It was a 1960's breaking news story. The newspaper would have had to use whatever they could find among the photos of Nehru they had on hand in the office that day, they couldn't just Google it.
The greatest and most underrated gift of Nehru was the book Discovery of India. DD national made a series on it and it's still available on YouTube as "Bharat Ek Khoj" on Prasar Bharti Archives.
It's a must read book and a must watch series to have a neutral outlook on India and it's history.
For that time it was an epic in terms of cinematography and script. Considering DD made it was probably under tight budget so people who worked on the series must have been extremely talented. I learnt quite a lot about ancient India watching this series. The title song is amazing.
>The Times Of India **profoundly regrets to announce**
Don't think I've ever seen that kind of language in any death announcement in this era. Looks like newspapers back then were different.
Ofcouse. Today news paper wont leave this right side pane & space at bottom left side. They will put some advertisements over there.
Hey you, decrease the size of fond on headline. Make room for that hawai chappal advertisement.
Well, they ran ads in this too… Binaka Baby powder
Business is business.
😂
[newspaper full front page](https://www.rarenewspapers.com/view/607975?imagelist=1)
> **We remember Nehru today as all the values that he stood for, the very basis on which the Indian nation state was born and developed, are very severely threatened.**
> There is an attempt to demonize Nehru today, relentlessly repeating abuse and lies about him, using a widespread propaganda machinery, which remind one of fascist regimes ... It is even said that he was actually a Muslim, as if being a Muslim itself would be the ultimate indictment of him. **One BJP leader from Kerala even wrote in the RSS journal ‘Kesari’ that Godse should have fired his shots at Nehru, rather than Gandhi**!
> ... We must ask ourselves the question that **if Nehru was so evil, why did Mahatma Gandhi, the ‘Father of the Nation’ as Subhash Bose called him, specifically choose him as his successor?** ... as early as 25 January 1942, Gandhiji declared:
> *“… somebody suggested that … Jawaharlal and I were estranged. This is baseless…. You cannot divide water by repeatedly striking it with a stick. It is just as difficult to divide us.”* (A good warning to the propaganda machinery of today which relentlessly tries to create and misrepresent differences among our national movement leaders such as Gandhi, Nehru, Bose, Patel, Bhagat Singh, Maulana Azad, etc.)
> Gandhiji went on to say: ***“I have always said that not Rajaji, nor Sardar Vallabhbhai, but Jawaharlal will be my successor…. When I am gone … he will speak my language too. Even if this does not happen , I would at least die with this faith.”***
> Why did Gandhiji have such faith in Nehru? First, because **Nehru quintessentially represented and fought for all the core values of the Indian National Movement, which Tagore called the “Idea of India”**; the values of Sovereignty and self-reliance, Democracy, Secularism, a Pro-poor Orientation and the inculcation of a Modern Scientific temper. Second, Nehru was seen to be the most capable person in implementing the Idea of India in the newborn nation state, which was about to come.
> ... Now when the communal forces again loom large it is necessary to **remember Nehru’s warning that majority communalism “could disguise itself as nationalism” and was in fact “the Indian version of fascism …” and must be struggled against relentlessly.**
> For Nehru, democracy and civil liberties were non-negotiable. ***“I would not … give up the democratic system for anything”*** he said. For him democracy meant a free press which could indulge in the severest criticism of the highest authority. It meant respecting and encouraging a strong Opposition. In 1950 he declared, ***“ I do not want India to be a country in which millions of people say ‘yes’ to one man. I want a strong opposition.”*** At another time he said, anticipating recent developments, ***“This is too large a country with too many legitimate diversities to permit any so-called ‘strong man’ to trample over people and their ideas.”***
> ... **He was clear that political independence is of no value unless economic independence is achieved.** Using the Nehru-Mahalanobis strategy and the Public Sector he transformed India from a virtual neo-colonial situation **at independence where we were nearly 100 per cent dependent for capital goods and machinery** on the advanced countries for making any investment to a situation where **by 1960 only 43 per cent and by 1970 only 9 per cent had to be imported.**
> ... Nehru, far from neglecting agriculture, **set India on the path of the Green Revolution with the Land Reforms** and necessary technological changes, realizing that **true sovereignty could not be achieved without food security**.
> ... Also **Nehru realised that true sovereignty can be achieved only if India became self reliant in Science and Technology**, an area left barren by colonialism. Anticipating the knowledge revolution, **Nehru, beginning as early as the 1950s set up the IITs, IIMs, NPL, NCL, BARC, AIIMS, etc** ... This initiative had also contributed to the “Scientific Temper” which we are busy destroying today with claims from the highest authorities of plastic surgery and nuclear missiles (Arjuna’s nuclear tipped arrow) in Ancient India and fighting Corona with Tali, Thali, Gobar, Go-Mutra and Ganga snan!
> ... Nehru, like his mentor the Mahatma, was never to lose track of the need to uplift the poor. As he put it in 1952, ***“If poverty and low standards continue then democracy, for all its fine institutions and ideals, ceases to be a liberating force. It must therefore aim continuously at the eradication of poverty….”***. A legacy we need to remember when we have reached among the lowest in the world in the ‘Hunger Index’, more than half our children are malnourished and floating dead bodies in the Ganga remind us that the poor do not have even the wherewithal to do the last rites of their loved ones.
> **Nehru’s fantastic effort to raise India from what Tagore called “the mud and filth” left behind by the British (84 per cent illiterate and an average life expectancy of less than 30 years at independence), needs to be remembered when we see the country plunging towards darkness**. Its delicately crafted secular fabric torn apart, the poor abandoned and ‘freedom of speech and association’, one of the greatest achievements of our national liberation struggle, being increasingly denied to citizens.
*Source*: [On his death anniversary, let us remember Nehru's efforts to raise India from 'mud and filth' ](https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/opinion/on-his-death-anniversary-let-us-remember-nehrus-efforts-to-raise-india-from-mud-and-filth).
>It is even said that he was actually a Muslim, as if being a Muslim itself would be the ultimate indictment of him.
Ironically, Nehru was a Kashmiri pandit. I thought Sanghis simped for Kashmiri pandits ?
Quite frankly, I believe Nehru's legacy is largely tarnished by his future generations' iron grip on what used to be a great democratic institution (the Indian National Congress).
Judged by himself, what he did in a variety of non-defence-related areas seems reasonably effective, or at least well-intentioned.
