Plot thickens great indian kamasutra Plot thickens

Mohammad Yunus who cried the most when Sanjay diedIt was Mohammad Yunus who cried the most when Sanjay died who fathered sanjay ? Mohammad Yunus?

Jammu & Kashmir’s ruling National Conference (NC) has averted a potentially destabilizing split with alliance partner – the Congress – following intervention of the top leaders. The alliance was reported to have been on the verge of collapse over chief minister Omar Abdullah’s insistence on going ahead with the contentious proposal of creating new administrative units from the block level.NC patron and Union minister Farooq Abdullah was reportedly forced to fly back from abroad to avert the crisis. He met Congress president Sonia Gandhi to sort out the matter on Wednesday. The urgency to prevent the split could have something do with the speculation in the political circles of a possible alliance between NC’s arch foe People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and the Congress.

If only India’s other stats – on economy, poverty alleviation, healthcare – grew at the rate crimes against women are climbing up in this country. At an increase of 31% it is exponential. It is also shocking, amazing and ridiculous. A 2006 report by the National Crime Records Bureau said in India a woman is raped every half hour and is killed every 75 minutes. And this is according to 2004 data. Factor in a one-third jump and do the math. Also, make space for the large number of women, perhaps larger than the ones reporting their violation, who keep quiet and bury their shame forever in their hearts for fear of another round of abuse, this time from family, society, police.

The alliance between the two parties had ended with its disastrous handling of the 2008 agitation over the allotment of forestland to the trust that runs the Amarnath shrine in south Kashmir Himalayas. It ruled Jammu & Kashmir when India-Pakistan relations were uncharacteristically good from 2004 to 2008 as the two countries started a peace process. The relatively good ties allowed the PDP-Congress government to rein in draconian elements of the state besides pushing for important CBMs like the reopening of the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad road. Omar Abdullah in contrast did not have a similar luxury and his record in comparison looks way dismal than his immediate predecessors – PDP’s Mufti Mohammad Sayeed and Ghulam Nabi Azad of the Congress.

Such barbarism in a country that dreams to be a world power and demands every seat at every global high table should indeed be humiliating not only for its leaders but also its people. But few are moved by the plight of half the nation’s population, still living in such dread, such suffocating coexistence. And this in 2009 – the 21st century.
Where do the perpetrators get such courage and confidence from that they stop a running bus, pull out a woman and leave her by the roadside after raping her, that they trap a foreign diplomat and rape her in a car, that they catch hold of a college student and violate her atop a building even as heavy traffic passes by a few feet below? How is it that a cop instead of protecting a young girl shuts her inside a police post and does the unthinkable?
The arrogance mostly comes from a knowledge that in a society like India’s the victims will be silenced “naturally and culturally”. It comes from the deadly and deeply ingrained dynamics of a feudal nation that treats women as second class citizens. And it comes from hundreds of years of brainwashing of the male mind after Manu said women were little better than cattle. Importantly, it derives an insidious power of its own by the silent suffering of women themselves, by their own reluctance to fight for the space they rightly deserve and are perpetually denied.
Top police officers say the number of rape cases reported may not even be a fraction of the one that’s actually committed. Social activists echo this. For every woman who reports her violation, there are 10 who will not speak up. Somehow, the Indian male – and a predominantly male-dominated police and administration – continues to put the onus of the crime, rather incredibly, on the victims: you must have sent some signal; you must have been dolled-up and dressed provocatively; maybe you are crying rape because you have been caught; why did you have to answer nature’s call when you know there could be thugs lurking around; what shame you have brought on us; why you.
This is enough to kill the spirit of most women and for those that can transcend this psychological brutality there is the crude questioning by cops and lawyers, something many victims say is like going through a second rape. Not surprising that they prefer to seal their lips and kill their sense of dignity and honour. And we are not even talking about the numerous others subjected to molestation, groping, eve teasing and degrees of verbal and physical abuse – at the movie hall, in the bus, in crowded bylanes, markets, trains, almost everywhere. As one female colleague who used to take the metro in Kolkata to commute said, “The first time I was groped, I created a ruckus. And fought like mad. But after a few times, it got hard. In any case, the stares you get after that is almost, like, killing. If you are a working woman in India not rich enough to take your own car to office, groping is a routine reality.”
A group of informed citizens have started a cyber campaign against rape, clamoring for stricter laws, including death sentence if it involves minors and handicapped. It’s already got robust support and, clearly, many think it’s a step in the right direction. The courts will have to get stringent – many still persuade the rapist to marry his victim – but there is urgent need for another three-pronged effort. One, investigating agencies will have to be sensitized on how to deal with such cases. Two, society at large will have to change its attitude towards victims and make the leap from judgemental censure to empathy. Finally, women themselves will have to fight their demons and come out in the open about their various abuses.
India, as an article in TOI recently said, is now one of the most dangerous places for women to be in. We can do without this dubious distinction.

