terrorism

United States of Elite versus Donald Trump : Sunni-Saudi-Anglo-Euro-Jihadi axis towards war.

Posted on August 23, 2017. Filed under: Afghanistan, Arab, Army, China, Communist, economics, economy, Egypt, Hindu, History, India, Iran, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Muslims, Pakistan, religion, Roman, Russia, Saudi, Shia, Sunni, Syria, Taleban, terrorism, Trump, UK, Ulema, US Presidential elections, USA, Wahabi |

Postulate One: European consumption levels could historically be only maintained by exploiting resources and productivity outside the self-defined territory of Europe (as in Roman expansion dependent on Egyptian grain and “barbarian” slave labour and fecundity).

Postulate Two: USA is an extension of western Europe as shaped in British state form revised under imagined and reconstructed Roman Republic with perceptions and constructions of both what is “European” and what is not – based on cumulative claims of history, both regional and global.

Postulate Three: Europe prioritizes consumption of its elite over ideology.

Most of what is happening now in the USA, in its politics, its legislative bodies, its government and state institutions – all the way to its attitudes towards and handling of or engagement with Islam, Middle East, and Asia can be deduced from the three postulates.

The Roman Republic generated several interesting phenomena that is rarely put in perspective when analyzing modern-day politics of the “western” world. The contest between the Plebs and the Patricians was a contest for power and say in state affairs between the increasingly self-aware Plebs (stemming from their co-option into the armies under people like Marius the uncle of Caesar in turn driven by elite hunger for land and slaves in the ever-expanding “periphery”) and the “Patri-cians” claiming descent from leading founding fathers of the historical Roman colony in Italy and who thereby had hogged the material and monetary benefits of the state formation exercise over the centuries. The Romans went through a phase of submission to non-Roman “rule” as well as “kingship” to finally overthrow “dynastic royalty” but evolving or recasting a new form of authoritarianism legitimized by representative bodies of people – closely followed in essence in the process of formation of USA.

All these are pretty well-known in standard history lessons: what is less discussed is how Roman institutions also institutionalized politico-financial corruption together with formation of well-organized coteries that infiltrated, and manipulated the Roman state institutions for combined business, political and power benefits – running almost as “organized crime”. In fact the model of “mafia” now popularized by Hollywood, typically labeled as originating in remnants of old Roman empire in the medieval such as “Sicily” or “Naples”, had their roots in the system of Roman knights/captains put in charge of various zones/districts of historical Rome. The blurred lines between ambitions of impoverished Patricians like that of the Caesars or the still wealthy Patrician Sulla, the stinking rich Crassus, or the yuppie military genius of a country bumpkin-from-peasant-north maternal uncle of Julius – Marius : they all formed a politically-financially-incestuous vicious competition of various groups of “mafia”.

Thus it is crucial to drop the Hollywood imagery of the “Godfather” and expand it in the reality of US politics on the more historical Roman “mafia” of the Republic and transition-to-empire phase of Rome. Such an “extended” mafia can be both “criminally organized” and “patriotic” or more “transnationally minded” just like the ancient Roman “mafia”.

The current phase can be thus understood as a phase of competition between two domestic groups of “mafia” (in the extended “Roman” sense I am using) where one side has grown close to the Sunni-Saudi interests over a cold-war, and inheritance of Indian Ocean geostrategic burdens of defunct British “political” empire (as in every mature and jaded “empire”, the formal fall of empire-state leaves behind a network of transnational finance and elite of ex-colonies connected firmly to an integrated shared “interests” with the ex-empires successor). This means this side shares the political and hence even religious biases of the Saudi Sunni axis which grew up under British imperial patronage as a supposed barrier to restrict the Ottoman grasp over the “passage” to India. This in turn led to panic scramble by then Russia and Europeans powers wary of the British to try and gain access to Indian Ocean aligning a veritable rivalry between “western” (France/UK) and “eastern” (Germany/Russia) Europe to push to the Persian Gulf. However the ancient contest for supremacy between the west and east of Euphrates that had once ended the Greeks and Cyrus’s house allowing Rome to grow, and similarly exhausted Byzantines and Parthians to allow Islamic jihad to flourish in the “frontier” no-mans land between the two sides – continued in the Arab versus Iran contest, and was used by the completely emasculated remnants of Arab tribes to reassert claims against the “east” and try to repeat their 7th century success using the British and French need to secure the Gulf.

Discovery of oil has gradually shifted the balance of power within the front of  Sunni-Saudi-“western” axis, and WWII drew up an extended “frontier” of two hostile “fronts” running roughly North-East – South-West from Balkans through Syria-Iraq into Persian gulf.

The “western” Anglo fear of Russian breakthroughs in this sector combined with Arab jealousy of the more pre-Islamic nationhood retaining Iran with all consequent better human capital not destroyed as much as in Saudis under mullahcracy – drove the US attempt at wooing Communist China away from USSR, in return China extracting economic entry into global capitalist flow, and an attempt to ring-fence Iran and central-Asian routes from Russia down south by encouraging Islamism in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

However even if this strategy largely succeeded in weakening USSR and led to its overthrow, two problems had been created for US “mafia”: the immensely financially networked with US Saudi lobby’s growing influence among the “mafia” and China’s capture of the US consumer market using its totalitarian state economy and control over Chinese labour. After US had to necessarily engage in the mop-up operations consequent to fall of USSR and Sunni-Saudi lobby’s grasping the opportunity to expand its long-held jihadi ambitions to revive Caliphate style re-conquest of the Middle East, and beyond, parts of US mafia must have realized the growing threat of China’s economy.

However during the long cold-war era, Sunni-Saudi axis had been allowed to become politically entrenched in influencing US foreign policy and thus in the US state institutions and its political class as well as in the instruments of ideological hegemony of modern states – like the media, academics of “humanities”. The faction of US mafia that realizes the supreme importance of China as a threat to their interests (by disrupting the mafia’s finger in the global – “outside of territory” economic exploitation) was the force that allowed someone like Donal Trump to come through. Looking from this perspective, it becomes clear why he had to be “promoted” – they needed an “outsider” or “outcast” or deemed “dilettante” political actor, therefore less likely to have been compromised by the existing pro-Sunni-Saudi pro-China cliques.

That the majority of US state institutions are waging a virtual but desperate war to remove “Trump” from power is simply a manifestation of the failure of the “cold-war” legacy portion of the administration and ideological establishment to grasp the drive and perhaps even realpolitik “sense/pragmatism” of the anti-China “patriotic mafia” as the need of the hour for “US” interests just as overthrow of USSR was in then US interests.

So Trump is being driven to make superficial “compromises” while he is trying to protect the underlying agenda of cutting China down to size. However the pro-Sunni-Saudi US mafia does not want China to be cut down to size as both the Saudis and the Chinese favour each other as hedges for their respective geostrategic ambitions. Saudis do not really want Pakistan to be cut down to size as Pakistan is most helpful in delegating tasks of wahabization and radicalization that serves Saudi geo-strategic ambitions while China does not want Pakistan to be harmed as Pakistan provides a corridor to Indian ocean as well as a useful jihadi counter-balance to India whose territory and population the Chinese see as an obstacle to their own imperial ambitions.

So even if Trump announces a troop increase in Afghanistan, the reality of the situation will simply help Saudi strategy for the zone. The Sunni jihadi assets were first tested on Syria – seen as a rival Shiite state, and on Iraq – but it quickly spiraled out of control revealing the extent of jihadism that Saudis have unleashed which even they can no longer fully control. Russian backing stalled overthrow of the Syrian regime, so that means the “western/European” and Saudi-Sunni jihadi assets need to be “saved” and protected by the pro-Saudi-mafia/European elite from total destruction so they can be unleashed against the real intended targets – Iran and Russia. This means there will be an attempt to carve out a “sovereign” protectorate style enclave for those dubbed “free Syrian army” on the eastern parts of Syria, thereby giving them breathing space and regrouping recouping as well as a Sunni buffer which in turn faces a Kurdi enclave on the east – thereby balancing each other and buffering each other. However the jihadis will be most effective in the greater anonymity of northern Afghanistan and even frontiers of Pakistan to be effective against Iran and Russia. Hence the bulk of the ISIS jihadis will be “helped” by “west” and Saudi-Sunni lobby to “escape” to northern Afghanistan.

US boots on the ground , in the hands of local networks of politics remaining from British imperial days – will effectively be a force that facilitates – willingly or unwillingly – the fall of the “north” to jihadis, while a “progressive” regime will gradually shrink to the south and east of the country around the big cities in the south even while under US “protection”.

The Saudi-Sunni penetration of the US state implies that Trumps “threat” to Pakistan will in effect have little impact. The Sunni-Saudi lobby has slightly different geo-political ambitions compared to what even the pro-Saudi lobby thinks it has. The Sunnis want a repeat of their seventh century jihadi performance – they want one sweep of continuous jihadi territory from Arabia through India into Indonesia in the east, and all the way to Gibraltar in North and Sub-Saharan Africa.

For myself, I see benefit in the expansion of Sunni jihad across Afghanistan and Pakistan and towards India. Jihad destroys pre-existing nationalisms – even the artificial and opportunistically foisted ones like that of Pakistan. It will also weaken the part of the modern Indian state that is ideologically and for other reasons, similar to the pro-Saudi lobby within US “mafia” and which can use state coercive resources to protect the Islamist interests against the non-Muslim majority of the country.  Any genuine resistance to jihad can only come from the vast non-Muslim populations of India but only when their state power actively is no longer able to protect the Islamic infrastructure and allows new state forces to come up that can resist and roll back jihadis back to where it started – in the deserts of Saudis. Jihadis expanding in north Pakistan and Afghanistan will also finally roll-back Chinese presence and effectiveness in this zone.

So the future is bleak and bright.

 

 

 

Advertisements
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The importance of preserving the Hindu “extreme”

Posted on March 12, 2017. Filed under: BJP, Hindu, History, India, Indian National Congress, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, religion, Tablighi, terrorism, Ulema, Uncategorized, Wahabi |

When the Indian National Congress (INC) started off in the late 1800’s as an elite club of landowners and entrepreneurs  its elite naturally went for “narampantha” (“soft path”) of pleasing the ruler to get crumbs as anti-narampantha would jeopardize their wealth/status by confrontation and retaliation by state. However it soon realized that unless it got the “common” “chota log” (literally “small people” used in a semi-derisive way to disparage the “lower status”) Hindu on its side, it would not have enough numbers to appear worth negotiating with.

But this meant a dilemma – how to keep the societal hierarchy of control over the “lowers” and prevent them from being “uppity” when realizing the power of their numbers in political mobilization. That problem was brilliantly solved by Gandhi’s almost-collaborative-with-Brits removal of Hindu-sadhus/babas who had been in the forefront of popular dissent/resistance against the Brit state, but which was also a threat to backers of Gandhi – as such movements showed the potential of decentralized, beyond-elite-control-from-above, Hindu “lower” mobilization, and which within colonial frame also threatened the economic gains that elite had maintained under new rulers. Simultaneously Gandhi and his coterie formulated the very first steps of Islam appeasement and recognition of both Ulemaic claim of sole control over Muslims and communal/separate “award” (as early as 1915/16).

The Ulema showed their strategic depth in recognizing the opportunity provided by the Hindu elite under Gandhian reformulation by setting one part of their own to act in collaboration with Gandhians ostensibly over Khilafat, but in doing so they could keep the pressure on INC not to go against core Islamic interests, especially where Islamic infra for future expansion was concerned. A part of this gain would also be in self-restriction and self-censorship by INC on any subtext of Hindu mobilization. Thus by selectively joining INC issues, the Muslim leadership secured INC restriction of “Hindu mobilization”, while protecting Islamic expansionist agenda and infra. Hindu elite in INC also recognized, that by playing along with Muslim leadership helped their own agenda of preventing Hindu mobilization which would empower the “lower”s.

Over time this meant that even if INC rode to power on Hindu mobilization it ultimately increasingly became a protector of Islamic interests for by its success in “eliminating” the “Hindu” side of mobilization, it could claim the “There is no alternative” factor later on, and Hindus became trapped in a vicious cycle of having to vote for a force that had betrayed every aspect of Hindu aspiration and even used “Hindu” infra/resources to help anti-Hindu forces and religions to expand at the cost of the Hindu. Its crucial not to allow the same process to repeat. The voices dubbed “fringe/extreme” simply because they talk of some purely Hindu aspiration and their aspirations pose an obstacle to imperialist expansionist and often predatory plans of totalitarian religions must not be allowed to be sidelined or ostracized, just because Hindu mobilization is helping political realignments.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Bangladesh as second base of Jihad on subcontinent

Posted on July 3, 2016. Filed under: Arab, Bangladesh, Bengal, Buddhists, Christians, Hindu, History, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Kashmir, Muslims, Pakistan, rape, religion, Saudi, Shahbag, slavery, Sunni, Taleban, terrorism, Wahabi |

Over the years, on this blog I have written several posts on Bangladesh and its role in Jihad on the subcontinent. On 1st July, jihadis confirming their Islamic credentials by shouting the customary laudatory exclamation by Muslims about their god, attacked the Holy Artesan Cafe near the posh Diplomatic Quarters of Dhaka, took hostages and stabbed/hacked to death most if not all of the 20 dead found later by the security forces. bbcnews

Abinta Kabir, Faraaz Hussein, and Tarushi Jain – three girls and all vacationing in Dhaka after their first year at US universities, were among those killed. While Abinta and Faraaz were Bangladeshi Muslims, Tarushi appears to be of Indian Hindu origins. Foreigners were separated from Bangladeshis and taken to an upper floor apparently for a Quran recitation test and torture. telegraph As per DailyStar Tarushi’s Indian origins is confirmed by the Indian Foreign ministers statements to the effect. The same site also states that Tarushi was a resident of Bangladesh but an Indian citizen, and her family had close personal friends among Dhaka’s Muslims such as her father Ziam Sanjeev’s friend Rashid Hassan Khan who has been quoted by The Daily Star. Daily Star also reports in greater details on the Quran test, (DailyStar)

“They (gunmen) did not behave rough with the Bangladesh nationals,” Reazul said quoting his victim son Hasnat. “Rather they provided night meals for all Bangladeshis.”“The gunmen were doing a background check on religion by asking everyone to recite from the Quran. Those who could recite a verse or two were spared. The others were tortured.” 

The unexplained issue here is then how come the two Bangladeshi Muslim girls were also killed along with Tarushi? Did they fail the Quran test too, or they were executed for being male-guardian unaccompanied women in public? Or they were found out to have been in USA as students or no-longer Bangladeshi nationals? Given jihadi’s obsession with rape and sexual torture of captive women, were these women spared from rape before being tortured to death?

Over the recent years, AQIS, or Al Queda in Indian Subcontinent claimed the following as targeted victims of their jihad in Bangladesh: (Source: SiteIntel )

  1. 15/01/2013 Asif Mohiuddin, wounded, at Uttara, Dhaka
  2. 15/02/2013 Ahmed Rajiv Haidar, killed, Mirpur, Dhaka
  3. 24/06/2014 Rakib Mamun, wounded, Muhammadpur, Dhaka
  4. 30/09/2014 Ashraful Alam, killed, Savar, Dhaka
  5. 16/11/2014 Shafiul Lilon, killed, Binodpur, Rajashahi
  6. 26/02/2015 Avijit Roy, killed, Dhaka Uni area, Dhaka
  7. 30/03/2015 Washiqur Rahman, killed, Tejgaon, Dhaka
  8. 12/05/2015 Ananta Bijoy Das, killed, Sylhet city
  9. 07/08/2015 Niladri Chattopadhyay, killed, Goran, Dhaka
  10. 31/10/2015 Faisal Arifin Dipon, killed, Jagriti prakashani, Sahbag, Dhaka
  11. 31/10/2015 Ahmedur Rashid Tutul, wounded, Suddhaswar Prakashani, Lalmatia Dhaka
  12. 31/10/2015 Ranadip Basu, wounded, Suddhaswar Prakashani, Lalmatia Dhaka
  13. 31/10/2015 Tareque Rahim, wounded, Suddhaswar Prakashani, Lalmatia Dhaka
  14. 08/04/2016 Nazimuddin Samad, killed, Dhaka
  15. 26/08/2016 Xulhaz Mannan, killed, Dhaka
  16. 26/08/2016 Samir Mahbub Tanay, killed, Dhaka

IS or Islamic state (of Iraq and Syria) claimed the following as victims of their targeted jihad: (Source: SiteIntel )

  1. 28/09/2015 Tavella Cesare, killed, silenced weapons, Dhaka
  2. 03/10/2015 Kunio Hoshi, killed, firearms, Rangpur
  3. 24/10/2015 One killed, 80 wounded, Shiite site, explosive device, Husseini Dalan, Dhaka
  4. 04/11/2015 One killed, one wounded, Stabbing, Ashulia, Dhaka
  5. 19/11/2015 Piero Parolari, wounded, Silenced Pistol, Dinajpur
  6. 19/11/2015 Ruhul Amin, wounded, Silenced weapon, Dhaka
  7. 19/11/2015 Rahmat Ali, killed, Unspecified mode, Kawnia Rangpur
  8. 26/11/2015 One killed, 3 wounded, Machine gun, Bogra
  9. 26/12/2015 One killed, at least 3 wounded, suicide bomber, 1 attacker, Ahmedia mosque, Rajshahi
  10. 07/01/2016 Samir Al-Din, killed, stabbing, Jhinaidah
  11. 08/02/2016 Tarun Dutta, killed, unspecified mode, Gaibandha
  12. 21/02/2016 Jogeshwar Roy, killed, sharp weapons, Panchagarh
  13. 14/03/2016 Hdifh Abdul Razzaq, killed, stabbing, Jhinaidah
  14. 22/03/2016 Hussein Ali Sarkar, killed, unspecified mode, Kurigram
  15. 23/04/2016 Rezaul Karim Siddique, killed, machete, Rajshahi.

The reactions to the attack have been predictable.

Begum Khaleda Zia, the leader of the opposition BNP,  while “gravely” condemning the incident, she apparently declared it to be “an outcome of the government’s undemocratic mentality that has been turned into an autocratic rule”. She held the  government responsible for such an attack, and blamed the emergence of militancy and such “bloodstained incident” as “the outcome of the prevailing oppressive rule of the government”.  (DailyStar) Thus Khaleda carefully avoided finding the root problem in the Islamic foundations of the nation and its society and its continuously maintained pace of Islamisation through riots, forced conversions, enforced exiles, rape and abduction of women, and alienation from land and turned it all into a blame game on her political rivals.

Sheikh Hasina, the prime minister, on the other hand thought that it was a “vested quarter [which] wanted to establish Bangladesh [as] a dysfunctional state keeping hostage innocent people. “They’ve taken a path of terrorism after having failed to win the hearts of people through the democratic process”. She blamed this same alleged “quarter” as  “pushing the soft-hearted youths and children to the path of destruction confusing them in the name of religion”. It can be inferred that here she is referring to her rivals in national politics of which BNP is the most dominant electorally and the now somewhat disgraced (from trial and execution of their 1971 time war-crimes accused leaders) Jamaat-e-Islami.

Hasina further states “The peace-loving people of Bangladesh won’t allow the perpetuators to materialise their strategy. We‘ll resist their conspiracy at any cost taking the people of the country with us…We’re committed to protecting at any cost the sovereignty of Bangladesh that was earned at the cost of martyrdom of 30 lakh and sacrifice of two lakh mothers and sisters.”

However, the society of Bangladesh is part of the same society that stood behind Muslim League in the lead up to Partition riots and Noakhali genocide, and the general ethnic cleansing of Hindus by forced exile, land-grab, rape, abduction of women. Its the same society that split into two rival contestants for power during the lead up to independence in 1971, with a large contingent of locals helping and participating in the rapine of the Pakistani army. (See my earlier post on this  https://dikgaj.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/sayedees-jamaat-e-islami-shows-how-islam-actually-spread-in-india-or-for-that-matter-in-arabia-too/).

Post independence, one half of Bangladesh polity – which by its length of occupation of state power, appears to be the more dominant faction, that represented by the BNP, rehabilitated the jihadis of 1971. The atrocities on Hindus and even Buddhists continued post-independence and the trend only has been more spectacularly splashed in the media recently due to the militant groups own propaganda and greater reach of the internet. (See another earlier post of mine on this: dikgaj on Bangladesh : counterstrategy). Hasina’s raising the issue of “sovereignty” is peculiar as its typically raised by Bangladeshis as a dark hint of alleged Indian eye on its territory and sovereignty. Possibly this was a diversionary tactic to prevent Indian reaction at popular level against the increasingly high profile targeting of Hindus in Bangladesh.

Hasina apparently addressed those “who are misguiding youths and children and patronising this” by claiming “Islam is the religion of peace. Stop killing people in the name of Islam; don’t blemish it with such incidents.” She also urged guardians to give proper education to their children and keep watch on them so that they cannot get derailed. Interestingly she does not explain why Islam is so susceptible to derailment.

Another group of so-called security “expertise” is trying to say that the violence was due to the competition between IS and AQS for base, recruits, and resources. In a sense they support my contention in my blogpost (dikgaj on ’71 blunder )

Indira Gandhi scored a tactical brilliance in 1971, but a strategic blunder when she helped an independent Bangladesh to form. This independent nation immediately showed its fangs of islamism, has continued to expel Hindus, abduct rape and enslave Hindu women, and welcomed all possible transnational anti-India and anti-Hindu forces. As and when Pakistan falls, this nation will provide an alternative base for jihadis to restart their movement.

What is the ground reality of Bangladeshi Islam that will increasingly jihadise the country on top of its latent Islamism and its foundations in jihad against Hindus and Buddhists?

Bangladesh hosts a number of transnational Islamic networks, and the second largest gathering of Islamic world takes place under a Tablighi Jamaat inspired and maintained so-called “world Istema”. Both Awami League and BNP led successive governments, seem to have warmly welcomed the Tablighi gathering with enthusiastic state involvement in its arrangements. Maulana Mohammad Ilyas  established Tablighi Jamaat  in 1926 to spread Deobandi Islam as a missionary line to reconvert the Muslims, who according to Tablighi notions ‘have gone astray’. The movement was in fact from the beginning considered as an extension of Deobandi movement’s preaching and proselytizing arm. ( Fred Burton and Scott Stewart, “Tablighi Jamaat: An Indirect Line to Terrorism”, Stratfor Global Intelligence, January 23, 2008, Burton and Stewart ).

Tablighi Jamaat is now a global network and as Furnish elaborates (Furnish)

it does promulgate a literalist reading of the Qur’an and strict emulation of Islam’s founder, Muhammad–both of which are problematic. Not only are the “sword,” or jihad, verses of the Qur’an numerous–numbering some 164 by one count[26]–but under the doctrine of naskh, “abrogation,” they supersede all of the Qur’an’s apparently peaceful verses. In addition, TJ members are taught to emulate Islam’s prophet unswervingly. Thus, when some learn about Muhammad leading armies in battle or ordering the execution of theological and political opponents, they may decide that the jihadist groups are more faithful followers of their prophet than TJ itself–and so make the transition. Thus, the key issue is not whether TJ is actively inculcating jihadist thought, per se. What is more important, and disquieting, is that the organization is instilling Qur’anic literalism and Muhammadan emulation, both of which are also staples of violent jihadist groups.

And there’s no arguing with TJ’s success. The Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist organizations may castigate the organization for its disengagement from politics and for its lack of popular welfare and education programs, but one could argue that Tabligh is better than its detractors at keeping its eye on the real prize: renewing piety among Muslims and indoctrinating them with a strong sense of Islamic community that is global in scope.

Tablighi Jamaat is singularly silent on Islamic terror incidents and is never known to have publicly condemned such jihadi acts. However its literal and orthodox insistence appears to be preparing a wide swathe of Muslim populations in countries it is allowed to operate towards first and acceptance of the historical claims of core texts of Islam, through its Quran and ahadith, and through this, secondly an acceptance of the violent, genocidal jihad waged by founders of Islam as proudly recorded or claimed in ahadith and Sira, or biographies of the founder of Islam.

Shoe bomber Richard Reid for attempted transatlantic airline bombing (2001), Jose Padilla for attempted dirty bomb manufacturing (2002) (Jane Perlez, “Pakistani Group, Suspected by West Jihadist Ties, Holds Conclave Despite Ban”, The New York Times, November 19, 2007,) in New York City, Barcelona terror plot (2008) (Kathryn Haahr, “Spanish Police Arrest Jamaat al-Tabligh Members in Bomb Threat”, Terrorism Focus Volume: 5 Issue: 6, February 13, 2000) and arrest of American Taliban John Walker Lindh in Afghanistan (2001) (Susan Sach, “A Muslim Missionary Group Draws New Scrutiny in US”, The New York Times, July 14, 2003), western Muslims involved in planning of terrorist attacks in the US, such as Portland Seven (2002), and Lackawanna Six (2002) all had one way or other been linked to Tablighi Jamaat and its proselytization.

French authorities have repeatedly blamed Tablighi Jamaat for promoting extremism as they found  Tablighi involvement in more than 80 percent of cases. (Burton and Stewart) Pakistan is considered the primary base of Tablighis because of possible access and recruitment among upper echelons of Pakistani civil and military power structures.  Several high ranking politicians like  Pakistani president Rafiq Tarrar, during Prime Minister Nawaz Shariff’s second term (1996-99), was active Tablighis. According to Riaz ul Hassan, former PM Nawaz Sharif during his second tenure (1996-99) visited Tablighi congregation at Raiwand, Lahore and had requested Tablighi Jamaat’s leader Omar Palanpuri, an Indian, to convince Sipah-e-Sahaba and its splinter group Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ) to end their violent anti-Shia terror campaign. The Tablighi leader replied, “there should always be a hot wire along with a cold one to light up the bulb’. (Riaz ul Hassan, “An insider’s account”, View Point Online, Hassan)

Former Pakistani intelligence chief (DG-ISI) Lt General Javed Nasir was an active Tablighi during his tenure (1995-97) and supported jihadis in Bosnia and Kashmir.(Khaled Ahmed, What did Husain Haqqani write?”, The Express Tribune, June 2, 2012, Khaled Ahmed ) Several members of 1995 attempted military coup in Pakistan against Benazir Bhutto were Tablighis. (Saba Imtiaz, “Tabligi cleric’s political meetings raise eyebrows”, The Express Tribune, August 22, 2011)  During Benazir Bhutto’s second term (1993-96), a group of jihadi officers collaborated with HuJI to try and overthrow her in 1995. Investigations found the Islamist officers were influenced by Jihad bi-al Saif (Jihad by Sword) an offshoot of Tablighi Jamaat.( Burton and Stewart )

Tablighi Jamaat’s missionaries who were then actively recruiting volunteers to fight the anti-Soviet jihad, were invited allegedly to Pakistan Military Academy during 1980s, to indoctrinate and convert the officers to Deobandi Islam (Shuja Nawaz, Crossed Swords: Pakistan, its Army and the Wars Within, Oxford University Press, Karachi, 2008). But the official pretension of recruitment only for a defensive pseudo-nationalist cause, is falsified by HuJI being founded by among others, Tablighi Jamaat members Qari Saifullah Akhter and Fazal ur Rehman Khalil. It was from the platform of HuJI that other jihadist organizations such as HuM, JeM and SSP/LJ came into being (Alex Alexiev, “Tablighi Jamaat: Jihad’s Stealthy Legions”, The Middle East Quarterly, Winter 2005, pp.3-11). Thus the pseudo-nationalist pretension of Pakistani mobilisation was in reality a cover for wider transnational jihad not aimed only at Afghanistan, and the ideological grounding by Tablighi Jamaat appears to sharpen rather than lessen the urge for jihad among Muslims.

Jamaat Islami and JUI factions also have close interaction with Tablighi Jamaat with many having dual membership, and Tablighi Jamaat’s annual congregations are regularly attended by these parties’ leaders. Tablighi Jamaat’s claimed apolitical non-violent character is perhaps merely a part of Islamic core tradition of  tactical hiding of militant agenda when revelation may jeopardise long term goals. But Islam’s core as politics and state power could not stay hidden forever, and during 2002 general elections Tablighi Jamaat announced its support for Muthaida Majlis-e-Amal, the alliance of Islamist parties which formed provincial government in KPK province and implemented its Islamist agenda, and is seen as promoting resurgence of Afghan Taliban and formation of Tehrik Taliban (TTP).

Tablighi Jamaat has been linked to  ‘American Taliban’ John Walker Lindh, Jose Omer Padila, David Hook ‘the Australian Taliban’, and Richard Reid ‘the Shoe Bomber’. (Muhammad Amir Rana, “Tablighi Jamaat: Discourse and Challenges”, Conflict and Peace Studies, April-June 2009, Volume 2, Number 2, Pakistan Institute of Peace Studies, p. 79.)

Thus the more intense proselytisation by Tablighi Jamaat type of transnational Islamic orthodoxification movements, allowed and even protected or sponsored actively by all ends of the Bangladeshi political spectrum, and even its state infrastructure, the possible jihadi penetration of the state coercive forces (BDR uprising), indicates both that Bangladeshi Muslim society in itself had the characteristics that welcomed radicalisation and in turn made it attractive for first “purification” and literalism based on the texts and claimed narratives of  jihad campaigns and tactical or strategic practices of conflict of the founder of Islam – by organisations like Tablighis.

Bangladesh will turn increasingly jihadi. All its “secular” portions, minority numerically anyway, will either be killed or forced to flee. Its weaker Hindu, Buddhist, Christian minorities either converted or exiled – possibly mostly the men, while the women will be kept behind by jihadi Bangladeshis as sex-slaves, as they did during the Noakhali genocide.

Bangladesh, Pakistan, and even parts of Nepal, Myanmar are being activated in a systematic and long term manner by subcontinental components of transnational jihad, whose ideological leadership or the necessary theological framework to carry out practical implementation of jihad, appears to be coming from the entire subcontinent including those ulama in India connected to not only the Deobandi spectrum but also Barelvis.

Only Indian Hindus have the only remaining chance to fight this back and in fact reverse the process into a cleansing of Islam and Islamic jihadi infrastructure from the entire subcontinent. For various reasons the current Indian state is a confused state ob the question of Islam (which is a different discussion). The Indian army has been extended from the Raj imperial framework of excess “secularism” which was a cover to keep the army alienated from the native majority and thus make it easier to keep the people subjugated to the regime. Such an army will be incapable of dealing with the psychologically sophisticated jihadi armies of the current era. Hindus should learn to organise themselves for defence militarily in all the ways necessary to tackle forces built along ISIS(IL), AQ lines without relying too much on existing state armies and defences.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Taharrush, Cologne, EU – why Islamic Rights come before Women’s Rights

Posted on January 17, 2016. Filed under: Arab, Christians, Communist, Egypt, feminism, Gaza, Historians with political agenda, History, Hosni Mubarak, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Israel, Jew, Jihad, Left, Marxism, Muslims, neoimperialism, Palestine, Politics, rape, religion, Salafi, Saudi, slavery, Sunni, Syria, Taleban, terrorism, USA, Wahabi |

The new years eve assaults on women in Cologne,  Germany, came apparently as a shock to many [France24_report]. When the first allegations began to crop up on social media, the state bodies responded with pacifiers and reassurances. The standard state tactic of repeating “be calm, be happy, nothing is wrong, everything has been taken care of, everything is as it always has been” line whenever it deems acknowledging the reality can jeopardise its control and domination over the population [State_attempt_at_coverup]. The response to this was a flurry of accusations on social media where individual women came forward to complain of their experiences of that night.

The political authority’s response to this bypass of and challenge to the state attempt to manage social perceptions through the media, and state spokespersons, was typical. The mayor of Cologne, who happens to be a woman, urged women to keep away from men “at an arms length” in public, and not “provoke” cultural sentiments of men from “other” cultures [keep_men_at_arms_length]. State complicity in delaying, or trying to suppress news on assault was exposed in the German public broadcaster, ZDF, apologising for delays. “The news situation was clear enough. It was a mistake of the 7pm ‘heute’ show not to at least report the incidents,” wrote deputy chief editor Elmar Thevessen on the show’s Facebook page.

The common European state, party politics, position seems to be arguing that

  1. Assaults were one-off, localised, not necessarily by men from particular national and religious identities.
  2. Even if assaults took place, they were cover for theft – not sexual but economic motives.
  3. Even if sexual, it was the women’s responsibility not to “invite” such attacks, by not provoking religious cultures which saw European women’s public appearance in dress or styles as provocative and justification for such attacks.
  4. If assaults were acknowledged openly by state bodies, it would strengthen the political “far-right”. Hence they should not be acknowledged.
  5. Maximum effort to delink assaults to Islam’s core cultural attitudes towards women, and if impossible to do – then try to emphasise ethnic, or national, or country origins of assaulters, and make it country or region specific, hoping to suppress the Islamic connection.

Interestingly, each of these positions expose much more about what is really going on than their proponents would like to expose.

It seems that the assaults were reported by women specifically to be by men of particular ethnic, national identities. It seems, assaults were not one-off, with similar incidents reported from Hamburg and other German cities, as well as from Finland and Sweden and Austria [pan-European_sex_attacks] and the attacks were explicitly sexual. The testimony of women at the receiving end, shows explicitly the hostile, angry, sexual aggression [explicit_sexual_nature_of attacks]. That snatchings, lootings, muggings accompanied sexual assaults, only adds to a viewpoint that sees the woman in public as free “property” who has no right to be with any valuables of her own: that is she herself is a “property” and a possession and belongs to the strongest man or men who can possess her and everything that she carries with her.

The attempt to pass this off as just  strange new, one off, only first time this year, phenomenon – is also jeopardised by the revelations of an obvious attempt at suppression of reports of similar persistent events in Sweden in the past – actually in summer 2015 [Swedish_media_suppression_of_reports].

The Islamic connection should have been transparent even if one did not study Islamic social history in details. There were reports of women demonstrators and journalists being asexually assaulted in Tahrir square in Egypt in the heady days of “revolution”. At the time most of these reports were suppressed, and the women concerned, even if from the “west”, characteristically shut up their mouths. The majority of women in western media or women’s rights activism appear to be very outspoken and “brutally and unflinchingly honest” when reporting, or investigating sexual assaults, sex-slavery, alleged on non-Muslim cultures, but their eloquence dries up when reporting on Muslim atrocities on women. In the past the meme of Israel, “Zionism” being the bigger, badder enemy seems to have been a persistent excuse used by senior, or “powerful” female voices in the anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian lobby to suppress dissemination of incidents of sexual assault, torture or slavery practised by revolutionary and heroic Palestinian society under “siege” as pointed out by Phyllis Chessler [feminism_as_protector_of_jihadi_violence_on_women’s_rights]. The following news will be sought to be dismissed as “Zionist” propaganda [Israeli_Muslim_teen_trafficked_into_sex_slavery_in_Palestine]. As Shmuley points out, western “liberal” feminism itself is often becoming an instrument for eventual ideological subversion of western women to acceptance of the attitudes encoded in Islam where a whole lot of political ideologies converge towards submission to Islam by non-Muslim societies [Shmuley_vs_Naomi]. In the words of Phyllis, [Feminist_silence_on_Islamic_assault_on_women’s_rights],

Feminists are, typically, leftists who view “Amerika” and white Christian men as their most dangerous enemies, while remaining silent about Islamist barbarians such as ISIS.

Feminists strongly criticize Christianity and Judaism, but they’re strangely reluctant to oppose Islam — as if doing so would be “racist.” They fail to understand that a religion is a belief or an ideology, not a skin color.

The new pseudo-feminists are more concerned with racism than with sexism, and disproportionately focused on Western imperialism, colonialism and capitalism than on Islam’s long and ongoing history of imperialism, colonialism, anti-black racism, slavery, forced conversion and gender and religious apartheid.

“Taharrush”, the rape-gauntlet “game”  [Taharrush_Islamic_spatial_strategy_to_isolate_and_rape_in_public] that surfaced in Tahrir square was a direct product of Muslim attitudes towards women in public, especially those less strictly dressed as per Islamic expectations and who were somehow therefore deemed to be declaring themselves as publicly sexually available women. The source of these attitudes lies in Arab Muslim ancient Islamic penchant for taking sex-slaves of women in raids, publicly strip them, rape them before husbands and male relatives to emphasise Islamic superiority even reported to be happening under the founder of Islam [surviving edited and abridged biography originally by Ishaq], and the much later codified Hidaya which stipulates the woman’s entire body and its complete use-right to have been bought either by nikaah rites or “right hand possession” war booty, or simply the woman in “hand” or possession. What happened in Cologne, was the same “Tahharush”, and both women and police would have been better equipped mentally and physically to deal with the situation had “Tahharush” – the dark side of the reality of the majority in the so-called Arab Spring was allowed to be openly discussed and noted in western media – when it happened almost 3-4 years ago.

What emerged at Tahrir square should have told the west and the world clearly, that what was being portrayed as a “revolution”, was in reality an Islamist reaction, which retained and in some sense enhanced acutely all the attitudes in classical jihadi Islam nurtured carefully over the years by the mullahcracy with whom the west compromised during the Cold War and ensured their protected continuance in preaching and preserving the jihadi core memes of Islam as an useful ally and antidote against spread of Communist ideas in Muslim world. West intervened specifically against any regime in any Muslim majority country that seemed to be incorporating deemed socialist elements in governance or society and thus made common cause with the most reactionary of elements among the mullahcracy. Each “socialist” regime experiment, however brief, in the Islamist countries did somewhat try to combat the mullah’s imposition of sex-slavery like conditions on women, tried to liberalize access to education, health, professional and economic avenues and opportunities to women. But just as now, western “political” theory of suppressing everyone else’s rights, or all humanitarian rights to the cause of defeating and crushing the “biggest/baddest” enemy – the mullahcracy and its Islam was deemed a less dangerous and less important threat – even if it was crushing women future and preparing whole generations of men in the sex-slaver mindset.

All the above reports throws up some key common observations,

  1. not only men in authority – but women who would be considered professionally empowered, with recognised public voice, either try to shift the burden of being safe on the women. Sometimes this involves de-facto urging to submit to cultural religious norms of “outside” cultures which clash with the native one on perception of women’s rights. Sometimes this is combined and bolstered by the bogey of not strengthening the far-right.
  2. thus the underlying value system of modern Europe is exposed in its subconscious, perhaps unintended, acknowledgement that all its so-called humanitarian universalist values are subject to preference orderings. The preference orderings are unstated, to allow maximum possible flexibility in contextually and opportunistically applying the officially touted formal values.
  3. for those in power in Europe,  staying in power or preserving their peer group’s political dominance over the state and society comes above any other humanitarian values shouted about. Thus a domestic political power struggle with the “right” is justification enough to relegate women’s rights as below that of Islamic cultural rights.
  4. empowerment of women, professionally, economically, and in political ranks or positions or hierarchies has no relevance for women’s rights as a social segment. Female activists themselves have taken on the generic authority structure attitudes they lambast as patriarchal and male chauvinism, in urging women to submit to cultural values that denigrate and sexually humiliate women.
  5. Europe’s liberalism has actually protected and nurtured a submissive urge towards Islam, and protection of the image and covering up of the reality of Islam. [State_complicity_in_Islamization_in_Germany].

Making women’s rights an exclusive women-only preserve, refusing to face the reality of Islamic connection to attitudes towards women, may not only jeopardise the future liberties of women, but also subvert the wider civil liberties of the freer world. The ideological strategy in the pro-Islamic has to be fought by calling their bluff and exposing the underlying dishonesty and subversion covered up by tactical dissimulation.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

CounterThoughts – 4: Bharatya nationhood and Yogendra Yadav’s neo-Stracheyism

Posted on March 3, 2015. Filed under: Buddhists, Hindu, Historians with political agenda, History, India, Indian National Congress, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Israel, Left, neoimperialism, Pakistan, religion, Russia, terrorism, UK, Uncategorized | Tags: , |

John Strachey, the iconic colonial administrator and so-called liberal theoretician posed the question “What is India? What does the name India really signify?” and answered it as

“The answer that I have sometimes given sounds paradoxical, but it is true. There is no such country, and this is the first and most essential fact about India that can be learned….India is a name which we give to a great region…there is not, and never was an India, or even a country of India, possessing, according to European ideas, any sort of unity, physical, political, social, or religious; no Indian nation, no “people of India,” of which we hear so much” [John Strachey, India: Its Administration and Progress, 4th ed. London, 1911, 1-5.]

Yogendra Yadav, http://ibnlive.in.com/news/india-is-a-statenation-not-a-nationstate-yogendra-yadav/417588-55.html uses Strachey in a dangerous game of justifying the centrifugal forces generated by persistent imperialist religions and ideologies which have remained foreign to Bharat by their own declared identification with politic-military-cultural centres of power and transnational intrigue situated outside the subcontinent’s geography.

Yadav’s article itself is a textbook illustration as to how Indian anti-Hindu humanities academics spin their fantastic narratives of Bharat’s past and even history of whatever period of whatever part of the world they cite to support their hidden political agenda. But refuting and showing up the fallacies, misrepresentations and gross suppression of historical realities in Yadav’s article will itself need another blog post. So here I will concentrate on giving the positive counter-arguments rather than the negative ones to simply refute him. During the course of these arguments one should be able to see the hilarious contradictions of Yadav’s pompous statements about India’s past, and even his lack of knowledge of the supposed “diversity-worshiper Congress leadership of the freedom movement”.

Briefly, Yadav’s tactics lies in mischievous and rather academically dubious silence on why the Brit Isles, or Spain, or Italy remained unified while Yugoslavia, USSR splintered, even though sociologically all had comparable “deep” identity diversities. Yadava’s mischief also lies in completely avoiding the role of religion behind state and unity and inter-religious rivalry in the disintegrations he blames the idea of nation-states on. However lets leave Yadav behind for a moment and look into the issues involved.

For John Seeley “the fundamental fact then is that India had no jealousy of the foreigner because India had no sense whatever of national unity, because there was no India and therefore, properly speaking, no foreigner” [John Seeley, The Expansion of England, London, 1882, 161.]

The same Seeley however saw in Brahmanism the seed of Indian nationalism ” After this victory [over Buddhism] Brahmanism had to resist the assault of another powerful aggressive religion, before which Zoroastrianism had already fallen and even Christianity… had to retreat some steps, Mohammedanism. Here again it held its own…Now religion seems to me to be the strongest and most important of all the elements which  go to constitute nationality, and this element exists in India” [Expansion of England, 1882, p.15].

However, the viewpoint of the new nationalist thinking in India was radically different with an insight either not available or unpalatable for the imperialist and racist European mind.

Gandhiji, then still in South Africa in 1909, wrote in “Hind Swaraj”: “The English have taught us that we were not a nation before and it will require centuries before we became one nation. This is without foundation. We were one nation before they came to India. One thought inspired us. Our mode of life was the same. It was because we were one nation that they were able to establish one kingdom.” [M. K. Gandhi-Hindu Dharma, Ahmedabad, 1950, p. 56].

The same year, Bengali historian Radha Kumud Mukerji read a paper before the Dawn Society, Calcutta, presenting his “scientific” findings on the “Fundamental Unity of India”. An expanded form of this essay was published from London in 1913. Bipin Chandra Pal wrote on his own interpretation of “nationalism” in 1912, in his monthly journal, ‘The Hindu Review’ under the title ‘Hindu Nationalism: What It Stands For’ followed by another article ‘Nationalism and Politics’ in May 1913.  His thesis was that European nationalism, being isolationist and materialist in nature was anti-humanity, while the Indian nationalism represented a higher stage of group consciousness and was a positive step towards human brotherhood and spirituality. In his own words, Hindu nationalism stood for – “God, Humanity and the Motherland” [B.C. Pal, Nationality and Empire, Calcutta, 1916.  22-48, 73-112].

For Sukumar Dutt “A mind free from western conception of nationality is absolutely necessary to comprehend the problems of Indian Nationality” (p.18) because “it is difficult for a western mind to grasp the order of the ideas, unknown in European history, which has evolved this unique conception of the spiritual unity of India.” [Sukumar Dutt, Problems of Indian Nationality, Calcutta, 1926, p.17]

For those who do not believe in the existence of any “nation” of Indians in the past and  throw all these into the “garbage heap” as “Hindu fundamentalists” living in their “dream world”, there are people who cannot fit the bill of “Hindu revivalism” by any stretch of imagination, holding similar views on nationalism.

However, already in the backdrop of experiences of WWI, in the 1920’s the three theoreticians, Ramsay Muir, G.P. Gooch, and MacDougall rejected the old definition based on five unities. MacDougall defined it as a ‘group consciousness’ [The Group Mind, London, 1920, p.100]. G.P Gooch [Nationalism, London 1920] was explicit, “The core of nationalism is group consciousness[….]. neither the occupation of a well defined area, nor community of race, language, religion, government or economic interests are indispensable to national self-consciousness” (p. 5-6). Ramsay Muir wrote “Nationality, then, is an elusive idea, difficult to define[….] Its essence is a sentiment”. [Nationalism and Internationalism, London, 1919].

In “Nationalism: A religion” [C.J.H Hayes, New York, 1960], Carlton Hayes concludes  “In simplest terms nationalism may be defined as a fusion of patriotism with a consciousness of nationality” (p. 2) and that “A nationality receives its impress, its character, its individuality from cultural and historical forces (p. 3)….historical tradition means an accumulation of remembered or imagined experiences of the past” (p. 4). Hayes defines patriotism “as a peoples’ territorial past, its ancestral soil, involving a popular, sentimental regard for a homeland where one’s forefathers lived and are buried or cremated” (p. 4).

Rejecting the nineteenth Century belief that nationalism was a political phenomenon and the existence of State was a prerequisite in nation-formation, Hayes writes, “If we are to grasp what a nationality is, we must avoid confusing it with state or nation” (p. 6). Accepting the idea of cultural nationalism, Hayes writes, “Cultural nationalism may exist with or without political nationalism. For, nationalities can do and exist for fairly long periods without political unity and independence.”

Hans Kohn, [The Idea of Nationalism, 1944] concludes that the nature of the processes of nation formation in Europe and Asia was not the same. In Europe ‘state’ was mainly instrumental in nation formation, while in Asia nationalism had cultural origins. Even political unity of Germany and Italy was preceded by vigorous intellectual and cultural movements led by Herder, Goethe and Kant, and Mazzini. Regarding patriotism, Hayes writes, “Loyalty to familiar places is relatively natural, but it requires artificial effort-purposeful conscious education and training to render men loyal to the sum total of places unfamiliar as well as familiar in an entire country inhabited by his nationality” (p. 9). That means that the spirit of patriotism and national consciousness does not permeate all sections of the population in the same degree at a given point of time. To quote Hayes again, “only through an intensive and extensive educational process will a local group of people become thoroughly aware of their entire nationality and supremely loyal to it” (p. 10).

Every Purana text contains a section called Bhuvan Kosh, in which the boundaries of the land called Bharatavarsha are clearly defined and its progeny is given a common name Bharati. A list of all the Janapadas scattered all over the country is given along with the lists of rivers and mountains. A smaller list of seven holy rivers, mountains and cities symbolizing the unity of the land are given there. These slokas were meant for daily recital. List of “punyasthan” or tirthas are explicitly given in the Puranas as well as Mahabharata. These pilgrim centers cover the whole land.

This devotion to the land is not confined to its physical or material aspect only. Vishnu Purana states that the gods in heaven also feel envious of those who are born in the land of Bharatavarsha because the gods after the expiry of their merits will have to take rebirth on the earth while those born in Bharata will be able to transcend the cycle of rebirth. Chapter 9 of the Bhishmaparva in Mahabharata describes Bharatavarsha. While describing the greatness of Bharatavarsha the narrator gives a long list of ancient kings who loved this land – combining the very modern elements of “patriotism, love of the land”.

Thus, we find that all the ingredients of the group consciousness called nationalism are present here. This consciousness of the geographical unity exists in the Samkalpa mantra meant to be part of daily prayers and was recited at the beginning of every sacred act or ritual. Dr. Radha Kumud Mookerji goes to the extent “India was preaching the gospel of nationalism when Europe was passing through what has been aptly called the Dark Age of her history, and was labouring under the travails of a new birth”. [Nationalism in Hindu Culture, London 1921, 2nd Edition 1957, p. 47]

Asokan inscriptions use a common dialect and script with minor regional variations addressed to the subjects. They use the term Jambudvipa. The Samkalpa mantra treats Bharat Khande or Varsh as a part of Jambudvipa. Kautilya’s Arthashastra, usually thought to be composed in the 4th Century B.C., in defining the territory to be conquered by a Chakravarti King defines it as the land between the Himalayas and the ocean from north to south and equivalent in span of eight thousand miles from east to west. [Book 9, Chapter 1, Prakarana 135-136 -R.D.Shyamasastry]. Mukherji was of the opinion that the conception of a single power dominating the whole country had not originated with Chandragupta Maurya or Kautilya but must have preexisted. Aitreya Brahmana (VIII 15) repeats the dictum that there should be only one ruler of this Prithvi up to the ocean.

In both the above references the word Prithvi has been used as the name of the country. In Mahagovindsutta of Diggha Nikaya (currently held to be the oldest portion of Buddhist Tripitakakas) “Maha Prithvi” name has been given to the land whose shape has been compared with that of a bullock cart which happens to be rectangular in the north and conical in the south. (Rahul Sankrityayana identifies this with Bharat). Therefore the word Prithvi could not have been used for the whole earth beyond Bharatavarsha.

The Prithvi Sukta of Atharva Veda (XII.I) uses the common word Bhumi for land, but uses Prithvi for that particular territory which was later called Jambudivpa or Bharatavarsha. Here, Prithvi is clearly identified with the Vedic history and culture. This Sukta states that this is the land where our ancestors displayed their valour, where gods defeated the Asuras; where our gods Ashwinis, Vishnu and Indra, the husband of Sachi performed their divine feats; it is the land where sacrifices are performed, for them altars are established, where our sacrificial posts stand erect where five classes of men (four varnas and fifth the Nishad) live; this land which is sustained by Dharma where we are protected by god Indra himself; where we offer ghee to the Agni, who acts as our messenger to the gods. It is the land where men offer their oblations to the gods in sacrifices and relish the remains of the sacrificial offerings. Here Indra destroys the enemies of gods, the Asuras and the demon Vrtra. This is the land where pillars (Yupas) are erected for the Sacrifices and where the Rishis chant the mantras of Rigveda Samaveda and Yajurveda, where Indra is offered Somarasa. The land, where ancient Rishis sang divine songs, where they performed seven sattras with Yajnas and Tapas. This is the land where men move in their chariots and bullock carts on the roads where Sabhas and Samitis function in the villages.

Although the Prithvi Sukta does not give exact boundaries of the land, but its citing Himalayas, Sindhu, the six seasons, the flora and fauna, agriculture and crafts all point to a geographical  entity identified as “Bharatavarsha”. Prithvi Sukta uses the word “bhumi” to denote ‘land’ while the word Prithvi denotes its name and expresses a deep sense of affiliation and identification with all the living and non-living attributes of this “land”. It repeatedly reminds us that this “motherland” sustains, feeds and gives refuge even after death. Therefore, this land is our mother and “we are her sons” (12th stanza), because it feeds us just like a “mother” (10-th stanza). Prithvi Sukta acknowledges different dialects and different norms of behaviour according to their own regions, but this motherland just like a “cow”, “feeds them all with her milk without any distinction” (45-th stanza).

The opening verse of the Prithvi Sukta mentions those values and ideals which sustain this land called Prithvi : Truth, Cosmic Law, Initiation, Penance, Veda and Sacrifice. The name Prithvi, itself could have originated from king Prithu (supposed to have started agriculture on the land) indicating a conscious connection of civilization and culture.

Was there a concept of early geographical core? Manu Smriti gives four increasing spheres of influence. As the core, Manu Smriti (II. 18-19) states that the land between the divine rivers Saraswati and Drishadvati was created by the gods themselves and was known by the name Brahmavarta. In this land the code of conduct transmitted by the tradition in regular succession from generation to generation was seen as the noble code of conduct for all varnas”.

As the next circle of expansion, Manusmriti mentions (II. 20-21) the name of Brahmarshi Desh which included the Janapadas of Matsya, Kurukshetra, Panchala and Shurasena. Manusmriti declares that the people born in this land were the torch bearers in the realm of human conduct and therefore all the inhabitants of Prithvi should learn the lessons in character and conduct from them (Manu II. 20-21).

The next expansion circle is named Madhyadesa in Manusmriti (II. 22), covering the land between Himalaya and Vindhya mountains from north to south and to the west of Prayag in the east and to the east of Vinsana in the west, (the place where river Saraswati is believed to have disappeared).

The fourth and the last expansion circle mentioned by Manu Smriti was called Aryavarta, i.e. the land of the Aryas. It was spread from eastern sea to the western sea and from Himalaya Mountain in the north upto river Narmada in the south. This pure land is worthy of performing sacrifices (yajna) and the black antelope, the symbol of sacrifice, could roam there freely. The lands beyond Aryavarta are impure, i.e. not yet part of the cultural stream. (Manu II. 22-23).

The etymology of the word Arya also includes the meaning ‘agriculture’ as well as its use as a qualitative meaning “noble, respectable, higher” in classical Sanskrit and Praakrit texts. Rigvedic “Aryanise the whole world”, could there have meant a civilizational process leading to the spread of an advanced culture and this is also reflected in the early Buddhist and Jain texts. The story of Mathav Videgh following the march of Sacrificial fire from the bank of the river Saraswati to the banks of the river Sadanira (Satapath Brahman) also indicates that it was a cultural process and not a racial one.

Gandhiji wrote in Hind Swaraj (1909). “Our leading men traveled throughout India either on foot or in bullock-carts………. what do you think could have been the intention of those farseeing ancestors of ours who established Setuabandh  in the south, Jagannath in the East and Hardwar in the North as places of pilgrimage? You will admit they were no fools. They knew that worship of God could have been performed just as well at home. They taught us that those whose hearts were aglow with righteousness had the Ganga in their own homes….But they saw that India was one undivided land so made by nature. They, therefore, argued that it must be one nation. Arguing thus, they established holy places in various parts of India, and fired the people with idea of nationality in a manner unknown in other parts of the world”. (M.K. Gandhi. Hind Swaraj, Chap. 9, Hindu Dharma, Ahmedabad 1950, p. 56).

If we are looking for “historical awareness of the need to defend borders as sign of awareness of nationhood” we are looking for something that will be hard to find not only in India but even across the world.

