myself.''

 

He contended that martial law existed de facto in Amritsar at that time although only demonstrations had been forbidden. He also claimed that his military column had stopped at every important point to announce that all meetings have been banned which were accompanied by the beating of drums.

 

However, when questioned with the help of a map of the city, General Dyer was forced to admit that important localities had been omitted, and a large number of people would not have known about the proclamation.

 

He confessed he did not take any steps to attend to the wounded after the firing. ''Certainly not. It was not my job. Hospitals were open and they could have gone there,'' came his pathetic response.

 

However, the misery suffered by the people was reflected in Rattan Devi's account. She was forced to keep a nightlong vigil, armed with a bamboo stick to protect her husband's body from jackals and vultures. Curfew with shoot-at-sight orders had been imposed from 2000 hours that night.

 

Rattan Devi stated, ''I saw three men writhing in great pain and a boy of about 12. I could not leave the place. The boy asked me for water but there was no water in that place...At 2 am, a jat who was lying entangled on the wall asked me to raise his leg. I went up to him and took hold of his clothes drenched in blood and raised him up. Heaps of bodies lay there, a number of them innocent children. I shall never forget the sight. I spent the night crying and watching..."

 

General Dyer admitted before the commission that he came to know about the meeting at Jallianwala Bagh at 1240 hours that day, but took no steps to prevent it.

 

Colum, a scholar who interviewed his widow and consulted his papers, said, "This unexpected gift of fortune, this unhoped for defiance, this concentration of rebels in an open space -- it gave him an opportunity as he could not have devised. It separated the guilty from the innocent, it placed them where he would have wised them to be -- within the reach of his sword.''

 

However, General Dyer admitted in his deposition that the gathering at the Bagh was not a concentration only of rebels, but people who had covered long distances to participate in the Baisakhi fair.

 

Swinson, an English journalist, described the scene as: ''Hundreds were asleep in the sun, others were concentrating on their game of cards. A number of them had come with their children, three to 12 years old. Some 27,000 odd people had gathered in the Bagh, an open space surrounded on all sides by houses with only four narrow entrances.''

 

General Dyer said he would have used his machine guns if he could have got them into the enclosure, but these were mounted on armoured cars. He said he did not stop firing when the crowd began to disperse because he thought it was his duty to keep firing until the crowd dispersed, and that a little firing would do no good.

 

He was censured by the Hunter commission for his action. He retired and was sent back to England. However, he continued to maintain that he had done no disservice to the Raj, and what he did was right, for which the British ought to be thankful.

 

In London, the general was given a hero's welcome. Called ''the saviour of India,'' the editor of the Morning Post collected 3,000 pounds to award him for his services. The Tories and a majority of members in the House of Lords rallied to his support. The army counsel which took up the case charged him only for an error of judgement, and recommended his retirement on half pay with no prospects of further employment. A British court even exonerated him of this charge.

 

 

http://www.hinduholocaust.com

[Guest guest]

dont you have anything better to do ?? what a load of rubbish........how can you take events that took place in the absence of modern gadgetry of war that makes the killing of thousands using machines ....and transpose it to a time when men fought out of fear and came together as acts of common defence against everything that was ranged to ensure they didnt 'live' ...they hunted, faced the elemnts and fought strangers out of sheer fear of the unknown ....what are you talking about ???

[Guest guest]

Henry Makow Ph.D., grandson of Holocaust victims, got his Doctorate in English Literature from the University of Toronto. His past articles exposing feminism and the new world order are at his website www.savethemales.ca http://www.savethemales.ca He welcomes feedback and may post some anonymously. Henryatsavethemales.ca

 

Calcutta: East India Company

by Henry Makow

 

Conspiracy theorists like myself believe modern history reflects a long-term conspiracy by an international financial elite to enslave humanity.

Like blind men examining an elephant, we attribute this conspiracy to Jews, Illuminati, Vatican, Jesuits, Freemasons, Black Nobility, and Bildersbergs etc.

The real villains are at the heart of our economic and cultural life. They are the dynastic families who own the Bank of England, the US Federal Reserve and associated cartels. They also control the World Bank and IMF. Their identity is kept secret but Rothschild is certainly one of them.

England is in fact a financial oligarchy run by the "Crown" which refers to the "City of London" not the Queen. The City is run by the Bank of England, a /private/ corporation. The City is a sovereign state located in the heart of greater London. Considered the "Vatican of the financial world," the City is /not/ subject to British law.

