Comments on: Nathuram Godse’s defence Speech http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/ Purpose of all the chaos is to create silence.......yes, I want silence! Fri, 24 Jul 2009 06:52:10 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: incest mom chat http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2440 incest mom chat Fri, 24 Jul 2009 06:52:10 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2440 ehh... 10x :) ehh… 10x :)

]]> By: Avinash Bhome http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2439 Avinash Bhome Sat, 16 May 2009 00:31:32 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2439 Many of the readers have requested for " the book/articles for complete/detailed statement of Nathuram Godse etc.", in their aforesaid comments. I suggest they should read:-- 1)" Gandhi Murder & After " by Gopal Godse, brother of Nathuram Godse, who was also in jail for 25 years - life imprisonment. This is English version of famous and banned Marathi book" Gandhi Hatya Ani Mee i.e. Gandhi Murder and I ". This book was banned in Maharashtra/India from 1950 to 1965-70, as it was an attempt to tell the other side (real side ?) of the story. This was naturally was not liked by the Congress -- which ruled India and almost all the states of India, till 1967. 2) " May it please your Honour ! "- a complete and detailed 50-60 page defence speech of Nathuram Godse, which he made in the secretly held in-camera court proceedings, where press-reporters were not freely allowed to make reporting of the case freely in newspapers at that time. These books are available all-over India, in English/International book - stalls. Those who want to know the other side of the story and the real facts of the history, should well take troubles in reading these books. Many of the readers have requested for ” the book/articles for complete/detailed statement of Nathuram Godse etc.”, in their aforesaid comments.

I suggest they should read:–

1)” Gandhi Murder & After ” by Gopal Godse, brother of Nathuram Godse, who was also in jail for 25 years – life imprisonment. This is English version of famous and banned Marathi book” Gandhi Hatya Ani Mee i.e. Gandhi Murder and I “.

This book was banned in Maharashtra/India from 1950 to 1965-70, as it was an attempt to tell the other side (real side ?) of the story. This was naturally was not liked by the Congress — which ruled India and almost all the states of India, till 1967.

2) ” May it please your Honour ! “- a complete and detailed 50-60 page defence speech of Nathuram Godse, which he made in the secretly held in-camera court proceedings, where press-reporters were not freely allowed to make reporting of the case freely in newspapers at that time.

These books are available all-over India, in English/International book – stalls.

Those who want to know the other side of the story and the real facts of the history, should well take troubles in reading these books.

]]> By: Avinash Bhome http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2438 Avinash Bhome Wed, 13 May 2009 20:05:37 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2438 It is more than 60 years now, still in schoold books it is taught to children that "Gandhiji was killed by a fanatic." If Natghuram was a fanatic, how he could have himself given his defence speach in the in-camera hearing. At the end of his speech, the judge ,hearing the case asked " Nathuram, What is your qualification?" Pat came reply that "I am a matriculate.". The surprised judge lauded Nathuram's speech as if it was made by an experienced advocate of a high-court. Nathuram was a journalist, he was running a fortnightly in Pune. Still journalists today, take pride in calling him "fanatic", without caring for going through the facts of history. The partition of India, was the culmination of "idea of separatism" nurtured tactfully by British in the minds of Indian Muslms after the 1857 War of Liberation. (Remeber, the 1857 war was faught together by Hindus and Muslims. Rani Zasi's military commander was a Muslim. The british realised the danger of Hindu-Muslim unity. If Hindus and Muslims remained together, the British rule would have ended much earlier.) So british tactufully divided Hindus & Muslims and ruled India for 150 years. After Lokmanya Tilak's death in 1920, Gandhiji arrived from Africa on Indian political scene. Trying to be hero of all Indians (Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims etc.etc.-as he was in South Africa), Gandhiji failed to realise that in India, Muslims had carefully nurtured the idea of separatism. He also forgot that there already was Muslim League, which was taking care of interests of Muslim Communities in India. But still, Gandhiji continued the British policy of "appeasement of Muslims in India", always neglecting the interests of Hindus, who were forming almost 80-90% of Indian population then. The continued appeasement of Muslims in India and their pamperring ultimately lead to the partition of India. The creation of Pakistan is the greatest folly, the dangerous fruits of which we have been experienceing for last 50-60 years in the form of extremists and terrorist activities throughout India. This is a permanent and life-long headache not only for India, but for the entire humanity. In fact Partion of India, is a gift of Gandhiji total weaked polcies of Muslim appeasement, culminating in formation of Pakistan. So in real terms Gandhiji is father of Pakistan, not India. And he is totally responsbile for massacre of lacs of Hindus during partition. When , instead of going to Eastern Punjab (present Punjab-on Pakistan border- to calm down the situation, Gandhiji was fasting in Nowkhali in West Bengal bordering East Pakistan (now Bangla Desh), miles away from the place of carnage of Hindus in Punjab and borders of West Pakistan then. Now, atleast after 60 years of Gandhi's murder, let our scholars, historians, reporters take a subjective view, study the history with a right perspective and decide for themselves, was Nathuram really wrong in killing Gandhiji ? Wasn't he representing the psyche of millions of Hindus all over the country at that time ? Atleast accept the fact that Nathuram was not fanatic at all. He had given a detailed thought to his deed , before executing Gandhiji. Atlease let us accept, that it was not an act by fanatic and let us tell our future generations what were the real facts, that let to killing of Gandhiji. Atleast now in 2009, that event is 60 years old. Come on let's make an introspection....Avinash Bhome. It is more than 60 years now, still in schoold books it is taught to children that “Gandhiji was killed by a fanatic.” If Natghuram was a fanatic, how he could have himself given his defence speach in the in-camera hearing. At the end of his speech, the judge ,hearing the case asked ” Nathuram, What is your qualification?” Pat came reply that “I am a matriculate.”. The surprised judge lauded Nathuram’s speech as if it was made by an experienced advocate of a high-court.