Start with UK. Apparently one tribal king invited the Romans in, and even left his inheritance to them, while his queen led other tribes against the Romans. Lots of English Breton tribal chiefs joined in with the Romans, and “aristocracy’s” habits were “Romanized”. But then, Hadrian built a wall cutting off Scots and Picts. When Saxons came in, they had been invited in as mercenaries by English kings who had risen up after the departure of the Romans. When they took land for themselves and tried to expand, the Welsh – predominantly perhaps Romano-Breton tried to fight them at their border – which was where Wales ended. And the distinction of Welsh, Scottish and Irish identities continued with bloody fanfare well into the early modern. So parts of UK were not conscious of their modern “borders” well into the early modern. But do we find strands of commonality – yes, starting from Bede’s narrative – monks and Christianity crossed “borders”, and were accepted as part of a “national” awareness distinguishing the “islanders” from that of the mainland or from the “Irish”.

Think of the Germans. At least six different tribes are mentioned by Tacitus, and we know mostly of their early history from their “enemies”. We have explicit references to sections of German tribes collaborating with the Romans against other German tribes, and not always defending their modern “borders”. Until modern German unification, the constituents of “German nation” existed in “elusive” mistiness of literature, myth and legends.

All through Europe, even in the Russia under the Golden Horde and then under the early Tsars, we do not always see a consciousness of “borders to be defended” in the modern sense. Whole groups, fought to defend themselves and survive, or migrated en-masse to preserve themselves. What was more important was survival of their “way of life”, their culture, and their “civilization” – whatever that “civilization” could be.

We dont even see that “defending the border” as part of “national/civilizational” awareness even in the Islamic regimes of Arabia, Iraq and Iran.

What is today our official “border” need not be our border in the future. If in the past that “border” had shrunk inwards, in the future it can expand. The crucial point was preservation of the core in times of adversity and expansion in favourable times – or when situation could be made “favourable”.

When hard-pressed in the north, it became a choice of “fight/flight”, and at some point they had to decide painfully what took priority – pride and annihilation, or “slinking away” to preserve your texts and the best continuing mechanism of “culture” – living, practicing humans. No wonder, so many of the Sanskrit texts were recovered from the “South”.

Borders should be taken as temporary compromises in space-time, to keep identities in equilibrium. When needed “borders” should be changed, even expanded – not “identities”.

 

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

CounterThoughts-3: A Call for Counter-Jihad

Posted on August 30, 2014. Filed under: Christians, Communist, economics, Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Israel, Jew, Jihad, Left, Marxism, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, rape, religion, Saudi, slavery, Sunni, Syria, Taleban, terrorism, UK, USA, Wahabi |

The discourse on ISIS, the iconic Islamic jihadist movement that illustrates all aspects of the core of Islam as a social and state meme – has been mired with the strange but expected confusions of  non-Islamic civilizations which try to model and understand the “other” on their own world-views and expectations of what it means to be human.

The stories of ISIS activities that make it to the media, are there for everyone to see and draw their own conclusions from. Problem is that we are either never told, or we don’t manage to realize ourselves, that what we make of a described event, is coloured and shaped by our pre-existing views on related and not so related elements. For a liberal, non-Muslim, “modernized”, educated mind, the very ideas of torture, sadism, rape, sex-slavery, is so far removed from daily contemplation – that the response is either a denial or disbelief that such a thing could really have taken place.

But the situation here is more complicated by possibly two factors in why we fail to grapple with the reality of Islam.

The west has difficulty in going after deconstructing Islam as it clearly recognizes that undermining the basics of Islam would need undermining the Judaic roots of Abrahamic religions and that undermines Christianity too. So it consistently tries to represent the challenge from Islam as a merely real-politik one, as conflicts between this or that factions over power, politics, and economic factors. So the real problems posed by Islam, its core of genocidic, civilization-erasing and often sadistically brutalizing corrupting memes are ignored, bypassed, whitewashed or even denied and constructed as temporary political/social conflicts that have no long-term relation to Islam as an idea. Thus Islamic jihad is always misrepresented as being driven by contests that have nothing to do with Islam per se.

There is also the post-Christian but still “Christian” west’s fears and loathing of what it deems “pagan” and “non-Abrahamic” which it fears will gain from a retreat of Islam as in places like India, where Hindus had proven a repository of civilizational memes too complex and resourceful to submit to colonial attempts at replacement.

The second and deeper problem with the non-Muslim failure to understand and deal with Jihad comes from the very fact of its liberal, and non-closed or non-exclusive world-view. The built in components of exploratory, doubtful, non-stationary in most modernized non-Muslim civilizational frameworks makes them necessarily accepting of diversity and dissent, which in turn make it impossible to reject exclusive claims.

The diversified interests of modern non-Muslim societies, problematizing as “narrow” and “primitive” and therefore denigrated, the obsessive, biologically focused memes of Islam that revolves round the capture, possession and control of natural resources, agriculture, irrigated land, women. Trying to make sense of the horrors of these fundamental drives in Islam, the non-Muslim mindset tries to hang on to modern Islamic society’s use of products of western consumer products (including cultural ones)  as signs of “normality” and eventual hoped for convergence with their own non-islamic ones. In the process they fail to realize that the primary attraction and interest within islamic societies remain the time-tested method of ordering societies on biological relationships, “natural orderings” of power and force and physical domination, coercion – that between men and women, between the military and the civilian, between the theologian and the politician. Whatever is absorbed from the non-Muslim is filtered through the lens of utility and non-challenging of the fundamental drives of Islam : gaining military technologies, and pure consumption that doesn’t upset Islam’s core power relations. Thus better guns and ammunition or nuclear bombs, missiles, are welcome as are women’s lingerie and cosmetic products or porn which are welcome if it enhances the male pleasure in the privacy of homes or brothels or harems of sex-slavery. Ideas that clash with such core obsessions of Islam, as sex-slavery – are not absorbed even in contact or immersion within non-Muslim societies, as shown by European participants of jihad in Iraq.

Once the confusion is cleared, the next step is an uncompromising exposure and deconstruction of Islamic attempts at camouflaging or whitewashing and misrepresenting both the term “Jihad” as well as its usage, not only now but also in history. Plenty of works now accumulated over the overwhelmingly and consistently violent interpretations of “jihad” and not the “personal-internal-peaceful” struggle that it is often whitewashed as when exposed in non-Muslim societies. When the Muslim knows there is not going to be annihilating retaliation, he/she will justify the violence, genocide, rape, massacre, slavery as being solidly supported by precedence and cryptic injunctions of the founder of their religion. When the Muslim is yet to gain numerical or military strength to carry his/her agenda out without facing negative consequences, he/she will cry about how jihad means peaceful-personal “struggle” and only turns “defensive” when “attacked”: not clarifying that this attack could be and has been taken merely even as non-Muslim existence in the neighbourhood, or non-Muslims practising their own culture.

The second step and need for the hour is a clear, unemotional recognition of this confusion over Islam and Jihad and declare a counter-jihad. There are two basic components to counter-Jihad: ideological and politico-military.

In ideology, ruthlessly challenge and call out the intellectual fraud often perpetrated by Islamists, their spokespersons or whitewashers – both Muslim as well as non-muslim, in defending, misrepresenting, or confusing their audiences over the term “jihad” and its usage.

In politico-military, attack every assertion of Islamist symbols, terms, politics wherever they try to make inroads. Militarily destroy their supporting geographical bases, political entities which seek their recognition and protection as respectable and equivalent to non-muslim entities.

In the military side, recognize that jihad is based on a shrewd psychological understanding of sadistic terror and sexuality. Jihad uses terror and sex to psychologically weaken and destroy its target populations, before any actual large-scale retaliation can take place. They count on non-Muslim liberal hesitation to strike back with forms of counter terror that matches the Islamic. What to learn from the Islamic is the clever use of deniability and “plausible deniability” to extract psychological and political  advantages by both practicing terror and denying practicing it. Islamics represent any concession from non-Muslim side as weakness of the non-Muslims and as proof of strength of their god and their theology.

Islamists crucially think that non-Muslim reluctance to use the sadism that muslims use on non-Muslims – is a sign of Muslim strength and non-Muslim weakness, and the weakness of the non-Muslim god/gods. Only when the Islamic will face terror of  higher sadism than his own, will he finally acknowledge defeat, as he will see his “god” weak and unable to protect him.

Islamics use provocation to invite retaliation which they can then pretend to be defending while actually having prepared for aggression before. They also don’t take chances after conquest by executing those who already have or are liable to resist. Provoking Islamists to take up arms makes them combatants and no-longer civilians. If anonymous groups and militants carry out counter-terror as the west allegedly arranged for to deal with leftist insurgency, then there is plausible deniability. There are many methods which have already been tried out both by the “west” and the “Islamics”.

Let the “struggle” begin.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

On academics and their open letters : neo-imperialism from afar

Posted on April 22, 2014. Filed under: Bangladesh, China, Christians, Communist, diaspora, economics, economy, Egypt, financial crisis, Gaza, Hindu, Historians with political agenda, History, India, Indian National Congress, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Israel, Jew, Jihad, Kashmiri Pundit, Left, Maoism, Marxism, Muslims, neoimperialism, Pakistan, Palestine, Politics, rape, religion, Salafi, Saudi, Shia, slavery, Sunni, Syria, Taleban, terrorism, Turkey, UK, USA, Wahabi |

 

A group of sixty odd academics in various UK institutions have decided to join the Indian electoral fray by posting an open letter to the “left” leaning Independent under the headline:

Letters: The idea of Modi in power fills us with dread

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/letters/letters-the-idea-of-modi-in-power-fills-us-with-dread-9273298.html

“As the people of India vote to elect their next government, we are deeply concerned at the implications of a Narendra Modi-led BJP government for democracy, pluralism and human rights in India.”

Concern is always nice. Concern about democracy, pluralism, and human rights are particularly nice to hear about. But when these concerns are raised by voice which are only selectively concerned, that troubles us. These academics are not concerned about continued Saudi rule and its impact on the middle East’s prospects for democracy, pluralism and human rights. They are completely silent about Palestinian ruling junta (that is what it is – because each one of them come solidly from military outfits, and once-dubbed-terrorist groups), or for China, or for Pakistan, or Afghanistan. But more of this at the end.

“Narendra Modi is embedded in the Hindu Nationalist movement, namely the RSS and other Sangh Parivar groups, with their history of inciting violence against minorities. Some of these groups stand accused in recent terrorist attacks against civilians.”

The slyness of academic evasiveness starts to reveal itself now. It is the same method by which so-called professional historians create new impressions of truth by weaving propositions into a narrative and creating a new narrative where propositions become blended into certainties. Note the smooth blending of “some” “stand accused”. At one smooth stroke, these academics of high integrity have made an “accusation” appear as “convicted”, and “some” is used to taint the “whole”.

By their logic, the Congress parivar (family) is embedded in a politics which has had very dubious roles, and sometimes outright bias in defacto protecting Muslim violence from Nehru’s time at power during the Partition, with selective targeting of alleged Hindu violence. Usually the Congress hides behind the legalistic excuse – again first used by Nehru to allow the Islamic violence in Noakhali, Bengal to continue while he personally and immediately intervened in Bihar where Muslims were at the receiving end – that when the Congress sees the victims as non-Muslim, non-Christians, it mumbles about law and order being a state prerogative. Whereas, when Muslims appear to be the target, Congress sees it as a union/federal/central issue. This was the cover under which Congress did not intervene in the genocide of Hindus of Jammu and Kashmir in the late 80’s because in this case it was the Muslims who were the perpetrators. The helplessness of the Hindu surviving refugees, was perhaps the root cause of the revival of the Hindutva” movement these academics so lambast – because many Hindus in the wider arena of India began to realize the selective bias of the Indian state under the Nehrus and the Congress in favour of whitewashing and allowing Islamist violence to thrive, especially if such violence was directed against Hindus.

The Congress is therefore imbedded in a movement, that has always protected Islamism and Islamist pretensions, and have at various times carried elements in its governments who are connected to or stand accused of rioting and communal hatred which amount to acts of terrorism.

“We recall the extreme violence by the Hindu Right in Gujarat in 2002 which resulted in the deaths of at least 1,000 people, mostly Muslims. This violence occurred under Modi’s rule, and senior government and police officials have provided testimony of his alleged role in encouraging or permitting it to occur.”

Recalling is a good thing, but if what happened before under a regime historically is proof of repeating the same then the Congress should be even more in the dock – for the Partition riots happened under the government of Jawaharlal Nehru, and ant-Sikh pogroms happened under Rajiv-Gandhi/Congress, and all the riots that happened before the BJP came first to power, with such spectacular ones as in Bhagalpur, were also under various Congress governments.

The academics think that by adding the word “extreme” to “violence” they can make a special case against Modi -as they perhaps feel, and rightly so, that “violence” has been the norm for anti-Hindu attacks by Islamists or Christianists too. Maybe for them those “other” violence are genuine expressions of grievances,

“Some of his close aides have been convicted for their involvement, and legal proceedings are ongoing in the Gujarat High Court which may result in Modi being indicted for his role. He has never apologised for hate speech or contemptuous comments about various groups – including Muslims, Christians, women and Dalits. His closest aide has been censured recently by India’s Election Commission for hate speech used in this election campaign.

“There is widespread agreement about the authoritarian nature of Modi’s rule in Gujarat, further evidenced by the recent sidelining of other senior figures within the BJP. This style of governance can only weaken Indian democracy. “

Different groups of people agree among themselves about different things. Concepts like “authoritarian” are so abstract, and inconcretizable, that tons of academic papers have tried to make academic careers out of hair-splitting over the very definition of “authoritarian”. Many communists are still dewy eyed over Stalin or Mao, and have “widespread agreement” among themselves over their most fortunate appearance on earth. Same goes for Hitler. Jews have “widespread agreement” in spite of a portion of Jewish origin academics hosted by various UK universities to the contrary – that existence of Israel is perfectly justified even at the cost of Palestinians. There is widespread agreement among large swathes of Muslims about the necessity and justifiability of historical violent genocidic jihad, and significant groups have “widespread agreement” among themselves about the benevolence of sex-slavery of the non-Muslim as part of jihad.

Typically when groups do not want to spell out the membership of the group, or are unsure about their numerical strength in proportion to the wider population – they turn to vagueness, or unpinnable conjectures -so that they can never be called out for lying or pretending, and claiming “widespread agreement” is one way of doing that.

The “widespread agreement” is among this tiny coterie of Indian origin academics – probably groomed and selected in the early days of their studenthood and careers by previous generations and peer groups of British interest serving academics, like the Marxist academics who desperately denied any role of triangular Atlantic slave trade in the kickstart of the British industrial revolution.

The curious bit is about somehow Modi being guilty of sidelining “senior” party members as proof of exceptional authoritarianism. All the Nehru-family members have sidelined senior party members to come to power. Does it not make them even more authoritarian already?

“Additionally, the Modi-BJP model of economic growth involves close linking of government with big business, generous transfer of public resources to the wealthy and powerful, and measures harmful to the poor.”

This is actually hilarious. For this is what actually has been happening since Margaret Thatcher in Britain, happened too even under Tony Blair, and has accelerated under Cameron. Do they want to say that all that has led UK down the drain? Or do they have not the courage to spell out those pearls of wisdom to the masters of their souls? It happens at even grander scale in China, where party-apparatchiks and their minions or progeny ruling over millions in their regional satrapys hog investments from a financial sector which is still centrally and nationally owned as well as managed. No, these academic’s can only open their mouth against the “Hindu” India, and the BJP and Narendra Modi. They have not open lettered even on the very entertaining case of Ukraine, where “right wing nationalists” have been on the rampage with alleged support of big biz and oligarchs who grew into tycoons with diversion of state investments. Naturally – since doing so is not in the current interests of the British ruling interests.

“A Modi victory would likely mean greater moral policing, especially of women, increased censorship and vigilantism, and more tensions with India’s neighbours.”

These academics never protested Muslim censorship, moral policing of women, vigilanteism in Indian Kerala, or Uttar Pradesh, or Bihar, or West Bengal, or Assam, or Christians doing exactly the same in Nagaland and Mizoram, and attempting to do the same in Manipur. They cannot mention anything about those other communities or religions or states, because they cannot afford to show these other ones in the same or worse light than the “Hindus” – then they lose the affection of the system.

Overall, then what does it show about such concerted concerns from such groups?

Let us go back to the very beginning again of their open letter. They are claiming that democracy, pluralism, human rights in a one specific distant nation, is going to be trumped if one man and his party or political alliance gets elected in a plural democracy which as yet respects human rights. One can see why they have been allowed to succeed as academics, because they can pretend an intellect which can be used to legitimize the complete lack of any logical capacity on issues that are of interest to a post-imperialist neo-imperialist state.

The west-European political dogma of the political class has now run into a fatal dilemma. They either have to accept that democracy and pluralism can be used, to subvert, overturn, or cover anti-democracy and non-pluralism – which makes themselves open to analysis as tow whether they had been doing and continue to do so themselves.

Or they have to find escape clauses that can be used selectively to target nations and regimes that they see as obstacles in the way of their agenda of global domination, within their dogma that still allows some mantle of legitimacy for their own systems.

The method being tried out in general for a couple of decades, is trying to enforce a so-called consensus or “widespread agreement”, on very vague and often duplicitous or contradictory criteria to judge if the “consensus” value system is being subverted or not. The west-European dogma thinks it has found an escape clause that can cover their selective neo-imperialist agenda – claim that a certain vague outline of democracy, pluralism and human rights exists – whose identification and verification lies solely in their own hands, which then justifies imperialist intervention in other nations, to overturn regimes, assassinate significant individuals, or economically and militarily destroy the fundamentals of that nation.

In order to find out in whose interests any self-proclaimed group of experts, academics, humanitarians, activists actually are acting for – we just need to check out what they remain silent on in contrast to what they choose to pick on. These open-letter academics do not criticize Hamas or Palestinian authority parts for their Jew-cleansing hate campaigns, torture, rape, murder, or that by the so-called freedom-fighters in Syria, or those in Kosovo and Croatia against Serbs in the 90’s, or the Bahraini state, or the Saudis, or Pakistan, or China, or western Ukraine, or Turkey, or Egypt, or even in their own backyard where the state ruthlessly cracks down with full state violence on peaceful protesters against economic destruction of the commoner.

Just compare their stances on these “other” stuff – and you can identify whom they work for, in whose interests.

 

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Studying Priyamvada Gopal : how to promote imperialism under an anti-fascist mask.

Posted on April 21, 2014. Filed under: Antisemitism, Arab, Buddhists, Christians, Communist, diaspora, Gaza, Hindu, Historians with political agenda, History, India, Indian National Congress, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Israel, Jew, Jihad, Kashmir, Kashmiri Pundit, Left, Macaulay, Marxism, Muslims, neoimperialism, Pakistan, Palestine, Politics, rape, religion, Salafi, Saudi, slavery, Sunni, Syria, Taleban, terrorism, UK, Uncategorized, USA, Wahabi |

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/14/narendra-modi-extremism-india

Priymavada Gopal’s opening piece in Guardian runs as follows:

Imagine this. A pogrom takes place in a foreign country targeting a minority group, say Christians, with hundreds brutally killed by rampaging mobs, many mutilated and raped, and foetuses removed from pregnant women. Thousands flee destroyed homes. The provincial leader on whose watch these events take place is a politician with open links to extremist Islamist organisations. Three holidaying British citizens are among the massacred. Allegations emerge that this politician’s language helped foment the massacres. With one of his cabinet jailed for her role in the pogroms he becomes the frontrunner to lead this increasingly powerful country. Would you worry?

Yes, is the likely answer, and so you should. In reality, the country is India, the extremists are Hindus, the 2002 Gujarat pogroms targeted Muslims, and the leader in question is Narendra Modi.

It is highly revealing to see how Gopal’s use of English carefully transforms, transmutes and transfers guilt and horror from a widely obvious violent religious movement to another with which she would otherwise have failed to establish any comparative basis. The violent scenario becomes her equation between two religious communities by which she can serve her dual purpose of reducing Jihadi guilt and responsibility on one hand, and raise the other community to the same violent status. “Removing foetuses” is an allegation that is typically dismissed by Indian “Thaparite” historians when they appear historically, as being carried out by Islamist mobs – as in the Moplah rebellion of the 1920’s or thr Partition riots.

In her hypothetical Islamic scenario, she does not equate “muslim” with “extremist”. In her follow on comment she makes that jump, subtly, and glibly – casually bracketing “Hindu” with “extremist”. But the most insidious and devious part of her argument lies in noting that she paints the “victim” in her scenario – as “Christian minority”. She did not say just any minority – for example Buddhist minorities, Sikh minorities and Hindu minorities are – and continue to be targets of Islamist attacks. But Gopal must only mention “Christian minorities”. She knows she is actually appealing to the Christian majoritarian audience of UK, trying to tickle their own underlying religiosity and religious anger and transfer it against the “Hindu”.

“As the candidate of the far-right Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), in current elections he does not dispute his or its links to the extremist Hindu network known as the Sangh Parivar.”

It is interesting to note the casual application of adjectives, which do not need to be, and are never qualified. Gopal thinks that extremist is such a well-defined term, that mere slapping it on anyone from such a high and undisputed authority as herself – is enough. Extremist in one school, one religion, one nation – become moderates, average, centrist in another school, religion, nation. Again Gopal is very careful in disjuncting “Muslim” from “extremist” – she reserves such joining to Muslim only by adding an “ist”, creating the linguistic illusion of the two being separate. No such kindnesses for the “Hindu” though. In the eyes of enemies of the Hindu, any assertiveness or protest or attempt at defining itself independently of self-appointed experts form outside – who however carry their own hidden religious agenda by criticizing religions/cultures selectively – is a criminal offense.

“Modi was a leading activist for its secretive and militaristic arm, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) – whose founder expressed admiration for Hitler, ideologies of racial purity and the virtues of fascism. It is an organisation that, on a good day, looks like the British National party but can operate more like Nazi militias. Known for an authoritarian leadership style, Modi’s only expression of regret for the pogroms compared them to a car running over a puppy, while he labelled Muslim relief camps “baby-making factories”.”

Interestingly, the roots of the current Palestinian movement against Israel, and Jews – has its roots in a certain Grand Mufti of Palestine, who became a close associate, admirer of Hitler, and collaborator of the Nazis. This Grand Mufti had however been helped to get selected to his post by the dubious role of the then British administrator of Palestine. Does this make the British, Christians, current Palestinian movements, any better than the RSS? The Palestinian groups still express admiration for Hitler, for example  http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=655

“Hitler awaited me. I said, ‘You’re the one who killed the Jews?’
He [Hitler] said: ‘Yes. I killed them so you would all know that they are a nation which spreads destruction all over the world. And what I ask of you is to be resilient and patient, concerning the suffering that Palestine is experiencing at their hands.’
I said [to Hitler]: ‘Thanks for the advice.’ “ http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=655&doc_id=6029

“Had Hitler won, Nazism would be an honor that people would be competing to belong to, and not a disgrace punishable by law. Churchill and Roosevelt were alcoholics, and in their youth were questioned more than once about brawls they started in bars, while Hitler hated alcohol and was not addicted to it. He used to go to sleep early and wake up early, and was very organized. These facts have been turned upside down as well, and Satan has been dressed with angels’ wings…”

“Palestinians whose first name is “Hitler”: Hitler Salah [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Sept. 28, 2005], Hitler Abu-Alrab [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Jan. 27, 2005], Hitler Mahmud Abu-Libda [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Dec.18, 2000.] Articles reflecting admiration for Hitler have appeared in both Fatah and Hamas newspapers.”

Millions go as aid and funds diverted for Palestinian movements from UK. Does Gopal lambast them similarly? no. Why not? Because doing so would not be in the interests of the core of the British establishment thinking– which still has its pro-Sunni, Wahabi, anti-Semitic bent of the early 20th century.

“Hindu extremism is rooted in a macho 20th-century response to British colonialism which mocked Hindu “effeminacy”. It is rarely scrutinised in the west, partly because Hinduism is stereotyped as gentle and non-violent in the image of Gandhi – who, ironically, was assassinated by an RSS activist – and benefits from the disproportionate attention given to Islamist violence, which enables other pernicious extremisms to slip under the radar.”

Gopal obviosuly covers up her glee at supposed “hindu effiminacy” just as newly enslaved woman in Islamic hands were often reported to be over-zealous to show her devotion to new masters by sharing in the mocking or humiliation of her own kin. Actually, Gopal’s shoddy scholarship and very poor or rather dishonest understanding of colonial history shows in her lack of reference to studies of militancy within the Hindu long before the British arrived, as in Warrior Ascetics and Indian Empires By William R. Pinch published from within the very Cambridge that Gopal struts about.

“For all its anti-British rhetoric, Hindu nationalism played no significant role in either the freedom struggle or in creating the secular constitution of independent India. But over recent decades, the notion of Hindutva (Hindu-ness) has grown in force along with the unfettered capitalism it espouses: it is responsible for vicious attacks on Christians, murdering missionaries and calling for Muslims to choose between Pakistan and the graveyard. And any victory for a proponent of a nuclearised Hindu India where homosexuality remains criminalised will have consequences that will be felt well beyond the subcontinent, not least in multicultural Britain.”

As for pontificating on who played no significant role in freedom struggle : Gopal follows the cue of Congress favoured so-called professional historians who see political agenda in everyone else other than themselves. The latter served the dual purpose of reassuring the British that the threat of militancy or militancy itself among the Hindu having any role in the removal of the Brits – because the Brits have always been mortally scared of appearing to have been militarily or violently thrashed. It fed into their ancient paranoia of appearing weak before continental brothers. The other purpose was legitimizing the dynastic continuity of British Raj through the Nehruvian one, by projecting Nehru and Gandhi as the sole harbingers of Indian freedom – erasing and denigrating all other threads of Indian freedom struggle and its success. Such an agitprop and construction of the colonial-anti-colonial story served the purposes of all three players in that game – British imperialism, the north-Indian mullah-Hindu-elite collaborator class developing within the Sultanate-Mughal spectrum represented by Motilal and Jawaharlal, and the mercantile fledgling capitalists of India. Making Gandhi the sole victor, then was strategy of redefining the Hindu as passively accepting of all that is thrown against, tolerant of everything and everyone so that the extreme exclusivism, culture erasure memes of Christianity and Islam could continue unhindered even after their British patrons were gone from direct power. Gopal simply parrots the line.

Interestingly, and expectedly, Gopal shows her lack of integrity by not mentioning that the anti-homosexual laws were actually British laws imposed on Hindus – in deference to Islamic and Christian demands when the laws were being formalized for the Raj, and that the current strongest opposition against decriminalizing homosexuality comes from Muslim leadership in India. It is Hindus who have some traditional space for the third “gender”, not Muslims – some of whose voice have already promised alternatives under Islamic law for India. Gopal slyly makes an Islamic and Christian problem into a Hindu one, and then pitched it on her chosen target. When mentioning “vicious attacks” on Christian missionaries, she quietly avoids the role and effect of such missionaries on simple believing communities, the fraud and financial promises used to manipulate and win converts, and the attacks on and exclusion of Hindus by missionaries. When Hindu “missionaries” go for similar work – they are murdered too, and their activity is touted by the likes of Gopal as disruptive and therefore their murder somehow legitimate. Gopal has absorbed British ruling classes’ traditional duplicity rather well.

“The Gujarat pogroms took place after an unexplained fire on a train, which killed Hindu activists and was swiftly attributed by Modi to Islamic forces and Pakistan. Allegations remain that he deliberately prevented authorities from intervening. Contrary to claims, India’s supreme court has not issued him a “clean chit” but criticised him as a “modern-day Nero”.”

For Gopal – the “fire” is “unexplained”, not even unfortunate – or no commiseration expressed for those burned. Notwithstanding that the commission reports did not declare the fire “unexplained”, but rather suspicious. However, the suspicious reports were generated to make it appear that the burned passengers set fire to themselves – so that arson was so strongly suspected and secretly acknowledged by the anti-Hindu forces in the country and abroad – that they swung into action to pitch the blame on the “hindu” themselves. Gopal mentions allegations in a neat weave to create the impression that they were somehow not mere allegations but truths.

“Modi’s moral culpability was recognised by both Britain and the US in denying him a travel visa for several years. Britain has also been attempting, without success, to get justice for the three Britons – Saeed and Sakil Dawood, and Mohammed Aswat – who were chased, cornered and brutally killed, their bodies burned beyond recognition. Now, disgracefully, trumped by British corporate interests in India, many owned by British Indians, governmental links with Modi have been re-established. This rehabilitation is the result of hard lobbying by some Hindutva-friendly politicians and the many front organisations that operate in Britain. We are urged to focus on corporate-friendly Modi, the pogroms being a little mishap to be shrugged off.”

Gopal is at her ridiculous shamelessness best : the US/UK’s rejection of Modi somehow reinforces the guilt of Modi. Is she prepared to do the same for US/UK’s virtual rejection of Palestinian demands and accept that it proves Palestinian guilt? Or UK’s virtual clean chit to allow South American genocide criminals to move freely in UK shows their lack of guilt? Gopal claims to have been at the forefront of fighting fascism – but fails to recognize the reach, spread and power of fascism in the form of Islamism. She want to equate Islamism with Hindu reassertion – and this is where she reveals her secret agenda.

“We should note with concern that some charitable funds raised in Britain, including for the 2001 Gujarat earthquake, went to charities run by Hindu extremists who systematically foment hate. So too must we care about the “saffron pound” sent by long-distance Hindu “patriots” to fund extremism. But investigating Britain’s Hindu zealots doesn’t have the same political currency as pronouncements about getting “tough” on Islamic extremism.

A Modi victory will strengthen the arm of chauvinist forces in Britain, which have already had successes such as shutting down exhibitions, quashing caste discrimination laws, and withdrawing Royal Mail stamps. Under Modi there will be no progress on Kashmir, which will also have far-reaching violent consequences. In the face of a global resurgence of the right we must be alert to all its extremist forms. Britons committed to anti-fascism must not allow their country to abdicate morality.”

The weakest part of Gopals’ argument is however her failure to establish any strong connection between a Modi victory and negative consequences for UK home territories. Shutting down of exhibitions and withdrawal of stamps is far behind the political exigencies by which the London series bombings are related to the global fascist Islamist agenda. Hindu India has little to gain out of blackmailing a puny world player like the UK whose only influence can be exercised through its big-brother the USA. Islamists on the other hand have a lot depending on the UK and vice versa. Her most concrete argument is that of Modi will stall progress on “Kashmir”. Interestingly again, Gopal shows her real affiliations and commitments by dropping the word Jammu – and making one cause with the Islamist agenda of erasing the reality of Hindu and Buddhist Jammu and Ladakh. Since she thinks “Hindu” is against “Kashmir” she is already subscribed to the idea of an Islamist Kashmir – the dream of islamists, many of whom find a niche in her very UK – and against whom she has nothing to say. Not to speak of no Guardian article from her pen about the fascism unleashed by the valley Muslims on Hindu “Kashmiris”.

Gopals’ anti-fascism is very very selective – it only finds it in Hindu reassertion, not in Islamics, or christians, or in the actions of states in the west and its Islamist allies like the Saudis, around the globe and sometimes on their own home territories – which have amounted to and continue to be so – as fascist. So at the end of the day, her shrill cry of sky-is-falling and frantic appeal to the UK to intervene in Indian politics reveals her real motivations – serve the cause of imperialism under cover of anti-fascism – the same face used in Europe and the world since the end of WWII.

 

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Counter Thoughts -2: Pakistan should be dissolved as a nation and absorbed into India.

Posted on February 24, 2014. Filed under: Afghanistan, Antisemitism, Arab, Army, China, Christians, Communist, economics, financial crisis, Hindu, History, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Kashmir, Muslims, neoimperialism, Pakistan, Politics, religion, slavery, Taleban, terrorism, UK, USA, Wahabi |

[First written almost 4 years ago: updated!]

How many nations of our times are based purely on a religion and recognized by other nations as independent nations? Only two – the Vatican City and Pakistan. Ironically they share in common some traits. Both have helped in the unravelling of the USSR but not of Communism – for it still survives behind the People’s Republic of China and is still working towards global dominance. In spite of the UK and West’s blatant support for Pakistani sadism on both Afghans and Indians, for its supposed role in overthrow of USSR – Pakistan is desperately grabbing the Chinese communist hands in gratitude for having benefited from Chinese nuclear proliferation. Pakistan showed that gratitude by dealing in stolen or robbed property – so typical of Islamism, by gifting China territory Pakistan received from its British facilitated deceptive raid mounted on Indian territories in 1948.

Both the Vatican and Pakistan have been courted by the USA in its Cold War struggles. Neither has disappointed. Both exert influence on the global politics disproportionate to their actual size, economy, military capabilities, and the capacity to contribute in any meaningful way towards a modern, knowledge based, technological and information society. Both manage to do so by manipulating their historical images as projections into the future.

But there the similarities end. The Vatican’s leadership has made amends to its historical victims, and has shown its flexibility and readiness to change with the times. It has steadfastly refused to underwrite radicalism of the theological variety [the severe castigation of the Liberation Theology for example].  This may change in the future. But the leadership of the Vatican have proved themselves consummate statesmen in the concessions and compromises that they have made while never abandoning the fundamental objective of total global ideological domination. This is an objective that would have been a crime if not from the “one and only true message”, for any other “religion” in the times when the Church ruled supreme. But now in the days of “total religious tolerance”, there is nothing wrong in having a declared agenda of “harvesting all souls” and poaching on the following of looked-down-upon religious cultures. In fact, legal and state coercive machinery in liberal states can be used to guarantee protection of any proselytizer – even someone swearing by texts that recommend putting the unrepentant unbeliever to the sword, while raising no questions as to the right of the followers of those very same religions – where they are a majority – to deny exactly those very same rights to non-co-religionsists. How tolerant Christianity can be with regards to cohabiting with Islamists, and vice versa – especially where Christians have sufficient numerical strength – was and is being shown in Sudan. But no great talk is being thrown about in the liberal western media about what is going on in Sudan and why.

Where Pakistan differs is not in its protection of organizations claiming the right to practice “Dawa” or spreading of the Islamist beliefs -in parallel to Christianist demands for the right to badmouth non-Christian religions and beliefs and “spread the light” – by any and all means possible, and where even “charity” as concrete monetary benefits is kosher in a process of buying religious allegiance that in the corporate world would be condemned as criminal bribing –  but in its total lack of statesmanship. Unlike the Vatican, the Pakistani leadership never apologizes to the victims of its Islamists, never acknowledges that it has nurtured Jihadis in its madrassahs, never concedes to modernization in education and social practices, never really allows any land reforms or dismantling of feudal exploitation in its backyard.

Pakistan is basically an anachronism, a nation whose only foundational claim for identity is a religion – in a historical period where the world is leaving behind, exclusive and historical claim based religions. Moreover, that religion is not even unique to the country – it is shared by a host of other nations, some of whom have louder and more well established claims of being the centre for that religion. So Pakistan is based on a type of ideology increasingly irrelevant globally as national foundation, and moreover on an ideology based identity shared with other “nations” – and therefore has no real claims of distinction from other nations. It cannot look at history and culture, for in spite of the best sadistic efforts of generations of  “mullahs” – elements of pre-Islamic cultures lie firmly interwoven in the national fabric, and those elements are shared by its imagined nemesis – India. In fact the pre-Islamic cultural element proved so strong that a part of it broke away in reaction in 1971 as Bangladesh.

So now Pakistan finds itself in a terrible dilemma. To strengthen and give uniqueness to its national foundation, it has to become more Islamic than “others”. Becoming more Islamic means more and more unquestioning obedience to a strict and literal interpretation of the core texts. That in turns means more Jihad with violent means which accelerates the competition between the ruling feudal elite, the army, the mullahs, the commons, the militants – to become “purer” than the others. That means an almost perpetual state of national Jihad. Purer Islam can only be maintained by preventing modernization – in education, productivity, technology and above all the questing mindset. Which means Pakistan will become more and more dependent on largesse from interested external sources and be a drain on the global economy as the sources would spread the cost around.

So the West and the global community should perhaps start thinking of dissolving the entity called Pakistan. Here are the brief reasons :

(1) Dissolving Pakistan saves the West (and therefore the world economy )a huge amount of money and resources needed to keep the state afloat, and a total drain, because none of that capital goes into productive capacities.

(2) Even though the Chinese are now playing second fiddle to the West, it is uncannily similar to the Ribbentrop-Molotov handshake where both sides appear to be buying time. Eventually, Russia and China could come together with Iran (or whatever is left of it even if a so-called revolutionary liberalization and democratization takes place there under non-theologians) to which the CAR will lean. As long as Pakistan remains an independent entity, it can play the prostitute and threaten to kiss the higher bidder or the one more willing to pay.  That is both a security risk and a potential disaster, if everything given to Pakistan lands up in Russian, Iranian or Chinese hands and the West’s presence is virtually terminated in the Afghan-Pakistan frontier. Dissolving Pakistan takes away this worry.

(3)  Dissolving Pakistan and putting up new independent states in its place actually creates new multiple centres where Jihad can be protected and nurtured. One Pakistan becomes many and the western problem multiplies. One of the best bets is to allow India to absorb the populations and the territories.   India is a growing economy which can absorb the costs. It has the capability and the will to manage multicultural groups and religious animosities. Culturally Indians of the western part of the country will be closer to the Pakistanis across the border [Punjab for example shares the language across the border in spite of the state sponsorship of Urdu] compared to any other external ethnicity or country. Moreover the costs of developing infrastructure and the economy or carrying out necessary social reforms will be borne on Indian shoulders and not on the west.

(4) As the price for non-intervention in the absorption, the West could extract concessions from India that it will have assured access and facilities to reach the CAR through channels and routes maintained and developed through Pakistani territories connecting the Karakorum Highway and other CAR approach routes.

(5) The Taliban lose their foster home, and are buffered off from the crucial supply routes of Karakorums and the Arabian Sea. The so-called Kashmir problem vanishes as the Pakistani military and ISI mechanism to foment terrorists inside India vanishes.  So one of the greatest excuses for maintaining Jihad from the Pakistani side, vanishes. With dissolution of Pakistan, one of the persistent Pakistani revivalist jihad trends that periodically and insistently reappears in Bangladesh, gets cut from its roots – leaving only Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states and elements from Malaysia as remnant patrons.

(6) India can and should promise land reforms, and redistribution of concentrated big-landholding from Pakistan’s obnoxious feudal lords and the military upper echelons who are either created landlords as rewards or come from the feudal network itself – to landless and marginal farmers of Pakistan. These are the same people who are exploited ruthlessly, often sexually and through slavery, by the Pakistani elite in an obvious extension of the worst aspects of casteism, but on which no Christian or western liberal intelligentsia will comment upon as it shows Islam in a bad-light compared to eminently much more bashable “Hindu”.

If it is any consolation, MacArthur broke the Japanese feudal class’s back to an extent through land-reforms, in post war Japan. Moreover all the off-shore money laundering units that UK maintains for complete deniability from its colonial days can still harness and will definitely attract Pakistani Islamist and feudal military elite’s looted capital for parking on the prospect of imminent fall before Indian troops, and to play with for financial speculative profits and bonuses by the “city” bosses. That in itself should convince the UK and its ally across the pond, to allow the “fall” to happen.

India, because of linguistic and unique cultural history, will remain firmly in western and specifically the Anglo-Saxon or Atlanticist orbit for generations to come. There are sufficient fissures in the Indian ruling class for the west to exploit and protect western interests.

It is worth a try – at least the largest source for generating terror of the Jihadi and allied kind (through international crime and other non-religious or ethnic militancy) will be effectively liquidated. At one stroke West no longer has to face Islamist terror, pay for upkeep of Jihad, and instead can profit from a growing economy which bears all the costs, together with an alternate route to get closer to tantalizing natural resources to be looted in Central Asia and keep a nervous eye to the age-old threat – Russia! After all, the greatest threats come from those shared common ideological roots, and who are well-versed as brothers from the same family school in the tactics of robber imperialism that originated in “greater” Europe!

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 4 so far )

CounterThoughts-1 : India’s failure in Bangladesh is a failure to understand Islam.

Posted on January 18, 2014. Filed under: Afghanistan, Arab, Bangladesh, Bengal, China, Communist, Delhi, Hindu, History, India, Indian National Congress, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Kashmir, Left, Maoism, Muslims, neoimperialism, Nuclear, Pakistan, Politics, rape, religion, Russia, Salafi, Saudi, Sunni, Taleban, terrorism, UK, USA, Wahabi |

It is almost six years since I started writing on this blog. As with most of my intellectual forays, it was to search for root causes to phenomena on which people seem to be talking from belief, bias, preconception and conscious or subconscious agenda, and on which I seemed to find no answers of my own yet.

Six years later, and a myriad interactions with ideological friends and foes or the merely non-committed, desperately trying to appear neutral middle-roaders, I feel that the task is not only to understand but also to try and share what I have felt to be the way forward while trying to understand.

However, I should stress that I do not support the idea of final answers and incontrovertible truths. More of that later, and I will try to explain why I think so. I am not demanding or claiming that others should think like me, or that what I say or think is important. But it is a deep seated, slowly maturing urge over the years to think aloud, to borrow the cliché. What do I expect out of it? A myriad small sparks, not the incinerating brilliance of a nuclear device, but the small, fragile, light of the primitive oil lamps, or the hopeful glowing embers of the evening fires of cooking of the first human settlements.

I am starting off this sequence with a topic that appears to hog the Indian subcontinental discourse for some time (apart from supposed uniqueness of Indian propensity to rape, or supposed waiting global disaster of a Modi led “saffron” resurgence, or the glowing future of a post NATO Afghanistan, and the continuously improving civilizational status of Pakistan) – namely, the recent elections in Bangladesh.

My thoughts on Bangladesh and its society has been laid out on this blog before. So I will only briefly touch and summarize.

Bangladesh was formed in 1971 as a result of an intra-elite factional contest for power over the Islamist movement that had managed in 1947 to use tactical violence, British covert support, and Delhi-Uttar-Pradesh-Gujarat based axis of the Indian Congress’s fear of the more populous two ends of the Gangetic plains – Punjab and Bengal’s long tradition of independent counter-Delhi political undercurrent.

For the Islamist, they needed a base in which they could nurture jihad and hopefully accumulate the resources for a future “final solution” of getting rid of all Kaffir on the subcontinent, and as many mullahs openly express – more openly in Taliban land fertilized by decades of Saudi funding and tacit support from the UK and the USA through their islamist allies in power in Pakistan. Pakistan was a good starting point for their agenda, as they felt that the liberalizing, modernizing, educating world of the Indian Hindu would eventually open up Islamic society beyond mullah sadistic control.

For the British, smarting under the loss of their global dominance to the Americans, Pakistan would be boots on the ground for British interests. Such interests would include long term hope of reviving sole control over Indian Ocean ring, use American fear of Soviet expansion to simultaneously get the USA involved in regional wars of attrition so over the that long term Americans would be weakened and hated sufficiently to leave the field open again for the British, while at the same time prevent modernization, liberalization and resurgence of cultural identities that the British had hated out of racial, religious and perhaps a bit of underlying twisted obsession with the darker side of human nature.  One of the foremost targets of British hatred was anything to do with the “Hindu”. It was the “Hindu” they saw as the elusive system which sourced resistance to imperialist subjugation where as the supposedly more virulent and “martial” Islam quickly turned bootlickers. For the British – the Congress was “Hindu”, “Sanskrit” was Hindu, Hindu temple and architecture was ugly compared to the seductive feminine curves of the “domes” of Islam, Hindu texts, knowledge base and culture represented the apotheosis of all that was supposedly, pure, Christian and “white”.  The rump state of India that was left after 1947, was still “Hindu” and the galling reminder that the Hindu failed to “convert” to submission to British claims of supremacy. Thus Pakistan, in its western and eastern ends would remain the best chance to gall India into the future, and be hopefully bases of jihadism if not outright British comeback – that will continue to bleed “Hindu” India. At least that was perhaps the hope anyway.

Where the British failed was their belief in their own propaganda, invented out of a necessity to play intra-Islam factionalism to subdue the Ottomans by raising the Wahabi-Saud jihad – that somehow intra-Islamic factional fight for dominance represented the non-monolithic nature of Islam. Islam being actually a cover for blatant imperialism, every regional power within a broader spectrum of Islamic following, will try to become the centre of that imperialist claim – so that they can then use the religious imperialist authority enshrined within Islam – to mobilize the total resources of global reach of Islam for their own individual regional power centre benefit. This has been the history of the Islamic politics right from its inception.

 

Contrary to western misrepresentation, this internal drive to become the supreme imperialist claiming the loyalty and support of all Muslims behind their power hunger, leading to inter-regional fights, does not represent any actual deviation from the core genocidic, culture erasing, enslaving agenda of Islam – where it concerns the as yet non-Muslim.

Now to understand Bangladeshi politics, this above understanding is crucial. The Awami League split from the Muslim League of Jinnah, not out of secular or non-Islamist core drives – but as power seeking movement that wanted the fruits of the partition of 1947, the control over the land and in more mundane terms, the wealth, property and women of the Hindu’s of eastern Pakistan and dominance over the whole of Pakistani state structure.  The greater contiguity and inter-mingling of non-Muslim motifs and memes and the relatively later entry of Islam into the area historically, compared to the western end of India, implied a difficult task ahead for “eastern” Islamists. There were spontaneous popular movements influenced by the remnant secular, liberal and modernizing influences of pre-Partition Hindu-presence [the relative strengths were roughly 45/50-55/50 at the end of a disputed and allegedly biased-in-favour-of-the-Muslim in the last census  before Partition], which was seized upon shrewdly and tactically by the Awami League leadership under Mujibur Rehman. But the fact is often forgotten that Mujibur started his political life as a student activist for the Muslim League in Calcutta, under patronage of Suhrawardy – the architect of government supervised and protected pogrom on Calcutta Hindus that led to the notorious pre-Partition massacres.

Independence for Bangladesh was therefore just a manifestation of the intra-Islamic fight within Islamic imperialism for monopoly of the imperialist claim, it no way represents any compromise at any fundamental level with the commitment to jihadist clearing of non-Muslim cultures, seizing their property and resources and enslaving their women. It would be natural to expect that after the formal separation of power and independence for Bangladesh was obtained by necessary tactical pretension by future leadership of Bangladesh to get Indian and global support – that the core of this political movement would quickly reassert its fundamental drive by getting rid of all symbols and structures that they saw as being tainted by the need to compromise even tactically to “Hindus” or non-muslim sympathetic powers. Mujibur was the most blatant symbol of this and therefore he had to be  made an example of. Note that elements of the core of Awami League and the military which had apparently sided with the “liberation movement” collaborated in the bloodshed.

Since, Bangladesh has consistently seen expulsion and genocide of remnant Hindus, looting of their property, rape and abduction and forced conversion of their women. Islamic atrocities are also typical in the deliberate psychological cruelty or sado-masochistic practices involved – for example it is not enough to simply kill the kaffir, but make it horrific by torture of the most inventive imagination, not only rape but rape before a father or a husband and forcing them to watch – intended to not only cause psychological trauma, but also to burn into the helpless men their emasculation and ineffectiveness. This is an extremely sophisticated grasp over the psychology of coercion, ans shows that the mullah is a highly trained and conditioned psychological warrior who has almost no sense of guilt or empathy where it concerns unleashing the more twisted form of sado-masochistic tendencies in the human.

The recent elections, showing widespread torture, rape, genocide of Hindus as an aftermath, in which elements of both the supposedly winning “secular” Awami League, as well as the BNP and Jamaat combination participated – shows that nothing really has changed from the early days of Islam in that zone. Mymensingh Gitika, a collection of medieval folk tales in verse forms from a region in Bangladesh – tells the story of a Hindu housewife being forced to pleasure a Qazi. Whether a faction loses or wins, be it Awami League or BNP or Jamaat – Islamists would go out to rape Hindu women, torch their houses, and loot their belongings, be it to celebrate a win , or to grieve over a loss.

Bangladeshi core thinking is reflected in the blatant statement of academics of Jehangirnagar university (a deliberate naming done to emphasize the Mughal association, from the Mughal name given to the then town, over the more ancient Dhaka-Vikramanipur – having therefore Hindu connotations) aspiring for an unbroken new Mughalistan carved out of Northern India stretching from Punjab and Pakistan over the Gangetic Valley all he way to Bangladesh and hopefully even what is now North-Eastern India.  Academics and “intelligentsia” of Bangladesh, openly discuss on media and TV shows, the desirability of destabilizing the North-East India so that eventually it gets detached from India and become ripe for Bangladeshi and “Islamic” expansion.

It is in the interest of the core drivers of Bangladeshi society – to preserve elements of Islamist jihadism. Over the years, Saudi and UK based funding sources have developed an extensive network of madrasshas and other institutional means of preaching the Arabic, Sunni-Wahabi views, and the result has been the increasing mass-presence of younger people in extremism, and obvious support enjoyed by the organizations like Hifazat whose members have played an increasingly visibly public as well as militant role.

Indira Gandhi scored a tactical brilliance in 1971, but a strategic blunder when she helped an independent Bangladesh to form. This independent nation immediately showed its fangs of islamism, has continued to expel Hindus, abduct rape and enslave Hindu women, and welcomed all possible transnational anti-India and anti-Hindu forces. As and when Pakistan falls, this nation will provide an alternative base for jihadis to retsart their movement.

I know that many have disagreed with me on this, but I still think, that in 1971, India should have raised the stakes by tantalizing the “west” with supporting Bangladeshi independence, but prepared to compromise if allowed to conquer and re-incorporate the northern “Pakistani occupied Kashmir”, hold on to the thin corridor to Rawalpindi up to the hills of the Swat, and extract a land corridor through Chittagong in the east to the sea. Impose demilitarization of east Pakistan on the formal logic of ensuring that Bengalis were not going to be subjected to Pakistani military atrocities, and guarantee autonomy within Pakistan.  End of all manipulations by China, USA and the UK and their support for the violently sadistic societies and mullahs of jihad in both ends of Pakistan. The Indian naval presence on both sides of the mouth of the delta and demilitarization would ensure the prevention of Pakistani military presence for ever to repeat the type sex-alavery and torture camps that they ran in 1971, and end of Chinese imperialist expansion schemes and their consequent inputs in genocide on subcontinental soil. End of Karakorum highway being lucrative for geo-political sadism and an alternative and peaceful land network to central Asia, connecting to India the more liberalizable northern Afghanistan, Central Asian Republics bypassing the Pakistani/Gulf/Saudi proximity and mullahfied jihadi societies of Southern Afghanistan and starving them of the economic flow that they now hog and use to support jihad.

It sounds too cynical, too “reverse-imperialist”, “safffron-revivalist”? We have seen most of the previous liberalizing conquests. They have only enhanced the blatantly cynical, racist, and sadistic existing imperialistic implementations of the Abrahamic cults. Why not a counter offensive that has proven its secular, liberal and modernizing credentials?

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

The Youth Uprising in Bangladesh – as expected, now a target of both Islamists and the government

Posted on April 9, 2013. Filed under: Bangladesh, Bengal, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Muslims, neoimperialism, religion, Shahbag, Taleban, terrorism |

On 28th February this year, I had written on this blog – about the Youth demonstration at Shabag in Dhaka, Bangladesh :

What should the Shabag youth be aware of ?

(1) They should remember, that Fascists always triumph when a more liberal, critical, popular movement with progressive aspirations starts and shows promise of almost nearing success, but cannot or is prevented from succeeding to gain a decisive share of power. This was how Russian Bolsheviks, French Jacobins, German Nazis gained power.

(2) Bangladeshi society as a whole is tilted towards youth – age wise – demographically. But the entire society is a continuous demographic relic of past times and social as well as religious fossils. The hold of mullahcracy runs deep – fostered by decades of dictators, sections of the army, and international Islamist forces as well as their cold-war patrons in the west.

(3) In a confrontation like this, Bangladeshi society is likely to split into roughly a 40-40-10-10 split. This is based on a rough estimate from past few elections, where, 40% go for what I dub the covert Islamists, represented within the Awami League, 40% go for the overt Islamists, represented within the BNP+Jamaat spectrum, 10% are really seculars, and 10% are undecided – who swing elections in the first past the post system.

(4) The Shabag youth probably represent around 15-20% –  the more educated, more urbanized, sections of the overall youth population. This does not mean that they are going to be defeated. Determined and audacious minorities have always been the one and only harbinger of change of societies and political systems. However, the dangers they must be aware of is that of complacency. There is a portion of rural youth kept carefully away from modernization by the collaborative structure of feudal remnants, land-grabbers (the primary motivation for supporting Pakistan was the hope in the middle and upper-middle level of rural Muslim gentry to gain the land and women and wealth of Hindus), virulent Islamists, collaborators and rapists and genociders of ’71 protected under pressure subsequently by the international Islamist networks, and the network of predominantly Saudi funded (and funded by charities working from western nations like UK) dawa-madrassa net.

(5) the state structure of Bangladesh will necessarily carry Islamist elements in its armed wings, intelligence, and administration.  These have been carefully nurtured from even the Liberation war times. There is a genuine possibility of a covert call to arms by the jihadists against the Shahbag movement.

(6) the youth should form an organizational structure, while keeping leadership in a group – so that individuals targeted for elimination will not stop the movement. They should remember that Islamist strategy of terror is “total terror”. From the time of the founder, verbal dissenters or critics were targeted for elimination – as in a female poetess accused of lampooning the leader of the early Islamics – and whose assassination was called for from within the early mosque. Families, loved ones, are targeted too – for the Fascist Islamist mullahcracy’s mind is a sadist one. It seeks not only to give pain, but it enjoys the very act of giving pain and that its victim is suffering mentally as well as physically.

The Egyptian youth have had trouble because they trusted the more established political parties pretending sympathy and failed to create a political structure of their own. The Shahbag youth should not make this error. They should understand that even the Awami League represents primarily an aging generation – and who therefore have greater identification with Islamist undercurrents. They will show this in signs of conciliatory tone towards Islamism, and try to prove themselves as “proper Muslims”. In turn this shows the inner ideological affiliations which even if weaker than that of BNP – is still an affiliation to the Islamists.

The Shahbag youth resistance will be sought to be controlled by both the major power elite factions in Bangladeshi politics. If they can manage to control, they will eventually dismantle this movement – for they do see it as a threat to their own established power structures.

I would suggest the possibility of underhand deal cutting going on with the Hifazat right at this moment under the overt excuse of dividing up the Islamist opposition from the government side. Awami League is most likely to come to an understanding with the Hifazat – where both sides will agree to an official “scaling down”.