 he Congress could be inclined to replicate the alliance again as the previous tie up worked out reasonably well in a state known for successive misrule. Omar may have been talked out of his insistence to quit for preventing the possible realignment, which could be disastrous for an unpopular government. The polarisation of the electorate on regional lines — Jammu and the Valley – makes it impossible for either PDP or the NC to rule on its own. Both parties are largely confined to Kashmir, while Congress gets its most seats from the Jammu region.In this backdrop, it is understandable why Omar has apparently gone back on his threat to quit and end the alliance if the creation of 700 new units does not materialize. The NC has touted it as a ‘bold step’ for taking ‘administration to the people’s doorsteps’ ahead of the Lok Sabha and assembly polls later this year. But, Omar would evidently continue to dig his heels in over the issue with elections in mind. Otherwise the tech-savvy leader would have understood he was insistent on furthering an archaic model of decentralization. Technological advancement has created more options to cut through the red tape which the creation of new units is bound to further add.

Despite practical objections, Sonia seems to have boosted Omar’s position for the time being. She is understood to have asked her state party leaders to cooperate with him over the issue. But it could lead to a more impractical solution involving creation of around 2,000 units, which the Congress is insisting on.

The two parties have agreed to factor in Congress’s objections to the proposal, which related to the costs involved and its ‘Kashmir-Centric’ approach. If the Congress leaders have their way, it could lead to creation of administrative units across the state. The initial proposal was estimated to cost Rs 800 crore and the revised one over two times the initial cost.

Experts wonder if the initial proposal was financially unviable, how could the revised one work. The state depends heavily on the Centre’s financial assistance and has been unable to get additional funds as well. It has even failed to pay salaries to employees of some departments for months. Where is the money going to come from is the common question?

The two parties are aware that the new units are unviable also due to financial crunch, but would continue to ‘shadowbox’ to salvage some support in their respective strongholds – Jammu for the Congress and the Valley for NC. The Congress could sell the creation of more units in Jammu region as a triumph of a party that champions the regional cause despite being a ‘national’ party.

This apparent ‘eyewash’ underlines the ruling alliance’s acceptance of grim electoral prospects. Omar has been unable to keep his promises like the phased revocation of the hated Armed Forces Special Powers Act despite remarkable change in the security situation. He had in 2011 promised to have it revoked in a few days. The draconian law, which gives sweeping powers to armed forces to kill, detain and carry warrant free searches besides immunity from prosecution, has come under sharp focus with the Army’s move to close the alleged extrajudicial killing and mutilation of the bodies of five Kashmiris at Pathribal in 2000. The case was closed after the Army insisted on trying it own men after challenging a local court’s jurisdiction to prosecute them despite compelling evidence citing the draconian law’s provisions.

Further, the government’s iron-fisted response to the street protests killed over 120 people in 2010 summer alone. ‘Non-lethal equipment’ used as a result in the following years to quell protests has blinded people and left many with grievous injuries. Besides the fatalities involved, the government has clamped down on protests by blocking internet services and locking down cities and towns. Issues related to governance along with broken promises have not gone down well with people either.

