The British (kind of) Apology

by Maria S Wed Feb 20, 2013 5:45 pm

I have not thought about the British and their occupation and regime for a long time!

I suppose with time..we (I) think of them as more "benign"..the reference to "the regime build on the skulls" touched a nerve. And frankly did not know much specifically- details about this particular massacre.

British PM regrets "deeply shameful" colonial Indian massacre

http://news.yahoo.com/british-pm-regrets-deeply-shameful-colonial-indian-massacre-075752903.html

by Petrichor Wed Feb 20, 2013 5:59 pm

Empty gesture guided by votes and money.

by Maria S Wed Feb 20, 2013 6:05 pm

It was a stark reminder about the past.
As for the value of an 'apology/regrets'..while it may be symbolic..since I was not "directly affected"..will refrain from commenting. I know for "some" people from other communities who were personally affected (ancestors being killed, enslaved..affected by other atrocities) symbolism- does make some difference, for others- it may not matter.

by Petrichor Wed Feb 20, 2013 6:09 pm

I find it doubly insulting - once when Dyer taught the 'moral lesson' and now when Cameron wants to use the opportunity to sidle up to economic redemption that may be provided by India.

by Maria S Wed Feb 20, 2013 6:11 pm

*I suppose there are no permanent friends-and no permanent enemies (I don't mean in the philosophical-faith dimension!)..I mean the shifts of alliances and relationships in geo-political dimensions..
I was reading an interesting review of "Vishwaroopam" in Facebook by someone who was reminding Kamal about the once close relationship between US and Taliban..I did not know Pres. Reagan dedicated a space launch to them..learn something every day:)
http://www.legitgov.org/Reagan-calls-Taliban-moral-equivalent-Americas-founding-fathers

by Hellsangel Wed Feb 20, 2013 6:16 pm

Maria S wrote:*I suppose there are no permanent friends-and no permanent enemies (I don't mean in the philosophical-faith dimension!)..I mean the shifts of alliances and relationships in geo-political dimensions..
I was reading an interesting review of "Vishwaroopam" in Facebook by someone who was reminding Kamal about the once close relationship between US and Taliban..I did not know Pres. Reagan dedicated a space launch to them..learn something every day
http://www.legitgov.org/Reagan-calls-Taliban-moral-equivalent-Americas-founding-fathers

Keep reading loony leftie websites and you will know more things.

This is how they describe themselves:

Citizens for Legitimate Government

A multi-partisan activist group established to expose and resist US imperialism, corpora-terrorism, and the New World Order

by Maria S Wed Feb 20, 2013 6:20 pm

If you knew there was a US space launch dedicated to the Taliban..good for you.
I like Pres. Reagan..am fascinated by him. I am not a rabid Democrat, you are welcome to make reading recos- sites, books..I will look into them.

by Petrichor Wed Feb 20, 2013 6:27 pm

I don't particularly like Reagan.
Reagan dedicated the space shuttle launch to 'people of Afghanistan'.
The quote about the moral equivalency of Taliban to founding fathers is suspect.

by Idéfix Wed Feb 20, 2013 6:33 pm

atcg wrote:I don't particularly like Reagan.
Reagan dedicated the space shuttle launch to 'people of Afghanistan'.
The quote about the moral equivalency of Taliban to founding fathers is suspect.

He certainly called the mujahideen (literally, "jihadi warriors") the moral equivalent of America's founding fathers. The Taliban as a group did not exist when Reagan made that comment, but some of those mujahideen were later organized into a group called Taliban ("students") by Pakistan with the tacit support of the US.

by Maria S Wed Feb 20, 2013 6:34 pm

Sure. I can't vouch for it!
But there is no question that the "Freedom Fighters" (Taliban) were used by many sides..including the US at that time. Of course the US- also used Saddam and he used the US..
*The point being- there are no "permanent" alliances/enemies.

by Petrichor Wed Feb 20, 2013 6:36 pm

panini press wrote:
atcg wrote:I don't particularly like Reagan.
Reagan dedicated the space shuttle launch to 'people of Afghanistan'.
The quote about the moral equivalency of Taliban to founding fathers is suspect.
He certainly called the mujahideen (literally, "jihadi warriors") the moral equivalent of America's founding fathers. The Taliban as a group did not exist when Reagan made that comment, but some of those mujahideen were later organized into a group called Taliban ("students") by Pakistan with the tacit support of the US.

