Muslim India

RARE SHOW OF COURAGE BY THE TIMES OF INDIA


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Columnists/S_A_Aiyar_I-Day_for_Kashmir/articleshow/3372132.cms

Independence Day for Kashmir

17 Aug 2008, 0338 hrs IST,

By Swaminathan S Anklesaria Aiyar

On August 15, India celebrated independence from the British Raj. But Kashmiris staged a bandh demanding independence from India. A day symbolising the end of colonialism in India became a day symbolising Indian colonialism in the Valley.

As a liberal, i dislike ruling people against their will. True, nation-building is a difficult and complex exercise, and initial resistance can give way to the integration of regional aspirations into a larger national identity — the end of Tamil secessionism was a classical example of this.

I was once hopeful of Kashmir's integration, but after six decades of effort, Kashmiri alienation looks greater than ever. India seeks to integrate with Kashmir, not rule it colonially. Yet, the parallels between British rule in India and Indian rule in Kashmir have become too close for my comfort.

Many Indians say that Kashmir legally became an integral part of India when the maharaja of the state signed the instrument of accession. Alas, such legalisms become irrelevant when ground realities change. Indian kings and princes, including the Mughals, acceded to the British Raj. The documents they signed became irrelevant when Indians launched an independence movement.

The British insisted for a long time that India was an integral part of their Empire, the jewel in its crown, and would never be given up. Imperialist Blimps remained in denial for decades. I fear we are in similar denial on Kashmir.

The politically correct story of the maharaja's accession ignores a devastating parallel event. Just as Kashmir had a Hindu maharaja ruling over a Muslim majority, Junagadh had a Muslim nawab ruling over a Hindu majority. The Hindu maharaja acceded to India, and the Muslim nawab to Pakistan.

But while India claimed that the Kashmiri accession to India was sacred, it did not accept Junagadh's accession to Pakistan. India sent troops into Junagadh, just as Pakistan sent troops into Kashmir. The difference was that Pakistan lacked the military means to intervene in Junagadh, while India was able to send troops into Srinagar. The Junagadh nawab fled to Pakistan, whereas the Kashmir maharaja sat tight. India's double standard on Junagadh and Kashmir was breathtaking.

Do you think the people of Junagadh would have integrated with Pakistan after six decades of genuine Pakistani effort? No? Then can you really be confident that Kashmiris will stop demanding azaadi and integrate with India?

The British came to India uninvited. By contrast, Sheikh Abdullah, the most popular politician in Kashmir, supported accession to India subject to ratification by a plebiscite. But his heart lay in independence for Kashmir, and he soon began manoeuvering towards that end. He was jailed by Nehru, who then declared Kashmir's accession was final and no longer required ratification by a plebiscite. The fact that Kashmir had a Muslim majority was held to be irrelevant, since India was a secular country empowering citizens through democracy.

Alas, democracy in Kashmir has been a farce for most of six decades. The rot began with Sheikh Abdullah in 1951: he rejected the nomination papers of almost all opponents, and so won 73 of the 75 seats unopposed! Nehru was complicit in this sabotage of democracy.

Subsequent state elections were also rigged in favour of leaders nominated by New Delhi. Only in 1977 was the first fair election held, and was won by the Sheikh. But he died after a few years, and rigging returned in the 1988 election. That sparked the separatist uprising which continues to gather strength today.

Many Indians point to long episodes of peace in the Valley and say the separatists are just a noisy minority. But the Raj also had long quiet periods between Gandhian agitations, which involved just a few lakhs of India's 500 million people. One lakh people joined the Quit India movement of 1942, but 25 lakh others joined the British Indian army to fight for the Empire's glory.

Blimps cited this as evidence that most Indians simply wanted jobs and a decent life. The Raj built the biggest railway and canal networks in the world. It said most Indians were satisfied with economic development, and that independence was demanded by a noisy minority. This is uncomfortably similar to the official Indian response to the Kashmiri demand for azaadi.