Nathuram was a journalist, he was running a fortnightly in Pune. Still journalists today, take pride in calling him “fanatic”, without caring for going through the facts of history. The partition of India, was the culmination of “idea of separatism” nurtured tactfully by British in the minds of Indian Muslms after the 1857 War of Liberation. (Remeber, the 1857 war was faught together by Hindus and Muslims. Rani Zasi’s military commander was a Muslim. The british realised the danger of Hindu-Muslim unity. If Hindus and Muslims remained together, the British rule would have ended much earlier.) So british tactufully divided Hindus & Muslims and ruled India for 150 years.

After Lokmanya Tilak’s death in 1920, Gandhiji arrived from Africa on Indian political scene. Trying to be hero of all Indians (Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims etc.etc.-as he was in South Africa), Gandhiji failed to realise that in India, Muslims had carefully nurtured the idea of separatism. He also forgot that there already was Muslim League, which was taking care of interests of Muslim Communities in India.

But still, Gandhiji continued the British policy of “appeasement of Muslims in India”, always neglecting the interests of Hindus, who were forming almost 80-90% of Indian population then. The continued appeasement of Muslims in India and their pamperring ultimately lead to the partition of India. The creation of Pakistan is the greatest folly, the dangerous fruits of which we have been experienceing for last 50-60 years in the form of extremists and terrorist activities throughout India. This is a permanent and life-long headache not only for India, but for the entire humanity.

In fact Partion of India, is a gift of Gandhiji total weaked polcies of Muslim appeasement, culminating in formation of Pakistan.
So in real terms Gandhiji is father of Pakistan, not India. And he is totally responsbile for massacre of lacs of Hindus during partition. When , instead of going to Eastern Punjab (present Punjab-on Pakistan border- to calm down the situation, Gandhiji was fasting in Nowkhali in West Bengal bordering East Pakistan (now Bangla Desh), miles away from the place of carnage of Hindus in Punjab and borders of West Pakistan then.

Now, atleast after 60 years of Gandhi’s murder, let our scholars, historians, reporters take a subjective view, study the history with a right perspective and decide for themselves, was Nathuram really wrong in killing Gandhiji ? Wasn’t he representing the psyche of millions of Hindus all over the country at that time ? Atleast accept the fact that Nathuram was not fanatic at all. He had given a detailed thought to his deed , before executing Gandhiji.

Atlease let us accept, that it was not an act by fanatic and let us tell our future generations what were the real facts, that let to killing of Gandhiji. Atleast now in 2009, that event is 60 years old.

Come on let’s make an introspection….Avinash Bhome.

