NATION is bigger then a father. I did it for my country. don't call me patriot I haven't any issue but I am not a terrorist either. I am Nathuram Vinayak Godse. When India was partitioned in 1947, there was very much of suffering and confusion. Millions were uprooted and hundreds of thousands died. It was the biggest human tragedy in Indian history.
A name Nathuram Vinayak Godse who known right now as a Terrorist and stray patriot, fired by a Distorted love for the “motherland”. Godse misunderstood the history and circumstances of the country. he was totally misguided by the religious belief and even lost his sense about what he was going to do. but how true is this?
We call Godse a terrorist,but in reality was he a Terrorist or a patriot? Was Rana Pratap a terrorist to Akbar. Was Shivaji a terrorist to Aurangzeb? Then how Godse is a terrorist to Gandhi?
let's have the truth, In recent history, it was the gallant battle put up by Chhatrapati Shivaji that first checked and eventually destroyed the Muslim Harassment in India. It was mandatory for Shivaji to get over and kill an haughty Afzal Khan, failing which he would have lost his own life. In deprecation history's towering warriors like Shivaji, Rana Pratap and Guru Gobind Singh as stray patriots, Gandhiji has only exposed his self-conceit. He was, paradoxical, as it may showed, a violent pacifist who brought untold disaster on the country in the name of truth and non-violence, while Rana Pratap, Shivaji and the Guru will remain enshrined in the hearts of their countrymen forever for the freedom they brought to them.
In the Ramayana Rama killed Ravana in a holocaust fight and relieved Sita. In the Mahabharata, Krishna killed Kansa to end his wickedness; and Arjuna had to fight and slay quite a number of his friends and relations including the revered Bhishma because the latter was on the side of the aggressor. It is my tenacious faith that in dubbing Rama, Krishna and Arjuna as guilty of violence, the Mahatma betrayed a total ignorance of the springs of human action.
Although Gandhi had done very well in South Africa to retained the rights and well being of the Indian community there. But when he finally returned to India he developed a subjective mentality under which he alone was to be the final judge of what was right or wrong. If the country wanted his leadership, it had to accept his inerrancy; if it did not, he would stand separate from the Congress and carry on his own way. Against such an attitude there can be no halfway house. Either Congress had to surrender its will to his and had to be content with playing second jasmin to all his Fad, whimsicality, metaphysics and Pristine vision, or it had to carry on without him. He alone was the Judge of everyone and everything; he was the master brain guiding the civil disobedience movement; no other could know the technique of that movement. He alone knew when to begin and when to withdraw it. The movement might succeed or fail, it might bring untold disaster and political reverses but that could make no difference to the Mahatma's infallibility. 'A Satyagrahi can never fail' was his formula for declaring his own infallibility and nobody except himself knew what a Satyagrahi is.
Thus, the Mahatma became the judge and jury in his own cause. These childish inanities and obstinacies, coupled with a most severe penance of life, sustained work and Elevated character made Gandhi formidable and Tireless. Many people thought that his politics were irrational but they had either to withdraw from the Congress or place their intelligence at his feet to do with, as he liked. In a position of such absolute negligence Gandhi was guilty of blunder after blunder, failure after failure, disaster after disaster.
I stoutly maintain that Gandhi has failed in his duty. Gandhi is being referred to as the Father of the Nation. But if that is so, he had failed his paternal duty inasmuch as he has acted very treacherously to the nation by his consenting to the partitioning of it. He has proved to be the Father of Pakistan. His inner-voice, his spiritual power and his doctrine of non-violence of which so much is made of, all crumbled before Jinnah's iron will and proved to be powerless. Gandhiji who had been a symbol of courage had crumbled before jinnah's demands, allowing him to break our nation & extract crores of rupees from us. Gandhi's vision and his message of peace was seen as compromising. Is partition of our Motherland a sign of freedom? no sane person can agree with it. The Congress, which had boasted of its nationalism and socialism, secretly accepted Pakistan literally at the point of the bayonet and abjectly surrendered to Jinnah.
India was vivisected and one-third of the Indian territory became foreign land to us from August 14, 1947. Lord Mountbatten came to be described in Congress circles as the greatest Viceroy and Governor-General this country ever had. The official date for handing over power was fixed for June 30, 1948, but Mountbatten with his ruthless surgery gave us a gift of vivisected India ten months in advance.
This is what Gandhi had achieved after thirty years of undisputed dictatorship and this is what Congress party calls 'freedom' and 'peaceful transfer of power'. The Hindu-Muslim unity bubble was finally burst and a theocratic state was established with the consent of Nehru and his crowd and they have called 'freedom won by them with sacrifice' - whose sacrifice? When top leaders of Congress, with the consent of Gandhi, divided and tore the country - which we consider a deity of worship.
The matter regarding here, the release of Rs. 55 crore to Pakistan towards the second instalment of arrears to be paid to it under the terms of division of assets and liabilities requires to be understood in the context of the events that took place in the aftermath of partition. Of the 75 crore to be paid the first instalment of Rs. 20 crore was already released. Invasion of Kashmir by self-styled liberators with the covert support of the Pakistani Army took place before the second instalment was paid. Government of India decided to withhold it. Lord Mountbatten was of the opinion that it amounted to a violation of the mutually agreed conditions and he brought it to the notice of Gandhiji. To Gandhiji's ethical sense the policy of tit for tat was repugnant and he readily agreed with the Viceroy's point of view. However, linking his stand in this matter with his fast he undertook. an intentional mix-up and distortion of facts of contemporary history.
