Category Archives: Exclusivist religions

Murder Spree in Kerala by Communists

Politically polarised media persons and ignorant souls keep on harping about intolerance and freedom of speech and try to narrate the reason for Kerala losing its peaceful atmosphere due to CPM-RSS clashes. The display of the real picture is either incomplete or distorted. Then, what is the fact? Are there really CPM-RSS clashes? Or they are the naked exhibition of CPM terror and violence against their ‘political enemies’?

Communists, that is, Marxists as per modern terminology, are always dead against other ideologies is a well known fact. World over, it is the same experience since the October Revolution which took place in Russia in the second decade of the last century. The very basic tenet of Marxism, Dictatorship of the Proletariat, espouses the authoritarian rule of the Communist party. This dictatorial euphoria leads to intolerance and hatred in the mindset of communists wherever they are. It is worse and grave wherever they get power.
In Kerala, which ever political clash we witness, CPM is a common factor on one side. It could be CPM vs Congress, CPM vs RSS, CPM vs BJP, CPM vs Kerala Congress, CPM vs (even) CPI and sometimes (one group of) CPM vs (another group of)  CPM. It proves the CPM’s intolerance towards other ideological groups and their ideologies. RSS and affiliated organisations are the worst affected ideological groups in this violent mess lashed out by the CPM.
The history of this ‘murder politics’ started during the 1940s itself, well before undivided Communist party could taste the power in Kerala political scenario.
Undivided CPI’s first significant physical attack against the RSS was in 1948 at Thiruvananthapuram.  It was significant because the attack was against an RSS Samghikh (RSS programme focused on physical exercises) addressed by the then RSS Sarsanghachalak M S Golwalkar, popularly known as Guruji. They attacked the gathering while Shri Guruji was on the dais. Veteran RSS swayamsevak P Parameswaran was the Mukhya Shikshak (main instructor). The swayamsevaks retaliated in a befitting manner. And, the young Marxists led by a student leader fled the spot. The programme went on. Guruji spoke as if nothing had happened. He did not even refer to the incident he witnessed.

Another major attack by CPI took place in 1952 on the similar gathering to be addressed by Guruji at Alappuzha. The sequence of event replicated here as well and the programme went on without much discussion on the violent attack.
CPM and the Culture of Violence
After a lull for almost a decade, CPI underwent a vertical split in 1964. Though CPI resisted from physically attacking the RSS swayamsevaks, CPM, the other group, after a few years’ of calm, took the violent route again. Next major CPM attack against RSS was in January 1969, near Shri Kerala Varma College, Thrissur. College management had invited Swami Chinmayanandaji to deliver a lecture. But, Kerala Students’ Federation (KSF), the precursor of SFI, with their CPM bosses of the area, used all sort of dirty tricks to insult and physically attack Swamiji. To avoid any physical assault on Swamiji, ABVP students encircled and guarded Swamiji and led him to the car to leave the place safely. The next day when the ABVP staged a protest rally against the CPM’s attempt to assault Swamiji, the CPM goons attacked the ABVP students. It resulted in a fierce street fight, perhaps first of that sort in the State. Thereafter, almost every year KSF and later SFI workers, with the help of CPM men outside, attacked ABVP workers in the college.

In 1969, the local workers allegedly led by Pinaryi Vijayan and Kodiyeri Balakrishnan, presently politbure (PB) members and former and present State secretary respectively, killed RSS worker Vadikkal Ramakrishnan, a sweets maker, in Thalasserry. The cold blooded murder was without any sort of provocation. After a month, they killed Sreedharan Nair, an RSS worker in Ponkunnam, Kottayam District. The same year Ramakrishnan, an RSS worker in Palakkad, was killed.
Veliyathunadu Chandran, a senior RSS worker and former Pracharak, was the next victim of the CPM attack in Parur of Ernakulam District on January 11, 1970. Mandal Karyavah Sankranarayanan was killed in Nallenkara, Thrissur District, in 1973. In 1974, CPM men killed RSS Mandal Karyavah Sudheendran in Kochi.

