The Assasination of Rajiv Gandhi

Subramanian Swamy
Konark
Price: Rs.350

Early in his book Subramanian Swamy recounts how he was once "watching TV news on Sri Lanka developments with
Laloo Yadav". The Bihari leader, in what must rank as the most original take on the Tamil-Sinhalese ethnic conflict,
remarked, "Kya jhagda hai? Sub Madrasi lagtey hain (What are they fighting for? All look like Tamils)."
The anecdote sets the tone for a volume that derives itself from Swamy's trademark mix of wicked humour, delicious
stories and undying quest for vengeance. The central thesis of The Assassination of Rajiv Gandhi is that the killing of the
former prime minister was followed by a disinformation campaign that sought to exonerate the LTTE. For this Swamy, the
Harvard-trained economist who is now president of the Janata Party, blames the Tamil Tigers' "people in high places" - a
phrase borrowed from an LTTE leader.
The strategy, Swamy argues, proved successful in keeping alive a contrived mystery even after the CBI and courts had
done their work. It managed to "manipulate the Jain Commission" inquiring into the larger conspiracy behind the murder
to the extent that it "declared open season on assassination 'theories'".
In between identifying the "hidden" friends of the LTTE, Swamy takes a swipe, in typically Swamy style, at all and sundry.
So R. Venkataraman's presidency is compared to that of "von Hindenburg" in pre-Nazi Germany, the RSS is the "mother
spider of all black widow spiders", Dhirubhai Ambani is "one of those Papa Docs of banana republics". Sometimes
sublime, more often ridiculous, instinctively over the top but never banal. That's Swamy - and this extract.
VICTIM: Swamy (right) says Rajivs killers had friends in Delhi
First Among the Red Herrings
No sooner Rajiv Gandhi's body had arrived in Delhi by special plane than rumours were set afloat
as to who was behind the assassination. I am convinced today, with a review of events and the
disinformation campaign unleashed, that in retrospect had I not been in office for a month after
the assassination, and as colleague of a prime minister who had a mind of his own, the LTTE disinformation network in
India would have thoroughly confounded the picture after the assassination and could have escaped the responsibility
for the assassination.
Much of the principle breakthroughs in unravelling the horrid crime were made during that one month (May 21-June
21,1991), which made it impossible for what (LTTE leader) Pottu Amman had hoped: that their "people in high places" in
Delhi would successfully spread the word that the LTTE had nothing to do
with the assassination.
From the first day, the attempt was to deny that it was the LTTE. Over the
months as it became clear that the LTTE was indeed the prime suspect the
attempt was to trivialise the assassination by floating all kinds of wild
theories implicating practically everybody so that people would not know
what to believe.
The first person to raise doubts about the LTTE being the assassins was the
Chief Election Commissioner (CEC), T.N. Seshan. He came to see me after the
assassination to tell me that Mossad of Israel had assassinated Rajiv Gandhi,
and that if we made him the home minister he would unravel it. At that
stage the only other person insistent that he be taken into confidence was
President Ranasinghe Premadasa of Sri Lanka. I never understood why.

"Seshan
blamed
Mossad for
the murder.
He asked to
be made
home
minister to
unravel the
mystery."
I thought in the case of Seshan that he was in emotional shock, and had taken leave of his senses. But I told him to talk to
Chandra Shekhar about it, and added that since we were a caretaker government I doubted if he could be made home
minister in the middle of a general election. After all, he was the CEC.

Seshan did go and talk to the prime minister, and later when I met the prime minister he said he was thoroughly taken
aback by Seshan and a bit amused. But we forgot all about it soon enough
since we had serious business at hand.
Journalist in a Honey Trap
Seshan soon appeared in Sunday under editor Vir Sanghvi's signature, as
the unnamed source to raise the same doubt, but Sanghvi made an
addition: that a minister in Chandra Shekhar's government had
masterminded the assassination. Knowing Sanghvi as a flippant and
supercilious journalist, I would have normally disregarded what he wrote.
But there were reports that he had once gone to London on an LTTE
sponsored trip, and was a victim of a honey trap. That was the LTTE hold on
him. What is curious is that Sanghvi was the first journalist to raise a doubt in a signed article about whether the LTTE
was at all a culprit in the assassination. This doubt was raised after the CBI/SIT had already filed the charge sheet in the
Trial Court naming Prabhakaran and 25 others of the LTTE as the accused.

It is interesting that the Supreme Court has held that the assassination decision was made by Prabhakaran after being
provoked by two interviews of Rajiv Gandhi (RG) taken by Vir Sanghvi, and published in the same Sunday (para 379, page
385). The nation needs to know what is so authentic to Prabhakaran about Sanghvi that he should have been so
provoked by his recounting that RG would despatch the IPKF again, and that RG thought that it was justified in the first
place. A perusal of the various issues of Sunday, and the columns of some of its leading editorial lights, however clearly
shows that the magazine had been for quite some time, since 1991, espousing the LTTE line in India.

Sanghvi was summoned before the Jain Commission on my affidavit, and cross-examined on his attempts to exonerate
the LTTE, and on the sources of his pro-LTTE stories, but he cut a sorry figure because the only source of his wild
allegations was a dead politician! Now who can verify that? How could anyindependent journalist declare the LTTE as
innocent when a trial was well under way, unless it was to help the LTTE by disinformation?
Hidden Friends of the RSS
The stage set into motion by Pottu amman, and taken judicial notice of by the Supreme Court, is the LTTE's attempt to
deny their involvement in the assassination and blame the CIA/Mossad for it. For this purpose, the LTTE had mobilised
(according to the decoded wireless intercepts of Pottu Amman's conversation with Sivarasan, after the assassination)
their friends in "high places" in India. Thereafter, the nation did witness a chorus, as if orchestrated, giving credence to
the same story ...
But it is sufficiently clear to me that this chorus of the assortment of worthies,
perhaps the people in high places in Pottu Amman's reckoning, was principally
orchestrated by Arjun Singh by manipulating the proceedings of the Jain
Commission. Arjun Singh had possibly several motives, but his palpable hatred
of the Nehru family is no secret to anybody except obviously to Sonia Gandhi.
The way Arjun Singh tried to divert the government-communicated LTTE threat
to her life to Mahatma Gandhi's murderers should have made her wonder.
Rajiv disliked Arjun Singh and was planning to dump him after the 1991
elections. Rajiv told me so. He as prime minister already had him (Arjun Singh)
investigated by home minister Buta Singh on reports of despicable corruption,
even as he had learnt from Giani Zail Singh that it was Arjun Singh who first had wanted the President of India to take the
unprecedented step of sacking the prime minister, and anointing him in his place, in return for a second term for the
Giani as president!
"Sanghvi was the
first journalist to
raise doubts
about the LTTE
being the culprit.
This, after the
charge sheet."
"Arjun Singh
manipulated
proceedings of
the Jain
Commission.
His hatred of
the Nehru
family is no
secret."

Then there are reports of Arjun Singh's confidant, a businessman from Indore, who maintains a close liaison with Libya,
and recipient of deposits made into an account in Cyprus. No doubt too that Libya must be thrilled with the Mossad
theory peddled by Arjun Singh. But he has nothing to fear as long as the BJP is in power. He is their "asset" because some
of the people he has been plotting against are by a coincidence (or is it?) staunch opponents of the RSS ...

Few know that Arjun Singh's first election campaign in 1957 was as Lohiaite Socialist Party candidate. There are those
who claim to have seen RSS chief M.S. Golwalkar, who had stayed at his father's residence in the early 1950s, along with
a young Arjun Singh in khaki shorts and black cap (RSS uniform)! I believe them, but cannot yet vouch for it.


Read more at: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/review-the-assasination-of-rajiv-gandhi-by-subramanian-
swamy/1/244208.html
Nehru dynasty: Varun Gandhis Muslim roots
Dr Shahid Qureshi
The racist mentality of the Indian ruling elite (Gandhis) has made them not only blind but also ignorant with the fact
that they might have roots to the very people they are abusing. Varun Gandhi, 29 nephew of Sonia Gandhi, the
Italian wife of Rajiv Gandhi and current leader of the Congress party in India. Varun was arrested and charged for
anti-Muslim campaign speeches that have catapulted him to the centre of the looming elections. He is running as
candidate for the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in next months parliamentary elections. Perhaps
Varun Gandhi should check about his real grandfather, how and why he is a Gandhi? May be a possible DNA test?
M. O. Mathai in his book Reminiscences of the Nehru age published in 1978 wrote that, the death of Feroze came
as a relief to Nehru and Indira. The death of Feroze in 1960 before he could consolidate his own political forces is
itself a mystery. Feroze had even planned to remarry. Those who try to keep tabs on our leaders in spite of all the
suppressions and deliberate misinformation, are aware of the fact that the second son of Indira (or Mrs. Feroze
Khan) known as Sanjay Gandhi was not the son of Feroze. He was the son of Mohammad Yunus.
Indiras second son as originally named Sanjiv. It rhymed with Rajiv, the elder brothers name. It was
changed to Sanjay when he was arrested by the British police in England and his passport impounded, for having
stolen a car. Krishna Menon was then Indias High Commissioner in London. He got another passport issued with
his name changed name to Sanjay. Incidentally, Sanjays marriage with the Sikh girl Menaka (now they call her
Maneka for Indira Gandhi found the name of Lord Indras court dancer rather offensive!) took place quite
surprisingly in Mohammad Yunus house in New Delhi. And the marriage with Menaka who was a model (She had
model for Bombay Dyeing sporting a towel) was not so ordinary either. Sanjay was notorious in his own ways and
had many a relationships. When Menaka got pregnant, her father Colonel Anand, threatened Sanjay with dire
consequences if he did not marry her daughter. And that did the trick. Sanjay married Menaka. It was widely
reported in Delhi at the time that Mohammad Yunus was unhappy at the marriage of Sanjay with Menaka;
apparently he had wanted to get him married with a Muslim girl of his choice. And it was Mohammad Yunus who
cried the most when Sanjay died in the freak plane accident. Mohammad Yunus in his book, Persons, Passions &
Politics one discovers that baby Sanjay had been circumcised following Islamic custom, although the reason stated
was phimosis. It was always believed that Sanjay used to blackmail Indira Gandhi and due to this she used to turn a
blind eye when Sanjay Gandhi started to run the country as though it were his personal fiefdom. Was he black
mailing her with the secret of who his real father was? When the news of Sanjays death reached Indira Gandhi, the
first thing she wanted to know was about the bunch of keys which Sanjay had with him.
Nehru was no less in his own ways. At least one case is very graphically described by M.O. Mathai in his
Reminiscences of the Nehru Age, page 206. Mathai writes: In the autumn of 1948 (India became free in 1947
and a great deal of work needed to be done) a young woman from Banaras arrived in New Delhi as a Sanyasini
named Shraddha Mata (an assumed and not a real name). She was a Sanskrit scholar well versed in the ancient
Indian scriptures and mythology. People, including MPs, thronged to her to hear her discourses. At the very
beginning of his book, The Nehru Dynasty, astrologer K.N.Rao mentions the names of Jawaharlals father and
grandfather. Jawaharlals father was Motilal and Motilals father was one Gangadhar Nehru. And we all know that
Jawaharlals only daughter was Indira Priyadarshini
Nehru; Kamala Nehru was her mother, who died in Switzerland of tuberculosis. She was totally against
Indiras proposed marriage with Feroze. Now, who is this Feroze? He was the son of the family grocer. The grocer
supplied wines, etc. to Anand Bhavan, previously known as Ishrat Manzil, which once belonged to a Muslim lawyer
named Mubarak Ali. Motilal Nehru was earlier an employee of Mubarak Ali.
Rajivs father Feroze was Feroze Khan before he married Indira, against Kamala Nehrus wishes. One
frequently hears that Rajiv Gandhis grandfather was Pandit Nehru. But then we all know that everyone has two
grandfathers, the paternal, and the maternal grandfathers. In fact, the paternal grandfather is deemed to be the more
important grandfather in most societies. Why is it that no one here find Rajiv Gandhis paternal grandfathers name?
It appears that the reason is simply this. Rajiv Gandhis paternal grandfather was a Muslim gentleman from the
Junagadh area of Gujarat - Nawab Khan who had married a Parsi woman after converting her to Islam. This is the
source where from the myth of Rajiv being a Parsi was derived.
Indira was chased out of the Shantiniketan University by Gurudev Rabindranath himself for
misdemeanour; the lonely girl was all by herself, while father Jawaharlal was busy with politics & women; while
Kamla Nehru was in hospital. Feroze Khan, the grocers son was then in England and he was quite sympathetic to
Indira. Indira changed her religion, became a Muslim woman, and married Feroze Khan in a London mosque.
Nehru was not happy; Kamala was on deathbed. The news of this marriage eventually reached Mohandas
Karamchand Gandhi. Gandhi called Nehru and practically ordered him to ask the young-man to change his name
from Khan to Gandhi. It had nothing to do with change of religion, from Islam to Hinduism for instance. It was just
a case of a change of name by an affidavit. And so Feroze Khan became Feroze Gandhi. The Father of nation didnt
mention this game of his in the famous book, My Experiments with Truth. When Feroze and Indira returned
to India, a mock Vedic marriage was instituted for public consumption.
On this subject, writes M.O.Mathai (a long time Private Secretary of Nehru) in his renowned (but now
suppressed by the GOI) Reminiscences of the Nehru Age on page 94, second paragraph: For some inexplicable
reason, Nehru allowed the marriage to be performed according to Vedic rites in 1942. An inter-religious and inter-
caste marriage under Vedic rites at that time was not valid in law. To be legal, it had to be a civil marriage. Its a
known fact that after Rajivs birth Indira and Feroze lived separately, but they were not divorced. Feroze used to
harass Nehru frequently for money and also interfere in Nehrus political activities. Nehru got fed up and left
instructions not to allow him into the Prime Ministers residence Trimurthi Bhavan. One day S.D. Upadhyaya,
Nehrus old employee, brought a letter in Hindi from Shraddha Mata. Nehru gave her an interview in the PMs
house. As she departed, I noticed (Mathai is speaking to her) that she was young, and beautiful. Meetings with her
became rather frequent, mostly after Nehru finished his work at night. During one of Nehrus visits to Lucknow,
Shraddha Mata turned up there, and Upadhyaya brought a letter from her as usual. Nehru sent her the reply; and she
visited Nehru late in the night ... Suddenly Shraddha Mata disappeared. In November 1949 a convent
in Bangalore sent a decent looking person to Delhi with a bundle of letters. He said that a young woman from
northern India arrived at the convent a few months ago and gave birth to a baby boy. She refused to divulge her
name or give any particulars about herself. She left the convent as soon as she was well enough to move out but left
the child behind. She however forgot to take with her a small cloth bundle in which, among other things, several
letters in Hindi were found.
The Mother Superior, who was a foreigner, had the letters examined, and was told they were from the
Prime Minister. The person who brought the letters surrendered them...I (Mathai) made discreet inquiries
repeatedly about the boy but failed to get a clue about his whereabouts. Convents in such matters are extremely
tight-lipped and secretive. Had I succeeded in locating the boy, I would have adopted him. He must have grown up
as a Catholic Christian blissfully ignorant of who his father was. Coming back to Rajiv Gandhi, we all know now
that he changed his so called Parsi religion to become a Catholic to marry Sania Maino of Turin, Italy. Rajiv became
Roberto. His daughters name is Bianca and sons name is Raul. Quite cleverly the same names are presented to the
people of India as Priyanka and Rahul. What is amazing is the extent of our peoples ignorance in such matters.
The press conference that Rajiv Gandhi gave in London after taking over as prime minister of India was
very informative. In this press conference, Rajiv boasted that he was NOT a Hindu but a Parsi. Mind you, speaking
of the Parsi religion, he had no Parsi ancestor at all. His grandmother (fathers mother) had turned Muslim after,
having abandoned the Parsi religion to marry Nawab Khan. It is the western press that waged a blitz of
misinformation on behalf of Rajiv. From the New York Times to the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post,
the big guns raised Rajiv to heaven.
At the very beginning of his book, 'The Nehru Dynasty', astrologer K.N. Rao mentions the names of Jawaharlal's
father and grandfather. Jawaharlal's father was believed to be Motilal and Motilal's father was one Gangadhar
Nehru. We all know that Jawaharlal's only daughter was Indira Priyadarshini Nehru; Kamala Nehru was her mother,
who died in Switzerland of tuberculosis. She was totally against Indira's proposed marriage with Feroze. Why? No
one tells us that! Now, who is this Feroze? We are told by many that he was the son of the family grocer. The grocer
supplied wines, etc. to Anand Bhavan (previously known as Ishrat Manzil) What was the family grocer's name?

One frequently hears that Rajiv Gandhi's grandfather was Pandit Nehru. But then we all know that everyone has two
grandfathers, the paternal and the maternal grandfathers. In fact, the paternal grandfather is deemed to be the more
important grandfather in most societies. Why is it then, nowhere, we find Rajiv Gandhi's paternal grandfather's
name? It appears that the reason is simply. Rajiv Gandhi's paternal grandfather was a Muslim gentleman from the
Junagadh area of Gujarat. This Muslim grocer by the name of Nawab Khan, had married a Parsi woman after
converting her to Islam. This is the source where from the myth of Rajiv being a Parsi was derived. Rajiv's father
Feroze, was Feroze Khan before he married Indira, against Kamala Nehru's wishes. Feroze's mother's family name
was Ghandy, often associated with Parsis and this was changed to Gandhi, sometime before his wedding with Indira,
by an affidavit. The fact of the matter is that (and this fact can be found in many writings) Indira was very lonely.
Chased out of the Shantiniketan University by Guru Dev Rabindranath himself for misdemeanour, the lonely girl
was all by herself, while father Jawaharlal was busy with politics, pretty women and illicit sex, the mother was in
hospital. Feroze Khan, the grocer's son was then in England and he was quite sympathetic to Indira and soon enough
she changed her religion, became a Muslim woman and married Feroze Khan in a London mosque. Nehru was not
happy, Kamala was dead already or dying. The news of this marriage eventually reached Mohandas Karamchand
Gandhi (better known as Mahatma Gandhi) . Gandhi urgently called Nehru and practically ordered him to ask the
young man to change his name from Khan to Gandhi. It had nothing to do with change of religion, from Islam to
Hinduism for instance. It was just a case of a change of name by an affidavit. And so Feroze Khan became Feroze
Gandhi. The surprising thing is that the apostle of truth, the old man soon to be declared India's Mahatma and the
'Father of the Nation' didn't mention this game of his in the famous book, 'My Experiments with Truth'. Why?
When they returned to India, amock 'Vedic marriage' was instituted for public consumption.

On this subject, writes M.O. Mathai (a long-time Private Secretary of Nehru) in his renowned (but now suppressed
by the GOI! ) 'Reminiscences of the Nehru Age' on page 94, second paragraph: ' For some inexplicable reason,
Nehru allowed the marriage to be performed according to Vedic rites in 1942. An inter-religious and inter-caste
marriage under Vedic rites at that time was not valid in law. To be legal, it had to be a civil marriage .' It's a known
fact that after Rajiv's birth Indira and Feroze lived separately, but they were not divorced. Feroze used to harass
Nehru frequently for money and also interfere in Nehru's political activities. Nehru got fed up and left instructions
not to allow him into the Prime Minister's residence Trimurthi Bhavan. Mathai writes that the death of Feroze came
as a relief to Nehru and Indira. The death of Feroze in 1960 before he could consolidate his own political forces, is
itself a mystery. Feroze had even planned to remarry. Those who try to keep tabs on our leaders in spite of all the
suppressions and deliberate misinformation, are aware of the fact that the second son of Indira (or Mrs.Feroze Khan)
known as Sanjay Gandhi was not the son of Feroze. He was the son of another Muslim gentleman, Mohammad
Yunus. Here in passing, we might mention that the second son was originally named Sanjiv. It rhymed with Rajiv,
the elder brother's name. It was changed to Sanjay when he was arrested by the British police in England and his
passport impounded, for having stolen a car. Krishna Menon was then India's High Commissioner in London. He
offered to issue another passport to the felon who changed his name to Sanjay. Incidentally, Sanjay's marriage with
the Sikh girl Menaka (now they call her Maneka for Indira Gandhi found the name of mythological Lord Indra's
Court dancer rather offensive !!) took place quite surprisingly in Mohammad Yunus's house in New Delhi .
The marriage with Menaka who was a model (She had model for Bombay Dyeing wearing just a towel) was not so
ordinary either. Sanjay was notorious in getting unwed young women pregnant. Menaka too was rendered pregnant
by Sanjay. It was then that her father, Colonel Anand, threatened Sanjay with dire consequences if he did not marry
her daughter and that did the trick. Sanjay married Menaka. It was widely reported in Delhi at the time that
Mohammad Yunus was unhappy at the marriage of Sanjay with Menaka. Apparently he had wanted to get him
married with a Muslim girl of his choice. It was Mohammad Yunus who cried the most when Sanjay died in the
plane accident.
In Yunus's book, 'Persons, Passions & Politics' one discovers that baby Sanjay had been circumcised
following Islamic custom, although the reason stated was phimosis. It was always believed that Sanjay used to
blackmail Indira Gandhi and due to this she used to turn a blind eye when Sanjay Gandhi started to run the country
as though it were his personal freedom. Was he black mailing her with the secret of who his real father was? When
the news of Sanjay's death reached Indira Gandhi, the first thing she wanted to know was about the bunch of keys
which Sanjay had with him. Nehru was no less a player in producing bastards. At least one case is very graphically
described by M.O. Mathai in his 'Reminiscences of the Nehru Age', page 206.