On the contrary, the Bank of England dictates to the British .. In 1886, Andrew Carnegie wrote that, "six or seven men can plunge the nation into war without consulting . at all." Vincent Vickers, a director of the Bank of England from 1910-1919, blamed the City for the wars of the world. ("Economic Tribulation" (1940) cited in /Knuth, The Empire of the City, 1943, p 60) /

The British Empire was an extension of bankers' financial interests. Indeed, all the non-white colonies (India, Hong Kong, Gibraltar) were "Crown Colonies." They belonged to the City and were not subject to British law although Englishmen were expected to conquer and pay for them.

The Bank of England assumed control of the United States during the T.R. Roosevelt administration (1901-1909) when its agent J.P. Morgan took over 25% of American business. http://www.savethemales.ca/000426.html

According to the "American Almanac," the bankers are part of a network called the "Club of the Isles" which is an informal association of European royalty including the Queen. The Club of the Isles commands an estimated $10 trillion in assets. It lords over such corporate giants as Royal Dutch Shell, Imperial Chemical Industries, Lloyds of London, Unilever, Lonrho, Rio Tinto Zinc, and Anglo American DeBeers. It dominates the world supply of petroleum, gold, diamonds, and many other vital raw materials; and deploys these assets not merely in the pursuit of its geopolitical agenda.

Its goal: to reduce the human population from its current level of over 5 billion people to below 1 billion people within the next two to three generations; to literally ``cull the human herd'' in the interest of retaining their own global power and the feudal system upon which that power is based. http://members.tripod.com/~american_almanac/fallhous.htm

Historian Jeffrey Steinberg could be referring to the US, Canada and Australia when he writes, "England, Scotland, Wales, and, especially, Northern Ireland, are today little more than slave plantations and social engineering laboratories, serving the needs of ...the City of London...

These families constitute a financier oligarchy; they are the power behind the Windsor throne. They view themselves as the heirs to the Venetian oligarchy, which infiltrated and subverted England from the period 1509-1715, and established a new, more virulent, Anglo-Dutch-Swiss strain of the oligarchic system of imperial Babylon, Persia, Rome, and Byzantium....

The City of London dominates the world's speculative markets. A tightly interlocking group of corporations, involved in raw materials extraction, finance, insurance, transportation, and food production, controls the lion's share of the world market, and exerts virtual "choke point'' control over world industry." http://members.tripod.com/~american_almanac/largest.htm

Steinberg belongs to a group of historians associated with economist Lyndon Larouche. They have traced this scourge to the migration of the Venetian mercantile oligarchy to England more than 300 years ago. http://members.tripod.com/~american_almanac/venlowry.htm

Although the Larouche historians do not say so, it appears that many members of this oligarchy were Jews. Cecil Roth writes: "The trade of Venice was overwhelmingly concentrated in the hands of the Jews, the wealthiest of the mercantile class." (/The History of the Jews in Venice, 1930) /

The Jewish banking families made it a practice to marry their female offspring to spendthrift European aristocrats. In Jewish law, the mixed offspring of a Jewish mother is Jewish. (The male heirs always marry Jews.) The daughter of Jewish banker Ernest Cassel married Lord Louis Montbatten, who was related to Queen Victoria and Prince Philip.

If they aren't already Jewish by intermarriage, many European aristocrats consider themselves descendants of Biblical Hebrews. The Hapsburgs are related by marriage to the Merovingians who claim to be descendants of the Tribe of Benjamin.

In addition, many aristocrats belong to the "British Israel" Movement that believes the Anglo Saxon races are the lost tribes of Israel and Jesus was king of England.

According to Barbara Aho, Rosicrucians and Freemasons, who believe in British Israelism, have a plan to place one of their bloodline on the throne of the rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem. This positioning of a false messiah whom the world will worship as Christ has been carefully planned and executed over many centuries. http://watch.pair.com/brit-israel.html

According to Barry Chamish, "there would be no modern state of Israel without British Freemasonry. In the 1860s, the British-Israelite movement was initiated from within Freemasonry. Its goal was to establish a Jewish-Masonic state in the Turkish province of Palestine...Initially, British Jewish Masonic families like the Rothschilds and Montefiores provided the capital to build the infrastructure for the anticipated wave of immigration. However, luring the Jews to Israel was proving difficult. They, simply, liked European life too much to abandon it. So Europe was to be turned into a nightmare for the Jews." http://www.rense.com/general28/brit.htm

Conclusion

I wasted much of my life getting a conventional education, so I feel I am beginning my education anew.

