Stanley Wolpert in his book clearly states that his book is not the only one that has discussed the subject of Nehru's homosexuality. There are a lot of books that he lists in his bibliography.
Stanley Wolpert is a great author. His research methods are above reproach. He had access to a lot of information, but he was not allowed to use a lot of the information on Nehru…hence he could use only public records. In the preface he complains about this. He read the information but was NOT allowed to use it. In the book he used only publicly available information.
There are stories on Page 25. Wolpert has come across some solid evidence but was not given permission to print it. He then grasped at straws to lead the reader to believe what he has information on. He also describes instances when Nehru dressed in drag "Wearing his wig, made up with lipstick, powder and eye shadow, his body draped in silks and satins, Jawahar most willingly offered himself up night after night to those endless rehearsals for the Gaekwar's At Home as a beautiful young girl, holding out her jug of wine and loaf seductively to her poet lover, Omar," he writes in one passage. In the book, Wolpert says Nehru's first attachment was with a young man called Ferdinand Brooks who was his French teacher. Brooks was a theosophist but Wolpert says before coming to India the "handsome' man was a disciple and lover of Charles Webster Leadbeater, a renegade Anglican curate who was accused of child molestation and pederasty on several continents. Leadbeater openly advocated mutual masturbation among young boys. The controversy is over material on pages 8-9 and page 12 last paragraph 4th. sentence, page 14 third paragraph, and then most explicitly pp. 23 -25 of Wolpert's book. The jacket of the book also clearly refers to Nehru's homosexuality.
The fact that Nehru had a relationship with his tutor who was a disciple of a well-known pederast (pp. 8-9) is evidence of Nehru's own homosexual interests. The pederast and Jawahar's love interest, not only espoused homosexuality and sex with boys but was summarily dismissed by Nehrus father despite the protestations of the young Nehru.
The material (story of Nehru and his Englishman who went for a swim naked in the hot weather) on the later pages esp. pp. 23-25 is based on actual and more detailed personal Nehru documents that Wolpert had access to. Wolpert could NOT use actual Nehru letters to describe the incident in detail. Permission to publish letters and information was first given to Wolpert and then permission to use the material was DENIED.
Stanley Wolperts letter to the Statement is piece of literature. There is a large body of evidence on Nehrus homosexuality. The bibliography in Wolperts book is now a list of other books that also list incidents. "About Nehru, I think he is one of the titans of modern history along with the likes of Gandhi, Azad, Badshah Khan, Gokhale and Tilak. He was a red blooded human being with all the concomitant frailities and passions. He spent his formative years at Harrow (an English Public (Prep) School) and Trinity College, Cambridge during the early years of this century. Homosexuality was then quite prevalent in upper class England and in fact was generally known in Europe as an English disease(sic).
Did he have a homosexual encounter with his teachers? possibly. If he had one, in today's parlance, it would be considered sexual molestation or rape: As he, presumably a minor was presumably attacked by an adult. Was he an homosexual? the evidence does not point in that direction. His sexual exploits with the other sex are legion. Whatever his sexual predilections, his accomplishments vis a vis the country he loved are without rational question."
The Nehrus have been great for India. They took more than 570 states and forged a country. Stalin and Mao had to murder millions to accomplish the same. Nehru had a great vision for India. The Mao, Nehru, Nasir, Sukarno combo would have created a new power block and changed the course of the cold war. His daughter could never see that far, and his grandson couldn't see beyond Italy.
His beliefs in Socialism has not only kept India behind the rest of Asia it has kept the Subcontinent in the throws of penury. His bias in Kashmir led to several wars between our respective countries. His sexual promiscuity set a bad example in interfered with the running of the state.
Here are some of Rajib Dogars comments:
"To the extent that I think one cannot truly separate the private from the public in the sense that the same person acts in both domains, I cannot agree. Nehru's personal likes and dislikes very much affected his
relations with Gandhi, with Patel and even with his own father and thus his strategy. This much is very clear. Nehru's rather cold and boorish behavior, by today's standards anyway, toward his wife do raise the
question about his mental set and his attitude towards sex and towards women.