]]> By: sadaf http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2437 sadaf Tue, 27 Jan 2009 22:29:32 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2437 Shivaji was a secular man as was Akbar. Both of them respected other's religion. Mind it, I say it once again, Shivaji was a secular man and be a better Hindu by knowing this fact. I am not talking about Aurangzeb who indeed was a bigot like present day Narendra Modi. In Shivaji's time Indian contitution was not written and there was no notion of present day India spanning from Nagaland to Kashmir and as much down south. And same for Akbar and Aurangzeb's time. Yet two of them, Shivaji and Akbar clearly maintained secular credentials, Aurangzeb did not. Read more to know details and read unbiased and scholarly works. Aurangzeb in his time did what Narendra modi is doing in his time, tyranny and nothing more. Shivaji did not indulge in tyranny though he resorted to gurella technique of modern times, yet he was clearly not aiming against muslims. Many muslims were with him on his side and this is very much a recorded history that Maratha were even led by brave and trusted Muslim general one of whom was leading and even died defending Maratha against Abdali in one of the most famous battle medival India has witnessed. Read man, read, and you will know that whoever is proud of Shivaji as a great hindu warrior must know that the great warrior was essentially a secular man. And as a present day man one can clearly see that things have always been like this on this great land whom we now address- India and at that time when concept of a Hindu nation was just developing, India of that time was essentially enough secularised by the efforts of Akbar and Shivaji. As for Afzal Khan he was an insignificant felow who died while attempting to kill Shivaji. Gandhi was no Shivaji who could have retaliated as swiftly to his killer Nathuram Godse as Shivaji did to Afzal Khan. Shvaji was against Aurangzeb and not muslims as such. He wanted his motherland which he considered those regions which were regions near present day Pune and neighbouring areas to be free from occupied forces of Mughals under Auranzeb. He had no problem if Aurangzeb remained confined to his Delhi region. He even attended once the court of Aurangzeb to bargain a deal where deal was not materialised and he got arrested and the famous escape happened and after which he wanted to decisively free his region from Aurangzeb's occupation, something like present day struggle of various states Nagaland, Kashmir, parts of Assam, once even Punjab too asked for it, demanding freedom from India. Now tell me, while Gandhi too advocated secularism, he might not be in his style as Shivaji, he nevertheless was a brave man just like as it is attributed to Sawarkar. Both Sawarkar and Gandhi have displayed their resentment against tyranny of British at that time when they were yet to be famous for their those very acts which brought them laurel and praise. Gandhi and Sawarkar were however at variance about issue of secularism. Gandhi was more in tune with Shivaji about the concept of secularism. Sawarkar was neither as brave as Shivaji nor was in tune with secular beliefs of Shivaji. At least he is not celeberated to be as brave as Shivaji. About Jinnah and Nehru, both were secular and both wanted to be the prime minister of undivided India. About Jinnah's secularism we all get to know when we read his side of narration of history, but even without reading, if we are to beleive what Advani says and still maintains, Jinnah was secular man, yet he was not like Gandhi who would give up. But Nehru was not the man who would let Jinnah have the cake so easily. How could he let him be the prime minister when he too was as good a candidate and more popular plus with support from Gandhi and Patel and Azad. He in fact with his team of Patel and Azad proved his point that he was a secular man, while Jinnah could not do so. Moreever, Nehru was un tune with Gandhi who himself was in tune with Shivaji's secularism. So one can see there was nothing else but secularism everywhere and India was like the child born of secular parents. Just how could the child be non-secular? The only non-secular voices were of Muslim League whom Jinnah rided to get away with his ambition of being head of the state, however small it may be. Or the other non-secular voice was that of the kind of Sawarkar who was unlike Shivaji - a secular and celeberated brave warrior. Sawarkar was no match to Shivaji's personality or achievement. Nor Shivaji would have approved of his inclination if he had been born in these modern times and definitely Nathuram Godse stands no where in front of Gandhiji or Shivaji, just as Afzal Khan stands nowhere in front of Shivaji. So dear friends get all your facts rechecked and read well and then form opinion. India was on course to become a secular nation from the times of Shivaji and even before him, from Akbar's time. I must add even before Akbar, that of Ashok's time, India was to be secular, and it has really and deservingly arrived to be secular India and I am proud to an Indian. Proud