Mathai writes:

'In the autumn of 1948 a young woman from Benares arrived in New Delhi as a sanyasini named Shraddha Mata (an
assumed and not a real name). She was a Sanskrit scholar well versed in the ancient Indian scriptures and
mythology. People, including MPs, thronged to her to hear her discourses. One day S.D. Upadhyaya, Nehru's old
employee, brought a letter in Hindi from Shraddha Mata. Nehru gave her an interview in the PM's house. As she
departed, I noticed (Mathai is speaking here) that she was young, shapely and beautiful. Meetings of Nehru with her
became rather frequent, mostly after he finished his work at night. During one of Nehru's visits to Lucknow,
Shraddha Mata turned up there and Upadhyaya brought a letter from her as usual. Nehru sent her the reply and she
visited Nehru at midnight...' Suddenly Shraddha Mata disappeared. In November 1949 a convent in Bangalore sent a
decent looking person to Delhi with a bundle of letters. He said that a young woman from northern India arrived at
the convent a few months ago and gave birth to a baby boy. She refused to divulge her name or give any particulars
about herself. She left the convent as soon as she was well enough to move out but left the child behind. She
however forgot to take with her a small cloth bundle in which, among other things, several letters in Hindi were
found. The Mother Superior, who was a foreigner, had the letters examined and was told they were from the Prime
Minister. The person who brought the letters surrendered them...'I (Mathai) made discreet inquiries repeatedly about
the boy but failed to get a clue about his whereabouts. Convents in such matters are extremely tight-lipped and
secretive. Had I succeeded in locating the boy, I would have adopted him. He must have grown up as a Catholic
Christian blissfully ignorant of who his father was.'

Coming back to Rajiv Gandhi, we all know now that he changed his so called Parsi religion to become a
Catholic to marry Sania Maino of Turin, Italy. Rajiv became Roberto. His daughter's name is Bianca and son's name
is Raul. Quite cleverly the same names are presented to the people of India as Priyanka and Rahul. What is amazing
is the extent of our people's ignorance in such matters. The press conference that Rajiv Gandhi gave in London after
taking over as Prime minister of India was very informative. In this press conference, Rajiv boasted that he was
NOT a Hindu but a Parsi. Mind you, speaking of the Parsi religion, he had no Parsi ancestor at all. His grandmother
(father's mother) had turned Muslim after having abandoned the Parsi religion to marry Nawab Khan.
It is the western press that waged a blitz of misinformation on behalf of Rajiv. From the New York Times to the
Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post, the big guns raised Rajiv to heaven. The children's encyclopaedias
recorded that Rajiv was a qualified Mechanical Engineer from the revered University of Cambridge. No doubt US
kids are among the most misinformed in the world today! The reality is that in all three years of his tenure at that
University Rajiv had not passed a single exam. He had therefore to leave Cambridge without a certificate.
Sonia too had the same benevolent treatment. She was stated to be a student in Cambridge. Such a
description is calculated to mislead Indians. She was a student in Cambridge all right, but not of the University of
Cambridge, but of one of those fly by night language schools where foreign students come to learn English. Sonia
was working as an 'au pair' girl in Cambridge and trying to learn English at the same time. And surprise of surprises,
Rajiv was even cremated as per Vedic rites in full view of India's public.
This is the Nehru dynasty that India worships and now a foreigner leads a prestigious national party because
of just one qualification being married into the Nehru family. Maneka Gandhi, though Indian, herself is being
accepted by the non-Congress parties not because she was a former model or an animal lover, but for her links to the
Nehru family. Saying that an Italian (or any foreigner) should not lead India will amount to narrow mindedness, but
if Sania Maino (now Sonia) had served India like, say, Mother Teresa or Annie Besant, i.e. in any way on her own
rights, then all Indians should be proud of her just as how proud we are of Mother Teresa. OR Saying that any other
party which comes to rule India is better is again equally worse.
attribution http://www.citehr.com/79125-nehru-dynasty-interesting-history.html#ixzz2mvY3gf7z
RARELY KNOWN AND UNPLEASANT TRUTHS ABOUT
V-S-Gopal / Blog / 6 yrs ago / 20 AA+A++ RARELY KNOWN AND UNPLEASANT TRUTHS
ABOUT NEHRU DYNASTY? Dr.V.S.Gopalakrishnan Ph.D., IAS Retd.
I dislike Nehru-baiting, if not Nehru-baiters. The baiting could be in respect of his socialistic policies and massive
State sponsored projects, or in respect of his personal character. Do you remember what Buddha said to a grieving
woman: Bring me a fistful of mustard from a house where no one has died? Similarly, no human being could be
perfect. We should assess a person in an over-all context. Considering how colossal were his stature, sacrifices,
leadership qualities, scholarship etc his minor peccadilloes deserve to be simply brushed off. Secondly, as regards
the Nehruvian policies, the criticisms arise usually from ignorance or misunderstanding. When India attained
Independence , the private sector was too emaciated to undertake big infrastructure projects.Let me say that
Jawaharlal Nehru was a person that I always adored and still adore. I was surprised to receive an email forward a
few days back that carried excerpts from a book called Nehru Dynasty allegedly written by K.N.Rao. Many
unflattering facts have been given therein about Motilal down to Sanjay. I was amazed at these facts of which I
was ignorant. So I went into a frenzy of internet browsing for hours and hours. It looks like we should find impartial
historians to sift pure truths including inconvenient truths for the benefit of posterity. Hiding inconvenient truths
or facts will be an anti-historical action.
What does K.N.Rao have to say, and who is he? Well, he is known as a great Vedic astrologer. He is a retired
Director General from the Indian Audit and Accounts Service and there is a detailed wikipedia entry on his name.
Why should he slander the Nehru family which is not an astrologers business? Well, the real title of his book is,
The Nehru Dynasty Astropolitical portraits of Nehru, Indira, Sanjay and Rajiv (published in 1993 by Windows
Publication; 276 pages). I should like to get a copy and read it, if available. This book is not available although
mentioned in Flipkart and other sites, and the reasons are not difficult to guess. I may not understand the jyotish part
of it. (I have read the works of Nehru and not the books on Nehru (by Stanley Wolpert, M.J.Akbar, M.O.Mathai and
others).What are the rarely known facts that K.N.Rao brings out? I shall briefly render them as follows.
Indira Gandhis husband was actually a Muslim called Feroze Khan. Feroze Khans father named Nawab Khan was
a grocer in Allahabad and supplied wines etc to the Motilal household. Nawab Khans wife was a Parsi with the
surname Gandhy and she converted to Islam before marriage. Indira was lonely and Feroze Khan came close to her
in England . Indira became a Muslim and married Feroze in a London mosque. Jawahar and wife Kamala did not
approve of this. At Mahatma Gandhis suggestion, Feroze Khan changed his name to Feroze Gandhi (Gandhy was
mothers first surname). [Some other authors say that Gandhi adopted Feroze as a son and gave him his own
surname, but this is generally not accepted]. The married couple came to India and had an arranged Vedic
marriage (1942).Rajiv was born in 1944 and Sanjay in 1946. As per K.N.Rao, Sanjay was really the son of
Mohammad Yunus and not Feroze Gandhi. (Wikipedia also mentions this.) My extensive browsing revealed that
there could be truth in this. Sanjays name was really Sanjiv. It seems that he was caught stealing a car and the
British police took away his passport. The kindly Krishna Menon, India s High Commissioner, got a new passport
issued in the name of Sanjay! Sanjays marriage to Maneka Anand took place in Mohammad Yunuss house!
When Sanjay died in an aircrash, it seems that Yunus was the person to weep the most.It is alleged that Rajiv
became a Catholic before marriage to Sonia Maino. Rajiv became Roberto. The children Rahul and Priyanka are
really Raul and Bianca! Well, our K.N.Rao's revelations are ended here.
A google search throws more interesting lights on the Nehrus. It seems that Jawaharlals fathers father
Ganga Dhar was a kotwal in Bahadur Shahs court when the British took over Delhi in 1857. Even the Delhi
Police website (www.delhipolice.nic.in) says it. It appears from the Moghul records that there was no Hindu Kotwal
then but a Muslim Kotwal called Ghiyasuddin Ghasi who had to flee to Agra to save himself from the British who
were after the lives of the Delhi Muslims. This Muslim Kotwal, while fleeing, changed his name/identity to the
Hindu name Ganga Dhar, the father of Motilal. (The word/surname Nehru was invented by Motilal later). Another
interesting fact is that Motilal allowed his wife to stay with his employer called Mobarak Ali, who owned the
bungalow Irshad Manzil which was renamed Anand Bhavan later on when Motilal bought it from him. Jawahar
was born not in Anand Bhavan but at 77, Mirganj, where Motilal lived in a small rented house initially in the middle
of a red-light area. Now you know why there is no touristic visit to the house where Jawahar, the first PM of India ,
was born. J.Nehru in his book recalls seeing a picture of his grand father Ganga Dhar which portrayed him as a
Moghul Nobleman. Is this corroborative of something? Again, in that picture it appears that Ganga Dhar was
having a long and very thick beard and was wearing a muslim topee and was having two swords in his hands!
Well, I stop here. My admiration for Nehru has not diminished one bit. I agree with many of my friends who say
"how does it matter if ancestry was intermingled with Christianity, the Zoroastrian religion, Islam or Sikhism?"
Indeed, I say, any of us may have, in different degrees and permutations and combinations, a part of the blood and
genes of the original Aryans, Greeks, Sakas, Parthians, Hunas, and many other categories of foreigners who made
India their home and intermixed freely in the Indian society.Let the text books on Nehru stay as such. Nehru is a
nation builder, and a great motivator for all. But history is history and for posterity the full and real facts could be
properly established by impartial historians. I believe like many others believe, that it would be much more
fascinating if Nehru really had had the widest religious ancestry !
The reason of sending this is many of you are youngsters doesn't know the truth.
This clearly shows how YSR was eliminated in a meticulous way..
PLEASE READ:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ysr-congress-online-supporters/JHxoQA8RrVU


9 Votes
Indira Priyadarshini perpetuated immorality in the Nehru dynasty. Intellectual Indira was admitted in Oxford University but driven out from there for
non-performance. She was then admitted to Shantiniketan University but, Guru Dev Rabindranath Tagore chased her out for bad conduct.
After driven out of Shantiniketan, Indira became lonely as father was busy with politics and mother was dieing of tuberculosis in Switzerland. Playing
with her loneliness, Feroze Khan, son of a grocer named Nawab Khan who supplied wines etc to Motilal Nehrus household in Allahabad, was able to
draw close to her. The then Governor of Maharashtra, Dr. Shriprakash warned Nehru, that Indira was having an illicit relation with Feroze Khan.
Feroze Khan was then in England and he was quite sympathetic to Indira. Soon enough she changed her religion, became a Muslim woman and
married Feroze Khan in a London mosque. Indira Priyadarshini Nehru changed her name to Maimuna Begum. Her mother Kamala Nehru was totally
against that marriage. Nehru was not happy as conversion to Muslim will jeopardize her prospect of becoming Prime Minister.
So, Nehru asked the young man Feroze Khan to change his surname from Khan to Gandhi. It had nothing to do with change of religion from Islam to
Hinduism. It was just a case of a change of name by an affidavit. And so Feroze Khan became Feroze Gandhi, though it is an inconsistent name like
Bismillah Sarma. Both changed their names to fool the public of India. When they returned to India, a mock vedic marriage was instituted for public
consumption. Thus, Indira and her descendants got the fancy name Gandhi. Both Nehru and Gandhi are fancy names. As a chameleon changes its
colour, this dynasty have been changing its name to hide its real identity.
Indira Gandhi had two sons namely Rajiv Gandhi and Sanjay Gandhi. Sanjay was originally named as Sanjiv that rhymed with Rajiv, his elder brothers
name. Sanjiv was arrested by the British police for a car theft in the UK and his passport was seized. On Indira Gandhis direction, the then Indian
Ambassador to UK, Krishna Menon misusing his power, changed his name to Sanjay and procured a new passport. Thus Sanjiv Gandhi came to be
known as Sanjay Gandhi.
It is a known fact that after Rajivs birth, Indira Gandhi and Feroze Gandhi lived separately, but they were not divorced. The book The Nehru Dynasty
(ISBN 10:8186092005) by K. N. Rao states that the second son of Indira (or Mrs. Feroze Khan) known as Sanjay Gandhi was not the son of Feroze
Gandhi. He was the son of another Muslim gentleman named Mohammad Yunus.
Interestingly Sanjay Gandhis marriage with the Sikh girl Menaka took place in Mohammad Yunus house in New Delhi. Apparently Yunus was
unhappy with the marriage as he wanted to get him married with a Muslim girl of his choice. It was Mohammad Yunus who cried the most when Sanjay
Gandhi died in plane crash. In Yunus book, Persons, Passions & Politics (ISBN-10: 0706910176) one can discover that baby Sanjay was circumcised
following Islamic custom.
It is a fact that Sanjay Gandhi used to constantly blackmail his mother Indira Gandhi, with the secret of who his real father is. Sanjay exercised a deep
emotional control over his mother, which he often misused. Indira Gandhi chose to ignore his misdeeds and he was indirectly controlling the
Government.
When the news of Sanjay Gandhis death reached Indira Gandhi, her first question was Where are his keys and his wrist watch?. Some deep secrets
about the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty seems to be hidden in those objects.The plane accident was also mysterious. It was a new plane that nosedive to a
crash and yet the plane did not explode upon impact. It happens when there is no fuel. But the flight register shows that the fuel tank was made full
before take-off. Indira Gandhi using undue influence of PMs office prohibited any inquiry from taking place. So, who is the suspect?
The book The Life of Indira Nehru Gandhi (ISBN: 9780007259304) by Katherine Frank sheds light on some of Indira Gandhis other love
affairs. It is written that Indiras first love was with her German teacher at Shantiniketan. Later she had affair with M. O. Mathai (fathers secretary),
then Dhirendra Brahmachari (her yoga teacher) and at last with Dinesh Singh (Foreign Minister).
Former Foreign Minister K Natwar Singh made an interesting revelation about Indira Gandhis affinity to the Mughals in his book Profile and
Letters (ISBN:8129102358). It states that- In 1968 Indira Gandhi as the Prime Minister of India went on an official visit to Afghanistan. Natwar Sing
accompanied her as an IFS officer in duty. After having completed the days long engagements, Indira Gandhi wanted to go out for a ride in the evening.
After going a long distance in the car, Indira Gandhi wanted to visit Baburs burial place, though this was not included in the itinerary. The Afghan
security officials tried to dissuade her, but she was adamant. In the end she went to that burial place. It was a deserted place. She went before Baburs
grave, stood there for a few minutes with head bent down in reverence. Natwar Singh stood behind her. When Indira had finished her prayers, she
turned back and told Singh Today we have had our brush with history. Worth to mention that Babur was the founder of Mughal rule in India, from
which the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty have descended.
~*~*~*~*~*~
It is difficult to count how many institutes of higher education are named after Rajiv Gandhi but, Rajiv Gandhi himself was a person of low calibre.
From 1962 to 1965, he was enrolled for a Mechanical Engineering course at Trinity College, Cambridge. But, he left Cambridge without a degree
because, he could not pass exams. Next year in 1966, he joined Imperial College, London but, again left it without a degree.
K. N. Rao in the above said book alleges that Rajiv Gandhi became a Catholic to marry Sania Maino. Rajiv became Roberto. His sons name is Raul and
daughters name is Bianca. Quite cleverly the same names are presented to the people of India as Rahul and Priyanka.
In personal conduct Rajiv was very much a Mughal. On 15th August 1988 he thundered from the ramparts of the Red Fort: Our endeavor should be to
take the country to heights to which it belonged about 250-300 years ago. It was then the reign of Aurangzeb, the jeziya master and number one
temple destroyer.
The press conference that Rajiv Gandhi gave in London after taking over as prime minister of India was very informative. In this press conference,
Rajiv boasted that he is not a Hindu but a Parsi. Feroze Khans father and Rajiv Gandhis paternal grandfather was a Muslim gentleman from the
Junagadh area of Gujarat. This Muslim grocer by the name of Nawab Khan had married a Parsi woman after converting her to Islam. This is the source
where from the myth of Rajiv being a Parsi was derived. Mind that he had no Parsi ancestor at all. His paternal grandmother had turned Muslim after
having abandoned the Parsi religion to marry Nawab Khan. Surprisingly, Parsi Rajiv Gandhi was cremated as per Vedic rites in full view of Indian
public.
~*~*~*~*~*~
Dr. Subramanian Swamy writes that Sonia Gandhis name was Antonia Maino. Her father was a mason. He was an activist of the notorious fascist
regime of Italy and he served five years imprisonment in Russia. Sonia Gandhi have not studied beyond high school. She learnt some English from a
English teaching shop named Lennox School at the Cambridge University campus. From this fact she boasts of having studied at the prestigious
Cambridge University. After learning some English, she was a waitress at a restaurant in Cambridge town.
Sonia Gandhi had intense friendship with Madhavrao Scindia in the UK, which continued even after her marriage. One night at 2 AM in 1982,
Madhavrao Scindia and Sonia Gandhi were caught alone together when their car met an accident near IIT Delhi main gate.
When Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi were Prime Ministers, PMs security used to go to New Delhi and Chennai international airports to send crates
of Indian treasures like temple sculptures, antiques, paintings etc to Rome. Arjun Singh as CM and later as Union Minister in charge of Culture used to
organize the plunder. Unchecked by customs, they were transported to Italy to be sold in two shops named Etnica & Ganpati, owned by Sonia Gandhis
sister Alessandra Maino Vinci.
Indira Gandhi died not because her heart or brain were pierced by bullets, but she died of loss of blood. After Indira Gandhi was fired upon, Sonia
Gandhi strangely insisted that bleeding Indira Gandhi should be taken to Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, in opposite direction to AIIMS which had a
contingency protocol to precisely deal with such events. After reaching Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, Sonia Gandhi changed her mind and demand
that Indira Gandhi should be taken to AIIMS, thus wasting 24 valuable minutes. It is doubtful whether it was immaturity of Sonia Gandhi or a trick to
speedily bring her husband to power.
Rajesh Pilot and Madhav Rao Scindia were strong contenders to the Prime Ministers post and
they were road blocks in Sonia Gandhis way to power. Both of them died in mysterious
accidents.
There are circumstantial evidences pointing to the prima facie possibility that the Maino family have contracted LTTE to kill Rajiv Gandhi. Nowadays,
Sonia Gandhi is quite unabashed in having political alliance with those like MDMK, PMK and DMK who praise Rajiv Gandhis killers. No Indian widow
would ever do that. Such circumstances are many, and raise a doubt. An investigation into Sonias involvement in Rajivs assassination is necessary.
You may read Dr. Subramanian Swamys book Assassination Of Rajiv Gandhi Unasked Questions and Unanswered Queries (ISBN : 81-
220-0591-8). It contains indications of such conspiracy.
~*~*~*~*~*~
In 1992, Sonia Gandhi revived her citizenship of Italy under Article 17 of the Italian Citizenship Law. Under Italian law, Rahul and Priyanka are Italian
citizens because Sonia was an Italian citizen when she gave birth to them. Rahul Gandhis Italian is better than his Hindi. Rahul Gandhi is an Italian
citizen is relevant from the fact that on 27th September 2001 he was detained by the FBI at Boston airport, USA for traveling on an Italian passport. If a
law is made in India that important posts like that of President and Prime Minister should not be held by a person of foreign origin, then Rahul Gandhi
automatically disqualifies to contend for the post of Prime Minister.
~*~*~*~*~*~
After finishing school education, Rahul Gandhi got admission at the St. Stephens College in New Delhi, not on merit basis but on sports quota of rifle
shooting. After a brief stay there in 1989-90, he did his BA from Rollins College, Florida in 1994. Just for doing BA one need not go to the US. The very
next year, in 1995 he got M.Phil. degree from Trinity College, Cambridge. The genuineness of this degree is questioned as he has done M.Phil. without
doing MA. Amaratya Sens helping hand is thought to be behind. Many of you might have seen the famous movie Munna Bhai MBBS.
In 2008 Rahul Gandhi was prevented from using an auditorium of the Chandra Shekhar Azad University in Kanpur for a students rally. Subsequently,
the Vice-Chancellor of the university, V.K. Suri, was ousted by the UP Governor. During 26/11 when the whole country was tense about how to tackle
the Mumbai terror, Rahul Gandhi was lavishly partying with his friends till 5 AM. Rahul Gandhi advises austerity for all Congress members. He says it
is the duty of all politicians to be austere. On the other hand he has a ministerial bungalow with a fully equipped gym. He is a regular member of at least
two of the Delhis poshest gyms, one of which is 5-star rated. Rahul Gandhis trip to Chennai in 2009 to campaign for austerity cost the party more than
Rs 1 Crore. Such inconsistencies show that initiatives taken by Rahul Gandhi are not his own but, workout of his party men only.
During the 2007 election campaign in Uttar Pradesh, Rahul Gandhi said that if anyone from the Nehru-Gandhi family had been active in politics then,
the Babri Masjid would not have fallen. It doubtlessly shows his Mohammedan affiliation as a loyalty to his ancestors. On Dec 31, 2004, John M. Itty, a
retired college professor in Alappuzha district of Kerala, contended that action should be taken against Rahul Gandhi and his girlfriend Juvenitta alias
Veronica for staying together for three days at a resort in Kerela. It is a criminal offense under Immoral Trafficking Act as they are not married.
Anyway, one more foreigner daughter-in-law is waiting to rule the tolerant Indians.
The Swiss magazine Schweizer Illustriertes 11th November 1991 issue revealed that Rahul Gandhi was the beneficiary of accounts worth US $2 billion
controlled by his mother Sonia Gandhi. A report from the Swiss Banking Association in 2006 revealed that the combined deposits of Indian citizens are
far greater than any other nation, a total of US $1.4 trillion, a figure exceeding the GDP of India. This dynasty rules greater than half of India. Ignoring
the center, out of 28 states and 7 union territories, more than half of them have Congress government at any point of time. Upto Rajiv Gandhi there was
Mughal rule in India, with Sonia Gandhi, the Rome rule on India have started.
~*~*~*~*~*~
The objective behind writing this article is to acquaint the citizens of India with their national leaders and show how a dynasty has misused the
democracy of this country. Several prestigious national assets and schemes are named after these lose-character people to immortalize them. Many
other shocking facts are not presented in this article because of lack of supporting evidence.
Source : Internet Media ( This article is sourced from Internet and MusikDIV donot endorse its contents )
Ramana Reddy
Melbourne

#1
21st February 2007, 10:38 PM
Observer
Senior Member
Senior Member of Hindustan Movement

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 124

Indira Nehru Her Ghosts & Inside story of Sonia Maino Gandhi

In 1947 India had virtually a bunch of few degreed educated people who simply grabbed
power, eminently among them JL Nehru who was self styled chosen leader. There were
other more qualified, more visionary leaders in India but destiny rules not only individuals
but countries.

