India got azaadi in BHEEKH- Kangna. - Page 9

A person who proclaims herself as a desh bhakt says such wonderful gem hence insulting our freedom fighters and their efforts🤢. How can a person stoop so low it's like jis thali mein khaya usi thali mein ched kiya🤬. And those media reporters are as disgusting and garbage as her🤬. Clapping on the insult of our nation and freedom fighters and encouraging her for that shameless🤢

Anyways to our padma shree award winner miss kangana ranaut she is a woman with lots of self respect and never takes anything in bheek then why the hell is she staying in india🤬. Go to some other country and stay there and leave india forever if you can't respect your own country🤬

Originally posted by: arnavfluffy

Savarkar was a great hero, and freedom fighter, who because of Nehru, was still in prison even after freedom. His poem, sagara praan talamala, still brings so much pain while reading.

Nehru, was a crook and not a freedom fighter. He was a selfish guy.

But others, rani laxmi Bai, Tilak, gandhiji, Bhagat Singh, so many countless others gave so much of their life for freedom.

We live in a free India only because of their sacrifices

Veer Savarkar was great, but you cannot discount Nehru. When you are dealing with slimes like British and Muslim League(no offencd to all Muslims) who were hell bent in destroying the national unity, you need a crook to deal with them.

Riots during partition really showed when religion overtakes humanity.

The funny thing is that Kangana has also insulted BJP by ignoring Atal Behari Vajpayee's term as PM when she said India got independence only in 2014. Does it mean Vajpayee and first NDA govt were also 'slaves' or did nothing for Indian civilization?

If BJP does endorse it then it means Modi wants to obliterate legacy of Vajpayee too who built BJP from a scratch.

Anyway Kangana is into older men and it seems this time the old man she has taken fancy for is Narendra Modi.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Nope. We're not going to have any derailing here.

1. Kangana called the nonviolent freedom struggle begging. The people who died as a result are beggars according to her. The people who were imprisoned, those who were tortured... all beggars.

2. Therefore, her contention and that of those who support her claims is clearly that peaceful protests are beggary. Violent movement is the only brave way to fight an enemy.

3. But the nonviolent movement won the freedom. Rebut that if you can.

4. The violent one... let's see, shall we?

Petitioning for clemency was allowed under law, and no one needed to be mocked for it. But Savarkar didn't simply petition for clemency, did he?

This is what he said to the Brits (parts in blue are cited from an article):

“The Mighty alone can afford to be merciful and therefore where else can the prodigal son return but to the parental doors of the Government?”

Savarkar offered to serve the “government in any capacity”. He declared he no longer believed in violence, justifying his conversion to constitutionalism because of the reforms the British government had introduced.

Savarkar said his conversion to the constitutional line would bring back “all those misled young men in India and abroad who were once looking up to me as their guide”.

THIS is bravery according to Kangana and her supporters? THIS is not begging?

No, thank you. I'd rather follow the emaciated Gandhi, who, after his arrest, continued with his nonviolent protests against British rule.

There is self-respect in standing tall and striking back (not first) or taking it when you're unable to strike back but doing it anyway because it's your way of telling them "No, you are not my master!"

There is zero self-respect in attacking from a position of power a people whose lands you're usurping (as the Brits did). And cowering the moment your puny attempt at violence gets caught (as Savarkar did) is cowardice.

Guess why Bhagat Singh is considered a hero? Gandhi didn't agree with Singh's tactics, either. But Bhagat Singh didn't cower when he got caught. He looked the Brits in the eye as he died.

Those are the kind of people Kangana spit her vitriol on.

4. I don't really care who the Indians Kangana quoted were. Point is they and she and you are parroting the British line. The same Brits who ultimately lost. Those who echo the British government's opinions on a people who won against them can and will be included in the same group or will be called cowards.

5. There are many problems with Nehru's quasi-communist ideology, but liaising with Britain wasn't one of those issues. How do you think the world functions? You can just split off with no currency, no economy, no army, at 12:01 AM on August 15?

6. #5 leads to #6 actually. If you believe India could've functioned on its own on day 1 after centuries of serfdom, you will also believe India could've actually won an armed battle against the Brits.

I have a suggestion for Kangana and her supporters. India now has the 2nd biggest military in the world, 2nd only to China.

Go ahead... sign up to fight a war against Britain. Or anyone else, say China.

Very few will. Because all those warmongers are usually quick to volunteer other people's lives, never their own.

So why would someone sane, who actually knows such an unequal war can never be won, draft a whole nation of young people into idiocy?