of its secular legacy left by Ashoka, Shivaji, Akbar, Gandhi and Nehru. Jai Hind. Shivaji was a secular man as was Akbar. Both of them respected other’s religion. Mind it, I say it once again, Shivaji was a secular man and be a better Hindu by knowing this fact. I am not talking about Aurangzeb who indeed was a bigot like present day Narendra Modi. In Shivaji’s time Indian contitution was not written and there was no notion of present day India spanning from Nagaland to Kashmir and as much down south. And same for Akbar and Aurangzeb’s time. Yet two of them, Shivaji and Akbar clearly maintained secular credentials, Aurangzeb did not. Read more to know details and read unbiased and scholarly works. Aurangzeb in his time did what Narendra modi is doing in his time, tyranny and nothing more. Shivaji did not indulge in tyranny though he resorted to gurella technique of modern times, yet he was clearly not aiming against muslims. Many muslims were with him on his side and this is very much a recorded history that Maratha were even led by brave and trusted Muslim general one of whom was leading and even died defending Maratha against Abdali in one of the most famous battle medival India has witnessed. Read man, read, and you will know that whoever is proud of Shivaji as a great hindu warrior must know that the great warrior was essentially a secular man. And as a present day man one can clearly see that things have always been like this on this great land whom we now address- India and at that time when concept of a Hindu nation was just developing, India of that time was essentially enough secularised by the efforts of Akbar and Shivaji. As for Afzal Khan he was an insignificant felow who died while attempting to kill Shivaji. Gandhi was no Shivaji who could have retaliated as swiftly to his killer Nathuram Godse as Shivaji did to Afzal Khan. Shvaji was against Aurangzeb and not muslims as such. He wanted his motherland which he considered those regions which were regions near present day Pune and neighbouring areas to be free from occupied forces of Mughals under Auranzeb. He had no problem if Aurangzeb remained confined to his Delhi region. He even attended once the court of Aurangzeb to bargain a deal where deal was not materialised and he got arrested and the famous escape happened and after which he wanted to decisively free his region from Aurangzeb’s occupation, something like present day struggle of various states Nagaland, Kashmir, parts of Assam, once even Punjab too asked for it, demanding freedom from India. Now tell me, while Gandhi too advocated secularism, he might not be in his style as Shivaji, he nevertheless was a brave man just like as it is attributed to Sawarkar. Both Sawarkar and Gandhi have displayed their resentment against tyranny of British at that time when they were yet to be famous for their those very acts which brought them laurel and praise. Gandhi and Sawarkar were however at variance about issue of secularism. Gandhi was more in tune with Shivaji about the concept of secularism. Sawarkar was neither as brave as Shivaji nor was in tune with secular beliefs of Shivaji. At least he is not celeberated to be as brave as Shivaji. About Jinnah and Nehru, both were secular and both wanted to be the prime minister of undivided India. About Jinnah’s secularism we all get to know when we read his side of narration of history, but even without reading, if we are to beleive what Advani says and still maintains, Jinnah was secular man, yet he was not like Gandhi who would give up. But Nehru was not the man who would let Jinnah have the cake so easily. How could he let him be the prime minister when he too was as good a candidate and more popular plus with support from Gandhi and Patel and Azad. He in fact with his team of Patel and Azad proved his point that he was a secular man, while Jinnah could not do so. Moreever, Nehru was un tune with Gandhi who himself was in tune with Shivaji’s secularism. So one can see there was nothing else but secularism everywhere and India was like the child born of secular parents. Just how could the child be non-secular? The only non-secular voices were of Muslim League whom Jinnah rided to get away with his ambition of being head of the state, however small it may be. Or the other non-secular voice was that of the kind of Sawarkar who was unlike Shivaji – a secular and celeberated brave warrior. Sawarkar was no match to Shivaji’s personality or achievement. Nor Shivaji would have approved of his inclination if he had been born in these modern times and definitely Nathuram Godse stands no where in front of Gandhiji or Shivaji, just as Afzal Khan stands nowhere in front of Shivaji.
So dear friends get all your facts rechecked and read well and then form opinion. India was on course to become a secular nation from the times of Shivaji and even before him, from Akbar’s time. I must add even before Akbar, that of Ashok’s time, India was to be secular, and it has really and deservingly arrived to be secular India and I am proud to an Indian. Proud of its secular legacy left by Ashoka, Shivaji, Akbar, Gandhi and Nehru.
Jai Hind.

