It is said that the truth always comes out inadvertently. In a rare slip of the pen, the Congress party’s inhouse magazine “Congress Darshan” turned into “Congress Darpan” by showing it the mirror. In its latest issue published on the occasion of 131st Foundation Day of the Congress party, the mouthpiece wrote articles criticizing Nehru for his "inept" handling of the Kashmir problem, adding that India would not have faced so many problems if the first PM had listened to Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. On Sardar Patel, the article said from the correspondence between him and Nehru, it was clear that on major policies, there were strong differences between them. Had Nehru listened to Patel, the situation in Kashmir, China, Tibet and Nepal would have been better, the write-up said. In 1950, Patel had sent a letter to Nehru alerting him on his policies on China and Tibet, and had specifically stated that China's policy lacked credibility. Patel also opposed Nehru’s move of taking the Kashmir issue to the UNO. It also added that Patel was instrumental in reconstructing the historic Somnath temple despite opposition of Nehru. On the Congress chief Sonia Gandhi, the write-up elaborated on her education and career. It said she was born in a small village in Italy and her father Stefano Maino was a member of the Italian fascist forces that fought against the Russian army. In another article, it said that Sonia became a primary member of the party in 1997 and became its chief in less than 62 days. Subsequently, it said Sonia made an unsuccessful attempt to form the government at the Centre.
It has always been the characteristic of Congress party to call the historical truths as lies and distort history to projects lies as facts. The article actually exposed the well-researched historical truths as to how Nehru handled the economic and political affairs of the country after independence just to promote himself and the cause of his dynasty. But for the current Congress people, Congress’s history starts from Nehru and ends with Rahul Gandhi via Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi and Sonia Gandhi.
By 1946, it had become quite clear that India’s independence was only a matter of time. An interim government was to be formed, headed by the Congress president as Congress had won the maximum number of seats in the 1946 elections. All of a sudden, the post of Congress president became very crucial as it was this very person who was going to become the first Prime Minister of independent India. The last date for the nominations for the post of the President of Congress, and thereby the first Prime Minister of India, was April 29, 1946. And the nominations were to be made by 15 state/regional Congress committees of that time. In that process, 12 out of 15 Congress committees nominated Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel but not a single one nominated Nehru's name. So Gandhi conveyed this to Nehru and tried to make him understand the reality. A shell-shocked Nehru was defiant and made it clear that he would not play second fiddle to anybody. Nehru coerced Gandhi into supporting him by saying that if he splits the Congress, the entire independence plan would go awry as the British would get an excuse in delaying independence by raising the question as to who should be handed over the reins of power, Congress with Nehru or Congress minus Nehru. So Gandhi thought that it would be safe to ask Sardar Patel for making the sacrifice than to reason with a power-smitten Nehru. In fact, he had commented that Nehru had gone power-mad. Gandhi always knew that Sardar Patel would never defy him. So, he instructed Acharya J B Kriplani to get some proposers for Nehru from the Congress Working Committee (CWC) members despite knowing fully well that only Pradesh Congress Committees were authorized to nominate the president. When Gandhi told Patel to voluntarily step aside from the race for Congress president, he readily agreed. When Dr Rajendra Prasad heard of Sardar Patel’s withdrawal of nomination, he was disappointed and remarked that “Gandhi had once again sacrificed his trusted lieutenant in favour of the glamorous Nehru”. Gandhi’s this decision proved too costly for the nation as thereby Gandhi introduced the concept of forced decisions by the so-called ‘high-command’ in Congress, which is now being followed by this political party for every decision making. If Congress today says that nobody should doubt the wisdom of Gandhi in making Nehru the PM over Patel, then can they also explain why they forget the wisdom of same Gandhi who said that Congress should have been disbanded after India’s independence?