Let me not exaggerate. Indian rule in Kashmir is not classical colonialism. India has pumped vast sums into Kashmir, not extracted revenue as the Raj did. Kashmir was among the poorest states during the Raj, but now has the lowest poverty rate in India. It enjoys wide civil rights that the Raj never gave. Some elections — 1977, 1983 and 2002 — were perfectly fair.

India has sought integration with Kashmir, not colonial rule. But Kashmiris nevertheless demand azaadi. And ruling over those who resent it so strongly for so long is quasi-colonialism, regardless of our intentions.

We promised Kashmiris a plebiscite six decades ago. Let us hold one now, and give them three choices: independence, union with Pakistan, and union with India. Almost certainly the Valley will opt for independence. Jammu will opt to stay with India, and probably Ladakh too. Let Kashmiris decide the outcome, not the politicians and armies of India and Pakistan.

Labels: brainwashing of India to project the whites over brown and black, Kashmir

What is the post-Ahmedabad Blast Scenario in India?


By Amaresh Misra


The Ahmedabad blasts mark a turning point in Indian political life. Till now, whenever and wherever a blast occurred, the blame was put squarely on Muslim terrorist organizations; there was unanimity amongst all major Indian political parties, whether in power or sitting in the opposition, over the central role played by Muslim extremist outfits in planning and executing lethal bomb blasts.

The situation was such that after every blast no matter if they happen to occur in Muslim areas, Muslim youths in their hundreds were picked up by the various State Police departments of the Indian Union. After the 11th July 2006 Mumbai blasts, hundreds of Muslims youths, most of them found innocent by the Mumbai Police later, were not only arrested without warrants but tortured as well. Similar was the case after terrorist attacks in Uttar Pradesh, the Malegaon and the Hyderabad Mecca Masjid blasts.

After each blast some obscure, new terrorist organization, which was never heard of before, and which was usually never heard of after as well, popped up to claim `responsibility' for violence. After the recent Ahmedabad blasts too the name of never heard of before `Indian Mujahideen' group popped up; the pattern was sickeningly similar and every secular indeed Indian feared for Muslim youths in Gujarat.

But suddenly, things started changing—the familiar pattern was disturbed; the UPA Government at the center appeared reluctant to toe the Gujarat BJP's Government line about the involvement of a Muslim organization executing the Ahmedabad blasts. Bombs started appearing in Surat and elsewhere in Gujarat—the police was conveniently informed about them before they could explode.

Then came the bombshell: BJP—the party which had always been the most strident about blaming `Islamic terrorism' for the blasts, the party which was in forefront of open Muslim persecution, the party which always demanded the most strict measures against not only terrorist organizations but often Muslims as a community, the party which advocated revoking draconian black acts like TADA and POTA, which suspended civil liberties and put Muslims in a dock—that party went on record to state that the Congress-UPA Government at the Center planned and executed and blasts in order to divert attention from the `cash for votes' scandal following the confidence vote in the Indian Parliament over the Indo-US nuclear deal.

The allegation is shocking all the more since the BJP is a known Muslim baiter—in the past, it has not only refused to listen to reason that how could a new Muslim organization pop up every time after each blast, but it has also been consistent in standing firm with Indian security agencies, however absurd their version might be on the arrest and torture of Muslim youths. In fact, in several cases, especially the 2001 attack on the Indian Parliament, the terrorist attack on the Red Fort, and the 11th July 2006 Mumbai blasts, the BJP appeared to have advanced knowledge of the events. Then in other cases, most famously in the Nanded blasts at Bajrang Dal Headquarters, bomb attacks in Vashi and Thane, Hindu terrorist outfits were found by the police to have been involved in executing blasts. Most of these organizations were affiliated to the BJP-RSS combine. The attack on RSS Headquarters in Nagpur turned out to be a hoax, a set-up where attacking terrorists, officially shot down by the Nagpur Police in an encounter, were found to be victims of `encounter deaths', about which even the Nagpur police was clueless; in Tamil Nadu, members of the Hindu Munaani, affiliated to the RSS have been charge-sheeted officially by the Tamil Nadu Police for planning the terrorist attack on RSS' Chennai head quarters.