In any case JL Nehru was atleast an intelligent, scholarly man but even if we accept his
leadership for first 10 years, he should have allowed other people to come up but he never
ever let anyone come in lime light.
The only little media that was there was controlled by JL Nehru himself.

If after 10 years of rule there had been fair elections JL Nehru would not have continued as
Prime Minister. After that disasters started and in 1962 India was attacked by China and in
one go, they grabbed large territorry of India and just a few years before that China took
over Tibet.

JL Nehru died a sullen man because his daughter was never a family woman. She was
dramatically power minded, interested in grabbing power as fast as she could. She
manipulated her marriage, relationships and JL Nehru watched this, permitting her all which
shows how stupid that man was.
Indira Gandhi had one son with Feroz Khan written by her as Pheroze gandhi which was
invented to show as if he was a Parsi. After divorce or nulling of marriage, She lived all
along in Delhi with her PM father. There she had affairs with dozens of men. It is absolutely
known to any one who was in the circle of top media and power. Her relation with a well
known man who was later "press secretary" or media man of the govt. gave birth to Sanjay,
who later died being part of a major conspiracy.

Lal Bahadur Shastri was poisoned by KGB while in Tashkent after 1965 war so that KGB
could project Indira priyadarshani as prime minister of India. Stage was set for her to be the
PM.

She wanted to be the Prime minister immediately after passing away of Nehru in May 1964
but she had no position.
Indira Gandhi's grabbing of power in 1966 was staged and well planned by one power
broker of Tamilnadu who prepared her to be the commander of Congress party and as chief
executive.

From this shady start till Indira's fall in 1984 it was a history of 18 years of treachery, lies,
manipulation and destruction of any growth. Most talented and enterprising India left India
in 60s, 70s and 80s because there was no chance of any one to grow.
It was virtually a communist state but labeled as Congress.

This fair skinned so called kashmiri brahman lady destroyed India and drastically tortured
Indian political system by twisting, manipulating to her whims.

Rajiv Gandhi was nothing but part of the chess game and his role perhaps was to catapult
antonia maino of italy to make sonia gandhi.


Sonia Gandhis is NO HINDU nor interested in India nor its people.
She is an ordinary yet very clever daughter of a man called Stefano who was a Fascist and a
member of fascist party and he joined Nazis as volunteer.

Sonia is the name
given to her subsequently by her father, Stefano Maino [now deceased] following his return
from Russia where he had been a prisoner of war. Stefano had joined the Nazi army as a
volunteer. Sonia is a Russian not Italian name. While spending two years in a
Russian jail, Sonia's father had become quite pro-Soviet; especially after the liberating US
army in Italy had confiscated all fascists' properties including his.

Second, she was not born in Orbassano as she claims in her bio data submitted to
Parliament on becoming MP, but in Luciana as stated in her birth certificate. She perhaps
would like to hide the place of her birth because of her father's connection with the Nazis
and Mussolini's Fascists, and her family's continuing connections with the Nazi-Fascists
underground that is still surviving since 1945 in Italy. Luciana is where Nazi-Fascist network
is headquartered, and is on the Italian-Swiss border. There can be no other explanation for
this otherwise meaningless lie.

Third, Sonia Gandhi has not studied beyond High School. She has falsely claimed in her
affidavit filed as a contesting candidate before the Rae Bareli Returning Officer in the 2004
Lok Sabha elections, that she qualified and got a diploma inEnglish from the prestigious
University of Cambridge, UK.

The truth is that Ms. Gandhi has never studied in any college anywhere. She did go to a
Catholic nun run seminary-school called Maria Ausiliatrice in Giaveno [15 kms from adopted
home town of Orbassabo]. Poverty those days forced young Italian girls to go to
such missionaries and then in their teens go to UK to get jobs as cleaning maids, waitresses
and au pair. The Mainos were poor those days.

[The following part of article is written by an insider of Congress]
Her father was a mason and mother a share cropper.

Sonia thus went to the town of Cambridge and first learnt some English in a teaching shop
called Lennox School [which has since 1970 been wound up]. That is all her "education" is--
-learnt enough English language to get domestic help jobs. But in Indian society education
is highly valued. Thus, to fool the Indian public, Sonia Gandhi willfully fibbed about her
qualifications in Parliamentary records [which is a Breach of Ethics Rules] and in a sworn
affidavit [which is criminal offence under IPC, severe enough to disqualify her from being
MP]. In popular parlance, this is called 420 or 10 "numberi" [not to be confused with 10
Janpath].These three lies indicate that Ms. Sonia Gandhi has something to hide, or has a
hidden agenda for India. We need to find out more about her.

Ms. Sonia Gandhi upon learning enough English became a waitress in Varsity Restaurant in
Cambridge town. She first met Rajiv when he came to the restaurant in 1965. Rajiv was a
student in the University, but could not cope with the academic rigour for long. So
he had to depart in 1966 for London where he was briefly in Imperial College of Engineering
as a student. Sonia too moved to London, and according my information, got a job with an
outfit run by Salman Thassir, a debonair Pakistani based in Lahore, and who has a export-
import company headquartered in Dubai but who spends most of his
time in London. Thisfits the profile of an ISI functionary.

Obviously, Sonia made enough money in this job to loan Rajiv funds in London, who was
obviously living beyond his allowances [Indira herself expressed anguish to me on this score
in late 1965 when she invited me to a private tea at the Guest House in Brandeis
University]. Rajiv's letters to Sanjay, who was also in London then, clearly indicate that he
was in financial debt to Sonia because he requested Sanjay who obviously had more access
to money, to pay off the debt.

However, Rajiv was not the only friend Sonia was seeing those days. Madhavrao Scindia and
a German by name Stiegler are worth mentioning as other good friends of Sonia.
Madhavrao's friendship continued even after Sonia's marriage to Rajiv. Scindia in 1982 was
involved in a traffic accident near IIT, Delhi main gate while driving a car at 2 AM. Sonia
was the only other passenger. Both were badly injured. A student of IIT who was burning
midnight oil was out for a cup of coffee. He picked them up from the car, hailed an auto
rickshaw and sent an injured Sonia to Mrs Indira Gandhi's house since she insisted in not
going to a hospital. Madhavrao had broken a leg and in too much pain to make any
demand. He was taken to hospital by the Delhi Police who had arrived a little after Sonia
had left the scene. In later years, Madhavrao had become privately critical of Sonia, and
told some close friends about his apprehensions about Sonia. It is a pity that he died in
mysterious circumstances in an aircrash.



The circumstance under which Rajiv hastily married Sonia in a Church in Orbassano is
controversial but that was his personal matter that has no public significance. But what is of
public significance is that Indira Gandhi who was initially dead set against the marriage for
reasons known to her, relented to hold a registry marriage with Hindu ceremonial trappings
in New Delhi only after the pro-Soviet T.N. Kaul prevailed upon her to accept the marriage
in "the larger interest of cementing Indo-Soviet Friendship". Kaul would not have intervened
unless the Soviet Union had asked him to.

Such has been the extensive patronage from the beginning extended to Sonia Gandhi from
the Soviets. When a Prime Minister of India's son dates a girl in London, the KGB which
valued Indo-Soviet relations, obviously would investigate her and find out that she was the
daughter of Stefano, their old reliable Italian contact. Thus, Sonia with Rajiv meant deeper
access to the household of the Indian Prime Minister. Hence cementing the Rajiv-Sonia
relations was in the Soviet national interest and they went to work on it. And they did
through their then existing moles in the Indira Gandhi camp.

After her marriage to Rajiv, the Soviet connection with the Mainos was fortified and
nurtured by generous financial help through commissions and kickbacks on every
Indo,Soviet trade deal and defence purchases. According to the respected Swiss magazine,
Schweitzer Illustrate [November 1991 issue], Rajiv Gandhi had about
$ 2 billion in numbered Swiss bank accounts,which Sonia inherited upon his assassination.
Dr. Yevgenia Albats, Ph.D [Harvard], is a noted Russian scholar and journalist, and was a
member of the KGB Commission set up by President Yeltsin in August 1991. She was privy
to the Soviet intelligence files that documented these deals and KGB facilitation of the same.
In her book,The State Within a State,The KGB in Soviet Union, she even gives the file
numbers of such intelligence files, which can now be accessed by any Indian
government through a formal request to the Kremlin.

The Russsian Government in 1992 was confronted by the Albats' disclosure; they confirmed
it through their official spokesperson to the press [which was published in Hindu in
1992], defending such financial payments as necessary in "Soviet ideological interest".

When the Soviet Union disintegrated in 1991, things changed for Ms. Sonia Gandhi. Her
patrons evaporated. The rump that became Russia was in a financial mess and disorder. So
Ms. Sonia Gandhi became a supporter of another communist country to the annoyance of
the Russians.

The national security ramification of this 'annoyance' is now significant: The President of
Russia today is Putin, a former dyed- in-the-wool KGB officer. Upon Dr. Manmohan Singh's
government taking office, Russia called back it's career diplomat Ambassador in New Delhi
and immediately posted as the new Ambassador a person who was the KGB station chief in
New Delhi during the 1970s. In view of Dr. Albats confirmed revelation, it stands to reason
that the new Ambassador would have known first hand about Sonia's connections with the
KGB. He may have in fact been her "controller". The new Indian government which is
defacto Sonia's, cannot afford to annoy him or even disregard Russian demands coming
from him? They will obviously placate him so as not to risk exposure. Is this not a major
national security risk and a delicate matter for the
nation?

Of course, all Indians would like good normal and healthy relations with Russia. Who can
forget their assistance to us in times of need? Today's Russia is the residual legatee of that
Soviet Union which helped India. But just because of that, should we tolerate those in our
government set up having clandestine links with a foreign spy agency? In the United States,
the government did not tolerate an American spying for Israel even though the two
countries are as close as any two countries can be. National security and friendship are
asdifferent as chalk and cheese.

In December 2001, I had filed a Writ Petition in the Delhi High Court with the photocopies of
the KGB documents, and sought a CBI investigation, which the Vajpayee Government was
refusing. Earlier, Minister of State for CBI, Vasundara Raje [now Rajasthan CM], on my
letter dated March 3, 2001, had ordered the CBI to investigate. But after Sonia Gandhi and
her party stalled the proceedings of Parliament on this issue, the then Prime Minister
Vajpayee cancelled Vasundara's direction to the CBI. The Delhi High Court issued a direction
to the CBI to ascertain from Russia the truth of my charges. The CBI procrastinated for
three years, and finally told the Court without an FIR registered the Russians will not
entertain any such query. But who stopped the CBI from registering an FIR? The next
hearing of the case is on September 8th.

After Sonia married Rajiv, she went about minting money with scant regard for Indian laws
and treasures. Within a few years the Mainos went from utter poverty to billionaires. There
was no area that was left out for the rip-off. On November 19, 1974, as fresh entrant to
Parliament, I asked the then Prime Minister Ms. Indira Gandhi on the floor of the House if
her daughter-in-law, Sonia Gandhi was acting as an insurance agent of a public sector
insurance company [Oriental Fire & Insurance], giving the Prime Minister's official residence
as her business address, and using undue influence to insure all the
officers of the PMO while remaining an Italian citizen [thus violating FERA]? There was
uproar in Parliament, but Mrs. Indira Gandhi had no alternative but to cut her losses. She
made a rare admission that it was so, and that it was by mistake, but that Sonia had
resigned from her insurance agent status [after my question]. But Sonia was incorrigible.
Her contempt for Indian law continued to manifest.

The Justice A.C. Gupta Commission set up by the Janata Party government in 1977 came
out with a voluminous report on the Maruti Company then owned by the Gandhi family, and
has listed eight violations of FERA, Companies Act, and Foreigners Registration Act
by Sonia Gandhi. She was never prosecuted, but can be still prosecuted because under
Indian law, economic crimes not subject to the statute of limitation.

In January 1980, Indira Gandhi returned as Prime Minister. The first thing Sonia did was to
enroll herself as a voter. This was a gross violation of the law, enough to cause cancellation
of her visa [since she was admittedly an Italian citizen then]. There was some hullabaloo in
the press about it, so the Delhi Chief Electoral Officer got her name deleted in 1982. But in
January 1983, she again enrolled herself as a voter! Such is her revealed disdain for Indian
laws and that is her mindset even today.

The bottom line observed in Sonia's mindset is that she can always run back to Italy if she
becomes vulnerable at anytime. In Peru, President Fujimori who all along claimed to be
"born Peruvian", faced with a corruption charge fled to Japan with his loot and
reclaimed his Japanese citizenship.


In 1977, when the Janata Party defeated the Congress at the polls, and formed the
government, Sonia with her two children, abandoned Indira Gandhi and ran to the Italian
Embassy in New Delhi and hid there. Rajiv Gandhi was a government servant then [as an
Indian Airlines pilot], but he too tagged along and hid in that foreign embassy ! Such was
her baneful influence on him. Rajiv did snap out Sonia's influence after 1989, but alas he
was assassinated before he could rectify it. Those close to Rajiv knew that he was planning
set things right about Sonia after the 1991 elections. She did too know of it because he had
told her. Ever wonder why Sonia's closest advisers are those whom Rajiv literally hated?
Ambika Soni is one such name. Ever wonder why she asked the President of India to set
aside, on a mercy petition, the Supreme Court judgment directing that Rajiv Gandhi's LTTE
killers be hanged to death, when she was not similarly moved for Satwant Singh who killed
Indira Gandhi or recently for Dhanajoy Chattopadhyaya? The explanation for this special
consideration for the LTTE lies in what Rajiv had told her in 1990.

Those who have no love for India will not hesitate to plunder her treasures. Mohammed
Ghori, Nadir Shah, and the British scum in the East India Company made no secret of it. But
Sonia Gandhi has been more discreet, but as greedy, in her looting of Indian treasures.
When Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi were PrimeMinisters, not a day
passed when the PM's security did not go to the New Delhi, or Chennai international airport
to send crates and crates unchecked by customs to Rome. Air India and Alitalia were the
carriers. Mr. Arjun Singh first as CM, later as Union Minister in charge of Culture was her
hatchet man. Indian temple sculpture of gods and goddesses, antiques, pichwai paintings,
shatoosh shawls, coins, and you name it, were transported to Italy to be first displayed in
two shops owned by her sister [i.e., Anuskha alias Alessandra]. These shops located in blue-
collar areas of Rivolta [shop name: Etnica] and Orbassano [shop name:Ganpati] did little
business because which blue collar Italian wants Indian antiques? The shops were to make
false bills, and thereafter these treasures were taken to London for auction by Sotheby's
and Christies. Some of this ill-gotten money from auction went into Rahul Gandhi's National
Westminister Bank and Hongkong & Shanghai Bank, London accounts, but most of it found
it's way into the Gandhi family account in the Bank of America in Cayman Islands.

Rahul's expenses and tuition fees for the one-year he was at Harvard, was paid from the
Cayman Island account. What kind of people are these Gandhi-Mainos that bite the very
hand of Bharat Mata that fed them and gave them a good life? How can the nation trust
such greedy thieves?

Since I failed to persuade the Vajpayee government to defend India's treasures from
plunder by the Mainos, I approached the Delhi High Court in a PIL. The first Bench of the
court issued notice to the Government, but since the Indian government dragged it's feet,
the Court directed the CBI to seek Interpol's and Italian government's help. The Italian
government justifiably asked for a Letter Rogatory for which a FIR is a pre-requisite. But the
Interpol did oblige and submitted two voluminous reports, which the Court directed the CBI
to hand over to me. But CBI has refused, and has claimed privilege!

The CBI has also been caught lying in court by telling the judges that Alessandra Maino is a
name of a man, and Via Bellini 14, Orbassano is a name of a village [not the street
address of the Maino's residence]. Although the CBI counsel had to apologise to the court
stating he made a mistake, he has been promoted to Additional Solicitor General by the new
government! The Vajpayee-Sonia mutual assistance pact is in full view. The case now
comes up on September 8th.

But the most sinister aspect of Sonia Gandhi's character is her connection with terrorists. I
am still working on it, but she has had long connection with the Habash group of
Palestinian, and has funded Palestinian families that lost their kith and kin in a suicide
bombing or hijacking episode. This, Rajiv Gandhi himself told me and was confirmed to me
[the funding] by Yassir Arafat when I met him in Tunis on October 17, 1990 at the request
of Rajiv Gandhi. Rajiv Gandhi and I were good friends from 1978, but became very close
buddies after V.P. Singh had betrayed him in 1987. We met practically every day, mostly in
the early hours from 1AM to 4AM. It was at my suggestion that he made Chandrashekhar
the PM. And contrary to public impression, he was not mainly responsible for the fall of
Chandrashekar government in which I was a Minister.

Besides the Palestinian extremists, the Maino family have had extensive business dealings
with Saddam Hussein, and surprisingly with the LTTE ["the Tamil Tigers"] since 1984.
Sonia's mother Paola Predebon Maino, and businessman Ottavio Quattrocchi were the main
contacts with the Tigers. The mother used the LTTE for money laundering and Quattrocchi
for selling weapons to earn commissions. Sonia's conduit to the LTTE has been and is
through Arjun Singh who uses Bangalore as the nodal point for contact.

There is a string of circumstantial evidence pointing to the prima facie possibility that the
Maino family may have contracted the LTTE to kill Rajiv Gandhi. The family may have
assured the LTTE that nothing would happen to them because they would ensure it is
blamed on the Sikhs or the evidence so much fudged that no court would convict them. But
D.R. Karthikeyan of the CBI who led the SIT investigation got the support of Narasimha Rao
and cracked the case, and got the LTTE convicted in the trial court, and which conviction
was upheld in the Supreme Court.

Although on the involvement of Congress Party in the assassination, DRK soft peddled on a
number of leads perhaps because he did not want political controversy to put roadblocks on
his investigation as a whole. The Justice J. S. Verma Commission, which was set up as the
last official act of the Chandrashekhar government before demitting
office on June 21, 1991, did find that the Congress leaders had disrupted the security
arrangements for the Sriperumbudur meeting. The Commission wanted further probe into it
but the Rao government rejected that demand. In the meantime under Sonia's
pressure, the Jain Commission was set up by the Rao government, which tried to muddy the
waters and thus exonerate the LTTE. But the trial court judgment convicting the LTTE came
earlier, and that sinister effort too failed.

Nowadays, Sonia is quite unabashed in having political alliance with those who praise Rajiv
Gandhi's killers. No Indian widow would ever do that. My investigations into Sonia's
involvement in Rajiv's assassination is therefore still on. I am also author of a best
seller titled Assassination Of Rajiv Gandhi,Unasked Questions and Unanswered Queries
[published by Konark in 2000] in which I have given some indications.

Is it not significant that the political career of Sonia Gandhi advances concomitantly with a
series of assassinations and apparently accidental deaths? How did Sanjay's plane nosedive
to a crash and yet the fuselage not explode? There was no fuel! Why was
there no inquiry conducted? Is it not a fact that Indira Gandhi died because of loss of blood
from the wounds and not directly due to a bullet impacting her head or heart? Then is it not
strange that Sonia had insisted that the bleeding Indira be driven to Lohia
Hospital -- in the opposite direction to AIIMS, which had a contingency protocol set up for
precisely suchan event? And after reaching Lohia Hospital, did not Sonia change her mind
and demand that they all drive to AIIMS thus losing 24 valuable minutes.

The same kind of mystery surrounds the sudden deaths of Sonia's other political roadblocks
such as Rajesh Pilot, Jitendra Prasad, and Madhavrao Scindia. Such things happened in the
dark ages in Italy. Should we allow it India like dumb cattle?


What Can We Do?

We have to ensure that the Maino clan does not stay in power. Dr. Manmohan Singh may be
PM, which is a small relief, but he is not a fighter. The real power in government today is
wielded by the Maino mafia gang. Can they be dethroned?

In Indian democracy, only a shocking scandal can unseat a government other than by losing
majority. Today's priority is not for toppling the Congress government as such since
Manmohan Singh is a decent and scholarly person, but in driving the Maino clan out of
India. It will however not be long before Sonia will give Manmohan Singh
marching orders, and he will march out meekly. We should not expect him to resist.

With Sonia's defacto government in place, it is also unrealistic to expect that I can get an
early victory in the courts on the KGB and antique smuggling cases.

The most potent weapon therefore to dislodge the Maino clan [including Rahul and
Priyanka] is by exposing their Italian citizenship. In 1992, Sonia revived her citizenship of
Italy under Article 17 of the Italian Citizenship Law [Act 91 of 1992]. Rahul and Priyanka
were born Italian citizens because Sonia was Italian when she gave birth to them [Italian
law based on jure sanguinis]. Hence, they continue be Italians since they never renounced
it. Both have been traveling abroad on Italian passports.
They may now acquire Venezuela passports since Rahul's girl friend Veronica is a
Venezuelan. That means one more foreign bahu for us tolerant Indians. The Maino-Gandhis
are certainly getting globalized. So what can patriotic Indians do?

There is an urgent need to document these facts on notarized paper, for which we need a
network in London, Milan, Hongkong and Venezuela. Those persuaded by my above stated
facts and arguments may join in and help set up this network.