Yes, it’s a fact that had Patel been our first PM, Kashmir and other such problems would have never existed today alongwith a particular minority community appeasement policy. Patel opposed Nehru’s plan for reservation for Muslims in the parliament which resulted in the then Govt. withdrawing such a proposal. He wanted all communities to forget their religion & first become Indian with their undivided loyalty to the nation. Patel was brutally honest and said that people belonging to the minority community in the country should not try to ride on two horses. Patel also thought that the onus was on Muslims to defeat suspicions about the actions of some of their co-religionists in the pre-partition days. It is well known how Nehru had treated a senior leader like Patel during his tenure, which has been documented by the people who worked with both Nehru and Patel at that time. It was the exemplary skills of Sardar Patel, which forced all the 550 Princely States to merge with Independent India. But still Sardar Patel, the then Deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister of India, was insulted, humiliated and disgraced by the then Prime Minister, Nehru, during a Cabinet meeting. “You are a complete communalist and I’ll never be a party to your suggestions and proposals,” Nehru shouted at Patel during a crucial Cabinet meeting to discuss the liberation of Hyderabad by the Army from the tyranny of the Razakkars, the then Nizam’s private army. “A shocked Sardar Patel collected his papers from the table and slowly walked out of the Cabinet room. That was the last time Patel attended a Cabinet meeting. He also stopped speaking to Nehru since then”, writes MKK Nair, a 1947 batch IAS officer who worked closely with Sardar and VP Menon his secy., in his memoirs “With No Ill Feeling to Anybody”. Nehru was against sending Indian forces to liberate Hyderabad and tried to scuttle Patels plan and instead wanted to take this issue to UN. Had Patel not acted tough and inspite of Nehru’s objection liberated Hyderabad during the “Operation Polo”, we would have been having another Kashmir right in the heart of India today. The formation of North East Frontier Service under the Ministry of External Affairs by Nehru and the removal of the affairs of the Jammu & Kashmir from the Ministry of Home Affairs are the major reasons behind the turmoil in both the regions. This was done by Nehru to curtail the wings of Sardar Patel. We would not have the Kashmir problem if Nehru had listened to the advice of Patel and the then Army Chief General Kariappa to delay taking his complaint to the UN for three days so that the Indian Army could drive out the Pakistani invaders from Kashmir. Despite this Nehru referred Kashmir issue to UN, Patel totally opposed this and said "it is purely an internal matter and why should we refer this to UN". Patel also said, "if only Nehru had listened to my advice, not a single Pakistani would have been allowed to stay inside Kashmir even for a single day. Patel raised this issue in the Congress Working committee and Nehru & Patel were at loggerheads. History has proved it beyond doubt that had Patel been the PM in place of Nehru, the country would not have faced the humiliation of 1962 war. Days before his death, Patel had written a letter to Nehru warning him about China’s nefarious designs but Nehru didn’t pay any attention to that letter.
Sardar Patel reconstructed the famous Somnath temple against the wish of Nehru without any state funding and when Rajendra Prasad, the then President wished to attended inauguration of the renovated temple, Nehru objected. But still Rajendra Prasad went ahead but Nehru was absent. However, later on Nehru wanted to renovate the Babri Masjid at Government expense, a proposal Sardar had turned down as the Home Minister. Sardar told Nehru that the Babri Masjid’s renovation was different from reconstruction of the Somnath Temple for which a trust was set up that raised nearly 30 lakh for the purpose. Government money was not spent - following which Nehru had to drop the idea (Patel’s daughter Maniben’s diary notes on September 20, 1950).
The consequences of Nehru becoming the first PM of India and the mess he created in India social, economic and political spheres have been tragic and the muddle he created still remains far from being sorted out. The nexus between the Congress led, self-proclaimed liberal-leftist-jihadi sympathiser-secular class, supported by the caste based political parties and the plethora of foreign funded NGOs, who play one community against another in the name of protection of human rights and poverty alleviation to ensure Congress continues to retain the power to rule India as it suits their interests. Historically, they have together tricked, suppressed, discredited any voice that tried to challenge them - Subhash Bose disappeared, Sardar Patel side lined, RSS became Gandhi's killer, Shastri mysteriously died in Tashkent, Jaya Prakash Narayan apparently poisoned in the hospital and now they are running the “intolerance-beef promotion-hindutava bashing Campaign”. They can stoop to any low to retain their stranglehold on power and their not allowing the parliament to functioning for last 2 sessions on one or the other pretext is not coincidental. These forces can do anything to harm Modi as he has risen as the greatest challenger to the rotten dynastic rule, politics of caste & religious divide, corruption & mis governance and everything else in the name of "secularism" and "pluralism". The congress trickster would do anything to continue the legacy of the dynasty to remain in power. Whoever has written the article has only stated the historical facts and reminded the nation about those true facts. Unfortunately, for the Sonia-Rahul sycophants, it is a sacrilege that the truth has been exposed about their dear leaders.