His relationships with other women also raise questions about how his policies may have been affected by his relationships-recall that Nehru liked his women to be somewhat intellectual. So to the extent that his personal reactions to people affect his policy making, these are relevant questions, both for history and for biography." The line I would draw is between the public and private life of a historical figure. To the extent that the private life affects the public policy, I would admit it. (Frankly, many of the examples you cite above are not exactly "private.") If the private life is brought into discussion, I would like to see justification for why it is being brought in. That is not my impression. But I cannot also fault people who construe it that way, like the editors of Pioneer. Mind you, all that they did was to publish extracts from Wolpert's book. If there was nothing unreasonable about the extracts, there should have been no need for Wolpert to respond..)
Why is homosexuality is such a big deal? For me, it is not. But, we are talking about the leader of a country for many of whose people homosexuality is outside the realm of experience. One doesn't need to be a genius to figure out that they are going to be thoroughly scandalized.
Nehru : A Tryst With Destiny
Those two tyrants soon merged in his mind, for loyalist Congress moderates–Gokhale's liberal Anglophile wing of gentlemen like Motilal–Page 72:
In India, the elections to the provincial councils as well as the Central Assembly were held in 1926, and Motilal was forced to bear alone the full burden of the Swaraj campaign, for his dear friend and president of the party, C.R. Das had died…I hardly had any workers worth the name to help me in my province."
Not only had Jawaharlal deserted him, but former friends and old allies, Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya and Lal Lajpat Rai, both ex-Congress Presidents, founded their own Nationalist Party that year, a Hindu first communal party, which won many seats in the United Provinces…..
THE MALAVIYA FACTOR & THE LAST ENGLISHMAN WHO RULED INDIA: Malaviya was president of the Hindu Mahasaba, a conserative communal society that focused on saving cows and slaughter Muslims while trying to force the conversions of Muslims to Hinduism, arguing that most of India's Muslim population had originally been Hindus but had forcibly been converted to Islam during some five hundred years of Muslim rule.
One of the most militant popular Hindu communal leaders of that "reconversion" (shudhi) movement, Swami Shraddhanand, was assassinated in Delhi that December by a Muslim extremist. The swami, like Lala Lajpat Rai, belonged to another fundamentalist Hindu society, the Arya Samaj, which advocated turning back India's history more than three thousand years to an ancient Aryan tribal polity, reflected in Vedic scripture, when Brahmans and cows were treated as gods on earth.
FRESH claims that Jawaharlal Nehru, one of India's 20th-century gods, had homosexual relations have provoked a furious row in the country's newspapers. A new biography suggests that India's founding father, and first prime minister, had a number of homosexual encounters during his English school days in Harrow, and later at Cambridge. And there is a description of the great man in drag at a London soiree.
The allegations occupy only three pages of the 500-page (Nehru: A tryst with Destiny by American historian Stanley Wolpert), but they have already taken on the proportions of a scandal. The Pioneer, an English language daily, described the claims as "sacrilege" and "blasphemous" and demanded government action. Prof Wolpert said the newspaper "obviously considers Nehru a god" and asked if India was not yet ready to discuss the lives of its leaders, warts and all. Obviously not.
The correspondence between Edwina Mountbatten and Nehru, whom she called her "beloved Jawaha", remains sealed by agreement between the estates of both families. But the central questions that provoked the row over the book – did Nehru have a homosexual side and did he have an affair or merely a platonic romance with the last Vicereine of India? – have been ignored in the furore over Nehru's divinity. India loves its deities. Not content with several hundred gods and goddesses, it is constantly creating new ones and there is little doubt that Nehru is regarded with reverence bordering on worship. There is not a government office – or even many homes – without a picture of him gazing nobly from the walls. "We love a lavish pantheon, a multiplicity of gods and goddesses. It has to do with ancestor worship," said Swapan Dasgupta, a newspaper editor.