SRINAGAR: J&K CM Omar Abdullah didn’t go to meet governor N N Vohra first after he left the assembly. He drove back home, drafted his
resignation — which is apparently so worded that it can be said to be ambigious about his insistence on immediate resignation — and reached Raj Bhavan with state finance minister Abdul Rahim Rather and political advisor Devendra Rana to hand it in.
Vohra is said to have reasoned with the 39-year-old chief minister, urging him not to act emotionally. He is learnt to have told him that he would not accept the resignation until the allegation was probed and determined one way or the other and Omar should carry on with his work until then.
Omar has finally agreed to stay on provided a clear time frame is given for the probe. The CM hasn’t made a statement after that but he bared his mind — and anguish — in the assembly: “I know it’s a false allegation. But I want to resign until I am cleared of this false charge. I cannot work till I am proved innocent. This is a blot on my character…Under the law, one is innocent until proven guilty. But that’s for routine crimes. Since the allegations raise questions on my morality, I consider myself guilty until proven innocent.”
His resignation letter is said to be a little more nuanced. It said, “I will be grateful if you could inquire into the allegations against me in a time-bound manner and…if you are satisfied that there is any basis in these allegations please accept my resignation immediately.”
His tormentor Muzaffar Beig appeared unmoved by the drama. Reacting to the CBI’s denial of his claim, he said, ‘‘The agency is trying to cover up the issue as it has been doing since it was formed.’’
He added PDP leaders named in the CBI list had been denied party tickets in 2008 assembly elections. Beig said Farooq Abdullah’s name, too, figured in the list as entry No. ‘C-38’.
Already the CBI has arrested G M Mir and Raman Mattoo, both ministers in the former PDP government, besides Iqbal Khandey, the former principal secretary to then chief minister Mufti Mohammed Sayeed.
Meanwhile, Vohra has reached Delhi to discuss the simmering crisis with government leaders.

Army’s decision to ‘close’ the infamous Pathribal case involving alleged extrajudicial killing of five innocent Kashmiri civilians in 2000 is yet another confirmation of how blatantly impunity thrives in Jammu& Kashmir (J&K). It comes despite compelling evidence of the brutality involved. Justice S R Pandian, who inquired into killings of seven people demanding a probe into the case, noted this when he concluded the ‘security forces had deliberately obliterated’ evidence of the Pathirabal operation by completely charring three of the five bodies. The head of one of the bodies was missing along with the entire upper portion above the chest. This, he said, was done with a malafide ‘intention of getting rid of even the last traces of physical identity’ before the disfigured bodies were eventually buried at various places within a radius of over two-km from the encounter scene.The mutilation worked initially. The killings were declared a ‘major breakthrough’ and the five dubbed as foreign terrorists, who had ‘killed’ 35 Sikhs on the eve of US president Bill Clinton’s visit to India in March 2000. As usual, the story was reproduced verbatim in the media and the ‘encounter’ was sought to be painted an end to the story. But it was only the beginning. The story turned on its head within days. The complacency with five accused Rashtriya Rifles soldiers allegedly went about the ‘encounter’ underlined the sense of invincibility sweeping powers gave them. They had not even bothered to cover their tracks properly. The Army unit allegedly coerced villages into burying the five before leaving the scene without ensuring their belongings set alight were fully burnt. The belongings proved to be the first major breakthrough in unravelling the plot.

More lives had to be sacrificed before the government agreed to exhume the bodies of the five civilians. The paramilitary CRPF fired and killed seven people demanding a probe into the ‘encounter’.The slain included the one, who had identified his father’s belonging among those of the five killed and exposed the encounter drama. This mounted pressure on the government, forcing it to order a probe into it. Initial DNA testing to establish the identities of the five was sabotaged before it was established the five they were indeed innocent civilians — Zahoor Ahmad Dalal (22), Bashir Ahmad Bhat (26), Mohammad Yousuf Malik (38) Juma Khan (50) and Juma Khan (38). Their corpses were found dressed up in Army fatigues. The nose and the chin of one of them were found in separate graves. Another was initially identified by his trouser as his head was missing. Zahoor’s body was completely charred without any bullet injuries. A portion of his charred sweater was all that was left of a handsome youth.