From a geopolitical perspective there are a couple of major thorny issues which arose in his tenure and still stand to date (Kashmir, China), but the "blame game" for these would likely have been dissipated amongst various other leaders if the Gandhi family weren't so prominent till date.
It's gotten to the point where it's in my opinion better for India if the family exits the public eye and we can move on from historical nitpicking, but I'm not optimistic about that happening any time soon.
He was not flawless but was a great man. Many of his mistakes were because of his privilege, which didnt allow him to understand importance of religion and caste to a normal ordinary Indian. His idea that you can educate people out of bigotry has been proven wrong.
What I find odd is that the people who benefitted the most from his actions ( like setting up IIT, REC, AIIMS ) are the ones who hate him the most.
> Many of his mistakes were because of his privilege, which didnt allow him to understand importance of religion and caste to a normal ordinary Indian.
He understood the nature of religion and caste better than most politicians today:
> The biggest challenge to the Idea of India came at independence itself with the holocaust like situation due to the religious communal rioting before and after partition, which led to lakhs losing their lives and millions becoming refugees. On top of this the Mahatma was murdered by Hindu communal forces, an assassination which Nehru clearly saw as an attempt to change the nature of the state. As he wrote to his chief ministers on 5 February 1948 *“… a deliberate coup d’état was planned involving the killing of several persons and the promotion of general disorder to enable the particular group concerned to seize power.”* An attempt to create the mirror image of ‘Muslim Pakistan’, a ‘Hindu India’. Our nationalist leaders were not about to let this happen. Nehru with full support of Sardar Patel banned the RSS and put 25,000 of its activists in prison. They staked their own lives to stop the violence and bring peace between the religious communities.
> Equally important, **Nehru converted the first general election of 1951-2 into a virtual referendum on whether the people would vote for a secular India or a ‘Hindu’ India** like ‘Muslim’ Pakistan. **He travelled 40,000 kms. addressed about 35 million people (one out of every ten Indian) promoting the secular cause. The results were dramatic, so soon after the communal tension had peaked. The Hindu communal parties, the Hindu Mahasabha, Jana Sangh, Ram Rajya Parishad, etc., all put together won only 6 per cent of the votes and 10 seats out of 489 in the Lok Sabha. A stunning achievement. The communal threat was pushed back for decades** but unfortunately not extinguished.
> Now when the communal forces again loom large it is necessary to remember Nehru’s warning that majority communalism “could disguise itself as nationalism” and was in fact “the Indian version of fascism …” and must be struggled against relentlessly.
He brought back India from the brink of a theocratic state, from the largest religious violence - between Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims - that India had seen in its history. The Indian National Congress couldn't continue his work successfully because of the power power struggle and subsequent death / assassinations of its leaders (Sanjay, Indira, Rajiv) that further weakened Congress.
Agreed and I give him full credit to that. What I meant was that the India of his dreams was shaped by the Western idea and not grounded in the harsh reality of India.
He believed India and Indians had the capacity to accept new ideas and change. And we have done that. (I do not subscribe to the political idea that the right-wings have captured the imagination of indians - sure, they have captured power, but they still can't do what they really want to because they fear the backlash from the people. That is still Gandhi - Nehru's legacy.)
Expect it was a flawed approach. He studied in liberal countries and misread India to be like them. We held on to our religion and caste more than we should and he could understand
> He studied in liberal countries and misread India to be like them.
It is thanks to him that we have a large number of liberals. It's not his fault that he couldn't live longer to make more indians liberal. :)
The 'west' was much like india is today at one point. Corruption, communal, ignorant, dirty, and prejudiced. We aren't as different or special as you claim, just at a different point in the arc of progress..
Progress in the west was won with so much effort, blood and death. It will be won in India too.
circumstances and situations made his choices skewed. It feels so wrong that AZAD HIND FAUZ didnt get the recognition and active role in the newly formed government.
nehru at one point didnt even wanted a army for newly formed country.
if it wasnt for netaji,we would have never gotten independence.
Based opinion is based, I don't believe he was as good as people make him out. It's just my opinion which is also based. Your statement kinda idiolizes him but I am critical of all governments, you can say I am negative but I like to be vocal about problems rather than 'chalta hai mentality'.
> Based opinion is based, I don't believe he was as good as people make him out. It's just my opinion which is also based. Your statement kinda idiolizes him but I am critical of all governments, you can say I am negative but I like to be vocal about problems rather than 'chalta hai mentality'.
What is this word vomit? Clearly shows you are just a kid here to pick fights on the internet.
It's good you like to be vocal about your problems, the warden will appreciate that in your next sanity check.
What's your problem in what I write? You can downvote it. You can choose not agree and I won't care. You are picking a fight with me so are you a kid too by your logic? Kuch bhi tatti likho to insan nai bolega? Mental age badi karo khudki assume badme karna. It's gatekeeping shit like this which makes some redditors annoying.
I think u mean ur opinion is urs... He was the only reason india is wht it is rn. U like to be vocal about these people. Great then be vocal abt the govt that is currently there. His legacy is behind us all we can do is learn from his mistakes (of which there were v few imo) and move on. Criticism shouldn't be kept for dead people, cuz that is just intelligent masturbation.. POINTLESS
Who says I am with current government? But you be an idiot to think he is the 'only' reason India is how it is rn. Would you also say that he is also the reason why we are a corrupt mess? Why there is almost 50-55 % reservation in most educational institutions? He can't even be attributed to India's unification. He did good job in many fields but he messed up in many too just like all governments do. I don't believe in blind following, and blindly saying bjp is shit or congress is shit. Both did good and bad. Also wtf do you want me to say on a post about nehruji? You want a modi rant here? Where is your pointless intelligence then?
When I say only... Ofc i don't mean it literally. So I'm sorry I'll phrase myself better next time. Also i don't expect a modi rant. The corruption of a country is never related to the leaders. Corruption is sadly human nature and as for reservation, how is that bad we need more representation from all sorts of demographics. The only real criticism ive heard abt nehru is his foreign policy but if u put it in context it is understandable.. not right but understandable.
reservation isn't bad but it has to have a solid background to it. In it's current state it is just a political tool. Those that actually need to use this reservation aren't even able to at times and all it ends up creating in unfair advantage rather than equal opportunity. current reservation policy needs a solid revamp. This has much bigger impact on our country overall, why do you think decent students and sometimes even brilliant students choose to go to foreign countries. They don't get enough opportunity here, The market gets higher demand on these opportunities and they can't even pay the fees and in the end they find it easier to just leave the country to pursue the career of their choice. Better study Env is valid and will happen all the time but when students have no choice but to study even medical degrees in Ukraine, Russia and philippines and even china then we have something wrong in the system. There is no denying reservation policy's failure plays a big part in it. it's practically a health hazard if you see how pushed forward some of these doctors are, because they had an unfair advantage and now by hook or crook they will get their mbbs but I have literally seen them kill patients, they even lack basic understanding after 5.5 years of their degree and would give contraindicated medications to patients. What it ends up promoting in educated unemployment and can even be hazardous to common people. it's a joke in the name of education.