Curiously, Nehru considered himself "the last Englishman" to rule India. He was a patrician anglophile, given to quoting Greek myths to bemused Congress party workers and singing old Harrovian songs. His home, Teen Murti House in Lutyens's Delhi, now a museum, is a celebration of Englishness: a Thirties colonial oasis of neatly tended lawns, country house flowerbeds and peacocks. Prof Wolpert describes young Nehru's "passionate love affair" with an Englishman and his "attachment" to his tutor, Ferdinand Brooks, a disciple and lover of an Anglican curate, Charles Leadbeater, who advocated mutual masturbation.
Nehru's penchant for make-up and drag is also noted. One reviewer claims that the revelations will cause "anger and distraction" among Nehru's admirers.
A previous book by Prof Wolpert, "Nine Hours to Rama", an account of Gandhi's assassination, was banned in India.
If his Nehru survives, it is sure to sell out – even if it does not secure its subject's place on India's altars.
HOW THE GAY LIFE KILLED MOUNTBATTEN: Encounters with youths exposed him to IRA. BY FRANK DOHERTY. First published in 'NOW' magazine , Volume 1 , No. 4 , October 1989 , page 37 .
'Lord' Mountbatten was particularly attracted to boys in their early teens ; it was this characteristic which made him especially vulnerable to the IRA , because he needed to slip away from his personal bodyguards to keep dates with such boys , some of whom came in contact with IRA men .
His vice habit was similar to that of the former British Secret Service Chief , 'Sir' Maurice Oldfield , who was appointed ' Ulster (sic) Security Co-Ordinator ' by Margaret Thatcher in the wake of the Mountbatten assassination .
'Sir' Maurice also slipped away from his 'personal protection detail' – a team of handpicked , plain-clothes British 'Royal' Military Policemen – on various occasions while he was living in Stormont House , beside Stormont Castle in Belfast . But a plan by the IRA to kill him during one such expedition into County Down failed when he was unexpectedly moved back to London .
[END of ' HOW THE GAY LIFE KILLED MOUNTBATTEN ' ]. (Monday 7th – ' A STICKY END ; THE OFFICIALS ' , from 1981 ).
STANLEY WOLPERT ON NEHRU:
Wolpert's suggestion of Nuhru's homosexuality and Mountabetten's own alleged homosexuality adds a new dimension to the relationship (wolpert 1996). Clearly Mountbatten and Nehur was fascinated with one another; both were upperclass public schoolboys and there is little doubt that they had amused each other in 1947
What did the three people see in each other? How did the menega de trois come about? What does each realtionship tell us about the lover and the loved one? Three different sets of answers need to be constructed. Let us start with Lady Mountbetten who adored and who was adored by Nehru at first sight. In the words of former Labor MP, she became bewitched by Nehru (Roberts 1994a: 182)
Jinnah REBUFFED MOUNTBATTEN OVERTURES:
…for this cozy traingle Jinnah was the outside…"with his legendary charm and verve Mountbatten turned the focus of Operation Seduction on the Moslem leader. Jinnah froze
Nehru died of Tertiary Syphilis-Aortic Aneurysm
Nehru's affair with Edwina Mountbatten has been well documented. With Lord Mountbatten being gay, was Nehru being screwed from all sides? This had a great impact on the boundary commission and the creation of Pakistan. MENEGE DES TROIS
LOVE TRIANGLE-MOUNTABTTEN IGNORED PROMISCOUS EDWINA'S AFFAIRS
NEHRU EDWINA AND JACKIE KENNEDY
PLATONIC OR PHYSICAL RELATIONSHIP–Physical relationship for sure.
POLITICAL FARCE BROKEN PROMISES AND FAKE DOCUMENTS:
The world will never forget the words of Nehru which is never adhered to. The world will never forget the fake Kashmiri Article of Accession that was never presented to Pakistan or the UN. The world will never forget Nehru's illegal take over of Hydrabad.