It appears that a vampire-like clique directs the world. This secretive cabal is represented by our dominant political, economic and cultural institutions. Western society has been subverted and western culture is bankrupt. Democracy is a form of social control and the mass media and education are forms of indoctrination.

Essentially the problem boils down to whether we believe man was made in God's image and has an obligation to lift himself to a higher level of truth, beauty and justice. Naturally monopolists have no use for this and want to define reality to suit their own interests. They have taught us that God is dead and man is defined by physical rather than spiritual appetites. Culture today tends to deny standards, ideals and goals of any kind. We are fed an endless diet of trivia and debauchery.

Certain Jews are an integral part of this elite neo feudal conspiracy. Throughout history they have had a symbiotic relationship with the aristocracy. But ordinary Jews like the serfs were manipulated and persecuted by their leaders. http://www.savethemales.ca/000258.html

True Judaism like Islam and Christianity affirms the supremacy of God as a moral force. A real Jew, like a true Christian or Muslim cannot perform an immoral act. It's time to reaffirm our belief in God.

Henry Makow Ph.D, is the inventor of the board game Scruples and the author of "A Long Way to Go for a Date." His articles exposing feminism and the new world order can be found at his web site www.savethemales.ca http://www.savethemales.ca/ He welcomes feedback at henryatsavethemales.ca Indicated if you do NOT want your message posted. (All posts are anonymous.)

UPDATE

A Pakistani View:

British Imperialism, Illuminati and the New World Order

6-8-4

It was nice for you to touch upon British imperialism and its Illuminati roots.

Being a person of Pakistani origin, I was on the receiving end of it. This can be of help shedding light on what really took place under the shadow of British-Illuminati imperialism. Please feel free to publish it.

To start with, its no coincidence that British imperialism begins only after the Illuminati Jewish bankers, the Rothschilds become established in Britain and realise that they cannot exploit the rest of the world in a similar fashion, since the usual tactic of infiltration into corridors of power would not work in foreign lands. They therefore simply appropriated the British flag as theirs and used the British as their extensions in non-Western lands. The British were dosed with pride in the "empire", "race", "Christianity" and "Queen" whereas it was really Rothschild's empire they were making.

The greatest evidence of collusion between Illuminati and early Imperialists is the great friendship between racist coloniser Cecil Rhodes and the house of Rothschild. This has been detailed in Fritz Springmeier's "Bloodlines and the Illuminati"

I would like to take the instance of colonisation of the subcontinent (India, Pakistan and Bangladesh). The British East India Company who snuck into India under the guise of traders first initiated colonisation. You can read about their Illuminati links at this page http://user.pa.net/~drivera/fw5.htm which says that "They were closely related to the Levant Company, and the Anglo-Muscovy Company, and spawned the London Company, which was chartered in 1606 by King James I, to establish the Virginia Plantation on a communistic basis, and the Plymouth Colony in 1621." And again "Every year, 24 Directors were elected by the Court of Proprietors (or shareholders, a majority of which were English Masons)."

What exactly was the lure of India which set Columbus sailing? The answer is that the Muslim Mughal rulers had achieved a sophisticated urban society with a degree of opulence in gold and spices never before seen in history. According to this link, "A report on Indian Industrial Commission published in 1919 said that the industrial development of India was at any rate not inferior to that of the most advanced European nations. India was not only a great agricultural country but also a great manufacturing country."It was the lure of Gold which attracted the Illuminati.

The British traders were not allowed to own property in India but one of them managed to gain the favors of Mughal emperor Aurangzeb by curing his ill wife. In return, he asked for land. This piece of land became the Madras Headquarters of the East India Company. After that, the East India company used the policy of divide and rule, pitting one group against the other. Robert Clive was an ambitious Englishman. Though not Illuminati, his ambitions made him a pawn in the hands of the Illuminati and his efforts are single handedly credited with establishing a British empire in India. Yet, once he succeeded in doing that, The Illuminati had him removed like a hair in the butter; even had him court-martialed and replaced with one of their operatives!

All was going well. According to this link "The vacuum created by the contrived ruin of the Indian handicraft industries, a process virtually completed by 1880, was filled with British manufactured goods. Britain's industrial revolution, with its explosive increase in productivity made it essential for British capitalists to find new markets. India turned from exporter of textile to importer."

