About Gandhi - Is this true?

[Stradlater]

11 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Bhagat Singh is an overglorified guy because of Punjabi dominance of Bollywood. There are thousands like him or more impactful than him that don't get the proper recognition.

 

And Gandhi still accomplished 100x more than Bhagat Singh or any of the other 1000s like Bhagat Singh.

 

When it comes to Shaheeds and martyrs for the independence movement, Bengalis are the bravest of the lot. Which is strange, because before the British, you'd have to go back a thousand years to find a brave Bengali.

 

 

Come on Yar Mulo Bhai give credit where it's due. Shaheed Bhagat Singh was far from being your typical average uneducated Paindoo Punjabi.

The guy's intellectual capabilities were brilliant for his age and the more I read his works and about him, the more I get in awe of that man. What a man! 

 

But the real hero amongst all revolutionaries and who rarely gets a mention was imo Sachindranath Sanyal. The guy spearheaded the revolutionary movement for around three decades and his bases all over India and not just confined to Bengal like other Bengali revolutionaries.

It's a shame that hardly anybody knows about him. A true Patriot!

[Muloghonto]

21 minutes ago, Green Monster said:

chotu,

 

why so illiterate?

 u link to things that don't say what u claim they say and present that as evidence

 

then u went crying to ms beetle to save u 

I link to things that say exactly what i claim it says. I linked a university medical department paper to prove you wrong that women do rape men. i also provided a peer reviewed article that says homosexuality is prevalent in animal kingdom. You ran away, just like the jaahils of your desert jaahil religion.

[Muloghonto]

24 minutes ago, Green Monster said:

chotu,

as a fake engineer, u urself said that only peer-reviewed journal articles are valid, yet u will not give us any!!! why so bhagoda?

I guess you are too stupid to realize that peer reviewed articles apply in matters of science. In matters of history, its first hand sources and second hand sources that matter. Had you ACTUALLY graduated from university, you'd know this.

[Muloghonto]

Just now, Green Monster said:

chotu shifting goalposts again!!!

Nobody is shifting goalposts, thats how the different fields work. History is not science. So peer review is irrelevant. History is about sources. Go get an education. 

[Muloghonto]

5 minutes ago, Green Monster said:

wrong, u misinterpret what is said then behave like a jaahil + bhagoda+ fake engineer

I quoted from those texts specifically and you ran away like a coward. 

[Muloghonto]

4 minutes ago, Green Monster said:

fake engineer obfuscating his goalpost shifting

Ignorant jaahil exposing his ignorance in typical desert jaahil way

[Muloghonto]

2 minutes ago, Green Monster said:

wrong, ur jaahil english skills make u think clades are the same things as species... the famous reading skills off a fake engineer+ bhagoda

for the purposes of the discussion, its the same thing, as proven by the definition i provided- when you ran away again. keep running. 

[Muloghonto]

4 minutes ago, Green Monster said:

fake engineer still has no answers!!!

When i have time, i will once again prove you wrong by quoting a university article on citation in HISTORY and you will run away like a desert jaahil again.

[Singh bling]

On 4/22/2018 at 7:34 PM, Muloghonto said:

 

The biggest reason why they left after WWII and not WWI is because of Gandhi- Gandhi's marches and bandhs made the Raj a deeply loss making entity. 

You must be kidding if you believe that British left becauss of Gandhi.British gave Independence to all colonies.Do you think that it was because of Gandhi??

 

WW1 did not change power dynamics much apart from restricting Germany but WW2 broke the back of European empires.Moreover in their support of Soviet they created biggest monster for themselves which was occupying Eastern Europe and could had invaded western Europe at will .Their only saviour was USA against that.