Thus, accusations that blamed the BJP for organizing both the Bangalore and the Ahmedabad blasts for political mileage after the formation of the Mayawati-Left alliance threatened their 2009 electoral fortunes, carried credibility. In the past the BJP brushed these allegations off by blaming secular and `pro-Muslim' forces of planting `conspiracy theories'. Now in the post-Ahmedabad blast phase, the BJP itself is constructing a conspiracy theory, blaming the Congress Government for facilitating the attack! Has anyone ever heard of anything like this before?

For the first time in recent Indian history, the glare of terrorism, has shifted from Muslims; by accusing each other, both the Congress and the BJP are in a way promoting conspiracy theories; both these parties are also going out of their way to say that the attacks happened as part of a plan to shift focus away from a political objective.

Now Left and other secular forces have been saying time and time again that a deeper enquiry has to be conducted into the nature and pattern of Indian bomb blasts; that it is insufficient to blame Muslim extremist organizations; that the angle whether Hindu fundamentalist organizations or rogue and communal elements in various State and Central agencies might be involved in the blasts, should also be probed: subtle hints have been given out about the hand of foreign agencies as well; in a country which has seen the assassinations of two Prime Ministers in which the hand of foreign agencies is still suspected; where one of those Prime Minister (Indira Gandhi) went on record blaming CIA for conducting covert-subversive activities in India; in that country the possibility that a conspiracy exists first, to carry out bomb blasts and terrorist attacks by some forces or an alliance of forces—and then make Muslims a scapegoat—at the top—both within and outside India—cannot be discounted.

But in the past, the Left and secular forces making these points have been laughed at; now, after the BJP accusations, these very forces stand vindicated. The issue is not whether the BJP charge is true or false; the issue is that a mainstream political party, a known anti-Muslim force is blaming not Muslims but the Government of India; this is the time when all persecuted Muslims and secular elements ought to stand up and demand justice for injustices committed in the past; the fracas over the Ahmedabad blasts between two main Indian political parties reveal that there indeed is a big conspiracy—involving the BJP, Congress and even some elements of the Samajwadi Party at various levels—often in collusion but opposition as well—behind bomb blasts that keep happening in India. If secular elements miss this moment, in which there seems to be a momentary collapse of the subtle understanding between the BJP and the Congress over the Muslim persecution issue, then another similar opportunity might not come by for some time.

Labels: Ahmedabad Blasts, brainwashing of India to project the whites over brown and black, Indian Muslims

Thursday, July 31, 2008



A LETTER TO THE EDITOR



Sushma Swaraj breaks the conspiracy of silence



Incensed by the blatant display of defiance, the serial bomb blasts, however symbolic they may be, in the two BJP ruled state, within days of BJP's humiliating defeat in Lok Sabha trust vote, when several of its own members, so famously committed to BJP/RSS Hindutva ideology, defected to UPA side, Sushma Swaraj’s public statement during a TV interview was long a coming.


She directly blamed Congress for the bomb blasts in Gujarat. According to reports she alleged that the weekend blasts in Bangalore and Ahmedabad were a conspiracy to divert attention from the 'cash-for-vote' scandal. She said: The blasts are a conspiracy to divert attention from the cash-for-vote scandal, claiming that the incidents took place just a few days after the government won the trust vote. With a note of finality she added: "These are not off-the-cuff remarks. I mean what I say."



Coming from a front-ranking Member of Parliament of the opposition, blaming the ruling Congress party for organizing serial bomb blasts, in two highly industrialized states in India, where BJP is now ruling, it shook the whole political establishment in India. Fresh from the open resort to horse-trading in MPs switching over from various opposition parties, the blame of actually organizing bomb blasts in which Indian citizens were killed and injured is something Congress can hardly stomach lying low. It apparently showed how far the two major political groups have fallen apart in as much as both are blaming each other for high criminal acts of massacres of innocent people through mass murder devices.



However much it may be said, that while both the parties have gone over board in blaming each other, there can be no smoke without fire. Even though the outraged media, from Times of India to Indian Express, Economic Times, Asian Age, Hindustan Times, Free Press Journal, all wrote editorials on the appalling nature of Sushma charges, all their efforts to paper over the crimes of the past, could hardly be suppressed.