#2
21st February 2007, 11:01 PM
Observer

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 124
Senior Member
Senior Member of Hindustan Movement

After reading above you can calculate who was behind assassination of

Lal Bahadur Shastri
Indira Gandhi
Rajiv Gandhi

both were Prime Ministers.

Most leaders of South Asia usually are to be assassinated almost always by conspirators to
keep them from exposing some people or having stopped them from some unacted
decisions.

Look at Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal and Sri Lanka
Most of the leaders are assassinated by vested interests.

Look at India.
Most of the top leaders are assassinated by vested interests.

WHAT IS KNOWN by the media or common people is just few images and myths but reality
is different.

Some people who appear to be so GOOD and interesting are actually plotters of major
conspiracies.

You can predict who is going to be next to be on dead primer ministers list of South
Asia..........

Ads by OnlineBrowserAdvertisingAd Options
#3
27th June 2007, 03:09 AM

hindustan
Hindustan is you
Senior Member of Hindustan Movement

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,467

The private life of Indira Gandhi
This book review appeared in The prominent daily of India, The Hindu Sunday, April 29,
2001

There have been biographies on Indira Gandhi by Pupul Jayakar, Zareer Masani and Inder
Malhotra ... does Katherine Frank's show us her feet of clay?

A FRIEND once told me a clerihew about Robert Clive which, with the appearance of
Katherine Frank's biography of Indira Gandhi, seems equally suited to her:

The best thing about Lord Clive
Is that he's no longer alive.
There's a great deal to be said
For being dead.

For if Indira Gandhi were not safely dead, it is pretty certain that Katherine Frank would
have been clapped in irons within Tihar Jail, locked up by the woman whose prolific love life
she seems, rather eponymously, the first to have been entirely frank about.

It is in the nature of biographies of the safely dead to expose or demolish privacies long
rumoured or whispered about during the subject's lifetime. But if the subject happens to be
a holy cow or has achieved the status of a deity, there is usually a conservative furore in
our part of the world when it is proven she had something as depraved as a normal sex life.
Rushdie's foray into the Prophet's sanctum may have been provocatively calculated to stir
an Islamic hornet's nest, but even ordinary depositions about the erotic relationships of
sacred heroes make people deeply uncomfortable.

About five years ago, Sisir Kumar and Sugata Bose published a volume of letters exchanged
between Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose and his Austrian lover, later his wife, Emilie Schenkl.
Of course Netaji was not dead five years ago and we know he is still alive and eating
shorshe machh even as we speak, but the book did demolish the peculiarly Bengali-
Victorian myth that Netaji, being God, had no sex life. Netaji's letters went so far as to show
that not only did he love a being other than Bengal, he even had a daughter by her. Which
self-respecting Bengali could swallow such an insult? This was even worse than the
equivalent news in Britain, some years ago, that Field Marshall Montgomery was gay all
along. The Forward Bloc immediately rioted and burnt the book in Calcutta, though in the
end they seem to have accepted that Bengali deities too can be allowed the occasional
carnality so long as everyone continues to believe they are immortal.

At roughly the same time, there appeared a surprisingly third- rate biography of Nehru by
the American historian Stanley Wolpert - surprisingly because Wolpert had always
possessed the most authentic credentials for being unfailingly second rate. This book
suggested that Nehru's many wild oats were not sown exclusively among womankind: he
had also favoured mankind when young. Wolpert's creative enthusiasm for the multiple
exercise of Nehru's crotch, which had failed to intrigue earlier biographers like S. Gopal and
Michael Brecher, caused him to forget that there happens to be a boundary between
speculation and fact. His book was temporarily banned in India: "stopped at Customs for
inspection".

Unlike her father, who himself would never have banned Wolpert, Indira Gandhi was no
Voltairean liberal. During her lifetime no one would have dared openly accuse her of
wanting men in bed. P. N. Haksar and P. N. Dhar, both strikingly handsome Kashmiri
pandits who served her with integrity and distinction and have written fine memoirs,
analyse her emotions with perception but say nothing about their boss's private life. In fact
the most perceptive observation about Indira Gandhi was once made by the singer-writer
Sheila Dhar (Mrs. P. N. Dhar), who knew Mrs. G. well enough to notice that "Indira Gandhi
had the developed instincts of an animal, she always responded to people with her skin".
The political animal that was Indira Gandhi has long been known and done to death: there
have been biographies by Pupul Jayakar, Zareer Masani and Inder Malhotra. It is high time
someone gave us an insight into the human animal and showed us her feet of clay.

If Katherine Frank's Emily Bronte: A Chainless Soul (Hamish Hamilton, 1990) is any
indication, she is the very woman for the task. The Bronte biography is one of the most
moving pictures of tragic womanhood I have ever read. Some of the phrases in Frank's
Preface to her Bronte biography provide an indication of why she has also chosen to write
about Indira Gandhi: "I see Emily Bronte's life as troubled, solitary and austere ... she made
her own choices boldly and stuck by them ... she cared nothing for the opinions and values
of others ... there was much that was dismaying, even forbidding, in her personality and the
story of her life is riddled with misfortune, loss and failure ... yet there was an undercurrent
of triumph in this life ... It was a life of rare and awesome autonomy".

It is an indication of the intellectual condition of the Congress Party that its old horses, who
are very hoarse and very old, are in a flutter about the fact that Mrs. G. may actually have
had an enjoyable sex life. My instinct is to applaud, but this just will not do. Even in an era
accustomed to scurrility, sleaze and Shobha De, the Indian Caesar's daughter should be
seen to be chaste, Hindu and properly womanly. Whereas, if the stories told are true - and
in such matters every substantial accumulation of rumours substitutes for proof - Indira
Gandhi may even have been a bad case of epitomising the brilliant parodic one-liner against
Hindu hypocrisy which says caste no bar lekin sex baar-baar. Mrs. Gandhi had, it seems,
nearly as much love for the pleasures of her residential bed as of her prime ministerial
chair. The Kissa was as much Kursi Ka as Palang Ka.

Her list of hits is impressively long. A Parsi husband who turned philanderer, a scandal-
mongering Malayali old enough to be her father's typist (he was once appropriately called a
Remington Randy), a yoga teacher who degenerated into a physical instructor, a poodle
Foreign Minister who never stepped far from her Home Ministrations - how wonderful to
learn that even as she was shackling her country with authoritarianism, she was
unshackling her libido at home. What a riproaringly wonderful and motley crew of purdah
paramours our Rushdiean Widow seems to have had. Our hearts go out to poor R. K.
Dhawan. How awful he must feel to be left out of this litany of lovers. Can we hope for a
memoir by him which regales us with proclamations of his non- innocence? Can we hope
that Mrs. Shobha De's publishers have given her an "undisclosed sum" as royalty advance
for her next potboiler on a subject which seems so entirely tailor-made to suit her well-
polished talons?

Anyone with half an eye can see that Indira Gandhi's life can be made, beyond the politics
and jingoistic nationalism, the very stuff of sex drama, of Babban Khan's Punjabi farce
"Chaddhi Javaani Buddhe Noo" (which translates roughly as "The Old Chap's Turning
Horny"), of the carnivalesque Restoration Comedy tradition of parodying the aristocracy, of
the "lewd" literature of subversion which has such strong popular roots in so many of the
country's regional languages. Though it is now too late, the material within Frank's
biography could even have been made, for instance, into an Italian romantic film starring
Gina Lollobrigida as the lovely Indira, Marcello Mastroanni as Feroze, Edward G. Robinson as
the seductively ugly M. O. Mathai and Anthony Quinn as the rugged yoga teacher. Surely
Sonia Gandhi, liminally poised between India and Italy, could have been persuaded to script
such a film? The finances would naturally have been provided by a joint venture set up
between the Quattrochi Family and the Sangh Parivar. The Guests of Honour at the first
screening would have been Khushwant Singh arm in arm with Maneka Gandhi. What
scenario other than the private life of Indira Gandhi could possibly give such an equal
measure of delight, for such diverse reasons, to secularists and feminists, the Bharatiya
Janata Party (BJP) and the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP)?

By art alone might such contraries be fused, enmities overcome. As exponents of the comic
tradition - from Aristophanes to Shakespeare to Swift to Rushdie to Yes Minister to Spitting
Image to R. K. Laxman to Jaspal Bhatti to Black Adder - have shown, the literary inflation
and consequent deflation of politicians into caricatures via comic art is the only certain
method for the ordinary citizen to get even with those who exercise everyday power over
us, to make us feel that our ordinariness at least transcends the insanities of their politics.
Those who love the exercise of power fear ridicule even more than they fear retirement.
Mrs. G. seems to have feared it most of all. In this seems to lie the psychological roots of
the Emergency.

If the Congress Party were less stuffed with hypocritical geriatrics it would realise that in
this epoch, when Kaliyuga has gone global and formed a multinational joint venture with the
bold and the beautiful, with liberalisation and liberalism, the world of vice has, in large
sections of urban India, been turned upside down into the world of virtue. If you want to be
politically correct, sexuality and hedonism in the woman now betoken female power. The
idea of womanly virtue, of the fallen woman, has fortunately no more stability than the
Berlin Wall. It may remain generally embedded as a patriarchal ideal, but everyone knows
that the winds of gender equality in sexual matters have been blowing hard and chilling the
traditional Indian male's privates into a deep recession.

Yes, there is no doubt about it, Frank has done us a favour by making Indira Gandhi roll out
of her Cleopatra rug, by making the skeletons in her bedsheets come tumbling out with her.
It is time we took the politics out of Indira's life and started to democratically look her
straight in the face. What if Katherine Frank has got minor dates and details wrong? The
next printing will sort those out. Meanwhile, how delightful to know at last that Mrs. G. was
only as human as any of us, that the peccadilloes for which Jawaharlal Nehru was
moralistically castigated merely inaugurated a tradition which continued and flourished with
his daughter. As we await the future biographies of Rajiv and Sanjay, Sonia and Maneka,
Varun and Priyanka, we can only pray that this tradition of a rich and varied sexuality is
being actively maintained even now by India's immortal First Family.

Rukun Advani is the author of Beethoven Among the Cows and runs Permanent Black, a
publishing company in New Delhi.

#4
3rd August 2007, 01:46 AM
hindustanmovement
Member
Senior Member of Hindustan Movement

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hindustan
Posts: 81

Secret History of Indira Rajiv Sanjay Sonia n other gandhis

The Nehru Family

Shailesh

At the very beginning of his book, "The Nehru Dynasty", astrologer K.N.Rao mentions the
names of Jawahar Lal's father and grandfather. Jawahar Lal's father was believed to be Moti
Lal and Moti al's father was one Gangadhar Nehru. And we all know that Jawahar Lal's only
daughter was Indira Priyadarshini Nehru; Kamala Nehru was her mother, who died In
Switzerland of tuberculosis. She was totally against Indira's proposed marriage with Feroze.
Why? No one tells us that !

Now, who is this Feroze?

We are told by many that he was the son of the family grocer. The grocer supplied wines,
etc. to Anand Bhavan, previously known as Ishrat Manzil, which once belonged to a Muslim
lawyer named Mobarak Ali. Moti Lal was earlier during his apprenticeship an employee of
Mobarak Ali.

What was the family grocer's name? One frequently hears that Rajiv Gandhi's grandfather
was Pandit Nehru. But then we all know that everyone has two grandfathers, the paternal
and the maternal grandfathers. In fact, the paternal grandfather is deemed to be the more
important grandfather in most societies. Why is it then no where we find Rajiv Gandhi's
paternal grandfather's name? It appears that the reason is simply this. Rajiv Gandhi's
paternal grandfather was a Muslim gentleman from the Junagadh area of Gujarat.


This Muslim grocer by the name of Nawab Khan, had married a Parsi woman after
converting her to Islam. This is the source where from the myth of Rajiv being a Parsi was
derived. Rajiv's father Feroze was Feroze Khan before he married Indira, against Kamala
Nehru's wishes. Feroze's mother's family name was Ghandy, often associated with Parsis
and this was changed to Gandhi, sometime before his wedding with Indira, by an affidavit.


The fact of the matter is that (and this fact can be found in many writings) Indira was very
lonely. Chased out of the Shantiniketan University by Guru Dev Rabindranath himself for
misdeveanor, the lonely girl was all by herself, while father Jawahar was busy with politics,
pretty women and illicit sex; the mother was in hospital.


Feroze Khan, the grocer's son was then in England and he was quite sympathetic to Indira
and soon enough she changed her religion, became a Muslim woman and married Feroze
Khan in a London mosque. Nehru was not happy; Kamala was dead on death bed already or
dying. The news of this marriage eventually reached Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. Gandhi
urgently called Nehru and practically ordered him to ask the young man to change his name
from Khan to Gandhi. It had nothing to do with change of religion, from Islam to!

Hinduism for instance. It was just a case of a change of name by an affidavit. And so Feroze
Khan became Feroze Gandhi.

The surprising thing is that the apostle of truth, the old man soon to be declared India's
Mahatma and the 'Father of the Nation' didn't mention this game of his in the famous book,
'My Experiments with Truth'. Why? When they returned to India, a mock 'Vedic marriage'
was instituted for public consumption. On this subject, writes M. O. Mathai (a longtime
private secretary of Nehru) in his renowned (but now suppressed by the GOI)


'Reminiscences of the Nehru Age' on page 94, second paragraph: "For some inexplicable
reason, Nehru allowed the marriage to be performed according to Vedic rites in 1942. An
inter-religious and inter-caste marriage under Vedic rites at that time was not valid in law.
To be legal, it had to be a civil marriage.


It's a known fact that after Rajiv's birth Indira and Feroze lived separately, but they were
not divorced. Feroze used to harass Nehru frequently for money and also interfere in
Nehru's political activities.


Nehru got fed up and left instructions not to allow him into the Prime Minister's residence
Trimurthi Bhavan. JL Nehrus secretary Mathai writes that the death of Feroze came as a
relief to Nehru and Indira. The death of Feroze in 1960 before he could consolidate his own
political forces, is itself a mystery.


Feroze had even planned to remarry. Those who try to keep tabs on our leaders in spite of
all the suppressions and deliberate misinformation, are aware of the fact that the second
son of Indira (Mrs. Feroze Khan) known as Sanjay Gandhi was not the son of Feroze.


Sanjay was the son of another Moslem gentleman, Mohammad Yunus. Here, in passing, we
might mention that the second son was originally named Sanjiv. It rhymed with Rajiv, the
elder brother's name. It was changed to Sanjay when he was arrested by the British police
in England and his passport impounded, for having stolen a car. Krishna Menon was then
India's High Commissioner in London. He offered to issue another passport to the felon who
changed his name to Sanjay.


Incidentally, Sanjay's marriage with the Sikh girl Menaka (for Indira Gandhi found the name
of Lord Indra's court dancer rather offensive!) took place quite surprisingly in Mohammad
Yunus' house in New Delhi. And the marriage with Menaka who was a model (she had
modeled for Bombay Dyeing wearing just a towel) was not so ordinary either.


Sanjay was notorious in getting unwed young women pregnant. Menaka too was! rendered
pregnant by Sanjay. It was then that her father, Colonel Anand, threatened Sanjay with dire
consequences if he did not marry her daughter. And that did the trick. Sanjay married
Menaka. It was widely reported in Delhi at the time that Mohammad Yunus was unhappy at
the marriage of Sanjay with Menaka; apparently he had wanted to get him married with a
Muslim girl of his choice. It was Mohammad Yunus who cried the most when Sanjay died in
the plane accident.


In Yunus' book, 'Persons, Passions & Politics' one discovers that baby Sanjay had been
circumcised following Islamic custom, although the reason stated was phimosis. It was
always believed that Sanjay used to blackmail Indira Gandhi and due to this she used to
turn a blind eye when Sanjay Gandhi started to run the country as though it were his
personal fiefdom.

Was he black mailing her with the secret of who his real father was?


When the news of Sanjay's death reached Indira Gandhi, the first thing she wanted to know
was about the bunch of keys which Sanjay had with him.


Nehru was no less a player in producing bastards. At least one case is very graphically
described by M. O. Mathai in his "Reminiscences of the Nehru Age", page 206. Mathai
writes: "In the autumn of 1948 (India became free in 1947 and a great deal of work needed
to be done) a young woman from Benares arrived in New Delhi as a sanyasin named
Shraddha Mata (an assumed and not a real name). She was a Sanskrit scholar well versed
in the ancient Indian scriptures and mythology. People, including MPs, thronged to her to
hear her discourses. One day S. D. Upadhyaya,Nehru's old employee, brought a letter in
Hindi from Shraddha Mata.


Nehru gave her an interview in the PM's house! ..


As she departed, I noticed ( Mathai is speaking here) that she was young, shapely and
beautiful. Meetings with her became rather frequent, mostly after Nehru finished his work at
night. During one of Nehru's visits to Lucknow , Shraddha Mata turned up there, and
Upadhyaya brought a letter from her as usual. Nehru sent her the reply; and she visited
Nehru at midnight...


"Suddenly Shraddha Mata disappeared. In November 1949 a convent in Bangalore sent a
decent looking person to Delhi with a bundle of letters. He said that a young woman from
northern India arrived at the convent a few months ago and gave birth to a baby boy. She
refused to divulge her name or give any particulars about herself. She left the convent as
soon as she was well enough to move out but left the child behind. She however forgot to
take with her a small cloth bundle in which, among other things, several letters in Hindi
were found. The Mother Superior, who was a foreigner, had the letters examined and was
told they were from the Prime Minister. The person who brought the letters surrendered
them...


"I (Mathai) made discreet inquiries repeatedly about the boy but failed to get a clue about
his whereabouts. Convents in such matters are extremely tightlipped and secretive. Had I
succeeded in locating the boy, I would have adopted him. He must have grown up as a
Catholic Christian blissfully ignorant of who his father was."


Coming back to Rajiv Gandhi, we all know now that he changed his so called Parsi religion
to become a Catholic to marry Sania Maino of Turin, Italy.


Rajiv became Roberto. His daughter's name is Bianca and son's name is Raul.
Quite cleverly the same names are presented to the people of India as Priyanka
and Rahul.!

What is amazing is the extent of our people's ignorance in such matters. The press
conference that Rajiv Gandhi gave in London after taking over as prime minister of India
was very informative. In this press conference, Rajiv boasted that he was NOT a Hindu but
a Parsi. Mind you, speaking of the Parsi religion, he had no Parsi ancestor at all. His
grandmother (father's mother) had turned Muslim after having abandoned the Parsi religion
to marry Nawab Khan. It is the western press that waged a blitz of misinformation on behalf
of Rajiv.


From the New York Times to the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post, the
big guns raised Rajiv to heaven. The children's encyclopedias recorded that Rajiv
was a qualified Mechanical Engineer from the evered University of Cambridge. No
doubt US kids are among the most misinformed in the world today! The reality is
that in all three years of his tenure at that University Rajiv had not passed a single
examination. He had therefore to leave Cambridge without a certificate.


Sonia too had the same benevolent treatment. She was stated to be a student in
Cambridge. Such a description is calculated to mislead Indians. She was a student in
Cambridge all right but not of the University of Cambridge but of one of those fly by night
language schools where foreign students come to learn English. Sonia was working as an
'au pair' girl in Cambridge and trying to learn English at the same time. And surprise of
surprises, Rajiv was even cremated as per vedic rites in full view of India's public.


This is the Nehru dynasty that India worships and now an Italian leads a prestigious national
party because of just one qualification being married into the Nehru family.

#5
6th August 2007, 09:49 PM

purushottam
Senior Member
Senior Member of Hindustan Movement

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: indore. m.p.
Posts: 1,733

Quote:
Originally Posted by sahastrabhuj
The Nehru Family

Shailesh

At the very beginning of his book, "The Nehru Dynasty", astrologer K.N.Rao mentions the
names of Jawahar Lal's father and grandfather. Jawahar Lal's father was believed to be
Moti Lal and Moti al's father was one Gangadhar Nehru. And we all know that Jawahar Lal's
only daughter was Indira Priyadarshini Nehru; Kamala Nehru was her mother, who died In
Switzerland of tuberculosis. She was totally against Indira's proposed marriage with
Feroze. Why? No one tells us that !

Now, who is this Feroze?

We are told by many that he was the son of the family grocer. The grocer supplied wines,
etc. to Anand Bhavan, previously known as Ishrat Manzil, which once belonged to a Muslim
lawyer named Mobarak Ali. Moti Lal was earlier during his apprenticeship an employee of
Mobarak Ali.

What was the family grocer's name? One frequently hears that Rajiv Gandhi's grandfather
was Pandit Nehru. But then we all know that everyone has two grandfathers, the paternal
and the maternal grandfathers. In fact, the paternal grandfather is deemed to be the more
important grandfather in most societies. Why is it then no where we find Rajiv Gandhi's
paternal grandfather's name? It appears that the reason is simply this. Rajiv Gandhi's
paternal grandfather was a Muslim gentleman from the Junagadh area of Gujarat.


This Muslim grocer by the name of Nawab Khan, had married a Parsi woman after
converting her to Islam. This is the source where from the myth of Rajiv being a Parsi was
derived. Rajiv's father Feroze was Feroze Khan before he married Indira, against Kamala
Nehru's wishes. Feroze's mother's family name was Ghandy, often associated with Parsis
and this was changed to Gandhi, sometime before his wedding with Indira, by an affidavit.


The fact of the matter is that (and this fact can be found in many writings) Indira was very
lonely. Chased out of the Shantiniketan University by Guru Dev Rabindranath himself for
misdeveanor, the lonely girl was all by herself, while father Jawahar was busy with politics,
pretty women and illicit sex; the mother was in hospital.


Feroze Khan, the grocer's son was then in England and he was quite sympathetic to Indira
and soon enough she changed her religion, became a Muslim woman and married Feroze
Khan in a London mosque. Nehru was not happy; Kamala was dead on death bed already
or dying. The news of this marriage eventually reached Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi.
Gandhi urgently called Nehru and practically ordered him to ask the young man to change
his name from Khan to Gandhi. It had nothing to do with change of religion, from Islam to!