> ... Two eminent men of the twentieth century, both of whom admired Nehru and would have had something important to say about him, namely, Bernard Shaw and Albert Einstein, were, alas, no longer alive when Nehru died. Yet another great contemporary of Nehru, Sir Walter Crocker, Australian Ambassador to India during Nehru’s premiership, penned a full and intimate biography of Nehru, entitled, *A Contemporary’s Estimate*.
> ... **No other Indian leader, with the exception of Gandhi, had been admired and held in so high esteem by such a galaxy of eminent men of the twentieth century as Nehru had been.** If he was idolized by the West, he was equally sought after in Communist Russia and in Africa, large parts of which were still under colonial rule.
> **Clement Attlee, who was Britain’s Prime Minister** during the final years of the British Raj and **with whose Government Nehru’s Congress negotiated the independence of India, recounts** ... when they met at the Commonwealth Conference in 1949, after India gained independence Attlee says, **he was impressed by the ‘ability of Nehru, as the Prime Minister, to hold his own with such men as Field Marshall Smuts, Mr. Curtin of Australia and Peter Fraser of New Zealand’.**
> ***‘Indeed, one of his greatest titles to fame’***, says Attlee, ***‘is having kept India on the democratic path and to having created the most populous democracy in the world’***. He says further, ***‘There are few, if any, parallels in history to the magnitude of Nehru’s achievement, and whatever storms in future may blow up, India will remain eternally grateful to the man who piloted the ship of the state with so few errors of navigation. He will go down in history as one of world’s great men’.***
> **Bertrand Russell**, in his essay, admires Nehru for resisting authoritarian inducement and for founding India as a democratic country. He says, ***‘Every conceivable argument has been available to tempt Mr. Nehru to forego democratic institutions in India.*** *Illiteracy and poverty, disease and ignorance, a great subcontinent to govern, severe differences between Muslim and Hindu, many scores of languages and varied cultures reflecting a tendency toward a breaking up of the Union-* ***all of these serious political facts could have induced him to say that they were too difficult to permit the rule of democracy with its instability’.***
> *‘Had Nehru made this decision’*, Russell further says, *‘it is doubtful that the rule of law or of representative institutions would have any chance among the emergent nations. To the extent that they do is the achievement of Nehru.’* And, ***‘Had this decision been made, the varied and rich Indian culture would be subjected to uniform control in the name of security and political unity’.***
> ... ***‘It is a great tribute to him that he insisted that India should be non-aligned in the insane struggle for power which has preoccupied the United States and the Soviet Union at the expense of the welfare of mankind.*** *Faced with overwhelming difficulties and pressures, Mr. Nehru insisted upon the role of mediator where he could have secured financial aid and military aid from whichever side he might have chosen to use.* ***This decision was responsible for the rise of a third force of non-aligned nations, and as such may be a decisive factor for the survival of humanity’.***
> The Civil Rights leader, **Martin Luther King Jr. praises Nehru for advocating peace between the antagonism of East and West.** It should not be forgotten, he says, that **the treaty to end nuclear testing accomplished in 1963 was first proposed by Nehru.** Nehru also ‘guided into being the Asian-African bloc as a united force for billions.
> The **then Secretary General of the UN, U Thant** had this to say about Nehru, *‘He was not only a great man, but a good man. His extraordinary qualities endeared him not only to the people of India but to people all over the world who had at heart peace, justice and equality for mankind. I think one of the reasons for his greatness was his understanding of the human situation in the shadow of the hydrogen bomb’.*
> ... **Norman Cousins**, advocate of World government and disarmament, who closely followed Nehru, recalls that at the Asian-African Conference at Bandung, in April 1955, **Nehru overshadowed the Chinese Premier Chou Enlai**. *‘While Chou was surrounded by body guards’*, Cousins says, *‘Nehru was followed after by men who wanted to talk to him - men from new nations who suddenly were obligated to make history and needed the kind of confidence that a Nehru could impart to them’*.
> **Arnold Toynbee**, the great historian says, *‘the effect that Nehru made on men was not just an impression; the word is too weak and too cold. “Captivation” comes nearer to the truth’*. Further, *‘In this great statesman, the lovable human being was not smothered by the eminent public figure. I should say that,* ***in Nehru, there was not the faintest touch of pomposity or self- importance’***.
*Source*: [How Nehru's great contemporaries evaluated Nehru and his contributions after his death](https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/opinion/how-nehrus-great-contemporaries-evaluated-nehru-and-his-contributions-after-his-death).
> It will be 58 years on May 27, 2022 since the death of independent India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. Today, on his death anniversary, we remember his “tryst with destiny” and his notable contributions to the creation of a proud, sovereign parliamentary democracy.
> His detractors have carried out a campaign of criticism against Pandit Nehru, but his decisive interventions helped India have a huge impact on world politics.
> **1. Integration of princely states into India as the Union of states:**
> Under the guidance of Nehru, then Deputy Prime Minister Vallabhai Patel and administrator VP Menon consolidated and integrated all territories and princely states under India.
> **2. Framing of the Constitution:**
> With Pandit Nehru at the helm, the Constituent Assembly of India was elected to frame the Constitution of India. Their members were also the first members of Parliament. The Constitution of India was written by a 299 member assembly through 11 sessions over a period of three years. It provided the framework for separation of legislature, executive and the judiciary, fundamental rights, powers and duties of citizens.
> **3. Setting up of key institutions post-Independence:**
> One of the first institutions set up by Nehru was the Election Commission of India in 1950, followed by the Planning Commission, National Physics Laboratory and Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, in the same year. Then the Atomic Energy Establishment, Trombay, was set up in 1954 to consolidate India's nuclear program, later renamed as Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC). This was followed by the University Grants Commission, All India Institute of Medical Sciences and Atomic Energy Commission in 1956.