In fact, Congress has been widely known in Muslim circles, to be in active collaboration if not actually using RSS cadre, to organize communal riots, targeting Muslims all around the country, throughout the 60 years of independence and even during freedom struggle days. The Rajeshwar Dayal episode is all on record.



The Sushma Swaraj outburst is more credible, as Samajwadi Party has now joined Congress in the new bail out arrangement and the proximity of SIMI to Samajwadi Party who had lifted the ban of them in Uttar Pradesh when they were in power there, could be a new alternative to Hindutva cadre that Congress can now use as muscle power, whenever it may need them. It is this factor that is intensely galling to the BJP. It is the cry of the jilted.



For all practical purposes, the war on India that Narendra Modi, has spoken about has turned into a civil war and common people will be mute victims of the spectacular changes in Indian polity from now on, much more bloody, much more ruinous, much more divisive than India has seen in the past. As they say, chickens have come home to roost.



Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai
ghulammuhammed3@gmail.com
www.ghulammuhammed.wordpress.com

Labels: brainwashing of India to project the whites over brown and black

A LETTER TO THE EDITOR:

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE NEW YORK TIMES AND THE TIMES OF INDIA

According to MINT, The New York Times, noted in 900-word story that “even after the tortuous road to the nuclear agreement, Indian strategic relationship with the United State remains troubled by several major disagreement, including Indian policy on Iran and Myanmar.”

Will the day ever dawn, when The Times of India, runs a similar story, reporting the real sentiment of the people of India with words like:

“Even after the tortuous road to the nuclear agreement, Indian strategic relationship with the United State remains troubled by several major disagreement, including US policy on Iran, Myanmar, Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Sudan among several issue centering on war and peace, the role of United Nation, the reshaping of International Monetary Fund and World Bank, the issues of Human Rights of Guantanamo Bay captives and their torture in captivity, et al.”

Not till the present oligarchs are roundly defeated and India freed from their stranglehold.


Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai
ghulammuhammed3@gmail.com
www.ghulammuhammed.wordpress.com

Labels: brainwashing of India to project the whites over brown and black, Tale of Two National Newspapers, The New York Times and The Times of India

Wednesday, July 23, 2008

A LETTER TO THE EDITOR:


WILL INDIA BECOME A 'BONDED SLAVE COUNTRY' OF THE USA?


It is noteworthy that Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in his tabled speech in the Lok Sabha, complained about his Left coalition partners who supported his minority government for 4 years and two months, that 'they wanted him to behave as their bonded slave'.


It is reassuring to his countrymen, that at least the PM knows how it is to be felt like a 'bonded slave'.


However, it is strange that he never responded reassuringly to the overwhelming warnings by the people across all political affiliations and even common people, so clearly alerting him to the perception, if not the reality of his acting as a 'bonded slave' of US President Bush. He allowed the Iran vote twice, even against strongest public protests; and he sacked his senior ministers with very important portfolios of external affairs and Petroleum ministries, clearly under open US pressure.


Besides, the whole series of actions focusing on the efforts to conclude an Indo-Pak civilian nuclear deal, underpinned by US legislative constraints on India's independent foreign policy and its freedom to maintain a credible nuclear deterrent, has been such a secretive and clock and dagger operation, that no one should be blamed for imagining the worst, from such clandestine and/or dictatorial attempts that left the undeniable perception of making India, a 'bonded slave of the USA.


To compound the matter, not only he was personally behaving as a bonded slave of a warmonger dictator, with his the comprehensive legislated package that is tagged to the Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement, Prime Minister has made his entire nation as a bonded slave of America.


Is there some racist connotation to his preference for becoming a 'bonded slave' of a white foreign power rather being a bonded slave to his own brown countrymen?


We cannot discount the fact, that British colonizers had the advantage of their white colour, when they were initially welcomed by the people here; so deeply brainwashed into a servile racist caste hierarchy by the wily high-caste managers/collaborators.



Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai
ghulammuhammed3@gmail.com
www.ghulammuhammed.wordpress.com

Labels: Bonded Slave, brainwashing of India to project the whites over brown and black, Racist casteist of India