I saw a reference to Sandinistas with that quote but no authentic source regarding the mujahideen.

by Idéfix Wed Feb 20, 2013 6:57 pm

atcg wrote:
panini press wrote:
atcg wrote:I don't particularly like Reagan.
Reagan dedicated the space shuttle launch to 'people of Afghanistan'.
The quote about the moral equivalency of Taliban to founding fathers is suspect.
He certainly called the mujahideen (literally, "jihadi warriors") the moral equivalent of America's founding fathers. The Taliban as a group did not exist when Reagan made that comment, but some of those mujahideen were later organized into a group called Taliban ("students") by Pakistan with the tacit support of the US.

I saw a reference to Sandinistas with that quote but no authentic source regarding the mujahideen.

I remember watching a documentary that contained a video clip of him using that phrase in connection with the mujahideen. I can't find it on Youtube. And the sources I found so far point to the Contras (who were fighting the Sandinistas). So you are right -- the quote is suspect unless I can find that video clip I watched a few years ago.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Wed Feb 20, 2013 6:59 pm

Maria S wrote:I have not thought about the British and their occupation and regime for a long time!

I suppose with time..we (I) think of them as more "benign"..the reference to "the regime build on the skulls" touched a nerve. And frankly did not know much specifically- details about this particular massacre.

British PM regrets "deeply shameful" colonial Indian massacre

http://news.yahoo.com/british-pm-regrets-deeply-shameful-colonial-indian-massacre-075752903.html

"Deeply Shameful"....so...????

A little history:

On his return to Britain, Brigadier Dyer was presented with a purse of 26,000 pounds sterling, a huge sum in those days, which emerged from a collection on his behalf by the Morning Post, a conservative, pro-Imperialistic newspaper, which later merged with the Daily Telegraph. A Thirteen Women Committee was constituted to present "the Saviour of the Punjab with the sword of honour and a purse."

But, that is how it is.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Wed Feb 20, 2013 7:11 pm

atcg wrote:
panini press wrote:
atcg wrote:I don't particularly like Reagan.
Reagan dedicated the space shuttle launch to 'people of Afghanistan'.
The quote about the moral equivalency of Taliban to founding fathers is suspect.
He certainly called the mujahideen (literally, "jihadi warriors") the moral equivalent of America's founding fathers. The Taliban as a group did not exist when Reagan made that comment, but some of those mujahideen were later organized into a group called Taliban ("students") by Pakistan with the tacit support of the US.

I saw a reference to Sandinistas with that quote but no authentic source regarding the mujahideen.

He was equating the Mujahideen - Hekmatyar/Masood/Dost - with the founding fathers for fighting against the Soviets.

Taliban came much later in the mid 90s out of the Deobandi seminaries, and the cadre from the Afghan refugee camps in the NW. in 96/97 Benazir warned that the Taliban are beginning to control roads and large tracts of area in Pak/Afghan border regions. Their growth was actively encouraged by the ISI and Zia. With a female PM, the Taliban were able to grow fast due to their fundamentalism. Benazir did not know how to handle them fearing backlash from the Mullahs if she went after them. the 98 Nukle explosions isolated Pakistan enabling Taliban to grow rapidly using anti-Americanism and hindustan. Of course by 98/99 Taliban took over and expanded their influence, and entrenched across the board.

okiee... quiz tomorrow for you folks.

by Maria S Wed Feb 20, 2013 7:49 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

He was equating the Mujahideen - Hekmatyar/Masood/Dost - with the founding fathers for fighting against the Soviets.

Taliban came much later in the mid 90s out of the Deobandi seminaries, and the cadre from the Afghan refugee camps in the NW. in 96/97 Benazir warned that the Taliban are beginning to control roads and large tracts of area in Pak/Afghan border regions. Their growth was actively encouraged by the ISI and Zia. With a female PM, the Taliban were able to grow fast due to their fundamentalism. Benazir did not know how to handle them fearing backlash from the Mullahs if she went after them. the 98 Nukle explosions isolated Pakistan enabling Taliban to grow rapidly using anti-Americanism and hindustan. Of course by 98/99 Taliban took over and expanded their influence, and entrenched across the board.

okiee... quiz tomorrow for you folks.

