There have been questions regarding Indian independence and the Indian constitution from 1947. All the voices would be silenced by threats, blackmails and emotional outcries from the Indian state. Let us see the history. Even death could be the reward: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajiv_Dixit
- The transfer of power:
Of late people like Baba Ramdev http://divyayoga.com/ http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:olEhW-z0fi0J:www.scribd.com/doc/30966876/YogSandesh-May-Eng2010+transfer+of+power+agreement+rajiv+dixit&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=in&source=www.google.co.inhave questioned whether India was really awarded freedom or was it just a transfer of power (Dominion status under the crown of UK as per the Indian Independence Act)
Speech regarding the Congress conspiracy (Rajiv Dixit - one who exposes in this video now stands murdered by the state):
from the British to the British trained colonial minded Congress. The answer is the latter. There was no real “Independence”. Congress and not the people of India were awarded with only a conditional and demeaning transfer of power. Practically speaking, there was no change of guard to decisively state. The legislature, executive, judiciary and all the vestiges remained. The same thing happened with Pakistan also. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1946_Cabinet_Mission_to_India#Formation_of_a_government
One of the conditions for the transfer is that the Indian state should forever be a part of the British empire through an organisation called ‘The Commonwealth’ through which all the havoc would be played sometimes even worse than pre 1947. Independence for the very meaning of the word means self dependence and self dependence cannot be awarded, it can only be assumed. This was not the case. A transfer of power was awarded which was largely masqueraded as ‘Independence’ by the then Anglo media. All this sums up into a state which is under a watchdog called ‘The Commonwealth’ whose premier is the queen of England http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_of_the_Commonwealth#History
who is advised by the British Parliament which is in turn managed by a bunch of lobbyists under the payroll of the companies who exploit the Indian nation and people with the whole machinery of the above said state. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_of_the_Commonwealth
For instance, if India were to declare itself free of the transfer of power and declare a different path, it would be gang raped by the Commonwealth and its progeny, the Anglo-Saxon states with sanctions, defamation by the media and all the most infernal ways possible until the aggressors take up the usual Anglo – Judeo Hellenic “responsibility of civilising the native” (read muting the already subservient native). Indian and consequently Pakistani “independence” is just a transfer of power from the ‘Whiteman’ bureaucrats to brown – skinned whitemen bureaucrats and not intended for the layman. This bureaucracy, to silence any further irritations either bribed the freedom seekers (through pensions and perks) and unleashed a Goebbels styled propaganda of the ‘Independence’ to the state of India which was just a conditional transfer of power to a few Anglo styled elite.
Speech regarding the Congress conspiracy (Rajiv Dixit - one who exposes in this video now stands murdered by the state):
from the British to the British trained colonial minded Congress. The answer is the latter. There was no real “Independence”. Congress and not the people of India were awarded with only a conditional and demeaning transfer of power. Practically speaking, there was no change of guard to decisively state. The legislature, executive, judiciary and all the vestiges remained. The same thing happened with Pakistan also. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1946_Cabinet_Mission_to_India#Formation_of_a_government
One of the conditions for the transfer is that the Indian state should forever be a part of the British empire through an organisation called ‘The Commonwealth’ through which all the havoc would be played sometimes even worse than pre 1947. Independence for the very meaning of the word means self dependence and self dependence cannot be awarded, it can only be assumed. This was not the case. A transfer of power was awarded which was largely masqueraded as ‘Independence’ by the then Anglo media. All this sums up into a state which is under a watchdog called ‘The Commonwealth’ whose premier is the queen of England http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_of_the_Commonwealth#History
who is advised by the British Parliament which is in turn managed by a bunch of lobbyists under the payroll of the companies who exploit the Indian nation and people with the whole machinery of the above said state. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_of_the_Commonwealth
For instance, if India were to declare itself free of the transfer of power and declare a different path, it would be gang raped by the Commonwealth and its progeny, the Anglo-Saxon states with sanctions, defamation by the media and all the most infernal ways possible until the aggressors take up the usual Anglo – Judeo Hellenic “responsibility of civilising the native” (read muting the already subservient native). Indian and consequently Pakistani “independence” is just a transfer of power from the ‘Whiteman’ bureaucrats to brown – skinned whitemen bureaucrats and not intended for the layman. This bureaucracy, to silence any further irritations either bribed the freedom seekers (through pensions and perks) and unleashed a Goebbels styled propaganda of the ‘Independence’ to the state of India which was just a conditional transfer of power to a few Anglo styled elite.