New Chapter after Emergency
Developments during the period of Emergency opened a new chapter in this politics of murders. Even though the aforementioned attacks were grave for RSS and affiliated organisations, CPM accepted killing spree against Sangh workers as their cup of tea in 1978, after the lifting of Emergency. During the Emergency the fight against the autocratic and dynastic rule was solely carried on by RSS and its affiliates in Kerala. Naturally, the young and the adventurist CPM men were frustrated. They could not reconcile with the compromising stand of the party leadership on Emergency. While communist leaders were not ready to take any anti-establishment stand, the RSS boys took up poster campaigns, pamphlet distributions, etc. Thousands of RSS men staged non-violent satyagraha, courted arrest and underwent inhuman police torture, which was beyond reconciliation for many communist supporters who were listening to empty rhetoric of ‘revolution’ every now and then. As a result, several of those CPM men joined the underground activities of RSS during Emergency. They turned active RSS workers after the Emergency. This phenomenon was more visible in the CPM strongholds areas like Kannur, Alappuzha and coastal Thrissur. The exodus of rank and file was the last straw on camel’s back for CPM.
The CPM leadership thought that murder of their ex-comrades who turned to the RSS would be the best deterrent to put an end to this attrition.  In September, 1978, they kicked off the killings in Thalassery, Kannur district, by murdering teen aged college student and Mukhya Shikshak Chandran of Panunda Shakha. Significantly, his father was a Local Committee Member of CPM. Thereafter, series of killings took place in Thalaserry Taluk. Most of the RSS martyrs were former CPM men or at least the family members of CPM men. When they felt that daggers and swords were not enough to suppress the RSS growth, they started manufacturing bombs. Since 1978, Several RSS men were killed in Thalassery itself. The most prominent of them were RSS Khand Karyavah Karimbil Satheeshan (1981),   BJP Kannur District secretary Pannyannoor Chandran (1986),  Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha State Vice President Jayakrishnan Master (killed in the class room while taking class in front of the  6th standard students), Kannur Zila Sharirik Pramukh Manoj (2014). In 1984, Kannur Zila Sahakaryavaha Sadanandan Master’s both legs were chopped off below the knees.

In 1980, Gangadharan, a young ABVP district officer bearer in Kannur, was killed in his office the day he joined the government service. The then ABVP State organising secretary KG Venugopal and the then RSS Zila Pracharak VN Gopinath told Organiser that as Gangadharan joined the duty in Survey Department, an employee informed the CPM goons and they immediately executed the killing on his chair itself. The killers even threatened the district collector against taking the body for post mortem!

The same CPM killers kept on attacking RSS men in Alappuzha District. The first among them was Gopalakrishnan (27) who was murdered on September 18, 1980. CPM killers dragged him out of a running bus and stabbed him to death. Another prominent Sangh martyr was Khand Karyavah Vishwambharan in Kuttanadu (1982). The murder of Pradeep (15), a 10th standard student, was another brutal act of CPM there.
CPM men killed several workers in Thrissur District after Emergency. Fierce attacks took place in Vadanappalli, coastal area in the district.  The attackers set fire to a house and a man was burnt to death in it.  Kodungallur Taluk Karyavah and a promising Sangh worker T Satheesan was killed in the street by CPIM workers in 1984. Former Pracharak Ayyappan was bombed to death by CPM men in Nayathodu, Ernakulam district, the same year. RSS worker Unnikrishnan was killed by CPM killers in Thrippunithura, Ernakulam District in March, 1984.

Three swayamsevaks were killed in a single incident in Murikkumpuzha, Thiruvananthapuram District in 1987. In September 1996, Anu, Sajith and Kim Karun, ABVP workers in Dewaswom Board College, Mannaar, Alappuzha district, were attacked and drowned in Pampa River.  Bimbi, an ABVP worker, was killed in Changanassery, Kottayam District in October, 1996.