The CBI, which later probed the case, eventually indicted Brig Ajay Saxena, Lt Col Brijinder Pratap Singh, Maj Saurabh Sharma, Maj Amit Sharma and Subedar Idrees Khan for killing the five in 2007. It described the killings as ‘cold blooded murder’ and presented a chargesheet against the five soldiers before a Srinagar’s court. The Army unsuccessfully challenged the move before the J&K high court before moving the Supreme Court (SC). It challenged the CBI’s jurisdiction to file the charges. The Army argued its men cannot be charged without the Centre’s permission under the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA). It cited the draconian law’s immunity clause knowingly as the Centre has never granted permission for trying armed forces in J&K including in rape and murder cases in the last two decades despite all its protestations about ‘zero tolerance to rights abuses.

The SC presented the last hope at least in the Pathribal case. But that too was dashed when it upheld the Army’s contention and allowed it to decide whether to try the five in a civil court or have them court-martialled in April 2012. It came surprisingly two months after the apex court questioned the extent to which the Army can claim immunity under the AFSPA. It had noted that rape and murder should not be considered as ‘normal crime’ and ‘there should be no question of sanction’ from the government to prosecute soldiers in such cases. The Court noted AFSPA gave ‘very limited protection’ in the ‘discharge of duty’ while hearing a CBI petition challenging the Army’s invocation of the draconian law to ‘bury the case’.

The five were not killed in the line of duty, but were abducted and murdered in cold blood as the CBI established. The option given to the Army to subject the Patribal accused to in-house proceedings reversed the unprecedented gains that had been made in the case. It reinforced the cynicism in the average Kashmiri Muslim that no arm of the Indian state could be trusted to be just to his/her community.

The Army predictably chose the easier path. As it is clear now, the brutal killings and mutilation of the bodies was too serious an offence to be left for the opaque military tribunal to adjudicate.

It would have been a potential game changer had the justice been allowed to prevail in the Pathribal case for it was perhaps the first time that a case, the one among thousands, was allowed to be investigated freely. But the way even institutions, otherwise the last hope for helpless masses, have acted in this case would make Kashmiris more real about their actual place in the world’s largest democracy.

