February 24, 2007

FOSA justifies death of Hindu Children

FOSA justifies death of Hindu Children

In a rare instance of cooperation from Pakistanis in FOSA, it is learned that FOSA has prepared a letter for the New York Times in which it justifies the killing of sixty Hindu passengers - a third of who were children - at Godhra in 2002. Aghast by the apathy towards loss of lives and condemnation of the dead, the Pakistani under terms of anonymity communicated with this website revealing the gross anti-Hindu mindset of its members.

FOSA’s displeasure sparked when the New York Times filed a report on the tragedy that befell the Samjhauta Express. In that the Times had quoted as follows "In 2002, Hindu-Muslim riots broke out after a train fire killed 60 Hindus returning from a religious pilgrimage. Muslims were blamed for the fire in the western state of Gujarat, and more than 1,000 people, most of them Muslim, were killed by Hindu mobs."

In a response that is yet to be published by the Times, FOSA alleges “Those killed in the 2002 incident were not "Hindus returning from a religious pilgrimage," but, as contemporary news reports tell us, most were returning from a political rally demanding construction of a temple at the site of a 400-year-old mosque destroyed by a Hindu mob in 1992.”

It must be remembered that 20 of the 58 passengers that were most abominably charred to death were children. It is FOSA’s opinion that these children were political rallyists. Moreover for a group that proclaims itself as a peace group and a voice for the people, the tone of the letter is clear that the death was a deserving climax for ordinary citizens attending a political rally.

We are happy to present the letter in full that FOSA has sent to the Times. Our informed Pakistani source also revealed the mechanism with which FOSA operates in wording its letters. It may come as a surprise to the Times’ editors (if they choose to publish this letter) that FOSA considers them profuse with “racist attitudes” – and therefore the artful wording in the letter. In a rare glimpse into the inner workings of FOSA, we also present the complete discussion from the moment it was evoked till the final wording was endorsed and sent off.

FOSA – Friends of South Asia - is a group of Pakistanis in San Francisco’s bay area that masquerades as Indians under the all-embracing umbrella of “South Asia”. They are known to have courted radical Indian communists and Jehadi terrorists. In March 2003 a FOSA volunteer, writing in Pakistan’s Daily Times accused the Indian army of massacring villagers in Nadimarg. Later that year, FOSA volunteers were seen promoting an ISI sponsored event in Washington DC called “Beyond the Blame Game: Grounds for Peace and Justice in Kashmir”. The event was reported in Indian media as an anti-India rhetoric. In summer of 2005 FOSA volunteers were seen carrying placards that read “Allah will destroy the terrorist state of India”.

The Letter




Dear Editor,

As members of Friends of South Asia, we see the deadly fire-bombing of the Samjhauta Express [World, Feb. 19, AP report] as an act of sabotage against two peoples striving for peace. We are dismayed by the misleading allusions in your article to the train fire in Gujarat in 2002. Those killed in the 2002 incident were not "Hindus returning from a religious pilgrimage," but, as contemporary news reports tell us, most were returning from a political rally demanding construction of a temple at the site of a 400-year-old mosque destroyed by a Hindu mob in 1992. Additionally, it is irresponsible to repeat the claim that "Muslims were blamed for the fire in the western state of Gujarat" without also mentioning that numerous forensic studies, official and non-governmental, and the report of the official judicial commission of inquiry concluded that the fire in 2002 was an accident internal to the train, and not the deliberate act of anyone outside the train, Muslim or not.

To see a newspaper of record fanning the flames of sectarian hatred by reproducing such careless reporting is disappointing and frightening to all of us working towards a peaceful and hate-free South Asia .

Sincerely,

Girish Agrawal, Sabahat Ashraf, Yasmeen Fatimah, Shalini Gera, Anu Mandavilli, Balaji Narasimhan, Aamir Qureshi, Roshni Rustomji, Ramkumar Sridharan

Note: Friends of South Asia is a San Francisco Bay area based group.



Friends of South Asia

P.O. Box 64389
Sunnyvale, CA 94088-4389
Phone: 408-480-5805
Fax: 928-395-2998
mail@friendsofsouth asia.org

www.FriendsOfSouthAsia.org



The Chatter

aamir q

"In 2002, Hindu-Muslim riots broke out after a train fire killed 60 Hindus returning from a religious pilgrimage. Muslims were blamed for the fire in the western state of Gujarat, and more than 1,000 people, most of them Muslim, were killed by Hindu mobs."



It's such a pity that the Hindutva brigade has been able to convince the media to call the people returning from Ayodhya as pilgrims!!


Secondly, how the heck could the media include "muslims were blamed for the fire" and not point out that subsequent investigations proved the fire to be accidental.

aamir q



Re: [FOSA-bayarea] Re: Letter to the NYT

I had noticed that it was from AP and that it wasn't mentioned out of NYT bias. Didn't read the last version of the letter, but at least the initial versions weren't criticizing NYT for a bias but what you mentioned - ignorace.

Anu Mandavilli <> wrote:

hi all,

just an update that the letter to NYT was mailed out this afternoon- per the NYT's (automated) reply, we'll know next week if it'll be published.


While the FOSA letter takes a principled stand on the matter, I'm not sure Aamir's comparison of the Washington Post article and the NYT piece is appropriate- for one, the NYT story was obviously a straight feed from the AP wires. As you might have noted, the story was posted on the NYT's website at 1.27 A.M. E.S.T, (in the immediate aftermath of the blasts in India), and was probably (minimally) processed by some lowly intern working the graveyard shift. I think it'd be a mistake to see that one para as indicative of the NYT's overall editorial policy. (Also, wholesale re-use of the wires is extremely common, especially in the case of International news/news of disasters, and does not really point to any particular shoddiness on the part of the NYT).

To me, that particular paragraph was much more representative of the sanctioned ignorance on the part of AP reporters about the context of Gujarat 2002 (and also about India, and the developing world in general), than of anti-muslim bias on the part of the NYT (irrespective of how anti-, or pro-muslim one finds the NYT at other times). I would also see this as yet another example of the solipsism of U.S. media in general, which, as some might know, was historically encouraged in tandem with the U.S.'s isolationist foreign policy.


Anyhoo, I hope it is clear that I am not denying the existence of racist attitudes amongst reporters/editors, (whether at the NYT or elsewhere) or that these attitudes inform the kind of stories that are produced. My point is that while it is sometimes important to take a position as a matter of principle, our collective indignation must also be tempered somewhat with an acknowledgement of the realities of newsroom routines and judicious use of our powers of tarring and feathering.

my 2 cents,

Anu


aamir q <> wrote:

The letter is done!!


Going ahead, a couple of things -


When I pointed the NYT article out, it was meant to be a reminder that despite subsequent investigations, the media is stuck on the theory being circulated in 2002 (that muslims burnt the train etc). Seems that the reporting varies across different media outlets -- Yasmeen found that Washington Post mentioned that subsequent investigations doubted the claims that muslims burnt the train. Post also pointed out that in the past hindu extremist organizations have threatened to sabotage the train.


But, lets keep an eye on articles that are written in the same vein as the NYT article - given that some people have worked so hard on the letter, it would make sense that the FOSA letter gets posted to any newspaper we find tarroting the line "muslims burnt the train". Ofcourse, it will be exactly the same letter with the same signatures - we don't have to repeat the process :-)



Secondly, given that the hindu extremists have in the past threatened to sabotage the train (as mentioned in the Post article), how is it that nobody is even asking for their role to be investigated? Shouldn't the media be pressing for that?

Hi Roshni, others,

Here's a version that, I think, can be final. A few changes from what Roshni sent out, nothing major, but I have tightened the language some and deleted some repetition. I've added the names - in last-name alphabetical order, of all the people who have chimed in so far, and Roshni can add any other names she may have by now. I think we can leave it up to the NYT editors to drop or retain names based on the space their policy. I've also added FOSA contact information. The length of the letter is 195 words - not counting the salutation & signatures.

-girish


February 23, 2007

Pashto - Waziristan song

An open letter to Kasuri -- B. Raman

February 23, 2007

Dear Mr Kasuri

I read with interest the following agency report, dated February 22, 2007, on some observations made by you regarding the need for co-operation between the intelligence agencies of India and Pakistan: 'Intelligence agencies of India and Pakistan will have to work together if South Asia is to live in a civilised manner,' Pakistan said on Thursday, emphasising that such a cooperation is possible if governments push it.

Pakistan Foreign Minister Khurshid Mehmood Kasuri, while talking to some TV channels in New Delhi, hoped India will share the outcome of the probe into the Samjhauta Express blast before the March 6 meeting of the Joint Anti-Terror Mechanism so that 'meaningful contribution' can be made to the fight against terror. Asked whether the intelligence agencies of the two countries could work together, he said, 'They will have to if South Asia is to live in a civilised manner.' He added that if both the governments 'put their weight behind' such an endeavour, it will work.' 'After all, both countries have suffered. It's your territory but majority of them are from Pakistan,' Kasuri said, and asked, 'Why shouldn't it work?'

Apparently, you are not aware that an exercise towards regular intelligence co-operation between Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence and India's Research and Analysis Wing was initiated when Gen Zia-ul-Haq was the President of Pakistan and Rajiv Gandhi was the Prime Minister of India. This exercise, which started well with promising results, ended in a flop due to an act of perfidy by Lt Gen Hamid Gul, who was the Director-General of the ISI in the late 1980s, not only towards R&AW, but also towards Mrs Benazir Bhutto, the duly elected Prime Minister of Pakistan between 1988 and 1990.

These are the facts of the case: In the 1980s, the Khalistani terrorist movement was at its height. The ISI was training and arming the terrorists. It had given shelter to terrorists of the Dal Khalsa, who had hijacked Indian planes to Lahore. Whenever the Government of India raised this issue with the Government of Pakistan, the latter denied the presence of any training camps or of the hijackers in Pakistani territory. In June 1985, Rajiv Gandhi went to the US on a state visit at the invitation of President Ronald Reagan. The Federal Bureau of Investigation discovered a plot by Lal Singh alias Manjit Singh of the International Sikh Youth Federation to assassinate Rajiv Gandhi during his stay in the US. Before they could arrest him, Lal Singh, who was a permanent resident of Canada, escaped to Lahore and was given shelter there by the ISI.

In the same month, June 1985, the Babbar Khalsa of Canada, headed by Talwinder Singh Parmar, planted an improvised explosive device in the luggage hold of Kanishka, an Air India aircraft, before it left Toronto for India. The IED exploded off the Irish coast. All the passengers and crew of the plane perished. Parmar, after having organised this, fled to Lahore and was given shelter there by the ISI. Lal Singh and Parmar lived in Lahore as the guests of the ISI from 1985 to 1992. Every year, Sikh jathas from India visit Lahore to worship at the Nankana Sahib. Many members of the jathas used to report to the Indian intelligence agencies on their return that Lal Singh and Parmar used to meet them and appeal to them to support the Khalistan movement. Whenever the Government of India took up with the Government of Pakistan the question of arresting and handing over the Dal Khalsa hijackers, Lal Singh and Parmar, the stock reply from the Pakistani Foreign Office was that they were not in Pakistani territory. Requests made by India through the Interpol also did not produce any results.