Power Dynamics in Murder Politics
CPM raises its dirty and violent heads when they are in power. Naturally investigation turns into a drama. Even though they kill during Congress-led UDF (United Democratic Front), the CPM-led Left Democratic Front (LDF) comes back to power in rotation (a common practice we witness in Kerala since the last several decades). Then they get an opportunity to manipulate the cases in their favour. Even the forthright judges have to face the wrath of communists if they deliver a verdict against CPM killers.  The judge who sentenced capital punishment for the killers of Jayakarishnan Master had to face violent protests, threats which finally led to giving him the police protection.
Non-discriminatory Violence
People believe that CPM Kannur district secretary P Jayarajan was involved in the murder of RSS worker Manoj (2014). He was arrested in this regard and jailed for several weeks. Later on, he got bail; alibi was heart ailment! Now, court has instructed him not to enter Kannur District. So, CPM deploys him for election campaign throughout the State.
CPM killers do not spare Congress men or party rebels. They have killed several workers of Congress, Muslim League and even their own coalition partner CPI.  The most prominent CPM rebel killed by the “big brother” was TP Chandrasekharan from Vadagara. He was killed in a brutal manner on the night of May 2, 2012. Later on it was alleged that the vehicle used by the killers bore the Arabic prayer verses for creating an impression that the culprits were Islamic fundamentalists. This murder shook CPM gravely. Senior CPM leader and former CM VS Achuthanandan publicly denounced the murder and went to console the widow of the killed. VS’s act was attacked by the official faction of the party led by his bête noire Pinarayi Vijayan.
The latest addition in the series RSS is the shameful incident that took place in Kattayikkonam near Thiruvananthapuram. RSS Taluk Pracharak Amal Krishna was attacked with an iron tool on March 14, 2016 and his skull was seriously damaged. A fresh engineering graduate was on ventilator for several weeks together and still struggling to return to the normal life.
The aforementioned are the scenario in a nutshell. More than 200 Sangh workers have sacrificed their lives for their freedom to choose social and personal life in Kerala, mostly at the hands of CPM criminals. In Kannur alone, 78 swayamsevaks have been killed.
This clearly depicts the intolerant and violent character of CPM in Kerala and its unilateral animosity against the nationalist thinking.
RSS’s peace initiatives
Significantly, RSS has always expressed readiness to find out the avenues to put an end to this dangerous murder politics.  Sangh had taken may serious initiatives in the past in this direction.
P. Parameswaran had taken over as the director of Deendayal Research Institute, New Delhi, in mid-1977 which he continued till the last leg of 1981. Those were the high time of CPM’s fascist murder politics. The blood of innocent Sangh workers was spilled on the streets of Kerala. Sangh leaders thought of a dialogue with senior CPM leaders in this regard.  Parameswaranji got in touch with RSS Kerala Prant Pracharak K Bhaskar Rao. Accordingly Parameswaranji wrote a letter to EMS Namboodiripad who was stationed in Delhi as the general secretary of CPM. EMS replied him in positive tone.