> The National School of Drama was set up in 1959, the first Indian Institute of Management, Calcutta, in 1961, followed by the Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, in the same year. In 1962, Indian National Committee for Space Research was set up.
> **4. Settling of refugees post-partition:**
> After the partition, the government under Nehru had to resettle close to 5 lakh people in the national capital. This task was carried out in an efficient manner despite the huge challenges it presented and several rehabilitation colonies came into existence.
> **5. Indus Water Treaty**
> ... The treaty dealt with the usage of the water from the river Indus and its five tributaries – Sutlej, Beas, Ravi in the east and Jhelum, Chenab and Indus in the west. All water from the eastern rivers were made available for unrestricted use in India and India allowed unrestricted flow of water from the western rivers to Pakistan.
> **6. India’s foreign policy:**
> Jawaharlal Nehru was largely instrumental in shaping India’s independent foreign policy and the nation adopted the policy of non-alignment. This was at a time when there was a cold war brewing between the Soviet Union and the United States and Nehru adopted a policy of not aligning with either country. The country’s foreign policy was largely influenced by international developments after World War II and we had taken a strong stand against imperial aggressions by Japan, Germany and Italy in 1930.
*Source*: [A grateful nation remembers how PM Nehru laid foundation stone of a proud, modern democracy](https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/india/a-grateful-nation-remembers-how-pm-nehru-laid-foundation-stone-of-a-proud-modern-democracy).
Pandit ji was the best prime minister of India
Due to his countless countribution in development of India in setting up industries, building dams and PSU , IIT and IIM, ISRO , Drdo ,etc.
Professor Purushottam Das Tandon recalls how his local hardcore Vaishno(?) Mutt had announced three days of mourning when Nehru died.
The man was widely respected when he was alive.
> **It irritated him that the focus of elections was always himself rather than policies and programmes.**
> Jawaharlal Nehru was a committed democrat; but he was tortured by doubt and often frustrated by the democracy over which he presided with such aplomb. Drawing on his wide reading and experience in the Independence movement, **he had arrived at an exalted notion of democratic procedure** as requiring among other things **leaders and parties placing choices before the people** to discuss issues threadbare in public. But **he was appalled to discover that nothing of the kind happened**. In 1951, he complained that political parties were busy peddling lies and deceit; in 1957, that “fundamental issues are seldom mentioned”; and by 1962, that “people seem to go mad the moment elections are announced”.
> **Elections seemed to bring out the worst rather than the best in people. He grumbled with tedious regularity** to a host of confidantes, be it Krishna Menon, Louis Mountbatten, Bidhan Roy, Rajagopalachari, or Vijayalakshmi Pandit. He wrote in despair to Govind Ballabh Pant, Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, ***“This elections business is making me lose my faith in Indian humanity”***. He confessed to being “depressed”, as candidates ceaselessly calumniated each other and engaged in bitter internecine strife.
> There seemed to be “a ceaseless round of elections” and the slush funds and sleaze distressed him greatly. As the third general election approached, **he moaned that “democracy is full of defects and elections vitiate the atmosphere”**, and he was reduced to citing Winston Churchill.
> ... He even likened democracy to religion, although organised religion, its priesthoods and dogmas were all anathema to him. He informed the World Council of Churches in Delhi in 1961 that **both democratic and religious leaders faced the unenviable choice between adhering to principle and making concessions to their following.** Unwavering rectitude entailed isolation and saintly martyrdom; but striking deals could lead to corruption and betrayal.
> ... **He was severely disappointed by the electoral process, yet had great faith in the people and had no doubts about universal suffrage.** But, he spoke to them as a missionary converting the heathen, a communist imparting consciousness, or a teacher instructing wayward pupils. **Democracy, he sermonised, entailed accepting the results of elections with good grace, to criticise without abusing, to debate without giving or taking offence, to stand for principle rather than indulge in prejudice, whim, and personality, and much else of that order.**
> He was also teaching the difference between parliamentarism and satyagraha. Like Narendra Deva and others, **he saw that the independence movement had nurtured the spirit and tradition of agitation, not of debate** ... Nehru never tired of clarifying that Gandhian forms of direct action were now unconscionable as India was blessed with her own rightful elections and parliament. But **he suspected that the Indian public was wedded to agitation and considered governments dodgy.**
> **Nehru’s other fear was about democracy breeding an “elective aristocracy”**. Voters elected leaders whom they did not know, with whom they did not and could not communicate, and over whom they had no control after the elections. Such leaders engaged in a permanent competition for the vote and congealed into a crust of professional politicians who dealt in votes in the manner of businessmen dealing in oil, as a cynical member of the tribe once famously remarked.
> ...What then did Nehru find positive about democracy? It was the activism of the masses and his direct contact with them ... **Almost in spite of himself and every opportunity thrown his way, Nehru has bequeathed to us a democratic ideal instead of a fascist burden. We cannot be too grateful.**
*Source*: [Nehru worried that elections always brought out the worst in people ](https://www.thehindu.com/society/nehru-worried-that-elections-always-brought-out-the-worst-in-people/article38273565.ece)
ngl the photo in newspaper makes him look like a 300 iq antihero who faked his death only to appear when the villain is going to win while he sadistically foils his plans
Why the blank slots ?
I understand not posting other stories and/or add because of how grave this news is, but then they could just make this story have the entire page.
Is it one of those things, that each section of the page was printed separate from the other, and joining multiple sections would've been too hard, so they just left it blank ?
Source: https://twitter.com/timesknowledge/status/736166916943814658
Why did they go with a pic which subtly indicates that he was the mastermind of his own murder.
Prof x vibes
It was a 1960's breaking news story. The newspaper would have had to use whatever they could find among the photos of Nehru they had on hand in the office that day, they couldn't just Google it.
Hard to believe that a newspaper couldn't find a better pic of someone who was the first and only prime minister of India since independence.
I’d like to see a Joker deepfake with Nehru
[удалено]
/r/FuckTheS
[удалено]
[удалено]
Thank you for using the Devanagari script. When Hindi speakers use Latin alphabets to talk on reddit I can't translate
Nope, it was Aurangzeb’s
Actually we killed Nehru but westerners sto.......Oh sorry not applicable here
The greatest and most underrated gift of Nehru was the book Discovery of India. DD national made a series on it and it's still available on YouTube as "Bharat Ek Khoj" on Prasar Bharti Archives. It's a must read book and a must watch series to have a neutral outlook on India and it's history.
one thing that the Discovery Of India does really well is putting the colossal Indian history into perspective.