The then Crown Prince Hassan of Jordan was a good personal friend of Rajiv Gandhi and Zia. Hassan's wife was of Pakistani origin, and he had known Zia from the days when Zia, as a middle level officer, was posted in Amman as the commanding officer of a Pakistani army unit based there. He contacted Zia and Rajiv Gandhi separately and suggested that the chiefs of the ISI and R&AW should meet secretly and discuss these issues away from the glare of publicity instead of levelling open allegations against each other. He offered to arrange the first meeting at Amman. His offer was accepted and he arranged a meeting at Amman between Lt Gen Hamid Gul and A K Verma, who was the head of R&AW. He introduced the two to each other and then disappeared from the scene. The two had two meetings -- the first at Amman and the second at Geneva. The atmosphere in the two meetings was positive. The agenda included not only the question of stopping the ISI's support to the Khalistani terrorists and handing over the terrorists given shelter in Pakistan, but also ways of solving the Siachen issue.

While there was progress in the discussions on the Siachen issue because the Pakistan Army was keen to have the Indian Army withdrawn from there, on the terrorism issue Lt Gen Gul took up the standard position that the Sikh terrorists wanted by India were not in Pakistani territory. However, through a carefully worked-out operation, he enabled the Indian authorities to get the custody of four Sikh soldiers of the Indian army who had deserted while they were posted in Jammu and Kashmir and sought sanctuary in Pakistan. He wanted the operation organised in such a manner that it would not appear that the ISI had handed over these deserters to R&AW. R&AW agreed to this and kept its word of honour to Lt Gen Gul that it would not tell the media about it.

When this exercise for a dialogue between the ISI and R&AW started, Zia-ul-Haq was in power. He was killed in a plane crash in August 1988. Following the elections to the Pakistan National Assembly held a few weeks later, Benazir Bhutto took over as the Prime Minister after she accepted three conditions imposed by the Pakistan Army: First, Gen Mirza Aslam Beg would continue as the Chief of the Army Staff; second, Lt Gen Gul would continue as the ISI chief; and third, Pakistan's nuclear establishment headed by Dr A Q Khan would work directly under Gen Beg. It would not report to Benazir. Crown Prince Hassan as well as Lt Gen Gul kept her informed of the exercise for a dialogue with R&AW. She agreed that it should continue.
Some months after Benazir took over, Lt Gen Gul, without consulting her, organised a raid on Najibullah's Afghan Army post at Jalalabad with the help of Afghan Mujahideen, Osama bin Laden's Arab followers and Pakistani ex-servicemen. The raiding party managed to surround the Jalalabad post for some days. Everybody thought they would ultimately capture Jalalabad and that would be the beginning of the end of the rule of Najibullah. It did not happen that way. Najibullah's Army post managed to repulse the raiders, inflicting heavy casualties.

Benazir took advantage of this fiasco, which was the creation of Lt Gen Gul, to have him replaced as the Chief of the ISI by Maj Gen Shamshur Rehman Kallue, a retired officer, who was close to her father and had been very loyal to the Bhutto family. After taking over, Kallue abolished the political division of the ISI, then headed by Brig Imtiaz. It was responsible for keeping a watch on Pakistani political leaders and civilian bureaucrats and also for assisting the Khalistan movement. On the advice of Lt Gen Gul, Nawaz Sharif, who was then the chief minister of Punjab, took Imtiaz into the Special Branch of the Punjab police to continue the ISI's operation for assisting the Khalistani movement. Lt Gen. Gul had a message sent to all Khalistani leaders that in future they should contact Imtiaz in the Punjab Special Branch for any assistance and not Kallue.

Lt Gen Gul also leaked to Nawaz Sharif and some members of the media the information about the handing over of four Sikh deserters to India. He did not admit that he did it. He alleged that Benazir, who was in close touch with Rajiv Gandhi, did it despite his strong opposition. There was a big campaign mounted by the Pakistan Muslim League, then headed by Nawaz Sharif, against her on this issue. Lt Gen Gul also told her detractors that Kallue, on her orders, had handed over to R&AW some files of the ISI on the Khalistani leaders. Benazir Bhutto was accused of being an R&AW agent and of betraying the Khalistan movement. Embarrassed by these allegations, Benazir asked Kallue for the files relating to Lt Gen Gul's meetings with Verma. After checking, he reported to her that there were no papers on the subject in the ISI headquarters.

Benazir's close friendship with Rajiv Gandhi, her alleged links with R&AW and her alleged betrayal of the Khalistan movement were some of the secret charges used by Ghulam Ishaq Khan, the then President, to dismiss her in August 1990, at the instance of Gen Beg and Lt Gen Gul.

Towards the end of 1990, Chandra Shekhar took over as the Prime Minister of India, with the support of the Congress, after V P Singh lost a vote of confidence in the Lok Sabha. He took Vidya Charan Shukla, formerly of the Congress, as his foreign minister. Through an intermediary, Rajiv Gandhi had a message conveyed to Chandra Shekhar about the meetings between Hamid Gul and Verma held at the initiative of Crown Prince Hassan and the progress made on the Siachen issue. Rajiv Gandhi suggested to Chandra Shekhar that this dialogue should be revived. Chandra Shekhar agreed and took up the matter with Nawaz Sharif, who had in the meanwhile taken over as the newly-elected Prime Minister of Pakistan. After some weeks, Nawaz Sharif replied through a diplomat of the Pakistani High Commission in New Delhi that there were no papers on this subject in the ISI and on being contacted, Lt Gen Gul totally denied having met Verma and discussed any issue with him. We were totally surprised by Gul's denial. R&AW prepared a summary of the discussions at the two meetings at Amman and Geneva and sent it to Nawaz Sharif through the Pakistani High Commission in New Delhi. He was also told that if he had any doubts in view of Gul's denial, he could check with Hassan, who had organised the dialogue.

Nawaz Sharif agreed to the resumption of the dialogue and a third meeting was held in Singapore between Lt Gen Assad Durrani, the then chief of the ISI, and G S Bajpai, the then chief of R&AW. Nothing came out of it. Durrani kept levelling allegations of R&AW's interference in Sindh. It was a dialogue of the deaf. There ended the hopes of co-operation.

An analysis was made in the R&AW as to why Gul denied his talks with Verma. Our conclusion was that since he and Beg had got Benazir dismissed on the charge that she had colluded with R&AW and betrayed the Khalistan movement, if he admitted that it was he who had the four Sikhs handed over to R&AW, that could make the dismissal of Benazir Bhutto in August 1990 mala fide in retrospect. Nawaz Sharif, who was a beneficiary of the dismissal, did not want to go deep into this either.
During the investigation into the Mumbai blasts of March 1993, the Indian intelligence collected conclusive evidence regarding the involvement of the ISI in the explosions. This evidence was given wide publicity and also brought to the notice of the American and Chinese intelligence officials by the R&AW as suggested by P V Narasimha Rao, the then prime minister. The CIA and the Chinese external intelligence, independently of each other and without each knowing of the offer made by the other, offered to organise a dialogue between R&AW and the ISI so that the heads of the two organisations could discuss the matter away from the glare of publicity.

Narasimha Rao rejected both these offers. He said: 'R&AW has been having a relationship with the CIA for 25 years. It has not been able to get its co-operation in counter-terrorism. Before suggesting to us counter-terrorism co-operation with Pakistan, let the US first co-operate sincerely with us in counter-terrorism. We know how Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto deceived Indira Gandhi at Shimla. He made an oral promise to work for the conversion of the Line of Control into the international border. After getting his soldiers back, he totally denied making any such promise to her. Now Hamid Gul is even denying meeting and discussing Siachen with Verma. It will be a dangerous illusion to think anything will come out of co-operation between the ISI and the R&AW. Let us not commit the same mistake again and again.' Narasimha Rao said no formal reply need be sent to the US and China on their offer. 'Let them guess from our silence that we are not in favour of it.'
You would now understand, I hope, why there is not much enthusiasm in India to the idea of a Joint Mechanism for Counter-Terrorism Co-operation. They say once bitten, twice shy. India has been bitten thrice -- after the Shimla talks between Indira Gandhi and Z A Bhutto; after the meetings between Verma and Hamid Gul; and after the meeting between A B Vajpayee and Nawaz Sharif at Lahore in February 1999.
Mr Foreign Minister, Pakistan has handed over so many terrorism suspects to the US and other countries. Forget about terrorists. Can you recall even a single instance where Pakistan has handed over even a cattle-lifter to India? Whenever India has asked Pakistan to hand over a terrorist or other criminal, Pakistan's response has been that India has not been able to produce convincing evidence against him. And whenever India has asked Pakistan to hand over a non-Muslim terrorist, Pakistan's response has been: 'Yes, we agree you have good evidence against him, but your information that he is in our territory is wrong.' The handing-over of the Sikh army deserters is the only instance of such action by Pakistan that I can recall. I cannot understand even today why Gul did it. Was he planning to use them to collect military intelligence from India?

All Pakistan has to do to demonstrate its sincerity is to hand over some of the terrorists from India living in Pakistani territory before the first meeting of the Joint Counter-Terrorism Mechanism. It will have a big impact in India and many sceptics will start supporting the mechanism.
With warm regards
Yours sincerely,
B Raman

Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Government of India

Mysterious happenings at Sethu (Ramar) bridge at Rameswaram

Mysterious happenings at Sethu (Ramar) bridge at Rameswaram



Adams Bridge (popularly known as Sethu bridge or Ramar bridge) at Rameswaram, Southern tip of India is

believed to have been constructed by Lord Ram and Hanuman to go to Srilanka to rescue Sita during Ramayana days. Scientists have also confirmed the existence of a bridge and matching of the bridge to the Ramayana days (see picture on left taken by NASA through satellite)

As part of Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project (SSCP), Indian Government initiated the process for cutting open the ancient Ramar Bridge . Mysteriously all the costly equipments like cutters, dredgers, spuds, cranes including ships got damaged and fell into the sea.

Generally, Hindus believe that this bridge is being safeguarded by Hanuman and any attempt to damage the bridge would be failure. Inspite of the public sentiments and heritage value of the bridge (as defined by UNESCO), Indian Government wants to go ahead with the dredging of this ancient bridge. According to media reports that the Dredging Corporation of India Limited which has undertaken the project has suffered huge loss and many senior officials have also submitted their resignation.

An advocate Mr Kuppu Ram from Ramanathapuram has filed a case in a court seeking injunction against damaging the ancient bridge.

We are bringing out a special 'news feature' on this 'mysterious events' covering the public sentiments.

Please click 'play' to listen to the full podcast (19 m). If you have broadband, you can listen through streaming audio. Otherwise, we suggest you to download the mp3 format (18 mb) to your desktop and listen through any mp3 players.

Click here to download mp3 format

February 22, 2007

How the Iranian Qods Force is operating in Iraq

Tuesday, 20 February 2007
NCRI - In a webinar - a conference on the web - organised on ISCC Site (http://www.iraniscc.info) today, Mohammad Mohaddessin, Chair of the NCRI Foreign Affairs Committee spoke about critical aspects of the clerical regime's meddling in Iraq. Following are excerpts of his remarks:

The documents and information I am going to present, shed light on the scope of the Iranian regime’s interference in Iraqi affairs.

One of these documents is the list of 32,000 agents of the mullahs’ regime in Iraq who receive monthly salaries from the Iranian regime. These people are currently in effect paid staff of the Revolutionary Guards’ Qods Force. (IRGC-QF)


A top-secret document of the IRGC, it was obtained by the sources of the resistance inside Iran.

A few points on the list:

This list contains details of only 31,690 Iraqis who are primarily affiliated with the Badr Brigade of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, also known as SCIRI. But it is not limited to them and includes other individuals and groups in Iraq.

It contains the Iraqi and the Iranian name for each individual, meaning that these individuals, who are located in Iraq, also have an Iranian name.

All of these individuals are considered as official members of the IRGC.

The list contains the personnel code, the account number and the amount of monthly salary of each individual in the Iranian currency, Rial.