Afterwards a telephonic conversation with Parmeswaranji, EMS proposed to have a talk with Kerala CM and PB member EK Nayanar who was scheduled to reach Delhi on one of those days. Accordingly the date and time for an RSS-Nayanar meeting at Delhi was scheduled. Ranga Hari and the then Kerala Prant Pracharak K Bhaskar Rao reached Delhi. But, some unexpected incidents took place in Delhi that day. A prominent ABVP worker of Kerala V Muraleedharan (erstwhile State BJP chief) was arrested that day in connection with CPM-RSS clashes in Thalasserry. But, ABVP central unit in Delhi got the information that it was KG Venugopal, the then Kerala state organising secretary and Sangh pracharak, who was arrested. Naturally they got agitated. They encircled the CM at Kerala House which went on for hours. Parameswaranji and RSS leaders who had reached Delhi were anxious about the dialogue. Parameswaranji phoned Nayanar.  CM’s response was warm and inspiring: “So what Parameswaran? They are after all boys. You come with your colleagues; let us have the dialogue!!”
During the initial talks Nayanar’s Cabinet colleague and Congress (S) leader PC Chacko (Congress national spokesman these days) was with the CM.  Bhaskar Rao, Parameswaranji and Ranga Hari represented RSS. Nayanar talked about the “boys’ naughtiness” in a lighter vein. Ranga Hariji told this correspondent that Nayanar said they were smart unlike Kerala boys; he kept on talking about the Delhi boys.
But Chacko in a more aggressive mood said, ABVP boys had brought daggers covered in the newspaper.  Nayanar stopped him. He said, the boys did not bring any weapon. In short, RSS leaders had a feeling that CPM did not dispute the RSS endeavour to close the chapter of violence. Both parties agreed to have the second leg of the discussion in Kerala. Hariji says, Nayanar said in his usual humorous style that he would crack the news of dialogue to the media as soon as he reaches Kerala. Hariji was assigned to fix the place for the meeting in Kochi. So, technically he was the convener of the second leg.
Once back in Kochi Hariji got in touch with a senior CPM leader operating from Kochi. Hariji told that RSS had no objection to attend the meeting in their (CPM) office; but, CPM could not even imagine it – What would their comrades think! Then RSS expressed its pleasure to host the meeting in its Kerala State RSS karyalaya.  But, CPM leader equated it with stepping on to the fire. Then both leaders decided to have the meeting in a house in Kochi acceptable to both sides. Accordingly a swayamsevak’s house was fixed; who was a businessman.
PB member P Ramamoorthy, Home Minister TK Ramakrishnan and senior leader MM Lawrence participated in the meeting from CPM’s side. Dathopanth Thengidi, Ranga  Hari and senior Sangh Pracharak P Madhavan participated from the Sangh’ side. Hariji remembers that paan had been arranged in the venue of the meeting for Ramamoorthy as Thengidiji knew about it as a labour leader. Since Lawrence and Ranga Hari were classmates during their school days, the personal rapport had helped a lot for the smooth dialogue between two organisations.
As a participant of both legs of the dialogue, Hariji remembers that both parties were very much particular to put an end to the physical attacks. During the discussion until the lunch time, proposals had come up to avoid violence. Both parties agreed to the proposal to hold the meetings of senior leaders of both sides whenever tension came up. The post lunch discussion took place in the government guest house, Ernakulam.  Hariji says that BMS leader R Venugopal (later on national working president of BMS) had come to the guest house even though he was not a participant in the discussion.
Hariji says, there was another dialogue sometime between 1984 and 1989 near Kottakkal, Malappuram District, during his regime as the Kerala Prant Pracharak. Present Leader of Opposition VS Achuthanandan had participated in that meeting. Adv. TV Ananthan (the then Prant Karyavah) and S Sethumadhavan (the then Sah-prant Pracharak) represented the Sangh. Some understandings were worked out; but again CPM violated in day light.