]]> By: sushil http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2436 sushil Mon, 22 Dec 2008 06:30:09 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2436 Every body is right.Ultimately it is the wish of GOD. Every body is right.Ultimately it is the wish of GOD.

]]> By: ExecutedToday.com » 1949: Nathuram Godse, Gandhi’s assassin http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2435 ExecutedToday.com » 1949: Nathuram Godse, Gandhi’s assassin Sat, 15 Nov 2008 22:59:23 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2435 [...] never betrayed doubt or regret. On the contrary, he cogently justified the murder at trial: I thought to myself and foresaw I shall be totally ruined, and the only thing I could [...] [...] never betrayed doubt or regret. On the contrary, he cogently justified the murder at trial: I thought to myself and foresaw I shall be totally ruined, and the only thing I could [...]

]]> By: Shreedhar http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2434 Shreedhar Sat, 04 Oct 2008 12:15:46 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2434 I wonder if it is educated, enlightened indians who post in this forum. What is this bane that grips this country that people can not rise above religion? why is it always hindu, muslim, christian and sikh? why not just the people of india? i am sure as a human being Gandhiji had his faults.. but i can not believe that educated people are justifying his killing in 2008! is taking a life the answer to any problem? NEVER. it is sad that 60 years after Gandhi's time, the people of this nation have not been able to look at religion as what it was meant to be, a way to promote self-discipline and not as a tool of hatred and bloodshed. We sure have miles to go before we sleep... it saddens me deeply. :( I wonder if it is educated, enlightened indians who post in this forum. What is this bane that grips this country that people can not rise above religion? why is it always hindu, muslim, christian and sikh? why not just the people of india? i am sure as a human being Gandhiji had his faults.. but i can not believe that educated people are justifying his killing in 2008! is taking a life the answer to any problem? NEVER. it is sad that 60 years after Gandhi’s time, the people of this nation have not been able to look at religion as what it was meant to be, a way to promote self-discipline and not as a tool of hatred and bloodshed. We sure have miles to go before we sleep… it saddens me deeply. :(

]]> By: samresh Singh http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2433 samresh Singh Tue, 05 Aug 2008 19:06:12 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2433 Fuck These Bastards like Rahul M and Gunjan Chauhan. Who don't know about India and Indian History. They Claim themselves Hindu or Indian But they don't know what it is all about. They don't know what this forum is discussing about. One say it was a policy of Britishers, but don't realize who accepted these were our great Indian leaders (Gandhi,Nehru). One Say that" India being a secular country instead of a Hindu nation is the credit of Gandhi ,Nehru" But forgot that Muslim country Pakistan is also their credit. Godse was never against the Secular state, but he want to save d intrest of hindus. Fuck These Bastards like Rahul M and Gunjan Chauhan. Who don’t know about India and Indian History. They Claim themselves Hindu or Indian But they don’t know what it is all about. They don’t know what this forum is discussing about. One say it
was a policy of Britishers, but don’t realize who accepted these were our great Indian leaders (Gandhi,Nehru).
One Say that” India being a secular country instead of a Hindu nation is the credit of Gandhi ,Nehru” But forgot that Muslim country Pakistan is also their credit. Godse was never against the Secular state, but he want to save d intrest of hindus.

]]> By: Neel C http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2432 Neel C Thu, 31 Jul 2008 23:23:35 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2432 Dear Rahul M, you are obviously an uneducated idiot who has no idea what he is talking about. Anybody who knows anything about Indian politics knows that the BJP and RSS fervently support the Sikh and Jain communities as they are "native religions of India" and that the RSS and BJP shielded and protected the Sikhs from the massacre against them instigated by the Congress Party in 1984. I am astounded and ashamed that you would bring up such a thing as Sati, as there has not beena recorded incident of it since the 1980s as far as I am aware and that every major Hindu political organization is extremely opposed to any such practice as it undermines the Hindutva movement. Wearing Dhotis and pajamas? What in the world are you talking about? Are you saying that people in India today don't wear dhotis? Is this a joke? Futhermore, what's wrong with that, people should be free to wear whatever they want, unlike in Muslim countries where dress is dictated sometimes under pain of death. If you were an Indian Hindu stuck somewhere in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, or anywhere else in the world where Hindus are treated like dogs and regularly killed and raped with no repercussions, you would be the first person begging the RSS, the BJP, or any "extremist" organization whose only goal is to preserve Hindu cultre to come and save you. Dear Rahul M, you are obviously an uneducated idiot who has no idea what he is talking about. Anybody who knows anything about Indian politics knows that the BJP and RSS fervently support the Sikh and Jain communities as they are “native religions of India” and that the RSS and BJP shielded and protected the Sikhs from the massacre against them instigated by the Congress Party in 1984. I am astounded and ashamed that you would bring up such a thing as Sati, as there has not beena recorded incident of it since the 1980s as far as I am aware and that every major Hindu political organization is extremely opposed to any such practice as it undermines the Hindutva movement. Wearing Dhotis and pajamas? What in the world are you talking about? Are you saying that people in India today don’t wear dhotis? Is this a joke? Futhermore, what’s wrong with that, people should be free to wear whatever they want, unlike in Muslim countries where dress is dictated sometimes under pain of death. If you were an Indian Hindu stuck somewhere in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, or anywhere else in the world where Hindus are treated like dogs and regularly killed and raped with no repercussions, you would be the first person begging the RSS, the BJP, or any “extremist” organization whose only goal is to preserve Hindu cultre to come and save you.