The list also contains the details of the each individual who is hired by the IRGC according to his personnel file, including the date of recruitment by the IRGC-QF and the Badr Brigade, the unit they served while they were in Iran, their military rank and code of personnel while working for the Qods Force.

I want to reiterate that this list only contains the details of individuals who were hired directly by the Qods Force in Iran and does not include individuals who have been recruited in Iraq in the course of the past four years. So in reality, the actual number of the Iranian regime’s agents in Iraq is much higher than the one on this list.

The Iranian regime has stationed its agents in all the major provinces of Iraq. As you can see, Baghdad and Basra have a very high number of agents and this the reason of the very unsafe situation in these two major cities.

This force was dispatched to Iraq in an organized way and in large groups shortly after the fall of the former Iraqi government in early 2003. They came through major border crossings under the direct command and supervision of the Qods Force, including IRGC Generals Qassem Suleimani, Iraj Masjedi, Ahmad Forouzandeh, and Hamid Taqavi.

The agents of the Iranian regime exposed in this document have an extensive presence and influence in Iraqi government agencies, in particular in the security apparatus some of which they control. They are the very same individuals who abducted two members of the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran in Baghdad in August 2005. There has been no news about their whereabouts for the past 18 months.

Some of these people are among senior political figures of Iraq. They receive monthly salary from the clerical regime, while they are considered as senior officials of the Iraqi government.

In order to control and keep track of various organs and their personnel, in all government agencies and in particular in military organs, some individuals function under the title of “Representative of Vali-e faqih” (representative of the Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei). These individuals report directly to Khamenei’s office. Even the head of that organ or office is not authorized to intervene in the affairs of the representatives of Vali-e faqih. Only Khamenei's office has the authority to appoint or remove these so-called representatives. Since the Badr Corps is considered a functionary of the Qods Force, it is not an exception. In all of its units, departments and general command, representatives of Khamenei ensure that his orders and directives are pursued and carried out. They report directly to Khamenei's Office.

There are 481 representatives of Khamenei in the Badr Corps. Some of them hold key positions in the Iraqi government and Parliament.

How are these agents paid?

Since the transfer of the Badr Forces to Iraq, its budget is being paid through the General Command of the Armed Forces in the Qods Force. This budget is under the title of “Budget and salary of extra-territorial forces.”

Members of the Qods Force take the money to border zone in Mehran (in the central sector of the border), where the money is handed over the Badr agents. Badr agents subsequently take the money to Iraq and transfer it to office of Abdul-Aziz Hakim in Jaderyieh district of Baghdad. SCIRI representatives go to Hakim’s office and receive their money.

The individual in charge of finances of SCIRI is named Abu Kawthar.

The representatives of Badr in various provinces go to Baghdad and to receive the money which they then take it to their provinces for distribution under the supervision of Badr officials.

In this stage I would like to explain a terrorist network of Iranian regime in Iraq. This regime has dozens similar networks in that country.

This specific network was established by one of its veteran agents. His Iraqi name is Jamal Jafar Mohammad Ali- Al-Ebrahimi. His Iranian name is Jamal Ebrahimi.

He is a notorious terrorist and was among those who had planned the explosion of American and British embassies in Kuwait in 1984. He has been staying in Iran ever since.

He was a commander of the Badr Corps for years and has gone through Command and General Staff training at Imam Hossein University of the Guards Corps in Tehran.

Following the downfall of the former Iraqi government in 2003, he went to Iraq. IRGC Brigadier General Qassem Suleimani, the Commander of the Qods Force organized 950 veteran members of Badr Corps under Ibrahimi’s command and called this group “Tajamo-e Islami” or Islamic Assembly.

“Tajamo-e Islami” has branches throughout Iraq and has played a prominent role in setting up Shiite militias that are affiliated to the Iranian regime and its terror activities.

Ebrahimi is on official payroll of the Qods Force and his salary is 2600863 Rials ($300). His bank account number in Iran is 50100460275 and his salary code number in the Qods force is 3829770.

Setting up Hezbollah establishment in Iraq

One of the networks that Ebrahimi has established is the Iraqi Hezbollah. It is very similar to the Hezbollah in Lebanon and is active in Basra and Baghdad. This organization is in direct contact of the Qods Force and Lebanese Hezbollah. The members of Hezbollah go through military and terrorist training in Basra.

Ebrahimi sends his forces to Iran to receive special military and intelligence gathering trainings. They enter Iran across the southern border and are dispatched in groups of 20-50 individuals to Ahwaz and Tehran. They are trained by the Qods Force and the special training course is between 15-30 days.

The allocated budget for Ebrahimi’s network is 1.5 million dollars a month and is paid directly by the Qods Force.

Major part of terrorist operations in southern sectors of Iraq, in particular in Basra, al-emara, Nasserieh and Najaf areas, are carried out by ebrahimi’s network.

Ebrahimi is in direct liaison with IRGC Brigadier General Mojtaba Abtahi who is commander of Fajr garrison, one of the main bases of the Qods Force in southern Iran in Ahwaz.

Transfer of weapons and ammunition to Iraq

A significant number of Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) that are used in Iraq are manufactured by the clerical regime and are sent to Iraq by the Fajr garrison.

According to our information, IEDs are manufactured in ammunition production section of the Defense Industries located in Lavizan in northern Tehran in three separate industrial sections called Sattari industries, Sayyad Shirazi industries, and Shiroodi industries. Each of these industries has it own specific production.

The orders for manufacturing highly explosive IEDs are given by the Bureau of Operations of the Qods Force to Sattari industries. Engineer Rahimi, deputy director of Sattari industries, is in charge of coordinating these projects.

IEDs are the primary types of weapons transferred at Shalamcheh border crossing in southern border.

In coordination with Fajr garrison, other weapons and ammunitions are transferred to Iraq through Bostan, Howizeh and Hour-al Azim border crossing in Missan province.

Conclusion:

What I have said sheds light on only a small portion of the Iranian regime’s meddling in Iraq.

The clerical regime, faced with intensifying domestic crisis and isolation inside Iran, views its only chance for survival in the establishment of a proxy regime in Iraq and the export of Islamic fundamentalism. By resorting to all sorts of means it is trying to achieve its objective in Iraq.

As scores of prominent Iraqis have underscored, Iraq is facing two occupations, with the Iranian regime being the main occupier.

Two forces are currently arrayed against one another in Iraq: democratic and patriotic forces vs. fundamentalist and extremist forces organized and led by the Iranian regime, which provides them with extensive financial, military and political support.

5.2 million Iraqis signed a declaration last June in which they said that the only way to establish democracy in Iraq is to cut off the hands of the mullahs’ regime and its agents in Iraq. They expressed their support for the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran in Iraq and the need for their stay in Iraq as a major barrier to the expansion of fundamentalism and terrorism emanating from the clerical regime ruling Iran.

The priority for the Tehran regime's military apparatus, especially the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) and the IRGC's terrorist Qods Force, is to organize and direct the regime's interference in, and the efforts to dominate Iraq. Iraq is the Iranian regime's launching pad to dominate the entire region and install an Islamic Empire.

Iraq is the main battle ground between fundamentalism and democracy in the whole of the Middle East region. For this reason, the clerical regime views the People's Mojahedin (PMOI), who are anti-fundamentalist Muslims, as the biggest barrier to its attempt to spreading influence in Iraq. As such, Tehran is doing its utmost to secure the extradition or the expulsion of the PMOI from Iraq. The removal of restrictions from the PMOI and the reaffirmation of their political refugee status in Iraq are a decisive factor in confronting the fundamentalism inspired by the Iranian regime.

Evicting Tehran from Iraq is the only solution to resolve the Iraqi crisis. Of course, as far as mullahs are concerned, they are using all the means at their disposal to step up their meddling in Iraq because it is indispensable to their survival. This explains why evicting the Iranian regime from Iraq and change in Iran are entwined.



Qods Force: Iranian regime's instrument for extraterritorial terror activities
Tuesday, 26 December 2006
NCRI - The following brief was prepared by the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI):

As far as the Iranian regime’s involvement in terrorism is concerned, Tehran has the most extensive terror network in the world. It is responsible for some 80 percent of all major terror attacks --directly or indirectly-- in the past two decades. Tehran has by far been the most sophisticated, well-funded state-sponsor of terrorism in the world. It is driven by an Islamic fundamentalist ideology and would use any opportunity and employ every source –regardless of its religious tendencies-- to accomplish its objectives. Tehran’s ties can be explained in this context.


The Qods (Jerusalem) Force is the most secretive, elite, and skilled unit of the Iranian regime’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. Formed in 1990, it is now responsible for all the extraterritorial activities of the Iranian regime, namely all terror attacks abroad. Its commander, Brig. Gen. Qassem Soleimani directly reports to the regime’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei.

Final coordination of the Qods Force’s activities around the world and provision of the appropriate diplomatic or other cover for its agents, the use of diplomatic facilities and immunities that facilitate receiving supplies and messages, weapons and military equipment for its terrorist agents fall within the responsibilities of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Tehran’s embassies. The embassies are also heavily involved in intelligence-gathering operations against opposition groups and figures. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs turns over the information to the Qods Force.

The Qods force was originally called the Lebanon Corps. It carried out the suicide truck bomb attack on the US Marine Barracks in Beirut in 1983.

The Qods [Jerusalem Force] is the most important agency tasked with the export of terrorism and fundamentalism.

1. In 1990, the Iranian regime consolidated all its intelligence agencies and extraterritorial institutions to form the Qods Force. The most experienced and veteran IRGC commanders were assigned to the Force. Brig. Gen. Ahmad Vahidi, the IRGC's Intelligence Directorate Chief was the Qods Force's first commander. He said our objective is the formation of an "international Islamic Army." Brig. Gen. Qassem Soleimani is the current IRGC commander. The headquarters for the Force is the former site of the U.S. embassy in Tehran.
2. The Qods Force has more than 21,000 Iranian members an thousands on non-Iranian mercenaries, which are active in intelligence gathering and terrorist activities in the Middle East and elsewhere, including in Lebanon, Afghanistan, Iraq, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Bosnia, Jordan, etc. The Force's representatives work in many embassies around the world as diplomats.
3. The Qods Force has 12 directorates. In addition, it has several units called International Affairs Units that pursue developments in other countries. They are: Iraq, Turkey, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Lebanon, Syria, Middle East, Russia, Africa, and Europe.
4. In addition to terrorist operations, the Qods Force also trains non-Iranian terrorist forces, including nations from Pakistan, Morocco, Lebanon, Iraq, Palestine and other Middle East countries. The training is provided to groups of 40 to 50 persons. The Force has dozens of garrisons across Iran in which it trains its non-Iranian operatives.
5. Some of the Force's training centers for foreign nationals are as follows:
a. Imam Ali Training base. It is one of the most important training bases and is located north of Tehran, in Alborz Kouh Street.
b. Khomeini Training base. It is located on Khavaran-Semnan highway, before reaching Pakdasht Township. Col. Rezai is the commander of the base, where a large number of foreign forces from Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine are being currently trained.
c. Bahonar base. It is located on Chalous highway, near Karaj Dam. This is also among one of the most important training centers.
d. Qods Training Center in Nahavand. It is located 45km from the town of Nahavand, west of Iran. Foreign forces, including those from Lebanon and Afghanistan are trained here.
e. Qom's Beit ol-Moghadas University in the city of Qom.
f. Training center in Tehran's Farahzad district.
g. Training center on Damavand highway.
h. Hezbollah Base in Varamin, southeast of Tehran.
i. Madani Base in Dezful, (southwest Iran).
j. Bisotoun Base in Kermanshah, (western Iran).
k. Tangeh Kenesht Base in Kermanshah, (western Iran).
l. Ghayour Training Base in Ahwaz (southwest Iran).