Indira Gandhi was a tough cookie coming from a very high profile family in India. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto said that Indira Gandhi was not a very good student at Berkley. By all accounts circulating in the media Mrs Indira Gandhi had a list of lovers. There are the known ones:
1) “Remington Randy” her father’s typist: Mathai Merely ( M. O. Mathai author of “Reminiscences of the Nehru Age and “My Days With Nehru”, 1979)
2) Her Yoga Teacher: Dhirendra Brahmachari
3) The Foreign Minister: Sardar Swaran Singh
4) Dhinesh Singh
5) Mohammad Yunus author of the book, ‘Persons, Passions & Politics’
Here is a sketch of at least three:
https://i1.wp.com/www.qbtpl.net/images/Dhirendra%20Brahmachari.jpgControversy was the second name of Dhirendra Brahmachari. He was mentioned in the press during his hey days as the Rasputin of India. He was a charishmatic yoga teacher who befriended the Nehru-Gandhi Family. He was also the personal tutor of Indira Gandhi. It was rumored that he had an affair with Indira gandhi, which might be quite possible as he was a handsome healthy man. He had an open access to Indira Gandhi’s house when she was the prime minister of india and many of the sychophants around Indira were quite jealous of Brahmachari’s proximity to Indira Gandhi. Kushwanth Singh has mentioned a lot of incidents of his encounter with dhirendra brahmachari. Kushwanth singh devotes an entire chapter in his book ‘God and Godmen of India’ for Dhirendra Brahmachari:(http://drvasu.wordpress.com/2007/10/22/dhirendra-brahmachari-sukshma-vyayama/)
https://i2.wp.com/farm3.static.flickr.com/2155/2515582939_dd91bf87d1.jpgMr. Sardar Swaran Singh, Minister of External Affairs of India (from 27 June 1970 to 10 October 1974)
Mathai Merely: There is much information available on Mr. M. O. Mathai who befriended Mr. Nehru and then became one of the most powerful men in his office. Mr. Merely has said some very nasty stuff about Mrs. Indira Gandhi.
This is what Khuswant Singh says about Indira Gandhi.
There is nothing spectacular about her rule.
She was incapable of tolerating any criticism and she picked up an aversion to some persons because she thought they were challenging her, among them Jayaprakash Narayan, a good, honest man. She couldn’t stand him because he was a challenge to her as the leader of the country, especially as people grew disillusioned with her rule. There were problems, droughts, challenges and Jayaprakash Narayan had emerged as a leader.
During her reign, corruption increased to enormous levels. She was really very tolerant of corruption, which was another negative mark against her. She knew perfectly well that some of her ministers were extremely corrupt, yet she took no steps against them till it suited her.
If she knew someone was corrupt, she tolerated him but if it suited her, she used the same corruption charge to get rid of him. She really had no strong views on corruption, which went sky high during her time.
Also, she felt uncomfortable with educated, sophisticated people. So you have the rise of people like Yashpal Kapoor, R K Dhawan, who was a stenographer who worked in her office, Mohammad Yunus, who just hung around her.
I believe this was because she had no real education.
She went to Shanti Niketan, then she went to Badminton School abroad, then to Oxford. Nowhere did she pass an exam or acquire a degree.
I think that bred a sort of inferiority complex of not being recognised as an educated person. She would pretend to have read a lot of books. She spoke French, which she picked up when she accompanied her ailing mother Kamala to Switzerland, which went in her favour. There were pros and cons but there was this sense of insecurity when it came to highly intelligent people and people with clear records. She felt more comfortable with second-rate people.
How did her insecurities, about which much has been written, affect India?
In her insecurity, she destroyed the institutions of democracy. She packed Parliament with her supporters with loyalty being more important than ability; she superseded judges; she corrupted the civil service. Favouritism became a great sport with her.
She also knew how to use people against each other and was quite a master of that. She would patronise somebody and when she thought he was getting too big, instead of appointing him to a senior post, she would appoint his close associate, knowing this would create a rift between them.
The best example is of V P Singh. It was his elder brother (Santa Bux Singh) who believed he would be made minister but instead she picked V P Singh, the lesser qualified of the two brothers, which only created enmity between the brothers. She would do this with calculated skill and in the bargain cause enmity between brothers, split up families.
In the long run it was not good for the country to play such games as she did. Few journalists interacted with Indira Gandhi the way Khushwant Singh, doyen of Indian journalism, did. As editor of the now defunct The Illustrated Weekly of India and later The Hindustan Times, he was witness to some of the most historic moments in Indira Gandhi’s 16-year-long rule.