The fast was undertaken with a view to restoring communal amity in Delhi. Gandhiji arrived from Calcutta in September 1947 to go to Punjab to restore peace there. On being briefed by Sardar Patel about the explosive situation in Delhi itself he changed his plans and decided to continue his stay in Delhi to restore peace with the firm determination to "Do or Die."
The influx of Hindus from Pakistan who were uprooted and who had suffered killings of relatives, abduction and rape of women and looting of their belongings had created an explosive situation. The local Hindus who were outraged by the treatment meted out to their Hindu brethren and the anger of local Muslims against reports of similar outrages on their coreligionists in India made Delhi a veritable witches' cauldron. What added poignancy to this was the realization that it happened in India itself just after a unique incident in the history of mankind: doing away of the shackles of a colonial regime by non-violent means. It was in this background that he undertook a fast unto death to restore communal amity and sanity in Delhi. And, as if to allow the critics of Mahatma Gandhi a chance to mix-up and manoeuvre, the decision of the government of India to release Rs. 55 crore to Pakistan came during this period of his fast.
But when Hindus in Pakistan were subjected to violent attacks Gandhi did not so much as utter a single word to protest and censure the Pakistan Government or the Muslims concerned. Gandhi was shrewd enough to know that while undertaking a fast unto death, had he imposed for its break some condition on the Muslims in Pakistan, there would have been found hardly any Muslims who could have shown some grief if the fast had ended in his death. It was for this reason that he purposely avoided imposing any condition on the Muslims. He was fully aware of from the experience that Jinnah was not at all perturbed or influenced by his fast and the Muslim League hardly attached any value to the inner voice of Gandhi.
Just because Gandhi was declared father of the nation it does not mean whatever he did was right. On 6/5/1946 MK Gandhi told Hindus to sacrifice and not to fight Muslim League. In Kerala when Muslim League killed 1500 Hindus and converted 2000 into Islam MK Gandhi said that it was a "brave act by Allah's followers.
30 January, 1948, the pre-eminent leader of the Indian independence movement in British-ruled India, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, stood in the gardens of a New Delhi building where a prayer meeting was about to take place. Nathuram Godse approached Gandhi at 5.17pm and bowed, then pushed aside one of Gandhi's grandnieces and shot him in the chest three times. if he wants he could easily run out of the crowd but instead he shouted "police" and surrendered himself as Gandhi collapsed.
Gandhi's death was mourned nationwide. More than two million people joined the five-mile-long funeral procession from Birla House, where he was assassinated, to Raj Ghat. Erected as a memorial to Gandhi, Raj Ghat bears the epigraph "Hē Ram" – meaning "Oh God" – widely believed to be his last words.
the congress party was secretly indebted to godse as he did what they couldn't due to Gandhiji's image. This can be proved from the fact that the govt. made a claim on Kashmir (till today). had they agreed with Gandhiji act, they would have given the entire Kashmir to pakistan in 1947 itself.
court trial began
"Born in a devotional Brahmin family, Speaking during his court trial, Godse, 'I instinctively came to revere Hindu religion, Hindu history and Hindu culture. I had, therefore, been intensely proud of Hinduism as a whole. As I grew up I developed a tendency to free thinking unfettered by any superstitious allegiance to any isms, political or religious. That is why I worked actively for the eradication of untouchability and the caste system based on birth alone. I openly joined anti-caste movements and maintained that all Hindus were of equal status as to rights, social and religious and should be considered high or low on merit alone and not through the accident of birth in a particular caste or profession. I used publicly to take part in organized anti-caste dinners in which thousands of Hindus, Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, Chamars and Bhangis participated. We broke the caste rules and dined in the company of each other.
In assassinating Gandhi, Nathuram gave his otherwise ordinary life a new meaning. This was perhaps the reason why he pleaded with the government not to show him mercy and send him to the gallows. His masculinity had been asserted. He had sacrificed himself for promoting the idea of militant Hinduism. He had killed the man who was sacrilegiously turning Hindus effeminate
he said, i knew….I shall be totally ruined, and the only thing I could expect from the people would be nothing but hatred… if I were to kill Gandhiji. But at the same time, I felt that Indian politics in the absence of Gandhiji would surely be proved practical, able to retaliate, and be powerful with armed forces. No doubt, my own future would be totally ruined, but the nation would be saved from the inroads of Pakistan…
….I do say that my shots were fired at the person whose policy and action had brought rack and ruin and destruction to millions of Hindus… There was no legal machinery by which such an offender could be brought to book, and for this reason I fired those fatal shots…
….I do not desire any mercy to be shown to me… I did fire shots at Gandhiji in open daylight. I did not make any attempt to run away; in fact I never entertained any idea of running away. I did not try to shoot myself… for, it was my ardent desire to give vent to my thoughts in an open Court. My confidence about the moral side of my action has not been shaken even by the criticism levelled of against it on all sides. I have no doubt, honest writers of history will weigh my act and find the true value thereof some day in future.”
The Judge was astonished by his speech and commented that if India had followed the Jury system of giving judgments, Godse would have been adjudicated as "Not Guilty" by the Jury, cause after the speech, the whole audience was in tears.This is the speech given by Nathuram Godse in the court in his last trial for the murder of Mahatma Gandhi.