They fought the war with the weapons they possessed. And won!

7. Partition... so now the claim is because the INC was unable to prevent the violence that happened there, India didn't actually get freedom by nonviolent protests? How does that even compute? It's as silly as saying because Covid is not killing as many people as Nipa, Covid is not dangerous. 2 different things... let's not try to conflate and derail.

___________

Enough is enough. The subcontinent existed for millennia before any of these political parties. The struggle of the people started in the 1800s. The land suffered many losses in the century which followed. Yes, freedom was obtained in 1947, and India was birthed.

It's history. Trying to erase it makes you no better than those who destroyed the Bamiyan Buddhas, than those who razed the subcontinent's temples and burned the ancient manuscripts.

Bal Gangadhar Tilak advised that Congress should distinguish between begging and claiming rights. He was a freedom fighter himself and was even at one point part of the Congress as well. So there was some criticism back then even against the Congress' stance. It's not towing the British line to say so.

India's freedom in 1947 wasn't complete. As you say, the country might not have been able to completely split off the next day after gaining that independence. So Kangana called the first ruling party as an extension of the British, which they were as part of the dominion of India.

At least we can agree that Bhagat Singh and others like him are considered as heroes, even by Kangana. There's no question of calling the martyrs as beggars, even the ones who protested peacefully. Bhagat Singh was martyred in 1931. Rani Laxmi Bai, much earlier. So there was a gap. Kangana wasn't talking about them but the events of 1947.

Originally posted by: atominis

The funny thing is that Kangana has also insulted BJP by ignoring Atal Behari Vajpayee's term as PM when she said India got independence only in 2014. Does it mean Vajpayee and first NDA govt were also 'slaves' or did nothing for Indian civilization?

If BJP does endorse it then it means Modi wants to obliterate legacy of Vajpayee too who built BJP from a scratch.

Anyway Kangana is into older men and it seems this time the old man she has taken fancy for is Narendra Modi.

Kangana is definately keeping the men in BJP happy. Otherwise why no sedation charges are not brought against her.

Originally posted by: Sadhanai

Bal Gangadhar Tilak advised that Congress should distinguish between begging and claiming rights. He was a freedom fighter himself and was even at one point part of the Congress as well. So there was some criticism back then even against the Congress' stance. It's not towing the British line to say so.

India's freedom in 1947 wasn't complete. As you say, the country might not have been able to completely split off the next day after gaining that independence. So Kangana called the first ruling party as an extension of the British, which they were as part of the dominion of India.

At least we can agree that Bhagat Singh and others like him are considered as heroes, even by Kangana. There's no question of calling the martyrs as beggars, even the ones who protested peacefully. Bhagat Singh was martyred in 1931. Rani Laxmi Bai, much earlier. So there was a gap. Kangana wasn't talking about them but the events of 1947.

Rani Laxmi Bai fought for the kingdom of Jhansi not for freedom. If her kingdom was spared by Lord Dalhousie through Doctrine of Lapse .It involved the British prohibiting a Hindu ruler without a natural heir from adopting a successor and, after the ruler died or abdicated, annexing his land. Rani Lakshmi Bai's adopted son was not recognized by them. Same problem was with Nana Saheb.

Violence never leads to stable government. All the violent coups are either crushed or end up in dictatorship. During 1900s most of the India had royality, who would have prefared to have their own country under their rule. Most of them would have ended have fighting with each other. A war causes massive loss of manpower and resources.

There is no doubt that Bhagat Singh and Bal Gangadhar Tilak laid their life for the country. But its another thing to establish a government and start development. Policies like non alignment came due to this reason.

India is very much British in many aspect. High tea and British table manners are part of government employee training. British courtesy of respecting others by referring strangers and even seniors as Sir and Ma'am is still followed.

As far as events of 1947 is concerned, seeds were sown during partition of Bengal in 1905 and communal electoral for minorities.

Kangana and some other people need to read about how and why partition happened. You cannot blame only congress for everything. There was another person called Mohammed Ali Jinnah and Muslim league too.

Awards bheek main milta hoga azaadi nahi.

https://tfipost.com/2020/01/the-real-reason-why-british-quit-india-in-1947/

Originally posted by: Sadhanai

https://tfipost.com/2020/01/the-real-reason-why-british-quit-india-in-1947/

On one end we whine about how we were still working for our masters until 2014 and on another we want to quote the very ‘masters ‘ when we want to prove a point?

Which loser will accept the supremacy and victory of his defeater? That too British of all the people?

Take a seat please!

Kangana via IG