]]> By: Yonatan http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2422 Yonatan Mon, 24 Mar 2008 04:11:20 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2422 As a Jew who is terrorized to give up his homeland to the MUslim dictators, I salut Nathuram Godse as a hero and saviour of India.. You Indians should be proud of this man. If not for him, you may all be urdu speakers today and being forced at gunpoint to recite Koran verses. Your wives and mothers woudl be prostitutes for deranged imams and shieks. Islam is a disaster and like Nazism has only one cause, world domination and wiping out the entire non-Muslim race. Look at all the brilliant cultures destroyed throughout the world because of this barbaric religion and people. The world always gives honor to criminals and puts to death the martyrs. Godse is a friend of India and Israel.. God bless you in the 7th heaven. As a Jew who is terrorized to give up his homeland to the MUslim dictators, I salut Nathuram Godse as a hero and saviour of India.. You Indians should be proud of this man. If not for him, you may all be urdu speakers today and being forced at gunpoint to recite Koran verses. Your wives and mothers woudl be prostitutes for deranged imams and shieks. Islam is a disaster and like Nazism has only one cause, world domination and wiping out the entire non-Muslim race. Look at all the brilliant cultures destroyed throughout the world because of this barbaric religion and people. The world always gives honor to criminals and puts to death the martyrs. Godse is a friend of India and Israel.. God bless you in the 7th heaven.

]]> By: Abhinav Karir http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2421 Abhinav Karir Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:18:30 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2421 Here is the link to the interview with Mr.Gopal Godse. http://www.asuku.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5286 Here is the link to the interview with Mr.Gopal Godse.

http://www.asuku.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5286

]]> By: Milind http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2419 Milind Mon, 11 Feb 2008 09:22:05 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2419 You can find the whole speech of Nathuram Godse in a marathi book written by his youngest brother Mr.Gopal Godse named " Gandhihatya ani Mi" You can find the whole speech of Nathuram Godse in a marathi book written by his youngest brother Mr.Gopal Godse named ” Gandhihatya ani Mi”

]]> By: Simhesvara http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2418 Simhesvara Sun, 10 Feb 2008 14:35:01 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2418 where is the actual complete speech and defence statement of Godse. There are more facts for all you Indians to know. I read it somewhere but now forgot where it was I read. Simhesvara from Malaysia where is the actual complete speech and defence statement of Godse. There are more facts for all you Indians to know. I read it somewhere but now forgot where it was I read.
Simhesvara from Malaysia

]]> By: Abhinav Karir http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2414 Abhinav Karir Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:15:16 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2414 The only objection i have to Nathuram's Godse's act is the killing. Killing should not be solution to problems. RSS or Hindu Mahasabha or hinduism as a matter of fact does not teach killing. At the same time, I appreciate the person who posted Nathuram Godse's defense speech as it is highly educative. As a child i had always learnt that Mahatma gandhi was the father of our nation and was a great soul, which i still think so. What we were not tought was why would someone kill him. There was always a question mark. If someone was to be punished, then that should have been Jawahar Lal Nehru or Jinha who were there only for power and were politician more than freedom fighters. At the same time i would also like to say that in many ways Sardar patel was a much better and stronger leader and a statesman as compared to Jawahar Lalji. It is very sad that in the history that we are tought in schools, not much credit is given to many others for the freedom struggle and is concentrated to just two leaders. Vande Matram..!! The only objection i have to Nathuram’s Godse’s act is the killing. Killing should not be solution to problems. RSS or Hindu Mahasabha or hinduism as a matter of fact does not teach killing. At the same time, I appreciate the person who posted Nathuram Godse’s defense speech as it is highly educative. As a child i had always learnt that Mahatma gandhi was the father of our nation and was a great soul, which i still think so. What we were not tought was why would someone kill him. There was always a question mark. If someone was to be punished, then that should have been Jawahar Lal Nehru or Jinha who were there only for power and were politician more than freedom fighters. At the same time i would also like to say that in many ways Sardar patel was a much better and stronger leader and a statesman as compared to Jawahar Lalji. It is very sad that in the history that we are tought in schools, not much credit is given to many others for the freedom struggle and is concentrated to just two leaders. Vande Matram..!!

]]> By: Sujaan http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2408 Sujaan Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:13:43 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2408 Okay, okay, extremely sorry about are we much better off...Got passionate. What I meant to point out was all the bribery and stuff which goes on and all the people you see dying unnecessarily and all the people who have to wait and wait and wait for justice which never comes their way and all the villages where women are still oppressed and all the children you'll get to see washing cups and dishes and working in the shops through out the day. I know they won't be able to earn their bread unless they work themselves but isn't it in all a pitiable situation? It's really confusing. Okay, okay, extremely sorry about are we much better off…Got passionate. What I meant to point out was all the bribery and stuff which goes on and all the people you see dying unnecessarily and all the people who have to wait and wait and wait for justice which never comes their way and all the villages where women are still oppressed and all the children you’ll get to see washing cups and dishes and working in the shops through out the day. I know they won’t be able to earn their bread unless they work themselves but isn’t it in all a pitiable situation? It’s really confusing.