As Indian Hindus still didn't have much of a concept of idealism or nationhood and the masses generally considered the new rulers not much different from the different powers they were serving for the last 1000 years, the British recognised their greatest enemy as Muslims and Muslim rulers. The Mughals still existed but their power had waned to within Delhi. A new threat arose in the South where a pious Muslim ruler, Tipu Sultan bearing the ancestry of the Prophet decided to unite all local powers against the British. He fought bravely but due to the treachery of the Muslim Nizam of Hyderabad, had to sign a humiliating treaty under which the Illuminati took his children as a security deposit! Lord Cornwallis (Illuminati) was involved in signing of the treaty. (yes, he's the same Cornwallis we later saw in America). Despite these hardships, Tipu fought back and died with a sword in clutched in his hand surrounded by the bodies of dozens of Englishmen he had manages to kill.

After Tipu's murder in 1799, it was open season on India. The Rothschilds ordered the British to snatch and ship out every piece of gold they could lay their hands on. They started annexing princely states left and right. Lord Dalhousie (Illuminati) was appointed Governor General in 1848. Though there is a University built in Halifax in his name, few know that he started a policy by which any princely state of devoid of official heirs would be annexed by Rothschild British agents. This policy proved very successful.

However, the Muslim power was still seething, and in 1857, an all-out war of independence broke out. Though there are horror stories of Muslims massacring British, few know that the British beheaded the sons of the Last Mughal emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar and presented their heads to him on platters! Bahadur Shah was later exiled to Burma where he spent the remainder of his life in a 4',x4' windowless jail cell.After that, there was a grand ball held at the Red Fort. The Rothschilds ensured that the original solid gold coated spires of the Taj Mahal were shipped off to Britain and replaced with brass ones. Instrumental in the success of the British were rail, telegraph and traitor princely states like the Nizam of Hyderabad.

India serves as a great example of how literature and language can be exploited and created for furthering Illuminati interests. Wilkie Collins of the Illuminati Collins bloodline started publishing imaginary tales of Muslim atrocities against Hindus and temple trashing by Muslim rulers in his famous novel, the Moonstone.

Hindus who were a non-cohesive group living peacefully with Muslims for years were suddenly pitted against Muslims. An Englishman started the original controversy of the Babri mosque being built on the birthplace of Hindu God Ram. To further distance Muslims from their Persian language and therefore Islamic roots, the British popularized Urdu language as a mass language for Muslims. The reason was that Urdu while sharing the script of Persian happened to be littered with native Indian words, making it more localized in its nature; and inheriting all the class bias of Indian language as well.

Then the British created Hindi language out of thin air as a national language for Hindus. Hindi was spoken like Urdu but had the script of Sanskrit, a Hindu script which had gone extinct centuries ago. Hindi would give Hindus identity making them antagonist to Muslimsand Muslims would be encouraged to abandon Urdu for Hindi, breaking complete contact with Islamic script. A certain John Gilchrist of Fort William College, Calcutta, directed these language politics. Mr. Gilchrist can be aptly called the father of Hindi language.

Languages were not the only tools the Illuminati created. Realising the danger posed by the call for jihad during Muslim Friday sermons, the British created a bogus Islam known as Qadyanism/Ahmedism/Ismailism, complete with its very own false prophet! This new cult would preach a "Colonial friendly Islam" and at the same time engage in assassinations of real Muslim intellectuals.

Illuminati Masonist/racist Rudyard Kipling would settle in India to further provoke the English to further colonialism by penning racist epithets like "White Man's burden" (should be called "Rothschild's burden"). Kipling's seemingly innocent novels contain subtle anti-Islamism and his epic "Jungle Boy" carries the Disney- Illuminati theme of man and civilisation being shunned for animals.

Kipling would even attempt to justify colonialism by pointing towards the British instruments of plunder such as railroads, telegraphs and the ports of Bombay, Calcutta and Madras as some landmarks of civilisation which the Indians could not construct themselves. Such a claim is dubious since the India on the eve of British arrival was a prosperous one; and there is no way to tell how things would have been in the absence of the British.

What can be said is that the Indians failed to offer the illuminati effective resistance; and were no match to their cold-blooded calculations. A very negative legacy left behind by the British was the culture of bribery and corruption in the administration lower levels. Since this corruption translated into very little when compared to the Illuminati stakes in India, The British preferred to keep an administration of bribe taking yes men rather than focus on clean administration. We find this culture continues to thrive in all areas of British imperialism; India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Egypt and Nigeria.