Most likely that the Awami League government will offer token punishments to the bloggers already arrested, and enact more stringent mullah-appeasing laws against “cyber-defamation” of Islam – so that the Hifazat Ameer can show his followers that he has “won”. If as alleged by the government the Hifazat movement has monetary backers, then they will be able to show possible Islamist sponsors abroad – that the money has not been wasted. Awami League will then be able to claim it has contained and diffused the “communal” threat and not allowed “communal forces” to consolidate.

Both sides will find it convenient to target the “bloggers” and the “Shahbag” youth. The latter represent a political threat to both the covert and the overt Islamists. Net gain – both covert (AL) and overt (BNP+Jamaat) as well as sundry mullahcracy – all gain one more notch of taking Bangladesh  further along the Islamism line by state enforced curtailing of exploration and exposure of the religions’ real totalitarian heart and agenda for the subcontinent.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Sayedee’s Jamaat-e-Islami shows how Islam actually spread in India or for that matter in Arabia too

Posted on March 3, 2013. Filed under: Arab, Bangladesh, Bengal, Hindu, Historians with political agenda, History, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Left, Pakistan, Politics, rape, religion, Saudi, Shahbag, Sunni, Taleban, terrorism, UK, Wahabi |

 What Jamaat-e-Islami of Bangladesh is doing in collaboration with other sharia-fascist Islamist groups is being dubbed by the media as merely being Pakistani agents, or trying to complete what Pakistan failed to do in 1971. There are two reasons or rather compulsions behind this media or even mainstream “secular”
political parties.

The first one is the fear in parties like Awami League stemming from the uncertainty of not really knowing how much of covert Islamist sympathy lies within their own ranks, or in the state machinery, or in the police and armed wings. Then there is also the fear of what pressures might be applied by external forces which no regime of Bangladesh can afford to displease.  A possible spectrum of such forces can perhaps be hypothesized as the covert state wings of UK, USA and KSA. Islamic leaders, or political  and military leaders from Islamic nations on the subcontinent – typically get immediate shelter in one of three countries when things get too hot in their native land and in anticipation of placing them back in their proper “roles” once things cool down – UK and KSA primarily, and USA secondarily. The eldest son of the current opposition leader has been “recuperating” quietly in UK ever since he went there for treatment after suffering health problems while in custody in Bangladesh under corruption charges. We can hear nothing, not even a murmur, from the anti-corruption agencies in Bangladesh over this – even though we do hear murmurs about the other son who is sheltered in Singapore. Another leader of the “interim-caretaker-government” is sheltered on the island too, and nothing is heard of him even though the opposition makes noises from time to time (not very loudly though). Musharraf has sheltered on the island too.

United Kingdom was instrumental in creating the Islamist problem on the subcontinent as part of a consistent and premeditated political programme of subverting Indian society, and there is some indication that the British state machinery had set the task of outlining separatist Islam based territorial and political units – to Islamic civil servants in the Indian administrative services as early as 1934.  Then the remarkably successful British Indian intelligence service, which penetrated almost each and every anti-Britsh peaceful or covert political groups, apparently failed completely in anticipating how demobilized Muslim soldiers of British Indian Army were being recruited by the Muslim League to train jihadi gangs as part of a planned pogrom and genocide move to be unleashed in the infamous “Direct Action Day”. The Partition violence was orchestrated to a very large extent from within resources ultimately traceable to the British Indian army (demobilized soldiers) and administration.

Thus it might actually be in the interest of sections of political and covert intelligence wings of both UK and KSA, not to allow the violent Islamist factions in Bangladesh (and in Pakistan) to be completely destroyed, as these may appear to be valuable destabilizing assets for future manipulation of subcontinental politics. If Awami League moves to the extent of destroying these assets, their leaders may suddenly find themselves assassinated or coups mounted.

The other reason, potentially, is the awareness that what Jamaat is doing – is actually consistently within the ambit of Islamism, and very much practised and used as precedence from the founding days of Islam. Thus countering the Jamaat is not possible from the Islamic religious angle. For every supposed “peaceful conversion” verse in the Quran, there are many more in the ahadith that makes deceptive, violent and genocidic jihad on the non-Muslim the norm.

That Jamaat is carrying out an Islamic programme is clear in the way it is actually repeating the Islamic jihadi meme for non-muslims on each and every excuse on which violence can be mounted, even if officially the call by them was simply to protest against the hanging order on Sayedee.

(1) In Chittagong, Jamaati Islamists attacked Hindu majority localities at Jaldi union of Banshkhali upazila and set fire to a Buddhist temple.(2) Jamaat members also burned houses at Dhopapara and Mohajonpara and attacked people with sticks, iron rods and sharp weapons.

(3) The rioters also burned three shops belonging to Hindus at Kaliash union of Satkania upazila.

(4) Members of Jamaat-e-Islami and its student wing Islami Chhatra Shibir attacked a temple and business establishments belonging to Hindus at Bhelkobazar in Sundarganj upazila of Gaibandha district.

(5) Rioters also vandalised some houses in Shovaganj union.

(6) Vandalism, arson and looting took place in temples, houses and business establishments of Hindus in Sylhet, Rangpur, Thakurgaon, Laxmipur and Chapainawabganj.

(7) Attackers had vandalised the central Kali temple at Mithapukur upazila in Rangpur and another at Kansat in Chapainawabganj.

Jamaat is indeed following in the same order of politics of violent provocation, and using legitimate retribution from the victim side as the excuse to increase the level of violence in a bid to extract totalitarian state power – that was laid down in the early battles and campaigns of the founding of the religion in northern Arabia, targeting deceptively, by ambush, by flouting of all then prevalent code of conduct of war,  by rape, genocide, and again betrayal of the basic human values.

As expected, while Islamist march in violent demand of action against the Shahbag youth in Kolkata, the “progressiveness” capital of India under watchful protection of the state police [that which also maintains watchful protection of Islamist and jihadi campaigns in Hindu villages along the border with Bangladesh on the Indian side], no protests or marches or sit-ins have happened from the left and secular brandholders of the state. After all, there could be much higher than allowed to be known – electoral and financial benefits from the Muslim population in the state.

What is happening in India and the neighbouring Muslim states – is a repeat, and therefore revealing of actual totalitarianist strategies by which Islam originally spread on the subcontinent. It is just a renewed attempt after gathering the strength that was needed to make the move – recovering from the losses of defeat at the hands of European imperialism, and pretension of submission and alliance with the west.

Ending with a full list of  the 20 charges against Sayedee for a sample of those activities reported and could be supported by witnesses : many others could not make it to the courts because of the successful delay in the trial for 40 years, by which time many witnesses had died or “vanished” when the Jamaat was rehabilitated under international and military-dictatorship patronage.

1. On May 4, 1971, Delawar Hossain Sayedee as a member of Peace (Shanti) Committee carried secret information to the Pakistan army about a gathering of a group of people behind the Madhya Masimpur bus-stand under Pirojpur Sadar and took the army to the spot. The army killed 20 unnamed people by firing.

2. On May 4, 1971, Sayedee along with his accomplices accompanied by the Pakistan army looted belongings of members of the Hindu community living in Masimpur Hindu Para under Pirojpur Sadar. They also set the houses of Hindus alight and opened fire on the scared people, who started fleeing the scene, killing 13 people.

3. On May 4, 1971, Sayedee led a team of the Pakistan army to Masimpur Hindu Para, where the team looted goods from the houses of two members of the Hindu community — Monindra Nath Mistri and Suresh Chandra Mondol — and destroyed their houses by setting them on fire. Sayedee also directlytook part in the large-scale destruction by setting fire to the roadside houses of villages Kalibari, Masimpur, Palpara, Sikarpur, Razarhat, Kukarpara, Dumur Tola, Kalamtola, Nawabpur, Alamkuthi, Dhukigathi, Parerha and Chinrakhali.

4. On May 4, 1971, Sayedee and his accomplices, accompanied by the Pakistani army looted the houses of members of the Hindu community and opened fire indiscriminately on them in front of Dhopa Bari and behind the LGED Building in Pirojpur, leaving four persons killed.

5. Sayedee declared publicly to arrest Saif Mizanur Rahman, then deputy magistrate of Pirojpur Sub-division, when the magistrate organised a Sarbo Dalio Sangram Parishad to inspire people to join the Liberation War. On May 5, 1971, Sayedee along with his associate Monnaf (now deceased), a member of Peace (Shanti) Committee, accompanied by the Pakistan army picked up Saif from the hospital where he was hiding and took him to the bank of the Baleshwar river. On the same date and time, Foyezur Rahman Ahmed, sub-divisional police officer, and Abdur Razzak (SDO in charge of Pirojpur), were also arrested from their workplaces and taken to the river bank. Sayedee as a member of the killer squad was present there and all three government officials were gunned down. Their bodies were thrown into the river Baleshwar. Sayedee directly participated and abetted in the acts of abduction and killing of those three officers.

6. On May 7, 1971, Sayedee identified the houses and shops of Bangalees belonging to the Awami League, Hindu community and supporters of the Liberation War at Parerhat Bazar under Pirojpur Sadar. Sayedee as one of the perpetrators raided those shops and houses and looted valuables, including 22 seers of gold and silver from the shop of one Makhanlal Saha.

7. On May 8, 1971, Sayedee led a team of the Pakistan army to the house of Nurul Islam Khan, where he identified Nurul Islam as an Awami League leader and his son Shahidul Islam Selim as a freedom-fighter to the army. Sayedee then detained Nurul Islam and handed him to the army, which tortured Nurul Islam. His house was then looted and finally set on fire.

8. On May 8, 1971, Sayedee and his accomplices accompanied by the Pakistan army raided the house of one Manik Posari at Chitholia under Pirojpur Sadar and caught his brother Mofizuddin and one Ibrahim. Sayedee’s accomplices then burnt five houses there. On the way to the Pakistani army’s camp, Sayedee instigated the members of the occupation force to kill Ibrahim by gunshot and dump his body near a bridge. On the other hand, Mofiz was taken to the army camp and tortured. Sayedee directly participated in the abduction, murder and persecution of the victims.

9. On June 2, 1971, armed associates of Sayedee under his leadership and accompanied by the Pakistani army raided the house of one Abdul Halim Babul at Nolbunia under Indurkani Police Station and looted valuables from Halim’s house. The team then reduced the house to ashes.

10. On June 2, 1971, Sayedee’s armed associates under his leadership and accompanied by the Pakistan army burnt 25 houses of a Hindu Para in Umedpur village under Indurkani Police Station. At one stage, a victim, Bisabali, was tied to a coconut tree and was shot dead by Sayedee’s accomplice.

11. On June 2, 1971, Sayedee led a team of Peace (Shanti) Committee members, accompanied by the Pakistani army, to raid the house of Mahbubul Alam Howlader (freedom-fighter) of Tengra Khali village under Indurkani Police Station. Sayedee and the team then detained Mahbubul’s elder brother Abdul Mazid Howlader and tortured him, and looted cash money, jewellery and other valuables from the house.

12. One day a group comprising 15-20 armed accomplices of Sayedee under his leadership entered the Hindu Para of Parerh at Bazar under Pirojpur Sadar and captured 14 Hindus, who were all supporters of Bangladesh’s independence. The fourteen were then tied with a single rope and dragged to Pirojpur and handed over to Pakistani soldiers, who killed them. Their bodies were thrown into the river.

13. One night, about 2 to 3 months after the war commenced, some members of Peace Committee under Sayedee’s leadership accompanied by the Pakistan army raided the house of Azhar Ali of Nalbunia village under Pirojpur Sadar Police Station. They then caught and tortured Azahar Ali and his son Shaheb Ali. The team then abducted Shaheb Ali and ultimately he was taken to Pirojpur and killed.

14. During the final stages of the war, Sayedee one morning led a team of Razakar Bahini consisting of 50 to 60 Razakars, into attacking the Hindu Para of Hoglabunia under Pirojpur Sadar. Seeing the attackers, the Hindus managed to flee but one Shefali Gharami failed to do that. Some members of Razakar Bahini entered her room and raped her. Being the leader of the team, Sayedee did not prevent them from committing rape upon her. Sayedee and the members of his team also set fire to the dwelling houses of the Hindu Para.

15. During the last part of the war, Sayedee led 15 to 20 armed Razakars who entered the Hoglabunia village under Pirojpur Sadar Police Station and caught 10 members of the Hindu faith. The attackers then tied all the members of Hindu community with a single rope, dragged them to Pirojpur and handed them over to the Pakistani army. They were all killed and their bodies were dumped into the river.

16. In the course of the Liberation War, Sayedee led a group of 10-12 armed Razakars and Peace Committee members, which surrounded the house of Gouranga Saha of Parerhat Bandar under Pirojpur Sadar. Subsequently, Sayedee and the others abducted three women and handed them over to the Pakistan army at Pirojpur where they were confined and raped for three days before being released.

17. During the Liberation War, Sayedee along with other armed Razakars kept Bipod Saha’s daughter Vanu Saha confined to Bipod Saha’s house at Parerhat under Pirojpur Sadar Police Station and regularly used to go there to rape her.

18. During the Liberation War, one Bhagirothi used to work in the camp of the Pakistan army. One day, after a fight with the freedom fighters, and at the instance of Sayedee, Bhagirothi was charged with passing information to the freedom fighters and killed.

19. During the war, Sayedee, being a member of Razakar Bahini and exercising his influence over the Hindu community of Pirojpur, converted 100-150 Hindus of Parerhat and other villages and compelled them to go to the mosque to offer prayers.

20. On a day at the end of November 1971, Sayedee got information that thousands of people were fleeing to India in order to save their lives. A group of 10-12 armed members of the Razakar Bahini, under Sayedee’s leadership, then attacked the houses of Talukdar Bari at Indurkani village and detained a total of 85 persons and looted goods from there. Of them, all but 10-12 persons were released in exchange for bribes negotiated by Fazlul Huq, a member of the Razakar Bahini. Male persons were tortured and female persons were raped by Pakistan soldiers deployed in the camp.

[Source : http://www.thedailystar.net/suppliments/charges_sayedee.pdf ]

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Delwar Hussein Sayedi found guilty as war-criminal Dilu Razakar : to be hanged for murder, genocide and rape.

Posted on February 28, 2013. Filed under: Army, Bangladesh, Bengal, Egypt, Hindu, History, Hosni Mubarak, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Muslims, neoimperialism, Pakistan, Politics, rape, religion, Salafi, Saudi, Shahbag, Taleban, terrorism, UK, Wahabi |

Is it time to celebrate? Perhaps at least the hope that an Islamist war criminal – who explicitly used Islamic memes long existing and preached and propagandized to the faithful brainwashed of mullahcracy subjugated and terrorized societies, to rape, loot, forcefully convert, murder, and commit genocide in collaboration with the jihadist army of Pakistan in 1971 – might, just might be hanged. Why is that unique? Because even the famously just International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) could not find any Muslim guilty of any war crimes or crimes against humanity  in the Balkan civil war, even though allegations existed against organizations like the Kosovo Liberation Army, but found almost all the Serbs accused – guilty.

Rarely have the international pretenses of justice ever found a Muslim war-criminal guilty and worthy of passing sentences of execution. Even more importantly, no mullah, no Muslim theologian – self-proclaimed or actually graduating through any of the Islamist educational networks, have been found guilty of war-crimes and crimes against humanity in spite of allegations. No one wants to talk about the Afghan Taliban leadership as fit for trials for war-crimes and crimes against humanity. No one talks of Hafeez Sayid or other Islamist Ulema leading, and producing the doctrines as well as the jihad factories nourished by the dawa system in Pakistan, as a criminal against humanity.

In that sense, the Bangladeshi youth at Shahbag have scored a first. They show a glimmer of hope – that one day the totalitarianism represented by Islamism will be forced to modernize and come out of its terror tactic of maintaining power by violently opposing and crushing all dissent and any criticism.

That the Jamaat leadership and the entire spectrum of Islamist parties and movements in Bangladesh are actually  Fascist totalitarian dictatorship aspirants, is shown by the following revealing Islamist mindset:

(a) they declare criticism of their leader’s past activities as equal to criticism of “Islam”. Criticism of Islam is “atheism”.

(b) they declare that atheism deserves the punishment of killing. “Atheists” must be killed as per Islamists.

(c) Jamaat not only targets their critics at Shahbag who are predominantly Muslims by birth, but Jamaat has targeted non-Muslim communities, both people and temples of Hindus and Buddhists in its programme of violent confrontation that is going on for more than a week.

(d) Islamists outside Muslim-dominated countries, have been organizing to demand that “Shahbag atheists” be punished,  and not unsurprisingly – they have shown their loudest presence in the United Kingdom, which appears to have grown into a haven for pockets of primarily Pakistani led Islamism and Islamist propaganda aimed at establishing Islamic totalitarianism in Europe as part of a wider programme of islamization.

What should the Shabag youth be aware of ?

(1) They should remember, that Fascists always triumph when a more liberal, critical, popular movement with progressive aspirations starts and shows promise of almost nearing success, but cannot or is prevented from succeeding to gain a decisive share of power. This was how Russian Bolsheviks, French Jacobins, German Nazis gained power.

(2) Bangladeshi society as a whole is tilted towards youth – age wise – demographically. But the entire society is a continuous demographic relic of past times and social as well as religious fossils. The hold of mullahcracy runs deep – fostered by decades of dictators, sections of the army, and international Islamist forces as well as their cold-war patrons in the west.

(3) In a confrontation like this, Bangladeshi society is likely to split into roughly a 40-40-10-10 split. This is based on a rough estimate from past few elections, where, 40% go for what I dub the covert Islamists, represented within the Awami League, 40% go for the overt Islamists, represented within the BNP+Jamaat spectrum, 10% are really seculars, and 10% are undecided – who swing elections in the first past the post system.

(4) The Shabag youth probably represent around 15-20% –  the more educated, more urbanized, sections of the overall youth population. This does not mean that they are going to be defeated. Determined and audacious minorities have always been the one and only harbinger of change of societies and political systems. However, the dangers they must be aware of is that of complacency. There is a portion of rural youth kept carefully away from modernization by the collaborative structure of feudal remnants, land-grabbers (the primary motivation for supporting Pakistan was the hope in the middle and upper-middle level of rural Muslim gentry to gain the land and women and wealth of Hindus), virulent Islamists, collaborators and rapists and genociders of ’71 protected under pressure subsequently by the international Islamist networks, and the network of predominantly Saudi funded (and funded by charities working from western nations like UK) dawa-madrassa net.

(5) the state structure of Bangladesh will necessarily carry Islamist elements in its armed wings, intelligence, and administration.  These have been carefully nurtured from even the Liberation war times. There is a genuine possibility of a covert call to arms by the jihadists against the Shahbag movement.

(6) the youth should form an organizational structure, while keeping leadership in a group – so that individuals targeted for elimination will not stop the movement. They should remember that Islamist strategy of terror is “total terror”. From the time of the founder, verbal dissenters or critics were targeted for elimination – as in a female poetess accused of lampooning the leader of the early Islamics – and whose assassination was called for from within the early mosque. Families, loved ones, are targeted too – for the Fascist Islamist mullahcracy’s mind is a sadist one. It seeks not only to give pain, but it enjoys the very act of giving pain and that its victim is suffering mentally as well as physically.

The Egyptian youth have had trouble because they trusted the more established political parties pretending sympathy and failed to create a political structure of their own. The Shahbag youth should not make this error. They should understand that even the Awami League represents primarily an aging generation – and who therefore have greater identification with Islamist undercurrents. They will show this in signs of conciliatory tone towards Islamism, and try to prove themselves as “proper Muslims”. In turn this shows the inner ideological affiliations which even if weaker than that of BNP – is still an affiliation to the Islamists.

The Shahbag youth resistance will be sought to be controlled by both the major power elite factions in Bangladeshi politics. If they can manage to control, they will eventually dismantle this movement – for they do see it as a threat to their own established power structures.

Islamists have however made a blunder. By equating criticism of war-crimes and war-criminal Islamists as anti-Islam, and therefore equivalent to atheism, and therefore fit to be killed – they have revealed what Islamism is really all about. They have managed to show that Islamism is equal to war-crimes, and that atheism by criticizing such depravity – proves itself pro-humanity and not anti-humanity as Islamism does in contrast.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Why a terror blast at inner-city Hyderabad : Owaisi’s Caliphate? Possible green on green Sunni Wahabi/Salafi jihad against Shias and Ahmedyyas.

Posted on February 22, 2013. Filed under: Ahmedyya, Arab, Bangladesh, Christians, Communist, Egypt, Hindu, History, Hyderabad, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Maoism, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, religion, Roman, Salafi, Saudi, Shia, Sunni, terrorism, Wahabi |

Indian and international media will have a field day speculating on the twin blasts killing many and injuring even more in the Indian city of Hyderabad, India. The security agencies of India, perhaps under proper political correctness imposed by “secular” regimes, will discover “saffron” hands behind the blast.

However, I would like to speculate on another possibility. That of “green on green” jihad by one sect of Muslims against others. The bane of all monotheistic, organized, textual and doctrinaire religions is the need for evermore apparent perfection and purity. That in turn almost always leads to hyperfine distinctions in interpretation of fixed ancient texts, based on which each new faction derides and when feasible, tries to eliminate the other factions if necessary by violent means. The reason as to why strictly textual religions almost surely land up in such political struggles for power is an entirely different issue, and not for this post.

The fact of the matter is however, that all three of Judaism, Christianism, and Islamism – would have fared far better had they not bled each other and themselves, in fratricidal and internecine bloodshed sourced from this contest over who is the “purest” within the family -so to speak. The Byzantine and Italian Roman church’s murderous jealousy of Arrianism had no small role in the eventual fall of Gothic Christian power in Spain to yield place to  Al Andalus. In the end the “Roman” calculation paid off through the Reconquista -but meanwhile almost 800 years of Islamic rule had to be endured (how “glorious” or “civilizing” it was – is issue of another debate).

The Byzantine iconodule versus iconoclast violence, and the three-cornered fight with the Coptic brotherhood, led to possibly quick capitulation of Coptic Egypt before Arab Muslim armies, and the roll-back of Byzantine power from south of the Bosphorus before the early pious Caliph armies.

The violent iconodule versus iconoclast Christian contest again perhaps had a significant influence on how early Islam shaped itself and placed itself as, with similar intra-faith conflicts starting up within Islam from its earliest days.

Most of the world has become aware of the intolerance of the most influential, (because of oil and “western” connections) faction of Islam – that of Sunni Wahabism, and in another direction also Salafism. However what is often overlooked is that as much as the Ummah theological leadership is looking to subvert the non-Muslim world for eventual conquest and enslavement, they reserve an equal violence for those they deem “less pure” than themselves in doctrinal interpretation of the unchanging text.

Recently Hyderabad was in the news – because a scion of the wealthy Islamic clan of the Owaisis of Hyderabad, had made typical Islamist speeches warning of violence towards Hindus. Owaisis have old family connections to pre-Independence reactionary regimes of the Nizam.  The Nizam was a key figure of Islamism in pre-Independence India, and had many close and influential friends among the planners and plotters of the British ruling circles. Nizam was a reluctant joiner of the Republic, and as a last ditch effort had unleashed his genocidic jihadi Razakars on the majority Hindus of his state, in looting, raping and massacres as per true jihadi legacy prior to the Indian army marching into the capital. In fact a certain ancestral clan relative of the current Owaisi’s had been very active in the Islamist movement that turned violent, and had been imprisoned by the Indian government after accession of the state.

It has been suggested by some researchers that he was “released” and quietly allowed to emigrate to Pakistan and his Islamist party under its new avatar MIM allowed to “revive” post-Independence because the Congress got increasingly worried at the resurgence of the Communists in the state and the city.

Subsequent Congress governments, appear to have coincided with the increasingly sharp religious identity politics among competing factions of both Christianism and Islamism that in a lop-sided but indirect way also involves the Maoists. The pulse of this three-cornered and very murky religious politics can be estimated from under the heavy fog of media and regime protection of so-called “minority” sentiments in the periodic and too stinky to be entirely suppressed scandals involving financial and other sorts of corruption that also reach into religious halos.

But what perhaps has gone under the radar for a long time, is the observation that more Sunni influence appears to be showing up in Andhra Pradesh – and its capital city Hyderabad – mainly though the tell-tale signs of spread – the mosques and “dawa” institutions. With such growth, and a possible Gulf connection behind providing the material means to sponsor such institutional growth – has come the inevitable signs of Saudi-esque  Wahabi intolerance – against other Muslim factions deemed “less pure”.

These less pure factions are those of the Shia and the Ahemedyya. Orthodox Sunnis berate the Ahemedyyas verbally when they are militarily powerless, and behead or torture to death when they have state protection – as in Pakistan and in some cases even in Indonesia or Bangladesh. Hyderabad is actually a significant centre for the Ahmedyyas and the Shias.  In fact , just the previous year there were reports headlined :

India: Ahmadiyya Muslim Mosque Attacked by Militant Clerics and Mob in Hyderabad

Source: http://ahmadiyyatimes.blogspot.ie/2012/03/india-ahmadiyya-muslim-mosque-attacked.html

The new angle to be looked into Islamic terror on the subcontinent is the added Sunni Wahabi and Salafist trend of also cleaning up their intra-Islamic rivals, especially Shias and Ahmedyyas.

 

 

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

The Fascist Mullahcracy strikes in Bangladesh : blogger knifed and hacked to death for demanding justice for war-crimes.

Posted on February 16, 2013. Filed under: Arab, Bangladesh, Bengal, Delhi, Hindu, History, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Muslims, neoimperialism, Pakistan, Palestine, Politics, religion, terrorism, UK |

Rajiv Haider, an activist young blogger from Bangladesh was stabbed and hacked with clovers, to death. His crime : his demand for justice for the war-crimes committed in 1971, by the so-called Razakars, Al-Bdrs, Al-shams, and various Islamist collaborators of the Pakistani occupation forces – running sex-slavery camps, torture chambers, and systematic genocide, massacres, forced conversion of Hindus.

While bloggers of the world seem to have come out in support of the “occupy Shahbag” movement and condemned the murder of Rajiv, Pakistani websites have been reported to have celebrated Rajiv’s murder.

The intolerance of any criticism is a common feature of all Islamists, and whenever a voice protesting any of the genocidic aspects of Islamism is cut off by the assassin’s hand, it is a call-sign of the mullah and his fascism. Pakistan was created by a fascist movement that used the tacit support of British intelligence and post-war demobilization policy of the British Indian army to employ Muslim ex-soldiers go out to train and lead armed Muslim gangs in preparation for jihad – which was given the spin of “direct action” by Jinnah and his Islamist advisors.

The then Congress leadership, in which Gandhiji had been sidelined, and Bose expelled [perhaps suitably “advised” to be lured into “escaping” so that the more amenable sections of the Congress leadership could be played into accepting a separatist Islamist homeland] – seems to have thought of the distant extremes of Punjab, North West Frontier Provinces, Balochs, and Bengalis as peripheral. Perhaps they also remembered that these were the regions which were the earliest militant dissenters against British imperialism – and hence likely to be rebellious against the Delhi/Uttar-Pradesh based “core” they were basing their new empire about. So it would be good riddance in a political sense, to allow these areas to be decimated by jihadis, and the non-Muslims/Hindus of these regions to be broken for generations so that they could not strike back politically against the new dynastic system fashioned along the British system.

In the process, they left the liberal and modernizing forces among the Muslims, decimated and cornered too – and left to the tender mercy of the mullah, who represent the darkest caverns of sadomasochistic evil in the human mind. Now, not only the Pakistanis or the Bangladeshis themselves, but the world suffers from the consequence of what happened in a power sharing game played by British imperialism, Sunni-Wahabi jihadism, and an immature and entirely devoid of statesmanship section of the Congress leadership keen for personal power.

We are facing a resurgent totalitarianism. This time its the totalitarianism of the mullahcracy.

Note: it is fascinating to see that the Bengali intelligentsia, and the Muslim rioting hordes that took over the streets of Kolkata – the supposed capital city of everything progressive, to hound Tasleema Nasreen out  – is not to be seen on the streets protesting Haider’s murder.  Tasleema was a Bangladeshi – so it was okay for  Indian Muslims and mullahcracy to come out into the streets against her. If she could be demonstrated against and rioted against even as a foreigner and for alleged insults she heaped on Islam by exposing the role of Islamists in raping or committing genocide on non-Muslims in Bangladesh – why is it so difficult to come out now similarly to condemn the murder of another Bangladeshi?

And, Indian intellectuals, especially of the Leftist variety from West Bengal – are nowhere to be found with their shrill cries of indignation. Isn’t that funny!

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Salute to the youth at Shahbag, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Posted on February 16, 2013. Filed under: Arab, Army, Bangladesh, Bengal, Christians, Communist, Egypt, Hosni Mubarak, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Left, Marxism, Muslims, neoimperialism, Pakistan, Palestine, Politics, religion, Taleban, terrorism |

I should have written this a long time ago, and only I am to blame for the lapse. The youth of Bangladesh, at least the significant portion of the youth of the country worth calling “the youth” at all – have “occupied” Shahbag, a spot of spring sunshine and resurgence and hope – in the country’s capital Dhaka.

They have been calling for the execution by hanging of the war-criminals, those Razakar or Jamaat-e-Islami or Islamists accused and convicted of war crimes, or crimes against humanity – of rape, genocide, murder, massacres, tortures during the nine month long direct struggle against Pakistani occupation in 1971.

Quite some time ago, on the eve of the Egyptian youth uprising – I had posted on this blog about the two stage and perhaps three stage struggle that the youth of Egypt would have to undertake. In Islamic societies at the level of Egypt, which had just come out of the phase of pseudo-secular dictatorships in cahoots with Islamist clergy under the carpet and a semi-religious alliance between the dictator, clergy, and western powers – the struggle is two phased.

In the first phase, leftists and liberals are unleashed to lead the overthrow of the autocrat. Underneath, the mullahcracy is prepared for action by their foreign handlers. Once popular anger is publicly poured out to justify withdrawal of support from the erstwhile “western” ally, the mullahcracy is unleashed as a legitimate alternative “government” to prevent “chaos” [whenever that word is unleashed on the public – it implies specific imperialist terminology perfected during European colonial enterprises], and the innate sadism latent in all mullahcracy can be used to eliminate the liberals as well as the radical portion of the youth. Peace of the graveyard then adorns both the religion of peace and the mullahcracy’s handlers in western capitals.

This was the pattern that emerged in Iraq of post WWII, in Shah’s Iran, in Nasser and Sadat’s Egypt, and even in Bangladesh.  The popular anger against the Pakistani sadism that started even as early as 1948 through the continued repression on peasant movements of the Tebhaga phase, was focused primarily by youth and student activists leaning towards the Left through the Language movement. It was this radical section of the youth that drew the politics of Bangladesh (then East Pakistan) towards complete independence and was also used by a section of the Awami League which had already started on a separate path from the old Muslim League.

The liberals and the leftists saw the Liberation struggle as militant revolutionary movement, and the west saw their opportunity in that if the military sadists in their pay in Pakistan failed to properly control the populace, the liberals could be allowed to overthrow the regional junta. Meanwhile the mullahcracy could be prepared for a helpful coup and back-to-Islamism new dictatorship. So Mujib’s entire family was wiped off, including kids (a sign that Islamists were set the task of assassination – typically modern Christian “western” thinking on assassinations go along more targeted individual elimination to serve as a lesson for the descendants) and a new dictatorship came under which the mullahcracy could come to power again . The process of elimination of the youth force and the liberals or left started even during Sk. Mujib’s tenure – indicating that the real militant force in the country, the coercive parts of the state and significant portions of the military – were connected to the mullahcracy and the latter’s supporters in foreign nations.

So as in Egypt, I would have expected at least one generation needing to go by – the youth that rose up in the first overthrow – to fail, to see their hopes dashed in the revival of the mullahcracy who revive all the older repressive forms and even roll back some of the modernizing windows provided by the old dictators. It would be their descendants – who would therefore rebel against the sop provided by the Islamist+western axis, against the mullahcracy itself.

This is what awaits Iran, Egypt or Bangladesh. It will be another cycle to even  the start of the process in Palestine or Saudi Arabia because the Islamist authoritarians that will be or are now in power are yet to reveal their inner sadism fully.

But Shabag in Dhaka is a flicker, a hope of eventual liberation, the first steps to the long walk to freedom from totalitarianism.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Who’s afraid of Afzal Guru’s hanging and “damaging consequences”? The thin shell of India’s self-appointed secularists.

Posted on February 9, 2013. Filed under: Ayodhya, Bangladesh, Bengal, Christians, Communist, Delhi, Egypt, exile, Hindu, Historians with political agenda, History, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Kashmir, Kashmiri Pundit, Left, Maoism, Muslims, neoimperialism, Pakistan, Politics, rape, religion, Taleban, terrorism |

Seema Mustafa, a noted journalist, wrote a piece on Rediff  http://www.rediff.com/news/column/hanging-could-have-damaging-repercussions/20130209.htm– about the possibly “damaging” consequences of the rather quiet hanging of Afzal Guru – an Indian from the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir, and an accused as well as convicted of a murderous terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament.

Mustafa’s primary concerns can be summarized as

(1) supposed signs of “bias” in a section of Indian journalists over questions of “nationalism”

(2) supposed allegation that Afzal did not have a fair trial or adequate representation

(3) supposed fear of “damaging consequences” of the hanging.

Mustafa brings out everything that is wrong with the Indian media’s long history of playing and pretending “secularism” which effectively became Hindu/Saffron bashing while selectively whitewashing, even protecting the image of so-called “minority” religions by clamping down on anything negative motivated by such religions. She writes in such frank tones of a sense of betrayal, that she possibly does not realize how she has exposed the underlying religious politics of selective favouritism that plagues her profession.

A television news anchor, shortly after Parliament terror attack accused Afzal Guru was hung by the government in Tihar jail, declared, ‘All nationalist, secular and progressive people support this.’

That was just one statement amidst a cacophony of euphoric reactions to the hanging, but stood out as many of us who have been opposing the death penalty and questioning the fairness of the Afzal Guru trial certainly do not regard ourselves as communal and reactionary or for that matter anti-national.

Quite the contrary really, and so it did sound strange when journalists supporting death by hanging, refusing to question the fact that Guru did not get a capable lawyer through the trial, and blocking out the responses of those raising such issues, so easily put large segments of the Indian population into their self-defined ‘anti-national’ frame.

And so before analysing the possibly disastrous consequences of this hanging, it is imperative to understand the mindset of television news anchors who have successfully managed to convert personal beliefs into news, and trash all voices of sanity and sobriety that seek answers to complex questions. News channels are supposed to report the news and not give their editorial comments to a point where contrary voices are restricted from giving their views.

Most interesting to read! Now did the colleagues of Mustafa, only report the “news” and not give their editorial comments to the point of restricting contrary voices from giving their views when it came to talking about the rape, eviction, enforced migration – each and every element of genocide by most current standards of definition of a genocide – on the Kashmiri pundits? How many of Seema Mustafa’s colleagues practised what she wants them to – when the targets were Hindus from Kashmir Valley, or did they care to give space to view from the “other” side of what is alleged to have happened in the burning of returning Hindu pilgrims in a locked train compartment at Godhra, that is supposed to have led to the inter-community clashes in Gujarat which has been mad einto an international issue. I remember watching a news report from a well-known “secular” channel of India based in New Delhi – during the heyday of the Kandhmal (Orissa) conflict, when Hindu tribals hiding out in the forests express their fear of being lynched by Christian mobs or their Maoist collaborators – but the news-anchor comments before them along the lines of “look how much they have been threatened so that they they lie out of fear”.  What reports have ever been covered by Mustafa’s secular colleagues on the atrocities carried out by Muslim gangs in Kerala, or West Bengal, or Assam? Did they go and ever give any space to any views on the “other” side, if that other side did not happen to be Muslim or Christian? It is exactly these sort of biased behaviour that strengthens the more radical among the Hindu!

There was a time when reporters followed the news, reporting it as it was, communicating and informing the public, without wearing their prejudice, bias or for that matter, views on their sleeves.

How many times have details of religiously motivated atrocities been ever objectively and impartially reported by the media – without considering the supreme objective of not allowing the tarnishing or exposure of the on-ground modus operandi of extremist religious movements if and only if those movements happen not to be “Hindu”? Riots have been frequent in the state of Uttar Pradesh, atrocities by organized muslim gangs in Kerala, or Bengal – but Mustafa’s colleagues never find the space to report them. By accusing her colleagues of biased and ideologically motivated reporting, Mustafa confirms that Indian media can be and does operate on religious and ideological bias in reporting. In fact many like us draw the inference that it must have been this or that Muslim gang that started a riot – if the media reports it as a violent clash between “two communities”. One way or the other, if the responsibility can be or needed to be – put on “Hindus”, the names or details will be leaked to the sufficient degree to make sure that the conclusion or impression holds.

Afzal Guru has been hung. And apart from the main story the news media has a responsibility to:

one, trace his story with the facts of the case highlighted;

two, review the trial through important voices to see whether he had the best legal advice at hand or whether he was virtually left unrepresented;

three, to find out (and not just from official quotes) whether his family was informed in time, and were asked to meet him as per the humane provisions of law;

four, to seek answers to the commonly asked questions as to why the rush now, has it been prompted by political considerations;

five, to look at the possible political consequences of the hanging at this point in time and analyse whether the death of one man was worth what might follow.

This constitutes responsible reporting. As for the beating of the drums, this can be safely left to the political parties and the government who have held innumerable press conferences to applaud the act.

Has this ever been done by Mustafa’s colleagues when the victims of religiously motivated violence were non-Muslims or non-Christians? Even Sikhs were not always given the benefit of “unbiasedness”! Recently unusually (for Indian courts in such cases) harsh sentences were passed on BJP political leader for her alleged complicity in riot violence against Muslims – and a woman to boot – in Gujarat, on a peculiar legalistic claim that her “crimes” deserved exemplary punishments (I thought law was usually claimed to be about “fairness” and not about “examples”). Did Mustafa and her colleagues go and research the “other” side’s views? Did they report allegations of one “victim” having been in the habit of pulling out his firearm on previous occasions to threaten non-muslims or even use the firearm [I did not see any follow-ups, even debunking attempts, of this by any of Mustafas  secular colleagues]. Significantly, she uses an expression that has often been used in the past by the Indian state, predominantly the Congress and the Leftists, and in some cases – ideology-less regional charismatics, to clamp down on protests against Islamic claims of immunity from even verbal criticism. The ubiquitious claim is that “any crackdown on Islamic violence, protests, or outrage, or even protest or criticism of an Islamic gang coercive street rampage behaviour – is going to lead to a deterioration of law and order problem”. On this excuse Indian state regimes often pre-emptively strike on opposition to Islamic claims, and such an attitude has been primarily responsible for the threats and attacks on writers the Islamic shariacracy in India think of as damaging to their agenda of Islamization of India – like the banning of Salman Rushdie’s book, or the hounding out of the exiled woman author from Bangladesh – Tasleema Nasreen.

Journalists are supposed to play the devil’s advocate, be on the other side of the fence as it were, and review the story in all its dimensions. Indian democracy has many views, and a media that insists only on one view as ‘nationalist’ promotes a monolith that is in contradiction to the pluralism and diversity of this country..

Unfortunately, Mustafa’s case seems to rest on having all these benefits as privileges of the Islamic only – and her voice comes out when she effectively sees these privileges being taken away from the Islamic. Mustafa even does not realize that “nationalism” has its boundaries and terms of debate that cannot be allowed to be infinitely stretched. Otherwise, no attack on the “nation” can be opposed logically, for there will always be a “diversified” view that supports exactly such attacks as valid becausee they do not agree to “our” definition of  “our nationhood”. One day, the presence of non-Muslims will become problematic for “nation-hood” – the argument used by the jihadis of Muslim League and Jamaatis to unleash the partition genocide and carve out “Muslim” nations.

The terror attack on Parliament was heinous. And could have been far more disastrous had the terrorists been able to enter the building.

But Mustafa fails to say that 12 people were killed in that attack. Is this part of merely factual reporting too?Is not “heinous” a qualitative expression and not an objective one?

It was clear at the onset that the police had no clue about the attackers. Finally, Delhi [ Images ] university lecturer S A R Geelani was arrested, and then Afzal Guru was picked up. Geelani’s trial took a chequered course, but because of the support in Delhi and the involvement of wellknown lawyers, he was finally released.

Guru was from Kashmir and unable to afford a decent lawyer. He did not have the money and as senior advocate Kamini Jaiswal managed to say hastily on a news channel, he went virtually unrepresented.

Geelani, contacted by Rediff.com, one of the news sites doing its job professionally, said, “Afzal Guru was denied a fair trial. This has been proved in his last moments. I do not understand the attitude of the government. They have done nothing but play to the gallery.”

“Do you know there is a case pending in the Supreme Court of India ? The court has been looking into the delay into this case, arguments are going on and the matter is pending justice.”

‘Do you think it was right to hurry up the matter?’

“The due process of law has not been followed. This is nothing but a flawed process.”

But somehow we have becomes so blood thirsty as a nation, so wedded to war and violence (largely because of TRP ratings) that we do not like to ask any questions. After all, even a death row convict has rights, or is the case now that all these chaps should be shown no mercy and hung the moment they are convicted by the courts?

As wellknown women rights lawyer Indira Jaising said, while arguing against the death penalty, is there not a right to reform, and if even reform for some is seen as impossible, is there not a right to remorse? And should not it be the job of the sane voice of journalism to ensure that at least the rule of law is respected, and the rights of an individual acknowledged?

The interesting piece about Indian journalism is revealed in the way the “facts” are presented here. Somehow the Indian “police” are seen to be “obviously” not having a clue “right from the beginning”. I am not sure how many police forces of the world have clues to crimes being committed “right from the beginning” – for such details in prior knowledge would in most case lead to prevention of the crime actually being committed. From this “obviousness” in the eyes of the journalist, an ominous silence hangs to the onset of the next statement about Afzal being picked up after the arrest of another. The insinuation perhaps intended is that somehow this allegation of “obvious lack of clue” should encourage the reader to suspect that the police arrested Afzal without any proof or evidence.  If the evidence gathering process was so good and reliable in passing sentences on Kandhmal and Gujarat riot accused after long delays and twists and turns that could have raised even more serious concerns about police “capabilities or intentions” – why is it suddenly so unreliable when the accused is implicated in a violent terrorist attack on the very symbolic seat of Indian democracy?

The impact of the hanging can have damaging repercussions at different levels, and far more than this government will be able to handle. The media informs us, through the usual sources, that the decision was taken after top-level meetings and discussions. So one is led to believe it was a considered decision.

Instead of instilling confidence, this actually evokes fear, fear of being led by a government that clearly is unable to make the right assessments and basically does not care if parts of the country go up in flames.

The government has bitten the bullet as channels screamed with joy, but there is every possibility of the bullet exploding in its mouth. And this is what makes one wonder at a political leadership that willfully invites trouble.

Aspects of the case, as has been pointed out by lawyers as well, were before the Supreme Court and the government could have easily ridden the issue out instead of converting it into a storm that will hit it, in all likelihood, in Kashmir.

The military has clamped down in Jammu and Kashmir. As a resident there said, “Not even a leaf is fluttering here.” But while the state can be confident of maintaining control in normal circumstances, and beating down demonstrations, it also realises that one civilian death will snowball into a major uprising.

The February 11, 1984 hanging of Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front leader Maqbool Bhatt led to a decade of the worst violence that India has ever seen. It is true that Afzal Guru does not have the same stature in terms of a leadership profile, but in terms of sympathy and support he was probably far ahead.

Besides, the alienation and anger in Kashmir is in a heightened stage, more so after the death of the young boys in the 2010 stone pelting incidents. A Facebook post by this columnist on Afzal Guru’s hanging has elicited a volley of responses reflecting this anger and alienation and asking why those responsible for the death of the boys have not met with similar punishment.

Now that sounds like a threat, isn’t it? It is time that the pretenders of secularism who actually effectively, on the ground, promote and protect Islamism by their selective reporting or campaigns at manufacture of social consensus in favour of Islamist agenda – realize, that a new generation is coming up. They are seeking to search out the reality of religious politics, especially of the medievalist brand of religiosity represented by modern Islamism. Even a Morsi cannot easily take an Egypt back to the 7th century one-sided propaganda that targeted all other cultures and human freedoms or civilizational achievements for erasure.If Mustafa is so concerned about the Kashmiri boys trained to give a Intifada style uprising – is she also concerned about the Kashmiri Hindus murdered, raped, looted at the start of the Shariafication drive of the Valley in the late 80’s – long before the excuse of all Muslim reaction stemming from the destruction of the disputed structure at Ayodhya could be given ?

The only logical explanation, thus, for the sudden hanging of Afzal Guru is the fact that general elections are around the corner.

And the Congress in its usual cynical manipulation of the votes is trying to eat into the majority constituency with this action. As for the Kashmiris they do not figure in Delhi’s plans. As for the secular forces, the argument voiced by Congress leaders is: ‘Where will you go. If there is Modi as prime minister you will have to be with us.’

So the minorities do not figure either, as they are the bechaara who can easily be made to run into Congress arms while fleeing from communal shadows. The secularists too, in the Congress analysis, will not be far behind as there is no Left and hence no Third Front alternative that could attract them in the polls.

So all in all a cozy scenario, except for the fact that the dynamics of India and the aspirations of the people cannot be controlled and tend to upset the most careful calibrations.

Tut -tut! why such a frustration? Is it so bad to be on the receiving end of the religious politics which had been so good for so many decades in expanding the network of madrassahs and Islamism spreading structures fueled by Gulf money and complicity by Islamophile regimes of the Left and Congress? If the Congress is really the supreme popularists they are made out to be, if saffron is really the outcast of Indian politics, and yet the Congress feels the pressure to need to appease the “majority” of the populations of India – that appeasement politics has run its steam off? That no longer should any population be hostage to the type of totalitariansim represented by Islamism – under excuses or threats of “potential damage”?

Take Islamist threats of damaging more liberal societies, and the tactics of emasculating entire societies by trying to raise apocalyptic visions of destruction and “damages” if terrorists are not pampered – with yourselves away from the public space! Nay! Better – speak more about this – because by doing so, the cozy arrangement to manipulate public opinion through clever manipulation of appeal to liberal values to progress non-liberal agenda  and veiled threats of violence otherwise – gets more and more exposed.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Indians ashamed to be Indians over the rape : confusing Indian identity with foreign misogyny

Posted on January 6, 2013. Filed under: Arab, Buddhists, Delhi, Hindu, Historians with political agenda, History, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Pakistan, rape, religion, terrorism |

Prequel : from a friend’s note saw that the UK Daily Mirror http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/india-gang-rape-victims-father-1521289 claims the name of the target of the gangrape to be Jyothi Singh Pandey. The first name means “light/illumination/brightness”. The middle name is a common patronymic/family/clan name of Northern India, meaning “Lion”, and the last name derives from Hindu “Pundit”, almost surely assigned only to “Brahmin” lineages. In India, we can now hear the bandying of “rape of Dalit girls” as a special issue – as if in Indian identity politics, even “rape” can be classified based on politically correct positive discrimination lines. Somehow, it appears that by the frequent throwing of a special phrase of “Dalit rape”, the rape of a Dalit girl is of a different order compared to the rape of a “Brahmin” girl. If according to tweeter allegations, the alleged minor who is alleged to have inserted the u-bar and ripped intestines by hand through the vagina, turns out to be a Muslim – then this rape flies against all the propaganda dished out by regime influence over Indian media – that it is only “repressive” “upper caste” Hindus who repress and rape minorities and “Dalits”. But again India is a strange society nowadays where people feel ashamed to be Indians over a rape, unlike most other countries whose leadership only make profound promises to “correct the situation”, but who never apologize or feel ashamed.

Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan and Tech Wizard Narayana Murthy – two iconic Indians of modernity, from two opposite ends of public entertainment and economic value creation, have been reported on Indian media as supposedly having felt “ashamed to be an Indian” over the issue of the Delhi gang rape.

Women activists on TV chat shows and discussion rounds have directly or indirectly blamed “Indian traditional attitudes” for the mistreatment of Indian women. The list of complaints is long : patriarchy, religious orthodoxy, fundamentalism. The overall impression in going through the media representations is however – a definite sense of discomfort in blaming “religion” for it. The reasons are obvious, because both Islam and Christianity in India have shown their orthodox, and religiously motivated, attitudes towards the female body and the female role in society so often and so intensively – that the main target of so-called secular politics, that is “Hindutva”, cannot be singled out, and the prime favourites of secularists will also get tarred and feathered.

The real reasons as to why Indians are in a spot is because they have been forced by regime dependent and encouraged professional historiography to cover up the reality of Indian cultural development, being forced to swallow fanciful reconstructions of Indian past where foreign imperialist ideologies like Islam and colonial period European Christianity had to be shown as having immensely positively shaped and “reformed” a supposedly “backward, primitive, pagan, Brahminical, repressive” Indian society.

The brevity of this post forces me to touch upon some of the myths of Indian history – especially where it concerns women, but very briefly.

Vedic and Puranic literature show ample examples of women choosing their own husbands, having the right to approach and be “satisfied” by a man they took fancy to,  to go out on dates with other men even while having fixed longer term partners and children [the very institution of Vedic marriage rites as a contract of mutual loyalty by the sage Swetaketu – son of Uddalaka – because he did not like his own mother going out with a strange man when he was a child and his father explained that women were free to “roam” and were not be held as private property]. If a woman chose to have a child outside of marriage, she and her child were both acceptable – for example, a founder of a Brahmin lineage, Bharadwaja, was a son of his mother Mamata by her brother-in-law Brihaspati (brother of her husband), and delivered twins she carried at the same time – one from her husband, and the other from the brother-in-law. Puranic literature shows many cases of women proposing to men they fell in love with, or have clandestine marriages [the story of Shakuntala], and being recognized as founders of prestigious lineages. Brahma’s unmarried daughter Saraswati declares that she would like to go and “live” with the Gandharvas because they know how to “please” women and she is not prevented from doing so.

The two famous epics, Ramayana and Mahabharata are much lambasted by western and Indian scholars as epitomizing patriarchal attitudes and repression. The central story of Ramayana revolves around the destruction of a whole city and a king because he abducted the wife of another. But the same story also told how an “adultress” could still “come back to life” and be taken back into society (Ahalya), and how it was okay for a wife to sit through the murder of her husband to marry the brother of her husband, whom she loved and served loyally (Tara). A key feature of the Mahabharata is however that a woman could practice polyandry – with the lead characters of the five-brothers sharing one significant wife. What is not mentioned is that Mahabharata shows the prevalence of swayamvara – the open and public choice of husbands by eligible girls, and of warrior women who go and fight alongside their husbands or even without husbands.  At least two women, Satyabhama, the wife of Krishna, and Chitrangada, the wife of Arjuna – are described as having actually taken to the battlefield – with their partners/lovers/husbands.

A primary cause of the core story of the Mahabhrata war is given to be the molestation of the wife of the five-brothers in public space. Thus molestation of women was seen to be worthy of terrible retribution. In fact in a little highlighted passage, Krishna explains the reason as to why the brothers who were reluctant to shed the blood of their kin, should actually take up arms – because if their elite-status wife could be so molested, what about the protection of women in general society? They should fight the war to re-establish “dharma” which among many other things, was also supposed to ensure freedom and dignity for women. With one exception, all abduction of women, in Mahabharata is punished – one way or the other – even in a society that recognized certain types of “abduction” if ended with “honourable” marriages. Bhisma, abducts Kasi princesses to give in marriage to his nephews (by the custom of his times he had a right to be angry because his nephews had not been invited to the sayambhara of the girls), but is punished for not marrying them – even if he  did not rape or molest them – by having to die at the hands of a transgender enemy. The Kurus are destroyed horribly because their leader molested a wife.

Interestingly, women were abadhya/aghnaya – or could not be killed, even in war-situations. A commander of one side, Bhisma, drops his weapons when faced with a transgender  opponent- whom he considers a woman, and allows himself to be fatally wounded to maintain this principle of conduct of war.

Sounds oh so Brahminical and patriarchal and repressive towards women, sexuality and the female body?

Indian regimes and historians often portray the advent of Buddhism as a “liberating” and “reforming” movement that “cleansed” Indian post-Vedic society from the “evils of Brahminism”, and try to shift all blame to the Vedic as being repressive towards “caste” and “women”. I have great respects for the Buddhists, but I am intrigued by very curious features of early and later Buddhism, that go against the propaganda.

First, early Buddhist literature show two things not shared in general by the Vedic – the gradation of human work as “uttama” (good/higher) and “adhama”(evil/lower) based, presumably on whether the work involved violence or not, and the emphasis given in Buddhism to the connection between “uttama/adhama” karma to reincarnation in a better future life or lesser punishment in such future existence. This would give an early pointer as to how  and why categories of work connected to animal husbandry or butchery, or tanning would become later “untouchable”. Buddha and his disciples seem to be over-aware of “superiority” of caste. If one tries to read up the extant early Buddhist literature, one can see “Brahmana” and “Sramana”(the term reserved for Buddhist aspirants and initiates) used equivalently. Moreover the Buddha is reluctant to be born in any other caste that “Kshatryia”or “Brahmin” in his next incarnation as Maitreya – because those are the “empowered” categories of society. So even the early Buddhists did not think their movement would abolish castes and hierarchies.

The more important feature relevant for our current discussion is the attitude towards women, women’s bodies and their dress and public behaviour. Many Vinayas and early texts portray women who freely move around in public in a disparaging tone, hinting at “low moral character”. Significantly the Buddha is claimed to have been reluctant in the early days to allow women to become members of his cloister or become nuns. After a lot of appeal from the women, he is supposed to have allowed them to join on condition that they follow certain restrictions on conduct in addition to those applicable for monks. Most interestingly these conditions pay a great deal of attention as to how the female body of the nun is to be “covered up” and require the nuns to be always under the authority of a male monk.

Bhikṣunīvibhaṅga, says that a bhikṣunī “should not show her nakedness when bathing. She is advised to either bathe in a screened-off area or to wear a bathing cloth”. Also another must-wear is kaṇṭhapraticchādana, “a robe that covers the rounding (of the breasts)”.  All the Vinaya texts devote a lot of space to discussing the exact forms of coverage of different parts of the nun’s body – all adding at least two more items of covering-dress over and above the three reserved for monks.