 

In short only two power centres were their after WW2 and those were USA snd USSR.so weak Britain did not had any power to hold colonies forget holding a big country like India

[coffee_rules]

On 4/22/2018 at 10:04 AM, Muloghonto said:

 

The biggest reason why they left after WWII and not WWI is because of Gandhi- Gandhi's marches and bandhs made the Raj a deeply loss making entity. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-3416178/Who-freed-India-Gandhi-Bose-New-book-claims-Netaji-s-INA-impact-British-rulers-Gandhi-Nehru-s-non-violence.html

 

Recently, I read about Ambedkar who confirmed that PM Atlee decision to quit India was not because of MG, but SCBose. The military activities of INA was feared to cause revolt within Indian army/Navy and would have caused a massive embarrassment to the colonial kingdom. Congress fed stories about MG getting us freedom is a hogwash, that even WB Commies who controlled the Indian History textbook believe it now. 

 

ndians serving in the British armed forces were inflamed by the Red Fort Trials. In February 1946, almost 20,000 sailors of the Royal Indian Navy serving on 78 ships mutinied against the Empire. They went around Mumbai with portraits of Netaji and forced the British to shout Jai Hind and other INA slogans. 

The rebels brought down the Union Jack on their ships and refused to obey their British masters. This mutiny was followed by similar rebellions in the Royal Indian Air Force and also in the British Indian Army units in Jabalpur. The British were terrified. 

After the Second World War, 2.5 million Indian soldiers were being de-commissioned from the British Army. Military intelligence reports in 1946 indicated that the Indian soldiers were inflamed and could not be relied upon to obey their British officers. 

There were only 40,000 British troops in India at the time. Most were eager to go home and in no mood to fight the 2.5 million battle-hardened Indian soldiers who were being demobilised. 

It is under these circumstances that the British decided to grant Independence to India. The idea behind putting these documents in the public domain, is not to in any way undermine the significant contribution of Mahatma Gandhi or Pandit Nehru, but to spark a debate about the real significance of the role played by Netaji’s Indian National Army. 

School textbooks are dominated by the role played by the non-violent movement, while the role of the INA is dismissed in a few cursory paragraphs. 

The time has come to revisit modern Indian history and acknowledge the immense contribution of Netaji in helping India win its freedom.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-3416178/Who-freed-India-Gandhi-Bose-New-book-claims-Netaji-s-INA-impact-British-rulers-Gandhi-Nehru-s-non-violence.html#ixzz5DifGmu74 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Edited April 25, 2018 by coffee_rules

[Singh bling]

When Roosevelt Took on Churchill to End British Rule in India

https://www.thequint.com/news/world/franklin-roosevelt-role-in-india-independence-british-rule-churchill

 

 

[Muloghonto]

6 hours ago, Green Monster said:

chotu the bhagoda,

 

for no discussions is clade = species, neither was it used that way in the paper u quoted!!! only a jaahil like u lies this much chotu!!!

Clade = all extant species of a common descendant. Therefore saying all 'extant clades in animal kingdom' = 'all existing species in animal kingdom'. Definition provided, you ran away. As usual.

6 hours ago, Green Monster said:

excuses, excuses, bhagoda will quote something that says one thing and he will claim it says something else!!!

Your inability to read, is not going to cut it chump.

I specifically quoted the texts and you ran away from quoting me there. Now you pretend you were right- like a typical bhagoda islamist. 

[coffee_rules]

Nehru/Congress duped gullible junta to win elections post Independence. Hindi poets penning songs..

 

Dedi hamein azaadi bina khadag bin dhall

sabarmati ke sant tune kardiya kamal!

 

But, the contribution of Gandhiji in being the political limelight , keeping the fire of freedom struggle pan India, should be appreciated.

Read this R C Majumdar Interview on his perspective of Indian history. Congress sidelined him in IGera and got JNU hacks like Romila THapar, Irfab Habib to rewrite mainstream history of India - an account of Ashoka, Akbar, Moghals, Aurangzeb and Congress Freedom Struggle.

