Talk:Nepalese royal massacre

Children?
Which two children were present during the massacre? Morhange (talk) 09:04, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Paras was wounded? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.203.55.128 (talk) 00:55, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Conspiracy theories are not
Thank goodness Gyanendra is not in power any more. The article is clear enough for those who can see. 212.188.109.24 (talk) 20:28, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Conspiracy Theory Section's Final Sentences
''Everywhere there is Controversy. But the Royal Family of Birendra was killed by Paras and his father. If Gyanendra and his family were safe and all other possible candidate for the throne were dead, then even a lay man can say that it was a tricky mind of Gyanendra to kill his elder brother and his family.''

This probably shouldn't be there. Also the above discussion topic.... uh.. Cheeked (talk) 22:14, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Dipendra?? nope.. Conclusions to be noticed o.O
Here are some of the conclusions drawn by the author of the book "The dreadful night: carnage at Nepalese royal palace". The writer of the book has for years been closely associated with King Birendra and him in many situations from close quarters. He is also the author of the book Bleeding mountains of Nepal, one of the bestsellers in Nepal and a respected writer. He describes the events surrounding the murders and goes into the official version. Based on these data and his experiences with the royal family he comes, like many others, to some conclusions which evoke many questions. He also gets to statements by one of the eyewitnesses, Kumar Gorakh Rana, who stated the following: I saw Dipendra Shah- like figure-that moved forward and fired the gun. The writer adds to Gorakh not sure of was that Dipendra was the culprit. Some of his conclusions were:

1. Dipendra was described in a state of intoxication needing help from his brother and cousins ​​here to go to his bedchamber where the attendants assisted him in taking off his clothes. How can Such a person, after a while, regain control, dress himself in battle fatigue, bear several at heavy guns, wear a long boat, put a leather glove and proceed to the billiard hall for a murderous shooting spree?

2. Crown Prince Dipendra eyewitnesses described drunk but the medical report Showed no alcohol in his blood and there was no immediate provocation to drive him mad.

3. If he were under the influence of drugs he could not possibly be as aggressive as he was Said to be. Drugs make men passive and submissive and not aggressive.

4. Assuming That he turned into a psychopath or sorts with a mixture of alcohol and drugs, how could he be in a physical condition to shoot at the targets as accurately as Desired Kumar Gorakh vouched he was doing.

5. Dipendra was a right-hander but the bullet was fired on his head from the left side behind his ear lobe. How could he shoot himself from Such an Unlikely position? More Over, was not he ook described as unsteady? Besides, his handgun was found in the pond and not beside him. How can a fatally injured man throw his gun so far?

6. There was no eyewitness to how the Queen, Prince Nirajan and the Crown Prince himself were killed. People suspect that there were other assassins in the premises doing the job.

7. No postmortem was formed on the royal bodies. The king, queen and Their sons and daughter were cremated within 24 hours of the incident preempting The Possibility of a fair and credible investigation. This hasty action was Justified on religious and customary grounds, How many followers could have been overturned under Circumstances as extraordinary as these. So people suspect That all this was done to bury the evidences forever. And the author wonders why the victims are transported to the nearest hospital (Bir Hospital at barely 1 km, another hospital 2 km) but to the military hospital 5 km. away. Former hospitals additionally had more facilities. Bir hospital even has a special royal department. And there are many other questions asked by the author regarding these killings. I hope this question to have some answers.

Note: Originally posted by didi (a user from startpagina) on startpagina.

 

So
paras was not present in the royal family's get together and he didn't misbehave with any of the guest so the 2nd line is not satisfactory the site has no proof to say that dipendra killed his whole family maybe it is true but being a public site you cannot blame it on him without been proven guilty.

Conspiracy theory section's final sentences
''Everywhere there is Controversy. But the Royal Family of Birendra was killed by Paras and his father. If Gyanendra and his family were safe and all other possible candidate for the throne were dead, then even a lay man can say that it was a tricky mind of Gyanendra to kill his elder brother and his family.''