SEX LIFE OF INDIRA GANDHI OF INDIA: The Indian Matahiri:- Indira’s tryst with seduction
Indira Gandhi (1917-1984) was known as a feisty young woman and a uber-hyper leader. Indira Gandhi was the only child of Kamla and Jawaharlal Nehru. She always had a big libido, probably inherited from her father who had a line of affairs, the most famous with Un-Lady Edwina Mountbatten. Stanley Wolpert and other have provided proof that Jawaharlal Nehru was gay and he consorted with the gay Viceroy of India Lord Mountbatten. Indira had lovers when she was young. She was friendly with Mohandas, and may have participated in his infamous and perverted Bharamacharya sexual experiments.
“Indira Gandhi had the developed instincts of an animal, she always responded to people with her skin” Singer-writer Sheila Dhar (Mrs. P. N. Dhar), who knew Mrs. Gandi well
Indira finally settled for one Feroze, someone who was docile and would interfere with her desire for other men. Some say she was pregnant when she wanted to marry a young man Feroze. Due to caste issues, she ran into problems. Mohandas adopted Feroze so that he could have the last name Gandhi. This made it appear that she was marrying a person with the last name Gandhi. This is a very strange episode because Indira already had a famous last name “Nehru”. The Gandhi nomenclature had more to do with religion than anything else. Her belligerence withworld leaders is well known. She constantly tangled with Henry Kissinger and they were not even on speaking terms. While in power Indira Gandhi liasons were pretty much an open secret to those who had access to the corridors of power in New Delhi.
Wolpert had always possessed the most authentic credentials for being unfailingly second rate. This book suggested that Nehru’s many wild oats were not sown exclusively among womankind: he had also favoured mankind when young. Wolpert’s creative enthusiasm for the multiple exercise of Nehru’s crotch, which had failed to intrigue earlier biographers like S. Gopal and Michael Brecher, caused him to forget that there happens to be a boundary between speculation and fact. His book was temporarily banned in India: “stopped at Customs for inspection”.
Unlike her father, who himself would never have banned Wolpert, Indira Gandhi was no Voltairean liberal. During her lifetime no one would have dared openly accuse her of wanting men in bed. P. N. Haksar and P. N. Dhar, both strikingly handsome Kashmiri pandits who served her with integrity and distinction and have written fine memoirs, analyse her emotions with perception but say nothing about their boss’s private life. In fact the most perceptive observation about Indira Gandhi was once made by the singer-writer Sheila Dhar (Mrs. P. N. Dhar), who knew Mrs. G. well enough to notice that “Indira Gandhi had the developed instincts of an animal, she always responded to people with her skin”. The political animal that was Indira Gandhi has long been known and done to death: there have been biographies by Pupul Jayakar, Zareer Masani and Inder Malhotra. It is high time someone gave us an insight into the human animal and showed us her feet of clay.http://www.hinduonnet.com/2001/04/29/stories/13290463.htm
The Indian Matahiri, The promiscuous Indira Gandhi: A tryst with seduction, and inveiglement. What lures the willing males to the black widow?
Who tops the list of amorous licentious women? Puissance has its own allure. Power the ultimate aphrodisiac makes one seductive and desirable. Many have used power to charm and seduce. Was Helen seduced or was she the seductress? Move over Matahari, and the Greek enchantress Venus. Cleopatra, you are nothing. Forget the sirens who tried to tempt Odysseus away from his journey. Who has the best Matahiri skills?
Venus de Milo you have met your match!
Ignore Aphrodite and leave the Roman Godess of Love in the dust.
The Roman techniques of seduction are passe. The Aphrodite is now in ruins but the knowledge lives. We have a new lady who knew more about the aspects of seduction than any of the real Goddesses of Greek, Roman, or Vedic mythology.
Bill Clinton’s affairs with Gina Gershon, Belinda Stronach
Sex: One in 3 US wives get some on the side
Nehru was Gay! Affair with Edwina also
It is now evident the Grand seductress of all was Mrs. Indira Gandhi who as part of her religious Brahman training was adept at the art of the Kama Sutra. Indira used her training to seduce many men. Like father like daugher:..Sex Life of Nehru: Menege De Trios:-Tryst with Homosexuality:-Love triangle Edwina, Nehru and Lord Mountbatten changed history
After all it is in the grand tradition as described in the Mahabharta. Draupathi in the story had 5 husbands. As in Braham temple custom, did the Nehrus get formal training in the art of sex and seduction? Certainly seems like it. Nehru seduced bother Edwina and Lord Mountbatten and his daughter Mrs. Gandhi used sex to her advantage and to move up the corridors of power.