India also became the focal point of the Opium Wars. There are reports that opium, which was bringing the decay of Oriental society and brought the downfall of the Chinese empire was actually being cultivated by the British in Patna and Afghanistan. The British did not sell it to Indians however. Instead they started giving away free tea (which contains addictive substance) at railway stations. Once the Indian population was hooked, they put a price on it.

Realising the need for local Indian Illuminati operatives, Freemasonry made its entry into India. The first Lodge was established at Fort William, Calcutta in 1730. (The same fort William from which Hindi arose). Interestingly, its coat of arms was the lion on the seal of the British East India Company! Freemasonry was gradually established in all major Indian urban focal points.

"Independence" But Whose?

As we know, the biggest Illuminati project of the 20th century was Communism. The Illuminati fostered the growth of the Indian National Congress through its operatives, A.O Hume and Wederburn. The idea was to create an independent India which would be a proxy for the Soviets. For this purpose, Indian freemasonry went overtime into grooming local Indian Mason operatives.

According to this official Masonic website, "Swami Vivekananda (initiated in 1884 under the name of Bro. Narendra Nath Dutt in Lodge Anchor & Hope, Calcutta). Motilal Nehru - Lodge Harmony, Kanpur (Father of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and grand father of Indhira Gandhi), C. Rajagopalachary (Governor General of India), Sir C P Ramaswamy Iyer (Divan of Travancore), Dr. P V Cheriy (Governor of Maharashtra), and Fakruddin Ali Ahmed (President of India)."

Since this Illuminati project of delivering an "independent India" to the Soviet sphere of influence required top priority, Illuminati operative Helena Blavatsky founded the Theosophical Society in India. The purpose was two-fold. First, Blavatsky would dig up the swastika and Aryan theory for the Nazis who were created to attack Russia, which would result in the entire Eastern Europe and Germany being transferred to Communists.

Secondly, the Theosophical Society would coordinate the Indian Independence movement through the Indian National Congress. Even back then, rumours began circulating about Blavatsky and the "Russians". A key theosophist activist was Mrs. Annie Besant who despite acting against the British, managed to mysteriously escape being punished by them. If one analyses the Indian independence movement, we notice the British building a crescendo of antagonizing the Indian National Congress and then caving in to their demands.whereas transfer of power to the INC was predetermined. Realising that Indian National Congress leaders were phoney in every respect, Mohammed Ali Jinnah, a British educated lawyer managed to get a mandate for an all Muslim Pakistan without shedding a drop of blood or going to jail.

The last Governor General of India, Lord Mountbatten is considered to be associated with the Rothschilds. He realised the threat Pakistan would pose to the about to be created Soviet proxy India. He assured that independent India got more than its share of landmass, including islands in the Indian Ocean, many border districts initially marked for Pakistan (which resulted in the Muslims being massacred), 95% Muslim Kashmir which should have gone to Pakistan, The Muslim princely states of Junagadh and Hyderabad, the latter of whom was expecting independent status for its traitorous role in 1857 and North-Eastern territories consisting of Orientals!

The time India was liberated coincides with a little known private ceremony known as "Hour of the British Empire" which is held in London. Further, the Rothschild owned British Petroleum was granted unlimited rights to all offshore Indian oil, which is still valid till this day. There is reason to believe that the internationalists were behind the death/disappearance of Indian freedom fighter Subhash Chandra Bose who would become a popular rival to Theosophist groomed Nehru after independence. Unlike Nehru, Bose was on the frontlines using Indian POW's of the British army captured by the Japanese to fight back against the British. His death remains a mystery and it was conducted by the illuminati to ensure Nehru had all control over India.

The Congress party consisted of numerous freemasons and theosophists who ensured that India with its strategic landmass was always a total ally of the Soviet Union. Later, many communist countries including India became part of the "non aligned movement" which enabled them to remain allied to the Soviet Union and yet receive major aid from internationalists and their tax free foundations in America, including components for atomic weapons. Even Canadian Deuterium made its way into Soviet proxy India. All of Indian military hardware consisted of Russian technology and despite the cold war, the Illuminati was very reluctant to back Pakistan in any way.