This probably shouldn't be there. Also the above discussion topic.... uh.. Cheeked (talk) 22:14, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

maybe someone killed them but without proof a respectable site like yours should not paste lines that blame on a person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.41.228.156 (talk) 10:13, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

More conspiracy theories
In the first week of May 2006, Maoist chairman Prachanda along with another senior leader Dr. Baburam Bhattarai [23] entered Nepal through Birgunj after presiding over a Maoist meet in Punjab, India. We don't don't where the Maoists were hiding during the insurgency. Suddenly they appeared in Brjung, which is on the border with India. Then we can rationally assumed they were hiding in India. You can find millon other evidences they were operating from India. Subsequently, the chairman of Nepal Maoists Party in a public gathering also stated that the massacre was planned by India. Then we can simply say that Maoist has something to do with the Massacre. Let me present my view. Maoist ultimately wished the end the Kingship and establish a republic. I can doubt this was going to happen till King Birendra was alive. People loved him more than they love anything. Sometime controversial but forever loved by people. In order to fulfill thier dream they also need to damage the image of King so people would not object them to King's reign.

They planned a wholesale massacre of the 1st line of the Royal family. But they didn't want harm anyone other member the royal family. This strategy was good and it's implementation excellent. First they killed all and spread the news the crown prince was still alive but severely injured. He is then declared King. Three days later news spread Dipendra is dead and Gyanendra is crowned the King. What a masterclass. Now people start believing Gyanendra was involved in this. I strictly beleive Gyanendra was in no position to led a coup-de-tat. If he was in that position he would have tried it long before when Birendra's popularity was rapidly fading.

This is simply a coup-de-tat led by the Maoist against the King. Gyanendra was only used as a scapegoat. This can simply be constructed by the fact Gyanendra was not holding the power but it was vested in Prime Minister GP Koirala. He did his best to cover up the investigation and ask people to believe Dipendra first killed nine person and later himself shoot himself his back by automatic machine gun. He made one of the absurb story but this story was the reason people started distrusting the King. The best part was to crown dead crown prince king and later declare him dead. Then they declared Gyanendra The King. Gyanendra never claimed himself King, but was appointed by Prime Minister and his aide.

People will believe it or not but Maoist were long before cooperating with Girija Prasad Koirala. First with necessary funds to bring down democratically elected Goverment of Krishna Prasad Bhattarai. Why on earth Koirala should bring goverment lead by his own party? Simply because Maoist needed him firstly from blocking the army being involved in the insurgency which would prove fatal cause Maoist were few in numbers at that time and secondly to infiltrate the royal security.

The relation between GP Koirala and King Birendra were never warm. Koirala’s self-damaging remark in 1990 at a mass meeting had demonstrated his uncompromising stance on ideologies and perhaps an utter lack of diplomatic skills and political maturity at that time. He had uttered then: “All denominations of communist parties and a criminal gang of the royal family are the same.” I fear Koirala was over-ambitious for his own bad. Yet another daunting challenge before Koirala was to read what is inside the mind of Prachanda, the ambitious president of the CPN-M. At least now it's clear he clearly failed. He didn't even dreamt what Maoist achieved in 2008 election and was beaten by huge margin. GP Koirala secretely dreamt of being the supreme ruler not reporting even king. He was partly sucessful as the King was removed but he could never be elected a leader.

Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist) followed only one principal of Lenin.Indirect evidence shows that the order to execute the royal family was given verbally by Lenin and Sverdlov. In Nepal case order was verbally given by Puspa Kamal Dahal, Baburam Bhattrai, Kiran Baidhya and Girija Prasad Koirala. One notable difference is that Lenin gave the orders after assuming power but here it was done before that.

Maoist leader were staying in India during thier hiding. They also recieved substantial money and weapon from India. So it will great act of foolishness to think India was uninvolved in this matter as it was providing safe sanctuary for the criminals most wanted in Nepal.

The events can be summed up as following.

Part 1 GP Koirala is selected Prime Minister. He then infiltrates the royal palace security. On the night 3 impostor(hired by Maoist) of Crown Prince Dipendra enter the Narayanhiti Palace and kill King Birendra and his family. They injure Gyanendra's wife Komal but it was a mistake due to chaos. Later they leave the palace so eye-witness who saw them believe he was alive.