..the list is long…read on for salacious details.
In 1964, the year of her father’s death, Indira Gandhi was for the first time elected to Parliament, and she was Minister of Information and Broadcasting in the government of Lal Bahadur Shastri, who died unexpectedly of a heart attack less than two years after assuming office. The numerous contenders for the position of the Prime Ministership, unable to agree among themselves, picked Indira Gandhi as a compromise candidate, and each thought that she would be easily manipulable. But Indira Gandhi showed extraordinary political skills and tenacity and elbowed the Congress dons — Kamaraj, Morarji Desai, and others — out of power. She held the office of the Prime Minister from 1966 to 1977. http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/southasia/History/Independent/Indira.html
There was much to write about during the years that Mrs. Gandhi in power.
“It is an indication of the intellectual condition of the Congress Party that its old horses, who are very hoarse and very old, are in a flutter about the fact that Mrs. G. may actually have had an enjoyable sex life. My instinct is to applaud, but this just will not do. Even in an era accustomed to scurrility, sleaze and Shobha De, the Indian Caesar’s daughter should be seen to be chaste, Hindu and properly womanly. Whereas, if the stories told are true – and in such matters every substantial accumulation of rumours substitutes for proof – Indira Gandhi may even have been a bad case of epitomising the brilliant parodic one-liner against Hindu hypocrisy which says caste no bar lekin sex baar-baar. Mrs. Gandhi had, it seems, nearly as much love for the pleasures of her residential bed as of her prime ministerial chair. The Kissa was as much Kursi Ka as Palang Ka.
Her list of hits is impressively long. A Parsihusband who turned philanderer, a scandal-mongering Malayalioldenough to be her father’s typist (he was once appropriately called a Remington Randy), a yoga teacher who degenerated into a physical instructor, a poodle Foreign Minister who never stepped far from her Home Ministrations – how wonderful to learn that even as she was shackling her country with authoritarianism, she was unshackling her libido at home. What a riproaringly wonderful and motley crew of purdah paramours our Rushdiean Widow seems to have had. Our hearts go out to poor R. K. Dhawan. How awful he must feel to be left out of this litany of lovers. Can we hope for a memoir by him which regales us with proclamations of his non- innocence? Can we hope that Mrs. Shobha De’s publishers have given her an “undisclosed sum” as royalty advance for her next potboiler on a subject which seems so entirely tailor-made to suit her well-polished talons?
Anyone with half an eye can see that Indira Gandhi’s life can be made, beyond the politics and jingoistic nationalism, the very stuff of sex drama, of Babban Khan’s Punjabi farce “Chaddhi Javaani Buddhe Noo” (which translates roughly as “The Old Chap’s Turning Horny”), of the carnivalesque Restoration Comedy tradition of parodying the aristocracy, of the “lewd” literature of subversion which has such strong popular roots in so many of the country’s regional languages.
Though it is now too late, the material within Frank’s biography could even have been made, for instance, into an Italian romantic film starring Gina Lollobrigida as the lovely Indira, Marcello Mastroanni as Feroze, Edward G. Robinson as the seductively ugly M. O. Mathai and Anthony Quinn as the rugged yoga teacher. Surely Sonia Gandhi, liminally poised between India and Italy, could have been persuaded to script such a film? The finances would naturally have been provided by a joint venture set up between the Quattrochi Family and the Sangh Parivar.
The Guests of Honour at the first screening would have been Khushwant Singharmin arm with Maneka Gandhi. What scenario other than the private life of Indira Gandhi could possibly give such an equal measure of delight, for such diverse reasons, to secularists and feminists, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP)?
By art alone might such contraries be fused, enmities overcome. As exponents of the comic tradition – from Aristophanes to Shakespeare to Swift to Rushdie to Yes Minister to Spitting Image to R. K. Laxman to Jaspal Bhattito Black Adder – have shown, the literary inflation and consequent deflation of politicians into caricatures via comic art is the only certain method for the ordinary citizen to get even with those who exercise everyday power over us, to make us feel that our ordinariness at least transcends the insanities of their politics. Those who love the exercise of power fear ridicule even more than they fear retirement. Mrs. G. seems to have feared it most of all. In this seems to lie the psychological roots of the Emergency.