On November 29 or 30, 1999, a meeting took place in Justice VR Krishna Iyer’s residence in Kochi. Because, RSS was not party to it! Even though RSS (media technically says BJP) was the main victim of violence by the CPM, participants of the meeting were Congress, CPM and CPI! They decided to maintain peace in Thalassery. The very next day, Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha state vice president Jayakrishnan Master was brutally killed, in front of his class 6th students!

When we take glimpses of the RSS-CPM dialogue, one thing is crystal clear: RSS took the initiatives for the dialogue. Therefore, there is no room for any discussion on who launches political violence in Kerala and who tried their level best to avoid it.
Recently a new turn has entered in this dangerous game. Ariyil Shukkoor, a Muslim League worker, was killed in Kannur. Another Muslim activist Faisal was killed. Though RSS was being targeted for this by CPM, enquiries in both the cases have indicted the CPM workers.  Now, communists also avoid direct involvement of their workers and instead hire the professional killers. There is a tendency to give communal colour through tacit alliance with the Islamists in the State. Continuation of this trend can be the gravest threat to the ‘God’s Own Country’.

(An Article from Organiser. By Satisan in Kochi & Ganesh Krishnan R in Kannur—Killing-Fields-of–Kannur.aspx)

Two Hindu boys shot in Pakistan’s Sindh province over blasphemy allegations


Two Hindu boys shot in Pakistan’s Sindh province over blasphemy allegations. One of the victims, 17-year-old Dewan Sateesh Kumar, succumbed to his injuries while his friend Avinash is in a critical condition, media reports said.

Two Hindu teenagers were shot in Pakistan’s Sindh province over allegations of Quran desecration today (July 27) while another was arrested for blasphemy. One of the victims, 17-year-old Dewan Sateesh Kumar, succumbed to his injuries while his friend Avinash is in a critical condition, Dawn reported.

The incident comes a day after a Hindu man was arrested over blasphemy charges in Ghotki area of the province, which shares its border with India. According to reports in the Pakistani media, one Amar Lal was arrested and booked for blashphemy after massive protests by Muslims in Ghotki. “A Hindu man was arrested for allegedly desecrating Holy Quran following massive protests and shutdown by Muslim community in Ghotki District of Sindh,” a report in the Dawn stated.

Communal tension in Sindh 

Tension prevails in Sindh following the arrest of Amar Lal. Police claims Amar is suffering from psychotic disorder. Shops remained shut and other daily activities remained affected in response to a shutdown called by Muslims in Ghotki. Several protesters blocked the national highway passing through the town causing a huge traffic jam. Shops owned by Hindus also remained shut. Sindh was in news recently when Hindus in the region had raised objections over the sale of shoes with ‘Om’ inscriptions. Hindus had staged massive protests in the region over reports of sale of such footwear.

Blasphemy Law

Section 295 (B) of the Pakistan Penal Code deals with blasphemy under which over 1,300 people have been accused of blasphemy from 1987 to 2014. The vast majority of the accusations were lodged for desecration of the Quran.


Facing New Evangelisation Strategies

Arise Bharat


Readers of Telugu may wish to read my article that appeared in Jagruthi, a Telugu weekly on Facing New Christian Evangelisation Strategies and lessons that Hindus must learn.

Facing New Evangelisation Strategies


English Version :

Facing the New Christian Evangelization Strategies

– Nadimpalli Ayush

 What Keeps Hindus attached to their traditions and remain as Hindus inspite of varied onslaughts?  This question has been bugging almost all evangelists who have come to Bharat.  In their ambition to Christianize the whole world, the evangelists have time to time revised their strategies. Though most parts of the whole world fell to their designs, they have faced major resistance in Bharat. However, the future of whether Bharat would remain Hindu depends largely on how the Hindus respond to the evangelistion strategies and methods.

” India’s first major contact with Christianity began when Vasco da Gama, from Portugal, landed with gunboat and priests in…

View original post 2,335 more words

The “Moderate Muslim” Strategy to Islamicize India

Ghazva-E-Hind – The Moderate Muslim Strategy to Islamicize India – Maulana Abul Kalam Azad

Maulana_Abul_Kalam_AzadThere is talk in certain circles of ‘Ghazva-e-Hind’ nowadays, a campaign to islamicise India. Back in 1946, Maulana Azad, a Congress president, argued the moderate nationalist muslim case to Islamicise India, and how muslim separatism was damaging islamisation. Although his real aim was to islamicise India, Azad was coopted by Congress, and was their secular and nationalist “poster” boy. In contrast, those nationalist Hindus who wanted to protect Hinduism, were castigated as ‘communal’, ostracised and excluded from the national discourse by Nehru and his followers.