Hinduism for instance. It was just a case of a change of name by an affidavit. And so
Feroze Khan became Feroze Gandhi.

The surprising thing is that the apostle of truth, the old man soon to be declared India's
Mahatma and the 'Father of the Nation' didn't mention this game of his in the famous
book, 'My Experiments with Truth'. Why? When they returned to India, a mock 'Vedic
marriage' was instituted for public consumption. On this subject, writes M. O. Mathai (a
longtime private secretary of Nehru) in his renowned (but now suppressed by the GOI)


'Reminiscences of the Nehru Age' on page 94, second paragraph: "For some inexplicable
reason, Nehru allowed the marriage to be performed according to Vedic rites in 1942. An
inter-religious and inter-caste marriage under Vedic rites at that time was not valid in law.
To be legal, it had to be a civil marriage.


It's a known fact that after Rajiv's birth Indira and Feroze lived separately, but they were
not divorced. Feroze used to harass Nehru frequently for money and also interfere in
Nehru's political activities.


Nehru got fed up and left instructions not to allow him into the Prime Minister's residence
Trimurthi Bhavan. JL Nehrus secretary Mathai writes that the death of Feroze came as a
relief to Nehru and Indira. The death of Feroze in 1960 before he could consolidate his own
political forces, is itself a mystery.


Feroze had even planned to remarry. Those who try to keep tabs on our leaders in spite of
all the suppressions and deliberate misinformation, are aware of the fact that the second
son of Indira (Mrs. Feroze Khan) known as Sanjay Gandhi was not the son of Feroze.


Sanjay was the son of another Moslem gentleman, Mohammad Yunus. Here, in passing, we
might mention that the second son was originally named Sanjiv. It rhymed with Rajiv, the
elder brother's name. It was changed to Sanjay when he was arrested by the British police
in England and his passport impounded, for having stolen a car. Krishna Menon was then
India's High Commissioner in London. He offered to issue another passport to the felon
who changed his name to Sanjay.


Incidentally, Sanjay's marriage with the Sikh girl Menaka (for Indira Gandhi found the
name of Lord Indra's court dancer rather offensive!) took place quite surprisingly in
Mohammad Yunus' house in New Delhi. And the marriage with Menaka who was a model
(she had modeled for Bombay Dyeing wearing just a towel) was not so ordinary either.


Sanjay was notorious in getting unwed young women pregnant. Menaka too was! rendered
pregnant by Sanjay. It was then that her father, Colonel Anand, threatened Sanjay with
dire consequences if he did not marry her daughter. And that did the trick. Sanjay married
Menaka. It was widely reported in Delhi at the time that Mohammad Yunus was unhappy at
the marriage of Sanjay with Menaka; apparently he had wanted to get him married with a
Muslim girl of his choice. It was Mohammad Yunus who cried the most when Sanjay died in
the plane accident.


In Yunus' book, 'Persons, Passions & Politics' one discovers that baby Sanjay had been
circumcised following Islamic custom, although the reason stated was phimosis. It was
always believed that Sanjay used to blackmail Indira Gandhi and due to this she used to
turn a blind eye when Sanjay Gandhi started to run the country as though it were his
personal fiefdom.

Was he black mailing her with the secret of who his real father was?


When the news of Sanjay's death reached Indira Gandhi, the first thing she wanted to
know was about the bunch of keys which Sanjay had with him.


Nehru was no less a player in producing bastards. At least one case is very graphically
described by M. O. Mathai in his "Reminiscences of the Nehru Age", page 206. Mathai
writes: "In the autumn of 1948 (India became free in 1947 and a great deal of work
needed to be done) a young woman from Benares arrived in New Delhi as a sanyasin
named Shraddha Mata (an assumed and not a real name). She was a Sanskrit scholar well
versed in the ancient Indian scriptures and mythology. People, including MPs, thronged to
her to hear her discourses. One day S. D. Upadhyaya,Nehru's old employee, brought a
letter in Hindi from Shraddha Mata.


Nehru gave her an interview in the PM's house! ..


As she departed, I noticed ( Mathai is speaking here) that she was young, shapely and
beautiful. Meetings with her became rather frequent, mostly after Nehru finished his work
at night. During one of Nehru's visits to Lucknow , Shraddha Mata turned up there, and
Upadhyaya brought a letter from her as usual. Nehru sent her the reply; and she visited
Nehru at midnight...


"Suddenly Shraddha Mata disappeared. In November 1949 a convent in Bangalore sent a
decent looking person to Delhi with a bundle of letters. He said that a young woman from
northern India arrived at the convent a few months ago and gave birth to a baby boy. She
refused to divulge her name or give any particulars about herself. She left the convent as
soon as she was well enough to move out but left the child behind. She however forgot to
take with her a small cloth bundle in which, among other things, several letters in Hindi
were found. The Mother Superior, who was a foreigner, had the letters examined and was
told they were from the Prime Minister. The person who brought the letters surrendered
them...


"I (Mathai) made discreet inquiries repeatedly about the boy but failed to get a clue about
his whereabouts. Convents in such matters are extremely tightlipped and secretive. Had I
succeeded in locating the boy, I would have adopted him. He must have grown up as a
Catholic Christian blissfully ignorant of who his father was."


Coming back to Rajiv Gandhi, we all know now that he changed his so called Parsi religion
to become a Catholic to marry Sania Maino of Turin, Italy.


Rajiv became Roberto. His daughter's name is Bianca and son's name is Raul.
Quite cleverly the same names are presented to the people of India as Priyanka
and Rahul.!

What is amazing is the extent of our people's ignorance in such matters. The press
conference that Rajiv Gandhi gave in London after taking over as prime minister of India
was very informative. In this press conference, Rajiv boasted that he was NOT a Hindu but
a Parsi. Mind you, speaking of the Parsi religion, he had no Parsi ancestor at all. His
grandmother (father's mother) had turned Muslim after having abandoned the Parsi
religion to marry Nawab Khan. It is the western press that waged a blitz of misinformation
on behalf of Rajiv.


From the New York Times to the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post, the
big guns raised Rajiv to heaven. The children's encyclopedias recorded that Rajiv
was a qualified Mechanical Engineer from the evered University of Cambridge. No
doubt US kids are among the most misinformed in the world today! The reality is
that in all three years of his tenure at that University Rajiv had not passed a
single examination. He had therefore to leave Cambridge without a certificate.


Sonia too had the same benevolent treatment. She was stated to be a student in
Cambridge. Such a description is calculated to mislead Indians. She was a student in
Cambridge all right but not of the University of Cambridge but of one of those fly by night
language schools where foreign students come to learn English. Sonia was working as an
'au pair' girl in Cambridge and trying to learn English at the same time. And surprise of
surprises, Rajiv was even cremated as per vedic rites in full view of India's public.


This is the Nehru dynasty that India worships and now an Italian leads a prestigious
national party because of just one qualification being married into the Nehru family.
All articles may be true but they have the value of postmortem report. The public is required
to be educated and unless it is done we who share such views cannot do any thing. The
opposition [BJP]is busy in in fighting activities and is losing power in the states where ever
it is in power. Now it is Hindu organisation who would fight against Mody What a nice
scenario. Keshubhai is yet dreaming for power.Is it right. Every one in BJP is dying for
power and corruption. By writing such articles we may show factual position but cannot
change the minds of the people. Let the reality be accepted.[purushottam]

Ads by OnlineBrowserAdvertisingAd Options
#6
27th April 2008, 10:30 AM

purushottam
Senior Member
Senior Member of Hindustan Movement

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: indore. m.p.
Posts: 1,733

Re: Indira Nehru Her Ghosts & Inside story of Sonia Maino Gandhi

Here is other story of Nehru-Gandhi Dynasty from my e mail friend .Please read it. I had
recieved a mail. . .but its delivery is getting failed after a delay of 4 5 days. .. . kindly bear
it . . its good for all of us. .



Its great to hear from you .Please look at the link here and here I am writing in Red

I am not a BJP fan or any other side. .. but I really hate congress. . . .Epically Gandhi
family. . .they are the basic reason why India is poor Till now. .. .

I might have gone harsh some places but you cannot neglect reality. . .
Before you read " I am sorry for words "


Why rahul gandhi suddenly feels like sleeping in village and all type of natak. . .
where was he 2 3 years back when there was no election any where around. .

If you want I can debate more. . .


On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Rani Murugan <hivaids_life@ yahoo.com> wrote:

Hi brother,
Nehru family was richest in India. No, they were not belonging to richest family.Motilal
Nehru`s father served a very loyal and faithful to britishers due to which he was givin huge
money from time to time.After came motilal nehru and you also know that money was
gifted to him from his dad.They were well educated and cultured. They purchased every
thing from time to time. . .education was also purchased for him. . . .rahul gandhi is having
3 murder case and 2 rape case in UK USA. . .in both the countries the name was changed
from " rahul " to person named " raul " which was called dead. . .Evidences were
demolished. . .After that Rahul was sent back to India. . .where Indian Media wrote "Great
Leader`s Greatr Son returned". . . These people are pro with power and money. . .they
know how to wrotten the system. . .Power never corrupt they. Motilal to Rahul it is the fifth
generation. In between Sonia Gandhi also there. Study the history of these people.Trust Me
if you give me links and figure can Leave my engineering and study this all day. . . Power
usually corrupt the man. They lived with immense power. See how much they are
corrupt.Mr. P chidambaram is the person who could have changed india with single day. .
.but he never did that. . .he is loyal to Mrs sonia Gandhi. . .This months GDP is 1.33% ask
any finance person. . .where did the money go. . .money is with chidambaram. . ..no no . .
.i am sorry not with chdambaram. . but with his sons and farthest relatives and family
person. . . .Always remember " sonia gandhi doesnot need money. . .she only needs few x
prime ministers and few x finance ministers. . ."




Political opponent will attribute things for character assassination upon rising leaders.Rahul
gandhi was living outside the country like since he was bourn. . .He came one day liived in
our country for like an year or 4 years at manx. . . and now you also agreed that he is
capable of participating polls. . . .what happen to suchin pilot. . . .who has done M.Sc. in
political science and is in congress. . . what happened to 22000 yoth congress. . . People
who are not in active politic try to understand the truth.I am not active in politics. . .but
please if you are active in politics please try to reanalyse the issues without having a prior
image about any one. . . It is necessary for their own life and future.You are right here


After Nehru his family influence in the politic is not the gift of Nehru. They gained it through
their sacrifice.I am sorry. . .which sacrifice. . .I must remind you. . .in our constitutuion it is
clearly said that " 10, janpath belongs to the government quarters of ruling party ". . . but
Sonia gandhi and family never moved out of the are even at the time of atal rule. . . now
exactly what type of sacrifice are you talking about They were not enjoying their life in the
five star hotel or with world beauties. Well sister. . .when my father diead. . .I dident left
the home. . .I was 4 years of Age and a lot of relatives were there to take me with them so
that I was away from all those visions. . . .Sonia gandhi and rahul priyanka were shifted
from india in1970 for reason of securities. . . Sonia gandhi returned on soon but. . . rahul
gandhi arrived in 1998. . . .man this country was really dangerous for him.They worked with
party.Really! great to hear that They were capable to fill the vacancy of leadership when
necessary arises.Trust Me If some how any how the whole gandhi family die then do you
think that there is no 1 good left. . .Let me tell you there are few people which are better
then this but are never asked for promotion. .. .


Priyanka visited Naline. Why others want to make it a great issue. She done it secretly. Who
published it. Why published it. What was his motive. These are the thing first we have to
thing. In our group you will see a mail calling for same purpose. . .if you are eager i m
forwarding you after this mail. . . . .Also that layer who did this RTI was a close relative to a
local congress man . . .that congress man is a close to Priyanka . . .So tell me who really
wants to bring it To media. . ..


Lalu Prasad was not a CM. But he is a good Railway Minister.Lalu Yadav is not a good
minister at all. . .Let me tell you 2 things. . .. .My relative is an engineer ata higher post in
Railway. . .he told me that they require huge oil and maintanence material from railway. .
.almost 1/4th of railway budget is kept for that. .. .At the same time 1/8th of budget for
railway track and 1/10 for signal and gate maintanence. . .All this was removed. .. .now
they are not haivng maintainence properties. . . .Being a mechanical engineer myself. . .I
can tell you that " You should always have a tip top tools with accessories to work in lab. . .
or accidents and death will be the name of your lab "

Second thing is . . .he gave a speach on management in Britain of which Indian mdeia
printed a lot. .. .There is a system in britain. . .if you like a teacher . . vote for him then
they will pay that teacher according to that. . . .

You know what happened. . .A charge sheet was filed against university reguarding "
wasting of time by putting a useless leacture of a political person who spoke nothing
reguarding their subject". . ..Also the fine was leavided on their Student leader who was
Indian . . . .


Same time He like the welfare of his family rather than the state or his own caste. He is
using the caste to achieve his goal. Before independence some people used Hindu and
Muslim to get leadership. After independence ambitious leader using provincialism, and
caste and bifurcation of state etc. to gain popularity and political power. These people do
not have any national view.

The nature of Nehru family so far is different. They live like all India leader. Caste, creed,
language etc have no influence upon them. They dont care about cast system of India. .
.they are just whorried about " being in power . . .and earning more money ". . .If they
really care about India they would have braught reservation in India but in the form of
economic. . .not on SC/ST and OBC. . .


No one can not take perfect action while he is in power. Our previous President Abdul
Kalam, Our present Lok Sabha Speaker, previous BW CM, Present WB CM and may others
can tell you many stories that they could not do. How they failed in any dreams.. . Trust me
they all won by not making Sonia Prime Minister. . .


Every action should be analysed clubbing with the circumstance. U tell me

Rani Murugan
Mayank Shukla


#7
27th April 2008, 07:21 PM

purushottam
Senior Member
Senior Member of Hindustan Movement

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: indore. m.p.
Posts: 1,733

Re: Indira Nehru Her Ghosts & Inside story of Sonia Maino Gandhi

Here is an article by great columnist M.V.Kamat which is worth reading. The imposing of
emergency was the greatest sin by the Congress. It is not that emergency cannot be and
need not be imposed but the manner in which it was imposed and democracy was crushed
was surprising. It was most shameful act by the Congress. It was not like a beauty spot on
the face of the moon but it was a spot of characterlessness on the Mahatma Gandhi"s
Congress who fought for the values and the Congress spoiled and destroyed the same.
Congress cannot and will never be able to justify the act.
Unfortunately for the then President of India Dr.Fakhruddin Ali Ahmad, he had no other
alternative to sign the decree on next day in back date as Indira Gandhi had in the mid
night without consulting him issued the orders instead of proclaiming the emergency by the
order of the President. This was all done by her to save her chair of Prime Ministership.The
High Court of Allahabad had declared the election of Indira Gandhi and by that judgment
she was perturbed as a Congresses cannot live without the oxygen of power!.

For saving her election she could successfully manage to amend the Peoples representation
Act also. Under law it was just a Colourable Legislation benefiting an individual.

The Dr. Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed and Indira Gandhi both were responsible for the murder of
the democracy. The then President could not dare to question the propriety of imposing the
emergency.Here is an article by M.V.Kamat lase read with my back ground.


Erase Them All!
BY M.V. KAMATH

Unsettling Memories: Narrative of the Emergency in Delhi

Emma Tarlo
University of California Press, Los Angeles, USA
Pages 234


If there is one event in recent history that Congressmen would want to forget, it is the
Emergency. They cannot stomach it. It tears at their hearts, especially if they have a
conscience. They would rather prefer to see it forgotten. Its arch exponent, Indira Gandhis
rogue son Sanjay, has long been thrown into the dustbin of history. And most sensitive
Congressmen would not like to be reminded of him. He is the archetypal villain, a man who
disgraced democracy by his authoritarian actions and brought the image of India down in
the eyes of the world.

Understandably, few Indian scholars have made any detailed study of what preceded June
15, 1975 when the Emergency was hastily enforced and what followed till March 1977 when
the Emergency was finally lifted. It has taken a Lecturer in Social Anthropology at the
University of London, Emma Tarlo, to dig into old files and resurrect the shameful times,
when all intellectual ife came to a pathetic standstill, the media was brutally curbed and
opponents of the Emergency were overnight arrested and jailed in their thousands. Emma
Tarlo unfortunately does not go deep into the political events that preceded June 15, 1975,
the deteriorating economy, the rising rate of inflation and the role of Jayaprakash Narayan
who, in his desperation, had called upon the Army to revolt.

Providing such a background would have been of great help in placing Emergency in its
context. Nor is much information provided regarding press censorship, the pressurisation of
editors some of whom bravelt stood up like V K Narasimhan of The Indian Express and C.R.
Irani of the Statesman, the arrest of some journalists, the torture in jails, demolition of
slums and forcible sterilisation of helpless victims all uncomfortable ground for historical,
political and socialogical analysis. A cmparison could also have been made as to how China
was meeting the rising tide of population growth. The Emergency, as the author puts it, has
been much mythologised, but little studied in all its varied aspects. It has slipped through
the net of academic disciplines. Worse, the collective silence of the Congress over the
Emergency speaks volumes for its fear of what damage the recounting of Emergency events
can do it its fate in the forthcoming elections.

The key protaginists of this book are men and women who, because of poverty and
circumstances, were targetted for slum clearance and sterilisation drives. The book begins
by examining the various means by which the memory of the Emergency has been distorted
or suppressed. As the author puts it, as a moment of national shame, a blot on Indias
democratic record, the Emergency has been as a moment for forgetting, than as one of
remembering. Strangely enough, she notes, there are no public monuments to the
Emergency.



How can there be one, unless one erects a monument subh as the one we have at
Jallianwala Bagh where the names of all those killed are listed to the eternal shame of the
British? Can a contemporary government in Delhi replicate it everywhere and name all the
people who were arrested and jailed? The focus in this book is largely on Delhi and what
happened in a resettlement camp. If it were to cover all the misdeeds perpetrated by the
Emergency the author would need to write several volumes to give a full account of what
truly happened. But Indians have a tremendous talent for forgetting their past. As the
author sadly notes: ``The violence that occurred at Chauri Chaura in 1922 has been
sidelined in the `nationalist master narrative of the freedom struggle which seeks to uphold
an image of non-violence. Similarly, she notes, ``the horror that accompanied Partition in
1947-48 has been underplayed or passed off as a `brief moment of madness because it
does not fit `the history of progress as we want to see it.

According to the author, `the Emergency cannot be forgotten without leaving some
casualties in the discourse of democracy, for to forget it is also to forget what was once
described as democracys finest hour: the vote which dramatically overthrew the Emergency
government in March 1977. The trouble with the author is that she does not know or
understand India. If India were to remember every atrocity perpetrated on its helpless
people, the books on history will run deep in the blood of those who tried to defend
themselves against alien and murderous barbarians, invaders whether Muslim or Christians.



And historians, especially if they are Hindus, will be called communalists, fascists, agents
provocateur and things much worse, for recording the evil dees of Muslim rulers, beginning
with Mohammad of Ghazni and ending with Aurangzeb and of Spanish and Portuguese
priests in Goa whose word was law till inquisition came to an end somewhere around 1780.
Emma Tarlo will be surprised to know that recently as March 2008, a Muslim leader, a
descendant of a former Nawab of Arcot, in Chennai, demanded that two miniatures that
showed the destruction of Hindu temples, one at Somnath and another at Mathura, by
Aurangzebs goons be removed from an exhibition because they might incite communal
passions!

Emma Tarlo insists that we should ``no longer be concerned only with what is written but
also with how it is written and what has been excluded. Wise words but impractical ones in
the Indian context. India is not the United States or Britain or France. There are events in
Indian history that are best forgotten by Indians. If one is to follow the authors advice, the
demolition of a temple to Sri Rama in Ayodhya and the building of a masjid on its historic
and holy site should not be forgotten. She should address herself to our secularists. For all
that, we should be grateful to emma Tarlo for recording a whole lot of interviews with those
affected by the Emergency. For the failure of Indians to do so, she atrributes it to a sense of
guilt on the part of authors, journalists, governments servants politicians and activists who
were unprepared for the Emergency, were caught unawares and undefended and have since
felt ashamed. May be.

It is not that there werent journalists and others who didnt fight the Emergency. Some did.
Books, too, have been written critical of the Emergency by many Indians. But
unquestionably Emma Tarlo has rendered sterling service to the cause of history by her
Delhi-specific account of what happened during those twenty odd months, through
interviews with some of the most affected people living in the slums around the capital.
What she has recorded is often more heart-rending than anything written about the
Emergency by scholars in an impersonal way. What she should remember however is that
Emergency is not forgotten. Its memory lies deep down in the sub-conscious.


Thanks and curtsy to Free Press Journal of which I am a regular reader and I find the news
paper which is devoted to the national spirit of democracy.

#8
29th April 2008, 07:38 PM
eagle
Senior Member
Senior Member of Hindustan Movement

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 139

Re: Indira Nehru Her Ghosts & Inside story of Sonia Maino Gandhi

If sonia ghandhi is from fascist family, then manybe indians need to stop following secular
ideas of congress. Also, while all this type of thinking is going on it should be noted that
large areas that now are part of this or that country used to be part of india and indians
couldl go about these places, but can't now. Also, there is some talkof bangladesh being
flooded by about 30 percent of its landmass, where do you think these people will go? And
how will india cope with this influx when it has many of its won problems. Secularism and
india should part company before it becomes much to late. Sonia ghandhi can run off to
italy if things become bad, think they will let any one else from subcontinent run of there?
By letting these things go, india is creating huge problems for itself.

Ads by OnlineBrowserAdvertisingAd Options
#9
30th April 2008, 09:57 AM

purushottam
Senior Member
Senior Member of Hindustan Movement

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: indore. m.p.
Posts: 1,733

Re: Indira Nehru Her Ghosts & Inside story of Sonia Maino Gandhi

What is required is to save the nation from bootlickers, flatterers and sycophants like
Arjunsingh, Digvijayasing and Pranab Mukherjee and company. Otherwise it is not possible
to do any thing.

