British Neutralized Mozlem Rulers in India and restored religious freedom, though many do not want to agree.
Even in 1857-58 mutiny, British killed mostly mozlems (nearly 1 million) and only 200,000 HHindus were killed.
British built railways to efficiently transport goods to ports in India, but they also allowed Indian public to travel in trains, though not in the whites-only compartments.
Re: British Neutralized Mozlem Rulers in India and restored religious
by piri on Oct 17, 2017 04:54 PM
Care to read what Shashi Tharoor has written about what the British did to India ?
Do you know that Tharoor has stated with historical evidence from the archives that Winston Churchill has as much blood on his hands as the most genocidal dictators of the 20th century (for his responsibility for causing the Bengal famine that killed lakhs) ?
Re: Re: British Neutralized Mozlem Rulers in India and restored r
by MISSIONARY on Oct 17, 2017 05:13 PM
Sahashi Tharoor is half-ignorant and half-educated. Bengal famine took place, when the British were in panic as the Japanese were fast approaching eastern part of India. Anyway, Churchill in general not a good person, though he was good at inspiring and shoring up the confidence of British citizens during second WW. Some black sheep are there in every ruing class. That itself does not prove that all British were bad.
British Neutralized Mozlem Rulers in India and restored religious freedom, though many do not want to agree.
Even in 1857-58 mutiny, British killed mostly mozlems (nearly 1 million) and only 200,000 HHindus were killed.
British built railways to efficiently transport goods to ports in India, but they also allowed Indian public to travel in trains, though not in the whites-only compartments.
British Neutralized Mozlem Rulers in India and restored religious freedom, though many do not want to agree.
Even in 1857-58 mutiny, British killed mostly mozlems (nearly 1 million) and only 200,000 HHindus were killed.
British built railways to efficiently transport goods to ports in India, but they also allowed Indian public to travel in trains, though not in the whites-only compartments.
Almost all the structures you have mentioned now are being used to serve Indian needs as offices, railway stations, etc. In that way, the imperial historicity and associated pompousness of oppressor is stripped off.
Now, Taj Mahal may be a wonderful white marble architectural masterpiece for others ....but... for Hindus ....it is dripping red soaked with blood of our people who were mass executed, our holy land and temples destroyed upon which i's'lamic structures were erected.
Taj Mahal is there, but as a symbol of reminder of cruelty and unimaginable oppression by Moghuls.
Please dont call this memory as propaganda ...we will wither away and will be repeatedly get punished if we forget the past history.
All Courts would be empty and jobless if individuals would meekly accept situations as it evolves ...however unjust or cruel ...and not fight back. It is this spirit of restoring justice and retaining our heritage that we need to protect as a larger society ....raising above individual needs and aspirations.
Thats a nice article, though heading is misleading.. Adityanath is very correct in stating "irrespective of who built & how it was built; Taj remains one of the most important things of our history"
The author is extremely well known for his pro leftist & biased view point in each & every single article that he pens. So I am pleasantly surprised to see some objectivity while presenting History. Facts should remains facts however unpleasant they may be, this article seems to reflect so.