Glossing over positive aspects of Azad’s 1946 interview, this analysis focuses on those aspects of moderate Muslim thinking and strategy that intermesh with Jihad in India and the world. Nine points of interest emerge in the analysis (all quotes are from the Maulana).

1) Azad opposes Pakistan not because he is a nationalist, but only because it does not help the Muslims.

“If Pakistan was right for Muslims then I would have supported it. But I see clearly the dangers inherent in the demand. … partition of India cannot promote their interests.”

2) “By demanding Pakistan we are turning our eyes away from the history of the last 1,000 years… ”

What is the history of 1000 years? It started with Ghazni’s invasions. So, the talk of 1000 years is an oblique reference to convert and islamicise India. Azad makes this clear:

3) “What is the cherished goal of a devout Muslim? Spreading the light of Islam or dividing territories along religious lines to pursue political ambitions?”

Continue reading


  • By Dr.Rahul Shastri

Whether it was E.M.S Namboodiripad or Harkishen Singh Surjeet then or Sitaram Yechury now, it comes as no surprise to listen to Communists praising Pakistan or China.


During 1962 India-China war, EMS said, “…the Chinese had entered territory that they thought was theirs and hence there was no question of aggression. At the same time, the Indians were defending territory that they considered theirs and so they were not committing aggression either…” .

In  1998, the general secretary of CPI(M), Harkishen Singh Surjeet reiterated the position of  E.M.S on the issues of border conflicts. Now, Sitaram Yechury, General Secretary of Communist Party of India (Marxist) says, what is wrong in saying ‘Pakistan Zindabad’.

There is a confluence of Hate Hinduism brigade today. Some openly talk of breaking India, and their right to do so is defended by others on grounds of “freedom of expression (FOE)”. Make no mistake, this is only a ‘good cop, bad cop’ routine. The agenda that unites them is Hate Hinduism. Communists supply the ideological and moral leadership, the media and westernised intelligentsia multiply the firepower, and the Congressis and others provide cannon fodder.

What is happening today is not idle chatter. It resonates with the tragic history of India. An aspect of its history that is deliberately hidden by communist historians, who control the history writing – How the communists have helped to break India.

What the communists did to break India and create Pakistan should never be forgotten. Those who forget history run the risk of it being repeated – the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce. Here are the documented details of communist love for Pakistan which led them to break India:


The demand for Pakistan had only to be raised for the communists to declare that Muslim League had become anti-imperialist and was no longer communal. Further that Jinnah was comparable to Gandhiji. Unbelievable? Read for yourself what Sri PC Joshi wrote in those days:

We were the first to see and admit a change in its character when the League accepted complete independence as its aim and began to rally the Muslim masses behind its banner. We held a series of discussions within our party and came to the conclusion in 1941-1942 that it had become an anti-imperialist organization expressing the freedom urge of the Muslim people that its demand for Pakistan was a demand for self determination…“

A belief continues to be held that League is a communal organization and that Mr. Jinnah is Pro-British.  But what is the reality? Mr. Jinnah is to the freedom loving League masses what Gandhiji is to the Congress masses. They regard the League as their patriotic organization as we regard the Congress.”[1]


Sri Hamdani, a Pakistani lawyer, presumably a leftist, writes the “CPI was the only organized secular party which supported the demand for Pakistan, and gave it an ideological justification on the basis of the principle of the right of self-determination to sub-national groups.” [2]

What was this justification?

The communist justification was “…The Muslim masses feared that they would be oppressed and exploited by Hindu India. … To refuse this demand [for Pakistan] meant to sanction national inequality and oppression.[2]

Oppression! Exploitation! In their name, destroy the country!
Does anyone find echoes of ‘ham kya mange azadi’ here?