#10
30th April 2008, 01:41 PM

gumnaam
Senior Member
Senior Member of Hindustan Movement

Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 121

Re: Indira Nehru Her Ghosts & Inside story of Sonia Maino Gandhi

Eagle: Congress claims to be secular but its idea of secularism is to please only the muslims
and promote the muslims so that they vote for congress in the election. Is that being
secular? Secular means to belive in equality and no discrimination on the basis if religion.
UPA advocated exatcly that and wanted government posts and other perks fixed for
muslims.

Manmohan Singh said that he was having sleepless nights when a muslim guy was held in
Australia for terrorism charges. The same Pm doesnt have sleepless nights when christian
missionaries forcefully try n convert poor people. The same Pm doesnt get sleepless nights
when France bans the turban and he doesnt even take up the matter with french president
who visited India recently. The same Pm doesnt get sleepless nights when an Indian in
Pakistani prison is going to be hanged.

UPA is a spineless except for a few good ministers but the vision is corrupted.

UNPA is a collection of theives. Its the bigest joke in India and they have a very bright
chance of ruling india in the next election. I wont be shocked if i see a mulayam singh PM.

NDA: well its infighting and not quite focussed.

BJP alone: No vision. Weak leadership of Advani who is now past his prime.

btw BSP's elephant is Dancing while Communists are busy eating india like termites.



1. Nehru's Family ::::: Why Did Indira Abort her Third Son (to be)?
http://www.swordoftruth.com/swordoft...wdiahtstb.html


A. Ghosh
Why Did Indira Abort her Third Son (to be)?

(Foreword: In order to fully comprehend the nitty gritty of this write up, it is advisable that our readers read up from the
old archives of the Sword of Truth web-site. There is an article there titled SHE which will throw considerable light on the
matter we are going to discuss. However, there are some more articles (ten in fact) which might help in the understanding
of the enormity of the situation. They are:

(1) A Glimpse at the Seldom Discussed Son of Nehru;

(2) A Tale of Two Lals;

(3) Indira-Jawahar Samvad;

(4) More on the Nehru Dynasty;

(5) Nawab Khan's Grandson Rajiv Gandhi's Islamic Roots;

(6) Nehru's Conduct That Gave Away His Islamic Roots;

(7) Nehrus: Where Did They Come From?

(8) Prabhupada on Nehru's Incarnation;

(9) Ruling by Fooling;

(10) The Story of Gangadhar, Father of Motilal.

Indira was an extraordinarily sexy girl. In fact she had been always on the 'prowl' for sex and was never under parental
control. Mother Kamala Nehru was in fact a nonentity in the Nehru household constantly insulted and driven into a corner
by the two sisters-in-law, Naan or Vijaylakshmi and the second daughter Krishna (who eventually became Krishna
Hutheesingh). The father, Jawahar was never in the picture. He was too busy with his own political activities and pursuit of
women of all kinds, be it an Edwina Mountbatten or a Hindu nun named Shraddha-mata.

Unbeknown to everyone outside, Jawahar never consummated his wedding with this 'not so accomplished girl' from the
vale of Kashmir. One might ask how come then that she gave birth to Indira Priyadarshini, whom Kamala loved very very
much? Well, the truth of the matter is that the only person who had a few decent words for Kamala was Manzur Ali, the
son of Mubarak Ali. The Alis were very close to the Nehrus and Manzur Ali, an accomplished man educated in Britain, was
sorry for Kamala. And it came to pass that eventually, Manzur Ali (a Shia' man like his father Mubarak Ali), fathered Indira.
Incidentally, it might be mentioned here that Mubarak Ali and NOT Motilal, had sired Jawahar. And hence, Manzur Ali and
Jawahar Nehru were siblings.

It is Indira's oversexed nature that had prevented her from completing her studies in London as well as in Bolpur, near
Calcutta. In both places, she was too busy with her sexual proclivities and could not properly complete her education. In
Oxford, she was told to leave the college for non-performance. At Shantiniketan she was found with a European professor
in a compromising position in his bedroom (in flagrante delicto) and Gurudev himself wrote to Jawahar to fly down from
Delhi and take his daughter back to his place. At the time, so goes the story, the Gurudev had told Jawahar that his
humble university (Vishwabharati) could not handle his daughter, as her demands were too high for Bolpur. That was the
end of Indira's formal education.

But that would not be a true evaluation of Indira's capabilities. She was extremely intelligent but not so industrious. She
lived in Geneva where her sick mother, suffering from tuberculosis, was undergoing a long treatment in a hospital. In that
short period, Indira mastered quite a bit of conversational French (they speak French in Geneva). Later, much later, as the
Prime Minister of India, she was once invited by France's General de Gaulle at the Elysee Palace; there Indira had
impressed the President of France enormously, as had been privately acknowledged by the President of France himself.
Apparently, de Gaulle had predicted great things for Indira in the future as India's leader.

It may be mentioned here that there was a time when the relation between the father and the daughter was very strained.
It took place when Indira had made up her mind to 'nikaah' Nawab Khan's good-for-nothing son, Firoz. They got 'nikaahed'
in a mosque in London and it was to make things smoother, the wily Gandhi, suggested the name change, from Khan to
Gandhi, supposedly a Parsi name. Otherwise, things could have gone haywire. The entire Nehru family, specially Kamala
Nehru had always been totally against Indira's marriage with Firoz, a stupid man.

It was then that Indira told her father that she would like to leave India and settle down abroad with Firoz. At that Jawahar
lost his temper and said loudly that she should know that Indira was NOT Jawahar's son. That by such threats Indira was
not going to frighten her father. Now, how do we know that? This father-daughter converstaion took place in Jawahar's
office in New Delhi. Next to Jawahar's office was another office occupied by a Muslim gentleman named Mobarak Mazdur,
also a barrister. In later years Mobarak Mazdur migrated to Calcutta and settled in the Park Circus area, where I had gone
specifically to meet him and discuss ths subject of father-daughter quarrel of the time. It was only then that it transpired
that Indira was NOT Jawahar's daughter and the name of Manzur Ali cropped up later. Mr. Mobarak Mazdur was fully
conversant with the entire father-daughter conversation but he did not divulge it at the time. When I met Mobarak Mazdur
(it was a few years before his death), I found Mr. Mazdur extremely annoyed with Jawahar and he poured fourth his
contempt for the so called Kashmiri Brahmin which exceeded my wildest expectations.

It is true that Nawab Khan had married a Parsi woman but her family name was NOT Gandhi. Also, she had changed her
faith to Islam at the time of her 'nikaah' with Nawab Khan, as is often the custom with India's Mohammedans. It was
circulated to the people (mostly for the consumption of the Hindus) in India that by virtue of the fact that Nawab Khan's
wife was a Parsi, Firoz too could be considered a Parsi and Parsis are in fact quasi Hindus and Nehru arranged a Vedic
wedding between Indira and Firoz. The fact of Nawab Khan's Parsi wife's change of religion was brushed aside and Firoz
was painted as a non-Mohammedan. All this, just to make the 'nikaah' a little more acceptable to the larger mostly Hindu
public. After his death, Firoz had been cremated like the Hindus and not buried in the Islamic fashion. It is a pity that by
doing so we lost all options for a DNA test.

Contd...
2. The Following Likes this post:
vivsa44 (January 18th, 2012)
3. July 24th, 2005, 08:49 PM#2
jitendershooda

Achievements:

Login to view details.
Nehru's Family ::::: Why Did Indira Abort her Third Son (to be)?
Contd...

Obviously, the argument is false. If it were not, then, the son of Sharmila Tagore, the Mohammedan wife to be of Pataudi,
who is called by the name of Saif (or sword) Ali should have been a Hindu Brahmin. Sharmila Tagore too had been
'nikaahed' by the Mohammedan Pataudi AFTER having converted her to Islam, her new name being Ayesha Sultana. How
about the two children of the genuine Parsi woman of a renowned Mumbai family, Honey Irani, sister of Daisy Irani. Javed
Akhtar 'nikaahed' her but we still don't know her Mohammedan name after conversion to Islam. Both her children, a boy
and a girl were given Arabic names following Islamic custom, Forhan for the boy and Joya for the girl. Not only that; when
Javed Akhtar who had been playing with the notorious Shabana gal under the pretext of producing the 'Tumhari Amrita'
one-woman drama and finally decided to 'talaq' Honey Irani, the most unholy operation was done quietly, quietly because
none of the secular media even mentioned about the criminal act. Honey Irani, the mother in her twilight years was denied
the company of her two children while the rascal Javed married Shabana openly under the protection of the diabolical
Muslim Personal law. In accordance with the laws of the Sharia, Javed kept custody of both their children thus leaving the
unhappy mother Honey Irani, all alone, in her old age. Javed, in the mean time, 'nikaahed' Shabana. Such is the situation
of our Dharma-Rajya today and no doubt the culprits are having their final judgment in the most horrible ways: self-
provoked fatal accident (in the case of Sanjiv aka Sanjay), slaughter (in the case of Indira Priayadarshini or Maimuna
Begum as she was reported to have been named after her 'nikaah' with Firoz Khan aka Gandhi), pulverization (in the case
of Rajiv at that election meet in South India, by a Catholic lady), the old Gandhi had already met his death in the hands of
Nathuram; and of course in the case of Jawahar himself who died an unexpected death. He died of a self-inflicted malady
called syphilis. I believe this is what happens when the leaders play with the honest sentiments of the people of the
country and cheat the nation. It is quite clear now, after the fact, that it was the Islamic ancestry of Jawahar and Indira
that was primarily responsible for Jawahar's refusal to the Indian army to get back the lost areas of Kashmir to the tribals
when the troubles first started in 1947, and Indira's handing over the 93,000 Paki troops to Pakistan after the Bangladesh
war in 1971. Indira never brought up the subject of genocide of unarmed Hindu men, women and children in Islamic
Bangladesh in 1971).

Let us now go back to the original story. In the artcle titled SHE, M.O. Mathai (the then private secretary of Jawahar,
hailing from South India, of Catholic faith) writes that Indira had two sons before she became pregnant again. He also tells
us in his article that this third baby was aborted and the relevant details are provided in the article SHE by Mathai himself.

Those among our readers who would have the time and energy to do some private investigation can find out that the first
son of Indira, Rajiv, was fathered by Firoz. After the birth of Rajiv, when Firoz tried to poison Indira by pouring powdered
glass in her milk (all details are provided in the article SHE), the conjugal relations between Indira and Firoz terminated.
The question arises, who then sired Sanjeev or Sanjay? It was Mohammad Yunus, a long time resident in the Nehru
household. One needs to procure a copy of Yunus' book titled: PERSONS, PASSIONS AND POLITICS (Vikas Publishing
House, Ghaziabad). It is in Mohammad Yunus' place that Sanjay had been circumcised within a week of the baby's birth
under the pretext that the baby suffered from 'phimosis', a common but wrong excuse. Rajiv had been circumcised in
Firoz's place, also in Islamic fashion. Indira was party to that function, the same Indira who would tell M.O. Mathai that she
would hate to have a Hindu as her husband.

There is something else that needs airing. Indira had hired Mohammad Yunus in the Foreign Office. A great deal of Yunus'
escapades is mentioned in Yunus' book. Yunus' son's name was Adil Shahryar. He was arrested by the US anti-corruption
department on charges of importing illegal substance and put in US prison for felony and was given a sentence of 35
years. All these years, Yunus had been biding his time and as soon as Rajiv became the prime minister (perhaps the
dumbest prime minister India has ever had!), Mohammed Yunus showed his true colors. He told Rajiv that he did not know
how, but Rajiv had to get the release of Adil Shahriyar. Otherwise, Yunus threatened to publicly release the Netaji papers
of which Yunus had been made the custodian by Nehru himself while still alive (which Yunus still is and the Indian public
has still not a clue about the Netaji papers!) Eventually, Rajiv did get the release of Adil Shahryar by going right up to
Ronald Reagan under the pretext of conducting the FESTIVAL OF INDIA campaign. It is not easy to visualize Rajiv to be
such a smart man. No doubt that there is a coterie of highly influential, intelligent but anti-national or treasonous men and
women, I suspect leftists and Mohammedans, operating inside India to advise men like Rajiv, that need to be exposed to
the nation!

Now comes the final question: why did Indira abort her third son? This son, if he had been allowed to be born and to grow
up like the other two, no doubt he would have looked quite different from his elder half brothers, Rajiv and Sanjay. Why?
For the simple reason that both the other fathers, Firoz and Yunus were of different, in other words, of North Indian
descent while M.O. Mathai was from South India. Naturally, if this third baby had come to this world, he would have looked
quite different from his other two brothers, although in every likelihood he would have been much smarter than Rajiv and
Sanjiv or Sanjay. Indira could not face the possibility of the public embarrassment that could have taken place and as a
rotten mother, opted for abortion of the baby. No doubt, a part of her punishment when Satwant Singh and Beant Singh
shot her down, stemmed from this acton of Indira's!

And hence, the smart Indira put a stop to the situation from developing. Although in his article SHE, Mathai does not spell
it out, his heart surely had broken when he discovered the truth but did not mention it to the readers. Obviously, Mathai
left the readers to discover the real reason for the sacrifice of his son in the hands of this virago, who would order
wholesale slaughter of innocent men, women and children on a Gurpurab Day, at the holy temple of the HARI MANDIR
SAHIB at Amritsar. However sad we might be, let us console ourselves that the revenge of our God has been quite
adequte. Not only did He claim His pound of flesh by a similar punishment of the mother but also of the son. The curse of
the Nehru dynasty brought upon us due to our shortsightedness and mindless hero-worship when the 'hero' had already
been replaced by our enemies with all outward false and unholy parapharnelia to pass them off as Kashmiri Brahmins;
Brahmins who would learn Persian and Urdu and not Sanskrit and an Indian homegrown language; who would be invited
by Saudi Arabia to visit Mecca during the Haj ceremony! How blind can we be?

From another Link :-

NEHRU DYNASTY
______________________________________________

GHIYASUDDIN GHAZI (Name changed to GANGA DHAR to
escape British army). His son was
MOTI LAL NEHRU
_______________________________________________

MOTILAL married and his first wife and son died
at childbirth.
MOTILAL and his second wife THUSSU (name changed
to SWAROOP RANI) had three children
THUSSU with MOBARAK ALI (Motilal's Boss) was the
first son JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU (he was circumcised)
MOTILAL AND THUSSU had two daughters by name NAN
(also called Vijaya Lakshmi) & KRISHNA
MOTILAL had also two ******* sons out of Muslim
women by name SHEIK ABDULLA &SYUD HUSSAIN
______________________________________________

VIJAYA LAKSHMI eloped with SYUD HUSSAIN (half
brother and sister) and had a girl CHANDRALEKHA
VIJAYALAKSHMI MARRIED R.S. PANDIT and had two
more girls NAYANTARA & RITA
JAWAHARLAL NEHRU married KAMALA KAUL (marriage
never consummated)
JAWAHARLAL had an affair with SARADDHA MATA
(assumed name) and had a son given away to an
orphanage in BANGALORE
JAWAHARLAL had an affair with LADY MOUNTBATTEN
but no children
JAWAHARLAL HAD MANY AFFAIRS and in the end died
of SYPHILIS
KAMALA KAUL had an affair with MANZUR ALI (who is
son of Mobark Ali who fathered Nehru also) and
their daughter is INDIRA PRIYADARSINI NEHRU
KAMALA KAUL had an affair with FEROZ KHAN (son of
Nawab Khan who supplied liquor to their house)
but no children

Contd...
4. The Following Likes this post:
vivsa44 (January 18th, 2012)
5. July 24th, 2005, 08:50 PM#3
jitendershooda

Achievements:

Login to view details.
Nehru's Family ::::: Why Did Indira Abort her Third Son (to be)?
Contd....

______________________________________________

INDIRA was found in the bed with her GERMAN
TEACHER at Shantiniketan
INDIRA PRIYADARSINI nikhahed as per Islamic rites
FEROZ KHAN after converting herself to Islam. Her
new name was MAIMUNA BEGUM and both had changed
their name to fool the public of India on the
advice of Ghandi by an affidavit in a court to
INDIRA GHANDI and FEROZ GANDHI
INDIRA and FEROZ had one son by name RAJIV GHANDI
(as per Islamic rites he was circumcised)
INDIRA had an affair with MOHAMMED YOUNUS and had
a second son SANJIV GHANDI (later the name
changed to SANJAY GHANDI to escape prosecution in
UK for car theft. He was circumcised as per
Islamic rites)
INDIRA had an affair with M.O. MATHAI (Nehru's
steno) and a son was aborted
INDIRA had an affair with DHIRENDRA BRAMMACHARI
but no children
INDIRA had an affair with DHINESH SINGH but no
children
FEROZ had an affair with TARAKESWARI SINHA
FEROZ had an affair with MEHMUNA SULTANA
FEROZ had an affair with SUBHADRA JOSHI and many
others.
______________________________________________

RAJIV GHANDI converted to a Christian Catholic
and changed the name to ROBERTO and married the
Italian Catholic Christian by name SONIA MAINO
(Sonia Maino was on the pay roll of KGB, the
Russian spy agency which presented her in front
of Rajiv Ghandi) and had one daughter and one son
by name BIANKA and RAUL. For the Indian public
these names are presented as PRIANKA and RAHUL.
6. The Following Likes this post:
vivsa44 (January 18th, 2012)
7. July 24th, 2005, 09:41 PM#4
rkumar

Achievements:

Login to view details.
Bhai Hooda.

In modern days of internet there are so many websites which have their own version of everything..Let us not be carried
away by this propaganda. This so called Mr Ghosh is talking as if he was shadowing everyone personally. There is so much
**** on ineternet and one has to be very careful about its authenticity.

RK^2
Last edited by rkumar; July 24th, 2005 at 11:19 PM.
8. July 26th, 2005, 10:14 AM#5
ramksehrawat

Login to view details.
Though Indira was not a very clean person as without fire smoke does not exist. Of course she had several relationships
and even her so called close friends have talked of this. But this is too much and seem to be the figment of imagination.
Isse kahte hain "rai ka pahad banana".
JAT - Justice And Truth
9. August 2nd, 2005, 09:49 PM#6
jitendershooda

Achievements:

Login to view details.
Originally Posted by ramksehrawat
Though Indira was not a very clean person as without fire smoke does not exist. Of course she had several relationships and even her so
called close friends have talked of this. But this is too much and seem to be the figment of imagination. Isse kahte hain "rai ka pahad
banana".
Bilkul Sahi kahete ho Sehrawat ji ... NEHRU ..INDIRA were not of clean image .... may be this list seems to be imaginatory
a bit, but reflects on their real pictures a lot ...
Some readers may not know that before 1993, the year before the web browser became available, the most popular place
to talk was usenet.
Most posters already left usenet groups but a few veterans of old era still post. Dr. Jay Maharaj of HI is an old old pal and
one of the prolific contributors and an excellent person. Harmony is dedicated and noble.

This article was recently posted and we present it here for information:

Sonia's power is her illgotten wealth

From: harmony - view profile


the kgb revealed that bags of monies were routinely brought into indira
gandhi's house, and also tons of monies were deposited into accounts in
britiain and swisserland - the two countries who love to grow fat on the
back of poor peoples' toil - run by rajiv gandhi while running around with
sonia. so, what made the gandhis, now sonia, so powerful despite being so
mediocre? it's the money, stupid. the loot. the reason the loot was not
blown whistle on is that indira gandhi, who looted out of a sense of
insecurity and isolation, was genuinely powerful whom nobody dare question.

July 6, 2006
The American Thinker

Sonia Gandhi's Reluctant War on Terror
September 21st, 2005

[The first of two articles]

India, along with Pakistan, is one of the key battlegrounds in the struggle
against Islamist terror for the future of civilization. The largest
democracy in the world, India has suffered its own severe Jihadist terror
attacks, albeit little-reported in American mass media. However, the
position and influence of one person, Italian-born and female, may adversely
constrain India's ability to play its role to the fullest degree in
combatting this worldwide threat.

Sonia Gandhi is one of India's most influential politicians, but her power
and positions are little-known overseas. She is the leader of the Congress
Party that leads the coalition government presently in power in India.
Though not a formal member of the government headed by Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh, she is probably India's most influential politician.

While Pakistan's General Musharraf is comparatively well-known to Americans,
what little they may know about Sonia Gandhi is limited to the fairy tale
romance of her marriage to Rajiv Gandhi, the scion of India's most powerful
political dynasty. Considering her position in Indian politics and India's
key role in the war on terror, this is a highly unsatisfactory situation.
This article and its second part are written to fill this void.

According to official records, Sonia Gandhi was born Antonia Maino in
December 1946 to working class parents in Orbassano, Italy, an industrial
suburb of Turin. Very little is known of her early life before she met Rajiv
Gandhi in Cambridge in 1965, and married him in 1968. They both moved to New
Delhi and took up residence with Rajiv's mother Indira Gandhi who was then
prime minister of India.

Rajiv, then working as a commercial pilot, seemed to have no political
ambitions at the time. Indira Gandhi's assassination in 1984 at the hands of
Sikh militants drastically changed the picture. It vaulted Rajiv to the
position of India's prime minister as his mother's successor. Sonia suddenly
found herself one of the most privileged women in the world.

Rajiv Gandhi's five-year term as prime minister was rocked by corruption
scandals over kickbacks in what is known as the Bofors deal, involving the
purchase of howitzers for the Indian Army. The scandal resulted in his
defeat in the 1989 elections. His administration was also embroiled in a
costly military adventure in Sri Lanka. It was Rajiv Gandhi's Bay of Pigs,
but with a deadly outcome. In May 1991 he was blown up by Sri Lankan LTTE
suicide bombers, non-Islamist terrorists who long have bedeviled South Asia.

The loss of two of her closest relatives, her husband Rajiv and her
mother-in-law Indira Gandhi, to sectarian violence seems to have left a
permanent scar on her and may account for her extreme reticence on the
subject of Jihadi terrorism.