Thank you for the quiz Prof. Saamiyar:)
I am def. not an expert!
*Sure there are differences between the Mujahideen and Taliban and other Groups/Sub groups. But as often happens..there are intergroup connections when money (a lot of money is involved).

by Hellsangel Wed Feb 20, 2013 8:01 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:....
okiee... quiz tomorrow for you folks.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/reagan-iran/

by Hellsangel Wed Feb 20, 2013 8:41 pm

What David Cameron did not apologise for

by Maria S Wed Feb 20, 2013 9:43 pm

The British dominance seems..so long ago..all the news related to Cameron's visit..brought back some historical perspectives/reminders.

by Maria S Wed Feb 20, 2013 10:09 pm

I guess "our diamond" is their best friend!

They don't believe in "Returnism" (really?) Pres. Bush 2 should feel better now..if the British PM can come up with terms like that in ref to a serious matter..

PM rejects 'returnism' of treasures

http://news.yahoo.com/britain-india-diamond-royal-crown-ours-000950576.html

by Idéfix Wed Feb 20, 2013 10:22 pm

It is a matter of time before they will have to return them.

by Maria S Wed Feb 20, 2013 10:27 pm

If not, I would like be on the diamond retrieval- seal team:)
Seriously, one would think that they would do the right thing and return it..not sure if the younger monarchs..esp. Kate wants it -but, who knows.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Wed Feb 20, 2013 11:14 pm

Hellsangel wrote:
Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:....
okiee... quiz tomorrow for you folks.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/reagan-iran/

The only unanswered question in the Iran-contra affair is how come Ollie North and Fawn Hall did not end up in bed....The Church fanaticism was perhaps stronger than their physical attraction.

But, still did they or did they ever not...?

by Kayalvizhi Thu Feb 21, 2013 1:12 am

Between February 7 and 12, 1965 India murdered more Tamil Nadu civilians than British did between 1900 and 1947 in TN.

When is India going to apologize to the people of Tamil Nadu?

by goodcitizn Thu Feb 21, 2013 1:14 am

Kayalvizhi wrote:Between February 7 and 12, 1965 India murdered more Tamil Nadu civilians than British did between 1900 and 1947 in TN.

When is India going to apologize to the people of Tamil Nadu?

Can you share some statistics to substantiate your comment?

by Kayalvizhi Thu Feb 21, 2013 1:20 am

goodcitizn wrote:
Kayalvizhi wrote:Between February 7 and 12, 1965 India murdered more Tamil Nadu civilians than British did between 1900 and 1947 in TN.

When is India going to apologize to the people of Tamil Nadu?

Can you share some statistics to substantiate your comment?

According to Thinathanthi India shot and killed more than 60 during 1965 abti-Hindi agitation, (you may find their names and some of their photos at "Language Agitation Martyrs Memorial" in Chennai.

Of the 60+, 1 was killed in January near Annamalai U. The rest were killed during the 2nd week of Feb.

by goodcitizn Thu Feb 21, 2013 1:47 am

Kayalvizhi wrote:
goodcitizn wrote:
Kayalvizhi wrote:Between February 7 and 12, 1965 India murdered more Tamil Nadu civilians than British did between 1900 and 1947 in TN.

When is India going to apologize to the people of Tamil Nadu?

Can you share some statistics to substantiate your comment?

According to Thinathanthi India shot and killed more than 60 during 1965 abti-Hindi agitation, (you may find their names and some of their photos at "Language Agitation Martyrs Memorial" in Chennai.

Of the 60+, 1 was killed in January near Annamalai U. The rest were killed during the 2nd week of Feb.

Wiki says the number is 70 (unofficial reports place the death toll as high as 500). How do these numbers compare to the number of Indians killed by the British between 1900 and 1947?