The important thing to note here is that the nuns are segregated cloistered members of the movement, and their covering up in public is insisted upon as “setting an example” to “society” on exemplary “moral conduct”. This in turn implies that their covering up was not needed within a segregated cloister, and the  general public was less concerned about covering up – so much so that the nuns had to be sent out to set an example.

But let us see what the non-Buddhists – before the advent of the Buddhists, were doing about women. Vandhul Malla, and his wife, a couple of martial arts experts and warriors, trained Visakha, the daughter of prosperous merchants, in warfare, chariot driving, weapons and “wrestling”. This daughter of merchants, married another merchant, set up her own household away from the extended family of her husbands, and ran her own business over and above that of her husband’s. This was the lady who was very much in public life, and with many other similar independent, business or otherwise productively engaged women – who were instrumental in promoting the early Buddhist “church”. They were not Buddhists, or the society that produced them were not Buddhists.

Chinese pilgrims visiting India from the middle of the 4th to the 8th century, similarly speak of the general freedom of movement of women, and the general law-abiding nature of citizens, with not much mention of crimes against women. This is the period when Buddhism was supposed to be in retreat, under huge repression from revivalist “Brahminism”.

Many of the women activists on Indian TV have referred to how “suttee” was stamped out by colonial regimes, as a model of how to deal with “patriarchal repressive traditions”. Interestingly, even as late as the first successful Muslim raid on Sindh portion of India in 712, as per the version of Islamic chroniclers whose claims on Indian society are claimed by professional historians to be “accurate” if they show non-Muslim society in any negative light (but “exaggeration” and “boasting”  or “fanciful” if it shows Islam in negative light) – the mother of the reigning king, wife of Chach, had actually helped in the assassination of the previous king and her previous husband – because she had fallen in love with a visiting handsome young Brahmin to her husband’s court – Chach.

Note that a wife could remove her husband from power, marry her lover, without facing social hue and cry and opposition, and without being forced to commit “suttee”. She was a “Rajput” to boot too.

But with the advent of Muslims, Indian society goes quickly downhill. Rape, abduction, public humiliation and sale of captive women become the norm. Girls and women are no longer safe in the public domain, and educational or professional space is closed off for women. The extremely misogynist, and sexually commodifying memes in Islam and Sharia take over the definition of Indian womanhood. The incidence of jauhar or “suttee”, self-immolation by widows on the funeral pyre of their husbands or on separate pyres, begin to be frequently mentioned only from the advent of Islamic armies. The label of “suttee” and widow-burning however stuck to the Hindu forever.

In my “how Islam came to India” series, I have shown how Qasim’s successful raid (three previous ones had failed) had as one of its primary objectives (apart from making good the war chest) the capture and enslavement of Indian women. Thousands of Sindhi women were captured, inspected in the public like cattle, enslaved and given as rewards to jihadis or reserved for the Baghdad markets and for the private pleasure of the pious leaders of Islam around their Gulf dens. The Islamic attitude that entered India at this stage can be estimated from the Islamist side story that – Qasim was executed with typical Islamic barbarity (by being stitched within raw animal hide, and then nails driven into the bundle – the rawhide would dry up and strangulate him also at the same time). His crime : the two Sindhi princesses he had sent for the pious head of Islam – the Caliph’s personal pleasures – were found no longer to be “virgins” in the bed by the pious Caliph. Whether the girls themselves tore their hymen and accused Qasim of “rape” – as told in some versions of the story, or their hymen tore because of some other causes – the fact comes out that these enslaved girls were vulnerable to rape during transport and sale.

All those crying hoarse about “Indian” traditions, should take note of the explanatory note given as the speech by the princesses – to the effect that they warn the Caliph about not “trusting mere women” on accusations of “rape”, and that the Caliph should not have taken their word for it. This single story gives out the entire mindset of Islam that imposed itself on India.  A girl crying rape was not to be believed easily against a man’s claim of innocence. Women are manipulative and they cry rape by tearing their own hymen. The status of a woman is that of “merely a woman/slave” and hence her words did not matter. And most significantly, where the “virginity” of the woman did not matter to the repressive culture “brahmin” Chach who married a widow and happily produced children with her – in the same period – the supreme leader of Islam has his goats shaken by discovering that his captive and enslaved bed-fellow was not a “virgin”.

How did women began to become a “problem” for Hindu households? In my post on “peaceful Sufis”, I have given the details on how the famous Sufi founder of Ajmer Sahrif obtained his wife. He “dreamed” that his prophet visited him and chastised him for not “keeping sunna” (not having a wife) and promptly the local Islamic commander arranged for a regional chief’s daughter to be captured and given to him that very “night”. The Sylheti “mouthpiece of peace” from Yemen, Shah Jalal – took up swords against the local non-Muslim ruler, whose daughter Anandi “promptly fell in love with this paragon of peace with a sword in hand on the battle field itself” (what was the girl doing there?), and was “immediately” “converted” and was married on the “battlefield”.

Shams Siraj Afif (fourteenth century) write “Firoz Shah was born in the year 709 H. (1309 C.E.). His father was named Sipahsalar Rajjab, who was a brother of Sultan Ghiyasuddin Tughlaq Ghazi. The three brothers, Tughlaq, Rajjab, and Abu Bakr, came from Khurasan to Delhi in the reign of Alauddin (Khalji), and that monarch took all the three in the service of the Court. The Sultan conferred upon Tughlaq the country of Dipalpur. Tughlaq was desirous that his brother Sipahsalar Rajjab should obtain in marriage the daughter of one of the Rais of Dipalpur. He was informed that the daughters of Ranamall Bhatti were very beautiful and accomplished. Tughlaq sent to Ranamall a proposal of marriage. Ranamall refused. Upon this Tughlaq proceeded to the villages (talwandi) belonging to Ranamall and demanded payment of the whole year’s revenue in a lump sum. The Muqaddams and Chaudharis were subjected to coercion. Ranamall’s people were helpless and could do nothing, for those were the days of Alauddin, and no one dared to make an outcry. One damsel was brought to Dipalpur. Before her marriage she was called Bibi Naila. On entering the house of Sipahsalar Rajjab she was styled Sultan Bibi Kadbanu. After the lapse of a few years she gave birth to Firoz shah“. If this could be accomplished by force by a regional officer, there was nothing to stop the king. In the seventeenth century, Jahangir writes in his Memoirs that after the third year of his accession, “I demanded in marriage the daughter of Jagat Singh, eldest son of Raja Man Singh (of Amer). Raja Ram Chandra Bundela was defeated, imprisoned, and subsequently released by Jahangir. Later on, says Jahangir, “I took the daughter of Ram Chandra Bandilah into my service (i.e. married her)”.

Ibn Battuta who visited India during Muhammad bin Tughlaq’s reign and stayed at the Court for a long time writes:  “At (one) time there arrived in Delhi some female infidel captives, ten of whom the Vazir sent to me. I gave one of them to the man who had brought them to me. My companion took three girls, and – I do not know what happened to the rest.” On the large scale distribution of girl slaves on the occasion of Muslim festivals like Id, he writes: “First of all, daughters of Kafir (Hindu) Rajas captured during the course of the year, come and sing and dance. Thereafter they are bestowed upon Amirs and important foreigners. After this daughters of other Kafirs dance and sing. The Sultan gives them to his brothers, relatives, sons of Maliks etc. On the second day the durbar is held in a similar fashion after Asr. Female singers are brought out. the Sultan distributes them among the Mameluke Amirs”. Thousands of non-Muslim women were distributed in the above manner in later years.

The few incidents I quoted above, are just a few among thousands of such narratives – described with pride and glee by Islamic chroniclers.  Wherever Muslims arrive for the first time in India, their chronicles show extreme surprise at the openness of Indian/Hindu womens’ public presence, their lack of “proper covering” (proper in the Islamic head-to-toe sense), and their relative freedom in society. The father of the doyen of Indian secularism – Hyder Ali, father of Tipu – is described in Nishan-i-Hyduri to have enslaved Coorgi women when he attacked Coorg – for their heinous crime of walking about bare-breasted or short dresses.

Thus it became a norm for Indian society – to be anxious and unhappy at the birth of the girl child, because the girl child brought rape, raid, and destruction of families, livelihoods, and entire communities. The girl child had to be married off early, hidden from the eager glances of every local muslim who felt it was his divine right to appropriate the beautiful of the kaffir for rape or other pleasures , and therefore not to be educated, not to be given skills to run businesses or professions, and closeted out of sunlight. Hidden away from the public place – so that even her existence did not come under the notice of Islamic hunters for female flesh.

Society takes a long time to come out of what had become a rationalization of impotence – especially if it had to be tolerated for more than a thousand years.

Indian culture is not about the violently misogynist memes of the Middle East, and Indians should not feel ashamed of their true culture – which was far different from the Islamic hybrid it is now pushed as for. It is a case of mistaken identities.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 7 so far )

The Delhi Rape as punishment of the uterus – a common theme in areas influenced by Jihad

Posted on December 31, 2012. Filed under: Bangladesh, Bengal, Chechnya, Delhi, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Muslims, Pakistan, rape, Russia, terrorism |

The alleged gangrape and torture of a young woman in the Indian capital of New Delhi, which ultimately led to her death two weeks later has become partly an international, and definitely an Indian national issue. The youth of the capital took to the streets, and soon the government was seen to be on the backfoot. It had failed to gauge the game changing paradigm of electronic bypassing of older political mobilization forms. It unleashed its police on the youth while keeping up the appearance of listening to youth grievances by meeting student leaders from its own and other official political party student fronts.

The reaction to the protests and the nature of the protests – both represent a sign of things to come for the existing political parties of India, but more of that in a separate post. Today, I will only raise a disturbing angle of the alleged rape that haunts me through my comparison of notes of rape as a penal instrument, used all around the subcontinent. The issue is that, unconfirmed but semi-official media reports indicate the possibility of the woman having been subjected to sharp instrument insertion into the vagina, as well as the possibility of an attempt to tear out the uterus.

The use of metal/hard objects after or during the rape – is usually a feature of penal rapes, typically done in a gang/group, and is reported more from Islamist or Muslim contexts. The rape is not just about sex, but also about penalizing – for being a woman, for being a non-muslim, for being the “temptresses” and leaders of going astray – as portrayed repeatedly in various contexts in the core texts of the theology.

I would expect such penal rapes to be more frequent the closer we get to long-time centres of Islamic military power in the subcontinent, in a gradient of increasing intensity as we move from the east to the west of Gangetic Valley, increasing from India to the Middle East across Pakistan.

Although the Ayatollahate would deny this – the following has consistent commonality with what the Pakistani soldiers do wherever they go, with concrete evidence for 1971 in now Bangladesh :

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/01/the_islamic_republic_of_tortur.html

“On August 9, in a letter published in the Etemad Melli paper, the reformist presidential candidate Mehdi Karroubi wrote that some detained individuals stated that some authorities have raped detained women with such force, they have sustained injuries and tears in to their reproductive system.”In another high-profile case, the very pretty 19-year old Taraneh was not shot with a single bullet to her chest, as was the case with Neda Agha Sultan There were no bystanders in the dungeon with a cell phone to capture the prolonged torture, rape, and sodomy of this teenager.According to reports, as well as testimony on the House floor from the honorable U.S. Congressman McCotter, on June 28, 2009, Taraneh Mousavi, a young Iranian woman, was literally scooped off the streets without any provocation on her part and with no arrest warrant. This young woman was taken to one of the regime’s torture chambers, where she was repeatedly brutalized, raped, and sodomized by Ahmadinejad’s agents, and with the consent of the “supreme leader,” Ali Khamenei.

Near death from repeated beating, raping and sodomizing, the fragile young woman, bleeding profusely from her rectum and womb, was transferred to a hospital in Karaj near Tehran. Eventually, an anonymous person notified Taraneh’s family that she had had an “accident” and had been to be taken to the hospital.

The devastated family rushed to the hospital only to find no trace of their beloved daughter. The foot-soldiers of Allah’s “divine representative” Ali Khamenei decided to eliminate all traces of their savagery. These vile people decided to remove the dying woman from the hospital before the family’s arrival, whereupon they burned her beyond recognition and dumped her charred remains on the side of the road.

Note that the intent is not to just to rape, but to kill. The target is the uterus. Here is the evidence from Beslan :
http://crombouke.blogspot.ie/2010/01/beslan-child-rape-torture-enforced.html

It was then that they began raping the girls. They wanted sex as they killed, and this is sexual homicide. A sex killer gets excited when he thinks about forcing himself inside an unwilling victim, but the rape itself does not produce the ultimate excitement. It is the rape followed by the killing that is arousing. This is what happened at Beslan.
One by one, females were targeted. The sex killers looked for the perfect victims, and after zeroing in, they grabbed and disrobed the little girls in the middle of the gym. There were muffled cries as the girls were humiliated in front of everyone. They were stripped, raped, and sodomized by several men. Not content to simply rape, the terrorists used their guns and other objects to penetrate the screaming victims while the other hostages were forced to watch. And the terrorists laughed. They laughed as they violated the children and made them bleed. What few people know is that some of the girls died as a result of being raped with objects. The internal damage was so severe that without immediate medical attention, the girls bled to death. Those who managed to survive required extensive reconstructive surgery and painful recoveries.But raping the girls was not enough for the deviants who had entered the school. The terrorists beat the other children. In fact, beatings took place regularly, and as they pummeled the little ones, the terrorists smiled and laughed. It was said that they would strike a child and then watch the child cringe. When the youngsters recoiled, their captors laughed. This says the offenders enjoyed inflicting the suffering. They wanted their victims to suffer.

Use of similar methods was peculiarly more intense in post-Islamic Spanish inquisition – compared to the rest of Europe. We know now, that opportunist Muslims switched sides during the final days and became devout Catholics. We see similar attitudes in Afghanistan, or Pakistan, or in the cancer that is now attempting to take over the frontier space across Russia in Daghestan or Chechnya.

Psychologically speaking, it could have connections to some hatred of the “mother”, the “uterus” being symbolic of that, a convoluted connection to self-hatred and hatred for imagined or real neglect/abandonment by the mother [and very peculiarly prominent in the founding stages of the leaders of the theology itself].

Whoever had primary role in that gang in doing this, is likely to have been exposed to the inner anecdotal/undercurrent of the meme of “penal rape” in the theology. By the way, with a lot of talk about Honey Singh, an Indian origin rapper apparently noted for raunchy lyrics and what has been described by womens’ rights groups as being misogynist and almost condoning rape – is claimed to be extremely popular or topping the chart in the Punjab and North India – and expectedly Bollywood. Now why exactly is he so popular exactly in that region, that saw the earliest and longest entrenchment of Islamic military power in the subcontinent – lies the answer.

Given the patterns, the psychological drive would be to dehumanize the woman – that is the reason even the penis is not used finally to commit the rape – it becomes a disembodied, dehumanized blunt or sharp tool. I would expect it to be accompanied by related dehumanizing actions – like urinating on the mouth/body etc. If they ever fully make the chargesheet public there is likely to be indications of this. But officially administrations typically drop the actual details of torture from public access. One cannot find the details in the judgment copies available for open access – on torture of women in police custody, for example. The now well-known case of Archana Guha’s is an example where public domain material, including the judgments, do not have the attached evidence – claims, and to know about what possibly this woman had to face, one has to look up a biography of her written by another woman.

My salute for the girl who fought to resist the six subhumans, as well as for Guha and her biographer.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 7 so far )

Allegation: Hindu husband of a Muslim woman murdered by Islamists – and an Indian provincial government covers up for the Islamists.

Posted on December 8, 2012. Filed under: Afghanistan, Ayodhya, Christians, Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Kashmir, Kashmiri Pundit, Muslims, terrorism |

I had to write allegedly in the title. First I have no real means of verifying the allegation, especially if any Islamophile regime in India decided to bring its full coercive power behind Islam. Second, I would not have needed the allegation qualifier – if it was say the case of a Muslim husband Rizwanur, being “murdered” (and no need for “allegedly” here) by Hindus for marrying a Hindu woman in the same province. As shown by the media of West Bengal, the then governments at centre and state, and the then fiery activist and the current Chief Minister of the province – who made it a public issue, offering namaaz e janaaja lamenting Rizwanur – and whose current police administration is now alleged to be suppressing the current incident from taking legal course.

For all those on the net, who believe in the supposed one-sided repression and violence on Muslims by Hindus in India, here is version that looks at cases on the ground from the other direction.  This might not have been what really happened, this might be an exaggeration, murderers and criminals have no religion, yadda, yadda. But do we allow such doubts to creep in when we accuse non-Muslims on supposed atrocities on Muslims?

http://southbengalherald.blogspot.ie/2012/12/hindu-man-marries-muslim-woman-shot.html

Dipankar Roy, 22 years old (Hindu) was brutally murdered as he had married Salima (Muslim). Both of them had been in love for a while. The victim was riding his motorbike coming back from Chandpara to his own house, when he was lynched and shot dead by Muslim activists led by Aamir Mandal, a member of the local Islamist organization. Dipankar’s body was found in a pool of blood and bore multiple bullet wounds in the chest, abdomen and shoulders. But West Bengal police has not bothered to arrest the murderers, as there is intense pressure from the local Muslim religious bodies. Instead, the police is trying to shield the perpetrators. District: North 24 Parganas.  Subdivision: Bongaon.   Near the Bangladesh border.

The alleged role of the provincial administration:

on December 5th, 2012, 05/12/2012 when the relatives of Dipankar Roy, who was killed by Aamir Ali on 03/12/2012, went to RG Kar Hospital morgue. At first, Shri Malay Roy (cousin brother of the victim) and Shri Haridas (brother in law) remained unattended for several hours. Later, when they insisted for the dead body, local police under Tala police station informed them, off the record, that it is instructed from the higher position to delay the process so that no sentiment can be created amongst Hindus while returning to their home town.

According to the blog-poster, the West Bengal police, under pressure from the local Muslim clergy-mafia nexus, is now barging into Dipankar’s house and intimidating / creating mental pressure upon the family members of the victim to cremate his body at the dead of the night without post-mortem, to avoid any further investigation into this issue.

After intervention of Hindu Samhati activists, the deadbody was finally released at around 4pm, post mortem was done, but that too without a medical certificate. One police from Bangaon police station Mr. Ranjan was posted in the hospital for passing minute by minute report to Bangaon police station. He insisted to accompany the deadbody in the small truck but family members objected to that citing very small place inside the truck. Then he called In-Charge Bangaon police station and forcibly entered into the truck under his instructions.

Later, the body of the victim was brought at Barasat. Activists of Hindu Samhati paid their homage to the victim. Then similar kind of program was also organized at Chandpara, Nera Pukur Pas en route to their house.

Late in the night, police came to the house of the victim and forced the family members to perform the last rites in the night itself as the Administration was scared of any communal tension in the area arising out of the cremation of the victim. Sisters and brother-in-laws of the victim strongly turned down the proposal of the administration and stuck to their demand for cremation in the morning. Then, local MLA (member of legislative assembly) came to their house at around 2330 hours and again, for half an hour, tried to convince the family for early cremation but it went in vain.

According to the blog, on 6th December morning, the family members proceeded  towards the crematorium for last rites.

Police had been deployed in huge numbers, especially in front of houses of Hindu Samhati activists. 500 plus people blocked the road in front of SDPO office at Bangaon town, as they carried Dipankar’s corpse. They were demanding immediate arrest of the killers of Dipankar.

This is not an isolated story in India. There is a huge propaganda machinery that runs in overdrive about supposed atrocities on Muslims in the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir. The reality is that the troubles in Kashmir started long before the so-called 1990’s demolition of the disputed structure at Ayodhya, or the so-called one-sided riot on Muslims in Gujarat, with several cases in the Kashmir Valley in the 60’s and 70’s whereby Hindu girls were abducted and raped systematically by Muslim gangs. Throughout northern India, especially in places of high muslim concentrations, riots and conflicts frequently break out on instigation by Islamics. They know, that their specific religious agenda and role will be protected by the politico-business-mafia interests that control the Gangetic Valley – and since the media is under constant threat unless it toes the regime lines (two Zee news functionaries were recently dragged to jail on allegations of extortion by a Congress MP) – no reports on any Islamic atrocity gets ever published or aired in India. A string of recent atrocities in the southern state of Kerala against Hindus, where a spate of gruesome ritualistic slaughter of animals, especially dogs, have also taken place and been interpreted to reflect the Islamic hatred and love for torturing dogs out of their founder’s possible hatred of Hekate. (There have been reports of the Afghan National Army members bringing in stray dogs into their compounds to torture and mutilate them to death.)

Just because the Indian state machinery manages to suppress the release of such information in the public domain, does not necessarily mean that Islamist atrocities on non-Muslims in India, are not  happening. Non-Hindus might rejoice secretly if Muslims eliminate Hindus, imagining that the space might then be clear for other proselytizing religions to harvest new slaves of their respective religions. But the fact remains that once mullahcracy takes over a country – Christians are constantly tortured and eliminated too, and the supremely confident Christian evangelists in the west, who boast such spectacular success on “pagans”- fail completely and abjectly and run with their tail behind their hind legs where it comes to harvesting Muslims.

It is crucial for the non-Muslims to unite in their perception of the totalitarianism represented by Islamism.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Say No to theological demands for immunity from criticism

Posted on September 22, 2012. Filed under: Antisemitism, China, Christians, Hindu, Iran, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Israel, Jew, Jihad, Left, Marxism, Muslims, neoimperialism, Pakistan, religion, Russia, Syria, Taleban, terrorism, USA |

As the so-called movie-protests continue with random and sometimes what appears as organized violence, here are a few thoughts :

  • Claim: The protests are not based on ideology/religion. They are expression of hatred against America and the West and Israel.
  • Reality : Muslims have been violently protesting against claimed insults to their religion or to their prophet, from the time of the prophet himself – according to Muslim core texts. Intolerance for any criticism of any Islamic claim is built into the theology. The case of assassinating a mother of suckling baby, for being a poet and composing verses that were irritating to the prophet – is one among many but not unique, iconic examples of the Islamic doctrine  of extreme intolerance of the spoken or written word.
  • Reality : If the protests were really against America and the West, why is Saudi Arabia or Saudi monarchy spared the loving expressions of outrage? A key factor in the West’s dominance of the globe is its linkage to Saudi oil and petro wealth. Saudis collaborate effectively with Israel against Iran. But nothing happens against those in the Islamic world who collaborate with and are helped in turn by the West.
  • Reality : Afghan Taleban and assorted islamists, Pakistani islamists, Yemeni islamists, Nigerian or Sudanese or Somali or Niger islamists, Iran and Iraq in their war against each other, or continued proxy conflicts in Iraq or Syria between Sunnis and Shias – all are about Muslims repressing Muslims, Muslims torturing, raping, massacring Muslim men, women and children. But no violent Muslim protests happen against them.
  • Claim : The reason for hating America, West and Israel, is because of their “mistreatment” of Muslims.
  • Reality : Russia “mistreats” Chechen and Daghestani Muslims. China violently represses Uyghurs. No protests happen against Russia and China.
  • Fact : Intolerance of the written or spoken word of criticism is built into the core theology of Islam. Even under the rule of the founder himself, the attested cases of execution of women are known to have been about claimed “mockers” of the prophet or Islam – as in the case of when Mecca was “conquered”.  These parts of the story – where poets- women or men were specifically targeted by Islamists, are quietly dropped in even the modern western dramatizations of these stories.
  • Fact : Islamic vitriol and denigration of other religions, primarily Christianity [even if use of Jesus in Islamic texts is always cited in apologetics], Judaism, and Hinduism – exist all over the web. The language of the vitriol range from the sophisticated to the vilest gutter versions ever imaginable. Perhaps they reflect more the state and hidden desires or psychological disorders in the repressive Middle Eastern societies, but in terms of cold hard printed or written word – they are worse denigrators of other religions and their respective beloved icons.
  • Fact : Christian leadership of the more established church organizations are and will remain ambivalent towards this intolerance, perhaps because some of them also feel the need for protection under neo-anti-blasphemy laws. Ideologies which know they have serious weaknesses in their foundations, resort to ideological as well as physical coercion to enforce their authority.  Their ultimate tool is the demand for silencing of critical voices and doubts – because the fear is that such words would expose the underlying vicious hunger for power masquerading as concern for the “spirit” after “death”.
  • Fact : Marxists too will be ambivalent towards this intolerance, because part of them look upon Islamists as a useful tool against their so-called neo-imperialists, or as potential allies against their infantile rage against their more-liberal-than-islam birth societies. Theirs is a search for the mythical golden pre-tribal age of primitive societies assumed to be egalitarian. For the Marxists who are more pragmatic, it is a case too of protecting their dogma and pseudo-religion against critical thinking – the reason Leninist party discipline was primarily seeking to gag dissent being made public, and the public getting uncomfortable ideas.
  • Fact : Fighting against the demand for this protection of intolerance, protection or immunity from the assailant “word”, is a crucial aspect of protecting all the gains that human civilization has made over the last five hundred years from the Renaissance. If we retain the right to freely criticize and express our dissent from any dogma, any theology, any ideology, any hypothesis, except the hypothesis of “right to criticize freely” – we can always regain whatever we lose through temporary reversals of the human civilization.
  • Appeal : do whatever is needful, democratically, freely, openly, publicly – to preserve the right to criticize, the right to freely speak and express, regardless of any dogmatic claim to the contrary.  Do not let any government or legislature of the free world accommodate the Islamist lobby in this regard. This is about freedom and all about not letting totalitarianism raise its head again.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

US Embassy Attacks and the Islamic politics of immunity from criticism

Posted on September 16, 2012. Filed under: Islam, Islamic propaganda, Israel, Jihad, Muslims, Politics, terrorism, USA |

No long post and winding analysis trying to be academically neutral this time but some straight points to ponder:

  • Islamist organizations, monarchies and states want to impose Islam on all of the non-Muslim world, whether violent Jihad in militarily favourable situations or pretending peaceful intent when militarily weak
  • US embassy attack is an attack on the fundamental principle behind the First Amendment of US Constitution
  • Islamists want to destroy free speech, followed by free thought
  • Islamists consider European nations sympathetic or vacillating or hesitant before Islam, but US and Isarel as the only two unlikely to compromise
  • Governments will show softness towards Islamist violence out of conisderations for financial and oil flows from the Gulf countries but free people do not have to be similarly soft.
  • Free non-Muslims of the free non-Muslim dominated world, even if suspecting their governments to the hilt about financial criminality and all possible deception- must remember that they can still get away with thinking against their rulers and their ruling system – something that will no longer be there under the totalitarian system represented by Islamism.
  • Free non-Muslims of the free non-Muslim dominated world, should stop and think if tolerance of Islamic intolerance is going to make their children’s world a safe and human one.
  • Make yourselves aware of the totalitarian danger from a religion that holds in its primary text divine sanction and justification for slavery [Sura al Baqara] and refuses to tolerate any criticism at all.
  • The last time we tolerated intolerance, we landed up with the Nazis and a bloody, gut wrenching war that left millions of lives scarred all over the world, and plunged us into new totalitarian regimes lasting for decades.
  • You are still free to think. Don’t wait to act politically, democratically, but still act in time to prevent any concessions to this intolerance.
  • Make a start, personally, to commit to walk away from this totalitarian ideology. In your minds – walk away, reject. Next time you vote, alongside your legitimate demands of jobs, and social justice, and fairness – demand rejection and moving away from Islamism – in every and all possible ways.
  • The danger is real. Help the governments used to hedging their bets, make up their mind to reject and oppose Islamism – the next time they seek your votes.
  • Look up the records of Holocaust – the camps of sex-slavery and brutalization and gas chambers and tortures and murder of children. That is what will await you, on a much larger scale, but this time on grounds of theological and divine justifications.
  • Whatever be your personal grievance with America, remember that this attack is an attack on freedom of thought and speech, two freedoms from which stem all the other hopes of humankind.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Why the Indian Left fails to understand religious extremism

Posted on August 25, 2012. Filed under: Ayodhya, Bangladesh, Christians, Communist, Hindu, Historians with political agenda, History, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Kashmir, Kashmiri Pundit, Left, Macaulay, Maoism, Marxism, Muslims, neoimperialism, Pakistan, Politics, religion, terrorism, Uncategorized |

For some time now, the Indian state of Assam has been on the news due to its large-scale civilian strife and internal displacement of communities. But even more spectacularly, the internet and the media to an extent – has been ablaze with the issue of alleged threat mails and texts that perhaps forced a lot of migrant labour and students from the North Eastern ends of India. Following up, the government of India apparently has moved on in its bid to control the net, just like almost any other government on the planet, on the formal platform of protecting vulnerable people.

I will not go into the details of the Assam ethnicity, migration, religious divide problem that is essential to get a perspective of what is happening there and why. But in this Kafkaesque world of interest groups, doublespeak, hidden motivations shaped in their outward expression by complicated legacies of history and concocted morality, what is much more revealing is what the intellectuals and the self-acknowledged voices of nations and communities say on the issue.

I will pick on a very interesting voice pointed out to me by a friend, that of Amaresh Mishra in his timesofIndia blog. Mishra gives a good clue to his ideological lens in the very beginning lines

Before joining the Times of India in 1993 as a roving correspondent, I was part of the radical Left movement led then by the CPI-ML (Liberation). However, sufferings of dalits, adivasis and the working classes—natural Left constituencies—did not contribute to my early, personal radicalization. Still a student leader in the Allahabad University, I took active part in debates, discussions concerning national-international topics—and agitations mainly—on student issues.

In 1984, the day our Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated, I was in Calcutta. I had gone there to take part in the national conference of the Indian Peoples Front—the only attempt of its kind—of a Communist Party sponsoring  a democratic-peoples party in India—made under the leadership of late comrade Vinod Mishra—the then general secretary of the CPI-ML (Liberation).

Mishra, says much more about where his mindset comes from – that of the Maoist strand within Indian communism, which typically frantically tries to distinguish itself from the second attempt at puritanism within Indian Marxism – that of CPI(M=Marxist), by adding the claim to be closer to Lenin in the L of its CPI(ML). In so many ways, the communists seem to uncannily reflect the classical search for ever more purity and a return to the golden mythical pure origins of all totalitarian and monoiconic ideologies including totalitarian religions – through evermore stringent factional and sectarian schisms.

Eric Hoffer writes : “Whence comes the impulse to proselytize? Intensity of conviction is not the main factor which impels a movement to spread its faith to the four corners of the earth. …Nor is the impulse to proselytize an expression of an overabundance of power. …The missionary zeal seems rather an expression of some deep misgiving, some pressing feeling of insufficiency at the center. Proselytizing is more a passionate search for something not yet found than a desire to bestow upon the world something we already have. It is a search for a final and irrefutable demonstration that our absolute truth is indeed the one and only truth. The proselytizing fanatic strengthens his own faith by converting others. …It is also plausible that those movements with the greatest inner contradiction between profession and practice – that is to say with a strong feeling of guilt – are likely to be the most fervent in imposing their faith on others.”  (The True Believer, Psychology of Mass Movements, 1948, p. 110-111)

This sense of inadequacy and insufficiency, minus the humility of spirituality, leads to a constant instability and inequilibrium that leads the communist radical as much as a religious one, into a permanent search for something to feel guilty about and atone for that guilt by extreme action on a focused enemy, the “other”, the devil of his instantaneous ideology. Note that Mishra is perhaps subconsciously aware of this – in that he claims that his radicalism did not stem from communism per se but had existed even before – that his innate fanaticism and radicalism perhaps only found an appropriate vehicle to express itself.

Mishra explains his “anti-right wing” radical thoughts based on his glimpse of communal violence in 1984, when according to him he witnesses an atrocity:

Back then, I was only 18 years of age; the incident traumatized me so deeply that after I got back to Allahabad I fought with everyone—including my close relatives—who—as per the norm those days—were abusing Sikhs incessantly.

For several days, I was unable to sleep; I was full of rage; it was good that I did not have access to a gun those days—I would certainly have used it on some right-wing, communal/anti-Sikh element in Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh.

I am expressing my inner most urges to make a point—that during desperate/unjust times—a sensitive human being—belonging to the majority community—can be driven to anti right-wing violence. Being a ruling class  brahmin—whose family had protected Muslims during the 1947 riots—and who took any violence against minorities as a challenge to his sense of honour directly—also must have contributed  a lot to my aggressive stance.     

So, imagine the plight/mindset of minority communities who saw unspeakable crimes—raping of daughters and mauling of children—being committed on their kith and kin.

It is most illuminating that Mishra always thinks of the “majority” in the context of the “Hindu”, and never ever expresses similar thoughts about the plight of the “minority” Hindu or Buddhist in Muslim majority areas or societies. In his memory and narrative, the “majority” member Hindu-Brahmin ancestor of his, is and does what is expected of the “majority” in any society. However, he conspicuously avoids the issue of duty of similar muslim majorities to protect the humanity and dignity of minorities in Muslim majority countries – even on the subcontinent and as neighbours, as in Pakistan and Bangladesh, where minorities have been systematically targeted for elimination and have been constantly dwindling from the time of Partition. Mishra of course needs to be completely silent about similar trauma and reaction in the “Hindus” seeing similar action during the Partition – when a future luminary of Pakistan, and icon of Bangladesh , Hussein Suhrawardy allowed a planned pogrom of Hindus to go through in Noakhali and Calcutta. Mishra cannot cite Liaqat Khan’s role in organizing a pogrom of Sindhi Hindus and what effect such memories should have had on Hindu survivors!

Amaresh Mishra then goes on to list the long tale of alleged woes of Muslims in India and allegations of state connivance in supposed “right-wing” torture. For Mishra’s deracinated guilt-ridden conscience, however, it does not pay to remember the case of the Kashmir Valley and the state sponsored “Muslim” “right-wing” atrocity on the Kashmir Valley Hindus from as early as late 60’s and early 70’s.  Mishra has never heard of a certain Kashmiri Pundit girl who was abducted and the consequences thereof – long, long before the destruction of the disputed structure at Ayodhya.

Mishra accepts that in India, it was possible to flourish as an “upper-caste” “ex-Naxalite”. He fails to realize, that in his clever self-pity, he shows that even after passing through “Naxalism”, it was impossible for someone to leave behind his awareness of privileged birth. Or therein lies the tragedy and the real failure of the Indian leftist, the failure to realize that his leftist radicalism often has its roots in an imperfect digestion of his Hindu cultural roots. The reason that the ranks of leftism are dominated by “upper castes” and Hindus, but not Muslims or Christians – who only make rare appearances, lie in Hindu threads of a pervasive universal humanism that has remained alive through texts and folk belief in spite of the louder voices of so-called elitism of caste or jaati-varna hierarchies. Islamic culture theologically endorses property, and the imperialism shaped later Christianity similarly endorses authoritarianism and property, and discourage rebellions against the theologically approved regimes which protect those very things that the Left seeks to destroy.

The remainder of Mishras’ article goes on to repeat the allegations in the current Congress led Indian regime’s attempts at sticking the blame for almost each and every terrorist atrocity on Indian soil at the door of Congress’s hated “other”, the apotheosis, the “devil” – of the saffron, or the “Hindu”. Mishra’s political project therefore does not wait to mention the fact that many of these alleged cases against the so-called saffron terror themselves suffer from allegations of torture, political witchhunts, use of state machinery to serve electoral calculations, and that some of the accused could very well be agents provocateurs sent deliberately by the state – like a certain Col Purohit.

Is it so that Mishra perhaps needs a devil, a satan, on whom he can put the sense of all his inadequacies, and transfer all his guilt to? The underlying Hindu memes of equality of all mankind – amritasya putra of the Upanishads, the persistent and recurring post-Vedic Indian thinkers who repeatedly fought with the elite against claims of hierarchy and superiority, prepare him to expect social justice for all humanity- something a predominantly Muslim society never, ever feels towards the non-Muslims. But the established social hierarchy that gave birth to him practices differently from the underlying memes, and this contributes part of the guilt.

But the major part of the guilt comes from the colonial project of Macaulay, prompted by his dear friend Sir William Jones, and other missionaries aligned to the imperialist project on British India. Jones’s favourite textual representation of “Hinduism” was the work attributed to Manu, even though at the time, there was ample evidence that in India, various other Hindu texts were actually followed – like the various grihya sutras of Apastambha, Baudhayana, or Gautama – many far more liberal than that of Manu. In fact modern scholarship excavates increasingly the reality of 18th and 19th century Indian “Hindu”legal practice as far more heterodox and non-Manu like than the British colonial project wanted it to be. For the British empire, demonizing the “Brahmin” was a primary necessity – just as it was for the centuries of Muslim invaders before them. The cultural and intellectual legitimacy of the “Hindu” needed to be undermined and associated with guilt before the colonial project could succeed fully. The source of Mishraic guilt lies in that colonial project. Even the very fact of his “Brahmin” upper-caste ancestor behaving very un-Brahmin-like during 1947 fails to stir him to question the Islamist and British colonial stereotype of the evil caste-repressive “Brahmin” exploiter.

The intellectual limitations that lead to Mishra’s feverish imagination of conspiracy theories could have been overcome had he allowed himself to look at news items like the following:

Hindu Bengali Muslim refugees in Myanmar moved for protection away from Bengali Muslim refugees in Myanmar.

Khine Myo Min: Myanmar government authority in Sittwe evacuated ninety eight Hindu refugees from Bengali Muslim dominated refugee camps to downtown Sittwe on Wednesday.

98 people from 18 Hindu families were moved from their current shelter of Thae Chaung and Thak Kay Pron camps to Sittwe city due to increased threats by Bengali Muslim extremists after many reported rapes and attempted rapes and tortures committed by the Bengali Muslims who are majority in the camp.

A mind more used to logical dissection without ideological preoccupations, would have immediately noted the peculiarity by which even the horrors of a common refugee existence fails to suppress the Islamic urge for genocide or repression/exploitation of the non-Muslim.

In constructing grand saffron conspiracies, Mishra ignores news items that come from his trusted “secular” side of the narrative construction business :

Rogue sms’s traced to Kerala and Bangladesh

Cyber security agencies have apparently detected the hand of radical groups, such as the Popular Front of India (PFI) in Kerala and Bangladesh-based Harkat-ul-Jehad al Islami (HuJI), while tracking SMSs that led to the exodus of Northeast people[…] they have been successful in detecting forwarding of bulk messages going viral from Bangladesh groups and PFI activists. Some of the messages hold out communal threats of retribution for alleged atrocities on Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar, a community in the Arakan state linked with Bangladesh, traditionally backed by Islamist and jihadist groups, such as the HuJI.

The Arakan state, in west Myanmar, lies on the route for supplying guns to Northeast insurgents through Cox’s Bazaar, in Chittagong in the past. The HuJI, formed by former Bangladeshi jihadists who took part in the Afghan civil war, was involved in the attack on Sheikh Hasina, now Bangladesh PM, in 2004.

The agencies, monitoring Facebook and Twitter, are also examining the possible role of the Hindu radical groups and the underworld.

Mishra, if he had retained his critical intellectual faculties, would have noticed that the “security” agencies could give much greater details in case of Islamist outfits, and could only add the “possibility” of “Hindu radicals” too being involved. Such equating of Islamism with saffronism seems to have become a requirement of Indian political correctness, often resulting in hilarious columns. Actually, such perspectives should have led to exploring the “possible role” of “Christian” groups in the North East too, with some prominent insurgent groups in the past having paraded their Christian identity a lot possibly in the hope attracting international sympathies from appropriate corners.

It is understandable as to why Mishra cannot quote the following items, or even dismiss them as concoctions of a right-wing state. His devil then has to be extended to icons he needs to clutch on to as the last remaining helpless wronged victims of his limitless guilt. If he has to acknowledge the reality, he loses the fulcrum of his life.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Guwahati/Assam-refugees-head-for-West-Bengal-Meghalaya/Article1-917351.aspx

When armed communities are at each other’s throats in the three violence-hit western districts in Assam, the unarmed and unorganised are fleeing the state — mostly to West Bengal and Meghalaya. The fear factor has gripped Bengali Hindus — the softest target whenever violence takes over the state’s fragile peace — and Koch-Rajbonsi tribals are fleeing the Muslim-dominated Dhubri district over the last one month since the Bodo-Muslim clashes broke out on July 20.

 Curfew in Allahabad

Curfew was today clamped in an Allahabad locality as a precautionary measure while stray incidents took place in Lucknow during a street protest against the ongoing ethnic strife in Assam.

“The curfew was imposed in Kotwali police station area from 7 P.M. And will remain in force till midnight when further decision will be taken after reviewing the situation,” Additional District Magistrate (City), D P Giri told PTI. Trouble began this afternoon when a procession was being taken out by some members of a minority community in localities falling under Kotwali police station.

However, policemen deployed in the area objected to the procession pointing out that no prior permission had been obtained and that order had to be maintained in view of large crowds expected at places of worship on the occasion of the last Friday prayers of Ramzan.
The agitators allegedly reacted strongly and tried to proceed with the procession with some of them indulging in heavy stone-pelting which left several persons, including some policemen, injured and caused damage to a number of shops in the vicinity and vehicles parked nearby.
[…]
Earlier, the protest march in Lucknow after the Friday prayers turned violent here as a group of people, shouting slogans against alleged atrocities on minorities in Assam and Myanmar, resorted to stone pelting and vandalism. The protest march which started from near the Tile Wali Masjid created a ruckus on its way forcing business establishments to close down and vandalising parks and vehicles, a senior police official said.

When the RAF and PAC tried to stop them they indulged in brick batting damaging public properties and vehicles. The protesters also took offence to the presence of media covering the event and damaged their vehicles and equipments, police said.

Later police resorted to baton charge as the protesters tried to march towards Vidhan Sabha.

With such a single-track focus, Mishra therefore shows no grasp of the longer social processes of history and reconstruction of history by both the colonial forces as well as those to whom the colonialists handed over power. He shows in exemplary detail, why the Indian Left had long stopped thinking and questioning themselves, their very own belief systems and values – to check for how those very concepts and values were shaped. In thinking how others wanted them to think for their own geo-strategic purposes and projects, projects which themselves are now defunct – there might still have been a way out.

But indulging in such conspiracy theories actually helps the neo-imperialist strategies to succeed. Mishra will be nowhere to defend whatever is left of his society when the time comes, a society which people of his ideology have helped undo out of unthinking and politically created guilt.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Islamo-Judaic Relations : politically correct mythology – 5: late-Medieval to the modern.

Posted on April 7, 2012. Filed under: Arab, Christians, diaspora, Egypt, exile, Gaza, Historians with political agenda, History, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Israel, Jew, Jihad, Muslims, Ottoman, Palestine, religion, Syria, terrorism, Turkey, UK |

Maimonides (1135-1204), was a famous Jewish philosopher and author who fled Spain from a murderous Muslim persecution and took up the job of a physician to Saladin. However over time his experiences come out in his “Letter to Yemen” [1]

“[as punishment] God has hurled us into the midst of this people, the Arabs, who have persecuted us severely, and passed baneful and discriminatory legislation against us… Never did a nation molest, degrade, debase, and hate us as much as they.”

Maimonides had correspondence with Jews over a large area (yes, including India), and was therefore in a position to compare.

The 9th century Muslim writer al-Jahiz (an Arab settled in Baghdad) wrote: “…the hearts of the Muslims are hardened toward the Jews but inclined toward the Christians.”[2] He pointed out that “in his time the Christians were both socially and economically better off than the Jews.”[3] He explained this by the political resistance of the Jews of Medina to Muhammad.

In this contemporary chronicle from Baghdad by Obadyah the Proselyte, in 1100 C.E.: [7: …the Caliph of Baghdad, al—Muqtadi [1075—1094], had given power to his vizier, Abu Shuja… [who] imposed that each male Jew should wear a yellow badge on his headgear. This was one distinctive sign on the head and the other was on the neck— a piece of lead of the weight of a silver dinar hanging round the neck of every Jew and inscribed with the word dhimmi to signify that the Jew had to pay poll—tax. Jews also had to wear girdles round their wastes. Abu Shuja further imposed two signs on Jewish women. They had to wear a black and a red shoe, and each woman had to have a small brass bell on her neck or shoe, which would tinkle and thus announce the separation of Jewish from Gentile [Muslim] women. He assigned cruel Muslim men to spy upon Jewish women, in order to oppress them with all kinds of curses, humiliation, and spite. The Gentile population used to mock all the Jews, and the mob and their children used to beat up the Jews in all the streets of Baghdad…When a Jew died, who had not paid up the poll—tax [jizya] to the full and was in debt for a small or large amount, the Gentiles did not permit burial until the poll—tax was paid. If the deceased left nothing of value, the Gentiles demanded that other Jews should, with their own money, meet the debt owed by the deceased in poll—tax; otherwise they [threatened] they would burn the body.”

Bernard Lewis refers to attempts at reform in the 19th century Ottoman empire by quoting a Turk “… whereas in former times, in the Ottoman state, the communities were ranked, with the Muslims first, then the Greeks [Greek Orthodox], then the Armenians, then the Jews, now all of them were put on the same level. Some Greeks objected to this, saying: “The government has put us together with the Jews. We were content with the supremacy of Islam.”[4] Most likely this refers to the reform decrees that resulted out of the power struggle between Muhammad Ali of Egypt and the Ottomans.

The British envoy, Dr John Bowring was in Lebanon and Syria in the 1830s, and he writes:

The Mussulmans. . . deeply deplore the loss of that sort of superiority which they all & individually exercised over and against the other sects. . . a Mussulman. . . believes and maintains that a Christian — and still more a Jew — is an inferior being to himself.[5] […] The condition of the Jews forms, perhaps, an exception [to the general improvement of non-Muslims] and cannot be said to have improved comparatively with that of the other Sects[6]

Towards the end of Mameluk rule (from the Mongol withdrawal in 1260 to the Ottoman conquest in 1517), a Franciscan monk named Francesco Suriano lived in the monastery in Jerusalem for about a quarter of a century. He served as Custos Terrae Sanctae or Guardian of the Holy Land for his order for some time and therefore the highest ranking Catholic official there, charged by the pope with overseeing Roman Catholic interests in the Christian holy places and Church affairs in the country. He writes about the Jews in Jerusalem:

“I wish you to know how these dogs of Jews are trampled upon, beaten and ill-treated, as they deserve, by every infidel nation, and this is the just decree of God. They live in this country in such subjection that words cannot describe it. . . there in Jerusalem, where they committed the sin for which they are dispersed throughout the world [i.e., the Crucifixion], they are by God more punished and afflicted than in any other part of the world. And over a long time I have witnessed that . . . No infidel [= Muslim] would touch with his hand a Jew lest he be contaminated but when they wish to beat them, they take off their shoes with which they strike them on the mustaches; the greatest wrong and insult to a man is to call him a Jew. And it is a right notable thing that the Moslems do not accept a Jew into their creed unless he first become a Christian. . . And if they were not subsidized by the Jews of Christendom, the Jews who live in Judea would die like dogs of hunger.”[7]

The Ottoman Empire needed the Jewish expertise in various fields including finances so initially after conquest they brought in some of the more outstanding into service. This was vehemently opposed by the local muslims. Therefore, “The Jewish community… paid the jizya at rates somewhat higher than the [Greek] Orthodox.”[8] Now, even under and after such “great” patronage by the Ottomans, Chateaubriand, (a famous French author), visited Jerusalem in 1806, and later wrote:

Special target of all contempt [i.e., of both Muslims and Christians], they lower their heads without complaint; they suffer all insults without demanding justice; they let themselves be crushed by blows… Penetrate the dwellings of these people, you will find them in frightful poverty…

Nothing can prevent them from turning their gaze towards Zion. When one sees the Jews dispersed throughout the world,… one is probably surprised, but, to be struck by supernatural astonishment, it is necessary to find them in Jerusalem.. . to see these legitimate owners of Judea, slaves and strangers in their own land. One must see them under all oppressions, awaiting a king who is to redeem them.[9]

Neophytos was a Greek Orthodox monk belonging to the Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulcher, which governed Orthodox church affairs in Jerusalem. Around 1834, Neophytos writes:

“As we are on the question of repairs, we must say something about the Jewish Synagogue. One year ago only, seeing the liberal dispositions of Mehemet Ali Pasha [Muhammad Ali] and Ibrahim Pasha [his son, general, and deputy], they dared to speak about their Synagogue. They asked that their House of Prayer, being in a ruinous condition and in danger of falling in, might be repaired. So, those who did not even dare to change a tile on the roof of the Synagogue at one time, now received a permit and a decree to build.”[10]

Felix Bovet, a Swiss Protestant minister who visited Jerusalem in 1858, writes “the Jews are still, to this day, the most miserable part of the population of the Holy City.”[11] Bovet quotes a French convert to Islam, who wrote: “the Jerusalem Jew only half lives, scarcely daring to breathe.”[12]

References
1. Maimonides, “Epistle to Yemen,” in David Hartman, ed., Crisis and Leadership: Epistles of Maimonides (tr. A Halkin; Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society 1985), p 126.

2. Quoted in Bernard Lewis, The Jews of Islam (Princeton 1984), pp 59-60.

3. Words of Moshe Sharon, op. cit., p 94; also see Carlo Panella, Il ‘Complotto Ebraico’ — L’antisemitismo islamico da Maometto a Bin Laden (Torino: Lindau 2005), p 89

4. Bernard Lewis, What Went Wrong? (London: Orion House 2002), p 104.

5. Quoted in William R Polk, The Opening of South Lebanon, 1788-1840 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 1963), p 138. Other 19th century Western observers noted the same Arab-Muslim Judeophobia, as quoted by Saul S Friedman, Land of Dust (Washington, DC: University Press of America 1982), p 136.

6. William R Polk, The Opening of South Lebanon, 1788-1840 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 1963), p 138.

7. Francesco Suriano, Treatise on the Holy Land (Jerusalem: Franciscan Press, 1949) [in original: Trattato di Terra Santa e dell’Oriente], pp 101-02. For a scholarly view of the Jews in Jerusalem in the late Mamluk period, when Suriano lived there, see Avraham David in “The Mamluk Period” in Israel: People, Land, State (Avigdor Shinan, ed.: Jerusalem: Yad Izhak Ben Zvi, 2005).

8. Amnon Cohen, “On the Realities of the Millet System: Jerusalem in the 16th century,” in B Braude and B Lewis, Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire (New York: Holmes & Meier 1982), p 14.

9. Chateaubriand, Itinéraire de Paris à Jérusalem (Paris: Juilliard 1964), pp 426-427.

10. Neophytos, Extracts from Annals of Palestine 1821-1841 (Jerusalem, Ariel Publishing House, 1979; compiled by Eli Schiller), p 78. Originally published in Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society, vol. XVIII (1938; tr S N Spyridon).

11. Felix Bovet, Egypt, Palestine, and Phoenicia (Eng. trans; London: 1872), p 180

12. Ibid., p 181.

Discussion

The more one studies the history of Islamic repression on the Jews, the more one comes up with the stark reality that in many many ways, the Islamic treatment simply picked up and intensified the iconoclastic violence and genocidic tendencies latent within the Churches of east. In many many ways, the appearance of the Islamics provided a tool and a hope in the eastern churches to actually achieve what they had so far failed to do – the complete elimination of the Jews as a physical reality.

From this started a whole lot of processes :

(1) realizing that the Jews will remain strongly resistant to conversion in spite of certain disgruntled Jews switching allegiance and acting against their own origin community (not surprising for Hindus of India!). As long as the Jews remained adamant to conversion, Jews are a problem to the two other claimants of the sole rights to the Abrahamic legacy (which in turn in its proselytizing/converting form is a most effective tool for imperialism).

(2) try and blame all atrocities , or even invent genocide/exile/enslavement on a grand scale and assign it to “Romans” (not the Church primarily)

(3) suppress all references to non-genocidic/encouraging behaviour from “Roman” authorities

(4) when instigating “Roman” authorities as much as possible to eliminate the Jews was not achieving this goal, the Islamists were a “Godsend”. This is shown in the active collaboration of the Eastern Churches leadership with the Islamists and Jihadists to eliminate and repress Jews to an extent they could only rant about but not actually implement under “Roman” rule. The combined effort achieves the target to a much greater degree than ever achieved before in the pre-Islamic period.

(5) jihadis use this eagerness in Church leadership to intensify their dhimma policy – which is not toleration as represented by Islamists and their non-Muslim apologists, neither is it a purely “social discrimination” non-physical-violence non-Jihad thing. It is a double edged sword, by first enforcing a one-sided set of extremely harsh and almost impossible to meet conditions on the Jews, and then systematically and regularly claim that the “covenants” of the dhimma had been broken so jihad was now applicable to the captive population of dhimmis.

(6) gradually Jihadis tighten the noose on Levantine non-Muslims, especially Christians who are increasingly subjected to forced conversions, genocide and enslavement once the Islamists gain a foothold with their leaders’ initial weaknesses, and this in turn makes the Christian leadership more and more eager to please the Islamists. They start suppressing evidence of Jihadi violence on Christians (unfortunately even the most enlightened so-called paragons of tolerance Ottoman behaviour in this regard is also historically documented) and increase their collaboration in persecution of Jews in the hope of achieving their aims of cleansing of the land of the Jews.

(7) this leads to the western churches being ideologically cornered since eastern churches have to justify their collaboration with the Islamics on the “original sin” or so called responsibility of “deicide”. This concept of collective responsibility was taken to its extreme both by the christians as well as the muslim leadership, but finds its perfection under Islamic leadership of christianity. So the major “expulsions” and “genocides” have to be put at the door of the Roman empire BEFORE the acceptance of Christianity as a Roman imperial religion.

“Sado-masochism” – the almost sexual enjoyment of giving and receiving intense pain (mental as well as physical)- is perhaps a key to understand this modern (and not so modern) Christian reaction against the Jews which intensified under Islamic leadership over the greater part of Christian leadership’s mindset. Its intensity and naked expression in Jihadi Islam is simply the next stage of development from Christian attitudes towards the origin – perhaps a generalization of father-son antagonistic dynamic so insightfully discovered by a man of Jewish origins, Sigmund Freud. The Judaic being the father, and Christianity the elder born, and Islam the younger, with the sons having a raging sibling rivalry, a shared hatred of the father who stands between them and the mother – the legacy of the Abrahamic.

Now why should it find expression in some Indians who were born as Hindus? Perhaps the same mindset that led to a few Jewish converts into Islam or Christianity – an unconscious attraction for the possibilities of gratifying their sado-masochastic tendencies!