Her husband's untimely death left Sonia Gandhi extremely wealthy. The true
extent of her wealth became known only when the Soviet archives were thrown
open following the collapse of the Soviet Union. KGB archives revealed that
as far back as 1982, when Indira Gandhi was still prime minister, Soviet
trading agencies were channeling funds into a company controlled by her son
and future Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.

This was brought to light by the Harvard Russian scholar Yvgenia Albats in
her book The State Within A State: The KGB and Its Hold on Russia. The Swiss
newsmagazine Schweizer Illustrierte (November 11, 1991) provided more
details. Citing newly-opened KGB records, it reported that Sonia Gandhi,
widow of the former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, was controlling a secret
account worth 2.5 billion Swiss francs (about 2 billion dollars at current
exchange rates ) in a Swiss bank in her minor son's name. This was reported
also by the Indian columnist A.G. Noorani in 1998.

In addition to assets in foreign banks worth in the billions of dollars,
Sonia Gandhi controls at least as much within India, in the form of trusts,
funds and foundations in the names of Nehru and Gandhi. Soon after Rajiv's
assassination, a sympathetic nation voted her a billion rupees (about 22
million dollars at today's exchange rate) to set up a foundation in her
husband's memory. All this gives her the power to dispense political favors
and patronage on a vast scale.

Sonia Gandhi today has two major assets: identification with the greatest
political dynasty in India - the Nehru-Gandhis - and enormous wealth. She is
not related to Mahatma Gandhi. Rajiv was Nehru's grandson. The Gandhi name
comes from Nehru's daughter Indira's marriage to Feroz Gandhi, unrelated to
the Mahatma. The impact of the Nehru-Gandhi name in India, especially to
earlier generations, may be compared to that of a hypothetical
Washington-Jefferson dynasty to Americans 200 years ago.

The source of Sonia Gandhi's power today is her great wealth rather than the
name. The Congress Party she heads is not now the force it once was in
India. Her own performance after she entered politics ten years ago has been
lackluster. She twice tried to assume power as prime minister but failed on
both occasions.

In 2004, after President Abdul Kalam declined to invite her to form the
government, she claimed that she is not interested in power but only in
serving the country. This is belied by facts. In 1999, when the government
lost its majority, she approached the then President K.R. Narayanan with the
false claim that she had enough support in the parliament to form a
government. The President rejected her claim.

Following her second failure, she chose the distinguished economist and
former chief of the Reserve Bank (India's Federal Reserve) Manmohan Singh to
head the coalition government. But even without official position, as the
leader of the largest coalition partner, she wields considerable power in
the government headed by her hand-picked Prime Minister.

Sonia Gandhi's main responsibility is to keep the coalition together. This
means keeping her alliance partners happy. As a result of this peculiar
arrangement, she finds herself in the situation of power without
responsibility and responsibility without power. Within the Congress Party,
she has total power but no responsibility, as she is not a member of the
government. As the coordinator of the ruling coalition, she has the
responsibility for keeping it together, but with no power over the
Communists and other non-Congress parties and leaders.

Thus, for all her enormous resources, she is unable to control other members
of the coalition. They can at any time withdraw support and bring the
government down. This means she cannot afford to take a stand against her
principal allies who keep the coalition afloat. Her largest allies are the
Communists and regional satraps from the two most populous states- Bihar and
Uttar Pradesh. These two states contain significant Muslim populations. They
can exert pressure on Mrs. Gandhi through their power brokers whose support
she cannot do without.

In a strange way, Mrs. Gandhi finds herself in a position quite similar to
General Musharraf's. Just as Musharraf has to keep his Islamist allies
happy, Sonia Gandhi too feels that she has to keep her Muslim power brokers
happy in order for the government to survive. She and her family now enjoy
security guards provided by the government. She will lose this protection
once the coalition government falls. This has made her soft in the face of
provocation by Islamic fundamentalist forces. This vulnerability and its
potential impact on the global war on terror is something that Americans
need to know and understand. Part 2 will examine this influence of private
citizen Sonio Gandhi.

ah

From: are we on same page?

the swiss should return all the money hoarded in sonia's account back to
indian treasury. it's a shame that swiss do these black crimes hiding behind
white (snow-leden) alps.
i think united nations should force swiss to live a honest moral life that
won't accept unaccounted money from worlds' criminals.


From: Dr. Jai Maharaj

Sonia is but one instrument of the Christian colonialism still in progress.
When Bharat is rightfully returned to the true Bharatiya, Sonia and her gang
will not be a part of the big picture.

Jai Maharaj
Om Shanti
The old usenet group of India at soc culture has at times very good posts that are usually from various sources.
Irrespective of source, Sandhya jain writes it clearly and care or not it does concern us all, Hindu, Sikh, Muslim or Christian
Indians. We all are being used as raw material.

This article was posted on Jul 26

Sonia declares war on Hindus after Mumbai Blasts

From: imem

Sonia's 'Iraq war' on Hindus
By Sandhya Jain

In the western world, politics is more about serving covert, mainly
illicit economic interests, than about meeting the genuine aspirations
of the people. The most glaring example of this, of course, is the
September Eleven incident in New York, which enabled President George
Bush to bomb Afghanistan into the Stone Age, set up a puppet regime in
Kabul, and go on to depose the Iraqi President Saddam Hussain and grab
Iraq's oil-field contracts and reconstruction dollars.

Occasionally the White House remembers that Osama bin Laden is supposed
to be America's Enemy Number One, and promises to go after him. But
these pledges are perfunctory, and it is little wonder that tremendous
popular resentment is building up in the US against the war in Baghdad.
More importantly, a growing body of important Americans are finding
fairly conclusive evidence of administrative collusion and cover-up in
the events of that fateful September in 2001.

In the case of the Mumbai blasts which took over 200 lives and injured
over 700 persons, one does not suspect that either the UPA regime or
the state government were complicit in the tragedy. But their
response-in the form of UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi's
surreptitious and silent midnight visit with home minister Shivraj
Patil, the wimpish statements of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Delhi
and at the G-8 in Moscow-raise grim questions about the sincerity of
the dominant Congress party in tackling the growing menace of Islamic
terrorism.

Indeed, given the anxiety with which the Congress is wooing the Muslim
voters, with prominent cabinet ministers shamelessly blaming the Hindu
community for the attack on the RSS headquarters in Nagpur last month,
the principal concern of the government appears to be only to defuse
and pre-empt a possible Hindu reaction, rather than nab the culprits
and make their sponsors pay a political price for their misdemeanors.
The Muslim community is complaining that it is being identified
unfairly with terrorism, yet the very fact that the Jammu & Kashmir
Government dares ask Hindu pilgrims not to raise slogans like "Bharat
Mata ki jai" for fear of creating communal tension gives the game
away.

Yet even by the standards of UPA pusillanimity, the decision to ban
certain Hindu websites and blogsites-as the first concrete
governmental action in the face of such a murderous attack on civil
society-would be laughable were it not so outrageous. Like a good
western woman, Sonia Gandhi has no stomach to fight Islamic terrorism.
So she has side-stepped that issue completely and like President Bush,
concentrated upon her real target-the Hindu community!

Hence, the website of Hindu Human Rights, the group of young activists
who helped shut down the offensive exhibition of M.F. Husain in London,
has been ordered to be blocked by the UPA regime! Hussain is, of
course, one of Ms. Gandhi's favoured artists, as anyone who has been
to the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation would know. So, though the site does not
sport any religious views at all, let alone 'extreme religious
views', it has been declared unacceptable.

In all, the government has blocked about 18 websites to supposedly
check the spread of terror and hate messages on the Internet in the
wake of Mumbai's serial blasts. It is being claimed that the websites
could be used by terror groups to communicate and spread provocative
messages. The government did not announce the ban officially, and it
was the ISP providers who confirmed receiving the site-blocking order.
The premier blog site, Blogspot.com (http://blogspot.com/)) has been
blockaded and this sent the entire blogging community into acute
disarray, as technical reasons have forced a blanket ban on all blogs,
since specific pages on the blogspot.com cannot be blocked; only the
site can be jammed.

Since the move is reminiscent of the Emergency-the anniversary of
which passed barely three weeks ago-anxious bloggers have urgently
sought (and found) solutions to the crackdown on freedom of speech. One
is to visit www.guardster.com and use the free proxy at the bottom of
the page; this will ensure that the Blog sites work without a hitch.
Additional proxy sites can be found on this site and there is also
www.econsultant.com/proxylist/index.html. One enterprising citizen has
suggested using the anti-censoring site of our friendly neighbour,
Pakistan. It seems that all blogspot blogs can be accessed at
http://pkblogs.com a site created by Pakistani bloggers to bypass
blockades by the Islamabad regime. Now that is a confidence building
measure!

It goes without saying that the extremely predatory Christian websites
such as the Joshua Project, nor the well known Islamic terrorist sites
where messages are posted after successful strikes, nor even the known
Marxist-Maoist sites have not been censored, even after the horrendous
massacre of 87 tribals who were living in a camp to facilitate the
Chattisgarh government's crackdown on the Maoist insurgents.

According to the grapevine, it is no accident that Hindu groups are
being targetted in the so-called war on terror. After Godhra, it was
said that the Hindu pilgrims from Ayodhya somehow committed mass
suicide for no apparent reason. Though security forces shot down three
assailants speeding towards the RSS headquarters in Nagpur, two cabinet
ministers had no compunctions saying that Hindus had stage-managed the
attack. The targetting of Hindu pilgrims in Kashmir is being disguised
as an exodus of 'tourists,' and now, the devastation of nearly one
thousand families (almost wholly Hindu) in Mumbai in just eleven
minutes leads to the silencing of Hindu human rights bodies.

Sonia Gandhi is moving with perfect determination in the direction she
wants to go. The Hindu community must decide if it wants to follow her
or tell her where to get off.



From: harmony

it would not surprise me if civil war revisits india. congress can care
less if india is reduced to chaos.


From: tripurant

harmony wrote:
> it would not surprise me if civil war revisits india. congress can care
> less if india is reduced to chaos.

What is this? Hindus always suffer. Now Sonia from Italy to persecute
us. When do we wake up and send her back to Italy for good?

Hey Krishna!
The old usenet group of India at soc culture has at times very good posts that are usually
from various sources. Irrespective of source, Sandhya jain writes it clearly and care or not it
does concern us all, Hindu, Sikh, Muslim or Christian Indians. We all are being used as raw
material.

This article was posted on Jul 26

Sonia declares war on Hindus after Mumbai Blasts

From: imem

Sonia's 'Iraq war' on Hindus
By Sandhya Jain

In the western world, politics is more about serving covert, mainly
illicit economic interests, than about meeting the genuine aspirations
of the people. The most glaring example of this, of course, is the
September Eleven incident in New York, which enabled President George
Bush to bomb Afghanistan into the Stone Age, set up a puppet regime in
Kabul, and go on to depose the Iraqi President Saddam Hussain and grab
Iraq's oil-field contracts and reconstruction dollars.

Occasionally the White House remembers that Osama bin Laden is supposed
to be America's Enemy Number One, and promises to go after him. But
these pledges are perfunctory, and it is little wonder that tremendous
popular resentment is building up in the US against the war in Baghdad.
More importantly, a growing body of important Americans are finding
fairly conclusive evidence of administrative collusion and cover-up in
the events of that fateful September in 2001.

In the case of the Mumbai blasts which took over 200 lives and injured
over 700 persons, one does not suspect that either the UPA regime or
the state government were complicit in the tragedy. But their
response-in the form of UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi's
surreptitious and silent midnight visit with home minister Shivraj
Patil, the wimpish statements of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Delhi
and at the G-8 in Moscow-raise grim questions about the sincerity of
the dominant Congress party in tackling the growing menace of Islamic
terrorism.

Indeed, given the anxiety with which the Congress is wooing the Muslim
voters, with prominent cabinet ministers shamelessly blaming the Hindu
community for the attack on the RSS headquarters in Nagpur last month,
the principal concern of the government appears to be only to defuse
and pre-empt a possible Hindu reaction, rather than nab the culprits
and make their sponsors pay a political price for their misdemeanors.
The Muslim community is complaining that it is being identified
unfairly with terrorism, yet the very fact that the Jammu & Kashmir
Government dares ask Hindu pilgrims not to raise slogans like "Bharat
Mata ki jai" for fear of creating communal tension gives the game
away.

Yet even by the standards of UPA pusillanimity, the decision to ban
certain Hindu websites and blogsites-as the first concrete
governmental action in the face of such a murderous attack on civil
society-would be laughable were it not so outrageous. Like a good
western woman, Sonia Gandhi has no stomach to fight Islamic terrorism.
So she has side-stepped that issue completely and like President Bush,
concentrated upon her real target-the Hindu community!

Hence, the website of Hindu Human Rights, the group of young activists
who helped shut down the offensive exhibition of M.F. Husain in London,
has been ordered to be blocked by the UPA regime! Hussain is, of
course, one of Ms. Gandhi's favoured artists, as anyone who has been
to the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation would know. So, though the site does not
sport any religious views at all, let alone 'extreme religious
views', it has been declared unacceptable.

In all, the government has blocked about 18 websites to supposedly
check the spread of terror and hate messages on the Internet in the
wake of Mumbai's serial blasts. It is being claimed that the websites
could be used by terror groups to communicate and spread provocative
messages. The government did not announce the ban officially, and it
was the ISP providers who confirmed receiving the site-blocking order.
The premier blog site, Blogspot.com (http://blogspot.com/)) has been
blockaded and this sent the entire blogging community into acute
disarray, as technical reasons have forced a blanket ban on all blogs,
since specific pages on the blogspot.com cannot be blocked; only the
site can be jammed.

Since the move is reminiscent of the Emergency-the anniversary of
which passed barely three weeks ago-anxious bloggers have urgently
sought (and found) solutions to the crackdown on freedom of speech. One
is to visit www.guardster.com and use the free proxy at the bottom of
the page; this will ensure that the Blog sites work without a hitch.
Additional proxy sites can be found on this site and there is also
www.econsultant.com/proxylist/index.html. One enterprising citizen has
suggested using the anti-censoring site of our friendly neighbour,
Pakistan. It seems that all blogspot blogs can be accessed at
http://pkblogs.com a site created by Pakistani bloggers to bypass
blockades by the Islamabad regime. Now that is a confidence building
measure!

It goes without saying that the extremely predatory Christian websites
such as the Joshua Project, nor the well known Islamic terrorist sites
where messages are posted after successful strikes, nor even the known
Marxist-Maoist sites have not been censored, even after the horrendous
massacre of 87 tribals who were living in a camp to facilitate the
Chattisgarh government's crackdown on the Maoist insurgents.

According to the grapevine, it is no accident that Hindu groups are
being targetted in the so-called war on terror. After Godhra, it was
said that the Hindu pilgrims from Ayodhya somehow committed mass
suicide for no apparent reason. Though security forces shot down three
assailants speeding towards the RSS headquarters in Nagpur, two cabinet
ministers had no compunctions saying that Hindus had stage-managed the
attack. The targetting of Hindu pilgrims in Kashmir is being disguised
as an exodus of 'tourists,' and now, the devastation of nearly one
thousand families (almost wholly Hindu) in Mumbai in just eleven
minutes leads to the silencing of Hindu human rights bodies.

Sonia Gandhi is moving with perfect determination in the direction she
wants to go. The Hindu community must decide if it wants to follow her
or tell her where to get off.



From: harmony

it would not surprise me if civil war revisits india. congress can care
less if india is reduced to chaos.


From: tripurant

harmony wrote:
> it would not surprise me if civil war revisits india. congress can care
> less if india is reduced to chaos.

What is this? Hindus always suffer. Now Sonia from Italy to persecute
us. When do we wake up and send her back to Italy for good?

Hey Krishna!
Nehru wanted army to be jettisoned, claims book

Had the Kashmir war not occurred, the Army would have been jettisoned. Well, a biography of Major General AA Jick -
Rudra of the Indian Army by Major General -Monty Palit claims so.

The book claims that Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru lost his cool when Lt General Sir Robert Lockhart, the first
commander in chief of India took a strategic plan for a Government directive on defense policy. It says that Nehru refused
a defense plan, as non-violence was the policy to be followed.

"Shortly after independence, General Lockhart as the army chief took a strategic plan to the prime minister, asking for a
government directive on the defense policy. He came back to Jick's office shell-shocked. When asked what happened, he
replied, The PM took one look at my paper and blew his top. 'Rubbish! Total rubbish!' he shouted. 'We don't need a
defense plan. Our policy is ahimsa (non-violence). We foresee no military threats. Scrap the army! The police are good
enough to meet our security needs'," Daily Times quotes the book.

According to the book, Jick thought the Kashmir war rescued the Indian Army.

"When confronted by Nehru three months later, he admitted this and added that he may have been thoughtless. Nehru
turned to him and asked the general if his sympathies were with Pakistan? Horrified, Lockhart replied, 'Mr Prime Minister if
you have to ask me that question, I have no business being the commander-in-chief of your forces. I know that there is a
boat leaving Bombay in a few days, carrying British officers and their families to England. I shall be on it'," it added.

According to the biography General Lockhart called his Military Secretary Jick Rudra subsequently, on January 26 1948,
and recommended him to look out for an heir since he had resigned from his post.
RAIBARELI IS PRIVATE PROPERTY

Keerthi Reddy

Behind the Facade of Priyanka Gandhi - The Genesis of Tyranny

"Yeh Hamara Kshetra Hai" (This is our area!) thundered the nasal voice from the campaign platform at Rae Bareli. Sound
like a mobster declaring his turf? Nope, it was the voice of the 28 year old inheritor of the Gandhi family's branded glamour
puss, the Great White Hope for a nation composed of nearly a billion "darkies", the future Empress of India's
underprivileged herself, Shrimati Priyanka Vadhra Gandhi. The Indian media has found itself a new goddess to worship.
The object of their affection is the product of the union between Rajiv and Sonia Gandhi. This election campaign has
revealed that come hell or high water, the Indian press has taken it upon itself to groom and project this 28 year old half
Italian, as the future leader of India.

Elaborate mythologies and biographies have already been concocted for future editorials about her. The past months have
exposed this little game of the newspapers as everyday's headlines were peppered with effusive eulogies in praise of
Priyanka. From her choice of Sari on a given day to her "striking" resemblance to Indira, to the number of Jalebis that she
consumed at Achhe Lal's shop, every minute boring moment of Priyanka Vadhra's life seems to be the subject of
unmitigated interest to her devout Bhakts from the Indian Press. It doesn't seem to make any difference to them that
the general public could give two hoots about the color of Priyanka's Saree. So it's pretty clear what the motivations of the
press are, to act as the manipulators who are preparing the ground for Priyanka's crowning. Given the utter failure of
Sonia Gandhi to project herself as a viable political leader of the Indian masses, the agenda seems to have shifted now to
focus on Priyanka the hope of the future for Congress.

Given the fact that someday we may well be faced with the prospect of having to suffer Priyanka Vadhra as a Prime
ministerial candidate, it behooves us to investigate further and do a little analysis on what this young woman is truly like
starting with herfamily background.
It's quite apparent that Priyanka is representative of the newest generation of the Gandhi family which has ruled Indian
politics for over fifty years. The legacy of the Gandhi family is also unquestionable, beginning with the Socialist nightmares
created for India by her great grandfather, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru in the 50's, the overwhelming dictatorial powerlust of
her grandmotherIndira Gandhi and uncle Sanjay Gandhi in the 70's, all the way to the Corrupt greed of her father Rajiv
Gandhi in the 80's and subsequently the unbounded ambitions of her Catholic Italian mother Sonia Gandhi during the 90's.
Given the mind boggling range of criminal activities practiced by her antecedents, Priyanka sure has a tough act to follow.
But she has already proven her family credentials by following the Gandhi family tradition of failing to graduate from
college.

The tradition of illiteracy in the Gandhi family dates all the way back to 90 years ago when Jawaharlal Nehru was somehow
able to manage an academic degree from an accredited college in London. Since then the members of the list of famous
Gandhis from Indira, Feroze, Rajiv, Sanjay, Sonia and Maneka never had the ability to get an academic degree. Priyanka
herself dropped out of Delhi University a few years ago. The Indian media however has always maliciously falsified this fact
about her qualifications. Press report after press report always casually mentions that "Priyanka graduated from Delhi
University a few years ago, following which she taught briefly at a Delhi school for children with spastic paralysis."
Priyanka's aunt Maneka Gandhi has directly contradicted this falsification by stating on record that not a single member of
the Gandhi family (including Priyanka) has been able to get a degree in the past 90 years.

Considering the immensely wealthy empire that the Gandhi empire has built via all sorts of fraudulent schemes which have
robbed India of billions, it is only natural that Priyanka has grown up with despotic tendencies. She was a pampered, spoilt
brat who received any thing that her heart desired and created the impression early in her psyche , that the being a
Gandhi is somehow "superior" to being just any ordinary mortal. This tendencies were coupled with her mother Sonia's
bigoted sense of superiority over Indians. It is a fact that Sonia Gandhi maintained her closest friendships with only
"White" Europeans who were present in India for the sake of business or on diplomatic missions. Another fact that
distinctly influenced Priyanka is the fact that Sonia Maino always has been and still is an exceedingly devout Roman
Catholic.
Priyanka's father Rajiv had to convert to Catholicism himself in order to marry Sonia. This is because Sonia is a baptized
Catholic and the Catholic Church would not solemnize her wedding to Rajiv unless he specifically converted to Christianity.
That Priyanka was raised in a strictly Christian setting is apparent from her choice of husband and her voluntary
participation in missionary work for the Missionaries of Charity. Priyanka's earliest role models include her imperious
grandmother Indira Gandhi, her father Rajiv Gandhi and the most unabashed proselytizer of them all, Mother Teresa.
Years ago Rajiv had commented about Priyanka, "She is strong-willed like my mother,". This comparison with a
grandmother who treated India as her own personal fiefdom, was to leave a lingering impression on Priyanka. Her physical
resemblance to Indira Gandhi as well as similarity of certain mannerisms had her convinced that like Indira, it was
somehow Priyanka's destiny to "save" India, through her innate leadership.