]]> By: Sujaan http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2407 Sujaan Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:04:48 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2407 I have no knowledge other than the fact that I am ignorant myself, but I should, in the light of the above-posted comments, like to express my views. I am in class XII at present, and therefore, have much to see of and learn about the world at large. What I found rather disturbing is someone's calling India a nation for the Hindus (saying something to the effect that Hindus have to fight for our own nation). A certain rather controversial author, but of an admirable English, says that India is almost a dream-state. The British are generally all British, the Brazillians all Brazillians, but look at us, SIkhs, Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, Jains, you name it, we've got it! Isn't that something to take pride in? I quite admit the faults Nehru and Gandhi both had, but even as retaliation could have been a way out, would we have placed ourselves, in no one's but our own eyes, anywhere above the oppressors (and I don't just refer to the British, but also to the Brahmins and other sects and sections who had exercised their power over weaker communities) had we, ourselves, resorted to those means of fighting? I quite appreciate it is illogical to ask of dumb millions a practice of such high ideals of non-violence, it is almost foolish. The point is that even after the British have left, Pakistan formed, are we socio-culturally much better off? Maybe a dictatorial rule would have seen to quicker progress of the nation, but isn't there something special in the fact that we (at least) tried to build our nation on the principles of liberalism and freedom and all of what is enshrined in our constitution? Isn't in conscientiously (wrong use of the word I guess) better? Those who call Nehru and Gandhi bastards should try and do something about the nation themselves, that too in state of affairs where you don't get arrested for every next move. I have no knowledge other than the fact that I am ignorant myself, but I should, in the light of the above-posted comments, like to express my views. I am in class XII at present, and therefore, have much to see of and learn about the world at large.
What I found rather disturbing is someone’s calling India a nation for the Hindus (saying something to the effect that Hindus have to fight for our own nation). A certain rather controversial author, but of an admirable English, says that India is almost a dream-state. The British are generally all British, the Brazillians all Brazillians, but look at us, SIkhs, Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, Jains, you name it, we’ve got it! Isn’t that something to take pride in?
I quite admit the faults Nehru and Gandhi both had, but even as retaliation could have been a way out, would we have placed ourselves, in no one’s but our own eyes, anywhere above the oppressors (and I don’t just refer to the British, but also to the Brahmins and other sects and sections who had exercised their power over weaker communities) had we, ourselves, resorted to those means of fighting? I quite appreciate it is illogical to ask of dumb millions a practice of such high ideals of non-violence, it is almost foolish.
The point is that even after the British have left, Pakistan formed, are we socio-culturally much better off? Maybe a dictatorial rule would have seen to quicker progress of the nation, but isn’t there something special in the fact that we (at least) tried to build our nation on the principles of liberalism and freedom and all of what is enshrined in our constitution? Isn’t in conscientiously (wrong use of the word I guess) better? Those who call Nehru and Gandhi bastards should try and do something about the nation themselves, that too in state of affairs where you don’t get arrested for every next move.

]]> By: daisy http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2388 daisy Wed, 05 Dec 2007 17:43:08 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2388 Well I believe what has happened has happened. All said and done...I honestly did not believe Gandhi died for the country, or got us independence....if he was anything more than a politician who saw India being divided and let it happen, was more infamous for using 2 women on either sides rather than a walking stick...and was probally just concentrating on being a a hero in everyone's eyes..or a stubborn kid who was just going after what he thought was right ignoring what was hapenning around him..... I beg to Differ from Balachandran that Ghandhi would have stopped India from being divided...read your history man.....this had been decided even before Ghandi's assasination. Having said that i also believe that killing one man was not the solution...Godse should have killed Neru , Jinnah..and all there followers as well.......oh ya and did i forget the British rulers who started this in the first place..and maye the mugal rulers as well who ruled India...... Our problem is that we are not one......we are proud of our religion. jobs, family, kids, having money, having good looking gf/bf's....but not of our counrty....had the county been one..or we had the right rulers to start with we would probably still been "THE GOLDEN BIRD" Well I believe what has happened has happened. All said and done…I honestly did not believe Gandhi died for the country, or got us independence….if he was anything more than a politician who saw India being divided and let it happen, was more infamous for using 2 women on either sides rather than a walking stick…and was probally just concentrating on being a a hero in everyone’s eyes..or a stubborn kid who was just going after what he thought was right ignoring what was hapenning around him…..
I beg to Differ from Balachandran that Ghandhi would have stopped India from being divided…read your history man…..this had been decided even before Ghandi’s assasination.
Having said that i also believe that killing one man was not the solution…Godse should have killed Neru , Jinnah..and all there followers as well…….oh ya and did i forget the British rulers who started this in the first place..and maye the mugal rulers as well who ruled India……