Each of the points (1)-(7) can be supported with documented sources. I have already mentioned once on the modern thinking in a large part “professional historians” on the so-called “greater role” of Romans in the “diaspora”. Apparently many like the one I mentioned have argued for the whole thing being a “myth”(!!) and that there was really no traumatic dispersal at the scales of hundreds of thousands or millions under the Romans [ there are detailed arguments about the 1.1 million being absurd based on actual estimates of food production, archaeological reconstructions of living conditions and settlement estimates, etc.] – according to these “experts”.

Maybe the pro-Islamics of all colours should unite against these very Jewish profs and academics as being part of a Zionist conspiracy with overt pro-Palestinian sympathies but actually undermining the whole Islamist cause!! Denying the key-pivot of Roman role in Diaspora combined with source narrative claims from Islamists themselves about atrocities and genocide perpetrated by Muslims on the Jews is problematic for the Islamist-line of Palestinian “movement”.

Part 4

To be continued.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Islamo-Judaic Relations : politically correct mythology – 4 : From departure of Muhammad to Islamist Conquest of Palestine and Syria

Posted on March 1, 2012. Filed under: Antisemitism, Arab, Christians, diaspora, Egypt, exile, Gaza, Historians with political agenda, History, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Israel, Jew, Jihad, Muslims, Palestine, religion, Roman, Syria, terrorism |

From the successful genocide at Khyber and land grab, in the late 620’s until his death, Muhammad tried to expand the reach of his army towards Syria and Palestine. His first attempt with an open declared campaign (for the first time in his life, because previously he had always relied on surprise and deception) against Heraclius was a disaster, and at this time we have reports of increasing dissent against his leadership. So Muhammad renewed his earlier strategy of covert and piecemeal targeting of isolated communities and tribes.

During this phase he was taken ill and passed away, according to the Hadiths, exactly at the time when a new and larger expedition was being planned against the then Byzantine held territories of Syria and Palestine. The expedition did take off, and similar expeditions were then subsequently organized until finally at the Battle of Yarmouk a large Byzantine army was defeated and Heraclius abandoned Syria and Palestine and went back to Constantinople. This is just within 10 years of Khyber. However many cities held out.

Some Bedouin nomadic tribes at this period did hover around in the frontierland between Byzantium and beyond (the southern desert of Palestine, west of the Euphrates (Hira) in the Syrian desert, Palmyra), where for a long time due to the competition with the persians, the Byzantines had come to an arrangement of benefits and payment to enlist the large nomadic Arab tribes as a bulwark against raids from beyond. The arable inner regions and the cities were populated by Aramaic speaking Jews and Christians. The contemporary writings of the Church Fathers and in Talmudic sources show that they had little or no identification/sympathy with the Bedouins (who spoke a different language) and actually were quite hostile because they faced constant raids. [1]

Moshe Gil, [1] quotes surviving sources from the defeated indigenous non-Muslim populations, to show that they

“reflect the attitude of the towns and villages in Palestine quite accurately; the attitude of a sedentary population, of farmers and craftsmen, toward nomads whose source of income is the camel and who frequently attack the towns, pillage and slaughter the inhabitants, and endanger the lives of the wayfarer. These sources completely contradict the argument to the effect that the villagers and townsmen in Palestine accepted the invasion of those tribes bearing the banner of Islam with open arms of their so-called racial affinity.” [This is a copyrighted book, so I cannot quote extensively. Those interested do look up]

The whole Gaza region up to Kaiseria [Caesarea] was sacked and devastated in the campaign of 634. Four thousand Jewish, Christian, and Samaritan peasants who defended their land were massacred. The villages of the Negev were looted. Cities such as Jerusalem, Gaza, Jaffa, Caesarea, Nablus, and Beth Shean were isolated and closed their gates. In his sermon on Christmas day 634 CE, the patriarch of Jerusalem, Sophronius, says “the Christians are being forcibly kept in Jerusalem…chained and nailed by fear of the Saracens, whose savage, barbarous and bloody sword kept them locked up in the town”. In 636, Sophronius, [Day of the Epiphany 636], writes of the destruction of the churches and monasteries, the sacked towns, the fields laid waste, the villages burned down by the “nomads” [generic name for Arabs including Islamics whom the Byzantine Christians were yet to recognize as any significant independent faith system] who were overrunning the country. In a letter the same year to Sergius, the patriarch of Constantinople, he mentions the ravages wrought by the Arabs. Thousands of people perished in 639, falling victim to the raids as well as the famine and plague that resulted from these destructions. [2] For Jerusalem, according to one version of the terms of the treaty with the Patriarch for surrender, “Jews” would not be allowed to remain within the city.

According to Baladhuri (d. 892 C.E. – his name also comes up in connection with records of campaigns in Sindh in India), 40,000 Jews [20,000 according to some translations] lived in Caesarea alone at the Arab conquest, after which all trace of them is lost. [3] Tabari further reports that 4000 survivors were taken prisoner and transported out of the region and given as slaves to Muslims in Al-Jurf. [4]

Gil further shows that the period of the conquest was also that of the destruction of the synagogues and churches of the Byzantine era, remnants of which have been turning up in archaeological discoveries. Towns in the western strip and the central strip (the region of the red sand hills and the swamps) in the Sharon, decreased from fifty-eight to seventeen. It is estimated that the erosion of the soil from the western slopes of the Judaean mountains reached as a result of the decultivation during the Muslim period to almost 2,000 to 4,000 cubic meters. The direct evidence of the destruction of agriculture and the desertion of the villages is shown by the fact that the papyri of Nessana are completely discontinued after the year 700. [1]

Similar conclusions have been reached in archaeological analysis with Negev being reduced to a wasteland. Gil has translated these observations by the 10th century Karaite [The rationalist movement within Judaism started by Maimonides] commentator Yefet b. Ali recording that there was great destruction in Palestine and that there were places which remained uninhabited, while there were other places to which people returned and settled:

“the places which were completely destroyed so that no memory of them remains, like Samaria…are the places which have been destroyed and ruined, but despite this there are guards and people living there, such as Hebron and others” [1]

There is no reason to expect, like some of us probably do – that just within 10 years the entire spirit of Badr, Khyber would be forgotten and abandoned by Islamism – all of a sudden when they overrun Palestine.

[1] Moshe Gil, A History of Palestine, 634-1099

[2] Bat Yeor, “Islam and the Dhimmis”, The Jerusalem Quarterly, 1987, Vol. 42,

[3] The origins of the Islamic state, being a translation from the Arabic, accompanied with annotations, geographic and historic notes of the Kitab futuh al-buldan of al-Imam abu-l Abbas Ahmad ibn-Jabir al-Baladhuri -p213 [4] Ibid p216-218

Part 3

Part 5

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Islamo-Judaic Relations : politically correct mythology – 3 : Foundation of Islam and the ethnic cleansing of Jews

Posted on February 18, 2012. Filed under: Antisemitism, Arab, diaspora, exile, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Israel, Jew, Jihad, Muslims, religion, terrorism |

3  Islam and the Jews – the historical testament :

I am starting with the record of “encouragement” by Muslims to the Jews living around the Levant and Near East. This may appear to be “too much history” – but pause to think what effect this can have on the collective social consciousness of the Jews towards the Muslims who continued in the longest most recent occupation of their homeland until 1948. Note that this is the early period – in the 600’s. I will post subsequently about the medieval period.

With Islam what seems to be most interesting is that the more organized communities that Muhammad appears to face up to, are the Jews. In fact it was a Jewish settlement, Yathrib, that afforded him asylum when he felt supposedly persecuted in his birth-place, Mecca. But significantly we hear that the Meccans had not carried out any violence on him for his activities and allowed him to “migrate” with 100 or 140 or 60 or 90 depending on sources] companions including females. Prior to this, Muhammad had preached “secretly” against the ruling clan, their beliefs, their idols and called for their overthrow. It appears that when one of his followers began mocking publicly and then got into a fight, he killed or fatally wonded a Meccan with a sharpened camel bone. That was how the sect was exposed and even then, Muhammad was offered medical help of the time [curing demonic possession which was the natural conclusion of Meccans because Muhammad claimed that he heard voices from angels, and God was speaking to him directly]. Yathrib has been renamed Medina now [another consistent Muslim practice of renaming a place to wipe out cultural linkages to the past].

After this, Muhammad seems to have taken to raiding vulnerable oasis settlements which appear to have been worked more by Jewish settlements. Whatever might have been his initial motivations, perhaps easy loot, providing females to his soldiers, the way the Quranic and Hadthic narratives have shaped it all up – makes it all a divine necessity.

This “God ordered” aspect and the peculiar notion of “Sunna” – emulating what Muhammad actually did, makes the erasure of Jews a persistent core religious theme within the Islamic. I acknowledge gratefully faithfreedom.org for most of the supporting material:

3.1 The Ethnic Cleansing of Banu Quaynuqa Jews from Medina by Muhammad-July, 624CE

After the decisive victory at Badr II and after assassinating intellectual critics at Medina, like a talented mother who lampooned his claims (Asma bnt Marwan) and a 120 year old Jewish critique, Muhammad moved against the Jews who were successful agriculturists, artisans, craftsmen, jewelers and merchants. The three important Jewish clans, the Banu Quaynuqa, Banu Nadir and Banu Qurayza made a covenant with Muhammad when he migrated to Medina “to live in tranquility and harmony and to aid him, should any attack fell on him.” So, Gabriel brought the decree (Quaran 8:58) from Allah that Muhammad was free to break the treaty with the Jews. Muhammad selected the B. Qaynuqa Jews as the target probably because they were the weakest of the three, and declared to the B. Qaynuqa Jews in their market:

“O Jews, beware lest God bring on you the like of the retribution which he brought on Quraysh. Accept Islam, for you know that I am a prophet sent by God. You will find this in your scriptures and in God’s covenant with you.”

The B. Qaynuqa Jews retaliated by ignoring his plea for Islam and challenged Muhammad to face them militarily, replying “Muhammad, do you think that we are like your people? Do not be deluded by the fact that you met a people with no knowledge of war and that you made good use of your opportunity. By God, if you fight us you will know that we are real men!” Then Muhammad demanded Jizya from the Jews but the Jews disparaged Muhammad by saying that His Allah was poor. An angry Allah, (Quaran 3:181), immediately promised His retribution to the Jews. Allah also revealed verse 3:12, 13, assuring Muhammad of his victory against the Jews. In addition, the Muslims also complained of sowing discord between the B. Aws and B. Khazraj by the Jews by narrating the battle of Buath, in which these two tribes had fought. It was during this time that Allah forbade, (Quran verse 5:57), to engage in friendship by the Muslims with the Jews and the Christians.

An Arab wife of a Muslim convert of Medina was waiting on a seat for some jewelry at a  Jewish goldsmith in the market of Qaynuqa. A flirtatious neighbor stepped on her skirt and on rising the inevitable happened. Her screamed drew a passing Muslim who immediately killed the offending Jew. The brother of the Jew then killed the Muslim. The family of the murdered Muslim then appealed to the converts of Medina to take revenge.

The conflict spread and contrary to the propaganda now made  that Muhammad avoided conflict and mitigated for peace, he made no such attempt or try to do  justice. He immediately gathered his followers under a white banner in the hand of Hamzah and marched forward to attack the Jews who took shelter in their fortified apartments. So, Muhammad laid a siege and a full blockade was imposed. The siege lasted for fifteen days. The Jews were expecting help from their Khazarj allies. But the help did not come. So, the desperate B. Qaynuqa Jews had no choice but to surrender to Muhammad. Their hands were tied behind their backs and preparations were made for their execution. At this time, Abd Allah ibn Ubayy, the Khazarite and a new convert to Islam (he was a highly effective exposer of Muhammad at Medina, indicated in Muhammad calling him a hypocrite) intervened.  He begged Muhammad for mercy, but Muhammad turned his face away. Abd Allah persisted. Finally, Muhammad yielded and let the prisoners escape execution. He then cursed the Jews and Abd Allah ibn Ubay with Allah’s punishment. Then Muhammad ordered the Jews of B. Qaynuqa to leave Medina within three days on condition  that the Jews surrendered their arms and jewel-making machinery.

Tabari writes: “Allah gave their property as booty to his Messenger and the Muslims. The Banu Qaynuqa did not have any land, as they were goldsmiths. The messenger of God took many weapons belonging to them and the tools of their trade

3.2 The Murder of Ibn Sunyanah at Medina by Muhayyish b. Masud -July, 624CE

Ibn Sunyanah was a Jewish merchant who was friendly and helpful to many Muslim converts. In the morning after the murder of Ka’b b. Ashraf, [a Medinite poet of Jewish descent who criticized Muhammad – and who was assassinated in a deceptive night meeting] Muhammad gave a general license to kill any Jew whom they might chance to meet.

Tabari:

The messenger of God said, “Whoever of the Jews falls into your hands, kill him.” So Muhayyish b. Masud fell upon Ibn Sunaynah, one of the Jewish merchants who was in close terms with them and used to trade with them, and killed him. Huwayyish b. Masud (his brother) at that time had not accepted Islam; he was older than Muhayysih, and when (the latter) killed (the Jew), he began beating him saying, “O enemy of God, have you killed him? By God you have made much fat in your belly from his wealth.” Muhayyish said, “I said to him, ‘By God, if he who commanded me to kill him had commanded me to kill you, I would have cut off your head.’” And, by God, that was the beginning of Huwayyish’s acceptance of Islam. He said, “If Muhammad had ordered you to kill me. You would have killed me?” and I replied, “Yes, by God, if he had ordered me to kill you I would have cut off your head.” “By God,” he said, “a faith which has brought you to this is indeed a marvel.” Then Huwayyisah accepted Islam.

From the Sahih Hadith of Sunaan Abu Dawud: (Book 19, Number 2996): Narrated Muhayyisah: The Apostle of Allah (PBUH) said: If you gain a victory over the men of Jews, kill them. So Muhayyisah jumped over Shubaybah, a man of the Jewish merchants. He had close relations with them. He then killed him. At that time Huwayyisah (brother of Muhayyisah) had not embraced Islam. He was older than Muhayyisah. When he killed him, Huwayyisah beat him and said: O enemy of Allah, I swear by Allah, you have a good deal of fat in your belly from his property.

3.3  The Ethnic Cleansing of B. Nadir Jews from Medina by Muhammad-July, 625CE

Bani Nadir Jews were the second of three tribes in the vicinity of Medina to be targeted. They were prosperous landowners with substantial orchards of date palms. Muhammad went to the Bani Nadir Jews to raise the blood money to be paid for the killing of two men of B. Amir, whom the assassin, Amr b. Umayya al-Damri, employed by Muhammad, had killed by mistake.

Muhammad, accompanied, Abu Bakr, Ali and Umar visited the village of B. Nadir, and requested the chief of B. Nadir to refund the blood money that he had already paid. The B. Nadir Jews received Muhammad courteously, asked him to sit down while they attentively listened to his demand and agreed to honor Muhammad’s request. After agreeing to Muhammad’s demand for blood money, the B. Nadir Jews went for a private discussion among themselves. Muhammad claimed that B. Nadir Jews wanted to kill him by dropping a stone from top of the house under whose shade he was waiting as informed by “Gabriel”. So, he suddenly stood up and left the place, as if to answer the call of nature asking others, including Abu Bakr, Umar and Ali not to leave the place until he returned. When his companions found that Muhammad’s return was very much delayed, they went out looking for him. On their way to Medina they met a man who told them he saw Muhammad was headed for Medina. When they met Muhammad at Medina, he told them of his perception of treachery by B. Nadir and asked the Muslims to prepare to fight the B. Nadir.

Muhammad asked another of his assassins, Muhammad ibn Maslamah (murderer of Ka’b b. Ashraf), to go to the Banu Nadir Jews to announce to them the ultimatum to leave Medina within ten days, and if after this deadline any Jew was seen in the area, he would be killed. Maslamah, on friendly terms with the Jews who expressed their dismay at the action of Muhammad, said, “ Hearts have changed, and Islam has wiped out the old covenants.”

When Abd Allah ibn Ubayy learned about the precarious situation of the B. Nadir Jews, he sent the message to them that he himself would be coming to their assistance with two thousand Jewish and Arab fighters. But the Banu Nadir Jews recalled that the same person promised to help the Banu Qaynuqa Jews, but in the end, betrayed. So, the Banu Nadir Jews, at first, decided towards removing themselves to Khaybar or nearby. They thought that they could still come to Yathrib (Medina) to harvest their crops and then return to their fortresses at Khaybar. Huyayy ibn Akhtab, their leader finally resolved against this view. He decided to send a message to Muhammad, declining his order of expulsion,. entered in their fortified fortresses, stocked them with enough supplies to last up to a year and got ready to defend themselves. So, no Jew left Medina after the expiry of the ten days ultimatum.

Accordingly, when Muhammad ibn Maslamah returned to Medina with the news Muhammad,  immediately gave order to his fighters in his mosque to arm themselves and march forward to lay a siege on the fortresses of B. Nadir. In the beginning, the Jews defended themselves well and the siege lasted for fifteen or twenty days. Muhammad, in contravention of the ancient Arab laws, cut down the surrounding date trees and burned them. When the Jews protested about the breaking of sacrosanct Arab laws on warfare, he demanded a special revelation from Allah (59:4) that was promptly sent down, sanctioning the destruction of enemy’s palm trees. In this verse Allah gave generous permission to the Muslims to cut down the palm trees: it was not a destruction but the vengeance from Allah, and to humble the evil doers that is to say, it is alright to cut down cultivated land and burn crops in a war. The Muslim poet Hassan b. Thabit enjoyed this destruction of the livelihood of the B. Nadir Jews and composed lyrics on this :

Sahih Bukhari :Volume 3, Book 39, Number 519:  Narrated ‘Abdullah:

The Prophet got the date palm trees of the tribe of Bani-An-Nadir burnt and the trees cut down at a place called Al-Buwaira . Hassan bin Thabit said in a poetic verse: “The chiefs of Bani Lu’ai found it easy to watch fire spreading at Al-Buwaira.”

We should note that the current propaganda by teleslamists tries to establish Muhammad’s kindness towards the trees/crops/orchards of enemies. [Most versions of sharia law texts sanction similar destruction of crops and trees of enemies – but this is carefully avoided in representations to western or non-Muslim audiences with an outright lie claiming exactly opposite stipulations].

B. Nadir surrendered after this and an agreement was reached by which Muhammad spared their lives, and required of the Jews to only take those of their property that they could carry on their camels, surrender all arms. Some of them, with their chiefs Huyey, Sallam and Kinana went to Khaybar.

An entire sura (Sura 59:al- Hashr) relates to the B. Nadir, where Allah says that the B. Nadir Jews were subdued by the striking of terror in their hearts.

Hussain Haykal comments:

After the expulsion of the B. Nadir Jews, Muhammad distributed their lands to the Mohajirs and with this, they were quite satisfied with their new lands. The Ansars were equally happy that they no longer had to support the Mohajirs. Muhammad claimed that B. Nadir property was a special gift from Allah to him. He sold B. Nadir booty to purchase arms, horses, provision for his wives and used the B. Nadir property to support his wives.

Sahih Bukahri: Volume 6, Book 60, Number 407:

Narrated Umar:

The properties of Bam An-Nadir were among the booty that Allah gave to His Apostle such Booty were not obtained by any expedition on the part of Muslims, neither with cavalry, nor with camelry. So those properties were for Allah’s Apostle only, and he used to provide thereof the yearly expenditure for his wives, and dedicate the rest of its revenues for purchasing arms and horses as war material to be used in Allah’s Cause.

Sunaan Abu Dawud : Book 19, Number 2961:

Narrated Umar ibn al-Khattab:

Malik ibn Aws al-Hadthan said: One of the arguments put forward by Umar was that he said that the Apostle of Allah (pbuh) received three things exclusively to himself: Banu an-Nadir, Khaybar and Fadak. The Banu an-Nadir property was kept wholly for his emergent needs, Fadak for travellers, and Khaybar was divided by the Apostle of Allah (pbuh) into three sections: two for Muslims, and one as a contribution for his family. If anything remained after making the contribution of his family, he divided it among the poor Emigrants.

3.4 The Genocide of Bani Qurayzah Jews by Muhammad-February-March, 627

After Muhammad escaped from the Battle of the Trench to Medina, and while he was washing his head in the house of Umm Salamah, one of his wives, “Gabriel” visited him at noon and informed him that the battle was not over yet, and that Allah commanded him (Muhammad) to besiege the B. Qurayzah. After listening to the instruction of Gabriel, Muhammad abandoned the noon (Asr) prayer and ordered the Muslims to march against B. Qurayzah, Ali being sent ahead of the rest. Muhammad informed his followers that during war, prayer can be omitted, as fighting during this time was more incumbent than praying.  In the evening, the Muslims soldiers marched toward the fortress of Bani Qurayza that lay two or three miles to the south-east of Medina. Muhammad rode an ass, while an army of three thousand Muslims, with thirty-six horses followed him. A tent in the compound of the mosque in Medina was also pitched where Sa’d b. Muadh took shelter to recuperate from his wound.

Muhammad approached the fortress of the B. Qurayzah Jews, yelling, ‘you brothers of apes.’ This is alluded to in  Qur’an in verses 2:65, 5:60 and 7:166, where Allah says that He turned the Jews in to apes : i and Muhammad had confirmed this “O brothers of monkeys and pigs! Fear me, fear me.” and asked his poet friend Hassan b. Thabit to make verbal abuse of the Jews through poems.

Sahih Bukhari : Volume 5, Book 59, Number 449: Narrated Al-Bara: “The Prophet said to Hassan, “Abuse them (with your poems), and Gabriel is with you (i.e, supports you).” (Through another group of sub narrators) Al-Bara bin Azib said, “On the day of Quraiza’s (besiege), Allah’s Apostle said to Hassan bin Thabit, ‘Abuse them (with your poems), and Gabriel is with you (i.e. supports you).’ ”

B. Qurayzah Jews were patient and courteous with Muhammad, and addressed him as Abu al-Qasim (father of Qasim, Muhammad’s dead son). Tabari writes: ‘When the Messenger of God had approached their fortresses, he said: “You brothers of apes! Has God shamed you and sent down his retribution on you?” they said, “Abu al-Qasim, you have never been one to act impetuously.”’

The Muslim archers had no impact and  a Muslim approaching carelessly, was killed by a Jewess by casting down a millstone on him.  After twenty-five days of siege, the Jews were on the verge of starvation. Among the Jews was Huyayy b. Akhtab who, as a fulfillment of his pledge to be with B. Qurayzah through thick and thin, did not escape with the Quraysh and the Ghatafan, but stayed with the B. Qurayzah Jews. Unable to bear the desperate situation of the Jewish women and children, the B. Qurayzah leader, Ka’b b.Asad proposed that the Jews should accept Islam to save their lives but the Jews refused. Ka’b proposed that they should kill their women and children, then, all the men could go out and fight Muhammad without any impediment. But the Jews did not want to kill their loved ones. Ka’b then proposed an attack on Muhammad the next day which was a Jewish Sabbath day (ie Saturday). The Jews flatly declined to engage in any warfare during the Sabbath.

The Jews  sent a message to Muhammad, asking that Abu Lubabah b. Abd al-Mundhir, their confidante from B. Aws, be sent to them for a discussion and advice.

Tabari writes: “When they saw him (i.e Abu Lubabah), the men rose to meet him, and the women and children rushed to grab hold of him, weeping before him, so that he felt pity for them. They said to him, “Abu Lubabah, do you think that we should submit to Muhammad’s judgment”? “Yes”, he said, but he pointed with his hand to his throat, that it would be slaughter.”’

So, the Banu Qurayzah sent the proposal to evacuate their territory and to remove themselves to Adriat (in Syria). Muhammad rejected their proposal and insisted on their abiding by his judgment. Having indicated by sign language what Muhammad had in mind for the Jews, Abu Lubabah felt guilty that he had broken his promise of secrecy with Muhammad. To atone for his ‘misdeed’ he went straight to the mosque and bound himself with ropes to one of the pillars. This pillar is known as the ‘pillar of repentance’ or the ‘pillars of Abu Lubabah’. Allah expressed His displeasure with Abu Lubabah’s conduct through verse 8:27.

In the morning, the B. Qurayzah Jews surrendered to Muhammad for his judgment. The male Jews were chained and kept in the fortress till a decision was made about their fate. The B. Aws people were on good terms with the B. Qurayzah Jews. They pleaded with Muhammad for mercy and a fair judgment for their Jewish allies. On this, Muhammad proposed that the judgment be passed by Sa’d b Muadh who was the B. Aws leader, recuperating from his wound in a tent nearby Medina. B. Aws and the B. Qurayzah both agreed on this proposal of Muhammad, hoping to have some mercy from Sa’d b. Muadh. Muhammad dispatched some B. Aws men to bring Sa’d to deliver his judgment. Riding a donkey Sa’d arrived at the site where all the seven or eight hundred Jewish men and many B. Aws people were standing to listen to his judgment. Many B. Aws people requested Sa’d to deal with the Jews with leniency and mercy. Sa’d then asked his people if they would accept whatever judgment he pronounced. The crowd agreed.

Then Muhammad asked Sa’d b. Muadh to pass his judgment. Sa’d replied, “I pass judgment on them that the men shall be killed, the property divided, and the children and women made captives.” Muhammad praised Sa’d for proclaiming a solemn judgment of the Almighty. “You have passed judgment on them with the judgment of God and the judgment of His Messenger.” Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 148: Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: “Some people (i.e. the Jews of Bani bin Quraiza) agreed to accept the verdict of Sad bin Muadh so the Prophet sent for him (i.e. Sad bin Muadh). He came riding a donkey, and when he approached the Mosque, the Prophet said, “Get up for the best amongst you.” or said, “Get up for your chief.” Then the Prophet said, “O Sad! These people have agreed to accept your verdict.” Sad said, “I judge that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as captives.” The Prophet said, “You have given a judgment similar to Allah’s Judgment (or the King’s judgment).”

[this is usually omitted in the “public face” versions of Shahi Bukhari : the full text of Sahih Al-Bukhari contains it] “The women and children were then separated from their husbands and fathers, others were put under the care of Abdullah, a renegade Jew. All the goods and possessions of the B. Qurayzah Jews, their camels and flocks were all brought as spoils of war to be distributed amongst the Muslims.”

After Sa’d b. Muadh passed the judgment of slaughter, the B. Qurayzah Jews were brought down from their dwellings; the men were handcuffed behind their backs with their women and children having already been separated. They were placed under the charge of Mohammad ibn Maslama, the assassin of Ka’b ibn Ashraf, to be despatched to Medina to the compound of the daughter of another Muslim, al-Harith before their execution in batches. A long trench was dug in the marketplace of Medina. The prisoners were then taken there, made to kneel down and beheaded in groups of five or six. Muhammad was personally present to witness this slaughter. Ali and Zubayr cut off the heads of the Jews in front of Muhammad. Sourcing from Al-Waqidi, Tabari writes:“…the messenger of God commanded that furrows should be dug in the ground for the B. Qurayzah. Then he sat down, and Ali and al-Zubayr began cutting off their heads in his presence.” Ibn Ishaq writes that they were taken in groups to Muhammad for beheading in front of him.

Tabari further writes: “The messenger of God went out into the marketplace of Medina and had trenches dug in it; then he sent for them and had them beheaded in those trenches. They were brought out to him in groups. Among them were the enemy of God, Huyayy b. Akhtab, and Ka’b b. Asad, the head of the tribe. They numbered 600 or 700-the largest estimate says they were between 800 and 900. As they were being taken in groups to the Messenger of God, they said to Ka’b b. Asad, “Ka’b, what do you understand. Do you not see that the summoner does not discharge [anyone] and that those of you who are taken away do not come back? By God, it is death!” the affair continued until the Messenger of God had finished with them.’

Huyayy b. Akhtab, the banished B. Nadir Jewish leader was taken to the execution field. Tabari describes his execution this way: “Huyayy b. Akhtab, the enemy of God, was brought. He was wearing a rose-colored suit of clothes that had torn all over with fingertip-sized holes so that it would not be taken as booty from him, and his hands were bound to his neck with a rope. When he looked at the Messenger of God, he said, “By God, I do not blame myself for being hostile to you, but whomever God forsakes is forsaken.” Then he turned to the people and said: “People, there is no injury in God’s command. It is the book of God, His decree, and a battlefield of great slaughter ordained against the Children of Israel. Then he sat down and was beheaded.’

One woman of the B. Qurayzah was killed. She was the wife of Hasan al-Qurazi and was friendly with Aisha. Aisha narrated her story of beheading thus: ‘Only one of their women was killed. By God, she was by me, talking with me and laughing unrestraintedly while the Messenger of God was killing their men in the marketplace, when suddenly a mysterious voice called out her name, saying, “Where is so and so?” She said, “I shall be killed.” “Why?” I asked. She said, A misdeed that I committed.” She was taken away and beheaded. (Aisha used to say: I shall never forget my wonder at her cheerfulness and much laughter, even when she knew that she would be killed.).’

This incident is also recorded in a Sahi Hadith of Abu Dawud:

Book 14, Number 2665: Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin: “No woman of Banu Qurayzah was killed except one. She was with me, talking and laughing on her back and belly (extremely), while the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) was killing her people with the swords. Suddenly a man called her name: Where is so-and-so? She said: I I asked: What is the matter with you? She said: I did a new act. She said: The man took her and beheaded her. She said: I will not forget that she was laughing extremely although she knew that she would be killed.”

A very old Jewish man named Az-Zabir saved the life of a Muslim convert, Thabit b. Qays in the Bu’ath war. Now, when Az-Zabir was about to be beheaded Thabit requested Muhammad to save the life of this old man and his family as a return to his favor. Muhammad reluctantly agreed to spare this Jewish man and his family members. Az-Zabir then asked Thabit b. Qays about the fate of the Jewish leaders such as Ka’b b. Asad and Huayy b. Akhtab, and he preferred to die rather than to live without them. Az-Zabir said, “Then I ask you for the sake of the favor I once did for you to join me to my kinsmen, for by God there is no good in living after them. I will not wait patiently for God, not even [the time needed] to take the bucket of a watering trough, until I meet my dear ones.” So Thabit brought him forward, and he was beheaded. When Abu Bakr heard what that old man said just before his execution, he said, “He will meet them, by God, in the Gehenna, there to dwell forever and forever.”

Muhammad commanded that all those Jewish men with pubic hair were to be killed. One Jewish boy took refuge with a Muslim woman, Salma bt. Qays. She requested Muhammad that mercy be shown to this Jewish boy. It is said that Muhammad spared his life. Here is a Hadith from Sunaan Abu Dawud on this: Book 38, Number 4390: Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi: “I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.”

Having beheaded all the adult males of the B. Qurayzah Jews, Muhammad now busied himself with the distribution of the Jewish booty. He divided the wealth, the wives and the children of the B. Qrayzah Jews among his followers. The booty rules were changed slightly. A horseman received three shares: two shares for the horse and one share for the rider. A foot Jihadist, who had no horse, received one share. It was the first booty in which shares were allotted and from which the Khums was deducted. This simplified rule on booty (fai) was followed in the later plunders.

 After executing all the adult male Jews, Muhammad sent Sa’d b. Zayd al-Ansari with some captives (women and children) from the B. Qurayzah to Najd to sell them in the slave market. Among the captive women, he found a pretty, young Jewess called Rayhanh bt. ‘Amr b. Khunafah and took her as his concubine. It is said that when Muhammad offered to make her his wife by embracing Islam, she declined. She preferred to remain a concubine slave to becoming a Muslim. “Messenger of God, rather leave me in your possession [as a concubine], for it is easier for me and for you.”

3.5 The Raid on Bani al-Mustaliq by Muhammad-December, 627CE

Two months after Muhammad returned from Dhu Qarad campaign, Allah suddenly revealed that B. al-Mustaliq, a Jewish tribe friendly to Muslims, under the leadership of Haritha b. Abi Dirar was mobilizing against him.  Muhammad, spread the rumour that B. al-Mustaliq were now joining with the Quraysh to launch an attack against the Muslims. The Muslims killed a man from B. al-Mustaliq accusing him of spying and Muhammad rallied all the fighting men around him to assail the B. al- Mustaliq. B. al-Mustaliq Jews took all precautionary measures to prevent such an invasion on them. Naturally, they sought help from other clans as well. Muhammad gave no opportunity to this clan to embrace Islam before facing genocide unlike previous occasions, when he had given a three days reprieve to decide whether to accept Islam or face liquidation.

Shahi Muslim Book 019, Number 4292: Ibn ‘Aun reported: I wrote to Nafi’ inquiring from him whether it was necessary to extend (to the disbelievers) an invitation to accept (Islam) before meeting them in fight. He wrote (in reply) to me that it was necessary in the early days of Islam. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) made a raid upon Banu Mustaliq while they were unaware and their cattle were having a drink at the water. He killed those who fought and imprisoned others. On that very day, he captured Juwairiya bint al-Harith. Nafi’ said that this tradition was related to him by Abdullah b. Umar who (himself) was among the raiding troops.

•Sahih Bukhari: Volume 3, Book 46, Number 717: Narrated Ibn Aun: “I wrote a letter to Nafi and Nafi wrote in reply to my letter that the Prophet had suddenly attacked Bani Mustaliq without warning while they were heedless and their cattle were being watered at the places of water. Their fighting men were killed and their women and children were taken as captives; the Prophet got Juwairiya on that day. Nafi said that Ibn ‘Umar had told him the above narration and that Ibn ‘Umar was in that army.

Muhammad gave Abu Bakr the flag for this attack. The Muslim forces then started marching with thirty horses. After eight days of marching they encamped at the wells of Muraysi near the seashore, close to Mecca. Muhammad pitched tents for himself, Aisha and Umm Salma, two of his wives who accompanied him. When the B. al-Mustaliq people heard the arrival of Muhammad’s soldiers, they were dismayed, but fought gallantly. After exchanging arrows for a brief period, the Muslim forces advanced and quickly surrounded the B. al-Mustaliq, and soon B. al-Mustaliq’s ranks fell in disarray and they were vanquished, having lost some of their men. Ali b. Talib killed a few wounded B. al-Mustaliq people; among them were Malik and his son. Muhammad seized their cattle herd, took many as captives and divided them among the Jihadists. Two hundred families were taken as captives, two thousand camels and five thousand sheep and goats, as well as a huge quantity of household goods were taken as booty. Juwayriah, the young, beautiful and vivacious daughter of B. al-Mutaliq chief was one of the captives. The household goods were sold in an auction to the highest bidders. During the battle a Muslim was mortally wounded by another Muslim by accident.

Here is the “encouragement” provided to the Jewish B. Mustaliq women captives.

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 5, Book 59, Number 459: Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, “We went out with Allah’s Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interrupt us, we said, ‘How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah’s Apostle who is present among us?” We asked (him) about it and he said, ‘It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist.” After having sex (rape) with his captive-girl, Said al-Khudri took this young girl to the nearest slave market for a quick sale. Here is the continuation of the above story, as told by al-Waqidi (vol.i, p.413) and excerpted by Rodinson: “A Jew said to me: ‘Abu Said, no doubt you want to sell her as she has in her belly a baby by you.’ I said: ‘No; I used the ‘azl.’ To which he replied [sarcastically]: ‘Then it was lesser child-murder!’ When I repeated this story to the Prophet he said: ‘The Jews lie. The Jews lie.’”

The captives of the B. al-Mustaliq were carried to Medina. Among the captives were two hundred women. Men from B. al-Mustaliq soon arrived to make terms for their release. At first, unknown to Muhammad, the pretty Juwayriah fell in the hands of Thabit b. Qays, an Ansar and one of his cousins. Juwayrah was a young woman, the daughter of B. al-Mustaliq chief and married to Musab b. Safwan. As soon as she became a captive, her marriage was immediately cancelled-as per Islamic rule and she was handed over to those two Jihadists [why two at the same time?] to do with her whatever they liked. Because of Juwayriah’s rank, her captor/s put a ransom of nine ounces of gold. She could not raise that large sum of gold. So, she approached Muhammad while he was resting in Aisha’s apartment and pleaded for some remission for the heavy price demanded for her release. As soon as Aisha saw Juwayriah she was filled with jealousy. Muhammad gently replied that he would pay her ransom and marry her. Juwayriah agreed on this suggestion. The ransom was paid and Muhammad immediately married her and built a seventh quarter to house her. She was only twenty and Muhammad fifty-eight when he married her. Aisha was thirteen at that time. [From Sunaan Abu Dawud, Book 29, Number 3920: (Narrated by Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin)]

This consistent enslavement, rape and concubinage of Jewish women should be noted. It is rarely matched in Christian “atrocities”. Moreover this entire description occurs in Islamic narratives – outlined with unabashed glee and pride.

3.6 Assassination of Al-Yusayr b. Rizam and a party of Khaybar Jews at al-Qarqara-February, 628CE

Even with the assassination of Abu Rafi (also known as Sallam ibn Abul-Huqayq), the chief of Khaybar Jews in December, 624 Muhammad did not feel safe from the Jews of Khaybar. The new chief of the Khaybar Jews was Al-Yusayr b. Rizam. He maintained the good relation with the B. Ghatafan, the tribe that Muhammad was scared of. Muhammad dispatched Abdallah ibn Rawaha, a leader of the B. Khazraj to Khaybar, to gather intelligence to eliminate Al-Yusayr clandestinely. But Abd Allah ibn Rawaha found the Jews to be very alert and returned to Medina. Muhammad sent him back with thirty men mounted on camels to persuade al-Yusayr b. Rizam to visit Medina. When the Muslims arrived at Khaybar the Jews treated them well. Abd Allah ibn Rawaha pretended to be friendly with the Jews and invited al-Yusayr b. Rizam to visit Medina with them. He assured al-Yusayr b. Rizam that Muhammad would make him the ruler of Khaybar, giving al-Yusayr b. Rizam a solemn guarantee of his safety. At first, al-Yusayr declined. But due to the persistence of the Muslim delegation he finally relented and went with them with a number of Jews. One of the Muslim delegates, Abd Allah b. Unays mounted al-Yusayr on his beast and rode behind him. When they arrived at al-Qarqarat, about six miles from Khaybar, al-Yusayr suspected the motive of the Muslims and changed his mind about going to meet Muhammad. He dismounted from the beast he was riding with Abd Allah Unays. Abd Allah b. Unays claimed that he perceived al-Yusayr was drawing his sword so he rushed at him and cut off his leg. Al-Yusayr hit Abd Allah b. Unays with a piece of wood and wounded his head. Ibn Ishak claims that later, God killed al-Yusayr. The Muslims killed all other Jews except one who escaped on his feet. When Abd Allah b. Unays came to Muhammad, Muhammad spat on his wound in his head and it healed immediately. Muhammad praised Allah when he heard the news of assassination of al-Yusayr b. Rizam and the killing of the Jews.

This is one in the long line pf precedence in Islamo-Jewish relationship about deceptive guarantees of safety/peace/non-aggression from the Muslim side towards the Jews – each of which was made when the Muslims side was not strong enough to kill off the Jews – but each of which was broken as soon as it was convenient to do so.

3.7 The Raid on Khaybar and Fadak by Muhammad-May, 628CE

After the famous Hudaibiya pact, with dissent mounting among his followers, in the backdrop of a severe drought at Medina, Muhammad decided to plunder and loot the remaining Jews at Khaybar. Haykal writes that the the Jews living at Khaybar were the strongest, the richest and the best equipped for war of all the peoples of Arabia (Hykal, Ch. Khaybar expedition).To assure and to please Muhammad in this plunder, Allah revealed Sura al-Fath (Victory, Sura 48) forgiving his past and future sins (48:2) and guaranteeing him triumph (48:21) through His (Allah’s) help. In verses 48:16, 20 Allah promised further booty for joining in Jihad; this was to improve the material life of the Jihadists. Mubarakpuri insists that this promise of booty meant the loot of Khaybar.

al-Tabari:

During the prevailing draught at Medina at that time, a group of B. Aslam who had embraced Islam came to Muhammad for assistance. But Muhammad had nothing to assist them. So he prayed to Allah so that they could plunder the richly laden fortresses of the Khyabar Jews including their luscious green agricultural lands. He said, “O God, Thou knowest their condition-that they have no strength and that I have nothing to give them. Open to them [for conquest] the greatest of the fortresses of Khaybar, the one most abounding in food and fat meat.”

The next morning, Muhammad plundered the fortress of al-Sa’b b. Muadh (a Jewish chief) that had the most abundance in food.

Sahih Bukhari : Volume 5, Book 59, Number 547: Narrated ‘Aisha: When Khaibar was conquered, we said, “Now we will eat our fill of dates!”

Volume 5, Book 59, Number 548: Narrated Ibn Umar: We did not eat our fill except after we had conquered Khaibar.

Muhammad’s army started marching against the Khaybar Jews with a force of around fourteen hundred with around 100-200 cavalry, covered the distance of about one hundred miles from Medina in about four or five days. Ibn Sa’d writes that it was a fasting month; some Muslims fasted, some did not. Before attacking the Khaybar Jews, Muhammad stopped at a valley named al-Rajii encamping between the people of Ghatafan and the people of Khaybar to prevent the people of Ghatafan to come to the aid of the Khaybar Jews when he attacked them.

When the Ghatafan heard of Muhammad’s advance they assembled their men and marched forward to help the Khaybar Jews. After marching for a day they heard from planted spies that Muhammad had attacked their families left behind. So they hastened back to protect their families. This opened the way to Khaybar and Muhammad made an early morning attack on Khaybar claiming that early morning times were miserable times for the infidels (Sahih Bukhari, vol. 4, book 52, number 195). The attack was so sudden that the farmers of Khaybar were completely taken by surprise when they were just preparing to go to their plantations.

Ibn Ishak writes that the war cry of the Muslims at Khaybar was, ‘O victorious one slay, slay!’ It is the Islamic custom to raid a place early in the morning invoking the name of Allah. Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 11, Number 584:

Narrated Humaid:

Anas bin Malik said, “Whenever the Prophet went out with us to fight (in Allah’s cause) against any nation, he never allowed us to attack till morning and he would wait and see: if he heard Adhan he would postpone the attack and if he did not hear Adhan he would attack them.” Anas added, “We reached Khaibar at night and in the morning when he did not hear the Adhan for the prayer, he (the Prophet ) rode and I rode behind Abi Talha and my foot was touching that of the Prophet.

The inhabitants of Khaibar came out with their baskets and spades and when they saw the Prophet they shouted ‘Muhammad! By Allah, Muhammad and his army.’ When Allah’s Apostle saw them, he said, “Allahu-Akbar! Allahu-Akbar! Khaibar is ruined. Whenever we approach a (hostile) nation (to fight), then evil will be the morning of those who have been warned.”

Initially shocked, the Khaybar Jews returned to rally around their new leader, Abul Huqayq and posted themselves in front of their citadel, Qamus. Previously, Muhammad had assassinated Sallam ibn Abul-Huqayq (Abu Rafi) and another Jewish leader, Al-Yusayr b. Rizam just a few months earlier. In the beginning, Muhammad made a few unsuccessful attempts to dislodge them from their formidable fortress.

Then one of the Jews, Marhab challenged the Muslims in a single combat. So, a Jihadist, Amir, confronted Marhab. Unfortunately, while attacking Marhab, Amir accidentally cut his vein by himself and died. Many Muslims thought that Amir had committed suicide and sought Muhammad’s clarification about those who commit suicide while fighting the infidels. Muhammad assured them that Amir will receive double reward for his (suicidal) action. Sourcing authentic chain of narrators, Ibn Sa’d writes: ‘ Salamah ibn Akwa said: “ I came across the Companions of the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him, who declared: All the good deeds of ‘Amir were lost, as he had committed suicide. Salamah said: Then I approached the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him weeping and asked : ‘Were the deeds of ‘Amir vain? He said: And who said this? I said some of your Companions (said this). The Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him said: He who said this uttered a lie. His reward has been doubled.”’

Sahih Bukhari on “suicide attacks”: Volume 5, Book 59, Number 515: Narrated Abu Huraira:

We witnessed (the battle of) Khaibar. Allah’s Apostle said about one of those who were with him and who claimed to be a Muslim. “This (man) is from the dwellers of the Hell-Fire.” When the battle started, that fellow fought so violently and bravely that he received plenty of wounds. Some of the people were about to doubt (the Prophet’s statement), but the man, feeling the pain of his wounds, put his hand into his quiver and took out of it, some arrows with which he slaughtered himself (i.e. committed suicide). Then some men amongst the Muslims came hurriedly and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Allah has made your statement true so-and-so has committed suicide. “The Prophet said, “O so-and-so! Get up and make an announcement that none but a believer will enter Paradise and that Allah may support the religion with an unchaste (evil) wicked man.

After the death (suicide) of Amir, Muhammad b. Maslamah (the professional killer) went to fight with Marhab and in a grueling duel he killed Marhab. Then Marhab’s brother, Yasir rushed forward to avenge his brother’s death. Then al-Zubayr went forward to meet him in a single combat. After a short fighting, al-Zubayr killed Yasir.

A general battle now ensued and the Muslims were able to make a good advance. The situation of the Jews became desperate. Muhammad started appropriating Khaybar property piece by piece, fortress by fortress. He captured the first fortress that belonged to Na’im. Muhammad’s comrade Mahmud b Maslama (Muhammad b. Maslama’s brother) was killed here when a millstone was hurled at him. The next fortress to fall was Qamus, which belonged to Abul Huqayq. Then Muhammad besieged the last two of the fortresses, the fortress of al-Watih and al-Sulalim for thirteen and nineteen days respectively. The Jewish leader, Sallam ibn Mishkam was killed and al Harith ibn Abu Zaynab took over the leadership of the Jewish forces. Many Jews, after being defeated at other locations had taken sanctuary at these two fortresses that Muhammad found difficult to penetrate. So he, as per Islamic rule, cut off their water supply. The Jews then had no choice but to submit to the invading Muslim army. Muhammad continued with his plunder until he finished capturing all the property that he could lay his hands on. He agreed to spare the lives of the surrendered Jews by expelling them from their ancestral homes on condition that they must hand over all their yellow and white metals (i.e. gold and silver). The Jews were permitted to take with them all their belongings that they could load on their beasts (camels and donkeys) except for gold and silver. Failure to comply with this stipulation meant a certain death-Muhammad warned. There was a severe shortage of provision for the Muslim soldiers and many of them became very hungry. Unable to find provision easily, Muhammad asked them to eat horse meat but forbade them to eat donkey meat. Other prohibitions imposed were: the eating of garlic (raw) and the ‘muta’ (contract) marriage. However, the Shias claims that no such ban on ‘muta’ marriage was imposed. [This and the source of dynastic religious heritage are the primary examples of the grand differences between the Sunnis and the Shias that many non-Muslims refer to vaguely when they talk about the non-monolithic nature of Islam ]

The Jews lost ninety-three men while the loss on the Muslim side apparently only nineteen men. Muhammad took some Khaybar Jews as captives, including Safiyyah bt. Huyayy b. Akhtab, an exquisitely pretty young newly married bride of Kinanah b. al-Rabi b. al-Huqayq. She was the daughter of B. Nadir chief, Huayy b. Akhtab who was beheaded by Muhammad in the slaughtering of B. Qurayzah (Muhammad had already expelled B. Nadir Jews from Medina. Kinanah had recently married Safiyyah, and had received a good treasure trove as gift. Muhammad also took two daughters of Safiyaah’s paternal uncle. At first Dihyah al-Kalbi, a Muslim Jihadists asked for Safiyyah. But when Muhammad saw her, he chose her for himself and gave her two cousin sisters to Dihyah.

Tabari writes:

“After the Messenger of God conquered al-Qamus, the fortress of Ibn Abi al-Huqyaq, Safiyyah bt. Huyayy b. Akhtab was brought to him, and another woman with her. Bilal, who was the one who brought them, led them pat some of the slain Jews. When the woman who was with Safiyyah saw them, she cried out, struck her face, and poured dust on her head. When the Messenger of God saw her, he said, “Take this she-devil away from me!” she commanded that Safiyyah should be kept behind him and that the Messenger of God had chosen her for himself.”

Muhammad then accused Safiyyah’s husband, Kinanah and his cousin of hiding some of their properties in contravention of the terms of surrender. He was especially angered that Kinanah had hidden the wealth (worth about ten thousad Dinars) that he received from his marriage to Safiyyah. A renegade Jew divulged the secret of Kinanah’s hidden gold treasures. That Jew went and fetched the hidden treasures. Kinanah and his cousin were promptly arrested by the Muslims and brought to Muhammad. Muhammad charged him of hiding his wealth in some underground storage. When Kinanah denied this allegation, Muhammad ordered to inflict torture on him. He was tormented by branding his chest with a heated stake and then he was beheaded.

Quoting Ibn Ishak, Tabari writes:

‘Kinanah b. al-Rabi b. al-Huqyaq who had the treasure of B. Nadir was brought to the Messenger of God, who questioned him; but he denied knowing where it was. Then the messenger of God was brought a Jew who said to him, “I have seen Kinanah walk around this ruin every morning.” The Messenger of God said to Kinanah: “What do you say? If we find it in your possession, I will kill you.” “All right,” he answered. The Messenger of God commanded that the ruin should be dug up, and some of the treasure was extracted from it. Then he asked him for the rest of it. Kinanah refused to surrender it; so the Messenger of God gave orders concerning him to al-Zubayr b. al-‘Awwam, saying, “torture him until you root out what he has.” Al-Zubayr kept twirling his firestick in his breast until Kinanah almost expired; then the Messenger of God gave him to Muhammad b. Maslamah, who beheaded him to avenge his brother Mahmud b. Maslamah.”’

Muir writes that then the heads of the two chiefs (Kinana and his cousin) were cut off. Citing the so-called treachery by the Jews for allegedly hiding their treasures, Muhammad now ordered the Muslims to take possession of the women and children of the Jews of Khaybar. Muhammad sent Bilal to bring Safiyyah, Kinana’s wife (real name Zaynab and was allotted to Dhiya al-Kalbi. But Muhammad chose her as his Safi – special selection by Muhammad before the khums and distribution of booty to the Muslims). So when Zaynab became Muhammad’s Safi she became to be known as Safiyyah (Muhammad’s special selection).

Sunan Abu Dawud: Kitab al-Kharaj Book 19; number 2988

‘A’isha said: Safiyyah was called after the word safi (a special portion of the Prophet).

Sunan Abu Dawud: Kitab al-Kharaj : Book 19; number 2992

Anas said: Captives were gathered at Khaibar. Dihyah came and said: Apostle of Allah, give me a slave-girl from the captives. He said : Go and take a slave-girl. He took Safiyaah daughter of Huyayy. A man then came to the Prophet (may peace be upon him) and said: You gave Safiyaah daughter of Huyayy, chief lady of Quraizah and al-Nadir to Dihyah? This is according to the version of Ya’qub. Then the version goes: She is worthy of you. He said: Call him along with her. When the Prophet (may peace be upon him) looked at her, he said to him: Take another slave-girl from the captives. The Prophet (may peace be upon him) then set her free and married her.

Bilal brought Safiyyah and her cousin straight across the battlefield strewn with the dead and close by the corpses of Kinana and his cousin. The two cousin sisters of Safiyyah shrieked in terror when they witnessed the grotesque scene of the slain dead bodies of their dearest relatives that they had to cross over. They tremulously begged a stone-hearted Bilal for mercy but to no avail. When they were brought to Muhammad, he cursed the panic-stricken cousins as devilish and cast his mantle around Safiyyah indicating that she was to be his own. Muhammad consoled a frustrated Dhiya by giving him Safiyyah’s cousin sisters. Ibn Sa’d says that Muhammad purchased Safiyyah from Dhiyah for seven camels and consummated his possession the same night.

Ibn Sa’d writes:

: “….when it was night, he entered a tent and she entered with him. Abu Ayyub came there and passed the nigh by the tent by the tent with a sword keeping his head at the tent. When it was morning and the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him, perceived (some body) moving, he asked: Who is there? He replied: I am Abu Ayub. He asked: Why are you here? He replied: O Apostle of Allah! There is a young lass newly wedded (to you) with whose late husband you have done what you have done. I was not sure of safety, so I wanted to be close to you. Thereupon the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him, said twice: O Abu Ayyub! May Allah show you mercy.” Note that the 3 month Iddat period was not followed.

During the time of negotiation with the Khaybar Jews, Muhammad sent a message to the Jews of Fadak asking them to surrender their properties and wealth or be attacked. When the Fadak Jews heard of Khaybar they requested Muhammad to take over their property and banish them. Muhammad did exactly that. After the Khaybar Jews surrendered to Muhammad and having lost their only source of livelihood, they requested him to employ them back on their properties for half the share of the crop. Muhammad found it much more convenient to re-employ them, as the Jews were already very experienced with their land, whereas the Muslims had no experience with agriculture and cultivation. So Muhammad made some conciliation to the Khaybar Jews by re-engaging them in their lost land, but on condition that he reserved the right to banish them at anytime he wished. Same terms were applied to the Fadak Jews. Later, when Umar became the Caliph of Islam, he expelled all the Jews from Kahybar and Fadak.

Khaybar became the booty of the Muslims, but Fadak became Muhammad’s private property (a Fai), as there was no fighting involved in Fadak. This provision was sanctioned by Allah in verse 17:64, 59:6-7

A fifth of the booty was set apart for Muhammad. The remaining four-fifths were then divided into 1,800 shares. One share went for a foot soldier and three for a horseman. One half of Khaybar land was reserved for Muhammad and his family and the remaining land was divided using the same rule as for the personal booty.

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 3, Book 39, Number 531:

Narrated Ibn ‘Umar:

Umar expelled the Jews and the Christians from Hijaz. When Allah’s Apostle had conquered Khaibar, he wanted to expel the Jews from it as its land became the property of Allah, His Apostle, and the Muslims. Allah’s Apostle intended to expel the Jews but they requested him to let them stay there on the condition that they would do the labor and get half of the fruits. Allah’s Apostle told them, “We will let you stay on thus condition, as long as we wish.” So, they kept on living there until ‘Umar forced them to go towards Taima’ and Ariha’.