 

http://www.kamat.com/kalranga/itihas/rc_majumdar.htm

Quote

"Dr. K M Munshi liked my work on ancient Bengal and asked me to work on a comprehensive volume on Indian history. He introduced me to many great scholars. In my seventy years of career that work was to become a great achievement. Dr. Munshi was also a great researcher and historian, and I truly enjoyed working with him. We did have our differences, but he always let me prevail. Since I could not ignore his opinion, I had to include both view points often contradicting each other, in several places. It took 35 years to complete all the volumes! I was happy that it was completed before Munshiji breathed his last."

"Munshi believed that a government sponsored institution can never document history in a honest manner. I realized this truth in the later years. The federal government built an editorial board to document India's freedom struggle with me as the chief editor. I discovered that other fellow historians were so eager to write history glorifying their friends in politics that I had to get out. We should not write corrupted history, however bitter the proceedings may be. Many countries have the tradition of changing history as their leaders change. We should not let India become one of those. History should be written based on sound proof and reasoning and not focused around famous personalities."

 

[Muloghonto]

45 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-3416178/Who-freed-India-Gandhi-Bose-New-book-claims-Netaji-s-INA-impact-British-rulers-Gandhi-Nehru-s-non-violence.html

 

Recently, I read about Ambedkar who confirmed that PM Atlee decision to quit India was not because of MG, but SCBose. The military activities of INA was feared to cause revolt within Indian army/Navy and would have caused a massive embarrassment to the colonial kingdom. Congress fed stories about MG getting us freedom is a hogwash, that even WB Commies who controlled the Indian History textbook believe it now. 

 

ndians serving in the British armed forces were inflamed by the Red Fort Trials. In February 1946, almost 20,000 sailors of the Royal Indian Navy serving on 78 ships mutinied against the Empire. They went around Mumbai with portraits of Netaji and forced the British to shout Jai Hind and other INA slogans. 

The rebels brought down the Union Jack on their ships and refused to obey their British masters. This mutiny was followed by similar rebellions in the Royal Indian Air Force and also in the British Indian Army units in Jabalpur. The British were terrified. 

After the Second World War, 2.5 million Indian soldiers were being de-commissioned from the British Army. Military intelligence reports in 1946 indicated that the Indian soldiers were inflamed and could not be relied upon to obey their British officers. 

There were only 40,000 British troops in India at the time. Most were eager to go home and in no mood to fight the 2.5 million battle-hardened Indian soldiers who were being demobilised. 

It is under these circumstances that the British decided to grant Independence to India. The idea behind putting these documents in the public domain, is not to in any way undermine the significant contribution of Mahatma Gandhi or Pandit Nehru, but to spark a debate about the real significance of the role played by Netaji’s Indian National Army. 

School textbooks are dominated by the role played by the non-violent movement, while the role of the INA is dismissed in a few cursory paragraphs. 

The time has come to revisit modern Indian history and acknowledge the immense contribution of Netaji in helping India win its freedom.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-3416178/Who-freed-India-Gandhi-Bose-New-book-claims-Netaji-s-INA-impact-British-rulers-Gandhi-Nehru-s-non-violence.html#ixzz5DifGmu74 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

As a Bengali, i admire SC Bose. But Bose was crushed. So whatever fears the british had of him causing revolts, ended the moment he was crushed and he died. He died in 1945 apparently. India got its freedom in 1947. So i highly doubt that the Brits considered it a cause, 2 years after the guy was dead and unable to do anything.

[Muloghonto]

1 hour ago, Singh bling said:

You must be kidding if you believe that British left becauss of Gandhi.British gave Independence to all colonies.Do you think that it was because of Gandhi??

 

WW1 did not change power dynamics much apart from restricting Germany but WW2 broke the back of European empires.Moreover in their support of Soviet they created biggest monster for themselves which was occupying Eastern Europe and could had invaded western Europe at will .Their only saviour was USA against that.

 

In short only two power centres were their after WW2 and those were USA snd USSR.so weak Britain did not had any power to hold colonies forget holding a big country like India

1. Tehran accords

2. Gandhi.

 

Gandhi set the stage for all british colonies that were not in the process of getting colonized (ie, not like AUS/NZ/USA/Canada where millions of Brits showed up to settle down) : cause enough activism to screw-up the economy and the Raj is gonna leave, as their sole purpose is now null and void- to make $$.