- Alien ‘constitution’:
This subservient intelligentsia then quickly set itself a task of ‘writing a constitution’ on its own. The ‘constitution’ was then passed by a set of individuals called the constituent assembly who are again from the same bureaucracy. These too were not elected after the ‘independence’. They were just a continuation of the erstwhile British state. The ethos of the constitution is one which is a careful plagiarist compilation of subservient clauses from different constitutions of entirely alien states.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constituent_Assembly_of_India
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constituent_Assembly_of_India
- Unratified outrage:
The constitution of India still stands non-ratified by the individual Indian. No referendum or plebiscite was held quoting the clauses of the constitution. Not even a simple “Aye/Nay” kind of referendum has been held till date. This is the case in countries which were awarded with independence to a caretaker body. Had the British really intended ‘independence’, the ensuing caretaker body would have immediately conducted a referendum. If this constitution is to be mine, it should have been voted for by my forefathers if not me, at least. I should decide not just who governs me but also on how I should be governed. If not, it is worse than serfdom – I decide the better one of the thieves and this has been going on for the last 64 years.
Ratification of American constitution: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitution#Ratification
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratification_of_the_United_States_Constitution#Ratification
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_drafting_and_ratification_of_the_United_States_Constitution
Iraqi! ratification:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_constitutional_referendum,_2005
Ratification of American constitution: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitution#Ratification
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratification_of_the_United_States_Constitution#Ratification
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_drafting_and_ratification_of_the_United_States_Constitution
Iraqi! ratification:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_constitutional_referendum,_2005
- Digression:
The usual reason given for not holding such a referendum is ‘the Indian is uneducated’; ‘there was chaos’ and all such blah blah. Who the hell are there people to tailor make an alien constitution and force subservience. Is this ‘Democracy’? First of all let us go to the “uneducated” claim. The “uneducated”, in reality means the non subservient. They had their own governing systems from time immemorial, their own practical constitution. They would definitely not have agreed upon disposing their native elders, systems and time tested ideals. So they were purposefully ignored. Not even a plebiscite was held among the freedom fighter pensioners. Were there uneducated too? Sounds contradictory! The next claim, of chaos, is even filthier. The Indian army which could fight the just separated Pakistani twin sharing a common head, Lord Mountbatten and not control a few goons; this is sheer humbug. The rioters were instigated by the lack of any control from the states which were still screaming of brotherhood. Moreover the rioters, for example the Razakars were clandestinely stage managed by the state itself. The state needs chaos whenever there is a possibility or awakening of the native.
- Destruction of India’s spirit:
The local governments and systems which survived in various degrees throughout India were gradually, through the years wiped out by false promises, propaganda and sometimes through direct cut throat measures. For example, in Tamilnadu, the last surviving native head, the post of the village treasurer, the Grama manyakarar (Monigar) was abolished by force (i.e. by the rule of the gun) in the 1970s.
- Creation of more ‘alien’ Indians:
The state nearly always decries Indian ethos, Indian systems, Indian values and everything characteristically Indian. Through such continuous rootwork, the state has to some extent made the Indians forget or at least disrespect the Indianess in them. Thereby it produces millions of neurotic serfs every year who themselves are ready to sell their own soul, body and resources. This all adds up to a sustained flow of power to the otherwise poor west, though fatally injurious to India.
- Indian ‘democratic’ elections:
The concept of election itself is Judaic. Those of wisdom eventually rise to power. To stop this ‘pagan’ resurgence, the Judaic clergy devised the system of elections. The human is not a solitary being. He/she is a social entity. India runs on the natural - pagan philosophy of social responsibility of the individual, family, the clan, the community and the head. In the natural system, everything is inherited and cannot be traded. Property, power and responsibility are all one and the same. Why should I need a representative when I myself am responsible? The representative is in reality a five year dictator who can do anything as he pleases. He has to make the most in these five years. For this he acts as an agent to various companies who also swindle as usual.
This all sums up to: There has been no ‘Independence’. The constitution of India itself is illegitimate. Electoral ‘democracy’ is alien to the Indian ethos.
A few individuals called the ‘power group’ who are mostly grandsons of colonialists stage manage all that happens in India ultimately for plunder, even worse than 1947 through clerical minded west trained ‘Indians’.
India is not a democracy in the real sense of the word. It could only be democratic with its native systems.
Finally a word - I love nation but hate the alien state. The Indian state is the only problem the Indian nation has. I am neither a naxalite nor a seperatist right winger. I am just another Indian worth his salt.
India is not a democracy in the real sense of the word. It could only be democratic with its native systems.
Finally a word - I love nation but hate the alien state. The Indian state is the only problem the Indian nation has. I am neither a naxalite nor a seperatist right winger. I am just another Indian worth his salt.