As the riots spread, police responded with lathi charges and firing on student processions. This further inflamed the situation. Acts of arson, looting and damage to public property became common. Railway cars and Hindi name boards at railway stations were burned down; telegraph poles were cut and railway tracks displaced. The Bhaktavatsalam Government considered the situation as a law and order problem and brought in para military forces to quell the agitation. Incensed by police action, violent mobs killed two police men. Five agitators (Sivalingam, Aranganathan, Veerappan, Muthu, and Sarangapani) committed suicide by pouring gasoline and setting themselves on fire and three more (Dandapani, Muthu, and Shanmugam) died by consuming poison. (a sixth suicide by self immolatation - by Sarangapani of Mayavaram occurred two weeks later). In two weeks of riots, around 70 people were killed (by official estimates). Some unofficial reports put the death toll as high as 500. A large number of students were arrested. The damage to property was assessed as one crore Rupees.^[24]^[38]^[42]^[45]^[51]^[52]^[53]^[54]

On 28 January, classes in Madras University, Annamalai University and other colleges and schools in the state were suspended indefinitely. Within the Congress, opinion was divided - On 31 January, a group of Congress leaders including Mysore Chief minister S.Nijalingappa, Bengal Congress leader Atulya Ghosh, Union Minister Sanjeeva Reddy and Congress president K. Kamaraj met in Bangalore and issued an appeal not to force Hindi on non-Hindi speaking areas as they believed it might endanger the unity of the country. Morarji Desai refused their demands regretting that Hindi was not made official before the anti-Hindi protests crystallized. He said Congress leaders in Madras should convince people there and no regional sentiments should come in the move to forge the integration of the country.^[38] Union Home Minister Gulzari Lal Nanda agreed with Bhaktavatsalam's handling of the agitation and commended him for standing "hard as a rock".^[55]^[56]

Rioting continued throughout the first week of February. On February 6, student representatives met Bhatavatsalam to find a compromise. But the talks failed and violence continued unabated. Processions, fasts, general strikes, burning of Hindi books, destruction of Hindi name boards, agitations in front of Post offices became commonplace. By the second week of February the students had lost control of protests. Annadurai (who had been released on 1 February) condemned the violence and asked the students to suspend the movement. But violence continued unabated. Efforts were made by both sides to find a compromise - Indira Gandhi visited Madras to try and reconcile the situation, while Bhaktavatsalam toned down his stance and started advocating "permanent bilingualism". In a Union cabinet meeting on 11 February, C. Subramaniam, the Minister for Food, demanded statutory recognition for English as official Language. When he was voted down, he resigned along with another minister from Madras State (O. V. Alagesan).^[11]^[42]^[53]^[57]^[58]

Faced with open revolt in his cabinet, Shastri remained unfazed. He recommended the acceptance of their resignations to the Indian president Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan. Radhakrishnan refused his recommendations by saying "Do you want to lose Tamil Nadu from India?. If not, kindly take back your recommendation". Shastri backed down and made a broadcast through All India Radio on February 11. Expressing shock over the riots, he promised to honour Nehru's assurances. Further he made four assurances of his own:^[38]^[57]

<BLOCKQUOTE sizset="false" sizcache0056325616489591224="5 8 85">
Every state will have complete and unfettered freedom to continue to transact its own business in the language of its own choice, which may be the regional language or English. Communications between one State to another will either be in English or will be accompanied by authentic English translation. The non-Hindi states will be free to correspond with the Central Government in English and no change will be made in this arrangement without the consent of the non-Hindi States. In the transaction of business at the Central level, English will continue to be used.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
Later he added a fifth assurance: The All India Civil Services examination would continue to be conducted in English rather than in Hindi alone.^[38]

by Kayalvizhi Thu Feb 21, 2013 1:58 am

>> How do these numbers compare to the number of Indians killed by the British between 1900 and 1947?

I said deaths in TN (not India)

by goodcitizn Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:03 am

Kayalvizhi wrote:>> How do these numbers compare to the number of Indians killed by the British between 1900 and 1947?

I said deaths in TN (not India)

Okay, then how is it a valid comparison? What did the British do that only affected some regions of India, particularly TN?

by Kris Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:14 am

panini press wrote:It is a matter of time before they will have to return them.

>>>>Strike while the iron is hot.. India has some leverage now and the world is more politically inclined to empathize.

by Kayalvizhi Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:14 am

>> Okay, then how is it a valid comparison? What did the British do that only affected some regions of India, particularly TN?

It is THE valid comparison. Killings in Tamil Nadu under British rule and under Indian rule.

by Kris Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:18 am

Kayalvizhi wrote:Between February 7 and 12, 1965 India murdered more Tamil Nadu civilians than British did between 1900 and 1947 in TN.

When is India going to apologize to the people of Tamil Nadu?

>>>>When are Captain Pirabhakaran and his apologists going to apologize to the parents of the children the butcher sacrificed?

