AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

        'The UPA Government falls between the three Pillars of Omission, Commission and Emission'—By a true patriot, non-pornographic.

        To quote the words of Johnson: 'Dishonour waits on perfidy—a man should blush to think a falsehood; it is the crime of cowards'. These words come to my mind when I see that the Government of India have tabled the findings of the Justice M K Mukherjee Commission which probed the alleged disappearance of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose, along with its Action Taken Report in the Lok Sabha. The three-volume report of the Justice Mukherjee Commission, constituted during the previous National Democratic Alliance regime, was tabled by Minister of State for Home S Regupathy. The one-man probe panel was set up under the Commission of Inquiry Act.

        The Justice M K Mukherjee Commission has concluded that Bose 'is dead but he did not die in the plane crash, as alleged and the ashes in the Japanese temple are not of Netaji' and '...in the absence of any clinching evidence a positive answer cannot be given' to the terms of reference.

        In regard to the controversy over the death of Bose that had surfaced after the announcement from Tokyo on August 23, 1945 that Netaji had died in a plane crash on August 18, 1945, the Commission has observed “however, some press reports published from Tokyo and Taihoku (Taipei) had given contradictory versions'.

        The ATR, tabled by Minister of State for Home S Regupathy along with the panel's findings, has stated that government have examined the Commission's report submitted on November 8 last year in detail and “has not agreed with the findings that — Netaji did not die in a plane crash and that the ashes in the Renkoji Temple were not of Netaji.'

        The M K Mukherjee Commission was not the first Commission to go into this issue. The Shah Nawaz Khan Committee, set up by the Government in 1956, to inquire into the circumstances of Netaji's death had, through a majority view concluded that Bose was killed in the plane crash. However, one of its members and Netaji's elder brother Suresh Chandra Bose gave a dissenting report saying there was no plane crash that led to Netaji's death. The majority report was accepted by the government.

        Another committee, headed by retired Chief Justice of Punjab High Court G D Khosla, was set up by the Government of India in 1970 and it had also concluded that Netaji had succumbed to injuries sustained in a plane crash in Taipei and that his ashes had been taken to Tokyo.

        The NDA Government had appointed the M K Mukherjee Commission to give an authoritative finding on the mysterious death of Netaji Subash Chandra Bose carefully considering the contradictory bits of evidence available in regard to the whole incident. I am unable to understand as to what weighed with the Government of India in rejecting the findings of the Mukherjee Commission. I am not therefore surprised that many opposition parties are going to raise this issue in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha.

        Walter Lippmann, the hard-hitting journalist of U.S.A. wrote: 'It is sophistry to pretend that in a free country a man has some sort of inalienable or constitutional right to deceive his fellow men. … … It may be inexpedient to arraign every public liar, as we try to arraign other swindlers. … … But in principle there can be no immunity for lying any of its protean forms'. The Congress Party under the stranglehold of Nehru after 1947, Indira Gandhi after 1969, Rajiv Gandhi after 1984 has consistently believed in a Government of liars, by liars, for liars. This condition has only worsened in the UPA Government today under the extra-constitutional stranglehold of Sonia Gandhi.

        In the panorama of Congress-sponsored falsehoods presented from time to time for public scrutiny, the known joke is that falsehoods not only disagree with truths, but usually quarrel among themselves. As an inveterate liar, congress always begins making falsehood appear like truth, and ends up by making truth itself appear like falsehood. Such an attitude is very evident in the murky way in which the UPA Government has rejected the findings of Mukherjee Commission. Rousseau must have had Congress liars of post-independent India in view when he wrote: 'Falsehood has an infinity of combinations, but truth has only one mode of being'. The UPA Government today is only dedicated to falsehood on all fronts with an infinity of variable combinations. The public of India have a right to reject the decision of the Government of India on the Mukherjee Commission Report as a private finding of the Nehru family not based on facts, either known or unknown. The murky process initiated by Jawaharlal Nehru and his other family members in high office after 1947 to completely wipe out the name of Netaji from the pages of our national history have been noted by all the true patriots in India and the world.

        The Congress Party has always believed in presenting half facts after independence on every issue of national significance. Unfortunately, half a fact becomes a whole falsehood. The Congress Party forgets the fact that by giving the truth a false colouring by its false manner of telling it, it becomes the worst of all known liars in our chequered history.

        Nehru on account of his political enmity towards Netaji, always tried with enthusiasm to downplay the importance of the INA in India's struggle for freedom. The great historian R.C. Majumdar wrote in 1948: 'Universal sympathy was expressed all over India for the INA Officers who were tried for treason in the Red Fort at Delhi in 1946 which gave a rude shock to the British Government. It clearly demonstrated that the Indians of all shades of opinion put a premium on the disloyalty of the Indian troops to their foreign masters and looked upon it as a true and welcome sign of nationalism. The honour and esteem with which every Indian regarded the members of the INA offered a striking contrast to the ill-concealed disgust and contempt for those sepoys who refused to join the INA and remained true to their salt. The British came to realize that they were sitting on the brink of a volcano which may erupt at any moment. It is highly probable that this consideration played an important role in their final decision to quit India in 1947. So the members of the INA did not die or suffer in vain, and their leader, Netaji Subash Chandra Bose had secured a place of honour in the history of India's struggle for freedom.' From this it will be clear that it was not Gandhiji's jail going or Nehru's jail going alone which led to the achievement of our independence on 15 August, 1947.

        These considered views of R C Majumdar were subsequently confirmed in 1956. It was admitted by no less a person than Clement Attlee, the Head of the British Government which conceived the idea of granting freedom to India and carried out the decision in spite of the opposition of the die-hard conservatives like Churchill. This is proved by the following extract of a letter written in Bengali by Sri P B Chakravarthy, former Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court on 30, March, 1976: 'When I was acting as Governor of West Bengal in 1956, Lord Attlee, who gave India freedom by putting an end to British Rule, visited India and stayed in the Raj Bhavan, Calcutta, for two days. I had then a long talk with him about the real grounds for the voluntary withdrawal of the British from India. I put it straight to him like this: 'The Quit India Movement of Gandhi practically died out long before 1947 and there was nothing in Indian situation at that time which made it necessary for the British to leave India in a hurry. Whey did they then do so?' In reply Lord Attlee cited several reasons, the most important of which were the activities of Netaji Subash Chandra Bose which weakened the very foundations of the attachment of the Indian land and naval forces to the British Government. Towards the end I asked Lord Attlee about the extent to which the British decision to quit India was influenced by Gandhiji's activities. On hearing this Attlee's lips widened in a smile of disdain and he uttered, slowly, putting strong emphasis on each single letter: 'M I – N I – M A L'. I referred to this talk of mine with Lord Attlee in a speech at Netaji Bhavan which was broadcast by the All India Radio—but omitting all references to Gandhi.'

        R C Majumdar in his History of the Freedom Movement in India has stated with pride that it seldom falls to the lot of a historian to have his views, differing radically from those generally accepted without demur, confirmed by such an unimpeachable testimony. He says that as far back in 1948 he had written in an article: 'The contribution made by Netaji Subash Chandra Bose towards the achievement of freedom in 1947 was no less, and perhaps far more, important than that of Mahatma Gandhi, and I hope true historians and all lovers of truth will now accept this view.' This judgement of R C Majumdar was completely vindicated by Lord Attlee who gave freedom to India in 1947.