The world will never forget that Nehru occupied Junagarh and Manvadar. JUDITH BROWN DESCRIBES NEHRU A HEDONISTIC FAILURE
Nehru: a political life Judith M Brown Yale University Press, 407pp, £25, ISBN 0300092792
Jawaharlal Nehru reportedly once described himself as the last Englishman to rule India. Raised in an affluent, westernised family, educated at Harrow, Cambridge and the Inns of Court, and an Anglophile all his life, Nehru was a prime minister with whom British and other western leaders felt at ease. Even as an Indian nationalist committed to driving out the British, Nehru never rejected the western culture that had shaped him. The great virtue of Judith Brown's new study is its careful account of how Nehru tried to graft the best of British institutions and values on to a country largely resistant to them.
This attempted fusion of east and west created considerable conflict between Nehru and his mentor, Mahatma Gandhi. It also meant that, despite the frenetic activity and lack of privacy entailed by his position, Nehru was often an isolated, lonely and ultimately rather tragic figure. As Brown's assessment of Nehru's 17 years as prime minister makes clear, his project for India failed. India today – led by a Hindu nationalist government, crippled by corruption and riven by communal conflict – is a nightmarish inversion of everything he tried to achieve.
But do we need yet another life of Nehru? Michael Brecher's political biography, written while Nehru was still alive, and Sarvepalli Gopal's three-volume work, completed in 1984, remain indispensable. Stanley Wolpert published a sensationalist biography in 1996, and both Nigel Hamilton and Sunil Khilnani have Nehru biographies forthcoming. Brown makes much of Sonia Gandhi allowing her to see previously classified, post-1947 papers "almost in their entirety". But the qualifying "almost" suggests that, like many before her, Brown was probably denied access to unpublished letters to family and close friends, including the crucial correspondence between Nehru and Edwina Mountbatten.
Brown believes that following the declassification of these papers, we need to look at Nehru's life "afresh", but there is little in her book that is new. The first three parts rehearse the well-known narrative of Nehru's years in the lead-up to independence in 1947. But most interesting and original are the last two sections, which provide a convincing assessment of Nehru's often neglected premiership from 1947-64. While Brown's sobering conclusion that Nehru's "new India" miscarried is not news, her careful and detailed exploration of the reasons why it did so are valuable.
Nehru's inability to delegate, his deteriorating health and his reliance on dubious characters such as Krishna Menon, his confidant and cabinet minister, all contributed to this failure. There were also external factors – for example, the opposition to him among state governments frustrated federal initiatives, and rapid population growth (which Nehru long refused to recognise as a major problem) hampered economic development. But perhaps Nehru's greatest enemy was his misguided, Soviet-style model of industrialisation and economic transformation. A series of five-year plans simply did not yield the results he had envisioned, and India became increasingly dependent on foreign aid. Nor did the country's brand of socialist democracy work effectively. Government-run industries proved inefficient: tight control constrained rather than encouraged economic development.
Among the many aspects of Nehru's "new India" project that backfired were the federal policies designed to reduce social inequities; ceilings on landholding, intended to benefit the rural poor; and legislation that aimed at improving the plight of Indian women and other oppressed groups. Abolishing "untouchability" in the new Indian constitution did not change entrenched prejudices, beliefs and traditions.
And then there was the debacle of China's invasion of India in 1962. A lack of adequate intelligence and foresight caught India totally off guard. It was saved only by China's unilateral ceasefire and withdrawal – a development that was as inexpli-cable to Nehru as the invasion itself. Menon, then defence minister, took the blame and resigned, but Nehru's reputation was gravely damaged.
Although the day of the Carlylean view of history as "the biography of great men" is long past, Brown concedes that "at particular historical junctures individuals can be of considerable importance", and this is her justification for a new biography of Nehru. She subtitles her book "a political life", and we are warned that most of "the personal dimension" will be excluded. On these terms, there is little to fault in her book.