The CPI declared approval of the AIML’s political aspirations… They also questioned the right of Congress to speak for the whole of India.[2]. Sajjad Zaheer, a noted Communist leader and intellectual, later the Secretary General of the Communist Party of Pakistan in 1948, supported the demand for Pakistan. The Party itself supported the demand for Muslim separatists “to the point of secession of the Muslim nationalities...” [4]


The problem with Pakistan demand was that Muslim League was not a mass organisation, since aristocrats and vested interests had important positions in it. The communists decided to change things at the ground level, by building the Muslim League wherever needed.

On Sajjad Zaheer’s suggestion, the Party decided to encourage its ranks to join the AIML with the intention of turning the AIML into a mass organisation.” [2]. The Communist Party not only supported the Muslim League, but also gave its own people like Sajjad Zaheer, Abdullah Malik and Daniyal Latifi to the League.” [3]. “… a number of well-known Communists like Daniyal Latifi and progressives like Mian Iftikharuddin resigned from the Communist Party and the INC to join the AIML.[2]

Daniyal Latifi was a well-known Indian communist who gave up his lucrative practice at Lahore to join the Communist Party as a fulltime worker. He later joined the Punjab AIML and became its active member.[2]

He was “trained in law by Jinnah himself, authored the Punjab Muslim League’s manifesto for the 1945-1946 elections, … the League’s entire election campaign in the 1945-1946 elections was stage managed in Punjab by the Communist Party of India….[3]

Mian Iftikharuddin was the president of the Punjab Provincial INC Committee, but was a very close sympathiser of the Communist Party. He was also a member of the Punjab Assembly from 1937 to 1947. He joined the AIML only in the last months of 1945. [2]. The Party also issued instructions to the district workers to cooperate with the AIML and enroll new members for the AIML organisations.[2]


The “AIML welcomed the Communist decision, as the popular base of the Communist Party could now be utilised by it to rally support for itself.” [2]. The communists set to work, issuing certificates: “After joining the AIML, the Communists tried to refurbish the AIMLs image as a progressive and forward looking organisation[3]

The biggest advantage was that with Communist certificates, Pakistan supporters were able to escape the charge of communalism and acquire a ‘freedom fighter’ halo. As Hamdani says: “the Communist Party of India that most secular and non-communal institution … wholeheartedly supported the Muslim League and the Pakistan Movement during the 1940s… They would not have done so if they had thought the League was operating on a narrow communal agenda.[3] 

Does anybody find echoes in what is happening with the Kashmiri separatists today?


Communist perversion reached its logical limit when they characterised Pakistan demand as nationalist and anti imperialist, while Akhanda Bharat slogan was called separatist!

Partition 1

While supporting the Pakistan demand in official documents, Sri Adhikari writes “We saw in the growth of the Muslim League not the growth of communalism but the rise of anti-imperialist consciousness among the Muslim masses…”.

On the other hand the same document refers to the supporters of Akhada Bharata as “… Hindu minded communal reactionary who under the garb of Akhanda Bharat …” “….slogan of “Akhand Hindustan” leads in fact not to unity but to disunity and disruption.” [4]

In this way was the banner of Pakistan unfurled by the communists in India. They attacked, delegitimised, and isolated the nationalists of India and helped to break India.



According to Ram Manohar Lohia the Communist support to the partition demand “acted like an incubator,[6] meaning that the seeds of Pakistan were nursed to ripeness in Communism. Those who tend to dismiss nationalist concerns at what is happening today as ‘alarmist’ would do well to study how Pakistani muslims today assess the contribution of communists in those days.

1. “Muslim League itself in the mid-1940 s benefited from communist work among the peasantry and strengthened its own secular appeal among a large section of the Muslim masses.” [5]

2. “By equating a religious community with a nationality, the Communists helped aiding the communal ambitions of the vested interests among the Muslims even further, giving respectability to these elements and, in the process, drove a wedge in the unity of the national forces.[2]

3. “the Communists were willing to be taken for a ride by the AIML leadership, and this probably the Leaguers enjoyed immensely.” [3]


When the communists led by Sajjad Zaheer went to Pakistan to collect their wages of sin, they met with bitter disappointment.