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:38 am

Kayalvizhi wrote:>> How do these numbers compare to the number of Indians killed by the British between 1900 and 1947?

I said deaths in TN (not India)

STILL you think the Brits killed LESS THAN 65 - heck even 500 - in TN between 1900 and 1947?

It is idiotic and myopic statements from you and your LTTE sympathizers that are responsible for the deaths of 1000s of innocent tamils in Sri Lanka.

you guy have pea-sized brain when it comes to strategy.

by Kayalvizhi Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:45 am

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:STILL you think the Brits killed LESS THAN 65 - heck even 500 - in TN between 1900 and 1947?

absolutely. go to any history book prescribed for BA history in TN universities

by Kayalvizhi Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:47 am

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:LTTE sympathizers that are responsible for the deaths of 1000s of innocent tamils in Sri Lanka.

if ltte is respoonsible for the 600000 or so deaths in sl island, then gandhi is reszponsible for jalianwalabaugh. so cameron is apologizing unnecessarily

by Kris Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:53 am

Kayalvizhi wrote:
Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:LTTE sympathizers that are responsible for the deaths of 1000s of innocent tamils in Sri Lanka.

if ltte is respoonsible for the 600000 or so deaths in sl island, then gandhi is reszponsible for jalianwalabaugh. so cameron is apologizing unnecessarily

>>>> But Gandhi didn't enlist children in his war. The butcher Pirabhakaran did. What is your justification for that?

by Captain Bhankas Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:18 am

isn't it time someone apologized for the atrocities committed by the mughal invaders?

by Maria S Thu Feb 21, 2013 8:44 am

I guess all roads/threads will lead to our other fav. topics..conflicts..people..etc, etc:)

by goodcitizn Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:21 am

Maria S wrote:I guess all roads/threads will lead to our other fav. topics..conflicts..people..etc, etc:)

This place is more like Vietnam Veedu.

by southindian Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:23 am

Maria S wrote:I have not thought about the British and their occupation and regime for a long time!

I suppose with time..we (I) think of them as more "benign"..the reference to "the regime build on the skulls" touched a nerve. And frankly did not know much specifically- details about this particular massacre.

British PM regrets "deeply shameful" colonial Indian massacre

http://news.yahoo.com/british-pm-regrets-deeply-shameful-colonial-indian-massacre-075752903.html

The queen did not regret when she visited

...and British PM said, Kohinoor belongs to them. Smile

by goodcitizn Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:44 am

southindian wrote:...and British PM said, Kohinoor belongs to them.

Yeah, to the victor belong the spoils.

by indophile Thu Feb 21, 2013 10:03 am

From old Sulekha -- some British links in the story for British atrocities in India (I wonder why they put it in "Creative").
http://creative.sulekha.com/1857-british-raj-atrocity-exposed-from-1-8-bn-victim-indian-holocaust-to-10-bn-first-world-climate-genocide_424422_blog

by Maria S Thu Feb 21, 2013 10:48 am

GC,
*Smiling* at Vietnam Veedu...think there are more colorful characters here!

SI,
I hope some day- Queen Kate apologizes and gives it back.

Thanks Mr. Indo.

atcg,
I may have disagreed with his politics and stands..but, I find Reagan quite intriguing as a person, he was a "loner" and..may be I am soft for hard core romantics (that's adds to their charm:)

by Idéfix Thu Feb 21, 2013 4:47 pm

indophile wrote:From old Sulekha -- some British links in the story for British atrocities in India (I wonder why they put it in "Creative").
http://creative.sulekha.com/1857-british-raj-atrocity-exposed-from-1-8-bn-victim-indian-holocaust-to-10-bn-first-world-climate-genocide_424422_blog

The British committed plenty of atrocities in India. But they managed to expunge them from popular history. And that is because they accommodated the Indian elites in their Raj, and created a system of mutual dependence. The elites got free rein to exploit the masses under the protection of the world's greatest empire and become fabulously wealthy, and the British got to become the wealthiest country in the world thanks to "the jewel in the crown" of their empire. The elites, who in other countries might be viewed as "collaborators with a colonizing enemy" after independence, secured control of the establishment. So instead of being ashamed of collaborating with the British occupation of their country, those elites actually are proud of the positions and titles conferred on them by the Raj. Most Indian historians are either part of those elites, or aspire to be part of them. It is not easy for them to question the prevailing narrative of more-or-less benign British rule that in their minds unified and modernized India.

by Maria S Thu Feb 21, 2013 6:54 pm

Another angle would be the softening- "romantization" of the British Rule..the mixing leading to the Anglo Indian community..and "looking up to British with some "superior reverence' referring them to "Dorais" (in TamilNadu).