6. The Qods Force has six major garrisons along Iran's borders with other countries. They are tasked with following up terrorist operations in the neighboring countries. They are:
a. Ramadan Garrison (First Corps) in Kermanshah (west). Mission: Iraq.
b. Nabi-Akram Garrison (Second Corps) in Zahedan (southeast). Mission: Pakistan.
c. Hamza Garrison (Third Corps) in Orumieh (northwest). Mission: Turkey.
d. Ansar Garrison (Fourth Corps) in Mashad (northeast). Mission: Afghanistan and Pakistan.

7. Terrorist Units.
In addition to the six garrisons, the Force has several other corps, including:
a. The Sixth Corps. Mission: Persian Gulf states.
b. The Seventh Corps. Mission: Lebanon and Syria.
c. The Eighth Corps. Mission: African States.
d. The Ninth Corps. Mission: Europe and the United States.

Qods Force in Iraq
The Qods Force is mainly focused on Iraq at the present. Iraq is the gateway to reach the rest of the Islamic world. The most senior IRGC generals as well as thousands of personnel are based in Ramadan Garrison. Their mission: To dominate Iraq. Large parts of southern Iraq are virtually in the control of the IRGC.

The regime has accomplished this feat by allocating billions of dollars, dispatching thousands of clerics and paying thousands of mercenaries on a monthly basis.

The Qods Force Fajr Garrison in Ahwaz has set up intelligence and reconnaissance squads to collect intelligence on the Coalition forces and identifying them. To this end, Fajr Garrison commanders, including Brig. Gen. Obeidavi, the garrison's commander, Hamid Taghavi, Ramadan Garrison's operations commander, Brig. Gen. Ahmad Forouzandeh, Ramadan Garrison's deputy commander, Brig. Gen. Balalek, Fajr Garrison's operational commander, Col. Heidar Saki, Fajr Garrison's intelligence commander as well as a number of other Fajr intelligence and operations commanders have repeatedly traveled to Al-Amara and Basra to make contact with these squads. They have posed as Iraqis in order not to be identified.

Each reconnaissance squad numbers around 20, each entrusted with a specific task. Some work in the streets as venders. Others are engaged in watch operations near their hideouts. Others have opened shops to collect intelligence and carry out surveillance operations on the Coalition forces. Some teams are engaged in filming. They also pose as ordinary people to get close to Coalition bases.
Some time ago, the Fajr Garrison set up an eavesdropping center in Basra. They intercept the communication between the government, police and Coalition forces. All equipment has come from Iran.

By causing chaos and launching terrorist operations on the Coalition columns in Basra, Al-Amara and Nassiriya, the Qods has prevented the Coalition forces from entering major population centers. The objective is to control the inner cities, both militarily and security wise.

The Fajr Garrison is currently smuggling different weapons' caches to Iraq. They use the Ajirdeh Dam region, Al-Aziz, Al-Holafayeh, Al-Moshrah. They also use the marshes in the south and the Tayeb region. The mostly use boats to do so.

The Fajr Garrison commander Obeidavi visits operatives affiliated with the Qods Force in Iraq on a monthly basis. He usually goes to Basra and Nassiriya.

In a confidential report to the Qods Force in June, the Fajr Garrison informed the Qods Force headquarters that "Iraqi groups affiliated with the Garrison have succeeded in setting up a well-coordinated entity to assassinate prominent Sunni personalities, including members of Iraq's Islamic Party, the Society of Muslim Scholars and other Sunni activists. By assassinating officials of these entities, they have succeeded in paving the way for pro-regime groups in Iraq's politics and facilitated their control of government portfolios."




Meet Brigadier General Qassem Suleimani, the commander of Iran's anti-American Qods Force.

by Dan Darling

10/05/2005



WITH RECENT U.S. and British allegations that shipments of explosives similar to those used by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) are being shipped into Iraq from Iran for use by the insurgency, it is long past time for American policy-makers to examine the role of Iranian Brigadier General Qassem Suleimani and the Qods (Jerusalem) Force unit under his command in fomenting and facilitating anti-American terrorist activity since the September 11 attacks.

The very nature of General Suleimani's position within the IRGC warrants him being on America's radar. As the commander of Qods Force, Suleimani is charged with overseeing the IRGC's extra-territorial operations and, according to Time magazine, he serves as a special advisor to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on the issues of both Iraq and Afghanistan. Under Suleimani--and his predecessor Ahmad Vahidi--Qods Force has been linked to nearly every instance of Iranian-backed terrorism over the course of the last decade, including the 1994 bombing of the Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, Argentina, that killed 85 and injured 230. A U.S. intelligence analysis of Qods Force leaked to the Washington Post in September 2003 provided even further insight into its activities.

According to the analysis, Qods Force has agents in most countries with large Muslim populations and its goal is to "form relationships with Islamic militant and radical groups and offer financial support either to the groups at large or to Islamic figures within them who are sympathetic to the principles and foreign policy goals of the Iranian government." Contrary to

the conventional wisdom that rules out Shiite-Sunni cooperation, the analysis also stated that Qods Force had trained more than three dozen Shiite and Sunni foreign Islamic militant groups in paramilitary, guerrilla, and terror tactics, including assassination, kidnapping, torture, and explosives.


THESE ACTIVITIES are alarming enough but, as explained in a second Post story from September 2003, the organization's role in anti-U.S. activities extends even further. Citing a European intelligence official, the Post noted that after the fall of the Taliban al Qaeda's second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahiri (whose relationship with Qods Force goes back at least a decade) negotiated safe harbor for much of the surviving al Qaeda leadership inside Iran, including bin Laden's son and heir apparent, Saad, and the terror network's de facto ministers of war, finance, propaganda, and ideology. Numerous media reports listed future-Iraqi insurgent leader Abu Musab Zarqawi as among these refugees.

While Zarqawi quickly left Iran for Iraq (possibly under duress from Iranian authorities because of both his anti-Shiite views and the government's desire to counter U.S. criticism that Iran was soft on al Qaeda), the rest of the al Qaeda leaders who took refuge in Iran continue to operate. Despite Iranian claims that any al Qaeda members within its borders are "in custody," these senior leaders appear to continue to operate within what a French counter-terrorism official described to AFP in July 2004 as "controlled freedom of movement"--a controlled freedom due in no small part to the influence of Qods Force.


THE ANTI-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES of Qods Force aren't simply limited to protecting the al Qaeda leadership. According to a report in Time, as early as September 2002 Ali Khamenei placed General Suleimani in charge of organizing various Iraqi groups as part of an Iranian plan to dominate the country following Saddam's removal. Among these targeted groups were the Badr Brigades military wing of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI is now a key member of the Iraqi ruling coalition), the Mujahideen for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (MIRI), Thar-Allah, and Iran's favorite proxy, the Lebanese Hezbollah. Yet it was not until April 2004 and the beginning of Muqtada al-Sadr's failed uprising that Qods Force would truly make its presence in Iraq felt.

As reported by the London Arabic newspaper al-Sharq al-Awsat, al-Sadr visited Iran in late 2003 and met with General Suleimani. At the onset of al-Sadr's uprising, the paper reported that Qods Force had set up training camps at Qasr Shireen, Ilam, and Hamid in southern Iran along the Iraqi border to train the radical cleric's Mahdi Army and financed his campaign to the tune of $80,000,000. A March 2005 report by the Brussels-based International Crisis Group (ICG) treated most charges of Iranian meddling in Iraq with skepticism, but quoted one E.U. diplomat as saying that "[Qassem] Suleimani seemingly had an agenda to support Muqtada al-Sadr in the Najaf crisis. . . . But as the war went on, he withdrew his support." The report cited another diplomat as saying that Iran had provided al-Sadr with "funding and arms."


IN MAY 2004, al-Sharq al-Awsat published a story claiming that members of Qods Force had attempted to provide both explosives and upwards of $900,000 to Abu Musab Zarqawi, with the intention of him carrying out attacks on U.S. and European embassies and commercial centers in five Gulf states. According to the newspaper, the plot was thwarted by Iranian intelligence at the behest of the-then President Khatami, who likely recognized that such action could easily result in a US reprisal against Iran. At Khatami's direction, Iranian intelligence arrested a number of al Qaeda operatives as well as a Qods Force official, yet no actions were taken against General Suleimani and he remains in command of the elite military unit to this day.

In August 2004, al-Sharq al-Awsat cited an official who had attended an Iranian military seminar in which General Suleimani stated that Zarqawi and 20 senior members of the terrorist group Ansar al-Islam are allowed to enter Iran whenever they want through border points between Halabja and Ilam in Iraq. When asked why Iran would support Zarqawi given his anti-Shiite activities, Suleimani stated that Zarqawi's actions in Iraq "serve the supreme interests of Iran" by preventing the creation of a pro-U.S. government. These remarks seem to square with the views of the ICG report on Iranian meddling in Iraq which, while largely skeptical, concluded that Kurdish assertions about Iran's Revolutionary Guards backing Ansar al-Islam (described by the U.S. State Department as "closely allied with al-Qa'ida and Abu Mus'ab al-Zarqawi's group" as well as "one of the leading groups engaged in anti-Coalition attacks in Iraq") "most likely have merit."

Thus far, discussions over the proper course of US policy towards Iran have primarily focused on the regime's nuclear program. Perhaps the activities of General Suleimani and Qods Force should be included in that discussion, too.

Dan Darling is a counter-terrorism consultant for the Manhattan Institute's Center for Policing Terrorism.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/

Rahul Gandhi rape allegation : Ratan Singh missing , HinduUnity to air his video clip



As a sequel to the report we published "Elder who helped alleged rape victim of Rahul Gandhi was beaten in Amethi" , now we've learned that the elder name is Mr.Ratan Singh . When we contacted some sources , including HinduUnity.org , they told us that he is missing since last week and his son is on run . The website hosted 5 video interviews and it is said that 2 more clips are intentionally not released . Now sources say , the website is releasing Video interview of Ratan Singh , the man who helped Ms.Sukanya, alleged rape victim . “Unlike other video clips ,Ratan Singh’s clip shows with face uncovered , he is one of the two persons who came forward and spoke without covering their face and narrated the incident” , told the source when questioned about the uniqueness and importance of this video clip .

If Mr.Ratan Singh is allegedly kidnapped by congress goons as per the sources then one should believe that an extensive cover up is going on . However IntellBriefs believe that it is time for an open investigation into these allegations and set the record right in the interest of Mr.Rahu Gandhi’s political future . One online petition which calling for the same , many individuals who signed the petition expressed favourably for an investigation . A comment says “Until and unless the authenticity of this is checked, no one has the right to call anyone a culprit. The need is to look it from both's point of view. If the rumors are really true the girl definitely requires protection and justice no matter if the person belongs to an influential family. And if the rumors are false even then the probe is required to give clean chit to Mr. Rahul.Since Rahul have all the sources I stand with Sukanya “ (Hitanshu Punj, comment 595 )

Let’s wait till HinduUnity.org airs the video of Mr.Ratan Singh and see what is so “unique” about this video clip.


Disclaimer : We have no intention to defame anyone, please feel free to air your opinion .

Devyani Rana weds while King Gyanendra faces abolition



Thursday 22nd February, 2007
(IANS)



In a kingdom where important decisions are taken after consulting astrologers and the position of the stars, the wedding of Devyani Rana, once known as the woman Nepal's ill-fated crown prince Dipendra wanted to marry, seems to be inexplicably linked with the royals.