Muhammad used the annexed land of the Jews of Khaybar to support his increasing Harem. Sahih Muslim, Book 010, Number 3759:

Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with them) reported: Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) handed over the land of Khaibar (on the condition) of the share of produce of fruits and harvest, and he also gave to his wives every year one hundred wasqs: eighty wasqs of dates and twenty wasqs of barley. When ‘Umar became the caliph he distributed the (lands and trees) of Khaibar, and gave option to the wives of Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) to earmark for themselves the land and water or stick to the wasqs (that they got) every year. They differed in this matter. Some of them opted for land and water, and some of them opted for wasqs every year. ‘A’isha and Hafsa were among those who opted for land and water.

page 1

Islamo-judaic-relations-politically-correct-mythology-4-from-departure-of-muhammad-to-islamist-conquest-of-palestine-and-syria/

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Only Muslims can burn holy texts : Kashmiri Muslims are simply being faithful

Posted on September 18, 2010. Filed under: Christians, Hindu, History, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Kashmir, Kashmiri Pundit, Muslims, Nuclear, Pakistan, religion, terrorism, USA |

A couple of days ago, Kashmiri Muslims burnt down a school run by Anglicans in supposed retaliation for proposal to burn the Quran in the USA. Parvez Samuel Kaul, the prinicpal of the erstwhile school, opens up on this http://richarddawkins.net/articles/520015-kashmir-principal-of-fire-ravaged-christian-school-speaks-out.

Parvez’s name itself is a compact history of Kashmir which is suppressed by interested forces in the West keen to tag along to Islamic bandwagon – a history of pre-Islamic Indians desperately searching for ways to survive against a murderous and sadistically fanatic belief system. Kaul is a Kashmiri Pundit surname – indicator that the person descended from Kashmiri “Hindu” Brahmins. His ancestor probably converted and became a Muslim and hence his name of Parvez. Finally he or his ancestor became a Christian given his middle name of Samuel [ the Islamic form would have been Ishmael/Ismail]. But no matter what the Kashmiri tries out – nothing saves him from the sadism that originated from the deserts of 7th century Arabia.

Islamists worldwide claim repression on them and justify atrocities on Kashmiri Hindus or Sikhs by Kashmiri and other infiltrator Islamic terrorists, and many in the West take up their refrain – without caring to know the other side of the story.

Burning books of non-Muslims has always been a standard practice of muslims everywhere in their militant phase – when they are no longer militarily weak and capable of Jihad. They of course copy non-Muslim books and sources of knowledge when they are weak [as the Pakistani nuclear scientist AQ Khan copied and stole nuke tech while studying in the West] using the liberal values of the non-Muslim. But they neither have the gratitude nor the conscience to acknowledge this debt or extend protection when they win militarily. “Cordoba” is now often cited as a paragon of tolerance and academic cooperation , but its foundational history is now suppressed. Interested people can do some research on their own on the created myths of these “tolerant Moors” of “Al-Andalus”.

Muslims use the knowledge gained by non-Muslims if it helps in war, and they will steal, loot, and preserve such knowledge. But it is all for destruction of anything that reminds humanity of its real civilization – for to Islam anything other than what the early Islamic militants said was Jahilya – darkness. They will seek to erase all other human civilization’s histories and cultures and components as long as the last Muslim survives.

Book burning is core Islamic tactics – and they claim the right to protect their own “holy text” while burning the “holy texts” of all others.

Futûhãt-i-Fîrûz Shãhî This small history was written by the Delhi Sultanate period Islamist ruler  Sultãn Fîrûz Shãh Tughlaq (AD 1351-1388) himself. The writer of Tabqãt-i-Akbarî, Nizãm’ud-Dîn Ahmad, a 16th century historian, says that the Sultãn had got the eight chapters of his work inscribed on eight slabs of stone which were fixed on eight sides of the octagonal dome of a building near the Jãmi‘ Masjid at Fîrûzãbãd.

[At Gohana, located in the modern Indian state of Haryana]

“Some Hindûs had erected a new idol-temple in the village of Kohãna, and the idolaters used to assemble there and perform their idolatrous rites. These people were seized and brought before me. I ordered that the perverse conduct of the leaders of this wickedness should be publicly proclaimed, and that they should be put to death before the gate of the palace. I also ordered that the infidel books, the idols, and the vessels used in their worship, which had been taken with them, should all be publicly burnt. The others were restrained by threats and punishments, as a warning to all men, that no zimmî could follow such wicked practices in a Musulmãn country.” [Elliot and Dowson, History of India. Vol. III, pp. 380-81.]

Now let us come to Kashmir proper.

Writes Srivar, “The erudites of that period witnessing the en masse destruction of books by Muslims fled their land with some books through mountain routes.” Sikander Bushtikan organized state administration to get the houses of Pandits ransacked and looted and the choicest books retrieved were thrown into rivers, lakes and wells and hurled into deep ditches and ravines.

Walter Lawrence states that ” All books of Hindu Learning which he (Sikander) could find were sunk in the legal lake and after some time Sikander flattered himself that he had extirpated Hinduism from the valley.” An Islamic chronicler, Hassan, writes, ” All the Hindu books of learning were collected and thrown into Dal Lake and were buried beneath stones and earth.”

Jia Lal Kilam records, “Even in their miserable plight they (Pandits) did not forget their rich treasures which linked them with their past. They felt that they were custodians of their past cultural heritage-the illuminating treatises on the stupendous Shaiva philosophy and other great works on literature, art, music, grammar, and medicine-works which have excited the wonder of an admiring world and wherever they went they carried these treasures with themselves. Judging from the depth of thought displayed in these works that have been preserved, their high literary merit, their insight into the depth of nature, their poetical flights, their emotional Devour coupled with an incisive logical treatment of the subjects dealt with in them, one can easily imagine the colossal loss the world has been subjected to by the acts of vandalism which resulted in the destruction of hundreds of works which contained the labours of more than two thousand years.”

Mohan Lal Koul writes http://www.kashmir-information.com/WailValley/B2chap11.html

“The destruction of books as leitmotifs of Hindu worldview, Hindu philosophical probes into supra-sensible realms, Hindu historiography, Hindu aesthetics did not diminish in its fury even in the comparatively peaceful times of Zain-ul-Abidin popularly known as Budshah. It is surprising that before his conversion to Shriya Bhat he is said to have constructed a cause-way from Naidkhai to Sopore with the temple stones and pillars along with invaluable stock of books that were looted from the temples, libraries and Pandit houses. He is the same king that rehabilitated the Pandits after their first forcible and massive exodus from their natural homes to unknown destinations.

The prolific and high calibre Kashmiri pandit scholars and intellectuals having scaled heights in creative drinking based on an all-embracing outlook and psychical diversity w ere reviled, humiliated and tortured to death. Bhuvaneshwar who had tremendous reputation all over the country for his amazing levels of scholarship in Vedic lore and learning was harassed and put to an orgy of plunder and loot (lotri-dand). Ultimately under motivations of infinite bigotry he was butchered in a merciless Muslim manner. His severed head smeared with tilak as a caste-mark was hurled away on a road-side with a view to instilling fear and trepidation among the intellectuals who had not renounced their religion and continued contributing to the indigenous expressions of learning and scholarship. All the Brahmans who were learned and had mastery over theology were exterminated. The fanatical intolerance and inveterate hatred that was exhibited against Hindu lore and learning and especially scholars irrigating them led to the demise of an ethos that had fostered plenitude and plenteousness of scholarship and learning.

Nona Dev, Jaya and Bhima Brahman with their depth of knowledge and breadth of vision were forced to commit suicide by leaping into the rivers. The Kashmiri Pandit scholars who were highly venerated for their varied contributions to learning and aesthetics were subjected to the mutilation of body-parts and gruesome killings. Nirmal Kanth who had mobilised resistance against Muslim holocaust was physically eliminated not for encouraging apostasy but for his attainments in the annals of learning and scholarship. Men of letters were put to a whole-sale massacre and the books which they had authored were looted, torn and burnt.

Records Shuka, “Khwaja Mir Mohammad on the other hand induced Kak Chakra (Kaji Chak) who was alarmed at the work of Nirmal Kanth and others to give him permission to act against them, and actuated by malice caused them to be killed.” Sukha again laments, “O Brah,nans, where in this Kali Yug are your Brahmanical spirit and practice? It was for want of these that the sorrowful and the affrighted Nirmal Kanth and others were killed. The oppression of the Mausalas (Muslims) which began in the times of Saidas (Sayyids) was perfected by Kaka Chakra (Kaji Chak).”

Now has this tendency of the Muslim stopped in modern times? No, long before the so-called Babri-Mosque demolition incident that is claimed by Islamophiles as the root cause of all Islamic violence on India – in 1989, The Muslims had started their core Islamic practice – ethnic cleansing of non-Muslims, complete erasure of non-Muslim literature, books and cultural icons, and abduction and looting of non-Muslim women to simultaneously swell the Islamic army with unbounded reproduction and denying the same route to the non-Muslim.

Koul further writes :

With the motive of destroying Sanskrit learning and its vestiges in Kashmir the invaluable treasure of Sanskrit manuscripts in Sharda script that was preserved in the Research Library, Srinagar was shifted to the Department of Central Asian Studies where it is said to have been dumped in gunny bags left to the care of hostile moths. The manuscripts are a veritable treasuretrove dilating on mind-body disciplines, recondite philosophical doctrines, arcane fortune telling systems, integrated theoretical systems from aesthetics to rhetoric and complexities of language nuances.

The books looted from Pandit clusters prior to their total decimation have been contemptuously torn, mutilated and scattered over the interiors of the houses. There are marauders who have collected numerous books on varied subjects, and have been selling them by weight. There is a special class of Muslim marauders who have dumped a huge stock of invaluable books in their residential quarters and have been selling them to retailers who in turn tear them page by page and convert them into cones and other geometrical shapes to vend off their retail items like tea, sugar, salt, spices et al. There are Muslim fanatics of the Jammaat-i-Islami breed who make a pile of the looted books in the isolated corner of a lane and set it afire chanting “death to Pandit Kaisers.” A few more cunning among them harness the services of Kashmiri Pandit hostages staffing back in the valley and despatch them to Jammu and other metropolises to mobilise the sale of old manuscripts in Shardascript at a lucrative price. The horoscopes looted from Kashmiri Pandit houses are also a saleable item with the looters.

An officer in the state government, a literattucr by all standards, at the time of “office move” from Jammu to Srinagar way back in 1992, was shocked and dismayed to learn about the sale of the looted books at a particular shop in a down-town locality. Camouflaging his real identity he made a foray into the Muslim den and succeeded in locating the shop. While accosting to the Muslim shopkeeper putting on a well-cut beard he was plainly informed that he had been selling books looted from the houses of Pandit Kafirs who had fled the land thus rendering a damage to the on-going movement. On enquiry he was told that he himself had been looting books from the Pandit houses and then he had contacts who have been pursuing it as a profession at the behest of respectable Muslims. “Who are the persons at whose behest they pursue it as a profession?” asked the officer. “That I cannot tell”, was the reply. Ultimately the officer was led into the interior of the shop where he purchased 5 kgs of books for fifty rupees. When back home he was surprised and vexed to find that the books he had purchased included Stein’s Rajtarangini and two volumes of Nilmat Puran. On perusal he discovered that all the books he had fetched home bore the signatures of the Pandits who had purchased them with the moneys that they had earned with the sweat of their brow. For the officer it was a shock, but for the Muslim looter it vas a religious act as he was vending off booty legitimised by the Textual injunctions.

It is rather interesting to see that the strongest Western power has now bowed down to this Islamic demand to protect its own texts while burning non-Islamic books. This is a very interesting following in the footsteps of what the Congress led governments in India have consistently done. So USA has now learned to follow India! Those grumbling in America about what happened should perhaps have the beginning glimmers of understanding how the most powerful elite of powerful and prosperous people – like Indians in the 7th or 12th or 16th century – start becoming dhimmi – or literally conditionally and whimsically protected trembling bootlickers of Islamism.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 6 so far )

The geopolitics of the Gaza adventure

Posted on June 5, 2010. Filed under: Arab, Gaza, India, Iran, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Israel, Jihad, Kashmir, Left, Marxism, Muslims, Pakistan, Palestine, Politics, Russia, Syria, terrorism, Turkey, UK |

The recent fiasco in the “Gaza adventure” throws up in sharp light the current tomfoolery that is being played on Asia. Since the fall of USSR there was a temporary lull in pandering to Islamist violence from the west. Within that space, the Jihadis consolidated and turned their attention from Russia towards their real objectives in Asia – Israel and India. They intensified their campaign against India with Jammu and Kashmir, and their rocket/bombing campaigns against Israelis, from both within Lebanon and the Gaza strip.

Their real ambitions is for global domination, and the real long term targets for Islam – militant Jihad and Ghazwas to convert, loot, rape and take over non-Muslim majority nations. This became clear to the racially and colour blinded ideology of the west only when the Jihadis turned their attention directly to pricking the west, as part of their global strategy to tie down western forces away from any protective interest the west may develop for Israel and India.

The calculations were quite clear and as consistently seen in the tactics of Islamist groups ranged against their Asian targets.

(1) Carry out terrorist outrages against both military and civilians of Israel and India, so that the military of these nations are forced to react. Use the terror attacks to stimulate survivor instincts within the civilians in the hope that they will create political pressure on their governments not to retaliate. Use the internationally conformed limitations within which national armies have to work as a tactical field advantage.

(2) Pressurize Muslims living within the territory of these nations to take sides, which in the ultimate analysis has always been historically proved to be on the position that “jihad cannot or should not be opposed violently” by Muslims anywhere. In every situation of war or conflict where Islamism has taken up arms to subjugate non-Muslims among them or beside them, the Muslim population has never ever really taken any effective steps to resist such Jihadi outrages on non-Muslims. In Middle East, in now Pakistan occupied western India, or in then East Pakistan now Bangladesh in 1971, large Muslim populations which apparently showed all outward forms of communal amity did not do anything to stop Jihadi outrages on non-Muslims and in many instance took advantage of the situation to possess land, wealth and women of non-Muslims. This practice is consistent with the basic line of Islamist expansion as formulated in their core texts.

(3) Simultaneously carry out a publicity campaign among western nations – especially those in academia and media who for various reasons have had anti-establishment fantasies all the while being sustained by the establishment. There have always been a toying undercurrent with Marxist thinking in the west, especially in the British universities beginning in the post war radicalism phase of 60’s. Probably this was maintained out of two tactical considerations by the authorities – as a honey trap to confine radical intellectuals so that they did not go out to do more damage in the outer world, and at the same time work as a captive experiment where the Leftist thought process could be observed and manipulated. Problem with this game is that it basically creates a reward system for radicalism and anti-establishment sentiments which over time will draw more and more opportunist political activists who will use this legitimacy to carry out their personal political agendas.

The Islamists used this sympathetic base from within the western establishment. It was natural that with the fall of the USSR and an overtly nationalistic and dictatorial redefinition under Putin the western establishment radicals were without a cause to champion. This they now found in championing the cause of supposedly repressed Islamic communities under Israel and India.

(4) To drive home the Islamist representation of reality, Islamists selectively targeted western institutions with violence. Having placed a pro-Islamist radical western sympathy base among the very vocal academia, media, NGO’s, charities etc, such targeting could be used to pretend that all this was because the west was not doing enough to destroy Israel and India or dismember these countries so that the Jihadis could occupy the dismembered portions. The general risk avoidance of the civilian populations of prosperous economies would ensure that there would be a backlash against any government retaliation.

(5) Once the western core of governments or regimes realized the new trends, the policy formulated was perhaps two pronged : give the Jihadis a new target of shifting attention towards Russia in Chechnyia and adjoining Muslim dominated areas sensitive for Russian security, and towards Eastern Turkmenistan currently under Chinese occupation. Simultaneously, overt pressure would be put on both India and Israel to concede more towards Islamist demands. It is possible that the first hesitant and obviously confused (read secret intense debate and therefore indecision) implementation of this policy was in the Balkans with the ultimate creation of a Muslim homeland within Europe.

(6) The success of the Croatian case showed the Jihadis the way forward, and they now know almost all the manipulative strings that they can use to pressurize the west into conceding more and more Islamist homelands carved out of non-Muslim dominated areas, from where they will launch more and more Jihadi campaigns.

The western strategists are losing this game. It is crucial that Israel and Indian people do not get confused by the manipulative propaganda and representations of Islamists and their non-Muslim sympathizers, and see to it that regimes capable of resisting western pressures are put in government.

The national armies and even special intervention forces have to work under international forms and restrictions that will be stringently applied by Islamists and their sympathizers for their ulterior motives. In both countries there should be targeted erasure of the sources of support for Jihad, or all anti-state terror under forces that do not officially exist. Forces which also have strong ideological indoctrination to add that extra armour to manipulation. Forces which do not exist and therefore are free of formal restrictions of so-called one-sided humanitarianism.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Islamist universalism to regionalism to imperialism to jihad

Posted on June 5, 2010. Filed under: Arab, Iran, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Jihad, Muslims, Pakistan, Syria, terrorism, Turkey |

The history of transformation of the revealed traditions is the history of empires. Most of the inspiration for empire building appear in communities that are not much productive in knowledge/technology terms themselves, but who are located on the major trade routes that carry continental level economic exchanges. Ambitious among them, see the potential in transforming an ideology that can help them mobilize to impose greater control over this flow and preferably the hotspots also.

The Jews opted out of the empire game early, perhaps because of factional experiences and therefore thinking of non-kin communities as unreliable. So that after this stage of national evolution, they became much more strictly endogamous and ceased proselytizing or converting to any significant level. However with the Islamists, one can easily see that the main centres of Islamic ambitions are exactly those which had empire ambitions also in pre-Islamic periods. The Qureshyi Mecca that produced the founding fathers of Islam are not exceptions in this regard, since the area had been at the periphery of major empires as well as quite close to major trade routes. The Nabateans and Sabateans lined the Red Sea trade routes right into the Arabain Sea as well as the trade routes connecting the Mediterranean to the CAR and India overland.

The two other ambitious Islamic centres are Anatolia-Syria, and Iran-Persia. Perhaps Afghanistan-Pakistan satisfies the criteria of being on the trade route while not being that productive themselves. Each of these centres thought that their imprial ambitions could be spurred and supported if they could use the universalist pretensions of Islam to justify imposing their regional rule on other territories under Islam.

But at the same time this universalism poses an unsolvable dilemma. Some have observed that each retreat of Islamist power is followed by decades or centuries belated but all-sweeping Islamist reaction. I would like to add that the reaction in fact is a much more complex phenomenon that is both the source of strength as well as the downfall of Islamists. The reaction is actually a cover for other regions within the reach of Islam to rush in in the name of Islam and impose their own regional imperial ambition on an area that has been weakened in fighting with the non-Musilm.

You can see this in noting that the cases that fit such succesful reaction, like the Mameluks, or Turks are all by Islamic armies led or core formed from regions external to the place they ultimately come to fight the “infidel” and clear the land of “kufr”.  Arabs are primarily interested in the riches of the Persian empire, and Egypt. Saladin was a Kurd prancing around in Egypt, Palestine. Mameluks were essentially Central Asians first enslaved and employed as soldiers in the early Caliphate. Seljuk Turks swept all the way from around the Pamirs, finsihing off the northern reaches of Ghaznavids, and ultimately expanding to form modern Turkey.

This is the reason in apparent century level gaps in the cause and reaction. It is not really a reaction, but an opportunistic use of Islamic universalism by regional ambitions to impose imperial extraction of profits from larger regions. However such imperial ambitions also impose a huge drain – economically, intellectually and ideologically – especially because the Muslims are mostly confined to areas which are not that highly productive. Over time, the new imperialist sucks the regional economy dry – and keeps other Islamic regions under constant subversion and suspicion – because it knows that other regions could try to emulate its successful strategy.

This is why in each corner of the Islamic world we find the ambition to pose as the centre of the Caliphate – be it Pakis, or Turkey or KSA or Iran. The more Islam expands the more we will see proliferation of that internal conflict. It is the universalist claims of Islamism that generates regionalism within Islam and which fuels further Jihad.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 4 so far )

Why is Christianity preparing the ground for Jihadi takeover

Posted on May 3, 2010. Filed under: Buddhists, Christians, Hindu, India, Iran, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, religion, terrorism, UK, USA |

Significantly unnoticed events have taken place over the last last few months :  at MIT a conference was organized by one Omar Khalidi, a staff member of MIT, who advocates separate laws for Muslims such as polygamy etc, different constituencies for Muslims to elect Muslim lawmakers, apparently has issues with Christian nature of USA and is known even by Muslim scholars as someone who selects his data to paint a picture that suits Islamic agenda. Some people are of opinion he is what one can call ‘soft’ jihadi.

The speaker list is a who’s who of  academics known for their soft corner towards Islamism. The keynote speaker is Paul Brass.  He has written several books on Hinduism whihc has been accepted as standard texts on Hinduism by many western universities. A close collaborator and fellow-traveller of the Thaparite school of Indian history (whose main thrust is to deny atrocity on non-Muslims by Muslim regimes and states in India )- is one of the leading academic activists to paint comparative pictures of Hindus vs Muslims antagonism and is supposed to be an authority on Hindu-Muslim violence. His books show an uncanny association of the word “Hindu/Hinduism” automatically with “right wing/extremists/nationalists” in close proximity or as qualifying adjectives. Read them and you will be inspired!

Read up on the other speakers and contributors mentioned and their sometimes not so much aired political positions and leanings : Angana Chatterji, Meenakshi Ganguly, Parvis Ghassem-Fachandi, Chinnaiah Jangam, Ratna Kapur, Omar Khalidi, Shafeeq R. Mahajir, Manoj Mitta, R.K. Raghavan, Balakrishnan Rajagopal, Haimanti Roy, Srirupa Roy, Bish Sanyal, Ornit Shani, Mukul Sinha, Nirjhari Sinha, Arvind Verma.

They serve ironically as great catalysts for “Hindu consolidation” and acceleration towards “right”.  Moorthy Muthuswamy has studied Khalidi for his apparent influence on political parties within India with an obvious agenda of creating a separate state for Muslims within India. This fits in with perhaps a perception among a section of Jihadis and their backers that  for the next stage of Islamist expansion, resources needed can be gleaned from non-Muslims in India since the Pakistan experiment has failed to provide the resources on its own.

Now why this consistent pattern of western support for elements that bring on Islamic Jihad on non-Muslim civilizations? Maybe the key lies in a fundamental weakness of Christianity towards Islam -specifically to the Arabic Sunni sect of Islam. The problem in fact can be traced back to this weakness after we eliminate all other potential reasons.

It appears that both Islam and Christianity had been in competition over the Judaic legacy and therefore each in its own way saw Judaism proper or the community of Jews as an obstacle to this ideological supremacy.  However, ideologically they cannot go too far away from each other in the fundamentals because of this root foundation in Judaism.  The conflicts bewteen Christendom and Islam in the historical period basically starts over this claim of sole legacy and takes the form of imperialist conflict – because, both the proselytizing versions of Judaism emerged out of a practical imeprialist need for expansion.

The conflict therefore took the form of war for territory and control of productive economies and trade routes of others. To maintain the drive for this imperialist expansion, each side needed to identify the other side as “alien” and the “devil”. The peculiarity of common origins and memes however forced them to find racial divide as an identifier of alien-ness and  the enemy.

To date there has been no solid, logical refutation of Islam by Christianity except the claim that Islamics do not recognize Jesus as the sole way to salvation. Even this is problematic because Islam places Jesus as one of the principal prophets and reserves a special role for Jesus in the “end-times”.   So the Christian-Islam conflict has taken the loose and weaker basis of “race” rather than any concrete and profound difference in ideology.

It is this theoretical confusion that is clearly indicated in the responses that Christian dominated west gives to Islamic moves. Contrary to the propaganda that west’s reaction to Islamism is purely determined by economic motives, it is actually Christianity’s secret attraction for what it perhasp considers the “purity” of the Sunni Arabic extension of Judaism. For example the West has studiously cultivated the Arabs since using them  as tools against the competitors of the British  – the Ottomans.  But there would be no reason to continue preferring them over and above the Iranians long after Ottomans have been finished, and both Arabia and Iran sit over oil wealth.  Not that the west does not dip to deal with Iran when needed – as in the Contra-hostage deal.

Where does this put Christianity and Islam in the eyes of other non-revealed-tradition cultures?

In UK, judicial and executive systems enforce the law  strictly when it comes to the case of say liquidation of the “holy cow” of a Hindu temple becuase, reasonably – the cow was diseased. However the same country and system finds desecration of its prized memorial by a Muslim as not being driven by religious hatred and has allowed a symbolic violent form of expression of hatred in Islam – the throwing of the shoe (typically symbolically used against the devil), as a legitimate form of public expression.

In the USA, the California text book controversy showed that the administration and system would be reluctant to withdraw protection to  attempts to represent the non-Muslim past of India in a way that suits the Islamic agenda aginst Hindus. The same system finds a Chief Minister of an Indian state known for his strong Hindu affiliations persona non grata even though he has not yet been convicted on the charges of complicity in Hindu-Muslim violence – the main excuse given to refuse him visas. However the same administration has no problem with Omar Kahlidi’s claims which as Muthuswamy points out are based on dubious scholarship. So the “Hindu” fall foul of freedom of expression but Islamist views do not.

In India, the Christian proselytizers are not known to target the Indain Muslim communities for conversion, but Hindus. Indian Christians are also not seen as active protesters against Jihadi activities or statements by various sections of Islamists.

Alll this shows up as a secret attraction and weakness towards the Sunni-Wahabi form of Islam within Christianity of the west to the Hindus, among whom the mistrust of Christian missionaries and their motives have been increasing. Moreover the gradually increasing intervention of western states in favour of protecting the primary propaganda mechanisms of Islamists, and prevention of movements or expressions of ideological criticisms of Islam, is bound to alarm Hindus or Buddhists across South Asia.

If  Christianity cannot resolve this fundamental dilemma, it will not be too distant a day, when the Azaan will be heard from Westminster Abbey, the British Monarch may well come out of his Zenana Harem to attend Friday Prayers where the Khutba will be read extolling a new Caliph in the middle East, and the USA rechristens itself the United American Emirates.

Yes, absurd perhaps – but just imagine it for a moment and decide!

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Is it time for the West to plan for dissolving Pakistan?

Posted on March 12, 2010. Filed under: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, China, Communist, economy, India, Iran, Islam, Muslims, Pakistan, Russia, Taleban, terrorism, USA |

How many nations of our times are based purely on a religion and recognized by other nations as independent nations? Only two – the Vatican City and Pakistan. Ironically they share in common some traits. Both have helped in the unravelling of the USSR but not of Communism – for it still survives behind the People’s Republic of China and is working towards global dominance. Both have been courted by the USA in its Cold War struggles. Neither has disappointed. Both exert influence on the global politics disproportionate to their actual size, economy, military capabilities, and the capacity to contribute in any meaningful way towards a modern, knowledge based, technological and information society. Both manage to do so by manipulating their historical images as projections into the future.

But there the similarities end. The Vatican’s leadership has made amends to its historical victims, and has shown its flexibility and readiness to change with the times. It has steadfastly refused to underwrite radicalism of the theological variety [the severe castigation of the Liberation Theology for example].  This may change in the future. But the leadership of the Vatican have proved themselves consummate statesmen in the concessions and compromises that they have made while never abandoning the fundamental objective of total global ideological domination. This is an objective that would have been a crime if not from the “one and only true message” for any other “religion” in the times when the Church ruled supreme. But now in the days of “total religious tolerance”, there is nothing wrong in having a declared agenda of “harvesting all souls”. In fact, legal and state coercive machinery can be used to guarantee protection of any proselytizer – even someone swearing by texts that recommend putting the unrepentant unbeliever to the sword.

Where Pakistan differs is not in its protection of organizations claiming the right to practice “Dawa” or spreading of the Islamist beliefs – but in its total lack of statesmanship. Unlike the Vatican, the Pakistani leadership never apologizes to the victims of its Islamists, never acknowledges that it has nurtured Jihadis in its madrassahs, never concedes to modernization in education and social practices, never really allows any land reforms or dismantling of feudal exploitation in its backyard.

Pakistan is basically an anachronism, a nation whose only foundational claim for identity is a religion – in a historical period where the world is leaving behind, exclusive and historical claim based religions. Moreover, that religion is not even unique to the country – it is shared by a host of other nations, some of whom have louder and more well established claims of being the centre for that religion. So Pakistan is based on a type of ideology increasingly irrelevant globally as national foundation, and moreover on an ideology based identity shared with other “nations” – and therefore has no real claims of distinction from other nations. It cannot look at history and culture, for in spite of the best sadistic efforts of generations of  “mullahs” – elements of pre-Islamic cultures lie firmly interwoven in the national fabric, and those elements are shared by its imagined nemesis – India. In fact the pre-Islamic cultural element proved so strong that a part of it broke away in reaction in 1971 as Bangladesh.

So now Pakistan finds itself in a terrible dilemma. To strengthen and give uniqueness to its national foundation, it has to become more Islamic than “others”. Becoming more Islamic means more and more unquestioning obedience to a strict and literal interpretation of the core texts. That in turns means more Jihad with violent means which accelerates the competition between the ruling feudal elite, the army, the mullahs, the commons, the militants – to become “purer” than the others. That means an almost perpetual state of national Jihad. Purer Islam can only be maintained by preventing modernization – in education, productivity, technology and above all the questing mindset. Which means Pakistan will become more and more dependent on largesse from interested external sources and be a drain on the global economy as the sources would spread the cost around.

So the West and the global community should perhaps start thinking of dissolving the entity called Pakistan. Here are the brief reasons :

(1) Dissolving Pakistan saves the West (and therefore the world economy )a huge amount of money and resources needed to keep the state afloat, and a total drain, because none of that capital goes into productive capacities.

(2) Even though the Chinese are now playing second fiddle to the West, it is uncannily similar to the Ribbentrop-Molotov handshake where both sides appear to be buying time. Eventually, Russia and China could come together with Iran (or whatever is left of it even if a so-called revolutionary liberalization and democratization takes place there under non-theologians) to which the CAR will lean. As long as Pakistan remains an independent entity, it can play the prostitute and threaten to kiss the higher bidder or the one more willing to pay.  That is both a security risk and a potential disaster, if everything given to Pakistan lands up in Russian, Iranian or Chinese hands and the West’s presence is virtually terminated in the Afghan-Pakistan frontier. Dissolving Pakistan takes away this worry.

(3)  Dissolving Pakistan and putting up new independent states actually creates new multiple centres where Jihad can be protected and nurtured. One Pakistan becomes many and the western problem multiplies. One of the best bets is to allow India to absorb the populations and the territories.   India is a growing economy which can absorb the costs. It has the capability and the will to manage multicultural groups and religious animosities. Culturally Indians of the western part of the country will be closer to the Pakistanis across the border [Punjab for example shares the language across the border in spite of the state sponsorship of Urdu] compared to any other external ethnicity or country. Moreover the costs of developing infrastructure and the economy or carrying out necessary social reforms will be borne on Indian shoulders and not on the west.

(4) As the price for non-intervention in the absorption, the West could extract concessions from India that it will have assured access and facilities to reach the CAR through channels and routes maintained and developed through Pakistani territories connecting the Karakorum Highway and other CAR approach routes.

(5) The Taliban lose their foster home, and are buffered off from the crucial supply routes of Karakorums and the Arabian Sea. The so-called Kashmir problem vanishes as the Pakistani military and ISI mechanism to foment terrorists inside India vanishes.  So one of the greatest excuses for maintaining Jihad from the Pakistani side vanishes.

India, because of linguistic and unique cultural history, will remain firmly in western and specifically the Anglo-Saxon or Atlanticist orbit for generations to come. There are sufficient fissures in the Indian ruling class for the west to exploit and protect western interests.

It is worth a try – at least the largest source for generating terror of the Jihadi and allied kind (through international crime and other non-religious or ethnic militancy) will be effectively liquidated. At one stroke West no longer has to face Islamist terror, pay for upkeep of Jihad, and instead can profit from a growing economy which bears all the costs!

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 5 so far )

TalebPak : towards the new Caliphate

Posted on October 17, 2009. Filed under: Afghanistan, China, Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Pakistan, Taleban, terrorism, USA |

The new leadership of the Taleban have openly laid out their formal objectives. Once they establish “purer” Islamism on Pakistan they are going to target India. This was stated in an interview broadcast by the Sky. This fits perfectly the scenario that I have been promoting as possible- perhaps for many, a bit too paranoid.

There can be all sorts of explanations and possibilities of deception to explain this away. One of the most plausible ones will be that of the need in some school of opinion within the USA to create the impression that India should contribute towards US plans as India is also “threatened” – or that if the collapse of Pak is not staved off with Indian contribution also, India will “suffer”. UK’s inner strategy or secret services may also be interested in maintaining their own strategic asset which they had created by the Partition on the subcontinent – Pakistan. China has contributed its own towards this “save Pakistan” bandwagon by raising the spectre of a “threat” in Arunachal Pradesh. At the same time Naxals have been activated inside India.

This means that all of the non-Indian parties involved in this merry game think that for one reason or the other, the time for loss of direct handle on the Pakistani Jihadi state is imminent. The Jihadis have organized and overcome their factional divisions, to further the overall aims with which the Islamists joined the British project of creating Pakistan. This overall aim on the part of the Islamists, was a revival of the legendary and mythical Caliphate that sat astride the main economic exchange route between the main production centres of the world – East and the West. The Islamists’ extremely low intellectual and educational level, combined with the aridity and nonproductivity of the lands they occupied, implied they could only live off the produce of others. Once oil runs out or is replaced by alternatives, the temporary productivity in economic terms that allowed them to flourish – will be lost. Then they will need to go back to the Caliphate model – which was essentially a way of justifying the basically looting economy of Islam – to extract surplus from allowing trade between the east and west.

Islamists cannot allow modern educational pursuits that could have allowed them to try and climb back on to the current knowledge based economy. Modern education is typically based on open exploration and unrestricted questioning. This is dangerous for Islam – as learning to question in one direction can spill over on to questioning the very claims based on which theologians and Islamic social system imposes itself on human society. So the Islamists’ very own obsessive search for permanent and absolute power, limits their educational, research and knowledge-base improvement. This leaves them only with the old Caliphate model to extract a peace-tax on global trade between the two main regions of innovation and productivity.

The Islamists have seen their chance now. USA the main thorn in their side (as the controller and chief patron – although supportive but still restraining beyond a certain limit) has been weakened. China has come up as a competitor economy to the USA, and is willing to take up the role of the patron. Also because of the competition, China will be more lenient than the USA in allowing the Jihadis greater freedom in their murderous objectives as long as such objectives do not directly infringe on China’s own imperialist designs.

Contrary to popular speculation I  had tried to emphasize that Pakistan will not implode on its own. Instead, the basic Jihadi core behind Pakistan’s state will activate its programme of Jihadi expansion in both directions – Afghanistan and India. This is part of recreating the only economic model they can understand and which they feel will still allow them to maintain their lifestyle and power structures – that of the mythical Caliphate (in historical reality a very short period of success).

The conflict we see now is a superficial one – maintained only because of external interest and pressure. This does not mean that every part of the state machinery of Pakistan is insincere in its formal confrontation. But only those parts which are vulnerable to western pressure or believe in a middle road between the Jihadis and the west are participating actively. This is a minority in Pakistan. Over the years, Arab patronization of Wahabi radicalization through education and other sociopolitical means have practically erased all resistance to the core Jihadi ideology within Pakistan. The society itself has no firm ideological and cultural basis to resist the Jihadis.

Sooner or later, India will have to face the Jihadis. It cannot do so by imagining and trying to convince the Indian people – that Islamic ideology is completely detached from what Islamists are practising. It cannot pretend that preserving the roots and basis of Islamic culture on the subcontinent will allow peaceful coexistence of Pakistan and India. By doing any such pretension, any Indian regime betrays its people – for it creates the false impression and expectations of inherent “benevolence” that is the source of confusion in being ruthless towards Jihadis.

There is only one solution for this whole problem – dissolution of Pakistan as a state, and complete dismantling of Islamic educational system, complete deactivation of those theologians already brought up in the Wahabi tradition. These in turn can only be done if the current populations under Pakistan comes under direct  control of  a secular regime that is also firmly anti-Islamist.

One way of course is the reunification of the people and land currently under the control of Islamophile and Jihad-tolerating-supporting regime in Pakistan, with that of a firm and no-nonsense secular power based in India. That will be the opening of untold opportunities for the people now living in Pakistan in terms of health, education and an open society where voices of dissent and protest against arbitrariness cannot be silenced by fatwas and fanatical Islamist zealots. Freedom from the terror of violent and personal-greed-hiding imposition of Sharia – is something which these people have even forgotten to dream about. The Indian ruling elite has proved its secular credentials by being more ruthless on what it dubs “Hindu right wing fascism” than it ever showed the teeth against Islamic Jihad. The “Muslims” of Pakistan will actually be treated more fairly than the “native” Hindus under such Indian regimes.

Those who will oppose this objective will do so from a variety of covert and overt interests and positions. This will include excuses of humanitarian values, claims of inherent benevolence of the ideology and all blames only on “misinterpretation”, supposed positive and inseparable cultural contributions, as well as claimed inherent superiority of the ideology compared to all other pre-existing ones on the subcontinent in terms “equality/fraternity” etc. with attendant suppression of real historical experience.

Covert interests will primarily be external – with strategic interests of  continued energy, economic and territorial imperialism. These can also be tackled, if India shows the will and determination to do so.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

Indian concession at Sharm-el-Sheik : breathing time for Jihad

Posted on August 10, 2009. Filed under: Afghanistan, Army, China, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, Rahul Gandhi, Taleban, terrorism, USA |

Manmohan Singh (MMS), the economist PM of India is being buffeted from both sides of the political divide about the mysterious origins of the supposed joint statement in Egypt at Sharm-el-Sheik (S-e-S). He has apparently conceded a lot to his Pakistani counterpart.

Any strengthening of the hands of the semi-feudal elite at the head of Pakistani regime and military, means strengthening of Jihadi Islam. For only by propagating Jihad, Pakistan has been able to ransom the world, and particularly the West, to survive on a state which was, right from its paranoid conception, unsustainable.

So what really could have been the run-up to the supposed concession by the Indian Prime minister?

Suppose we have the following hypothesis :

The inner echelons of decision making within the Congress hierarchy decides in tandem with (or is persuaded by) USA and UK, that, in the short term – stabilization of the Gilani government is necessary. If the Gilani government falls, and the unreliable Pakitani Army (PA)  is left with government powers, or Musharraf makes a comeback, or the PA teams up with the Talebs, or atleast some sort of  Terrorist State of Pakistan (TSP) government pressure is not mounted against the Talebs until the Afghanistan elections are over, USA will lose all its bases in TSP although TSP will still carry on with support of China.

This could panic the Congress leadership, if they do not have much faith in the fighting ability of the Indian people. The current Congress-top-think is probably geared towards equating survival with the proximity of USA. USA could convince the Congress leadership that, it was more important to increase the prestige of Gilani in the eyes of the “commons” of TSP, since Gilani was actually on amuch weaker political basis and is only being propped up because of USA. The Congress on the other hand has been given a strong electoral mandate recently to do as they please. So some concessions, to Gilani, would be important.

As is usual in such cases, MMS might have been reassured that it would all only be verbal, and not meant concretely and as a commitment. The coterie around the dynasty however were not sure of the political fallout, and hence the “future leader” was solidly kept out of any association with this. If any negative thing comes out of S-e-S, it will be blamed on the benign ego of a well-meaning but elderly gentleman inching towards senility (no MMS is not senile – but I am saying it could be passed off as such).

I also think of  him as amenable to “persuasion”. Of course he is subject to “influence”. But he is too weak politically to take such decisions all alone. Such decisions have to come from a more protected and better hidden core. The script is definitely there – and I had been worrying for quite some time that the new Government of India seemed too “eager” and over-ambitious and was in a hurry, and for me that was a possible indication that they knew they had little time before something quite negative was possible.

My worry is that the phenomenon that happened around Sanjay, is repeating itself around Rahul Gandhi. A so-called young gun think-tank could be forming. But this time around, the interested “outsiders” will not take the risk, and will ensure that at least some of their controllers belong to this circle. Likely candidates will be those who have had long “foreign” stints – I have a certain gentleman from “God’s own” in mind.

A Bharatyia society that takes the decision to reincorporate territories currently under Government of  TSP occupation, will only do it after it has come to certain decisions about TSP and the people under it. People are not born with genes for Islamic Jihad and universal hatred for the Quafir. Children born in TSP and Afghanistan are not born with a gene for Jihad either. These are people, who are  kin of the Indic (in spite of their tall-claims of having Arabic descent) – they have almost entirely Indic roots. I, for one think of them simply as blood brothers and sisters of Indians who are forced into a crucible of hatred from birth and not given any other options to even think of other options. Incorporation under a liberal, democratic and modernizing nation of India gives them that option to be otherwise – to be different from the rabid pack of animals they seem to be headed towards.

I would consider it a civilizational duty of Bharat to create conditions under which branches of the Bharatyia civilizational family, however distant they might have become, and however wayward they might have become, are brought back to the family hold – by the ears, if need be, kicking and screaming if needs be. To be thrashed if they want to go back to the lawless streets, and loved if they behave. This is to ensure that we do not have a vicious bandit on the loose whom we could have easily controlled and made otherwise useful.

It will also be much safer for the “neighbours”.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Talebani Pakistani Army unleashed – the great gift of the West and China to the subcontinent

Posted on April 27, 2009. Filed under: Afghanistan, Army, China, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Kashmir, Muslims, Pakistan, Russia, Taleban, terrorism, USA |

The Taliban thrust towards India is now probably materializing. Those who have been dreaming for implosion of Pakistan should sit up and notice. A lot of the strategic negatives for India I had scoped for are possibly coming together now. Obama’s policy as I mentioned before was about stabilization and all his initial bluster would be simply to not be outdone by Bush’s legacy. His ultimate goal would be a compromise with Jihad, minimize US commitments and withdraw without appearing to withdraw. The US is leaving the neo-caliphate, and Obama is simply trying to buy it out by paying Pakistan lavishly.

Whether India likes it or not, my envisioned TalebaniPakistani caliphate expansive thrust from their base area in the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, into the South East will start now in earnest. They will be helped by China, who will see this as a golden opportunity to seal off India’s potential linking up with Afghanistan and blocking Chinese access to the subcontinent through north Kashmir. The Caliphate’s expansion into Kashmir is a big strategic gain for Jihad. A weak and Islam-appeasing Government of India will simply give this as proof that Indians are not doing sufficiently in appeasement. Even the unthinkable could happen – the Indian state could fall before Jihad in the North. And this would then be an unrelenting aggression from neo-caliphate jihad.

With the declared and proposed “army action” by Pakistani Army against the Talebs, one of two things is going to happen. Either the Pakistani Army command arranges for an “eyewash” of temporary retreat by the Talebs so that international pressure can be staved off a bit. But a worse future scenario would be the formal switching over of sides by the Pakistani Army troops once they are in the “contact zone”. This would lead to a very rapid “collapse” of the entire north of Pakistan.

For the moment, it is not in the interests of the Pakistani Army to reveal to the world that the entire north collapses before the Talebs or that the Talebs are simply the irregular wing of the theologian-Jihadi-military structure of the Pakistani Army. This will choke up the material resources supply that it needs to finance and support its long term Jihadi ambitions for the subcontinent. With the recent phased supply promised by the “west” it needs to formally wait until this resource is delivered. Also, China would be under pressure to and there could be concerted effort by the US to remove the nukes from within Pakistani territory. Which would be a great loss of bargaining power for the Pakistani Army.

So my guess will be a formal temporary retreat by the Talebs, and much fanfare about assembling troops for military action against the Talebs. This will never materialize fully on the ground. Any formal engagement that Pakitani Army is forced to go in with the Talebs now, is problematic. If they really have to take action, for the sake of the media and the western opinion, this would mean a war of attrition between irregulars and regulars of the same force. This is not good for the future projections and ambitions of the Pakistani Army. So there is going to be no serious fight. At most those units will be sacrificed deliberately whose loyalty to the essential Jihadi cause of the Pakistani Army leadership, is suspect. Or whose future preservation could preserve military expertise in “undesirable” ethnic communities.

The promised huge western help and the undercover help provided by China and the Islamic powers has to be built up sufficiently, as stocks have been depleted to provide for the success of the Taleb adventure in Afghanistan, and maintaining terrorist activities against India. Once sufficiently built up, the resources will be used to plan and support the next phase of Jihadi expansion – more into Afghanistan and east and north into Pakistan, and finally on to India – the ultimate target.

But any serious attempts by the Pakistanis to use the Talebs to finish their unfinished agenda of grabbing Kashmir by People’s Liberation Army, will necessitate actions on many fronts, both to the general direction of south-west and west from Srinagar. The complication can be facilitation by the PLA of the Talebs from the “north” or Karakorum highway, and any diversionary attacks or movements by the PLA in Chinese occupied sectors of India.

Hopefully the USA is not at the same time manipulated by its allies and “business interests” like UK or China, to treat this as an opportunity where the Talebs appear to be less strong in the Afghanistan sector as they appear to have moved their momentum to the east. There could be genuine agreements between the so-called good-Talebs and the USA to “shift east”. On the other hand it could all be a part of ruse and deception, where the Talebs want to appear to have moved to the east, but in reality preparing to trap the NATO forces in the west.

Some Indian political parties have promised Indian army support to tackle terrorism inside Pakistan. Promising openly, Indian soldiers to fight Taleban in Pakistan, can be a double-edged sword. On the one hand, this can activate US and western forces who have interests in the outcome of Indian elections in favour of the “promiser”. But on the other hand this will prompt the Taleb-Pakistanis to intensify their campaign against Kashmir and western India in general. Given that the grounds have been prepared for both “withdrawal to save the skin” as well as “jingo” mentality, this can lead to an uncertain outcome. There can be loud cries of, “more needs to be done to assure the communities, since all these attacks are actually because of rise of right-wing Hindutva”.

What appears to be lack of control by the government, is actually an appearance. This is partly true but represents possibly a deliberate attempt by the ISI+Pakistani+Taleb combination to delegitimize the civilian governmental structure. Behind all this facade, the combination is working towards its traditional goal – the overall subjugation of the subcontinent under an Islamic regime, and restoration of what they consider their glory days of lording it over India.

They have managed to coax Obama admin’s funds, which in-spite of all attempts to the contrary, will still be surreptitiously diverted to fund the Pakistani national project of conquering at least part if not whole of India. USA is trying to find glorious ways of covering up withdrawal from Afghanistan. Already this has led to inventing a “moderate” Taleban (Islamic Jihadis always pretend to be moderates when they think they can extract resources, or buy time). If the plan has been hatched between Pakistan+China on one side and USA+UK on the other, it can be a dangerous trap for India, if India has to divide its forces and get bogged down in a war which China and allies sponsor as a proxy war, while the entire north-west of India lies vulnerable.

Suppose, US cuts a deal with its invented “moderate Taleban” and brokers an agreement between Zardari and the Talebs for power-sharing in the North West. This will simply be a ratification, according to my thinking, of the TalebPakistaniArmy plan to coax USA into a position where, the defacto transition to a TalebPakistaniArmy Islamic state is tacitly endorsed by the USA in the “hope” of showing to its electorate and the world media that USA has retreated “ethically”. This plan could have the support of UK+China. Karazai could be brought in on this out of necessity on his weak power and resource basis. Russia+Iran could be made to wait and watch. So in that case the entire brunt of the TalebPakistaniArmy expansionist plan would fall towards India. Why India? Because of many different possible calculations.

TalebPakistaniArmy can hope to get tacit Chinese support. It can hope to get US reluctance to commit forces in this theatre as a favourable scenario. It can calculate that Government of India can be made to negotiate in an international form of “zazyia” extraction. This can be made in a form very similar to the way in which “zazyia” was extracted from the USA – by posing as “funds” required to “develop” sufficiently “to alleviate poverty and economic factors that gives rise to terrorism”. A situation can easily be developed by which India is made to look like a “miser” “who is reluctant to share her fortune” with the poor “neighbour”, and therfore must face the consequences of continuing “terror attacks”.

Internal divisions, fractured and antagonistic opinions within the “anti-Jihadi” section in India, who still agonize over the “hows” and “why’s” of Jihad and what strategy should be appropriate, can be banked upon to provide the typical scenario of lack of ruthless retaliation that probably existed during the early years of Islamic invasions into India. It can also be a military preemptive move to prevent India participating in any joint military operations in the core areas of Pakistan. China could panic if Indians start talking too much of sending expeditionary forces into Pakistan.

The asinine policy of inventing a “moderate Taleban” to cover up the eventual retreat from the Afghan theatre, is the latest in the superb series of contributions from the Anglo-US to human civilization. The help provided to Pakistani Army (the state and the army is the same in Pakistan, at least from the army viewpoint – so resources provided formally to the civilian government will be surreptitiously moved to Pakistani Army disposal or manipulation) will simply be used against remaining “divergence” in Afghanistan and the final push towards the Jihadi dream of an uninterrupted Islamic empire running from Arabia to Indonesia.

Whether that dream is realistic or feasible is an entirely different question, but the enormous pain and horror on the way even towards the eventual demise of that dream, is something that the west will forever be guilty of.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

Change of regime in the USA : strategic implication for the Indian subcontinent

Posted on January 21, 2009. Filed under: Afghanistan, China, economy, India, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, Taleban, terrorism, USA | Tags: |

Obama’s takeover could actually be a dampener for all those hoping to see more positive action in favour of India. His primary concern will be restoration of the US economy. US strategic interests in Asia will therefore be intimately tied in with strategies for growth of the US economy. In spite of rhetoric, economic calculations will impose restrictions on where and how far Obama will go. It seems most unlikely that Obama will increase overseas military commitments and war or surgical strikes against Iran is most unlikely unless Iran deliberates provokes US into a position where it will be embarrassed internationally if it does not retaliate. Obama will try to hold the “line” rather than expand or contract. His main tactic will be to retain the bluster to outshine Bush in foreign affairs but basically do nothing. He will try to achieve more with bluffs and diplomatic pressure and nerve wars rather than do anything that escalates military commitments. He will be under pressure to be seen not to retreat compared to Bush’s legacy, which will be a dampener for those within and outside US who hope that Obama will reverse many of the aggressive Bush moves.

For the subcontinent, Obama’s main strategic steps will be to reassure and to a certain extent increase cooperation with India mainly in the economic arena. Obama will also see to it that Indian regimes are not penalized at the elections by not taking aggressive retaliatory measures against Pakistan. Obama’s tactic will be to increase public visibility of military collaboration with India, and a declared programme of strengthening defence capabilities of India, and maybe even some kind of enhanced NATO type guarantee of alliance/protection in case of third party aggression. Similarly Obama will see to it that any Pakistani regime is not penalized by the people, by holding off India from POK. If India can bargain here properly, it can wrangle out an agreement to station troops on the eastern border of Afghanistan as part of a strategy of anti-terror and disruption of Taleban supply lines to the POK.

The key here again will be to stabilize rather than expand. This is here where Obama and US policy will begin to unravel. The situation in the Afghan+Pakistan front needs expansion and dynamic rather than stabilization. Stabilization of control would mean the beginning of loss of initiative on NATO part and the turning point of the campaign. The reason static war would be disastrous for the US, is because of the peculiar ground situation. So far the anti-US forces have been fighting Chinese Red army style mobile warfare. Such war style can only be matched by continuous positional movement and encirclement of mobile warriors. As soon as this movement is lost, the mobile warriors gain advantage. For now, in an unfamiliar and unaccustomed territory, positional static NATO can be picked off at ease by its opponents.

Obama’s concentration on economic affairs out of necessity, is likely to lead to less stress on foreign affairs that are seen to be expensive and without direct long term benefits. This in turn is likely to lead to less clarity on strategic military objectives, and a corresponding confusion in the military command over operations. It will not be as if Obama himself will be directly responsible, but his preoccupation with internal affairs and priority to world economic manipulation will lead to a neglect of military expansion and therefore adoption of stop-gap stabilization tactics. Obama will try to get India onboard for the US economic recovery programme, and formulate joint policies to counter China. Strategically, this can benefit the entire Indian subcontinent, especially those economies in a position technologically and educationally to benefit from such US-India relationship – especially India, Bangladesh and SriLanka. But this will also be a great opportunity for India to push through in strategic initiatives of its own about the central Asian republics. India can shrewdly play around to force US acceptance of Indian military presence, if India offers to provide substantial military and economic help directly to the Afghan government. Most diplomatic pressures are only effective when the other party realizes that the pressurizing party will go ahead and do something anyway – and that it is better to join in before it is too late to appear to be a reliable “friend”.

US current needs coincides with India’s on the economic front, primarily against Chinese capture of world markets, and I think there will be no problems in the evolution of collaboration here. But overall this economic movement will subtly and in a very complex way, leave its mark on the military/political strategic scenario, whereby the US and the NATO will ultimately retreat from the Afghan front. This is both a danger as well as an opportunity for India, if it has the correct leadership.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Mumbai’s Jihad in Dhul-Quadah- hidden message from the Quran and the Hadiths to India and USA

Posted on December 3, 2008. Filed under: China, Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, religion, Taleban, terrorism, USA |

Mumbai’s recent Jihadi terror attack is big media story now. Pakistan has played its cards well – its military and secret service has long been in alliance with the Islamic theologians to promote Islamic Jihad all over Asia. This definitely has been going on for a long time with full knowledge and resourcing by the West from the days of the Cold War – and it is these same leaders of the West  who are now desperate to see to it that India does not militarily retaliate. Pakistan has warned already with great alacrity that it will move the Pakistani Army to the Indian border if “tension” increases due to “India” and its fight in the North West against Talebani/Al Qaeda terror will “suffer”! This is hilarious for it simply covers for the complete lack of effort and effectiveness or will to fight against the Islamic Jihad on behalf of the Pakistani state, obvious for years now.  It is practically impossible for the Pakistani establishment too – for its primary reasons for existence since its formation by the British was to subjugate India once again in the name of Islam – nothing else, absolutely no other goal exists for Pakistan. Islam imposes unquestioning obedience to Islamic theologians who are increasingly unable to cope with the intellectualal complexity of modern science and society and knowing fully well that only the retrogression and imposition of primitive 7th century Arabian desert culture of looting kafelas and women and property of neighbouring tribes in Ghazwas was the only safe bet to continue in power. Pakistan’s state establishment and its theological establishment know that as a failed state and a gift of blind British shortsightedness, the only way to extend their existence is to live off the wealth and productivity of India. Wherever the Muslims invaded in its historic past, it looted and destroyed without even understanding the basics of sophisticated economies – and inevitably ruined these invaded countries over the long run – leading to their vulnerability against European colonization.