[coffee_rules]

7 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

As a Bengali, i admire SC Bose. But Bose was crushed. So whatever fears the british had of him causing revolts, ended the moment he was crushed and he died. He died in 1945 apparently. India got its freedom in 1947. So i highly doubt that the Brits considered it a cause, 2 years after the guy was dead and unable to do anything.

Even after he died, INA had a presence in India and there was a lot of soft corner for INA among the Indian soldiers of British army (sepoys). 

 

http://www.historynet.com/indian-national-army1942-45.htm

 

Quote

With the Japanese defeat in Burma in mid-1945, the INA crumbled without ever securing the mass defections from the British Indian army that Bose had confidently predicted. Bose died in an air crash while en route to the USSR, where he had hoped to elicit Soviet aid to continue his struggle against the British to achieve India’s independence.

 

Arguably, the INA achieved far more after Bose’s death. With thousands of INA soldiers becoming British prisoners at the end of World War II, British authorities made a series of misjudgments regarding the prisoners’ fate that only served to fuel India’s desire for independence from Britain. The first mistake was to publicly try some former INA soldiers in November 1945 – thereby alerting the entire Indian population to the INA’s existence and pro-independence mission. British censors had carefully kept this information from the public during the war, but it was now suddenly thrust upon an increasingly restive Indian population that was more than ever ready for independence.

 

Britain’s next egregious misjudgment was in the selection of which INA soldiers to put on trial. The British opted to try Major General Shah Nawaz, Lieutenant Colonel P.K. Sahgal and Lieutenant Colonel G.S. Dhillon – respectively, a Muslim, a Sikh and a Hindu. Yet in their determination to demonstrate their even-handedness by selecting a representative defendant from each of India’s major religions, British authorities unwittingly united these disparate population elements in sympathy for the accused.

 

Compounding these issues was another misjudgment regarding the choice of location for the trial proceedings – Delhi’s Red Fort. Dating back to the 17th century, Red Fort not only was a famous symbol of India’s once-mighty independent Mughal empire, it also stirred memories of previous armed resistance to British rule, the bloody 1857 Indian Mutiny. Known as the “Red Fort Trials,” the INA proceedings ended in farce. The main accused were released after being found guilty, their sentences suspended.

 

Britain had hoped that the show of British resolve represented by the INA trials would cow India’s restive population, calm the growing mood of militancy among Indian nationalists, and result in widespread vilification of the INA “traitors.” That plan, however, backfired. The trials and associated publicity not only helped ensure that the INA’s anti-British, pro-independence activities became widely known, they also resulted in the INA receiving extensive popular support from the Indian population.

 

[Muloghonto]

7 minutes ago, Green Monster said:

wrong chotu,

 

see here

ur little incel mind cant understand that words half different meanings!!!

incel is running away again, why don't u beg to Ms Beetle or little Moochad to intervene and save ur bum like in the other thread(s) little bhagoda 

 

 

As per your own definition, it means all extant species in animal kingdom that have a common ancestor (clades) have homosexuality in them.

See, makes no difference. As usual, you are easy to prove wrong. 

 

[Muloghonto]

Just now, Green Monster said:

wrong chotu, 

u are putting ur agenda into the paper,  overweight incel can't hide his jaahiliyat...

 

not once in this paper does the author say clades = species 

He doesn't need to. Just like in your example, if someone says all Indians speak Bengali = bengalis, marathis, tamils, etc. all speak bengali, similarly saying all clades show homosexuality = all species under the clade shows homosexuality. 

Just now, Green Monster said:

the author says clade, which by definiton isn't a species, it can be as large a group as ape 

Yep. 
And when he says all clades show behaviour X, it means all subsections under the clade shows said behaviour. The whole point of using supra-terms is to encompass all the ones below it. 