The 34-year-old, who comes from one of Nepal's best-known families, is marrying Indian Human Resource Development (HRD) minister Arjun Singh's grandson Aishwarya Friday in a ceremony that will be attended by the who's who of Nepal, India and elsewhere. The wedding will be followed by a reception Saturday evening -- both events are to be held at Arjun Singh's Delhi residence.

The tiny Himalayan kingdom stunned the world in June 2001 when the king of Nepal, Birendra, his queen Aishwarya, crown prince Dipendra, his two siblings and other members of the royal family were killed in a midnight shootout in the royal palace in Kathmandu.

Initially, Dipendra was held responsible for the killings as the first reports attributed the massacre to his rage at his parents' opposition to his plan to marry Devyani.

Later, speculations began about the possibility of other people being involved in the killings since the weapon, with which Dipendra was believed to have shot himself after killing the others, was not found near his body.

The massacre wiped out entire family of King Birendra and the crown finally went to his younger brother Gyanendra, who, ordinarily, would never have ascended the throne.

Now that the passage of time has healed some of the wounds and Devyani is seeking to make a new life for herself by tying the knot with Indian Human Resources minister Arjun Singh's grandson Aishwarya, fresh doom threatens Nepal's royal family again.

King Gyanendra faces the abolition of his crown after triggering a raging controversy with an ill-timed message to the nation.

On Monday, when Nepal celebrated its 57th Democracy Day - the day five decades ago when the kingdom overthrew the despotic regime of Devyani's ancestors - the king issued a message to the nation in which he justified his attempt to seize power two years ago and rule the country directly.

The move came as a surprise since after the fall of the royal regime owing to public protests last year, a new constitution came into effect, removing the king as head of state.

Under the new circumstances, it is the prerogative of the prime minister to address the nation on important days and events, with the king having no role to play at all.

The royal message roused public anger against monarchy afresh in the country with violent protests continuing even Thursday. Students in remote Bajura district in far west Nepal vandalised the statue of King Birendra, who had been the most popular king for agreeing to relinquish absolute power and become a constitutional monarch.

In an unprecedented move Wednesday, Nepal's parliament asked the government of Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala to take action against the king for issuing an 'unconstitutional, unnecessary and undemocratic' message.

Now the Maoists, who began waging a war since 1996 to abolish monarchy, are making fresh demands to axe the crown.

The rebels, who had agreed to hold an election and leave it to the people to choose between monarchy and a republic, are now saying the king may conspire again to seize power. Maoist supremo Prachanda Wednesday said his party would table a proposal in parliament within a couple of days.

The proposal would seek to amend the new constitution and declare Nepal a republic, without waiting for the June elections.

February 20, 2007

Britain's Assault on America Revisited

BOOK REVIEW


by Jeffrey Steinberg

The Anglo-American Establishment
by Carroll Quigley
New York City: Books in Focus, Inc., 1981
354 pages, paperback

Professor Carroll Quigley (1910-1977), the noted Georgetown University historian, completed the writing of The Anglo-American Establishment sometime during the late 1940s. Yet the book was never published until 1981, four years after the author's death. Since the publication was delayed for more than 30 years, it is not at all inappropriate to publish a review of this important work 26 years after its first publication. In fact, one would be hard-pressed to find a more useful moment to review this invaluable account of the British oligarchy's assault on the United States.

Since the inauguration of George Bush and Dick Cheney in January 2001, the United States has been under relentless attack from within. Many a sage Bush-Cheney critic has observed that the current Administration has done more damage to the United States than any foreign enemy could ever inflict. From the Iraq War, to the looming preemptive attack on Iran, to the collapse of the physical economy, to the disintegration of conditions of life for the vast majority of the lower 80% income brackets, and the assault on Constitutional rights, the Bush-Cheney Administration has successfully turned most of the world against the United States, and turned millions of Americans against their own elected government—and against the very idea of government acting on behalf of the general welfare.

Yet few critics, with the exception of Lyndon LaRouche, have raised the specter of a foreign hand behind the Bush-Cheney wrecking operations. This is largely explained by the fact that the vast majority of Americans, including within the political class, have lost a true sense of history. They perceive the consequences of the government's actions from the more limited standpoint of relatively near-term cause and effect, or from the vantage point of a specialist's limited historical lens. Moreover, they all generally accept the false notion that the British hand in world affairs has been vastly reduced, and that the impulse towards empire has been abandoned or suppressed, due to England's "diminished" condition. One need only read the inserted special report in the Feb. 3, 2007 edition of the Economist to recognize that the City of London is now celebrating "another British imperial moment," centered around the successful promulgation of yet another devastating myth: that globalization is an irreversible, driving force in world economic and political affairs.

It is in this context that the present review of the Quigley book is written. For what Professor Quigley recounts, with impeccable documentation, is a more than 100-year assault upon the American Constitutional republic by a conspiracy of leading British imperialists, who saw the survival of the British Empire in apocalyptic terms: Either the United States would be coopted back under London domination, or the Empire would crumble. Based on this assessment, a tight-knit group of leading British oligarchs launched a series of projects, aimed at recasting the British Empire as a "Commonwealth of Nations" and drawing the United States, forever, back into the fold.

The project documented by Professor Quigley, involved the philosophical assault on the American republican outlook, and the gradual establishment of an alternative ideology, based on the "Anglo-American" or "English-speaking" vision of the world. This so-called "Anglo-American" vision was, in fact, the outlook of the Venetian Party of Anglo-Dutch bankers and aristocrats, who believed in world government, under the control of a tiny elite. That this is the antithesis of the American System outlook is self-evident to anyone who has studied the history of the American Revolution, the Constitutional Convention, the evolution of an American school of foreign policy by John Quincy Adams, and the development of the American System of political economy of Alexander Hamilton and Mathew and Henry Carey.

The obliteration of the true history of the United States, and its replacement with a false history of Anglo-American shared world vision ("free trade and democracy") is, perhaps, one of the greatest and most underestimated achievements of the conspirators profiled by Quigley. Unfortunately, in his Anglo-American Establishment, Quigley himself fails to draw out the fundamental distinctions between the American and British systems, and thus misses the most fundamental point of his otherwise most valuable exercise in historiography.

The Venetian System
Ironically, Professor Quigley's book begins with a very precise description of the Venetian "Doge" system. The original Cecil Rhodes conspiracy, launched in the late 19th Century, was precisely and consciously modelled on the Venetian system of secret government, run by a self-selected and self-perpetuating committee. Here is Quigley's introduction to the formation of the conspiracy, which he then details, from its origin in 1891 through to 1945:

"One wintry afternoon in February 1891, three men were engaged in earnest conversation in London. From that conversation were to flow consequences of the greatest importance to the British Empire and to the world as a whole. For these men were organizing a secret society that was, for more than fifty years, to be one of the most important forces in the formulation and execution of British imperial and foreign policy.

"The three men who were thus engaged were already well known in England. The leader was Cecil Rhodes, fabulously wealthy empire-builder and the most important person in South Africa. The second was William T. Stead, the most famous, and probably also the most sensational, journalist of the day. The third was Reginald Baliol Brett, later known as Lord Escher, friend and confidant of Queen Victoria, and later to be the most influential advisor of King Edward VII and King George V.

"The details of this important conversation will be examined later. At present we need only point out that the three drew up a plan of organization for their secret society and a list of original members. The plan of organization provided for an inner circle, to be known as 'The Society of the Elect,' and an outer circle, to be known as 'The Association of Helpers.' Within the Society of the Elect, the real power was to be exercised by the leader, and a 'Junta of Three.' The leader was to be Rhodes, and the Junta was to be Stead, Brett and Alfred Milner. In accordance with this decision, Milner was added to the society by Stead shortly after the meeting we have described.

"The creation of this secret society was not a matter of a moment. As we shall see, Rhodes had been planning for this event for more than seventeen years. Stead had been introduced to the plan on 4 April 1889, and Brett had been told of it on 3 February 1890. Nor was the society thus founded an ephemeral thing, for, in modified form, it exists to this day. From 1891 to 1902, it was known to only a score of persons. During this period, Rhodes was the leader, and Stead was the most influential member. From 1902 to 1925, Milner was leader, while Philip Kerr (Lord Lothian) and Lionel Curtis were probably the most important members. From 1925 to 1940, Kerr was leader and since his death in 1940 this role has probably been played by Robert Henry Brand (now Lord Brand)."

Using historical archives, and cross-gridding an enormous amount of data, Quigley traced the evolution of the conspiracy. He identified the original Cecil Rhodes Trust as the first institutional expression of the conspiracy. The Rhodes Trust, as spelled out in Rhodes' last will and testament, established a scholarship program, aimed at recruiting leading young Americans into their Venetian scheme. The Rhodes Trust spawned a larger organization, known as the Milner Kindergarten, which, in turn, established the Round Table, a public journal for the conspirators, and the Royal Institute of International Affairs, which, in turn, spawned a series of institutions all over the British Empire, and in the United States (the New York Council on Foreign Relations). At all times, the extended Rhodes-Milner group controlled the editorial policy of the London Times, and used All Souls College at Oxford as their private finishing school, and research and propaganda hub.

The details of this evolution need not be summarized here. The purpose of this review is not, after all, to provide a Monarch Notes summary of the findings of The Anglo-American Establishment, but, rather, to take the reader beyond the conspiracy as spelled out by Quigley to a deeper level, more appropriate to the present crisis in U.S. political affairs.

Instead, it is worthwhile to merely highlight several of the leading "facts" presented by Professor Quigley and then move on to the deeper point, which these crucial facts help to explain.

The Milner Group 'Writ Large'
In his chapter dealing with the Royal Institute of International Affairs, Quigley provides a blunt summary: "The Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA)," he wrote, "is nothing but the Milner Group 'writ large.' It was founded by the Group, has been consistently controlled by the Group, and to this day is the Milner Group in its widest aspect. It is the legitimate child of the Round Table organization, just as the latter was the legitimate child of the 'Closer Union' movement organized in South Africa in 1907. All three of these organizations were formed by the same small group of persons, all three received their initial financial backing from Sir Abe Bailey, and all three used the same methods for working out and propagating their ideas (the so-called Round Table method of discussion groups plus a journal). The similarity is not an accident. The new organization was intended to be a wider aspect of the Milner Group, the plan being to influence the leaders of thought through The Round Table and to influence a wider group through the RIIA."

After detailing the founding meeting of the RIIA "at a joint conference of British and American experts at the Hotel Majestic on 30 May 1919," Quigley noted that, "The American group of experts, 'the Inquiry,' was manned almost as completely by persons from institutions (including universities) dominated by J.P. Morgan and Company. This was not an accident. Moreover, the Milner Group has always had very close relationships with the associates of J.P. Morgan and with the various branches of the Carnegie Trust. These relationships, which are merely examples of the closely knit ramifications of international financial capitalism, were probably based on the financial holdings controlled by the Milner Group through the Rhodes Trust. The term 'international financier' can be applied with full justice to several members of the Milner Group inner circle, such as Brand, Hichens, and, above all, Milner himself."