Pakistan’s state promoted the Taleban with Western blessing, and the madrassahs were utilized to brainwash and train generations of Jihadi males – the resources were a heaven-sent for the Muslims since the western support could be used to radicalize more of the youth in Jihad and ultimately use it to carry out “Ghazwa-e-Hind” – total liquidation of the “Hindus”, looting their wealth, land and women – the lucrative incentive to participate in Jihad for the millions of products of only feudal Islamic preaching and nothing else. The military-secret service establishment, probably already moved a major portion of the army to the Indian border knowing fully well about the planned attacks on Mumbai. This army movement would have served a dual purpose (1) the brainwashed Jihadi tutoring of the younger generations most likely to provide the lower ranks of the army are in all likelihood collaborating with the Taleban in the North Western provinces or deserting to them, or supplying the products of the ordnance factories of Pakistan to the Taleban. Moving the remnant under the control of the government to the eastern borders separates them from the Talebani contagion (2) since the elected government (but not the army) has already lost control over the north-western areas and the tribal belt, and failed to contain the Taleban and Al Qaeda, this attack provides a good excuse for abandoning the sham fight against “Jihad” from Afghanistan altogether, and practically leave it in Talebani hands. All these indicate that the theologian-elite nexus of Pakistani society has already come to an agreement with the Taleban-Qaeda to form an alliance to takeover the Pakistani state, and turn it into a hardcore Islamic regime able to strategically extract support from Iran and China and the blindly shortsighted opportunist imperialist elements within European elite  to liquidate the only thorn in Islam’s side in Asia and the Indian Ocean region – India. Once India can be subjugated to Islamic sadism, the pan-Islamic belt runs in an uninterrupted belt from Africa, middle East, through to Indonesia – the weak and pacifist societies of Myanmar and Thailand will be mere tasty morsels before Jihadi Islamic greed.

What was the hidden Quranic and Hadithic message within the Mumbai attacks ? This was more a message for the remaining terror modules within India and their support bases within Indian state protected Islamic communities, networks and theological establishments.

22nd-27th of November must be the second half of the Islamic month of Dhu’l Qadah – and as far as I can remember, this is a very significant month in the Islamic calendar. This is the first pilgrimage or Umrah that the Muslims made after the migration/hijra to Medina under Muhammad. The Muslims came on the morning of the fourth day of Dhual-Qadah, in the 7th year after migration, after the treaty of Hudaybiyyah the previous year. The entire event lasted for three days. Any pilgrimage during the month of Dhul-Qadah is named a “major pilgrimage”, or just “pilgrimage” (Hajj), while pilgrimages on all other month are called “minor pilgrimage” (Umrah). The Muslims were armed even though the prevalent practice was not to carry weapons on pilgrimage. The treaty had provided for temporary abandonment and evacuation of the town of Mecca, by the Qureysh when the Muslims entered it, and was primarily meant as a show of strength by Muhammad to the Qureysh.

I find it highly significant in the context of Islamic viewpoint to mount the attack on Mumbai at this date -we have to consider actual terror activities described unemotionally and compare with Mumbai outcomes. A highly significant incident in this month was the destruction of the Banu Quraiza Jews. The Banu Quraizah Jews were originally part of an alliance of Jewish tribes who managed and cultivated the oases farms in the desert of northern Arabia who had been alarmed at the systematic expulsion, sudden ambush and slaughter, and looting of all their camels, women and children. They tried to form alliances with expelled Jews and defend themselves against the Muslim raids. There is hardly any evidence of their having done any atrocity on the Muslims even by Islamic chroniclers – their only crime seems to have been resisting ethnic cleansing, eviction from land which they had worked hard on, and defend their women and children – typically described by the chroniclers as “conspiracy against Islam and Allah’s messenger”. After a siege lasting for 25 days, the Jews surrendered:

Sahih Bukhari records: [Original Sahih Al-Bukhari]
The women and children were then separated from their husbands, others were put under the care of Abdullah, a renegade Jew. All the goods and possessions of the B. Qurayzah Jews, their camels and flocks were all brought as spoils of war. The B. Qurayzah Jewish men were handcuffed behind their backs with their women and children having already been separated. They were placed under the charge of Mohammad ibn Maslama, the assassin of Ka’b ibn Ashraf, to be sent to Medina before their execution in batches. A long trench was dug in the marketplace of Medina. The Prisoners were then taken there, made to kneel down and beheaded in a group of five or six. Muhammad was personally present to witness this slaughter. Ali and Zubayr cut off the heads of the Jews in front of Muhammad. Sourcing from Al-Waqidi, Tabari writes:
“…the messenger of God commanded that furrows should be dug in the ground for the B. Qurayzah. Then he sat down, and Ali and al-Zubayr began cutting off their heads in his presence.” Ibn Ishaq writes that they were taken in groups to Muhammad for beheading in front of him.

Tabari further writes:
‘The messenger of God went out into the marketplace of Medina and had trenches dug in it; then he sent for them and had them beheaded in those trenches. They were brought out to him in groups. Among them were the enemy of God, Huyayy b. Akhtab, and Ka’b b. Asad, the head of the tribe. They numbered 600 or 700-the largest estimate says they were between 800 and 900. As they were being taken in groups to the Messenger of God, they said to Ka’b b. Asad, “Ka’b, what do you understand. Do you not see that the summoner does not discharge [anyone] and that those of you who are taken away do not come back? By God, it is death!” the affair continued until the Messenger of God had finished with them.’

The Sahi (authentic) Hadith of Abu Dawud: Book 14, Number 2665:
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin: No woman of Banu Qurayzah was killed except one. She was with me, talking and laughing on her back and belly (extremely), while the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) was killing her people with the swords. Suddenly a man called her name: Where is so-and-so? She said: I I asked: What is the matter with you? She said: I did a new act. She said: The man took her and beheaded her. She said: I will not forget that she was laughing extremely although she knew that she would be killed.”
The very old Jewish man Az-Zabir had saved the life of a Muslim convert, Thabit b. Qays in the Bu’ath war. When Az-Zabir was about to be beheaded Thabit requested Muhammad to save the life of Az-Zabir and his family as a return to his favor. Muhammad agreed. Az-Zabir then asked Thabit b. Qays about the Jewish leaders such as Ka’b b. Asad and Huayy b. Akhtab, as he preferred to die rather than to live without them. Az-Zabir replied, “Then I ask you for the sake of the favor I once did for you to join me to my kinsmen, for by God there is no good in living after them. I will not wait patiently for God, not even [the time needed] to take the bucket of a watering trough, until I meet my dear ones.” So Thabit brought him forward, and he was beheaded. Abu Bakr commented “He will meet them, by God, in the Gehenna, there to dwell forever and forever.”
[this is the battle that gives explicit culling of all adult males including those that had begun to show pubic hair] Hadith from Sunaan Abu Dawud: Book 38, Number 4390: Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi: I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.
After executing all the adult male Jews, Muhammad sent Sa’d b. Zayd al-Ansari with some captive women and children from the B. Qurayzah to Najd to sell them in the slave market.  Among the captive was a young woman called Rayhanh bt. Amr b. Khunafah [all her male relatives including her husband were executed under personal supervision of the prophet of Islam] and took her as his concubine. It is said that when Muhammad offered to make her his wife by embracing Islam, she declined. She preferred to remain a concubine to becoming a Muslim and said, “Messenger of God, rather leave me in your possession [as a concubine], for it is easier for me and for you.” [Some biographers claim that Rayhana eventually accepted Islam].

I think this is highly relevant as the terrorists were perhaps trying to send a message not only to non-Muslim Indians but more so to the Muslims of India who would connect the significance better than non-Musilms. If the reports of supposed torture [comment by Dr. Aaron Abraham, physician friend  of the slain Rabbi in Mumbai on Indian media, who has claimed the Rabbi’s body] on the Jewish family, separate execution of the women, and deceptive negotiation with the commandos about hostages when they had already been executed, are confirmed then this will tie in exactly with the significance of this raid in Islamic theologian eyes.

For the Taleban-Qaeda and their various backers all over the middle-east, China, Iran, theologians of Saudi Arabia – this is the start of the signal for Muslims in the subcontinent, that those who are really “faithful” should see this as the command of the final offensive towards annihilation of the Jews and the “Qureysh” of the modern world – the Americans. The month of Dhul Quadah was used to attack Mumbai so ferociously and target Israelis because of Islamic historical significance of notorious Jew-liquidation campaigns by the prophet of Islam and show of strength to his opponents at Mecca in this “sacred month”. The genocide of the Banu Quraizah Jews by the Muslims in this context came immediately after the battle of the “trench” in which the leader of Islam was almost killed and was only saved by “falling into a ditch” and another Muslim resembling him becoming the centre of wrath of the enemy and being killed in error. This could be a message to the remaining terror modules and community support networks of Jihad within India to the effect that recent advances and attacks by the NATO forces with elimination of key commanders, is like the temporary setbacks of the “battle of the trench” and that the “faithful” should take this as the signal for the final campaign – to eliminate all “tribes” (read India, Israel etc) allied to the “Meccan Qureysh” (read Americans) before “conquering Mecca” (read USA).

But, I hope, the Islamic Jihadis get this message clearly into their heads – that they have made a tremendous blunder. Since many from the middle east do visit this site – they should clearly understand, that they have fallen a victim to propaganda from a certain section of regime sponsored historians of India and colonial neo-imperialist historiography of European origins, that “Hindus” are soft targets, and that they can be beaten to a pulp without much damage to Islam. Reality was that “Hindus” managed to survive, still maintaining all their liberal practices compared to Islam, over more than 1300 years of brutal fighting and resistance – a history of conflict and resistance that brought successive Islamic regimes to their knees, completely erased out of public discourse by Indian official historians under Western pressures for tactical reasons of the Cold War. What Islamists have done in Mumbai, has set in motion a process, by which the Hindu will galvanize into a nation and regime that will visit terrible retribution and possible complete eventual liquidation of Islam in most parts of Asia – this time around no imperialist regime will succeed to keep it in check.

It will be the height of political stupidity to think that this is going to be led by this or that party of Indians, the Congress or the BJP – not really, it will be a political force in the making from the grassroots that will coerce even the BJP if necessary to pursue a less opportunistic line, and will leave the shattered remains of both parties by the roadside in its march towards an extreme rightwing reaction against all things Islamic. I already feel sorry for the “common” Muslim who will have to bear the brunt of this reaction if they do not liquidate their theologians and reject the Jihadi core of Islam as ant-Islamic and not just un-Islamic – an outcome most unlikely I think!

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Indian voter’s only short term solution against Islamic terror : zero tolerance of politicians, media, and academics’

Posted on November 29, 2008. Filed under: Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Politics, religion, terrorism |

There is now candlelight vigils all over India, mourning and showing anger at the Mumbai attacks – and the media is hawing and hemming about recognizing the anger of the common Indian but still ordering on the behalf of Islamophile regimes that people should do nothing that hurts Islam for the survival of the political regime crucially depends on the roughly 13-14% Muslim swing vote factor in Indian elections. Although some Muslim voters do appear to vote outside of religious affiliation, it has been always a recognized fact of Indian elections that groups like the Deobandi fatwaists or the Imam of the Jame Mosque in Delhi decide for whom the majority of the Indian Muslims vote.

India’s Islamophile regimes’ typical obsession is about giving highest priority to protection of Islam, and is the only non-Muslim majority country that sponsors and hugely subsidizes costly Hajj pilgrimage for Muslims and even uses government infrastructure overseas especially to provide for such pilgrimage. The reason for this is the steady decline in the voter fraction of the Congress as evident right from the first general elections in independent India (less than 50%) when it had hardly any opposition left thanks to the British who selectively wiped off the competitors of Nehru, their lackey and choice for continuation of their interests in India. In fact electoral laws that appeared to go against the Congress even as apparent in the that very first elections were amended at the behest of the Nehru government. This was thus a problem right from the start even as the two major most populous and influential opposition from people, those from Punjab and Bengal, were partitioned and traumatized and decimated under Islamic Jihad as allowed to develop by the British with most of their policymakers deciding to side in favour of Islam probably out of revenge for the loss of the Indian empire resulting from the anti-British movement spearheaded predominantly by the Hindus.

Indian Hindus have known for 1300 years what Islamic terror means, (see here) and Indian Hindus have fought back with the only tactic that is effective against Islamic terror – with similar tactics of deceptive, violent, sadistic attacks – this is how the non-collaborator Rajputs, the Vijaynagar empire, or the Marathas under Shivaji, or the Sikhs under Ranjit Singh were able to bleed the Sultanate and the Mughals to getting dismembered. Only after independence, which coincided with the start of Cold War, British pressure was high on India to protect and nurture Islam as part of whole range of strategy based around immunizing the south and middle east of Asia against communism. This was the reason, combined with Nehru’s increasing realization that over time, the British suppression and removal of credible opposition to him and his coteries would be neutralized as the basic forces within Indian non-Muslim society would reassert, that for the future the marginal Islamic vote would be crucial for the survival of the Congress in power. This led to a huge campaign to whitewash the record of Islam in India, by regime sponsored and dependent historians so that future generations of non-Muslims did not have access to knowledge and evidence that showed the real agenda and modus-operandi of Islam – while the madrassahs and Muslim religious educational institutions, systems were protected and continued to disseminate the actual Jihadic core message of the texts of Islam.

This has made generations of Indian Hindus unprepared psychologically for Islamic violence. But the trend has reversed once the British nurtured intelligentsia, historians, academics, and politicians began to die out from natural demographic factors – with more and more Indians being educated within India and being able to move out of India as well and becoming independent of government control and influence and finding out on their own about the real nature of Islam from resources not restricted (even if the rulers wish to) in the free world.  They are vilified by the whitewashers of the Thaparite school of Indian history for they realize the danger these new generations of India pose for the existence of the Islamophile regimes.

In the short term the only thing Indians can do is to have zero tolerance for politicians, media and academics that protect, justify, or do nothing against the ideological motivator for terror – Islam, and especially politicians at the centre of the federal system in whose tenure terrrorist attacks take place -simply try to give zero votes to each candidate of the regime in the next general elections – that is the only thing that will hurt these callous bootlickers of Islam.

Related previous post

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

A large, if not the final nail in the coffin of Islam in India – Mumbai blasts signal the end of an era of Islamophile regimes

Posted on November 28, 2008. Filed under: Bangladesh, China, Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, religion, Taleban, terrorism |

What Islamic Jihadis have done in Mumbai has been micro-covered by the world media now. It is not my task to repeat what cameras and anchors have been ranting about. However, it is a day of great sadness as well as a day of great hope. For with this attack Islam has sealed its fate in India. It will continue to survive for years but its end has begun. The Hindu has now essentially broken its final shred of shyness and philosophical disregard of its own relentless annihilation. I have warned in this blog before that this is one community that appears docile on the outside, but with great resilience, persistence and determination that had fought the Islamic hordes for more than a 1000 years – this is how nearly 80% still survive within the borders of India.

The media under the overwhelming influence of a leftist political correctness imposed by almost 60 years of Islamophile and blatantly anti-Hindu propagandist regime dependent Thaparite school of Indian history, will continue to do damage control in favour of Islam, and the Indian political establishment will try to divert attention by hinting at “foreign hands”. But this is one damage that cannot really be covered. The bulk of the Indian population has disjointed itself psychologically from everything Islamic – including every element in the apparatus of state and civil society that appears to have sided with Islam, protected Islam or patronized Islam. If the BJP fails to give shape to this disjunction, the momentum of the “Hindu” will not stop, and we will see a new nationalist avowedly Hindu movement taking birth.

The Taleban, the Al Qaeda, Pakistani state and security apparatus that supplies and sources terror outfits and outrages in India, the ideological backbone from which modern Jihad took its inspiration – the return to orthodoxy movements of the Tabliqi Jamaat and the Deobandis in the subcontinent, in spite of all their tactical show of condemnation of terrorists as unIslamic (but not antiIslamic and not punishable like sexual offences by stoning or death), the communist imperialism of China which sponsored both Iran and Pakistan, all will now be clubbed together by the “Hindu” as the enemy – and anyone, any force in the world that sympathises, patronizes, justifies Islami Jihad will be silently assigned the status of enemy by the “Hindu”. The Congress’s political future is doomed, the BJP may not fare much better if it does not reflect this rising silent rage in the Hindus. The Congress will still survive in the next general elections but its political pre-eminence is now on inevitable decline.

As I have tried to warn many times in this blog, once this Hindu consolidation takes place, the days of Islam on the subcontinent are numbered. Once India itself frees itself of Islam, the new “Hindu” India will turn its attention to Pakistan and Bangladesh and the next round of retaliatory and liquidation moves against Islam will take place. Its start of the endgame in the  Indian subcontinent at least for Islam – a faint glimmer of hope in an otherwise overwhelming gloom.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

The Centre-Left regime of India has scored once again – Mumbai mauled by Jihad while security forces are busy painting the “Hindu” as terrorist

Posted on November 26, 2008. Filed under: Bangladesh, Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, religion, terrorism |

All Indian media has been buzzing with images and sounds of the Mumbai Taj hotel burning as a result of an encounter between Jihadi terrorists and Indian security forces. There could be more fatalities, and more casualties. Encounters have been going on in other places in Mumbai too. But the main target of the Taj was also an important place where corporate India met regularly and at the time of the Jihadi attack several important trans-national business meetings were going on. The Trident is another hotel where terrorists have struck.

Why did the Jihadis get so bold? They have got the clear message from the Left of Centre Indian regime currently in power that with the general elections next year in sight, the regime will do everything to convince the Muslim populations of India that the regime is prepared to go to any lengths to please Islam – what better method than to try and paint the “Hindu” – the  hated “infidel”, the “qufr”, whose land is to be looted by Jihad, whose women are to be raped and captured and enslaved by Jihad, and all whose cultural icons to be erased by Jihad, as the “bad guy” and therefore gain the gratitude of Islam.

The Islamists know that the Islamophile regime of India will use its state power to prevent any retaliation – the only language of retaliation and revenge that Islam understands will not be spoken to the Muslims. This whole game of Islamic Jihadi sadism on the non-Muslims of India would have been over forever in a matter of months if the “Hindus” decided and were allowed to take matters into their own hands. The Islamophile regime at the centre knows this very well and has used every means possible to prevent the majority community come to exactly such a conclusions – including traditional state influence and regime sponsored academics’ control over the media. It is possible, that Centre-Left has already decided or panicked that the next general elections could be quite bad for them and that the majority sentiment was veering away from them – so they desperately went out to ensure minority support which because of long term steady mobilization by Muslim theologians and infiltration from the neighbouring Muslim countries of Pakistan and Bangladesh has now significant vote swing capabilities in terms of sheer numbers.

The Centre-Left regime’s tactic is self-defeating. Its antics and Jihad’s singleminded agenda of destroying non-Muslim cultures has now more or less ensured that non-Muslims of India mostly have now come out of the traditional illusion of mythical peaceful advent of Islam in India propagandized by the Thaparite school of Indian history. There will be a huge campaign now mounted by the Indian media and the regime in power that the greatest need of the hour is for Indians to respect “communal harmony” – so that the only language Islam understands (and if spoken, historically, Islam always turned “peaceful” – for their greatest theological concern is to survive and increase in numbers) that of retaliation and liquidation of Islamic leadership and support bases, will not be used – giving time and confidence for Jihad to expand further in India. There will also be an attempt perhaps to divert attention and justify Jihadi action in two cliche modes (1) “we have to understand the frustrations that lead to such desperate actions!” (implying that Indians should concede more and more to Islam while similar logic should not be applied to non-Muslim frustration) (2) “it was because of the Hindu terror that Muslims reacted” – implying that Hindus should never think of resisting Jihad.

Non-Muslims of India should identify which political groups appease Jihad and Islam and vote accordingly.  At this stage, India will not survive, if Islam and its Jihadi agenda cannot be contained and liquidated – this will be the primary issue for the nation’s existence. If India survives only then can it deal with its economic problems – and non-Muslims have to consolidate their position with respect to Islam. For those in the West who have been supporting and still continue to think of protecting Islam in India as continuation of British Imperialist and Cold war western strategy – should get it into their myopic thick heads, that the fall of India to Islam will complete the pan Islamic regime running from NorthAfrica through the Middle East to Malaysia and Indonesia and will nicely cut the West off from all the major sources of world’s oil and the Asian markets.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Future scenario for the Indian subcontinent – 5 : Malegaon blast investigations – a turning point for the Right and fatal blunder for Centre-Left

Posted on November 21, 2008. Filed under: Army, Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, religion, terrorism |

It is unimaginable how the wise-old political wizards of the Centre-Left in India committed this monumental blunder of allowing the Mumbai ATS to suddenly discover “Hindutva terror” before regional elections and the general elections peeping in the horizon. The key figures chosen for media highlighting and vilification are significant : a mid-ranking male army officer and female religious activist. We can speculate whether these figures were deliberately chosen to make a plausible story (sourcing of explosives and technology from “military” experience and ideological motivation from religious activist – a “female” terrorist is also a scoring point in favour of Islam as apologists can shout – look, at least in India Islam is so good as not to make females into terrorists, and therefore how bad the “Hindus” are! the more this drama goes on the more it becomes too convenient a political scoring point for the Centre-Left). We can speculate if it was done to reassure Muslim voters that the Centre Left was doing all it could to demonize the “Hindu” and therefore the Muslims should vote overwhelmingly in their favour. However I am less concerned with motivations if any for concocting such a storyline – for as the future will show, the Centre Left loses the game in all possible ways.

It will not matter if the “Hindu” accused really were or were not involved in the blasts. Any calculation by the Centre Left of using this “case” to serve one or more of the three main possible objectives (1) in regional/provincial elections to gain  Muslim votes (2) demonize the “Hindu” and make it embarrassing for the common “Hindu” to vote from community and cultural affiliations (3) to distract the general and rising anger in non-Muslim populations of India about the de-facto helplessness or lack of political will in the Centre Left whose only strong stands against Islamic Jihadi terrorism excel in the volubility of their media statements, will prove futile. The Centre Left completely fails to understand the long-term shift in the general non-Muslim Indian consciousness towards a open recognition of the extremely retrogressive and traumatic role of Islam on the subcontinent (this recognition remained deeply submerged but dormant under official educational propaganda and patronage of Islam compared to denigration and demonization of the Hindu starting officially approved school textbooks which detail plenty of “evils” of “Hinduism” but none whatsoever in the revealed traditions).

By picking on a “Hindu” armyman  and a “Hindu” woman religious activist, ironically the Centre Left will realize soon what cultural icons they have created for the “Hindu” – symbols that will only gain stature if the government manages to prove them “guilty”. To the common Hindu mind, if they really carried out the “blasts”, they were for the first time in decades doing something in revenge or retaliation against persistent Islamic terror that started within India through Pakistan sponsored Talebani Jihad in Kashmir – in the face of what will appear to be consistent failure by the Centre Left to protect non-Muslims of India from Jihadi Sadism. This is the same strategy of “retaliation” from the population in a situation that appears to continue to provide relentless terror and repression “tolerated” or “indirectly protected” by a national government that was followed by the Palestine “Liberation” movement against Israel and was romantically lauded by the Centre Left for decades. This has proven quite successful for the Palestinians with Israel politically cornered, and the basis for this success, the gain of political legitimacy in the the minds of populations who had felt helpless and unprotected before has every likelihood of being repeated in the arena of social consciousness in India.

It is this tremendous blunder by the Centre Left in failing to read the basic social trend that will cause them to regret this incident in the decades to come. The Right of course in the future will come to realize this as a turning point that indicates the fundamental changes taking place in Indian society that ultimately will lead in its favour.

part 4

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Future scenario for the Indian subcontinent – 4 : India’s long term drift towards the Right

Posted on November 12, 2008. Filed under: Bangladesh, Communist, Hindu, History, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Kashmir, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, religion, terrorism |

Before I continue with my series on the “immensely significant periphery” of the Indian subcontinent, I would like to touch here briefly on the “heartland” India itself, as its fundamental trends are going to have an impact on the developments in the periphery. India is crucially and deeply involved in almost all the countries of the “periphery”.

The recent investigations and attempts by the Mumbai ATS to implicate the so-called “Hindu Right Wing” in the blasts in the predominantly Muslim areas of Nanded and Malegaon in Maharashtra is significant for more reasons than the obvious immediate ones in the minds of the investigators or in their political “motivators” within the Congress led government both at the state as well as the national level as suggested by the political detractors of the Congress. Any speculation as to the political motivations to paint the “Hindu” as terrorist and equate with the “Islamic” terrorists with the next general elections in sight is good food for the “political” media. So far all the “brain mapping” and “modern” techniques of extraction of truth has failed to provide any basis for the speculative allegations against the so called “Hindu Right”. Scanning the media reaction and media trial by “secular” forces of the security apparatus’ attempts at “nailing” Islamic terrorists we can find a deep suspicion and derision of any “identification” of Islam with “terrorism” and where it becomes really indefensible – we hear loud protests that we should all actually look into the real “provocations” behind such “Muslim reactions”. The same voices appear to be instantly convinced about the legitimacy of the Mumbai ATS’s claims, and leads us to realize the real political affiliations of this “progressive” “neutral and objective” voices which are allowed solely to be voiced on the media. In any case these are all processes of short term duration played out in the immediate future.  We should look at the real significance of this phenomenon for the longer term.

The fact that some “Hindus” could decide to take matters into their own hands, was always a possibility, and I have repeatedly stressed this out here in my blog.  The root of this phenomenon goes back a long way into the history of the Indian subcontinent and how that history has been reconstructed in the modern period under the British and its successor regimes for their own hegemonistic purposes. The fundamental problem is that of the complete denial by regime dependent historians of the Nehruvian and post Nehruvian Congress-(pro-Soviet)-Leftist schools of Indian history of Islamic atrocities on the non-Muslims of India throughout the numerous invasions and conquests and the various Islamic state authorities, and the struggle carried on by the non-Muslims against such Islamic behaviour. The fact is that the memory of Muslim torture, rape, abduction and forced marriage of women, enslavement, extreme economic exploitation with religious justifications, carries on in non-Muslim groups who have strong traditions of intergenerational transfer of knowledge and experiences. The handing down of this memory, a basic distrust of all things Islamic, runs deep in most strongly bonded “Hindu” clans and communities that have faced Islamic onslaught and survived still maintaining their “Hindu” identity, and does not need the “official” vehicle of “historical education” under the watchful reconstructive eyes of the Thaparite school of Indian history.

Just as Islam failed to completely convert all Indians because of the intensive and long drawn out struggle against Islam – an aspect completely suppressed by the Thaparites as it would jeopardize their “idyllic” myth of peaceful conversions and perfect communal amity – the Thaparites failed to completely brainwash all Hindus and rewrite the history of Islam in India in their minds. The Hindu appears docile, compromising, philosophical, “other-worldly” etc., but this is a deceptive impression – for the story of their struggle and their survival against the ruthless barbarities of Islam have been edited out of public representation through the media or education. This long struggle, which preserved their culture to a great extent (although traumatized and showing the cultural effects of such trauma in “self-repression”) if studied properly and honestly, will show that this is a community which appears “loose”, divided, ritualistic and carrying a lot of baggage like “caste” which can mostly be traced surprisingly to modern colonial regimes of Islam and the British – but all these are mere superficial features, the social veneer hiding their actual strategic flexibility and determination that have continuously produced characters like the legendary founders of the Vijaynagar empire, or Shivaji and Ranjit Singh.

The transition to “independence” in India followed the general subcontinental pattern of elite mobilization to get control of state power and machinery established by a colonial regime for the elites’ monopolistic hegemonistic enjoyment. This meant that the British actually handed over power to a regime that was likely to remain in the British sphere of influence and carry out policies in favour of British interests. The British helped liquidate opposition to Nehru within India by using discriminatory repression against likely alternative popular candidates, because Nehru showed significant psychological disjunction from the majority culture on the one hand and great affinity for the British “taste” or Islam on the other- thereby ensuring continuation of long term British imperialist design on the subcontinent.

The apparatus of state control under colonial regimes depended on the apparatus of personal power, and this structure was retained essentially even after transition. This implies retention of personnel and systems faithful to the previous colonial masters, with direct and indirect structures of ideological and cultural hegemony of the British continuing through various mechanisms like education (the current Prime Minister proudly reminded his British audience once that he was an “Oxonian” himself and that “many Oxonians” have in the past gone forth to rule India). This regime embarked on the project of redoctrinating the forthcoming generations of Indians into a soporific mythical history of India where everything “Hindu” was retrogressive and evil, and only those aspects of Hinduism which tried to be syncretic with the revealed traditions were worth treating without disdain – and all the revealed traditions as practised or introduced in India as paragons of virtue and as liberating for Indian society (The Thaparites actually manage to “confess” this agenda in their public posturings).   Such indoctrination programs could be maintained only as long as the generation represented in the state apparatus derived from colonial affiliations, remained active. Natural causes progressively diminish the proportion of such elements in the apparatus of social control, and it was a matter of time only that newer generations of Indians from the majority community would reassert their deep cultural affiliations to their own community.

All this will lead to a gradual strengthening of the “Hindu” community bonds, and cultural affinities. Modern generations of professionals or intellectuals will gradually erode or eliminate practises that are seen as retrogressive or obstructive towards reassertion of “Hindu” hegemony.  This cultural consolidation would not have taken a political turn, if the Indian regimes did not try to denigrate or delegitimize this “Hindu” cultural identity. Blatant whitewashing and patronizing of religions like Islam, in complete contradiction to social historical memory of the “Hindus”, alienated the community from political forces that supported such regimes. We have to remember, that there are concrete case studies of how Islamic forces were encouraged by such regimes when faced with possible electoral defeat at the hands of “leftists”, beginning in the 60’s – long before the rise of the BJP.  Similarly the Kashmiri Islamic aggression, the atrocities and ethnic cleansing of non-Muslim Kashmiris, continued without hindrance under these very same regimes beginning in the 70’s and intensifying into the late 80’s, long before the BJP became a significant electoral force. Early 70’s also showed that the essential character of Islam on the subcontinent had remained unchanged from its first appearance through the Arab raids into Sindh – through the brutal massacre, organized rape, and destruction of cultural icons of the “Hindus” in the then East Pakistan, now Bangladesh. All these factors combined with the relentless terrorist activities of Islamic groups supported by Pakistan, forced the “Hindu” cultural consolidation process to take a political turn -as Hindus probably came to realize that they would need to control the apparatus of state power to ensure survival against violently retrogressive Jihadi Islam whose sole aim is to completely liquidate all traces of non-Muslim cultures.

The more the “Hindu” is demonized, and Islam raised sky-high in praise, the greater will be the politicization of this essentially cultural reassertion. Retaliation against atrocities that appear to continue under state “non-chalance” has been found to be effective – and is romantically praised in many circles both in the West and India – take the case of the Palestine “Liberation” movement for example. The Indian state has not been able to stop Kashmiri Jihadi Islami atrocity nor has it been able to prevent explosions at huge human costs sourced by Islamic militants. It was only a matter of time before some “Hindu” thought of retaliation seeing in the government’s consistent failure  and indirect “encouragement” and protection of Islam – the root ideological cause and motivation for such violence (and not the humans who are brainwashed at madrassah’s from childhood in hatred of the Qafir). Just as in Palestine, or Algeria, such retaliation will unfortunately prove quite effective – and the “villains” of today have every likelihood of turning “heroes” or “liberators” of the future. A long term side-effect of continued demonization of the “Hindu” will be an increasing acceleration of the community towards the “Right”, and I feel that the process has now become irreversible. The next general elections may not reflect this, but over a longer span of 10-20 years the trend will be evident.

This Right-wing tendency will not necessarily be characterized by a dominance of “Brahmins” (as its opponents hopefully try to prophecy). The leadership is more likely to come from the “middle/upper middle” order of the social hierarchy, and surprisingly or in complete contradiction to “social wisdom” could even contain so-called “backward castes”. This wil be a defensive consolidation initially, and then turn increasingly aggressive towards all forces it sees as potentially hazardous for its cultural survival. Once this trend takes political shape, there is hardly any force left in the subcontinent that will be able to survive against it without huge foreign intervention. This Right wing consolidation also has effects on the periphery. Its immediate beneficial effects will perhaps be first felt by Sri Lanka and Nepal. But more of this later!

part 5

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

If Obama wins Islamic regimes have every reason to celebrate

Posted on November 4, 2008. Filed under: China, Communist, economics, financial crisis, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Politics, terrorism, US Presidential elections, USA |

Obama’s rather rash remark about Pakistan should not be held against him by the Islamic Jihadist world. Democrats usually make such statements on the heat of the moment, but they have almost always turned out to be the greatest patrons and protectors of Islamic fundamentalism, alongside Republican manipulations in favour of strategic utilization of Islamic Jihad to settle international and domestic political scores – like that by Reagan in the case of Iran. In fact some of the greatest friends of Islamic Jihadi progress have come from the most vociferous of their “expected” ideological enemies – like Kissinger of Jewish origin, the friend of Turkey, Indonesia, Pakistan, and one who claims to have even “opposed” his own administration over its support to Israel in the Yom Kippur war. Similarly the communist Soviet Union, or the socialists and leftists of various shades where Islam is non-dominant, in spite of posturing about themselves being the only legitimate “progressives” of the world, (except in the Islam dominated countries like that of the middle-East, in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, or Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh where the leftists were dealt with in true Islamic style – Sadistic enjoyment of physical torture and liquidation of ideological opponents) turn out to be staunchest of friends and protectors of Islamic Jihad until they are themselves wiped clean off by Islam.

If he wins, he will scale down US military involvement against Islamic Jihad to a certain extent, although the traditional military-industrial-business complex’s interests will oppose this scaling down if it threatens their existence.  Also I have a feeling that the financial situation will suddenly “ease up” if Obama wins, and a short term miraculous return of “confidence” will take place, with loosening up of apparent financial flows. The restriction of financial flows coincided with a timeline that is intimately connected with the US presidential elections, and without going into a lot of technical discussion about international capital flows from “hot sources” like the oil-profit flush mainly Islamic countries or trade-surplus flush China, we can apply a very old principle in crime detection – who benefits from the “crime”, in this case who benefits from the “financial crisis”? The immediate tying up of the “crisis” with “Bush” and the “Republicans”  is perhaps an important pointer. This will become more obvious, if “confidence” and financial flows “return” on the election of Obama. In that case this “high” will continue for some time, probably for the next financial year, and then the western economy will be in for another shock. The reason for this short term recovery and subsequent further damage and financial mayhem, is the essentially political motivation behind capital that is generated and controlled under state regimes with strong ideological leanings and commitments. Capital from such regimes will be used for political purposes, and it is in both the oil-rich OPEC and China’s interests that the financial system of the West is weakened sufficiently for their initial targets of removing western penetration into Asia.  For these forces, a short term revival of the financial situation will be conducive to ensuring that the west turns its attention inwards and relieves the military pressure on Islamic Jihad. The rolling back of US pressure on the middle east will give time to the Jihadis to recuperate and recapture “lost” ground both in a military and ideological sense – a situation similar to the one following the withdrawal of US helpers of Mujahideen after withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan – paving the way clear for PakistanI and Saudi Jihadi takeover of the region.

In the long run however, it is not in the interests of Islam and China to continue to allow the west to flourish “financially” as strengthening of the economy of the west will in its turn revive Western interests in blocking Jihadi takeover of Asia. So eventually the financial crisis will return to the west.

What are the ways out?

(1) The west has to make its single societal obsession to be self-sufficiency in energy, and food.

(2) Be “patriotic” in spending – buy “local” and produce, produce, produce – all the basic necessities of life, food, clothing, shelter. Stop buying products sourced from Islamic countries or China – this will at least partly address the huge trade gap problem. Rather cooperate and take community initiatives to “produce” locally and develop local economies and markets, and not depend on international trade and exports for prosperity.

(3) Address problems of racial, ethnic and other forms of discrimination within western societies that provide opportunities for propaganda and misrepresentation of ulterior motives and agenda of aggressive and retrogressive ideologies like Islam.

(4) force governments to make “capitalism” social – bring the real “free market” conditions of Hayek by preventing concentration of capital in the hands of the few, and instead of socialist largesse or benefit, provide access and capability to use capital to the “lowest of the low” and encourage individual initiative.

(5) Reject and boycott politicians or political forces that compromise with or protect Islamic or Chinese propaganda and interests out of greed for profit from otherwise non-productive huge accumulated capital of the small elite groups that support such political entities, or out of greed of capital from middle eastern oil profits.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

What to do with the Hindu – demonize or reconstruct?

Posted on October 30, 2008. Filed under: Hindu, India, Politics, religion, terrorism |

A leading web search engine flashed today the news of a serial blast in the far-eastern province of Assam in India, perhaps better known to most of us in the west as a label appearing on certain brands of tea. The blasts killed perhaps at least 65 people. Blasts are becoming an acceptable part of the common Indian’s life, so it no longer raises shockwaves. Indians go on about their daily business, and there is little reflection of ripples in the remote corners of the country. It is perhaps how Indians went on with their daily business when the Islamic hordes overran the north, in search of food, wealth, and women which their rapacious lifestyle had already denuded from the hinterland of India, in Persia and Central Asia. But what caught my attention was the casual mention of “possible involvement of suspected Hindu extremists” also in the recent blasts in India, along with the general statement and reference to Indian governmental claims of Pakistani secret service involvement along with suspected separatists and Islamic infiltrators. Just as the alleged attacks of the “Hindu” King of Kashmir, Harsha, on some “Hindu temples” is repeatedly shouted about by the Thaparites as claim that “iconoclasm” was of the same scale between Hindus and Muslims, while quietly suppressing the comment that the source of this claim Kalhana the chronicler makes  – that in doing so Harsha was behaving like a “Turushka” (Turk – a generic name used by early Indian chroniclers for Muslims, which the Thaparites twist into trying to exclude “Arabs” from the records of Islamic barbarism) – the authors and editors of this web-piece have been careful to try and associate “Hindus” also as potential terrorists at par with “Muslim” terrorists.

It is understandable that a for a lot of people, it is urgent to demonize the “Hindu”. It is crucial for political elite in India who are dependent on divisions of the “Hindu” vote. It is crucial for Islamic organizations who follow the Quranic and Hadithic injunctions to utilize the divisions in “unbeliever’s” attitudes towards Islam to utilize support or sympathy of one “unbeliever” group against another, until all “unbeliever” groups are weakened and assimilated or conquered – typically, the best and preferred method being execution of adult males,  and enslavement of children (pre-puberty males) and the women, and taking over all lands and wealth of non-Muslims. It is also crucial for the ideologically committed and therefore of limited statesmanship in the Left, for possible reasons ranging from a cynical recognition that the “mainstream” Indian society still abhors “communism” based on their loose “Hindu” religious identities, or a secret admiration and attraction for the colonial period reconstructed claims of “Islamic brotherhood and community feeling” , or as some scholars have speculated, may even have its origins from the failure and frustration of the Bengali “armed anti-British insurrectionists” (who dominate among the founding fathers of  Indian Communism) to mobilize the Muslims of Bengal in their anti-colonial cause.

For long I have had my own debates with myself about the “Hindu”. In my study of the “Hindu” sources, I have increasingly come to the realization that at least at one level the Thaparite criticism that the “Hinduism” of today did not exist in the past, is correct. For the Thaparites, this non-existence is confirmed by what they interpret as (1) lack of a unified centre and presence of sects (2) lack of surviving records of the term “Hindu” (3) literary evidence of practises that are taboo in modern “Hinduism”.  Although I do find a severe and crippling lack of logical clarity on the part of the Thaparites, I agree with their conclusion – that many of the features of “modern Hinduism” never existed. Where the Thaparites stop short, for obvious reasons of their political agenda and affiliation, are the exploration of historical causes behind introduction of “such features” into the philosophy, ritual and practice of the survivors of pre-Islamic Indians among Islamic state authorities.

I am going to raise a few simple ideas that the “Hindus” can possibly consider. I will justify where I feel direct justifications exist from within “Hindu” literary sources, and where no such justifications exist, I will simply ask that the proposed idea be considered as an extension or interpretation of an idea contained within the basic philosophical and logical texts of the Upanishads.

My proposition consists of four basic and simple ideas :

(1) Replace the use of the word “Hindu” with the word “Bharatyia”. The word definitely does not exist in the core literature, and although occuring early among the Islamic scholars the earliest references from the “Hindu” side appear only in certain royal inscriptions in the medieval period in Central and South India. Almost certainly the etymology of the word comes from a corruption of a root derived from the Sanskrit “Sindhu” and transformed by the tongue of foreigners, especially foreigners who have been associated beyond doubt with the “Hatem” divide of “Satem/hatem” linguistic divide in the Indo-European – and therefore a distinct region beyond the immediate neighbourhood of the Indian subcontinent. The Bharatyia is a better description of the body of the nation as it connects solidly and consciously with the geographical territory of the subcontinent, as mainly established in the highly political tract of the epic Mahabharatam. I will later give my commentary on the Mahabharatm as embodied political ideology of the “Bharatyia” nationhood, and here only mention my suspicion that the name of “Bharat” was deliberately chosen by the constructors of the epic not as a mere name of  king or emperor – but for very specific features and actions by this mythical king which set him apart from other mere royalty and made him a representation of an ideal of “statehood” or “nation” (Bharat disinherited his biological heirs, and gave the reign to someone outside royal birth, because he valued the “nation” and its interests higher than his own personal feelings or attachments).

(2) “Varna” is a descriptive attribute and not a classificatory one and not an inherited one.  Each person should be considered as having all the four “Varnas” inside him or her, and depending on the context, each person can and should manifest features of all four “Varnas” as and when required. The same individual when a student or participating in a ritual is a “Brahman”, when fighting a war is a “Kshatryia”, when carrying on “trade” or commerce is a “Vaishya” and when doing physical labour is a “Shudra”.  At different time points in life, all these roles can become important and necessary for the single human being.  I will give both textual justifications for this more elaborately later, as well as my own interpretations and justifications.

(3) Give the formal symbol of “Yognapobita” (the “sacred thread”) to all students of “Bharatyia darshan” (Bharatyia philosophy) irrespective of origin, class, region, gender. Once given the symbol could be worn also when participating in a ritual, but only in these cases of being a student or participating in a religious ceremony. This definitely does have precedence in the literature.

(4) Make the Upanishadic concept of “Charaibeti” – “never become stationary – move on” as the central concept of “Bharatyia Darshan”. The continuous “quest” for understanding, revisiting previous understanding and requestioning continuously as and when new understanding or knowledge is achieved. All else, rituals, practises, laws, injunctions, should be subordinate to this central concept. Only the act of “quest” should be the permanent feature and all else should be taken as transitory and temporary, and understood as an imperfect response to current conditions and limitation of knowledge. Views of the world, including that of any supra-human conscious authority controlling all processes, or the absence of any such, should be treated the same – subordinate to the quest. This can seem a bit too strong on the agnostic or atheist side, but there are substantial references to the basics of this concept in the Upanishads. Moreover, as stated, the concept is far from pure agnosticism (the concept does not rule out searching or questing the possibility of existence of such an “authority”) or pure atheism (it does not rule out any current understanding by some of what they experience or what some in the future may experience as “God”).  However, as I have said in the introduction, I see no reason to be limited by the exact wordings of a text, and we can extend or interpret – for it is the human mind which thinks of the text, it is the human hand which writes it or gives words to it, and it is another human mind which reads it or hears it.

I think these four basic concepts can be worthwhile to explore, having foundational basis in the preexisting philosophical and religious texts and therefore not completely alien or rejectable by those who need the reassurance of continuity – as tools for moving forward, for unifying the people of the subcontinent into a forward looking nation, the ultimate dream of the ultimate statesman in the Mahabharatam – Krishna.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 4 so far )

Mumbai Anti-Terror Squad’s sudden discovery of “Hindu terror blast” is “secularly” believable- the same ATS whose discovery of “Islamic terror” was “secularly” doubtful!

Posted on October 23, 2008. Filed under: Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Politics, religion, terrorism |

In my previous post on the latest series of blasts in India, at Malegaon, I had raised three possible scenarios –

” ….(1) If Islamic terrorists did this, why would they want to have Muslims killed in the blast? Or is it that this was the safest place to carry out blasts, given that deep cover was necessary now when the security forces would be combing the whole country – and such cover could only be provided by a sufficiently large and entrenched Muslim community, and therefore the momentum of Jihad could only be maintained by continued explosions but now only within a smaller feasible radius around the base of the cover. It could also be punishment to the local Muslims at large, who might have shown reluctance or lack of sufficient enthusiasm to join the Jihadi network – there is strong disapproval in the Quran for those Muslims who show “reluctance” in joining militant Jihad or providing material support for such Jihad.

(2) A second more sinister aspect could be a tactical calculation that, these attacks could be attributed to the so-called “Hindu Right wing”, and thus help in the current apparent campaign of the UPA to try to equate “Islamic terror” with “Hindu Right”. If true this would be a very subtle and cynical tactic on the part of the Jihadists, as it achieves many objectives – (1) this makes Jihadi terror appear more “palatable” (2) helps the Congress in its desperate fight to utilize minority support in the coming elections and attempt at delegitimizing the BJP  (3) makes the vacillating among the “secular” Hindus shaky in identifying with or leaning  towards the “Hindu Right”.

(3) A third possibility could be a copy-cat retaliation from among the non-Muslims of India, as a part of making Muslims share the pain of Jihadi and Islamic terror. This could be an increasing possibility if the Islamophile state policy of India continues. The reaction to Islamic terror is coming, in spite of my deep reluctance to accept the reality of such reaction which will tend not to distinguish between the barbaric theologians of Islam and the common brainwashed followers who in the case of India will be descended from the most unfortunate of pre-Muslim Indians, and one day it will sweep Islam away and deposit it in history’s garbage heap.”

The Mumbai Anti Terror Squad (ATS) has apparently suddenly found “evidence” of possible “extremist Hindu” groups in the Malegaon blasts. This is the same ATS whose “evidence” was severely questioned and doubted by the so-called “right-minded” secular “intellectuals” and “activists” when such “evidence” concerned “possible extremist Islamic” groups. The so-called secular forces fail to realize that by dismantling the credibility (in India, such issues are usually decided by trial by the media, who appear to be under strict compulsions to always portray the “Hindu” as “fascist” – for example in a documentary on the Kandhmal incident, I saw the commentator consistently describe tribals converting out of Christianity and describing their reasons for  “disillusionment” openly on the camera as evidence for “conversion into Hinduism out of terror”, or another commentator with great reluctance mumbling briefly about “the general atmosphere of fear” when she discovers on camera that the tribal family hiding out in the forests every nightfall away from their homes was actually “Hindu” as obviously this would be a “blot” in the overall representation of a “one-sided” Hindu “assault”) of the ATS when it “went against Muslims” it leaves the door open to raise similar doubts when the ATS “goes against Hindus”.

Those who would want to see a pattern, could perhaps easily find a pattern of “finding” evidence of implication of “Hindu extremism” in those parts of India, where either the BJP is dominant, or is likely to be a strong contender for state power in the upcoming general elections. There is now increasing symptoms of what is possibly a very cynical political tactic – try to equate “Islamic terror” with an invented “Hindu terror”, and thereby try an prevent “Hindu consolidation” as a political force. This is only the result of extreme panic on the part of portions of the political elite who have thrived on maintenance and strengthening of fissures in Indian society (some of which like caste by birth, are of dubious historical authenticity although declared by historians to be of endemic and ancient in nature) that the processes of “Hindu consolidation” are accelerating.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Future scenario for the Indian subcontinent – 2 : Bangladesh and transformation of Islam

Posted on October 22, 2008. Filed under: Army, Bangladesh, Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, religion, terrorism |

In my previous post I have written about the current political situation in Bangladesh, where I have expressed my serious concerns about the role of the army in consolidation of the Saudi theologian led radicalization of Bangladeshi Islam, and Islam’s agenda for the subcontinent as a whole. But in the introduction I have also promised visions of revolutionary and positive changes for the “immensely significant periphery”.  In this post we will look at the potential for “positive changes” for Bangladesh.

Historically, Bengal (the undivided province) was one of the richest areas of the subcontinent, with a thriving agrarian and “industrial” economy – with records and evidence for a flourishing trade link with Egypt, South East Asia, as well as the Roman empire, in commodities like sugarcane molasses, cotton and fine cotton textiles. The province was sufficiently rich to support independent Sultanates against the nominal control of the Delhi Sultanate, and whenever the central-Northern Indian empires weakened, this tendency of the region to secede politically revived. The same pattern emerged when the Mughal empire weakened, with the Subahdars, and the Nawabs emerging as semi-independent rulers of the region (the highly emotional claim in Bengali literature of the “last independent” Nawab is fallacious – technically and formally, the Nawabs were “vassals” of the Mughal emperors, and Siraj was not the last Nawab either, as he was “legally” followed by Mir-Jafar and Mir Qasim who were “formally” endorsed by the Mughal emperor). The revenue and the products of the province supported and provided a substantial portion of the income of Aurangzeb, towards the beleaguered dusk of his reign.

Bengal was also the first rich Indian plum in the East India Company’s pocket, whose looting of the province and its economy is far better recorded (and less suppressed than the records of destruction and denudation under Islamic rulers). The cumulative effect of Islamic looting for 600 years and British looting for 200 years  could be seen in the Bengal famine of 1943 – as official records indicate that by this period, this once rich, net exporter province had become a net importer of its staple food -rice, and any obstruction in the flow of such imports could land up Bengal in severe famine. The previous notorious large scale famine of 1769 can be tied up very well with extreme taxation at the hands of tax-farmers employed by the Company, but once the tax regime normalized the province regained its vitality to a certain extent, although it never regained its pre-Mughal or pre-Islamic prosperity.  The extent of Mughal and Sultanate period extraction and impoverishment of Bengal is well attested to by foreign travellers, [see my series on How Islam came to India…economic decline], but systematic British exploitation brought Bengal to its knees.

After Partition from India, Bangladesh was virtually treated as a semi-colony by west Pakistan, and the issue was partly a motivator for the independence movement. Even after independence and a tremendous growth in its productive capacity, population pressure has ensured that Bangladesh is still crucially dependent on imports of essential commodities from its neighbours, and mainly from it’s supposed nemesis-India. The main export earnings of Bangladesh comes from its historical main commodity of export – cotton textiles. Since the ethnic and cultural (in spite of religious divides) composition of Bangladesh is essentially similar to that of  neighbouring Indian province of West Bengal, we should expect cultural biases in favour of intellectual and technological achievement. Thus with proper modern and widely accessible scientific and technological education, Bangladesh can achieve the potential it originally enjoyed before the advent of Islam or the British.

While most of Indian populations have had greater success with modern education and technological elevation, the main obstruction in the progress of Bangladesh has been the grip of Islam over its society. On the one hand Islam prevented the majority of Bangladeshi populations from joining the secular and modernizing trends within British India, and led directly to their subservience to Pakistani exploitation without any benefits of modernization. On the other hand Islam of the Arabic version had never had it easy with the ingrained traditions, beliefs and culture of the Bangladeshis – and nowhere in the subcontinent are syncretic tendencies between Islam and Hinduism so vividly apparent as in Bangladesh. This second largest community of Islam remained quite consciously distant from the Wahabi versions of Islam and the Islamic theologians are forced to tolerate the indignities of hearing the appearance and peaceful coexistence of Hindu Krishna or Radha together with calls towards the God of Islam in the ever-popular songs of Hason Raja (descendant of converted Hindu elite).

With the realignment of Bangladesh elite under pressure from the army to the Islamic axis, this struggle between syncretic Bengali Islam and the revivalist, orthodox, and extremely retrogressive Sunni Wahabi Jihadi Islam has been gaining virulence since the formation of Bangladesh. The Islamic Jihadi theologians are quite worried that left to its own wiles, Bangladeshi Islam will forget the Arabic Islam’s agenda of Jihadi expansion and total liquidation of all non-Muslim cultures. This is the reason there has been increasing flows of funds to strengthen the Islamic propagation networks of the madrassahs and maqtabs or “charitable institutions” – the net effect of all such efforts being visible in the increasing militancy of overground and underground Islamic organizations in Bangladesh. In spite of all propaganda as to the early “peaceful Sufi” converters of Hindu Bengalis, the general pattern on the subcontinent is also found with Sufi or other modes of conversion – that their “huge” success almost always coincides with the presence of Islamic military forces in close proximity – and just like other Sufis, the more famous Sufis of Bengal show fondness for direct military action to win converts or wives.

If the Bangladesh army’s command core, and the elite whose networks give support to this core, can be prevented in this agenda of Wahabi Islamization of Bangladesh, the natural tendencies of this emotional and spirited community will move against Islamic retrogression – the socio-cultural aspects of Arabic Jihadi Islam being completely alien to this more diverse, productive, and flexible Bengali culture. Bangladesh can realize its full intellectual, economic and technological potential only if it is no longer burdened with Islam – the creed that most violently suppresses all “quests”,  “quests” that are the key towards progress. Modernization and technological upgrading of the productive forces would also bring in a fundamental change in the historical dynamic that at least partly fuelled Islamic conversions – the hunger for land in a highly productive agrarian economy, that forced Hindu elite to convert to preserve land ownership in the face of Turko-Afghan or Mughal aggression, or tempted the landless to convert and use the Jihadi sanctions to grab land from non-Muslims. In the process of this  national redirection, such a liberation from the authoritarianism of retrogressive Islam, will also transform or redefine “Islam” as represented by the Bangladeshi Muslims, and could be a way forward or an example for other Islamic communities not under direct and total control of Wahabi Sunni Islamic theologians.

Part 1

Part 3

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Future scenario for the Indian subcontinent – 1 : Bangladesh elections hopefully

Posted on October 19, 2008. Filed under: Bangladesh, Bengal, Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, religion, terrorism |

The future scenario for the subcontinent is intricately linked with what happens in what we can loosely call the “greater” Bharatavarsha – the original Sanskritic name in literature for not only the subcontinent as we understand today but also including adjoining areas currently in Afghanistan, Iran, and central Asia. India derives from Graeco-European corruption of possibly Persian rendering of Sindhu [the Satem/Hatem divide in Indo-European] and is used mostly in European colonial terminology.

I am starting this series with what I choose to call the “immensely significant periphery”,  the countries of Bangladesh, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan. I feel that the force of historical development is accelerating now in all the countries of the “immensely  significant periphery” and the future trends are dangerous, revolutionary on the one hand and hold also tremendous possibilities for positive change on the other hand and at the same time.