Part 2

Then GP Koirala announce Crown Prince Dipendra as the King who is already dead. Then after three days Dipendra dies. Reports are spreading in world media that RWA and CIA suspect Gyanendra of the killing. This greatly helped the killers motive to damage reputation of a prospective King. And then appoint Gyanendra as King.

Wikipedia is not a soapbox. It is not the point of Wikipedia to state conspiracy theories or other fringe opinions as a fact, let alone without references. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 19:59, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

how is this article not referenced to Mr. Tul Bahadur Shrechan
Mr. Tul Bahadur Shrechan had in 2009 called on the reports claimed that he along with other individuals had ploted for the event way back in 1975. Why.... is there no reference or metion of this in the article...? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Binaya.shrestha (talk • contribs) 15:04, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Cantsayit's comments
One hour later, Paras returned to the party armed with an H&K MP5 and an M16 and fired a single shot into the ceiling before turning the gun on his uncle, King Birendra. Seconds later, Paras shot one of his aunts. He then shot his uncle Dhirendra in the chest at point-blank range when he tried to stop Paras.[1].[1]

During the attack, Dipendra darted in and out of the room firing shots each time.


 * Something's confusing here... First this article is saying Paras drank heavily and then was doing the shooting, then it says Dipendra was firing shots.  Wasn't it supposed to be Dipendra who did the killings?

174.44.203.185's comment
The Victims of the massacre section is weird, also pretty hilarious Victims of the massacre

Many royal armies working inside and outside the Palace.These armies were not only the national army but also the innocent sons of our own citizens. [edit]Wounded '''Princess Shova, King Birendra's sister(the shooter didn't kill this alien in full consciousness.)The massacre was scary. This decision not to shoot this alien can't be taken in any drunken or drugged state of mind. Gorakh Shamsher, Princess Shruti's husband(the shooter didn't kill this alien in full consciousness.) Princess Komal, Prince (now former King) Gyanendra's wife and former Queen( the one who didnt shoot Shova and Shamsher will not shoot Komal, this decision of mind is not possible in any state of drunken or drugged mind.) (Princess) Ketaki Chester, King Birendra's cousin who had renounced her title( the name that is and was never heard during royal celebrations and news is appearing after the incident took place and this person is not affected at all in this scary massacre .) Prince Paras]He was not wounded .He is the son of the King and the future King so he has a full practice on these kinds of small things.''' — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by 174.44.203.185 (talk) 01:13, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

This article is an embarrassment to Wikipedia and the Nepalese people
A magic fairy did it, not Dipendra. Just ask the Nepali ultra-royalists who edit this ridiculous joke of an article.

It reads like a poorly-photocopied conspiracy tract somebody handed out on a Kathmandu street corner, and presents the Nepali people as ignorant 3rd world serfs who believe in the divine infallibility of monarchs. 65.188.237.108 (talk) 00:07, 3 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Please care to elaborate on the "ridiculous joke of an article" thing. And which part of the text makes it read like a "poorly-photocopied conspiracy tract". Please specify. Don't write texts on talk pages that read like conspiracy theories themselves. Shirsakbc (talk) 13:31, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Orchestration by the Chinese Government
The reference to the orchestration of this event by the Chinese government was added anonymously today by someone using the congress IP range. It references an article from rediff.com. I don't know if this is a credible news source. Any thoughts? It's a serious accusation to make without a credible source. Tenthrow (talk) 18:00, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Rediff.com should be considered reliable. According to Alexa, it's ranked as the 20th most visited website in India, so we're not talking about some obscure fringe site. JohnValeron's stated reasoning for removal of the statement was that it didn't specifically mention Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist). However, the article did specifically mention Maoist rebels, and in Nepal that is who sources are generally referring to when they mention Maoists. 143.231.249.138 (talk) 15:45, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Nepalese royal massacre. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081211104644/http://edition.cnn.com:80/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/south/06/08/nepal.royal.probe/index.html to http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/south/06/08/nepal.royal.probe/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 02:09, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Kill dDependra king wrong
It's wrong dependra not kill king 👑 Google. It is I say And Nepali say This about king I listened from grandfather. 120.89.104.246 (talk) 03:17, 13 December 2021 (UTC)