Limited amounts of American small arms made it to Afghanistan through Pakistan but it is important to note that the American ambassador supervising it and the Pakistani President, General Zia were killed in the same plane crash! India had major stakes in the Soviet Union, including a possible obliteration of Pakistan if the Soviets made it across Afghanistan. It is interesting to note that the UN turned a blind eye to the illegal Indian invasion and annexation of Goa. This proves that the UN was created to foster Illuminati plans.

Of course, the farce of Indian independence will never be known to the casual observer, who is subjected to whitewash such as the BBC movie, "Gandhi" and Larry Collin's (Of Illuminati Collins bloodline) "Freedom at Midnight". As for Indians, despite their population of around 1 billion, they seem to be too hungry, hate obsessed and materialistic to ever figure out. And again, greeting the powerful of the world with folded hands is never looked down upon. In India. And rather represents a 1000 year old tradition.

It is interesting to note that the Indian government crushed the real peasant classes who became genuine Communists without the Communist International batting an eye; and Soviet aid to India was never hindered.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Illuminati switched horses; abandoning the Congress party for the Hindu fascist Bharatiya janata Party (BJP). Though never in control of this party, this was the closest the Illuminati could get to exercising influence. The UN and world media would turn a blind eye to the burning alive of 5000+ Muslim civilians by Hindu hoodlums. Israel would become intimately involved with India, to the extent of Israeli fighter planes being detected in the process of launching pre-emptive strikes on Pakistani nuclear reactors after India conducted its recent nuclear tests .The coming to light of this event enraged the Chinese allies of Pakistan to such an extent that they gifted Pakistan a complete fleet of fighter planes.

The recent resurgence of the Congress has upset Illuminati plans. The creation of a one world government under the Illuminati UN will require not just horrendous wars in the Middle East but the rest of the world as well. In South east Asia, we may see a war with Pakistan, North Korea and China against India, Taiwan and south Korea. If it happens to be a nuclear war, the carnage will help pave way for a UN one world government. For that purpose, the Illuminati is working to get the recently dethroned Hindu fascist BJP party back on its feet.

Regards

Henry

[Guest guest]

You feel Islam was spread by missionaries more than invasion???????????

 

Read this:

 

The aim of the victorious Islamic Armies was to wipe off everything pre-Islamic in the countries they overran in a few decades after the passing away of Prophet Mohammed. Thus began a process of Arabization of all the countries the Arabs overran in their Jehad

 

Their victory was due to thier Barbarism,immoral war policies (any strategy to win) and not due to Bravery.

 

Their Victory was due to lack of Unity among Indians,our total reliance on only the one leader of Battle,leader's death->end of war which the Muslim invaders exploited very well.

 

Islam is basically a medium of Arab Imperialism - Military, Political, Economic and Cultural

 

Anwar Shaikh, a scholar of Islam writes the following in his essay entitled ISLAM - The Arab National Movement, about how and why Islam is basically a medium of Arab Imperialism - Military, Political, Economic and Cultural.

 

Would a Muslim or a Christian, like to associate with that period of his country's history which is alien to his cultural identity.

 

Islam, in fact, is a perpetual declaration of war against all those, who do not believe in Muhammad. This war is not confined to words but it is really brutish, barbaric and bewildering. It makes society a hot bed of mutual hatred based on discrimination of Momin (Muslim) and Kafir (non-Muslim). Thus, it ignites the flame of eternal conflict far more dangerous, debilitating and devastating than Karl-Marx could ever visualize: "They (unbelievers) are Satan's party they are the losers.... Those (the Muslims) are God's party....they are the prosperers." (LVIII The Disputer: 20)

 

What the Koran says about Jehad

 

 

The Muslims are commanded to wage an everlasting war against the unbelievers and are assured victory in the struggle. Surely, the Marxist social philosophy is an extension of the Koranic doctrine. To realize the significance of this statement, one ought to read the following:

 

1. On unbelievers is the curse of Allah. (The Cow: 161 )

 

2. Allah is an enemy to unbelievers. ( The Cow: 15 )

 

3. The worst of beasts in Allah's sight are the ungrateful, who will not believe. (Spoils of War: 55)

 

4. Oh ye who believe! the non-Muslims are unclean. (Repentance:17)

 

5. Oh ye who believe! Murder those of the disbelievers and let them find harshness in you. (Repentance: 123)

 

6. Oh believers, do not treat your fathers and mothers as your friends, if they prefer unbelief to belief, whosoever of you takes them for friends, they are evil-doers. (Repentance: 20) 7. Humiliate the non-Muslims to such an extent that they surrender and pay tribute. ( Repentance: 29 )

 

Through the doctrine of hatred, Islam incites Muslims against non-Muslims and proposes Jehad as the solution to make Islam the dominant faith. What is Jehad? It is the battle against unbelievers such as the Hindus, the Christians, the Jews, the atheists - in fact, unbelievers of all sorts.