By her own admission, Priyanka has said " Ever since I was a little girl Indiraji was a role model. But as I grew up I
became more and more influenced by my father. But I have consciously tried not to model myself on anyone. I am me.
Priyanka Gandhi." The traces of conceit are already self-evident in her assertive retort that she is a unique individual with
power and potency in her own right. In contrast to Priyanka's assertiveness, one of her only two competitor's to the
Gandhi mantle, her younger brother Rahul displays an awkwardness and the type of submissive behavior, which does not a
leader make. In comparison to Priyanka's strong and colorful demeanor, Rahul looks like an insipid hanger on. Much of his
lack of self-esteem can be attributed to the explosive secret that Rahul Gandhi is in fact mentally retarded. His mental
handicap has been well hidden by the Gandhi family and the unconscionable press.
Rahul was in fact refused permission to some of Delhi's top institutions because of his mental handicap. A frustrated
Gandhi family had then pulled strings at Harvard, where a quota of seats is always available for a price to the rich and
famous. Since then Rahul was bundled off to the US and later UK much as his father Rajiv Gandhi had been packed off to
Cambridge in the hopes that he would somehow muddle through an academic degree. Rajiv of course never passed a
single test at Cambridge and instead of bringing home a degree came back with an equally illiterate Catholic au pair of
Italian extraction as his wife. Following in his father's footsteps, Rahul too has come back without a degree to his name,
and a fair skinned South American Catholic girlfriend on his arm.

To Priyanka therefore the fact that her brother Rahul hardly counts has competition has further strengthened her self-
glorification and firm belief that she is the only legitimate heir to the crown of Congress and India's leadership. Her mother
Sonia has encouraged this quality at every step knowing full well that Priyanka possesses the very traits which alienate
Sonia from the masses, chief among them being Priyanka's ability to talk fluently in Hindi. Priyanka's qualifications for her
trusteeship in the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation are laughingly listed as "her experience as a teacher and educationist". The
Foundation is of course nothing but a front for Sonia and kids to siphon off millions of rupees from the Indian taxpayer.
They have refused to allow their accounts to be audited for over five years. Another alarming clue to the personality of
Priyanka can be ascertained from her mother, Sonia's beliefs. In her book "Rajiv" (which she co wrote with Priyanka) Sonia
focuses on the divine right of this family, in its destiny to serve India, to serve it as "sacrificial goats" as she puts it. Sonia
believes to the point of superstition that any member of the Gandhi family who enters politics starting with her husband,
would be killed. She wrote that Rajiv Gandhi was offered as a sacrificial lamb and that she fought like a tigress but failed
from preventing him being served on the altar of the national cause. No doubt Sonia's desire to see herself and her
children as martyr's stems from her Catholic beliefs. It is a horrifying thought that Priyanka must have absorbed such
perverse self-aggrandizement about her own role as a martyr for the sake of India.

This belief in her destined superiority was reinforced with the recent focus of media attention on Priyanka. she basked in
the limelight as the reporters fell over each other in their eagerness to describe the "youth, beauty and fearlessness of her
manner". Page upon page was written to attest to her immense popularity with the common public. Paeans of praise were
penned about her disarming ability to "reach out and touch the hearts of the poorest" in what can only be termed as the
natives' repulsive display of adoration for the white-skinned goddess. Her husband Robert Vadhra and sister in law
Michelle, both devout Catholics have jumped on the bandwagon, accompanying her wherever she goes.

Priyanka's wedding itself was one of the biggest exercises in fooling the public. Her husband Robert Vadhra is a baptized
devout Catholic, the son of Rajinder and Maureen Vadhra who are both confirmed Catholics. This detail can be attested
from the fact that the Delhi archdiocese had made a big ruckus about the fact that Priyanka was not baptized when they
sought permission to get married in a Catholic ceremony at the Sacred Heart Cathedral of Delhi. Robert had to produce his
Baptism papers and Priyanka had to produce proof of her conversion to Christianity, before they could be married in the
Catholic ceremony at Sacred Heart Cathedral at 10.30 am on February 5, 1997. This was hastily followed by a publicity
exercise where the already married couple was shown being wedded in "traditional Hindu style" on February 18, 1997 at
Sonia's Bungalow on 10 Janpath. The fact that this was a completely superficial and fake ceremony to fool the Indian
public into believing the myth that the Gandhi family follows traditional Hindu customs, was given away by the glittering
wedding ring on Priyanka's finger. There is no custom of wearing a wedding ring among Hindus.

Robert Vadhra himself is the perfect foil to Priyanka's ambitiousness. He is a chubby, college dropout, usually termed as a
"non-descript jewelry exporter from Meerut". The truth however is quite different. Robert is the heir to a family business
which has made its fortune through the illicit secret smuggling of rare Hindu and Buddhist Antiques. His family business,
Artex (Stands for Art Exports) is famous for its stock of antique brassware and jewelry, the majority of which,
unbeknownst to the Indian public has been smuggled from national heritage sites and museum collections. Sonia Gandhi
herself is an old hand at the antiques trade, her own house being a testament to this interest. Thousands of rare antiques
are smuggled from India, many of them come from the Indira Gandhi Foundation which has a priceless collection of
paintings and antique objects of art.

Given her frightening proclivity to emulate her imperious grandmother and the imperious display of authority that Priyanka
often indulges in, it is clear that she considers herself the destined heir to the throne of power. Her recent outburst in Rae
Bareli against her own uncle Arun Nehru, is proof enough of the fact that Priyanka Gandhi will not let principles or ethical
proprieties stand in her naked thirst for power. The vitriolic tone of her speech in Rae Bareli is chilling. In bitter accent,
Priyanka exhorted the crowd that

"Mujhe aap se ek shikayat hai. Mere pita ke mantri-mandal mein rehte hue jisne gaddari ki, bhai ki peeth mein chura mara
- jawab dijiye - aise aadmi ko aap ne yahan ghusne kaise diya? Unki yahan aane ki himmat kaise hui? (I have a complaint
against you (the people). A man who was a traitor in my father's Cabinet, who stabbed him in the back - answer me - how
dare you let such a man set foot in this constituency? How dare he have the insolence to come here?"
When she noticed the audience's shocked expression, Priyanka hastily went into her well orchestrated explanation. "Yahan
aane se pehle maine apni maa se baat ki thi. Maa ne kaha kisi ki burai mat karna. Magar main jawan hoon, dil ki baat aap
se na kahun to kisse kahun? (I spoke to my mother before coming here. She told me not to speak badly of anyone. But I
am an adult, and if I cannot say what is in my heart to you, then to whom else can I speak?"
"Mujhe yahan aa kar garv mehsoos ho raha hai. Yeh Indiraji ki karmbhoomi hai. Woh meri daadi hi nehin thi, sari janata ki
maa bhi thi. Indiraji ke baad Rae Bareli mein koi vikas nahin hua." (I am filled with pride at coming here. This is the place
where Indira Gandhi's did her work. She wasn't just my grandmother but the mother of you all! After Indiraji, no progress
has happened in Rae Bareli)

And then at the end, Priyanka's arrogance let loose in an unrestrained rush. "Yeh hamara Kshetra hai!" she shreiked from
the ramparts. "This is OUR land", pronounced the self styled future savior of India's ignorant masses, in a bone chilling
tone. Just like her great grandfather, her grandmother, her uncle and her mother Priyanka Vadhra Gandhi is at last
displaying the true colors behind her facade. And that face is one of utter lust for power, unabashed arrogance and a firm
belief in her destiny as the leader of India. To Priyanka Gandhi, Rae Bareli and the rest of India unquestionably BELONG to
her. In typical Gandhi family style, she doesn't care about the rights or even the opinions of Indians, she claims suzerainty
over India as her birthright. In all of her campaign speeches, she has shown not the slightest inclination to talk about any
of the real issues. The subject of her exhortations to the crowd has always been the debt that they owe to her family for
having saved them from a fate, that according to Priyanka, was worse death, Priyanka's message to the Indian public is
clear, "You owe us and we own you." The other leaders of Congress experience the everyday humiliation of have been
sidelined and contemptuously ignored by the new "Madame" in town.

If this is not dynastic rule then what is?? If these are not the clear cut characteristics of a tyrannical despot, then what
are? A bemused Atal Bihrai Vajpayee was heard starting his election speech in Rae Bareli with the half jesting comment
that he was afraid to step in Rae Bareli as this area belonged to the Gandhis, according to Priyanka. And then in a
heartening rejoinder that echoes the outrage of a democratic nation of close to one billion Indians, the prime minister of
India said in measured terms," From Kashmir to Kanyakumari India is one country and people are free to move anywhere
they liked. Nobody but Nobody (Not even Priyanka Gandhi) can impose restrictions on the coming and going of another
person. Such is not the language commonly tolerated in democracies."

It is highly doubtful whether a self styled future tyrant like Mrs. Priyanka Vadhra, who is being groomed to consider India
as her personal property and Indians as her personal minions, will ever see things in the context of democracy. For the
latest heir of the Gandhi dynasty, the fate of India always has and always will be, at the mercy of their family's personal
and private autocracy
This is just a political game. firstly if she met one of her fathers killers and claims that it was a personal meeting then why
leak it to the media. That also at a time when some old chamchas of Gandhi family like Arjun Singh have started barking
about Rahul Gandhi as PM. So all this news is nothing but a PR exercise. Rahul Gandhi comments on her sisters visit like a
parrot.

Rahul Gandhi wants to be PM without evening becoming a minister. The news that he rejected a cibent berth was made
like such a big deal.

And this CNN IBN is just licking congress I and its known for its Anti BJP stand. It receives funds from CNN as its sister
concern which in turn is funded by the vatican.

This is just a Bullshit PR exercise by Chamchas of Gandhi Family.
and BJP is sleeping like always.
For forty of the sixty years since Independence, a member of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty has ruled as
prime minister in India. The family came to personify the struggles and triumphs of the entire nation an
identification they did everything to promote. The story of how the family intertwined its fate with that of
the nation starts with its fiercely ambitious founder, Motilal Nehru (18611931), who rose from poverty to
become a leading lawyer and member of the Indian National Congress, and set out to make his son,
Jawaharlal Nehru (18891964) the greatest man in the world.
By the time Jawaharlal was born, his fathers wealth was legendary and his home at Allahabad, Anand
Bhavan (Abode of Joy), a by-word for luxury. The child grew up with tennis courts, a swimming pool,
lawns with sparkling fountains, rich furnishings and a retinue of liveried servants. It was the first house in
Allahabad to have electricity and water laid on; it soon had flush toilets and hot and cold running water.
The Nehru family were Brahmins, the highest caste of Indian society, traditionally destined as priests or
scholars. Every birthday Jawaharlal was weighed in public in a huge balance against grain and other goods
that were then distributed to the poor an early example of the relationship between his physical being
and that of the people of India, a theme that was developed throughout his life.
Jawaharlal was sent to England for his education at Harrow, Trinity College, Cambridge and the Inner
Temple. Spending so many of his formative years away from his country he became, he later wrote, a
queer mixture of East and West, out of place everywhere, at home nowhere. Back in India he served in the
High Court at Allahabad; and became involved in the independence movement, a cause in which he met
Mohandas Gandhi in 1916. When some peasants came to his house looking for Gandhi, hoping to share
their tales of oppression with him, Jawaharlal, at a loose end, went home with them and this experience
was his first revelation of living India. As he described it:
They looked on us with loving and hopeful eyes, as if we were the bearers of good tidings, the guides who
would lead us to the promised land. Looking at them and their misery and overflowing gratitude, I was
filled with shame and sorrow, shame at my own easy-going and comfortable life and our petty politics of
the city which ignored this vast multitude of semi-naked sons and daughters of India, sorrow at the
degradation and overwhelming poverty of India.
As he travelled around India, his sister Krishna, and sometimes his wife Kamala, would accompany him.
Slowly, Krishna recalled, he grasped the psychology of the masses and began to feel a thrill at being able
to influence vast crowds. His act of taking family members on these rigorous trips was (consciously or
not) building the Nehru legend that the family in some mystical way had a unique relationship with India.
A former moderate in nationalist politics, Motilal Nehru was voted president of the Indian National
Congress in the wake of the Amritsar massacre in 1919, and again at the key session in Calcutta in 1920
when he dramatically backed Gandhis call for withdrawal from British-run courts, elections, legislatures,
schools and colleges, and for the boycott of official functions and foreign goods. The reason for Motilals
about-turn was not policy, but family: he knew Jawaharlal would go with Gandhi; Motilal voted to be on
the same side as his son when the battle started.
Out went the Western kitchen, crystal, china and wine cellar in Allahabad, along with the horses and
carriages; the staff was drastically reduced and the Western clothes sacrificed on a giant bonfire. The
stories of the Nehrus wealth were often wildly exaggerated, as were the tales of how low they now abased
themselves (they still lived very comfortably by Indian standards) so that the mythic element of the
renunciation could shine through. This destiny was not thrust upon the Nehrus; they fashioned it
themselves.
In 1928 Motilal Nehru presented a draft constitution for a future India under dominion status within the
British Empire. Embracing universal adult franchise and equal rights for women, the Nehru report was the
basis of the constitution India would adopt twenty years later an example of the way Nehru skills helped
define the nation. When Gandhi put his name forward for the presidency of the 1929 Congress at Lahore,
Jawaharlal was embarrassed and tried to refuse the honour, but Motilal was overjoyed and hymned the
occasion with a Persian adage, What the father is unable to accomplish, the son achieves. Indira,
Jawaharlals twelve-year-old daughter, was present to see power pass from father to son.
Motilal renamed his house Swaraj Bhavan (Abode of Freedom), and donated it to the nation in April 1930,
a year before his death. It attracted crowds of devotees anxious to catch a glimpse of the family. The
verandas of the house were full of these visitors of ours, wrote Jawaharlal, Each door and window had a
collection of prying eyes. Among pictures of the gods and Indian heroes, the bazaars sold pictures of
Jawaharlal and his wife Kamala with the inscription adarsha jori (the ideal couple) rather ironically,
considering their less than ideal married life.
The family, and Jahawarlal especially, spent long spells in jail for their anti-British activities. On a famous
occasion Indira was obliged to tell a visitor to the house, Im sorry but my grandfather, father and
mummy are all in prison. Jawaharlal wrote regularly to Indira during his absences and in 1929 published
the correspondence as Letters From A Father to His Daughter. His lengthy account of Indian history from
the Indus Valley civilization through British rule and the independence struggle, The Discovery of India,
written while he was in prison for the last time, even included events from his own life, such as the death
of his wife Kamala. The familys activities, their relationships, and literally their world-view, were being
made public property. Jawaharlal was writing them into history.
The 1935 Government of India Act gave self-government to the Indian provinces. During the first elections
in 193637, Jawaharlal went on a national campaign on behalf of Congress, travelling 50,000 miles by
plane, train, car, bicycle, cart, steamer, paddle boat, canoe, horse, elephant, camel and on foot. One time
the crowd waiting to see him was so packed that when he arrived he had to walk on their shoulders to get
to the front to address them. He is said to have addressed ten million people and been seen by many
more.
When Indira Nehru married a nationalist activist, Feroze Gandhi, in 1942, the Labour MP Stafford Cripps,
an old family friend, was a guest at the wedding. A cabinet minister in Churchills coalition government, he
was in India to broker a deal to end independence agitation a deal Congress turned down. Indiras
cousin Nayantara said, It was quite usual in our family for a very personal, private event to be somehow
involved with matters that were happening in the world and in the country. So we took it for granted that
the Cripps Mission should be somehow mixed up with Indiras wedding. Feroze was no relation to
Mahatma Gandhi, but many Indians and not a few foreigners believed he was, an association that would
do Indira no harm at all.
Indira and Feroze spent little time together once their sons Rajiv and Sanjay had been born in 1944 and
1946. When Jawaharlal, a widower, became prime minister in 1947 in newly independent India, he needed
a consort and Indira with Rajiv and Sanjay moved in to the prime ministers residence, learning
diplomacy at home and on foreign visits. It was here that Indira acquired the imperious attitude that the
Nehrus were the ruling family.
When Indira became minister of information in the government formed by Lal Bahadur Shastri after her
fathers death in 1964, it was her first experience of government, though she was referred to as the only
man in the cabinet after she took decisive action during the war with Pakistan in 1965. Less than two
years later Shastri died suddenly, and Indira Gandhi was called upon to take over as the only person who
could hold the Congress Party together and unite the nation. In the election that followed, Indira declared
that she would pursue policies in the interests of the country: the Congress is big, but India is bigger. It
was the true message of her campaign: to rely on her own popularity with the people, going over the
heads of the party chiefs. It was during this election in 1967 that she was addressed as Mother Indira for
the first time.
Indira's imperious rule earned her enemies who finally caught up with her when she was taken to court on
a charge of minor electoral irregularities in 1975. The court invalidated her election of 1971 and disbarred
her from office for six years. Announcing that 'the security of India is threatened by internal disturbances',
she therefore declared a state of emergency. Opposition leaders were arrested, the press controlled, and
strikes banned. The state of emergency was not forced on Indira; insulated from reality by her hand-
picked advisers and sycophants, she had projected her own fears and insecurities onto the nation. India
was not 'in peril from both internal and external enemies', as she protested; but Indir herself was
menaced by her enemies, and she so closely identified her fate with that of the nation that she was unable
to distinguish that a threat to one was not necessarily a threat to both.
Meanwhile, Indira was grooming her younger son, Sanjay, to succeed her, but he was piling up enemies
even in Nehru loyalist heartlands by a brutal policy of forced sterilizations to achieve lower population
growth. When Indira finally permitted elections in 1977 (using the slogan Indira is India) she lost
decisively and was expelled from parliament. For the first time since independence the Congress Party was
not in power.
Indira fought back, a branch of Congress loyal to her alone. In the election of 1980, as if trying to out-
perform her father, she travelled 40,000 miles, addressing twenty-two meetings a day with a combined
audience of one hundred million. After she was returned to power a journalist asked her how it felt to be
Indias leader again. Indira responded ferociously, I have always been Indias leader.
Six months after the election Sanjay Gandhi was killed while performing aerobatic stunts in a private
plane. Indira was devastated, but publicly remarked People come and go but the nation continues to live
as usual, placing a family event in a national context. Sanjays widow Maneka was ready to step into
Sanjays shoes, but Indira refused to endorse her and, in a public falling-out with her daughter-in-law,
threw her out of the family home. Maneka, the only member of the younger generation who was a natural
politician, subsequently became an MP and was a minister in four governments, all in opposition to
Congress. Indiras elder son Rajiv, a quiet man who had a job he loved as an airline pilot, was conscripted
to take over his brothers constituency and was made nominal head of Indiras Congress Party. He
ingenuously confessed to reporters that he had entered politics to help mummy.
On October 31st, 1984 Indira was assassinated by her Sikh bodyguards, enraged by her having ordered an
attack on the Golden Temple in Amritsar, which Sikh terrorists had been using as a stronghold. Congress
loyalists, thrown into confusion and lacking a procedure for selecting anyone but a Nehru to rule, reached
for the next member of the dynasty. The official announcement of Indiras death was made at 6 pm, nearly
nine hours after she had been shot, and long after the BBC World Service had announced the news. At 6.20
Rajiv was sworn in. After only three years in parliament, with no cabinet, or even junior ministerial
experience, Rajiv Gandhi became prime minister of the worlds largest democracy. Two months later his
Congress Party won 415 of 543 parliamentary seats, the largest electoral landslide in Indian history.
The inexperienced and reluctant politician lost the next election, in 1989, and became leader of the
opposition, an unusual situation for a Nehru-Gandhi. When, during an election campaign in May 1991
Rajiv was blown to pieces by a Tamil suicide bomber, the tragedy of his death was compounded by the
political turmoil caused by the absence of an obvious successor. In a gesture of exceptional bad taste,
within four days of Rajivs death Congress unanimously elected his Italian-born widow Sonia president.
She declined the honour, and also refused to stand in an election later that year.
Throughout the early 1990s a barely competent minority Congress administration that felt it needed the
Nehru magic continued to woo Sonia and her two children, Priyanka and Rahul. Sonias position was
impossible: she hated politics for having taken her beloved husband from her even before it had killed
him. She had no political skill and did not speak any of the languages of India, except English. But only
involvement in politics would guarantee her children the level of protection they needed if they were to
escape the fate of their father and grandmother. Slowly, Sonia edged closer to the political centre, joining
the party in 1997, becoming its president in 1999, and successfully standing for election in 1999. She
then took office as leader of the opposition.
After the election of May 2004, won by Congress and its allies, Sonia was set to become the fourth prime
minister of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty, unanimously supported by the other parties in the coalition. Her
enemies counted up the strikes against her: she was a Roman Catholic, Indian by neither birth nor blood,
and with a poor command of Hindi. After a tense few days, Sonia judiciously listened to her inner voice
and recommended the respected economist Manmohan Singh as prime minister. She retained the post of
chair of the Congress parliamentary party.
Rahul Gandhi successfully contested his fathers former constituency in 2004. His sister Priyanka,
considered the more charismatic of the younger Nehru-Gandhis, acted as a campaign manager and did
constituency work but resolutely refused a formal political role. Supporters have established a site of
martyrdom at the former family home in Delhi, now the Indira Gandhi Memorial Museum, where a path of
shining, underlit crystal glass in the grounds shows the last walk Indira took to the spot where she was
killed. Relics of the exalted ones are shown as if they were a holy family: the blood-stained sari Indira
wore when she was gunned down; the shredded clothes in which Rajiv was dressed when he was blown
up. With the fourth generation of Nehru-Gandhis in charge of Indian politics, and a fifth preparing for the
future, the familys tryst with destiny seems to have many more years to run.