Even earlier, communists and their supporters were denied tickets and formal positions in the party by the Muslim League, and the League manipulated things to its own advantage [pp 570-1, 6].

After the formation of Pakistan, the “state started to use Islam as a political weapon to counteract various democratic forces. Islamic doctrine was employed in the media to persuade people against the anti-religious (meaning anti-Islam) … communists. Public gatherings by communists were occasionally attacked and disrupted by mobs claiming Islamic tendencies or love for Pakistan.” [6]. “Public Safety Acts and other draconian measures from the colonial period were reinvigorated and used to arrest and harass party workers and sympathetic trade unionists. Important members of the Communist Party of Pakistan’s central committee were periodically jailed and communist publications were routinely banned or confiscated. Even literary journals linked to the Progressive Writers Association, Sawera, Adab e Latif or Nuqush, were constantly asked to stop publication for disseminating anti-state literature.” [6]

Soon there was a crackdown and incarceration of the “…members of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Pakistan, Sajjad Zaheer and Mohammad Ata. The poet and progressive intellectual, Faiz Ahmed Faiz (Faiz was never a card-carrying member of the Communist Party) was also accused of being a co-conspirator and was jailed along with the others. … Zaheer spent the next several years in jail and soon after his release in 1955 he went back to India.” [6]

…“there were widespread arrests and blanket clampdown on communist party activities. The entire process crippled the movement and demoralized cadres.” [6]

Many were tortured, and Hassan Nasser of Hyderabad, was tortured to death. Communist organisations like the “Kisan Committee, Sind Hari Committee, Democratic Women’s Association, Peace Committee, Democratic Student Federation,and other groups … were very soon contained through severe persecution and state violence.” [6]

The wages of sin were paid in blood by the Pakistanis. 

The same has happened to communists in Iran, East Pakistan, and all other Islamic states. When will they understand that no amount of idealism can justify long lasting lunacy and betrayal of nationalism?

Why this lunacy? Most communists are not born idiots. One can only infer that they are blinded by hate. Hatred for Hinduism. Hatred is destructive. Love for the motherland should supplant hatred in the human soul. That alone is the way forward.

Vande Mataram!


[1] PC Joshi Congress and the Communists, People’s Publishing House Bombay, p 5.

[2] Communist Support for the Creation of Pakistan, Y.L. Hamdani, ,

[3] “Heretic, communist and Muslim Leaguer” —Yasser Latif Hamdani, June 14, 2010,

[4] G. Adhikari, Report to CC, on Pakistan and National Unity, Communist Party of India.

[5] “Communists in a Muslim Land: Cultural Debates in Pakistan’s Early Years” Kamran Asdar Ali,  Modern Asian Studies, 45, pp 501-¬534, 2011.

[6] “The Guilty Men of India’s Partition”, Ram Manohar Lohia.


Watch what Sitaram Yechuri’s said in an interview with Karan Thapar

His full interview with Karan Thapar is here.

The Story of a GREAT BETRAYAL, blog post.

The 7-Great-Indian-Communist-Treachery.

Communists as Razakar Collaborators:
K M Munshi the Indian representative to Nizam, wrote about Commie Betrayal.

CD01  CD02

Indian Communists as Chinese Stooge:
Declassified CIA reports on Indian Commies during 1962 War is damning.

C1 C2

C3  C4

Indian Communists as British stooge:

C5  C0

Indian Communists as KGB Stooge:


Dr.Ambedkar on Communists: “In another context, presiding over a District conference of the Depressed Classes at Masur in September 1937, Ambedkar declared that he was a confirmed enemy of the Communists who exploited the labourers for their political ends, and there was no possibility of joining them. Reference: Book Perfidies of Power: India in the New Millennium, by P Radhakrishnan, page 54.

Why Communists opposed the Constitution?
A must know quote of Dr.Ambedkar from his speech on 25th November 1949 (Reference from archives of Parliament debates)