Our problem is that we are not one……we are proud of our religion. jobs, family, kids, having money, having good looking gf/bf’s….but not of our counrty….had the county been one..or we had the right rulers to start with we would probably still been “THE GOLDEN BIRD”

]]> By: Durochurhoott http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2361 Durochurhoott Fri, 16 Nov 2007 09:42:25 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2361 Two new studies show why some people are more attractive for members of the opposite sex than others. The University of Florida, Florida State University found that physically attractive people almost instantly attract the attention of the interlocutor, sobesednitsy with them, literally, it is difficult to make eye. This conclusion was reached by a series of psychological experiments, which were determined by the people who believe in sending the first seconds after the acquaintance. Here, a curious feature: single, unmarried experimental preferred to look at the guys, beauty opposite sex, and family, people most often by representatives of their sex. The authors believe that this feature developed a behavior as a result of the evolution: a man trying to find a decent pair to acquire offspring. If this is resolved, he wondered potential rivals. Detailed information about this magazine will be published Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. In turn, a joint study of the Rockefeller University, Rockefeller University and Duke University, Duke University in North Carolina revealed that women are perceived differently by men smell. During experiments studied the perception of women one of the ingredients of male pheromone-androstenona smell, which is contained in urine or sweat. The results were startling: women are part of this repugnant odor, and the other part is very attractive, resembling the smell of vanilla, and the third group have not felt any smell. The authors argue that the reason is that the differences in the receptor responsible for the olfactory system, from different people are different. It has long been proven that mammals (including human) odor is one way of attracting the attention of representatives of the opposite sex. A detailed article about the journal Nature will publish. Two new studies show why some people are more attractive for members of the opposite sex than others.

The University of Florida, Florida State University found that physically attractive people almost instantly attract the attention of the interlocutor, sobesednitsy with them, literally, it is difficult to make eye. This conclusion was reached by a series of psychological experiments, which were determined by the people who believe in sending the first seconds after the acquaintance. Here, a curious feature: single, unmarried experimental preferred to look at the guys, beauty opposite sex, and family, people most often by representatives of their sex.

The authors believe that this feature developed a behavior as a result of the evolution: a man trying to find a decent pair to acquire offspring. If this is resolved, he wondered potential rivals. Detailed information about this magazine will be published Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

In turn, a joint study of the Rockefeller University, Rockefeller University and Duke University, Duke University in North Carolina revealed that women are perceived differently by men smell. During experiments studied the perception of women one of the ingredients of male pheromone-androstenona smell, which is contained in urine or sweat.

The results were startling: women are part of this repugnant odor, and the other part is very attractive, resembling the smell of vanilla, and the third group have not felt any smell. The authors argue that the reason is that the differences in the receptor responsible for the olfactory system, from different people are different.

It has long been proven that mammals (including human) odor is one way of attracting the attention of representatives of the opposite sex. A detailed article about the journal Nature will publish.

]]> By: vidyadhar http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2360 vidyadhar Fri, 16 Nov 2007 09:19:39 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2360 If you judge Gandhi from the prism of hinduism, he deserved his death. But what did Godse achived by killing Gandhi after everything had been finished, that is after the partition had been done. Nehru and congress used his killing brilliently and even to this day, RSS and BJP is paying the price for Godse's action. Even after 50 years of misrule by Congress, mismanagement, bringing the country to the verge of disastor, BJP being the main opposition, cannot able to get more then 25 % of the overall popular vote in any parlementary election. If you judge Gandhi from the prism of hinduism, he deserved his death. But what did Godse achived by killing Gandhi after everything had been finished, that is after the partition had been done. Nehru and congress used his killing brilliently and even to this day, RSS and BJP is paying the price for Godse’s action. Even after 50 years of misrule by Congress, mismanagement, bringing the country to the verge of disastor, BJP being the main opposition, cannot able to get more then 25 % of the overall popular vote in any parlementary election.

]]> By: Debasis http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12/nathuram-godses-defence-speech/#comment-2304 Debasis Tue, 30 Oct 2007 12:31:57 +0000 http://sarsij.wordpress.com/2005/11/12//#comment-2304 In Simple words Gandhi n Nehru both are qualified bastards.... If these peoples are not with us then our Country will be more peaceful n developed than others. In Simple words Gandhi n Nehru both are qualified bastards…. If these peoples are not with us then our Country will be more peaceful n developed than others.

]]>