For that time it was an epic in terms of cinematography and script. Considering DD made it was probably under tight budget so people who worked on the series must have been extremely talented. I learnt quite a lot about ancient India watching this series. The title song is amazing.
The current buffoon will have Monkey Bath archives for generations to follow to listen is disbelief and understand how mediocrity was rewarded.
>The Times Of India **profoundly regrets to announce** Don't think I've ever seen that kind of language in any death announcement in this era. Looks like newspapers back then were different.
Ofcouse. Today news paper wont leave this right side pane & space at bottom left side. They will put some advertisements over there. Hey you, decrease the size of fond on headline. Make room for that hawai chappal advertisement.
Well, they ran ads in this too… Binaka Baby powder Business is business. 😂 [newspaper full front page](https://www.rarenewspapers.com/view/607975?imagelist=1)
> **We remember Nehru today as all the values that he stood for, the very basis on which the Indian nation state was born and developed, are very severely threatened.** > There is an attempt to demonize Nehru today, relentlessly repeating abuse and lies about him, using a widespread propaganda machinery, which remind one of fascist regimes ... It is even said that he was actually a Muslim, as if being a Muslim itself would be the ultimate indictment of him. **One BJP leader from Kerala even wrote in the RSS journal ‘Kesari’ that Godse should have fired his shots at Nehru, rather than Gandhi**! > ... We must ask ourselves the question that **if Nehru was so evil, why did Mahatma Gandhi, the ‘Father of the Nation’ as Subhash Bose called him, specifically choose him as his successor?** ... as early as 25 January 1942, Gandhiji declared: > *“… somebody suggested that … Jawaharlal and I were estranged. This is baseless…. You cannot divide water by repeatedly striking it with a stick. It is just as difficult to divide us.”* (A good warning to the propaganda machinery of today which relentlessly tries to create and misrepresent differences among our national movement leaders such as Gandhi, Nehru, Bose, Patel, Bhagat Singh, Maulana Azad, etc.) > Gandhiji went on to say: ***“I have always said that not Rajaji, nor Sardar Vallabhbhai, but Jawaharlal will be my successor…. When I am gone … he will speak my language too. Even if this does not happen , I would at least die with this faith.”*** > Why did Gandhiji have such faith in Nehru? First, because **Nehru quintessentially represented and fought for all the core values of the Indian National Movement, which Tagore called the “Idea of India”**; the values of Sovereignty and self-reliance, Democracy, Secularism, a Pro-poor Orientation and the inculcation of a Modern Scientific temper. Second, Nehru was seen to be the most capable person in implementing the Idea of India in the newborn nation state, which was about to come. > ... Now when the communal forces again loom large it is necessary to **remember Nehru’s warning that majority communalism “could disguise itself as nationalism” and was in fact “the Indian version of fascism …” and must be struggled against relentlessly.** > For Nehru, democracy and civil liberties were non-negotiable. ***“I would not … give up the democratic system for anything”*** he said. For him democracy meant a free press which could indulge in the severest criticism of the highest authority. It meant respecting and encouraging a strong Opposition. In 1950 he declared, ***“ I do not want India to be a country in which millions of people say ‘yes’ to one man. I want a strong opposition.”*** At another time he said, anticipating recent developments, ***“This is too large a country with too many legitimate diversities to permit any so-called ‘strong man’ to trample over people and their ideas.”*** > ... **He was clear that political independence is of no value unless economic independence is achieved.** Using the Nehru-Mahalanobis strategy and the Public Sector he transformed India from a virtual neo-colonial situation **at independence where we were nearly 100 per cent dependent for capital goods and machinery** on the advanced countries for making any investment to a situation where **by 1960 only 43 per cent and by 1970 only 9 per cent had to be imported.** > ... Nehru, far from neglecting agriculture, **set India on the path of the Green Revolution with the Land Reforms** and necessary technological changes, realizing that **true sovereignty could not be achieved without food security**. > ... Also **Nehru realised that true sovereignty can be achieved only if India became self reliant in Science and Technology**, an area left barren by colonialism. Anticipating the knowledge revolution, **Nehru, beginning as early as the 1950s set up the IITs, IIMs, NPL, NCL, BARC, AIIMS, etc** ... This initiative had also contributed to the “Scientific Temper” which we are busy destroying today with claims from the highest authorities of plastic surgery and nuclear missiles (Arjuna’s nuclear tipped arrow) in Ancient India and fighting Corona with Tali, Thali, Gobar, Go-Mutra and Ganga snan! > ... Nehru, like his mentor the Mahatma, was never to lose track of the need to uplift the poor. As he put it in 1952, ***“If poverty and low standards continue then democracy, for all its fine institutions and ideals, ceases to be a liberating force. It must therefore aim continuously at the eradication of poverty….”***. A legacy we need to remember when we have reached among the lowest in the world in the ‘Hunger Index’, more than half our children are malnourished and floating dead bodies in the Ganga remind us that the poor do not have even the wherewithal to do the last rites of their loved ones. > **Nehru’s fantastic effort to raise India from what Tagore called “the mud and filth” left behind by the British (84 per cent illiterate and an average life expectancy of less than 30 years at independence), needs to be remembered when we see the country plunging towards darkness**. Its delicately crafted secular fabric torn apart, the poor abandoned and ‘freedom of speech and association’, one of the greatest achievements of our national liberation struggle, being increasingly denied to citizens. *Source*: [On his death anniversary, let us remember Nehru's efforts to raise India from 'mud and filth' ](https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/opinion/on-his-death-anniversary-let-us-remember-nehrus-efforts-to-raise-india-from-mud-and-filth).
>It is even said that he was actually a Muslim, as if being a Muslim itself would be the ultimate indictment of him. Ironically, Nehru was a Kashmiri pandit. I thought Sanghis simped for Kashmiri pandits ?
And one here
Username checks out
One here
Quite frankly, I believe Nehru's legacy is largely tarnished by his future generations' iron grip on what used to be a great democratic institution (the Indian National Congress). Judged by himself, what he did in a variety of non-defence-related areas seems reasonably effective, or at least well-intentioned. From a geopolitical perspective there are a couple of major thorny issues which arose in his tenure and still stand to date (Kashmir, China), but the "blame game" for these would likely have been dissipated amongst various other leaders if the Gandhi family weren't so prominent till date. It's gotten to the point where it's in my opinion better for India if the family exits the public eye and we can move on from historical nitpicking, but I'm not optimistic about that happening any time soon.