Lord Brand, whom Quigley identified as the head of the Rhodes doge system, from 1940 until his death in the early 1960s, was the chairman of the London branch of Lazard Brothers Bank. Lazard was at the epicenter of the entire Rhodes/Milner/Round Table scheme, and was, as EIR has documented in recent years, a key bridge to the continental European fascist operations known in France as the Synarchy (the Banque Worms Group), and to Wall Street. Lord Brand designated his replacement at the head of London Lazard as his successor, as well, within the Round Table group, thus carrying the conspiracy well beyond the time frame covered in Quigley's book. Further highlighting the role of Lazard in the still-ongoing Venetian scheme, Quigley appended a "Tentative Roster of the Milner Group," including the Society of the Elect, the Association of Helpers, and a small list of foreign members. Quigley only listed four Americans, clearly reflecting his meticulous attention to detail, and his refusal to draw any speculative conclusions that could not be substantially backed up by historial records. The four Americans were: George Louis Beer, a wealthy tobacco magnate who wrote a series of late 19th- and early 20th-Century laudatory histories of the British colonial system and its role in shaping American policy; Frank Aydelotte, the President of Swarthmore College, a Rhodes Scholar, and the historian of the first 40 years of the Rhodes Scholarship; Jerome Greene of Columbia University; and Clarence Streit.

Streit was a leading American proponent of union with Great Britain. He wrote a famous tract, Union Now, and launched a movement to bring this about. The fact that Professor Quigley named him as one of only four proven American members of the Rhodes/Milner inner core is of significance in its own right. The revelation that Streit was the father-in-law and leading mentor of Lazard Brothers banker Felix Rohatyn is invaluable, in that it opens a window into the Round Table schemes, extended up to the present day. Rohatyn, along with his longtime collaborator George Shultz, personifies the present efforts of this Anglo-American apparatus—an effort that is at once viciously aimed at the destruction of the United States as a sovereign power, and sophisticated. Shultz was the architect of the current Bush-Cheney Administration, and has been the guiding hand behind every hideous policy to come out of the White House since 2001. Rohatyn, for his part, has been a one-man wrecking ball inside the Democratic Party, operating behind the scenes from his boutique Wall Street investment house to destroy the last shreds of the U.S. high-tech industrial base and promoting the takedown of the government role in the maintenance and development of the nation's vital infrastructure.

What Quigley Didn't Write
Virtually any criticism of Quigley's masterful work must fall within the domain of what he did not say. This reviewer is not in a position to judge whether Quigley failed to distinguish between the American and British systems because of a genuine lack of familiarity with the subject, or because he chose to leave certain historical principles unstated and implicit. Perhaps former President Bill Clinton, a Georgetown University student of Professor Quigley, could shed further light on this. For now, it is vital to rescue Quigley's work from the grips of American populists, by filling out certain crucial summary matters that complete the picture.

During the last decades of the 18th Century and throughout the 19th Century, it was widely recognized that the newly established American Constitutional republic represented an alternative to the European oligarchical model of rule by a small elite. Following the groundbreaking work of the first U.S. Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton, the American System of political economy came to be associated with national banking, sovereign credit, the investment in critical infrastructure, and the use of protective tariffs to defend the development of a national agro-industrial economy to promote the general welfare. Nineteenth-Century American economists like Mathew and Henry Carey, and some European students of the American System, like Germany's Friedrich List, developed the American System as the alternative to the British System of free trade, slavery, and suppression of colonial development.

From the moment that the American Revolution succeeded in freeing the North American colonies from the British imperial yoke, leading British circles, typified by the Baring Bank and British East India Company's Lord Shelburne, sought to recapture the United States. Following their military defeats in the War of 1812 and the U.S. Civil War, the British elites were forced to begrudgingly accept that the United States had emerged as such a leading agro-industrial power, that reconquest was no longer remotely possible. Following the completion of the Trans-Continental Railroad in 1869, the United States consolidated a continental republic, further underscoring the strength of the U.S.A. and the American System.

At that point, leading British circles determined that the only path to reconquest was to destroy the United States, politically, economically, and philosophically, from within. The launching of institutions like the Rhodes Trust and the British Fabian Society, aimed precisely at this objective, and the task was set out over a succession of generations.

At the same time, the post-Civil War U.S.A. was busy spreading the American System around the world, particularly in continental Eurasia. By the final decades of the 19th Century, the American System had taken root in many parts of continental Eurasia, from the Germany of Bismarck, to the Russia of Count Witte and Mendeleyev, to the Japan of the Meiji Restoration, and the China of Sun Yat-sen.

While Professor Quigley focussed his attention on the British efforts to subvert and recapture the United States, the British also took very aggressive action to kill off the American System thrust into Eurasia. Under Prince Edward Albert ("The Prince of the Isles"), later King Edward VII, the British launched a series of manipulated wars—in the Balkans and in the Far East—that led shortly to World War I. The purpose of all of these efforts was to defeat the spread of the American System. Virtually no account of the Balkan Wars, the Sino-Japanese War or the Russo-Japanese war makes any link to the extraordinary late 19th Century spread of the American System into Eurasia. This is a major weakness in the histories of this period.

Beginning in 1901, following the assassination of President William McKinley by a British-sponsored anarchist, Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson promoted the idea of an Anglo-American alliance, British Fabianism, and other manifestations of the Round Table project. By the mid-1920s, the United States had entered into a period of cultural and economic disintegration, brought about by the promotion of free trade, unbridled speculation, and a variety of culturally degenerate projects.

FDR Revives the American System
Nevertheless, when Franklin Roosevelt was elected President in November 1932, he was able to revive the American System and rapidly reverse the decades of degeneration. Had FDR survived to serve out his fourth term, there is little doubt that he would have devoted his post-World War II efforts to the dismantling of the European colonial empires, as he vowed in a series of confrontations with Churchill during the war-time summit meetings in Halifax, Casablanca, Tehran, and Yalta.

The deeper lesson for the British in the successful FDR revival of the American System was that the cultural underpinnings of the American republic were strong enough, still, to carry forward the fundamental principles of the American Founders, even after years of erosion, and even with deeply flawed, and even traitorous figures in the Presidency.

The FDR legacy, particularly in the form of the Bretton Woods System, had to be gutted, and the industrial foundations of the United States destroyed altogether, if the Round Table agenda was ever to be realized.

In 1960, when John F. Kennedy was elected President, on the basis of a promise to revive FDR, the British again moved to literally exterminate the threat. Kennedy was assassinated, along with brother Robert Kennedy and Rev. Martin Luther King. Richard Nixon became President in January 1969, and within two years, under the guiding hand of British Round Table agents Shultz and Henry Kissinger, Nixon dismantled FDR's Bretton Woods System, and opened the U.S. economy—and the world—to a 35-year period of looting and disintegration.

Now, with the Bush-Cheney Presidency in its waning months, the greatest threat to humanity is that the British "invisible hand" behind this regime will move to finish off the United States—from within. It is for this reason, above all, that Cheney must be removed from office as the first step towards restoring the American System tradition, and proving the durability and superiority of the republican system.

THE PEACE TRAIN BLAST: FORENSIC TRAIL

One does not know whether the platform of the old Delhi station from which the train left has a closed circuit TV. If it had, an examination of the film should help in identifying persons, who were carrying suit cases similar to the one recovered from the train. Once this train leaves Delhi, no passenger can board it in the intermediate stations till it reaches Attari on the Indo-Pakistan border. It has, therefore, been presumed by many analysts that the perpetrators must have placed the suit-cases containing the IEDs at the Delhi railway station. The other possibility is that the perpetrators might be having accomplices in the railway staff and might have used them to have the suit-cases placed at the intermediate stations.



By B. Raman

In terrorism-related cases involving the use of improvised explosive devices (IEDs), the break-through in the investigation often comes from the forensic, documentary and other trails left by the terrorists. The successful investigation and prosecution of the Mumbai blasts of March, 1993, by the Mumbai Police was attributable to the forensic trail left by the terrorists in the form of one unexploded IED and some abandoned hand-grenades and AK-47 rifles and documentary trail in the form of the entry of their real names in the passenger manifests of the flights by which they went to Pakistan for training and fled to Dubai after the explosions.

2. The success of the London Police in identifying the perpetrators of the blasts of July 7, 2005, was made possible by the films of the closed circuit TV in the railway stations in which the terrorists had boarded the trains, which they blew up. The even greater success of the British investigators in respect of the planned, but unsuccessful blasts of July 21, 2005, was made possible by the fact that the IEDs malfunctioned.

3. The difficulties faced by the Delhi Police in the investigation of the blasts of October 29, 2005, in a market of Delhi and by the Mumbai Police in the investigation of the suburban train blasts of July, 2006, are due to the fact that there was no malfunctioning of the IEDs and, as a result, there was no forensic break-through. The Mumbai blasts are considered a highly-sophisticated operation because there was not a single failure and the terrorists had taken great pains to cover up their tracks. As a result, the Police have been forced to rely on interrogation of suspects and narco-analysis. These, though important, do not have the same credibility in the eyes of international experts. Hence, the continued skepticism abroad in accepting the conclusions of the Mumbai Police.

4. The blasts on the Delhi-Attari Samjotha Express (Peace Express) on the night of February 18, 2007, are remarkable for the success as well as the failures of the terrorists. Their diabolic success is evident from the fact that two of the IEDs, reportedly attached to bottles containing incendiary material, functioned without a mishap, causing a carnage in which 67 passengers---mostly Indian and Pakistani Muslims---perished. Their surprising failure is evident from the fact that at least a half of their IEDs failed to explode and has been recovered by the railway authorities. According to some reports, they had planted a total of five IEDs of which three failed to function. According to others, they had planted four IEDs, of which two failed.

5. These IEDs recovered intact can provide the investigators with a valuable forensic trail in the form of fingerprints, the identification of the explosive material used, and the origin of the explosive material, detonators, timers and the suitcases in which the IEDs and the bottles containing the incendiary material were kept. So many failed IEDs should normally be a surprise in the case of well-trained, clued-up and experienced terrorists. The perpetrators of the London blasts of July 7, 2005, had these qualities and, as such, they did not have a single failure. The perpetrators of the attempted blasts of July 21, 2005, in London did not have these qualities and hence failed. The failures of the perpetrators of Deewana could indicate a possibility---remote at present--- that they were new to this business of terrorism---either new recruits of old and well-established organisations or new recruits of new organisations. A systematic follow-up of the forensic trail left by them should help in determining their identity in course of time.

6. One does not know whether the platform of the old Delhi station from which the train left has a closed circuit TV. If it had, an examination of the film should help in identifying persons, who were carrying suit cases similar to the one recovered from the train. Once this train leaves Delhi, no passenger can board it in the intermediate stations till it reaches Attari on the Indo-Pakistan border. It has, therefore, been presumed by many analysts that the perpetrators must have placed the suit-cases containing the IEDs at the Delhi railway station. The other possibility is that the perpetrators might be having accomplices in the railway staff and might have used them to have the suit-cases placed at the intermediate stations.
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: itschen36@gmail.com)

People’s Resistance Movement of Iran rejects allegations of Alquida ties

IntelliBriefs received this statement from People’s Resistance Movement of Iran (former Jondollah of Iran )which categorically rejected ties to western governments and also Alquida .



Statement of People’s Resistance Movement of Iran (former Jondollah of Iran ) to Media & International community

After our recent defensive measures to prevent the Islamic Republic of Iran from the genocide of Baloch people, some news media have published certain allegations that we categorically reject. People’s Resistance Movement of Iran (former Jondollah of Iran ) is a defensive organization that has been formed to campaign for freedom and democracy in Iran and to protect the Baloch people and other religious and ethnic minorities.

Our mission is to change the present regime and establish a new system in Iran in which every Iranian enjoys equal opportunity and equal rights. We have undertaken to accept the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and all other United Nations conventions on resolutions. We only act in self-defence and whenever the Iranian regime kills an innocent Iranian, we act in accordance to all United Nations conventions that allow people and nations to defend themselves against aggression and genocide.