But can an individual life be so easily bisected into the political and the personal? The policies of both Nehru and Indira Gandhi on Kashmir, for example, were rooted in their own deep feelings about their land of origin. There is no indication that Brown conducted any interviews, even though many of Nehru's colleagues, followers and family are still alive. We look in vain for love affairs (Edwina Mountbatten is despatched in a paragraph), childhood conflict, rivalries between the Nehru women, or the story of Nehru's strange but ultimately successful marriage and the lingering grief he felt after his wife died.
Brown defends her approach by claiming that Nehru's was "essentially a political life . . . utterly dedicated to politics . . . at the expense of normal family experience, of all but a few close friendships and ultimately of his own health". This is undoubtedly true, but his personal relationships were vital to him, especially those with women: his wife Kamala, his daughter Indira (their published correspondence reveals a complex relationship) and, to a lesser extent, with the two women to whom he was closest as prime minister, Padmaja Naidu and Edwina Mountbatten. All were privy to Nehru as both private and public man.
Brown's "political life" is an absorbing, scrupulously resear-ched and convincing assessment of one of the most important political figures of the 20th century. But for the whole man, we must wait for a future Nehru biographer.
Katherine Frank is the author of Indira: the life of Indira Nehru Gandhi (HarperCollins)
The Pakistani movie "Jinnah" showed the deep love affair between the Brahman Hindu who called himself the last Englishman in India and the promiscuous Jewish wife of Lord Mountbatten–the last viceroy of the British Indian Empire. According to Stanley Wolpert, the gay Lord Mountbatten was too much in a hurry to return to his activities in England and moved the independence date by two years. South Asia was supposed to be independent in 1949. The reduction in time led to the atrocities committed by the Radcliff Line hurriedly put together by Lord Radcliff–who burnt all his maps and left Delhi the day the actual boundaries were announced.
The love affair between Edwina and Nehru changed history, because Edwina influenced Mountbatten with the Nehru's ideas on Kashmir and the partition of Bengal and Punjab–which were not agreed upon in the Cabinet Mission Plan.
Gandhi was funded by India and it tried to change the impression of Mohnadas Gandhi–the pervert who slept with married women and allowed his guests to insert an anemia in his behind. Pakistan should fund the venture showing the true nature of Nehru.
Indian Summer, the proposed Hollywood film about the alleged love affair between Jawaharlal Nehru and Edwina Mountbatten, will not get made.
Reason: the economic slowdown and the curbs suggested by the Indian government.
"We were in between a rock and a hard place," PTI quoted film director Joe Wright as saying in New York. "The Indian government wanted us to make less of the love story while the studio wanted us to make more of the love story."
The comments evoked a strong reaction in India.
"We haven't debarred Universal Studios from making a love story," said a senior information and broadcasting (I&B) ministry official who did not want to be named. "We've asked them to make minor changes in the script as recommended by an expert committee and to add a disclaimer that it's a work of fiction."
The ministry had asked the producers to delete four scenes from the film: a kiss between Nehru and Edwina, a dancing scene, Nehru saying 'I love you' and a shot of them in bed.
I&B minister Ambika Soni had earlier told HT that the procedure in the case of Indian Summer was the same as the one adopted for other Hollywood films such as the Oscar-winning Slumdog Millionaire.
Another reason for the scrapping of Indian Summer was the reported financial cuts at film studio Universal.
The production of the about $40 million (Rs 180 crore) film — with Hugh Grant as Lord Mountbatten and Kate Blanchett as Edwina — was to start next year. Jinxed Nehru-Edwina film nixed for good, Chetan Chauhan , Hindustan Times, New Delhi, October 21, 2009, Last Updated: 00:21 IST(22/10/2009)
Gandhi Unmasked: Criticism of Mohandas Gandhi by his grandsons and other Indians, Nobel Committee & US Congress The Gandhi Page 