If the Congress Party were less stuffed with hypocritical geriatrics it would realise that in this epoch, when Kaliyugahas gone global and formed a multinational joint venture withthebold and the beautiful, withliberalisationand liberalism, the world of vice has, in large sections of urban India, been turned upside down into the world of virtue. If you want to be politically correct, sexuality and hedonism in the woman now betoken female power. The idea of womanly virtue, of the fallen woman, has fortunately no more stability than the Berlin Wall. It may remain generally embedded as a patriarchal ideal, but everyone knows that the winds of gender equality in sexual matters have been blowing hard and chilling the traditional Indian male’s privates into a deep recession.
Yes, there is no doubt about it, Frank has done us a favour by making Indira Gandhi roll out of her Cleopatra rug, by making the skeletons in her bedsheets come tumbling out withher. It is time we took the politics out of Indira’s life and started to democratically look her straight in the face. What if Katherine Frank has got minor dates and details wrong? The next printing will sort those out. Meanwhile, how delightful to know at last that Mrs. G. was only as human as any of us, that the peccadilloes for which JawaharlalNehru was moralistically castigated merely inaugurated a tradition which continued and flourished with his daughter. As we await the future biographies of Rajiv and Sanjay, Sonia and Maneka, Varun and Priyanka, we can only pray that this tradition of a rich and varied sexuality is being actively maintained even now by India’s immortal First Family. Rukun Advani is the author of Beethoven Among the Cows and runs Permanent Black, a publishing company in New Delhi.”
By 1973 the decline had begun. This was just the beginning of the end for Indira Gandi.
1973, Delhi and north India were rocked by demonstrations angry at high inflation, the poor state of the economy, rampant corruption, and the poor standards of living. In June 1975, the High Court of Allahabad found her guilty of using illegal practices during the last election campaign, and ordered her to vacate her seat. There were demands for her resignation.
Mrs. Gandhi’s response was to declare a state of emergency, under which her political foes were imprisoned, constitutional rights abrogated, and the press placed under strict censorship. Meanwhile, the younger of her two sons, Sanjay Gandhi, started to run the country as though it were his personal fiefdom, and earned the fierce hatred of many whom his policies had victimized. He ordered the removal of slum dwellings, and in an attempt to curb India’s growing population, initiated a highly resented program of forced sterilization. In early 1977, confident that she had debilitated her opposition, Mrs. Gandhi called for fresh elections, and found herself trounced by a newly formed coalition of several political parties. Her Congress party lost badly at the polls.
In the second, post-Emergency, period of her Prime Ministership, Indira Gandhi was preoccupied by efforts to resolve the political problems in the state of Punjab. In her attempt to crush the secessionist movement of Sikh militants, led by Jarnail Singh Bindranwale, she ordered an assault upon the holiest Sikh shrine in Amritsar, called the “Golden Temple”. It is here that Bindranwale and his armed supporters had holed up, and it is from the Golden Temple that they waged their campaign of terrorism not merely against the Government, but against moderate Sikhs and Hindus. “Operation Bluestar”, waged in June 1984, led to the death of Bindranwale, and the Golden Temple was stripped clean of Sikh terrorists; however, the Golden Temple was damaged, and Mrs. Gandhi earned the undying hatred of Sikhs who bitterly resented the desacralization of their sacred space. In November of the same year, Mrs. Gandhi was assassinated, at her residence, by two of her own Sikh bodyguards, who claimed to be avenging the insult heaped upon the Sikh nation. (http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/southasia/History/Independent/Indira.html)
WILL THE FILM ON INDIRA SHOW HER AFFAIRS?What else could the main opposition party in center have thought of than to have a full-length feature film on its late leader Mrs. Indira Gandhi? The film has made headlines right from the day it was announced that veteran journalist, television personality and littérateur Kamleshwar is writing a film script on the life of late Congress leader who stayed as prime minister of India for a very long time. The latest news is that Manisha Koirala who shot to fame for her controversial film Ek Chhoti Si Love Story , has been selected to portray Indira Gandhi on the silver screen. This was formally announced in Mumbaiveryrecently. The film titled Indira Gandhi-A Tryst WithDestinywill roll in the beginning of the next year and will be released worldwide by the end of the same year. This happens to be 100th film for its writer Kamleshwar.But it is the second film for producer Nitin Keni who last made Gadar-Ek PremKatha with director Anil Sharma
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s