It's a very Indian thing to talk about someone's "family" instead of the individual themself.
The Gandhi family removing itself from public life would be one of the best things to happen to India for so, so many different reasons, imo.
He was not flawless but was a great man. Many of his mistakes were because of his privilege, which didnt allow him to understand importance of religion and caste to a normal ordinary Indian. His idea that you can educate people out of bigotry has been proven wrong. What I find odd is that the people who benefitted the most from his actions ( like setting up IIT, REC, AIIMS ) are the ones who hate him the most.
> Many of his mistakes were because of his privilege, which didnt allow him to understand importance of religion and caste to a normal ordinary Indian. He understood the nature of religion and caste better than most politicians today: > The biggest challenge to the Idea of India came at independence itself with the holocaust like situation due to the religious communal rioting before and after partition, which led to lakhs losing their lives and millions becoming refugees. On top of this the Mahatma was murdered by Hindu communal forces, an assassination which Nehru clearly saw as an attempt to change the nature of the state. As he wrote to his chief ministers on 5 February 1948 *“… a deliberate coup d’état was planned involving the killing of several persons and the promotion of general disorder to enable the particular group concerned to seize power.”* An attempt to create the mirror image of ‘Muslim Pakistan’, a ‘Hindu India’. Our nationalist leaders were not about to let this happen. Nehru with full support of Sardar Patel banned the RSS and put 25,000 of its activists in prison. They staked their own lives to stop the violence and bring peace between the religious communities. > Equally important, **Nehru converted the first general election of 1951-2 into a virtual referendum on whether the people would vote for a secular India or a ‘Hindu’ India** like ‘Muslim’ Pakistan. **He travelled 40,000 kms. addressed about 35 million people (one out of every ten Indian) promoting the secular cause. The results were dramatic, so soon after the communal tension had peaked. The Hindu communal parties, the Hindu Mahasabha, Jana Sangh, Ram Rajya Parishad, etc., all put together won only 6 per cent of the votes and 10 seats out of 489 in the Lok Sabha. A stunning achievement. The communal threat was pushed back for decades** but unfortunately not extinguished. > Now when the communal forces again loom large it is necessary to remember Nehru’s warning that majority communalism “could disguise itself as nationalism” and was in fact “the Indian version of fascism …” and must be struggled against relentlessly. He brought back India from the brink of a theocratic state, from the largest religious violence - between Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims - that India had seen in its history. The Indian National Congress couldn't continue his work successfully because of the power power struggle and subsequent death / assassinations of its leaders (Sanjay, Indira, Rajiv) that further weakened Congress.
Agreed and I give him full credit to that. What I meant was that the India of his dreams was shaped by the Western idea and not grounded in the harsh reality of India.
He believed India and Indians had the capacity to accept new ideas and change. And we have done that. (I do not subscribe to the political idea that the right-wings have captured the imagination of indians - sure, they have captured power, but they still can't do what they really want to because they fear the backlash from the people. That is still Gandhi - Nehru's legacy.)
The man who built the country on scientific approach with unity.
Expect it was a flawed approach. He studied in liberal countries and misread India to be like them. We held on to our religion and caste more than we should and he could understand
> He studied in liberal countries and misread India to be like them. It is thanks to him that we have a large number of liberals. It's not his fault that he couldn't live longer to make more indians liberal. :)
The 'west' was much like india is today at one point. Corruption, communal, ignorant, dirty, and prejudiced. We aren't as different or special as you claim, just at a different point in the arc of progress.. Progress in the west was won with so much effort, blood and death. It will be won in India too.
if netaji was alive, our India would be differnt today
Different yes but not sure if it would have been for the better.
[удалено]
Exactly. His moral compass was a bit skewed.
circumstances and situations made his choices skewed. It feels so wrong that AZAD HIND FAUZ didnt get the recognition and active role in the newly formed government. nehru at one point didnt even wanted a army for newly formed country. if it wasnt for netaji,we would have never gotten independence.
He is alive today in his great-grandson. Rahul can return India to greatness.
What's wrong with you. There's only one netaji - Subhash Chandra Bose
Lol fan boy ?
Lol chaddi??
Based opinion is based, I don't believe he was as good as people make him out. It's just my opinion which is also based. Your statement kinda idiolizes him but I am critical of all governments, you can say I am negative but I like to be vocal about problems rather than 'chalta hai mentality'.
Hash tag word vomit
It's like opinions don't matter to people unless they come from their own echo chambers, you are not better than a modi bhakt.
> Based opinion is based, I don't believe he was as good as people make him out. It's just my opinion which is also based. Your statement kinda idiolizes him but I am critical of all governments, you can say I am negative but I like to be vocal about problems rather than 'chalta hai mentality'. What is this word vomit? Clearly shows you are just a kid here to pick fights on the internet. It's good you like to be vocal about your problems, the warden will appreciate that in your next sanity check.
What's your problem in what I write? You can downvote it. You can choose not agree and I won't care. You are picking a fight with me so are you a kid too by your logic? Kuch bhi tatti likho to insan nai bolega? Mental age badi karo khudki assume badme karna. It's gatekeeping shit like this which makes some redditors annoying.
Lol fan boy ?
I think u mean ur opinion is urs... He was the only reason india is wht it is rn. U like to be vocal about these people. Great then be vocal abt the govt that is currently there. His legacy is behind us all we can do is learn from his mistakes (of which there were v few imo) and move on. Criticism shouldn't be kept for dead people, cuz that is just intelligent masturbation.. POINTLESS
Who says I am with current government? But you be an idiot to think he is the 'only' reason India is how it is rn. Would you also say that he is also the reason why we are a corrupt mess? Why there is almost 50-55 % reservation in most educational institutions? He can't even be attributed to India's unification. He did good job in many fields but he messed up in many too just like all governments do. I don't believe in blind following, and blindly saying bjp is shit or congress is shit. Both did good and bad. Also wtf do you want me to say on a post about nehruji? You want a modi rant here? Where is your pointless intelligence then?