We strive to force the Iranian regime to abandon its brutal policies against the Baloch people and other Iranian citizens. We campaign to stop discrimination, brutality, injustice, corruption and ethnic cleansing in Iran.

We categorically announce that we have no any kind of relationships and links with Alqaedah, Taleban and other fundamentalist groups. We categorically announce that we have no any kind of relationships with foreign countries including the United States of America and the United Kingdom. We do not receive any support, arms, ammunition, training and financial help from any country.In such conditions it is not easy for us to live peacefully. Yet, we have been able to maintain our independence in such important geopolitical centre and battlefield.

The fact that the Iranian regime labels us as the agents of Taleban, Alqaedah, the United States of America and the United Kingdom clearly demonstrates that we cannot be part of Taleban and a friend of America at the same time. We cannot be a member of Alqaedah and also a friend of United Kingdom and other Western countries. The Iranian regime has underestimated the potentials of the Baluch people and therefore, has to find an excuse for the killing of the Baloch people. We have a moral right to defend ourselves, our community, our nation and our country. It is the Iranian regime that is dealing with different terrorist groups and foreign countries.

Thousands of Baloch people have been killed by Iranian regime and so far the United Nations and other international organizations have never raised their voice against the discrimination and genocide that the Islamic Republic of Iran has been committing in our land.

We were a civil society that was forced into armed struggle by the Iranian regime. We commit ourselves to restart our civil campaign as soon as the conditions in Iran allows.

As our recent operations proved that the Iranian regime is too weak to defend itself. It is much less powerful than what it pretends to be. The Iranian security guards and their elite have become aware of the regime's brutality and corruption and therefore, they are not prepared to defend this regime anymore. All of those security forces that have been arrested by us have confessed that the Iranian regime is financing terrorism in the region because it is too weak from within to defend itself and therefore, it needs other proxies to defend it.

People’s Resistance Movement of Iran
(former Jondollah of Iran )

February 19, 2007

Blast in Samjotha Express in DEEWANA : Experts say NO to peace process


THE DEEWANA INCIDENT

by B. Raman

Incident
I am strongly against the Indo-Pakistan peace process as carried on by the present Government in New Delhi. It is playing into the hands of Gen. Pervez Musharraf and his horde of jihadi terrorists whom he and Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) have been using to make India bleed. At the same time, I am against postponing the so-called peace process because that would be interpreted by the terrorists as a major success for them. By all means continue talking with Pakistan, but talk strongly and make it clear that till terrorism stops, there will be no progress on other issues. Discontinue the joint counter-terrorism mechanism fraud sought to be perpetrated by Musharraf on us. Discard the softness which has crept into our counter-terrorism policies and in our diplomacy. Strengthen the hands of the Police, give them the required special powers and let them have a free hand in their investigations.


Sixty-six innocent civilians were killed following explosions in two coaches of the Samjotha Express going from Old Delhi to Attari on the Indo-Pakistan border around midnight on February 18, 2007. The incident took place near the railway station Deewana, about 100 kms from Delhi. This train was started in 1975 to facilitate travel by poor Muslims in the two countries to visit their relatives. The train from Delhi to Attari generally carries Indian Muslims going to visit their relatives in Pakistan and Pakistani Muslims (mainly Mohajirs) returning to Pakistan after visiting their relatives in India. It should not, therefore, be a cause for surprise if many of those killed are reported to be Muslims.


At the morgue in the nearby town of Panipat, bodies were laid out in blue bags between huge slabs of melting ice. Officials said about 30 of the bodies were charred beyond recognition.

"I have been working here for 25 years and I have never seen anything like this," said nurse Rohtas Singh. "Some bodies don't have legs, some don't have arms, some have no faces. Some you can't even make out if they are men or women." -- http://www.alertnet.org/


2. It has been reported that fire engulfed the two coaches after one or two explosions. Thus, fatalities would seem to have been caused as much by the explosions as by the fire. V N Mathur, the General Manager of the Northern Railways, has been quoted as saying that two suitcases were recovered from the spot -- one on the rail track and one from the train. Both the suitcases contained improvised explosive devices (IEDs).According to him, one of them also had incendiary material, either kerosene or petrol.

3. Presuming that these accounts of one or two explosions caused by IEDs are correct, the Deewana incident resembles the Mumbai blasts of July, 2006, in three respects---the terrorists attacked a soft target; it was an act of mass casualty terrorism; and they chose a train as their target. There are two major differences. In Mumbai, the terrorists attacked different suburban trains with a multiplicity of well-timed and well-orchestrated explosions. This required a high degree of sophistication. In the Deewana explosion, there is so far no evidence of such sophistication. When one attacks different suburban trains, one is sure of killing many people, but the killing is indiscriminate and not targeted. At Deewana, they have attacked one inter-city train, by which many Indian and Pakistani Muslims travel. It was a targeted attack, with the knowledge that many Muslims were likely to be killed. From the point of view of targeting Muslims, the Deewana explosion resembles the Malegaon explosion of September 8, 2006, in which many Muslims were killed. However, at Malegaon, there was no attack on trains or other means of transport. The IEDs were kept near a mosque. The level of sophistication at Malegaon was higher than the one at Deewana, but lower than what one had seen at Mumbai.

4. It is important for the experts to have a look at the modus operandi, targeting and motivation in all these explosions at Mumbai, Malegaon and Deewana. They should not be treated as separate incidents unconnected with each other.

5. The suburban trains of Mumbai and the targets of attack at Malegaon were not politically significant targets. The Samjota Express was. It is an important and the oldest component of the confidence-building architecture, which has come up between India and Pakistan. Except between 2002 and 2005, when it had remained suspended following the attempted attack on the Indian Parliament by Pakistani terrorists in December 2001, it had functioned fairly well, much to the convenience of poor Muslims in the two countries. it is not a train of the affluent elite. It has been the preferred mode of transport of poor people, who cannot afford to travel by air or road.

6. The timing of the Deewana attack is intriguing. It took place a day before the visit of the Pakistani Foreign Minister Khursheed Mahmood Kasuri to New Delhi for talks with his Indian counterpart.

7. One has to await further evidence before assessing who might have been responsible for the Deewana tragedy. The Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET), the Pakistani jihadi terrorist organisation, and its Indian collaborator the Students' Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) were found responsible for the Mumbai explosions. The SIMI was reportedly found responsible for the Malegaon explosions. One does not as yet have any idea as to who might have been responsible for the Deewana incident.

8. I am strongly against the Indo-Pakistan peace process as carried on by the present Government in New Delhi. It is playing into the hands of Gen. Pervez Musharraf and his horde of jihadi terrorists whom he and Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) have been using to make India bleed. At the same time, I am against postponing the so-called peace process because that would be interpreted by the terrorists as a major success for them. By all means continue talking with Pakistan, but talk strongly and make it clear that till terrorism stops, there will be no progress on other issues. Discontinue the joint counter-terrorism mechanism fraud sought to be perpetrated by Musharraf on us. Discard the softness which has crept into our counter-terrorism policies and in our diplomacy. Strengthen the hands of the Police, give them the required special powers and let them have a free hand in their investigations.

(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: itschen36@gmail.com)

February 18, 2007

Sachar report defies logic, Muslims are better off

Tales of backwardness and creation of political myths

There is the unique case of the Hindus of India’s Kashmir: about 10 per cent of the population in 1947, they have been reduced to a tiny number (5,000). The rest numbering about 4,00,000 have been compelled to abandon their home and hearth and made refugees in their own land.

While Hindu population is falling steadily, the Muslim population is increasing. This is too well known.
The series of reports on the under-representation of the Muslims in services etc (obviously being presented as a monolithic community) and their over-representation in the jails and more such disclosures through the Sachar Committee’s report, are meant to portray the overall image of a deprived community while implying that the Hindus in post-Partition India have an over-representation in services and other arenas, which is neither warranted by history nor by their number.

But first, the very methodology of producing this genre of statistics and its derivatives, which leave out the context and other parameters. In this arithmetic, it is imperative to calculate what the Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Christians have lost for ever in what are now Pakistan and Bangladesh. Their losses were entirely appropriated by the Muslims. This never happened in India. The relative position of religious communities in India can never be seen in isolation: that would make sense only when the overall scenario—the political status, economic condition as well as the security concerns of both Hindus and Muslims in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and also in India’s Kashmir—is taken into account. While Pakistan and Bangladesh have carried out a religious and ethnic cleansing of its minorities, the Muslim population in India continues to rise at a rate higher than that of the Hindus.

Since the Muslim community looks at itself as a part of the fraternity of the believers world-wide, they are generally concerned at the fate of the Muslims outside India. This prompted Gandhiji to take up the Khilafat issue. That justifies rallies against Bush when he visits India but red carpet for Musharraf. Hence GoI espouses the Palestinian cause while smothering the horrible plight of the Hindus, Buddhists and Christians in Pakistan and Bangladesh. Softness towards the latter are explained because of the exigencies of the vote-bank politics and the role of petro-dollar. It is because of this umbilical chord that Pakistan keeps harping on the “plight” of the Muslims in India.

The projection of the Muslims as the only losing community is unconvincing if the totality of the picture is not smothered. Historic problems can’t be viewed from arbitrarily selected starting points.

Additionally, there is the unique case of the Hindus of India’s Jammu and Kashmir: about 10 per cent of the population in 1947, they have been reduced to a tiny number (5000). The rest numbering about 4,00,000 have been compelled to abandon their home and hearth and made refugees in their own land. Now eking out a miserable living in the refugee camps of Jammu and elsewhere for more than 16 years, they have been resorting to distress sell-off of their ancestral properties to the Muslims of the Kashmir Valley for a pittance.

While the Jews can return to Germany now and re-establish their synagogues and claim their property back, and the Asians of Uganda can return, that option is firmly closed to the Kashmiri Hindu refugees. Even after this, a central minister from Kashmir wants a reservation for Muslims!

Muslims of India on the whole are better off, more secure than the Hindus of Kashmir Valley. The point is some minorities are different from other minorities and some majorities are different from other majorities.

A look at this chart would further clarify this enigma of the “persecuted” minorities and “pampered” majorities.

The top three positions in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh:

President, Prime Minister and Army Chief

India: Muslim, Sikh, Sikh

Pakistan: Muslim, Muslim, Muslim

Bangladesh: Muslim, Muslim, Muslim

In India’s case, it needs to be noted that Sonia (nee Maino) Gandhi, an Italian-born is the Chairperson of the ruling UPA. That is, she is the de facto head of the government. Her most trusted political advisor is Ahmad Patel

So the share of Hindus (%) in what is called the Indian sub-continent for the top jobs is nil.

Additionally the Deputy Chief of the armed forces in India happens to be a Muslim and how about the comparable figures in Pakistan and Bangladesh? As for some other prestigious positions:

Chairman of the Central Public Service Commission, which recruits the elite civil services:

India: Muslim

Pakistan: Muslim

Bangladesh: Muslim

Chief of the National Planning Commission:

India: Sikh

Pakistan: Muslim

Bangladesh: Muslim

Chief of the Election Commission:

India: Muslim

Pakistan: Muslim

Bangladesh: Muslim

Here also the Hindu share (%) is nil.

Last but not the least, the cricket teams in this part of South Asia:

India: Out of 16 players currently playing there are five Muslims.

Pakistan: So far only two Hindus have played for Pakistan (in 59 years).

Bangladesh: Only two Hindus have played so far but now they are out of the team.

I am leaving out the “heroes” from the filmdom and the advertisement world in India which are conspicuously getting bereft of Hindus. If that does not mean much, as some would say, why not name the number of non-Muslims recognised in those fields in Pakistan and Bangladesh?