 

Just now, Green Monster said:

whatmore, he is yet to provide a single source which says clades=species, which i have given shwoing they arent the same

his own paper, the very one he claims supports him doesn't say species!!!

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3565526/

 

the very same paper he claims is evidence, says what he says is untrue. now this incel is telling us bisexuality= homosexuality 

I quoted directly from the paper. Word for word. Take it up with the authors, not me. 

 

Just now, Green Monster said:

word for word from the same paper he gave, literal iq off an icel jaahil is dangerously low!!!

 

narcissit's ego is so fragile, he can't admit he was wrong!!! poor guy is reduced to religious bigotry against Muslims b/c he can't make an argument!!!

LOL. 

You keep running away from the central fact, that how can islam be true, when it calls a behaviour seen in many many animal species to be true. 

No amount of twisting will free you from that question, kiddo. 

[Muloghonto]

4 minutes ago, Green Monster said:

he doesn't need to is now this great analyst's argument...

unlike jaahils like u, a professional like him knows that words have specific meaning

 

Yep. And a supra term encompasses all terms below it. Just like your example. A clade show X means all species under clade also shows X. Former cannot be true without the latter. 

4 minutes ago, Green Monster said:

u can't even understand a basic analogy

India(clade) WBangal, Punjab, Gujrat (species) within the clade, and speak Punjabi(behavior)

Yes. And if India(clade) shows behavour X, it means all subsets (species) shows the same behaviour. Very straightforward. 

4 minutes ago, Green Monster said:

clade is a larger group, species is a smaller group, speaking Punjabi is a behavior 

India(clade) has members of a (species)Punjab which speak Punjabi(behavior)

Mammals(clade) species(Humans)  gay (behavior)

 

u are so jaahil that u are conflating what one species does with an entire clade

Mammals(clade) species(Humans)  use internet (behavior)

For the statement 'Indians speak Hindi' to be true, all members of the group 'Indians' has to exhibit said behaviour.

When a statement says 'a clade shows behaviour x', for it to be true, all species under the clade must show the same behaviour. 

 

4 minutes ago, Green Monster said:

nope, only an insecure narcissist can't stand being wrong infront of a Muslim, so u will make up what the author means.

You are yet to even touch the argument, how can something be unnatural, if its present in nature. 

4 minutes ago, Green Monster said:

Nope, only I did, ur are the only one who is inferring what u want from it... i quoted the same paper which says exactly what I said, only a few species show homosexual exclusive behavior, u are so insecure in front of an educated muslim that u are making things up to protect ur fragile ego

My quote is the first line from the paper itself, you idiot. The very first line. Again, learn to read. 

 

4 minutes ago, Green Monster said:

see, he has no argument besides misinterpreting what an author says and results to insulting Muslims as his only argument...

I misinterpreted nothing, i quoted the very first line of the said paper. 

 

 

[Muloghonto]

Just now, Green Monster said:

Sure  incel,

Someone saying Indians speak Gujrati means all groups in India speak Gujrati 

If it was a scientifically accurate statement, then yes. DUH!

Just now, Green Monster said:

If India(clade) shows behavior Gujrati all species of India(Bangal, Punjab, Central Province) speak Gujarati

For a clade to show a behavior, the statement would have to be that the clade itself shows the behavior

the paper says this

The behavior is found in the clade, not that the behavior is a trait of the calde itself, u silly little jaahil... saala doesn't read his own "evidence"

The paper says it is found in a clade, a clade mammals, homosexuality is found in humans, means that it is found in that clade...

seriously, how dumb are u???

The paper does not say that a behaviour is valid for a clade when its invalid for its sub-species. 

Just now, Green Monster said:

strawman and shifting goalpost

u even misinterpreted the first line of the paper

u misinterpreted the whole thing, such is ur jaahiliyat

 

I directly quoted the line verbatim.

Now stop running and explain to us, how what is found in nature, is unnatural. If homosexuality is unnatural, why did you God make so many homosexual animals ?