 

Jehad is nothing but an Inducement to Murder and Plunder non-Muslims for their Sheer Crime of Not Believing in Muhammad

 

 

Since humans do not like harming innocent people, Jehad is nothing but an inducement to murder and plunder non-Muslims for the sheer crime of not believing in Muhammad. It is called a "holy war." Those who return home victoriously, come laden with booty, which includes wealth and non-Muslim women for concubinage and free seduction but those "crusaders" who are killed "in the way of Allah" go straight to paradise where ever-young virgins of exquisite beauty and pretty boys anxiously wait to serve them! Even more stunning is the fact that while every code of moral conduct treats murder, rape, plunder, lechery as sins, Islam counts them as acts of piety.

 

For more on this refer to Islamic Culture by Anwar Shaikh.

 

Anyway We now need to look at future and correct the mistakes of past.

 

1)A truth is a truth though hard to digest.

 

2)I totally agree with Gopaldas that What is to be taught in School and Colleges is not be decided by Government policies but by facts alone.

 

3)"To know True History whether dark or bright is the fundamental right of each and Indian."

 

4)I am not against a particular religion but there has to be equality in dealing with people of different religions.There can be another debate regarding the diifferent rules regarding muslims as regards Polygamy etc

in the Constitution.

 

5)Depriving Indians of True Medieval History cannot be a solution to the problem of Hindu-Muslim unity in India.

 

6) If at all there is a solution , then it's abolition of Government policies,laws based on race,caste,Religion.

 

7)Demolishing the paragraghs regarding religion,caste in the Birth Certificate of Individual and not withhelding History is the real solution to India's problem.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Mahatma K. Gandhi (1869-1948), Indian nationalist leader:

 

It is impossible for me to reconcile myself to the idea of conversion after the style that goes on in India and elsewhere today. It is an error which is perhaps the greatest impediment to the world's progress toward peace ... Why should a Christian want to convert a Hindu to Christianity? Why should he not be satisfied if the Hindu is a good or godly man?

 

How very nice it would be if the missionaries rendered humanitarian service without the ulterior aim of conversion.

 

I hold that proselytisation under the cloak of humanitarian work is unhealthy to say the least. It is most resented by people here. Religion after all is a deeply personal thing. It touches the heart. Why should I change my religion because the doctor who professes Christianity as his religion has cured me of some disease, or why should the doctor expect me to change whilst I am under his influence?

 

My fear is that though Christian friends nowadays do not say or admit it that Hindu religion is untrue, they must harbour in their breast that Hinduism is an error and that Christianity, as they believe it, is the only true religion... so far as one can understand the present (Christian) effort, it is to uproot Hinduism from her very foundation and replace it by another faith.

 

The first distinction I would like to make ... between your missionary work and mine is that while I am strengthening the faith of people, you (missionaries) are undermining it.

 

If I had the power and could legislate, I should stop all proselytizing ... In Hindu households the advent of a missionary has meant the disruption of the family coming in the wake of change of dress, manners, language, food and drink ...

 

I regard Jesus as a great teacher of humanity, but I do not regard him as the only begotten son of God. That epithet in its material interpretation is quite unacceptable. Metaphorically we are all sons of God, but for each of us there may be different sons of God in a special sense. Thus for me Chaitanya may be the only begotten son of God ... God cannot be the exclusive Father and I cannot ascribe exclusive divinity to Jesus.

 

It is my firm opinion that Europe (and the United States) does not represent the spirit of God or Christianity but the spirit of Satan. And Satan's successes are the greatest when appears with the name of God on his lips.

 

I consider western Christianity in its practical working a negation of Christ's Christianity. I cannot conceive Jesus, if he was living in flesh in our midst, approving of modern Christian organizations, public worship, or ministry.

 

It pains me to have to say that the Christian missionaries as a body, with honorable exceptions, have actively supported a system which has impoverished, enervated and demoralized a people considered to be among the gentlest and most civilized on earth.