Population figures: While Hindu population is falling steadily, the Muslim population is increasing. This is too well known.

In all, it may be said, very definitively that Hindus as a community are losing political power and clout very rapidly in a “shrinking and shrunken India”, and would lose whatever is still left in their hands. Having been victors all along, the Muslims can’t claim to be hapless victims now.

Those who tend to compare the plight of the Blacks in the USA with the Muslims in India are oblivious of history and logic. The Blacks were imported by the Whites as slaves unlike the Muslims who came as invaders and converted the local people. The Black minority has neither ruled the USA nor has it partitioned its country.

Our market-savvy pundits would say that despite the steady political/demographic decline of the Hindus, some of them are very resourceful and so there is nothing to worry. History provides many examples when money-power without the backing of politico-military support just withered away. Moreover, the number of prosperous Muslims is quite substantial. It would be quite revealing to see the percentage of the Hindus in the ever-growing list of the farmers committing suicides in Vidarbha, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and even in the communist-ruled West Bengal

Their socio-economic under-development is explained by social, psychological, political, historical and demographic factors. They also suffers because of their obsessions and misplaced priorities. The Muslim under-representation is also explained by their larger families and fascination for the madrasa.

Poverty of the people (Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, neo-Buddhists, etc) is caused by the phoney policies for the underprivileged, like the “socialistic” policies enforced by the “secular” dispensations without creating jobs.

Number game can help in making identity in politics, as it did before partition, but can never become the criterion for any unfair communal entitlements now. It may be recalled that the Jews with 0.21 per cent of the world population have got 22 per cent of all Nobel Prizes. So, how about a campaign against this “anomaly” first?

(The writer teaches history at Hansraj College, University of Delhi and is a former Member of ICSSR, a former Post Doc Research Scholar, University of London, and Visiting Fellow, Dept of Politics, University of Hull.)
---------------------------------Morebelow:--------------------http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=163&page=11 This is how Pakistan tackles its minorities

Pakistan’s Punjabi-dominated army in search of the elusive purity and to perpetuate its hold on power structures encourages the majority Punjabi Sunni population in its misadventures. In pursuit of power, the bogey of threat from India was conjured.
Pakistan, on its creation in 1947, had approximately 13 per cent minorities residing within an Islamic population of 76 million. In its unholy fervour to achieve physical instead of the spiritual purity, the minorities were reduced to 2.5 per cent even as the country’s population soared to 156 million by the year 2000.

In any society, it is the minorities that play the crucial role of moderation. Their existence is a safeguard against extreme tendencies. Pakistan lost the benefit of this natural societal instrument of balance early in its history. Once the minorities, more or less, were out of the way, Pakistan’s Punjabi Sunni population, which not only constituted the majority but also controlled the instruments of power in the state, turned to killing Shias, expelling Ahmadiyas from Islam, denying basic rights to the Balochis, depriving Sind of water resources, and suppressing population in the Pakistan-occupied Kashmir including Northern Areas. Under the clouds of Talibanisation, this became further skewed when the women who constitute nearly half the population were denied education and practically incarcerated in their homes—thus further impairing the societal balance. Simultaneously, Pakistan army and the ISI persisted with their destructive spree by exporting terrorism to India, SE Asia, Central Asia, EU and America—all in the name of religion! In the comity of nations, one can hardly find a parallel to this inherent self-destructive proclivity.

Pakistan’s Punjabi-dominated army in search of the elusive purity and to perpetuate its hold on power structures encourages the majority Punjabi Sunni population in its misadventures. In pursuit of power, the bogey of threat from India was conjured. In schools, children were indoctrinated to hate Indians. Therefore, the genesis of the Pakistan’s present fault line lies in the diabolically engineered mindset that has created multiple fault lines and which have now coalesced into one deep and divisive fault line running right across the length of the country, threatening its virtual vivisection into two halves.

The first major setback to Pakistan occurred 24 years after inception when it lost 55 per cent of its population in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) and almost half of its territory. Religion could not act as effective glue due to the insatiable avarice the Pakistan’s Punjabi army displayed in its refusal to share legitimate power with the eastern wing. Islamabad conveniently blames New Delhi for this separation but a closer scrutiny of facts reveals otherwise. Between 1947 and 1970, whenever Pakistan chose to attack India, the strategically simple option available to India could have been to annex East Pakistan, which Islamabad was never in a position to defend effectively due to the vast geographical distances and consequently the enormous military logistics involved. Nevertheless, New Delhi absorbed Pakistan’s attacks and localised it to its western front, never extending the war to the eastern theatre. With millions of refugees pouring into India in 1971, Islamabad made its position in East Pakistan untenable, and India was compelled to initiate positive action. Since occupation of territory was not the motive, Indian Army promptly withdrew after liberating Pakistan’s eastern wing from the miseries and atrocities being perpetrated by the western wing on its own people.

In 1950s, Hans J. Morgenthau, the then Director of Center for the Study of American Foreign Policy at University of Chicago, in his book The New Republic had observed, “Pakistan is not a nation and hardly a state. It has no justification, ethnic origin, language, civilisation or the consciousness of those who make up its population. They have no interest in common except one: fear of Hindu domination. It is to that fear and nothing else that Pakistan poses its existence and thus for survival as an independent state.” During the same period, another American scholar Keith Callard in his book Pakistan—A Political Study commented, “The force behind the establishment of Pakistan was largely the feeling of insecurity.” Both these scholars missed out on some vital aspects that can be attributed to the “fear of Hindu domination” and “insecurity”. First, creation of Pakistan was an Anglo-Saxon mischief to protect their vested strategic interests. Second, the land bestowed to create Pakistan was separated amicably without war. Third, the western powers, (and China that uses Pakistan as a proxy against India) fuelled these imagined fears that only created the effect of exacerbating latter’s psychological fault line. Therefore, explanations like “fear of Hindu domination” and “insecurity” and other excuses as justification are used as psywar tool to disguise Islamabad’s treachery against New Delhi since 1947. Indian Political Right does not indulge in ‘export of terrorism’ or ‘suicide bombers’ as an instrument of foreign policy!

After the break-up of Pakistan in 1971, West Pakistan should have emerged as a more cohesive unit—geographically, politically, economically and in orientation. However 33 years hence, nearly 55 per cent of Pakistan’s area is witnessing vicious insurgencies, which, if not controlled, could lead to further vivisection of the country. Most of the population in these areas, i.e. Waziristan, Balochistan, NWFP, and Northern Areas (Gilgit and Baltistan) in PoK has been historically difficult to control and administer. This notwithstanding, ever since Musharraf’s ascension to power, these areas have slipped from peripheral disquiet to intense insurgencies. Normal governance in these areas has collapsed and is being held only by military force. These multiple fault lines as explained subsequently, if not adequately addressed, can lead to internal strife and break-up of Pakistan.

The Pakistan government has also been using money to buy the allegiance of tribal leaders. Recently, the corps commander Lt. Gen. Safdar Hussain has publicly admitted to having paid Rs. 32 million (US $ 5,40,000) to some tribal leaders for severing their links with Al-Qaeda and Taliban.

BALOCHISTAN: The Balochistan province constitutes 44 per cent (347,190 sq. km.) of Pakistan’s landmass and has a population of 6.5 million, i.e. 4 per cent of Pakistan’s population. Only 70 per cent of Baloch are in Pakistan, the reminder being in Iran and Afghanistan. All the 22 districts of Balochistan are currently impacted by insurgency incurring an estimated cost of Rs. 6 million every month to the Pak establishment, and also resulting in severe gas and power shortages in the country, especially in Punjab. Gas supplies from Sui, Loti and Pir Koh gas fields have been disrupted. Surface transport has been crippled. Three naval boats have so far been destroyed in Gwadar port. Railways have been compelled to operate only at night. So far, on at least a dozen occasions, railway tracks have been blown and on more than two dozens occasions gas pipelines have been targeted.

NWFP: North West Frontier Province (NWFP) with an area of 74,521 sq.km. and a population of approximately 24 million in addition to 3 million Afghan refugees, is a problem in perpetuity because of the Pashtuns, who straddle the Durand Line (2450-km-long Pakistan-Afghanistan border). The relations between the NWFP and the central government are increasingly becoming tenuous, as the majority of the population is averse to Pakistan’s cooperation with the US against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. The area continues to be infested with fundamentalists and Islamic terrorists In fact, it is the fundamentalist Islamic parties that call shots in the province and lend all kinds of support to the remnants of Taliban.

PoK (NORTHERN AREAS): The Northern Areas comprising Gilgit and Baltistan have an area of 72,496 sq.km. and a population of 1.5 million, and is governed directly by the central government in Pakistan. In fact, the Northern Areas, which are actually a part of PoK, but incorporated in Pakistan, are five times of the area designated as Azad Kashmir. This area, culturally and linguistically much different from other parts of Pakistan, has been subjected to state-backed Sunni terrorism. The composition of the Northern Light Infantry Units is being re-engineered by the central government to make it Sunni dominant.

The Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), which witnessed devastating earthquake in which more than 70,000 people lost their lives, witnessed the administrative apathy of the central government in Pakistan with regard to the region. The Pakistan army unlike the Indian Army was unable to respond to the needs of the people—thus leaving much of the rescue and rehabilitation to 1000 NATO personnel and fundamentalist organisations like JuD.

Predicated on the situation in Pakistan, it can be averred that more than half the country has slipped into anarchy and the remaining may also follow if Islamabad does not carry out a drastic reassessment of its nationhood and statehood. In fact, Pakistan army is getting over- stretched owing to its commitments in internal security duties and deployment on its borders with India and Afghanistan. Internally, the anti-India catalyst that sustained Pakistan army is no longer effective. Even on the Afghanistan border the ISAF and Karzai are fiercely determined to defeat any attempt by Islamabad to re-export Taliban.

Today the internal instability within Pakistan is fast acquiring proportions that could lead to further break-up of the country—all due to sheer myopic policies pursued by its military junta. An external power today does not need to wage a war. It can simply exploit the precarious internal situation by using its intelligence agencies to attain the same objectives by fuelling the dissent through psywar and financial means. Fortunately, Pakistan has to contend with a benign power like India, which in the first instance created the former by magnanimously donating its land. Therefore, Islamabad instead of exporting hatred and destruction, should seek positive parity with India and others in terms of improving the quality of life of its citizens in an inclusive manner. Towards this Pakistan must:
Seek positive parity with India, i.e. with regard to human development. Negative parity will bleed Pakistan in human and economic terms.
Realise that Pakistani statehood has remained vulnerable due to flawed nation-building policies, e.g. Punjabi domination, which constitutes 58 per cent of the total population.
Realise that army can be a symbol of nationhood and an instrument and not the state itself.
Realise that Islamic terrorists are a double-edged weapon and can never get Pakistan its illusive nationhood and statehood.
Realise that by attempting to engineer history, the future is rendered in jeopardy.
Realise that Pakistan has the potential to be a positive role model for other Islamic countries.
It is a well-known fact that a large number of Islamic countries are bestowed with extraordinary oil wealth that drives the world economy. If the terror factory of Pakistan and other Islamic fundamentalist institutions had used this wealth to educate and modernise their societies and to improve the quality of human resources in the early eighties, at the dawn of the 21st century, it would have emerged as a modern, powerful and positive entity in the world arena without firing a single shot! Pakistan’s establishment therefore must realise that its possible vivisection, due to its flawed policies, may deal a fatal blow to the very Islamic cause, that it purports to countenance and guide. (The writer is editor, Indian Defence Review.)