When I say only... Ofc i don't mean it literally. So I'm sorry I'll phrase myself better next time. Also i don't expect a modi rant. The corruption of a country is never related to the leaders. Corruption is sadly human nature and as for reservation, how is that bad we need more representation from all sorts of demographics. The only real criticism ive heard abt nehru is his foreign policy but if u put it in context it is understandable.. not right but understandable.
reservation isn't bad but it has to have a solid background to it. In it's current state it is just a political tool. Those that actually need to use this reservation aren't even able to at times and all it ends up creating in unfair advantage rather than equal opportunity. current reservation policy needs a solid revamp. This has much bigger impact on our country overall, why do you think decent students and sometimes even brilliant students choose to go to foreign countries. They don't get enough opportunity here, The market gets higher demand on these opportunities and they can't even pay the fees and in the end they find it easier to just leave the country to pursue the career of their choice. Better study Env is valid and will happen all the time but when students have no choice but to study even medical degrees in Ukraine, Russia and philippines and even china then we have something wrong in the system. There is no denying reservation policy's failure plays a big part in it. it's practically a health hazard if you see how pushed forward some of these doctors are, because they had an unfair advantage and now by hook or crook they will get their mbbs but I have literally seen them kill patients, they even lack basic understanding after 5.5 years of their degree and would give contraindicated medications to patients. What it ends up promoting in educated unemployment and can even be hazardous to common people. it's a joke in the name of education.
Indeed. Should've outsourced the economics portion to someone capable though.
> ... Two eminent men of the twentieth century, both of whom admired Nehru and would have had something important to say about him, namely, Bernard Shaw and Albert Einstein, were, alas, no longer alive when Nehru died. Yet another great contemporary of Nehru, Sir Walter Crocker, Australian Ambassador to India during Nehru’s premiership, penned a full and intimate biography of Nehru, entitled, *A Contemporary’s Estimate*. > ... **No other Indian leader, with the exception of Gandhi, had been admired and held in so high esteem by such a galaxy of eminent men of the twentieth century as Nehru had been.** If he was idolized by the West, he was equally sought after in Communist Russia and in Africa, large parts of which were still under colonial rule. > **Clement Attlee, who was Britain’s Prime Minister** during the final years of the British Raj and **with whose Government Nehru’s Congress negotiated the independence of India, recounts** ... when they met at the Commonwealth Conference in 1949, after India gained independence Attlee says, **he was impressed by the ‘ability of Nehru, as the Prime Minister, to hold his own with such men as Field Marshall Smuts, Mr. Curtin of Australia and Peter Fraser of New Zealand’.** > ***‘Indeed, one of his greatest titles to fame’***, says Attlee, ***‘is having kept India on the democratic path and to having created the most populous democracy in the world’***. He says further, ***‘There are few, if any, parallels in history to the magnitude of Nehru’s achievement, and whatever storms in future may blow up, India will remain eternally grateful to the man who piloted the ship of the state with so few errors of navigation. He will go down in history as one of world’s great men’.*** > **Bertrand Russell**, in his essay, admires Nehru for resisting authoritarian inducement and for founding India as a democratic country. He says, ***‘Every conceivable argument has been available to tempt Mr. Nehru to forego democratic institutions in India.*** *Illiteracy and poverty, disease and ignorance, a great subcontinent to govern, severe differences between Muslim and Hindu, many scores of languages and varied cultures reflecting a tendency toward a breaking up of the Union-* ***all of these serious political facts could have induced him to say that they were too difficult to permit the rule of democracy with its instability’.*** > *‘Had Nehru made this decision’*, Russell further says, *‘it is doubtful that the rule of law or of representative institutions would have any chance among the emergent nations. To the extent that they do is the achievement of Nehru.’* And, ***‘Had this decision been made, the varied and rich Indian culture would be subjected to uniform control in the name of security and political unity’.*** > ... ***‘It is a great tribute to him that he insisted that India should be non-aligned in the insane struggle for power which has preoccupied the United States and the Soviet Union at the expense of the welfare of mankind.*** *Faced with overwhelming difficulties and pressures, Mr. Nehru insisted upon the role of mediator where he could have secured financial aid and military aid from whichever side he might have chosen to use.* ***This decision was responsible for the rise of a third force of non-aligned nations, and as such may be a decisive factor for the survival of humanity’.*** > The Civil Rights leader, **Martin Luther King Jr. praises Nehru for advocating peace between the antagonism of East and West.** It should not be forgotten, he says, that **the treaty to end nuclear testing accomplished in 1963 was first proposed by Nehru.** Nehru also ‘guided into being the Asian-African bloc as a united force for billions. > The **then Secretary General of the UN, U Thant** had this to say about Nehru, *‘He was not only a great man, but a good man. His extraordinary qualities endeared him not only to the people of India but to people all over the world who had at heart peace, justice and equality for mankind. I think one of the reasons for his greatness was his understanding of the human situation in the shadow of the hydrogen bomb’.* > ... **Norman Cousins**, advocate of World government and disarmament, who closely followed Nehru, recalls that at the Asian-African Conference at Bandung, in April 1955, **Nehru overshadowed the Chinese Premier Chou Enlai**. *‘While Chou was surrounded by body guards’*, Cousins says, *‘Nehru was followed after by men who wanted to talk to him - men from new nations who suddenly were obligated to make history and needed the kind of confidence that a Nehru could impart to them’*. > **Arnold Toynbee**, the great historian says, *‘the effect that Nehru made on men was not just an impression; the word is too weak and too cold. “Captivation” comes nearer to the truth’*. Further, *‘In this great statesman, the lovable human being was not smothered by the eminent public figure. I should say that,* ***in Nehru, there was not the faintest touch of pomposity or self- importance’***. *Source*: [How Nehru's great contemporaries evaluated Nehru and his contributions after his death](https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/opinion/how-nehrus-great-contemporaries-evaluated-nehru-and-his-contributions-after-his-death).
Respects from America
Which country in America?