*Almost all of the time, it was British Daddies and Indian Mommies..and the British Officers were encouraged to "date"- "pay"- "coerce/seduce" (saying in a nice way) Indian women..all seen as "benign" for the most part.
.
*Can't help but wonder if Rajiv had fallen in love with Ms. Nigeria or Ms. Mozambique, she would have been so easily accepted and revered as Mother Gandhi now.
http://www.margaretdeefholts.com/angloindian.html

by Petrichor Thu Feb 21, 2013 7:14 pm

That's a nice write-up, Maria. Thanks for posting.

The stereotyping of the Anglo Indian woman as the 'promiscuous siren' did much to vault me over some difficult teen milestones Smile

by Maria S Thu Feb 21, 2013 7:23 pm

atcg wrote:That's a nice write-up, Maria. Thanks for posting.

The stereotyping of the Anglo Indian woman as the 'promiscuous siren' did much to vault me over some difficult teen milestones

You are welcome, atcg:)
Ah! Those teenage milestones..
They used to be referred to as "chattakari"..or "aapakari" (slang). In movies- they were often stereotyped..until Ms. Lakshmi brought some respect to them with her nice portrayal- as a "real heroine" in the movie "Chattakari" (Malayalam) and "Julie" (Hindi)..although there was pre-marital sex!

by Maria S Thu Feb 21, 2013 7:57 pm

Aww..had to listen to some of the nice old songs..

The other one -Bhool Gaya Sab Kuch was kind of edging on R-rated with clothes on:)

Sivaji did something with his eyes..so did Lakshmi (expressive)!

So will post..Yeh Raatein Nayi Purani...in Lata's voice..

by Rishi Thu Feb 21, 2013 8:05 pm

Maria,

But for the British rule, you would not be a Christian. The reality of you and your parents being Christian has its ties to the British colonialism.

Have you ever thought about it?

I am saying this because you are criticizing the British rule. The truth is more complicated than the narrative of Britishers being mere rapacious invaders.

Disclaimer: There is nothing wrong in being a Christian.

by Maria S Thu Feb 21, 2013 8:26 pm

Rishi wrote:Maria,

But for the British rule, you would not be a Christian. The reality of you and your parents being Christian has its ties to the British colonialism.

Have you ever thought about it?

I am saying this because you are criticizing the British rule. The truth is more complicated than the narrative of Britishers being mere rapacious invaders.

Disclaimer: There is nothing wrong in being a Christian.

Good evening Sara:)

Make that great, great, great grandparents- I am a seventh generation Christian. More importantly one by CHOICE now. I don't know about "what could have been"..I could have been your..well, one of "your own" or you could be one of "our own"..if history and destiny would have been different. If my destiny was to be a Christian..I could have ended up being a Chinese Christian woman in 2013 and Christianity spreading faster in China than in most places- with no British occupying them.

Seriously, there is no question that there were some positive things/changes the British can take credit for (but, then again..I hope you know me enough to know..I can find some good in everyone, everything, that's just nature).But, being objective...there were some good British influences.

*This is not a British bashing thread, that's not my intention..with Cameron's visit..brought back some memories about the bad events which happened.

Glad you spoke to me The British (kind of) Apology 459784477

Am happy!

by Kayalvizhi Thu Feb 21, 2013 10:55 pm

panini press wrote:The British committed plenty of atrocities in India. But they managed to expunge them from popular history. .

I was not planning to come back to 1965 anti-Hindi agitation but the comparison between Brit Rule and Hindian rule over Tamil Nadu is so remarkable I have to come back.

In the same way British expunged their killings from history books, Hindians have exounged the killing of 60+ unarmed Tamil civilians in about a week in Feb 1965. The CBSE text book says Tamils destroyed property (true) but the CBSE history do not mention that Indian police and army murdered 60+ (Textbook in political science for Class XII, First Edition, 2007. page 152 and 153

http://www.tamiltribune.com/12/0901.html

by Sponsored content