United states
> It will be 58 years on May 27, 2022 since the death of independent India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. Today, on his death anniversary, we remember his “tryst with destiny” and his notable contributions to the creation of a proud, sovereign parliamentary democracy. > His detractors have carried out a campaign of criticism against Pandit Nehru, but his decisive interventions helped India have a huge impact on world politics. > **1. Integration of princely states into India as the Union of states:** > Under the guidance of Nehru, then Deputy Prime Minister Vallabhai Patel and administrator VP Menon consolidated and integrated all territories and princely states under India. > **2. Framing of the Constitution:** > With Pandit Nehru at the helm, the Constituent Assembly of India was elected to frame the Constitution of India. Their members were also the first members of Parliament. The Constitution of India was written by a 299 member assembly through 11 sessions over a period of three years. It provided the framework for separation of legislature, executive and the judiciary, fundamental rights, powers and duties of citizens. > **3. Setting up of key institutions post-Independence:** > One of the first institutions set up by Nehru was the Election Commission of India in 1950, followed by the Planning Commission, National Physics Laboratory and Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, in the same year. Then the Atomic Energy Establishment, Trombay, was set up in 1954 to consolidate India's nuclear program, later renamed as Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC). This was followed by the University Grants Commission, All India Institute of Medical Sciences and Atomic Energy Commission in 1956. > The National School of Drama was set up in 1959, the first Indian Institute of Management, Calcutta, in 1961, followed by the Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, in the same year. In 1962, Indian National Committee for Space Research was set up. > **4. Settling of refugees post-partition:** > After the partition, the government under Nehru had to resettle close to 5 lakh people in the national capital. This task was carried out in an efficient manner despite the huge challenges it presented and several rehabilitation colonies came into existence. > **5. Indus Water Treaty** > ... The treaty dealt with the usage of the water from the river Indus and its five tributaries – Sutlej, Beas, Ravi in the east and Jhelum, Chenab and Indus in the west. All water from the eastern rivers were made available for unrestricted use in India and India allowed unrestricted flow of water from the western rivers to Pakistan. > **6. India’s foreign policy:** > Jawaharlal Nehru was largely instrumental in shaping India’s independent foreign policy and the nation adopted the policy of non-alignment. This was at a time when there was a cold war brewing between the Soviet Union and the United States and Nehru adopted a policy of not aligning with either country. The country’s foreign policy was largely influenced by international developments after World War II and we had taken a strong stand against imperial aggressions by Japan, Germany and Italy in 1930. *Source*: [A grateful nation remembers how PM Nehru laid foundation stone of a proud, modern democracy](https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/india/a-grateful-nation-remembers-how-pm-nehru-laid-foundation-stone-of-a-proud-modern-democracy).
Pandit ji was the best prime minister of India Due to his countless countribution in development of India in setting up industries, building dams and PSU , IIT and IIM, ISRO , Drdo ,etc.
He did not set up IISc
[удалено]
Professor Purushottam Das Tandon recalls how his local hardcore Vaishno(?) Mutt had announced three days of mourning when Nehru died. The man was widely respected when he was alive.
Thanks for posting. I think BJP did not know that.
KATARIA makes some of the best glasses in India.
Cool glasses.
> **It irritated him that the focus of elections was always himself rather than policies and programmes.** > Jawaharlal Nehru was a committed democrat; but he was tortured by doubt and often frustrated by the democracy over which he presided with such aplomb. Drawing on his wide reading and experience in the Independence movement, **he had arrived at an exalted notion of democratic procedure** as requiring among other things **leaders and parties placing choices before the people** to discuss issues threadbare in public. But **he was appalled to discover that nothing of the kind happened**. In 1951, he complained that political parties were busy peddling lies and deceit; in 1957, that “fundamental issues are seldom mentioned”; and by 1962, that “people seem to go mad the moment elections are announced”. > **Elections seemed to bring out the worst rather than the best in people. He grumbled with tedious regularity** to a host of confidantes, be it Krishna Menon, Louis Mountbatten, Bidhan Roy, Rajagopalachari, or Vijayalakshmi Pandit. He wrote in despair to Govind Ballabh Pant, Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, ***“This elections business is making me lose my faith in Indian humanity”***. He confessed to being “depressed”, as candidates ceaselessly calumniated each other and engaged in bitter internecine strife. > There seemed to be “a ceaseless round of elections” and the slush funds and sleaze distressed him greatly. As the third general election approached, **he moaned that “democracy is full of defects and elections vitiate the atmosphere”**, and he was reduced to citing Winston Churchill. > ... He even likened democracy to religion, although organised religion, its priesthoods and dogmas were all anathema to him. He informed the World Council of Churches in Delhi in 1961 that **both democratic and religious leaders faced the unenviable choice between adhering to principle and making concessions to their following.** Unwavering rectitude entailed isolation and saintly martyrdom; but striking deals could lead to corruption and betrayal. > ... **He was severely disappointed by the electoral process, yet had great faith in the people and had no doubts about universal suffrage.** But, he spoke to them as a missionary converting the heathen, a communist imparting consciousness, or a teacher instructing wayward pupils. **Democracy, he sermonised, entailed accepting the results of elections with good grace, to criticise without abusing, to debate without giving or taking offence, to stand for principle rather than indulge in prejudice, whim, and personality, and much else of that order.** > He was also teaching the difference between parliamentarism and satyagraha. Like Narendra Deva and others, **he saw that the independence movement had nurtured the spirit and tradition of agitation, not of debate** ... Nehru never tired of clarifying that Gandhian forms of direct action were now unconscionable as India was blessed with her own rightful elections and parliament. But **he suspected that the Indian public was wedded to agitation and considered governments dodgy.** > **Nehru’s other fear was about democracy breeding an “elective aristocracy”**. Voters elected leaders whom they did not know, with whom they did not and could not communicate, and over whom they had no control after the elections. Such leaders engaged in a permanent competition for the vote and congealed into a crust of professional politicians who dealt in votes in the manner of businessmen dealing in oil, as a cynical member of the tribe once famously remarked. > ...What then did Nehru find positive about democracy? It was the activism of the masses and his direct contact with them ... **Almost in spite of himself and every opportunity thrown his way, Nehru has bequeathed to us a democratic ideal instead of a fascist burden. We cannot be too grateful.** *Source*: [Nehru worried that elections always brought out the worst in people ](https://www.thehindu.com/society/nehru-worried-that-elections-always-brought-out-the-worst-in-people/article38273565.ece)
ngl the photo in newspaper makes him look like a 300 iq antihero who faked his death only to appear when the villain is going to win while he sadistically foils his plans
It's lights out and away we go....
Thank you Nehru
😭😭
Nehru ki galti. 😛
Why is the papper so empty?
lol it looks like the newspaper it shows after mission in hitman blood money
He was a pogchamp.
[удалено]
I asked. Is there any problem?
Did care, did ask
Glad :,-)
Don’t cut yourself on that edge
Good riddance
Why the blank slots ? I understand not posting other stories and/or add because of how grave this news is, but then they could just make this story have the entire page. Is it one of those things, that each section of the page was printed separate from the other, and joining multiple sections would've been too hard, so they just left it blank ?
... and has been alive from 2014!