I will deal with the case of Bangladesh first, as it has been going through a peculiarly significant phase in its tumultous political history. I have already written about my analysis of the balance of forces in Bangladesh society as developed through its separation from India during the Partition, and its separation from Pakistan in 1971,  previously in this blog. I see no reasons to change my estimate, that forces of modernization and Bengali nationalism is slightly weaker than Islamic retrogression. The 1971 war against Pakistan was an anomaly in the sense, that apparently this weaker force managed to get rid of Pakistan’s grip on Bangladesh. However, we can see, that this tilting the balance in favour of the nationalists and modernizers was essentially due to the long covert and finally short overt support given by India. The two forces within Bangladesh fought under their respective leadership which however as in most Asian nationalist struggles, were mostly derived from the same social elite class networks. Factions within the elite fight it out for their personal ambitions and look for support among potential social groups whom they can manipulate to bolster their personal claims for state power. Thus, at the upper levels of this political contest, dividing lines of ideology tend to get blurred. As members of elite have the same social networks tugging on their sentiments, leanings and deep hidden inclinations.

It is critical to understand and identify this distinction between supporting social groups and their leadership to understand the evolution of subcontinental politics. In Bangladesh for example, the “nationalist” faction leadership originally evolved out of the Indian Muslim League (both radicalized under and radicalizing Jinnah), and contained leaders like Suhrawardy (a great hero of “nationalist” Bangladesh) whose role in the Calcutta riots has remained questionable. The core elite leadership around Mujibur Rehman, managed to retain elements like Khondokar Mushtaq, and representatives of the strong force of Islamic fundamentalism which in the case of Pakistan or Bangladesh is usually only expressed in ethnic cleansing of Hindus or Buddhists, or abduction, rape and forced marriages of non-Muslim women, and grabbing non-Muslim property. Mushtaq later turned out to be the figurehead of a coup by officers of the Bangladesh Army that assassinated Mujibur and his entire family then present, in classic Islamic style reminding us of the great traditions of Caliphate – wipe out even the toddlers, so that no male descendants can turn up later to become focus and claim for political power (another sign of the medieval Islamic thought patterns of the Bangladesh elite that dominated the Army).

Subsequent history of Bangladesh has shown clearly that its armed forces are dominated by an Islam leaning leadership. The Army managed to liquidate “left leaning” army officers and members, (like Col. Taher) but brought to power commanders with overt, distinct, and explicitly Islamic agenda – like Gens Jiaur Rahman and his successor H.M.Ershad. These army regimes protected, and revived the Islamic fundamentalists represented and regrouped under the Jamaat e Islami, an organization openly against the nationalist liberation movement and many of whose leadership are also implicated in genocide, organized rape, and torture of people they considered “pro-India”, Hindu, and anti-Pakistan or anti-Islamic. The military regimes saw to it that war-crimes accusations were never seriously taken up, promoted Islamic education and propaganda machinery primarily through the madrassahs, and began to steer the country back towards the Islamic axis of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan.

Popular discontent with the political and military regimes have erupted from time to time, which were most likely to have been prompted and utilized by elite factions desperate in their “prolonged” lack of access to state power. But the character of the social elite that thrived on Islam, in their early land-grabbing from Hindus under the Sultans or the Mughals (or conversion of Hindu elite to preserve their land), and Islam sanctioned Jihads or Ghazwas to loot women and property of non-muslims, never changed. This elite is obsessed with possession of land, (the only country in the subcontinent that maintained and justified looting of non-Muslim land and property under an “enemy property act” was Pakistan, and Bangladesh continued to enjoy this law long after its independence from Pakistan – a clue to the mindset of the Bangladeshi elite) and they need Islam to complement and maintain the semi-feudal rural social structures that ensure elite control (just as in Pakistan).

The latest feather in the cap of the Bangladesh army is what is popularly mentioned in the Bangladeshi media as “1/11”  (1/11/2007) in that the army engineered what can only be seen as a coup – with possibly active involvement and covert support from a host of Western powers – a formal replacement of the “caretaker” government with a group that quite ruthlessly moved towards dismantling the established political power centres. The military elite quietly and quickly eliminated the captured alleged leaders of extremist Islamic outfits, in total secrecy from the media – possibly to suppress any potentially damaging leaks of connections to the elite itself, and we cannot completely rule out the possibility of covert connections between military intelligence and the so-called Islamic extremist as part of a much broader pattern of connections and support of the military of Islamic countries provided to hardline Islamic militant organizations like that of the ISI in Pakistan.

The military continues to be extremely shy of appearing to be “hard” on the Jamaat, or any Islamic organization – the latest parody being the “inability” of the police to arrest the secretary general of the Jamaat, who freely roams the country and the capital giving speeches or meeting politicians from the Right side of the political spectrum.

The army had managed to chastize the existing politicians under corruption charges, and given the history and record of Islamic armies or secret services, it is safe to assume that substantial doses of torture and ruthless psychological manipulation was liberally applied to neutralize the leadership or make them sufficiently pliable – the favourite method of dealing with those whom the Bangladesh Army finds unpleasant was recently illustrated by the fate of an expat Bangladeshi barrister from London by Air Force personnel. What the army is aiming for is quite clear : it wants the ruling social-military  elite’s interests protected. Given the close alliance the Bangladesh army has developed over the years with the Islamic axis, this also means forwarding the agenda of Islamic absolute control over the subcontinent.

The army needs the two main factions within the ruling class to converge to this overall agenda, and for this it is prepared to sacrifice or coerce individuals from among its own class who have become more a liability than an advantage – as it eliminated Jia or sent Ershad to jail, and turned the “next generation of political inheritors” either “physical wrecks” like Jia’s sons or ensure Haseena’s son’s virtual exile in the USA.  Political legitimacy independent of Islamic control and dependent on charismatic tradition is an obstacle in the army’s overall plans, and it appears that the army is desperate to ensure subservience of the two elite factions into a national “consensus” framework, and in this a key role will be played by the hardcore Islamic faction led at least superficially by the Jamaat. The Jamaat’s involvement in crucial “dark episodes” of Bangladesh’s history ensures its continued influence within the elite including perhaps even the core driving the military – with mutual dependence and “sensitive knowledge” about each other. The Jamaat is the hidden trump card to “soften up” one faction and “threaten” the other, and will be used by the military to enhance its agenda for Bangladesh.

The promised elections in December will not be held unless concrete commitments are obtained from both elite factions to follow and toe the line given by the army, and this will involve the strengthening of the Jamaat’s role in Bangladeshi politics, as well as overall gradual manifestation of the agenda of Islam for the subcontinent. In its turn it means continued sheltering of Islamic militants for infiltration into India through the border state of West Bengal ruled at present by a sympathetic “Left”, continued protection and enhancement of the madrassah system of education, continued attacks on cultural items deemed “un-Islamic”, and providing a second base for the flourishing and operations of the Islamic theologians hell-bent on returning the world to the looting, raping, genocidic, ethnic cleansing ideology of 7th century Arabic Islam.

The media has had a field day in blaming the politicians for this situation. But in reality the politicians were never strong enough to override the military, and the nationalists who emotionally fought for a “Bengali culture” as distinct from the “Urdu-Pakistani” Islamic state were of necessity too humane to match the cunning, ruthlessness and pathologically Sadistic upbringing of the Islamic elite of Bangladesh. It was only a matter of time, before the Islamic leadership panicked sufficiently that if they delayed any further they might never recoup their agenda at all.

Part 2

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Karazai guarantees safe passage and return for Mullah Omar – a game foolishly started by NATO that the Taleban will win

Posted on October 3, 2008. Filed under: Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, religion, Taleban, terrorism, USA |

Hamid Karazai has offered safe passage and “safe return” to one of the founders of the Taleban – “the students” – Mullah Omar. This is perhaps based on the assumption that the Taleban leadership is still roaming freely and safely somewhere in the grey zone in North West Pakistan and North Eastern Afghanistan. Hamid Karazai would not have made this offer, unless NATO and primarily the USA approved of it. What are the tactical calculations behind such monumental blunders?

(1) NATO and the USA thinks that they have to somehow lure the Taleban leadership out of the “protection” of the Pakistani ISI establishment, into Afghanistan where they can have a greater freedom in dealing with the Taleban. This calculation is asinine – even if the Taleban agrees to this truce, they will leave their bases in Pakistan intact under the protection of the Pakistani army top brass and the ISI. None of the real military strength of the Taleban will be compromised. The Taleban and the Al Quaeda will hold on to this strategically crucial area between Afghanistan and Pakistan as the new base of expansion for their brand of Islam. One just has to look at Google earth to see how militarily important this particular region is – and together with Syria-Anatolia-Turkey, has been crucial in the overall Islamic expansionist plans since its inception in Arabia in the 7th century.

(2) An even more stupid idea would be thinking of luring Mullah Omar and his cronies in Taleban to come and share some form of political power in Afghanistan, and thus gradually soften them up a bit in standard politics. Mullah Omar’s brand of politics is that laid down in the Hadiths, the Shariah and the Hidaya – where politics is simply following the orders of “higher ups”, doing everything as dictated by the existing Islamic texts which claims to be word of a supra-human authority beyond any questioning or negotiations by mere human beings – and these higher ups typically are the Mullahs and the Imams – most of the time whose qualifications do not rise beyond a learning of the Arabic texts by heart, and the various compilations and addendums accumulated over the centuries facilitating and justifying the most horrible of inhuman measures to be applied on society to ensure control by these demented, perverted and self-serving megalomaniac theologians for the satisfaction of their biological needs. A modern democracy will be beyond their personal control, and will require rights to be given to people not allowed under Islam, and a modern technologically and knowledge-based sophisticated society can throw up severe questions on the fundamental premises of Islam itself. Mullah Omar’s entry into Afghan politics will mean beating up cloth-entombed women for imaginary infractions of Islamic virtue, or the public execution of rape victims for adultery, a rolling back of science education, and the imposition of Islam’s barbarity that is always trying to drag us back to the darkness of  the male founders of Islam and their essential greed for wealth, women, and the sadistic enjoyment of the pain of those under their power.

(3) With the Bush presidency at its fag end, those Islamophile elements within the USA or the European countries behind NATO, who are ever-willing to compromise with Islam are trying to reassert their position of tactical as well as strategic co-existence – the same strategy that has led to the flourishing  of Islamic Jihad over the better part of the twentieth century. Islam’s agents would convince western decision-makers that it is possible to tackle Islam through democracy and that all we need is “love” and “peace” – it is only a few disgruntled Muslims who are to blame, and not Islam as a whole. These disgruntled Muslims can be bought over with “power” and “luxury” just as the Saudi Royal house could be – most of whose young princes while being educated out in the “decadent West” had shown consistent and wide departures from Shariati “Islamic purity”. But the fundamental problem is the complete lack of understanding of Islam itself, and the convenient overlooking of the fact that the “buying” was only successful in a land and system on which Islam had no influence or ideological control, where the state was not a totalitarian Islamic state, and which therefore placed limitations on the satisfaction of the immense biological greed that drives the male-centric ideology of Islam. Where an Islamic state has already successfully established itself, no buying is successful.

Mullah-Omar or his representative’s return will only mean re-emergence of the Talebani-Al-Qaeda power base back in Afghanistan, and it will have then formally expanded from its current power base within the state of Pakistan, into Afghanistan again. Hamid Karazai and his “Mujahideen” were very effective against the Russians, but will be no match against the Taleban without US help – as the Taleban and Al Qaeda follow the Sadistic and cynical [and therefore highly effective against modern “civilized” military forces] military theory proposed in the core texts of the Islam and as reported to have been practised by the prophet of Islam himself. It is always, deception, deception and deception – probably very closely matched by the infamous Dantonist slogan of “de l’audace, encore de l’audace, et toujours de l’audace”.

Pakistan has been the refuge of the worst forms of Islamic fundamentalist theologians right from its inception. On the Indian subcontinent, this Muslim theologian class is mostly descended from imported “foreign-born” adventurers, who had little cultural or educational qualifications beyond that of the few injunctions of the Quran or the Hadiths. The “real” Muslim intellectuals, mostly descended of pre-Muslim Persian and Afghan-Hindu or Buddhist elite, visited or were “forced to visit” (like Al Beruni) but did their best (like Ibn Sina) to stay away from the Islamic invaders and marauders like the Turks, Mongols or earlier Arabsinto Persia, outer India (Afghanistan/Seistan) and the Indian subcontinent itself. It was the nearly criminal British colonial policy that revived this Islamic theologian class through the so-called colonial law reforms, which ignored and overturned the syncretic and modernizing trends that had evolved in interaction over centuries of successful defence by the Hindus of their traditions and more liberal polity, and simply asked the theologians to dust-off their copy of the Sharia or the Hidaya (just as they did damage the Hindu modernization process by naively supporting the clamour by certain Brhamins that their copy of the  Manu-Smriti/Samhita was the sole repository of “Hindu” law – a mistake obviously committed by AlBeruni too who reports textual claims of “caste” but shows no awareness of “sects” which were typically never recognized by Brahminical texts).

With the legitimization of the existence of Pakistan, the British and the Congress under Nehru, who appeared to swallow all pride and shame and had not a single strong word to utter against the Islam inspired Jihadi outrage perpetrated on the common woman, child and man of the Sikhs and the Hindus, in his eagerness to slip into the “Indian vice-regal throne” with British blessing, connived to protect and give shelter to Islamic Jihad. Muslims deciding to remain in India were not “encouraged” to leave India for Pakistan as the Hindus in Pakistan were repeatedly “encouraged” to do, as the very clear calculation of the British and hence of Nehru dependent on their tutelage was that if Pakistan failed to become the centre of Jihad and Islamic proselytization, the remnant Islamic populations within India as nurtured by Nehru could be used to further continuing British designs on the subcontinent given that the middle-east was coming increasingly under US control.  All this also tied in nicely with the then prevalent paranoia and the “neo-crusade” against Communist Russia, as some dimwit with typical European shortsightedness had  decided that Islam would be the best antidote to Marx, and the Islamic worldview should be protected and encouraged and its spread through the Mullahs and Imam’s ensured and encouraged.

This sort of Islamic insurgency, as in most insurgencies, utilizes the ruggedness of the terrain and terror to survive or flourish. If we look at historical commanders (like Alexander) who succeeded in subduing these regions, we can see that they were relentless in liquidating centres of resistance, typically after complete and absolute encirclement, by first cleaning up the plains surrounding the rugged lands and then cornering and trapping the insurgents and liquidating them giving no quarters . This whole area, including that of Pakistan can only be rid of the menace of Islam, by a similar military doctrine, that emphasizes tight encirclement and complete liquidation.

But the west will continue in its muddled understanding of Islam, trying to model it by their own religions and failing to understand its predatory and sadistic essence. The perhaps secret sadistic tendencies in some of the males, and masochistic tendencies in some of the females among the non-Muslims are expressed in their outward defence and sympathy for Islam, and provides support for the shrewd observation in the Quran and directly from Muhammad as reported in the Hadiths, that the “unbelievers” are themselves divided over attitude towards Islam, and that the Muslims should use this tactically to finish off one group after another using this division of opinion.

It is time to identify this fifth column in our societies, and try and expose their ideological dishonesty and opportunism or simple befuddlement. If non-Muslims do not consolidate and come to tactical and strategic understanding for ultimate erasure of Islam as an ideology and re-humanization of ex-Muslims as modern human beings, the fate of civilization is Islamic barbarity, injustice, superstition and darkness over all knowledge and quest.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Blasts again in India – this time in Muslim majority areas :change of tactics or something even more sinister?

Posted on September 29, 2008. Filed under: Hindu, India, Islam, Muslims, religion, terrorism |

Blasts again shook two cities of India late Monday night and took human lives – they appear to be similar in pattern to what probably accidentally happened in Delhi two days ago. What is highly significant is that blasts are now taking place in areas which are Muslim majority regions. The nature of explosives also point to a highly effective but cruder technology.  One of the cities to have the latest of these blasts is Malegaon – literally derived from a 18th century place-name meaning “village/town of gardens”. It was originally strategically located between Gujarat and Agra, the early Mughal military and administrative centre. A local jahagirdar, Naro Shankar Raje, started building a fort in the area in 1740, a project that took 20 years, and this construction work attracted a large number of Muslim workers and artisans from places like Surat and northern India. When the British captured the Malegaon fort in 1818, Muslims from Hyderabad migrated to Malegaon. After the failure of the 1857 “first war of independence” British brutality of reprisals forced many Muslims to migrate from around Delhi and other places of UP into Malegaon as a convenient community refuge. Famine in 1862 forced Muslim weavers in the Varanasi area to move to Malegaon. In my series on the effect of Muslim rule on the economic decline of India I have extensively written on how the producing classes were ruthlessly exploited by the imported “Ashrafi” (literally pure – this is the title given to themselves by the descendants of those whose records show no more qualifications than an infinite capacity for bloodlust, murder, rape and loot, and of course an extreme devotion to “Islam” which of course very conveniently always condones such acts as part of Jihad)  Muslim elite almost to the point of ruin.

The non-Muslim artisans of northern India at the time of the Muslim invasions were in severe straits. India had been famous as a producer, and exporter of cotton and fine cotton based material as well as in constructions and architecture. The early pre-Muslim towns and cities of Northern India therefore had a concentration of artisans specializing in weaving, dyeing or construction and masonry. By the very nature of their work, they were dependent on the urban environment and a concentration of necessary infrastructure not only for their particular skills but also for trade and markets. As the Hindu kingdoms fell before the Muslim invasions, the artisan’s survival (which had already been quite jeopardized because of the Muslim interference in Indian trade through Central Asia and the Indian Ocean sea-trade using piracy) was crucially dependent on holding on to their urban production infrastructure. This probably led to their acceptance of Islam as there are countless indications and claims by the Muslim chroniclers [like Ferishta and many many others] of the only choice given to the inhabitants of a city that fell to Muslim armies, as being either conversion to Islam  or death.

Thus we do find a concentration of Muslim weavers in Varanasi, the very ancient centre of Hindu cultural development, and the capital of a long surviving kingdom. These were in fact descendants of the Hindu artisan class converted under extraordinary circumstances.  If they are now concentrated in Malegaon, they should be treated as Hindu descendants who were converted under extreme pressure, when they were defenceless and without protection of their rulers, when their livelihoods and survival were at stake. There has been a similar blast in 2006 in Malegaon, exactly on similar dates of religious significance to  the Muslims – the Shab-e-barat, with the end of the Ramadan month in sight.

If Islamic terrorists did this, why would they want to have Muslims killed in the blast? Or is it that this was the safest place to carry out blasts, given that deep cover was necessary now when the security forces would be combing the whole country – and such cover could only be provided by a sufficiently large and entrenched Muslim community, and therefore the momentum of Jihad could only be maintained by continued explosions but now only within a smaller feasible radius around the base of the cover. It could also be punishment to the local Muslims at large, who might have shown reluctance or lack of sufficient enthusiasm to join the Jihadi network – there is strong disapproval in the Quran for those Muslims who show “reluctance” in joining militant Jihad or providing material support for such Jihad.

A second more sinister aspect could be a tactical calculation that, these attacks could be attributed to the so-called “Hindu Right wing”, and thus help in the current apparent campaign of the UPA to try to equate “Islamic terror” with “Hindu Right”. If true this would be a very subtle and cynical tactic on the part of the Jihadists, as it achieves many objectives – (1) this makes Jihadi terror appear more “palatable” (2) helps the Congress in its desperate fight to utilize minority support in the coming elections and attempt at delegitimizing the BJP  (3) makes the vacillating among the “secular” Hindus shaky in identifying with or leaning  towards the “Hindu Right”.

A third possibility could be a copy-cat retaliation from among the non-Muslims of India, as a part of making Muslims share the pain of Jihadi and Islamic terror. This could be an increasing possibility if the Islamophile state policy of India continues. The reaction to Islamic terror is coming, in spite of my deep reluctance to accept the reality of such reaction which will tend not to distinguish between the barbaric theologians of Islam and the common brainwashed followers who in the case of India will be descended from the most unfortunate of pre-Muslim Indians, and one day it will sweep Islam away and deposit it in history’s garbage heap.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Terrorist Blast kills child in India while Markey demands we all shake in fear of Pakistan and stop the N-deal – fools of the world unite to preserve Islam, you have nothing but your shame and the blood and tears of non-Muslims to lose

Posted on September 27, 2008. Filed under: Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Nuclear, Pakistan, Politics, religion, terrorism, USA |

Two young men on a bike were riding through a busy market in the Mehrauli area of South Delhi. A black polythene wrapped box dropped off from the bike. A young girl called after the bikers, to tell them that they had dropped a package, and picked it up  and gave a young boy to return it to the bikers. The bikers however sped away. And then the box exploded killing the boy on the spot, injuring three others seriously, and in all injuring 17 people. These were perhaps terrorists on the way to planting explosives to catch maximum population densities over the weekend markets leading up to the festive season in Northern India. These were perhaps terrorists simply carrying explosives in small packets from one storage to another. Several pointers indicate the stamp of Islam in this – this is a Muslim dominated area, with most traders and clients belonging to the Muslim community, with a “prestigious” mosque nearby, and the time of the day was not the point at which Hindus from outside the area would be likely to be in sufficient number, which makes it unlikely that the blast was pre-planned. Secondly, it would be typically Islamic ethics as in historical practice [and not as per lofty claims in the modern sanitized reconstructions of the history and practice of Islam] which considers preservation of the life of the Muslim soldier or raider to be much more important than show the courage or chivalry of saving the innocent child by accepting the package back. Especially as I have pointed out many times in my posts here before, the Quran as well as the Hadiths indicated that the life of children of non-Muslims was not really important for Muhammad – “they[children and women of “pagans”] are from them[“pagans”]” in the context of possibility of danger to the children and women of non-Muslims when Muslims attack at night.

While we have this in the capital of India, we have the eminent wisdom of Eddy Markey whose argument against the Indo-US civil N-deal  in the last desperate attempt by the Islamophile lobby in the US to block the deal in the House and the Congress, is simply that Pakistan “warned of arms race” if the N-deal with India went through. No wonder that Islam gains converts in the USA, if such asinine statesmanship is voted to represent the American people in the legislature.

India is strategically crucial in the defence of non-Muslims against the last scourge of 21st century human civilization – Islam. Christianity has not proved to be a strong antidote to Islam. The reason lies in the very origins and nature of both the aggressive proselytizing branches of the revealed traditions. The Jews had long decided in favour of a restriction of their faith to ethnicity and strictly by biological descent, for various possible reasons, perhaps not excluding the severe political and military repression they apparently went through in the final stages of their theological development [however, by the logic of the Thaparite School of Indian History applied to prove absence of historical Islamic terror in India, we have little record of “trauma” at the hands of the Romans from the side of the Jewish victims, and therefore the “trauma” theory should normally be suspect as per “professional” historian’s standards – copying the logic of Thaparites, we could say that Romans including the “Romanized” Josephus, after all always had boasted and prized military ruthlessness and therefore could have written in all the gory details of the liquidation of the Jews as propaganda for self-glorification]. Hindus have no formal mechanism for conversion, and for a non-hindu to become a “Hindu”, they also have to take the socio-biological route – either getting married to a Hindu or getting “adopted” by a Hindu. Hindus are not congregational, and do not insist on collective religious action under a centralized religious organization. Both Islam as well as the more radical offshoots of Christianity starting from the medieval period have been on the other hand distinctly aggressively proselytizing – this is the characteristic of minority ideologies without strong social roots desperately struggling to increase following and power in competition with established ideologies. Both Islam and Christianity could significantly expand only through military imposition of the faith – as in their original forms they represented a simplification of the world view that was far less complex and sophisticated compared to some of the cultures they were in conflict with. It is usually not remembered that Christianity really expanded in Europe only two significant phases – the first under the aggressive military imposition under Constantine and second under the Frank Charles [Charlemagne]  who reputedly chopped off thousands of Saxon chief’s heads to establish acceptance of Christianity but himself showed just like Constantine many persistent departures from the Ten Commandments.

As I have pointed out earlier, such minority ideologies would be attractive to (1) those who have not been able to keep up with increasing technological and therefore socio-economic superstructural complexities of a given civilization (2) those who are insecure and feel bewildered faced before the increasing number of multiple and myriad choices and decisions (3) low sense of self and self-esteem who need the esteem of a group to compensate (4) to men if these ideologies promise the sexual and social subjugation of women especially if such men feel threatened by the independence and control of women over their own sexuality and are only reassured if the entire activity of women are restricted to reproductive and physically submissive sexual roles only (5) to the economically and politically disadvantaged if such ideologies promise to legitimize the transfer ownership of wealth, power and women from the current elite irrespective of qualifications of the “neo-converts”.  This is indeed the attraction of Islam, and it remains true for those Americans who satisfy the criteria mentioned above.

Europe is actively allowing the main organizational units for aggressive Islamic proselytization, the mosques where theologians inevitably having training and connections to the Sunni Wahabi orthodoxy safely operating out of Saudi Arabia and definitely benefiting from the price of oil, carry out the real agenda of Islam – the brainwashing and preparing of future adult Muslims to undertake violent military Jihad to capture the lands, wealth and women of non-Muslims.

Islam actively and openly promotes the destruction of or taking over of as well as prevention of the construction of new cultural centres of non-Muslims, including shrines, temples, or holy sites, and therefore it has no ethical right to protection of its own cultural centres. Attitude towards any ideology should be based on reciprocal basis – and new constructions of mosques or Islamic cultural or religious  centres should not be allowed unless the Islamic countries allow the construction of non-Muslim centres. Further, since Muslims have and continue to destroy non-Muslim cultural icons or religious places wherever they have military and political authority or so called “land of Islam”, no protection should any longer be  given to Muslim centres in “non-Muslim lands”. Every terrorist activity by Muslims should actually be made to be responded with an actual reduction in number of practising Muslims, not the Islamic method of reducing non-Muslims by chopping off the head of anyone who refuses to follow Islam, but by either disenfranchising, expelling, or exchanging populations, if the Muslims refuse to give up their religion publicly. It is Islam as a practising religion which must go – it will not be the first time a religion has bitten the dust because people leave it in droves.

Both in India and the USA, the non-Muslims should now decide on and identify the forces in their respective countries that are Islamophiles – and are trying to bring in Islam for various personal, political and economic tie-ups with the Islamic establishment as well as a mistaken perspective of the strategic importance of Islamic oil and Islamic markets. Pressure should be mounted for more self-sustainable energy sourcing within their own national boundaries, and develop internal markets rather than depend on the easier route of enjoying excessive profits from trade with the Islamic markets. Economic activity of non-Muslim countries should try to bypass the Islamic countries as much as possible.  The thorny issue of conversion into Christianity in India can be tackled easily, if the Christian and Hindu groups come to an understanding that they will not proselytize on each other’s existing following, but coordiante or concentrate on converting Muslims. Also in India, it is important to delink religion or ethnicity from social opportunities and benefits but which will be hotly resisted by the Congress as its management of political power at the centre is crucially dependent on the maintenance of these social fractures.

The world will never know peace from the threat of Islam, unless the last practising Muslim is no more, for as long as the practise of Islam remains, its Jihadist violent greed for the Sadistic enjoyment of the pain of the non-muslim under its power, its continuing agenda of promoting war on non-Muslims [just type in Google “ghazwa-e-Hind”  -literally translating as the Arabic tribal style raid to loot wealth, and women of another tribe to be launched on/in India] , and its fundamental driving force of greed for the lands, wealth and women of non-Muslims, will plague the human civilization – as it crystallizes, sanitizes and gives suprahuman “divine” justification for all the most biologically powerful and dark motivations  in humans.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Germany edges close to India – countries where anti-Islam means pro-Nazi

Posted on September 23, 2008. Filed under: Communist, History, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Politics, religion, terrorism |

A proposed demonstration against the proposed construction of a mosque at Cologne, Germany, which was supposed to be raising “stop Islam” slogan, was banned – ostensibly in the face of “communist” or other “leftist” counter demonstration. I wonder why Germans do not burst out laughing at the sheer absurdity and farce of it all! (I am holding back my temptation to make a very politically incorrect joke about why we should not expect them to laugh at all about this). Germany’s weakness for Islam seriously started with the realpolitik of a Kaiser who played a pivotal role in the initiation of the trans-Syrian “holy rail” to Mecca in the 1890’s, that ultimately connected all the way through to Baghdad. This is the rail line which probably significantly fuelled the industrial demand and market for steel in Germany, as the whole railway, with all its supporting infrastructure was manufactured in Germany and shipped to the building site. This is also the rail line which served as the iconic backdrop to the fictionalized hagiographies of “Lawrence of Arabia”. Germany’s relationship deepened with the Ottoman Turkish empire, perhaps not only as a strategic and tactical countermove to the British Empire’s hogging of all of the world’s colonial “goodies” and British Imperialism’s persistent refusal to “share” markets – a position it now has strongly reversed and demands all the world’s markets to open up after losing imperial dominance. German scholars have left us some important translations of works from the middle east, which perhaps in the hands of the likes of some of the British “scholars” who plastered up “obscene” ancient figurines on Indian temples, would have been destroyed forever. But Germany’s fascination with the “Orient” and especially Islam took a much more serious turn during the march of Nazism – the anglicized shortened form of the original in Deutsche meaning “National Socialism”.

We have the following gems about how intensely antagonistic the Nazis and Muslim leadership of the Middle East were to each other: the first is a message from  Himmler to The Grand Mufti Haj Amin al Husseini, [“GrossMufti” in Deutsche]  dated November 2, 1943,

[message from Heinrich Himmler to an anti-Balfour Declaration meeting]:

To the Grand Mufti:
The National Socialist Movement of Greater Germany has, since its beginning,  inscribed upon its flag the fight against world Jewry. It has, therefore, followed with particular sympathy the struggle of the freedom-loving Arabians, especially in Palestine, against the Jewish interlopers. It is in the recognition of this enemy and of the common struggle against him that lies the firm foundation of the natural alliance that exists between National-Socialist-Greater Germany and the freedom-loving Moslems of the whole world. In this spirit I am sending you on the anniversary of the infamous Balfour Declaration my hearty greetings and wishes for the successful pursuit of your struggle until the certain final victory.
Signed: Reichsfuehrer-S.S. Heinrich Himmler

Better still is the following recording by Haj Amin al Husseini, the Grand Mufti [“GrossMufti”] in Berlin, November 21, 1941, in his own handwriting about his meeting with Hitler in his diary:

The words of the Fuehrer on the 6th of Zul Qaada 1360 of the Hejira (which falls on the 21st of November 1941) Berlin, Friday, from 4:30 P.M. till a few minutes after 6. The objectives of my fight are clear. Primarily, I am fighting the Jews without respite, and this fight includes the fight against the so-called Jewish National Home in Palestine because the Jews want to establish there a central government for their own pernicious purposes, and to undertake a devastating and ruinous expansion at the expense of the governments of the world and of other peoples.
It is clear that the Jews have accomplished nothing in Palestine and their claims are lies. All the accomplishments in Palestine are due to the Arabs and not to the Jews. I am resolved to find a solution for the Jewish problem, progressing step by step without cessation. With regard to this I am making the necessary and right appeal, first to all the European countries and then to countries outside of Europe.
It is true that our common enemies are Great Britain and the Soviets whose principles are opposed to ours. But behind them stands hidden Jewry which drives them both. Jewry has but one aim in both these countries. We are now in the midst of a life and death struggle against both these nations. This fight will not only determine the outcome of the struggle between National Socialism and Jewry, but the whole conduct of this successful war will be of great and positive help to the Arabs who are engaged in the same struggle.
This is not only an abstract assurance. A mere promise would be of no value whatsoever. But assurance which rests upon a conquering force is the only one which has real value. In the Iraqi campaign, for instance, the sympathy of the whole German people was for Iraq. It was our aim to help Iraq, but circumstances prevented us from furnishing actual help. The German people saw in them (in the Iraqis-Ed.) comrades in suffering because the German people too have suffered as they have. All the help we gave Iraq was not sufficient to save Iraq from the British forces. For this reason it is necessary to underscore one thing: in this struggle which will decide the fate of the Arabs I can now speak as a man dedicated to an ideal and as a military leader and a soldier. Everyone united in this great struggle who helps to bring about its successful outcome, serves the common cause and thus serves the Arab cause. Any other view means weakening the military situation and thus offers no help to the Arab cause. Therefore it is necessary for us to decide the steps which can help us against world Jewry, against Communist Russia and England, and which among them can be most useful. Only if we win the war will the hour of deliverance also be the hour of fulfillment of Arab aspirations.
The situation is as follows: We are conducting the great struggle to open the way to the North of the Caucasus. The difficulties involved are more than transportation because of the demolished railways and roads and because of winter weather. And if I venture in these circumstances to issue a declaration with regard to Syria, then the pro-de Gaulle elements in France will be strengthened and this might cause a revolt in France. These men (the French) will be convinced then that joining Britain is more advantageous and the detachment of Syria is a pattern to be followed in the remainder of the French Empire. This will strengthen de Gaulle’s stand in the colonies. If the declaration is issued now, difficulties will arise in Western Europe which will cause the diversion of some (German-Ed.) forces for defensive purposes, thus preventing us from sending all our forces to the East.
Now I am going to tell you something I would like you to keep secret. First, I will keep up my fight until the complete destruction of the Judeo-Bolshevik rule has been accomplished.
Second, during the struggle (and we don’t know when victory will come, but probably not in the far future) we will reach the Southern Caucasus.
Third, then I would like to issue a declaration; for then the hour of the liberation of the Arabs will have arrived. Germany has no ambitions in this area but cares only to annihilate the power which produces the Jews.
Fourth, I am happy that you have escaped and that you are now with the Axis powers. The hour will strike when you will be the lord of the supreme word and not only the conveyer of our declarations. You will be the man to direct the Arab force and at that moment I cannot imagine what would happen to the Western peoples.
Fifth, I think that with this Arab advance begins the dismemberment of the British world. The road from Rostov to Iran and Iraq is shorter than the distance from Berlin to Rostov. We hope next year to smash this barrier. It is better then and not now that a declaration should be issued as (now) we cannot help in anything.   I understand the Arab desire for this (declaration-Ed.), but His Excellency the Mufti must understand that only five years after I became President of the German government and Fuehrer of the German people, was I able to get such a declaration (the Austrian Union-Ed.), and this because military forces prevented me from issuing such a declaration. But when the German Panzer tanks and the German air squadrons reach the Southern Caucasus, then will be the time to issue the declaration.
He said (in reply to a request that a secret declaration or a treaty be made) that a declaration known to a number of persons cannot remain secret but will become public. I (Hitler) have made very few declarations in my life, unlike the British who have made many declarations. If I issue a declaration, I will uphold it. Once I promised the Finnish Marshal that I would help his country if the enemy attacks again. This word of mine made a stronger impression than any written declaration. Recapitulating, I want to state the following to you: When we shall have arrived in the Southern Caucasus, then the time of the liberation of the Arabs will have arrived. And you can rely on my word.
We were troubled about you. I know your life history. I followed with interest your long and dangerous journey. I was very concerned about you. I am happy that you are with us now and that you are now in a position to add your strength to the common cause.” [Source: The Arab Higher Committee. Its Origins, Personnel and Purposes. Documentary Record Submitted to the United Nations, May 1947, by the Nation Associates].

Huseini, was after all, being consistent with the core teachings of Islam in his fanatical anti-semitism. The Quran does not give direct incitement to massacre of Jews, but gives hints and references consistent with the more gory details supported by all the principal Hadiths. There was only one significant difference between the teachings of the Quran and the Hadiths on one side and the Nazi philosophy on the other side, the Prophet of Islam categorized the Jews as “people of the book” and hence at least in the Quran, they should be allowed to survive only on condition they pay a “survival tax” or Jiziya or they convert to Islam, whereas in the Hadiths of course, their males are declared to be fit to be “killed”, their lands to be “appropriated by Muslims”, and especially their women to be taken over by the Muslims. Although there are some allegations of sexual contact between the Jewish captive women and Nazi soldiers or officers, formally there were severe laws against such practices, and there are known instances of convictions and sentences carried out.

At the time of his death, Hitler’s official place of residence was in Munich, which led to all rights to Mein Kampf, coming under the ownership of the state of Bavaria. The government of Bavaria, in agreement with the federal government of Germany, does not allow any copying or printing of the book in Germany [and opposed it also in Sweden without success]. Owning and buying the book is legal. Trading in old copies is legal as well unless it is done in such a fashion as to “promote hatred or war”, which is, under anti-revisionist laws, generally illegal.   In Austria, the possession and/or trading of Mein Kampf is illegal. In France, the selling of the book is forbidden unless the transaction concerns a historical version including commentaries from specialists and states the law allowing its special historical edition.  In the Netherlands, selling the book, even an old copy, can be illegal as “promoting hatred”, but possession and lending is not. The Dutch states treats this as claims of copyright infringement (as acclaimed owner of the translation) and does not allow any publishing. In 1997, the government explained to the parliament that selling a “scientifically annotated version” might escape prosecution, and the debate was repeated in 2007 with similar conclusions. In Indonesia the book is available in Indonesian language, in Lebanon, an Arabic edition of Mein Kampf was published in 1995 by Bisan/Beisan.  In Turkey, the book is freely available and a Turkish edition was reported to be a bestseller in Turkey in March 2005, and claimed to have sold over 100,000 copies in two months. Note that the European nations which had significant collaborators with the Nazi ideology during the war, have turned the strongest protectors of the European populations who are considered to be completely immature, from the possible insidious infection in contact with the words of a “demented fanatic” by trying to ban these words, whereas these very same words are not deemed to be “antagonistic” or “revisionist” in the Muslim countries.

If the European populations are so intellectually immature that they cannot handle “Mein Kampf”, how can they handle the Quran, which says in the context of the first successful looting and massacre mission by the Prophet of Islam after six earlier unsuccessful ones on his relatives from Mecca engaged in their traditional trading journeys [and after having been allowed to leave and “migrate” from Mecca with full life, limb and liberty, and with indications of having abused profusely the beliefs, sentiments, as well as the hospitality of the Meccan Qureysh with his associates sometimes having also shed blood of those who had refused to submit to their ideology] – the “famous” Nakhla raid:

022.039 To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged;- and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid;-
022.040 (They are) those who have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right,- (for no cause) except that they say, “our Lord is Allah”. Did not Allah check one set of people by means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of Allah is commemorated in abundant measure. Allah will certainly aid those who aid his (cause);- for verily Allah is full of Strength, Exalted in Might, (able to enforce His Will).
022.041 (They are) those who, if We establish them in the land, establish regular prayer and give regular charity, enjoin the right and forbid wrong: with Allah rests the end (and decision) of (all) affairs.
022.042 If they treat thy (mission) as false, so did the peoples before them (with their Prophets),- the People of Noah, and ‘Ad and Thamud;

002.190 Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.
002.191 And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.
002.192 But if they cease, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
002.193 And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression.
002.194 The prohibited month for the prohibited month,- and so for all things prohibited,- there is the law of equality. If then any one transgresses the prohibition against you, Transgress ye likewise against him. But fear Allah, and know that Allah is with those who restrain themselves.

Those who were reluctant to join in the war of plunder were reproved. Allah’s revelation on this came down in verses 47:20-21. These verses granted paradise to those who fight (or terrorize and plunder) for Islam i.e., Jihad and are killed.

047.020 Those who believe say, “Why is not a sura sent down (for us)?” But when a sura of basic or categorical meaning is revealed, and fighting is mentioned therein, thou wilt see those in whose hearts is a disease looking at thee with a look of one in swoon at the approach of death. But more fitting for them-
047.021 Were it to obey and say what is just, and when a matter is resolved on, it were best for them if they were true to Allah.

Allah then asked the Jihadis to “strike off the heads of the unbelievers; to make a great slaughter and bind them fast in bonds” in verse 47:3-4

047.003 This because those who reject Allah follow vanities, while those who believe follow the Truth from their Lord: Thus does Allah set forth for men their lessons by similitudes.
047.004 Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been Allah’s Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost.

Furthermore, the true believers were expected not only to fight but also to contribute materially towards the cost of war (4:66-67, 9:88, 9:111), to kill and be killed. Those who did this were promised a higher rank in paradise (4:74, 4:95). The believers were asked to prepare with whatever force in their ability, troops, horses, etc. to strike terror into the hearts of the unbelievers.

004.066 If We had ordered them to sacrifice their lives or to leave their homes, very few of them would have done it: But if they had done what they were (actually) told, it would have been best for them, and would have gone farthest to strengthen their (faith);
004.067 And We should then have given them from our presence a great reward;

009.088 But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper.
009.111 Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.

004.074 Let those fight in the cause of Allah Who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah,- whether he is slain or gets victory – Soon shall We give him a reward of great (value).
004.095 Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-

009.073 O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell,- an evil refuge indeed.
009.123 O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him.
008.060 Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly.

This does not seem to promote “hatred” or “war”? Or the Hadithic description of ethnic cleansing of the Jews which have an uncanny resemblance to what happened to the Jewish areas or ghettos under the Nazis? -for example the genocide of Bani Qurayzah Jews by Muhammad-February-March, 627 : The Muslim soldiers marched toward the fortress of Bani Qurayza that lay two or three miles to the south-east of Medina. Muhammad rode an ass, while an army of three thousand Muslims, with thirty-six horses followed him. After twenty-five days of siege, the Jews grew desperate, exhausted and terrified at their future. They were on the verge of starvation.

Tabari writes: ‘When they saw him (i.e Abu Lubabah), [ A Muslim from a friendly tribe whom the Jews hoped to intercede on behalf of them] the men rose to meet him, and the women and children rushed to grab hold of him, weeping before him, so that he felt pity for them. They said to him, “Abu Lubabah, do you think that we should submit to Muhammad’s judgment”? “Yes”, he said, but he pointed with his hand to his throat, that it would be slaughter.”’ Haykal writes that the Jews thought that the former allies from al-Aws tribe would give them protection if they migrated to Adhriat in al Sham, and that Muhammad would allow them. Muhammad rejected their proposal and insisted on their waiting for his judgment.

In the morning, B. Qurayzah Jews surrendered. The male Jews were chained and kept in the fortress till a decision was made about their fate. The B. Aws were friendly with the B. Qurayzah Jews and pleaded with Muhammad for mercy and a fair judgment for their Jewish allies. On this, Muhammad proposed that the judgment be passed by Sa’d b Muadh who was the B. Aws leader, trying to recuperate from his eventually fatal wound in a tent at Medina. B. Aws and the B. Qurayzah both agreed on this proposal of Muhammad, hoping to have some mercy from Sa’d b. Muadh. Muhammad dispatched some B. Aws men to bring Sa’d to deliver his judgment. Many B. Aws people requested Sa’d to deal with the Jews with leniency and mercy. Sa’d then asked his people if they would accept whatever judgment he pronounced. The assemblage agreed.

On being asked by Muhammad Sa’d b. Muadh replied, “I pass judgment on them that the men shall be killed, the property divided, and the children and women made captives.” Muhammad praised Sa’d for proclaiming a solemn judgment of the Almighty and termed Sa’d’s judgment as fair and said, “You have passed judgment on them with the judgment of God and the judgment of His Messenger.” Sahih Bukhari records:

Volume 5, Book 58, Number 148: Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: Some people (i.e. the Jews of Bani bin Quraiza) agreed to accept the verdict of Sad bin Muadh so the Prophet sent for him (i.e. Sad bin Muadh). He came riding a donkey, and when he approached the Mosque, the Prophet said, “Get up for the best amongst you.” or said, “Get up for your chief.” Then the Prophet said, “O Sad! These people have agreed to accept your verdict.” Sad said, “I judge that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as captives.” The Prophet said, “You have given a judgment similar to Allah’s Judgment (or the King’s judgment).”

[Original Sahih Al-Bukhari] The women and children were then separated from their husbands, others were put under the care of Abdullah, a renegade Jew. All the goods and possessions of the B. Qurayzah Jews, their camels and flocks were all brought as spoils of war. The B. Qurayzah Jewish men were handcuffed behind their backs with their women and children having already been separated. They were placed under the charge of Mohammad ibn Maslama, the assassin of Ka’b ibn Ashraf, to be sent to Medina before their execution in batches. A long trench was dug in the marketplace of Medina. The Prisoners were then taken there, made to kneel down and beheaded in a group of five or six. Muhammad was personally present to witness this slaughter. Ali and Zubayr cut off the heads of the Jews in front of Muhammad. Sourcing from Al-Waqidi, Tabari writes:

“…the messenger of God commanded that furrows should be dug in the ground for the B. Qurayzah. Then he sat down, and Ali and al-Zubayr began cutting off their heads in his presence.” Ibn Ishaq writes that they were taken in groups to Muhammad for beheading in front of him.

Tabari further writes: ‘The messenger of God went out into the marketplace of Medina and had trenches dug in it; then he sent for them and had them beheaded in those trenches. They were brought out to him in groups. Among them were the enemy of God, Huyayy b. Akhtab, and Ka’b b. Asad, the head of the tribe. They numbered 600 or 700-the largest estimate says they were between 800 and 900. As they were being taken in groups to the Messenger of God, they said to Ka’b b. Asad, “Ka’b, what do you understand. Do you not see that the summoner does not discharge [anyone] and that those of you who are taken away do not come back? By God, it is death!” the affair continued until the Messenger of God had finished with them.’

Sir William Muir describes: ‘The men were penned up in a closed yard, while graves or trenches were being dug for them in the chief marketplace of the city. When these were ready, Mahomet, himself a spectator of the tragedy, gave command that the captives should be brought forth in companies of five or six at a time. Each company was made to sit down by the brink of the trench destined for its grave, and there beheaded. Party by party they were thus led out, and butchered in cold blood, till the whole were slain. One woman alone was put to death; it was she who threw the millstone from the battlements.’

Huyayy b. Akhtab, the banished B. Nadir Jewish leader was taken to the execution field. Tabari describes his execution:

‘Huyayy b. Akhtab, the enemy of God, was brought. He was wearing a rose-colored suit of clothes that had torn all over with fingertip-sized holes so that it would not be taken as booty from him, and his hands were bound to his neck with a rope. When he looked at the Messenger of God, he said, “By God, I do not blame myself for being hostile to you, but whomever God forsakes is forsaken.” Then he turned to the people and said: “People, there is no injury in God’s command. It is the book of God, His decree, and a battlefield of great slaughter ordained against the Children of Israel. Then he sat down and was beheaded.’

Only one woman of the B. Qurayzah, the wife of Hasan al-Qurazi and a friend of Aisha, was killed. Aisha’s narrated her story of beheading thus:‘Only one of their women was killed. By God, she was by me, talking with me and laughing unrestraintedly while the Messenger of God was killing their men in the marketplace, when suddenly a mysterious voice called out her name, saying, “Where is so and so?” She said, “I shall be killed.” “Why?” I asked. She said, A misdeed that I committed.” She was taken away and beheaded. (Aisha used to say: I shall never forget my wonder at her cheerfulness and much laughter, even when she knew that she would be killed.).’

The Sahi (authentic) Hadith of Abu Dawud: Book 14, Number 2665: Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin: No woman of Banu Qurayzah was killed except one. She was with me, talking and laughing on her back and belly (extremely), while the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) was killing her people with the swords. Suddenly a man called her name: Where is so-and-so? She said: I I asked: What is the matter with you? She said: I did a new act. She said: The man took her and beheaded her. She said: I will not forget that she was laughing extremely although she knew that she would be killed.”

Ther very old Jewish man Az-Zabir had saved the life of a Muslim convert, Thabit b. Qays in the Bu’ath war. When Az-Zabir was about to be beheaded Thabit requested Muhammad to save the life of Az-Zabir and his family as a return to his favor. Muhammad agreed. Az-Zabir then asked Thabit b. Qays about the Jewish leaders such as Ka’b b. Asad and Huayy b. Akhtab, as he preferred to die rather than to live without them. Az-Zabir replied, “Then I ask you for the sake of the favor I once did for you to join me to my kinsmen, for by God there is no good in living after them. I will not wait patiently for God, not even [the time needed] to take the bucket of a watering trough, until I meet my dear ones.” So Thabit brought him forward, and he was beheaded. Abu Bakr commented “He will meet them, by God, in the Gehenna, there to dwell forever and forever.”

Muhammad commanded that all those Jewish men with pubic hair were to be executed. Hadith from Sunaan Abu Dawud:

Book 38, Number 4390: Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi: I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.
After executing all the adult male Jews, Muhammad sent Sa’d b. Zayd al-Ansari with some captive women and children from the B. Qurayzah to Najd to sell them in the slave market. While we do not have an accurate price of a female slave during that time, Ibn Sa’d writes that Khadijah, Muhammad’s first wife, bought her slave, Zayd b. Haritha, (who would later become Muuhammad’s adopted son), for four hundred Dirhams at the slave market of Ukaz, Mecca. [the price of young slave varied from five hundred dirhams to eight hundred dirhams – Sunaan Abu Dawud hadith numbers, 3946 and 4563]. Among the captive was a young woman called Rayhanh bt. ‘Amr b. Khunafah and took her as his concubine. It is said that when Muhammad offered to make her his wife by embracing Islam, she declined. She preferred to remain a concubine to becoming a Muslim and said, “Messenger of God, rather leave me in your possession [as a concubine], for it is easier for me and for you.”

I have not heard of the Quran or the Hadiths being banned in Europe. As for the communists or the leftists, they need simply to look for a functioning leftist, socialist or communist party working in any of the core Islamic countries in Asia – other than a few intellectuals tolerated here and there – with two notable exceptions, one without a country among the Kurds, and the other in Turkey where the nationalist modernization started by the army under Ataturk is still battling it out with headscarfs and explosions. The communists can also ponder the fate of the communists at the hands of Muslims in Afghanistan, or the “Marxist” army commander in Iraq who took over from the boy-king and was then replaced by the mentor of Saddam. Forgetting history is a serious lapse, but selective percolation of politically motivated reconstructions or “scientifically annotated” histories in favour of a particular group or ideology and against others is a “criminal” offence against freedom of thought and speech – for ultimately it always leads to the most pernicious of ideologies to take over our lives by not revealing to us the real agenda behind the sugar-coated pills provided by the “ideologues”.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Islam’s Targets in Asia – Israel and India : who is supplying the military hardware?

Posted on September 21, 2008. Filed under: Hindu, India, Islam, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, religion, terrorism |

With the Marriott Hotel in the capital of Pakistan, being the latest of targets of a blast from an estimated 1000 Kg of explosives, the old question becomes obvious again – who is supplying the military hardware and the logistics for such attacks? It is not only about who is supplying, but also the question of who has the capability of supplying such necessary ingredients of terror? Both in Isarel and India, Islam’s terrorists are showing up with the latest military technology and knowledge of explosives and using such hardware which are only typically available only in the armies of modern nation states. Weapons in modern warfare come from sophisticated defence establishments and are a result of long and intensive research, and are necessarily products of highly sophisticated and centralized industrial networks with the end product almost inevitably coming from the top of the industrial pyramid. Thus, increasingly it is becoming impossible for the non-military common population to mount any successful rebellion against a national government – as even veterans or those who have been trained  in the military as reserve cannot do much without access to the hardware, and continued supply from these industries for military consumables and replacements.  Thus it is crucial to note that in Islam’s continued aggression on Israel and India, two things have to coincide to sustain this onslaught – (1) the preservation and stoking the fire of the hardcore Sunni Wahabi or closely allied in agenda (but not necessarily allied in practical terms) Shia sectarian aggressive proselytization and an obsessive intent on capturing the lands and the non-muslim people of Israel and India (2) the continuous provision of finance and military hardware for the various levels of Islamic terror- ranging from  paramilitary/semi-armies like that of the Hezbollah, Pakistani Taleban, or regrouping Al Qaeda in Afghanistan all the way through to the individual suicide bomber in Iraq, or the executors of blasts in Pakistan and India.

In India, the situation is rather more complex than in Israel. It appears to me that now there are indications of a disturbing possible collaboration between Islamic forces and other ideologies. The other ideologies involved in this collaboration may not be fully aware of their own place in the overall Islamic strategy for the Indian populations. The Islamic strategy appears to be heading now towards utilizing the existing divisions between the various ethnicities and non-muslim religions or ideologies. There is a strong possibility that various so-called Maoist outfits, ethnic separatists, as well as some proselytizing religious groups could be playing into the hands of the Islamic Jihadi leadership. The Quran, and the Hadiths repeatedly stress, as well as provide examples of how Islam utilizes the conflicts and misunderstandings between various groups of “unbelievers”, to weaken all unbelievers until they are no longer militarily strong to resist Islam when it suddenly reveals its actual Jihadi militant agenda. A part in this could also be played by the clever use of political anxieties within anti-“Hindu” political parties that a cultural consolidation of the “Hindu” is taking place within India, and showing signs of a political consciousness as well. This could be behind the recent string of attacks on churches in BJP led states or states where BJP has come to a sharing of state power, as, if we apply the principle of who benefits from a “crime”, we can see that everyone gains apart from the BJP – the Congress gains by posing as the protector of minorities and then can curry for votes from these sections, the proselytizing groups gain by posing as the “leader” among all the different sects of this religion and polarize religious sectarian sentiments in favour of their particular sectarian group [especially if their prestige and funding is dependent on the number of “conversions” of the “heathen” they have benn able to make], and “Maoists” gain money or arms in return for supporting actions against the majority groups in favour of a particular religious sect. In all this Islamic Jihadis gain the most, by engaging the majority community in basically what amounts to “death by a thousand cuts”, and could be behind supporting all these groups with money and arms.

For India, two things are working in its favour – its military is still relatively free from the presence of Islamic influence, and that a cultural and political consolidation of the “Hindu” is taking place. The political forces  that have been infiltrated by Islam are an “aging” generation, and an “aging” ideology which tries to relive an earlier era following the various compromises and sheer greed for personal power that accompanied the formal but not actual removal of India from the British empire – and is still following the realpolitik of the Cold War, not realizing that even the West has had to reverse its earlier overwhelming Islamophilia in favour of a more practical policy as consistent with their dependence on “Islamic” oil and markets.

It is important for non-Hindu non-Muslim proselytizing groups to realize, that any attempt to replace the culture of the Hindus from among its populations through the after-effects of “conversions” will only make these converts more vulnerable to the onslaught of Islam – as monotheism of the revealed traditions represents a simplification of the complexity and diversity of the world view of the classical Hindu philosophies, and it becomes infinitely easier to convert from one form of the revealed traditions to another – as is seen by the increasing conversion rates of Christians into Islam in Europe and America. Leaving the Hindus as they are, is the best possible antidote to Islam on the Indian subcontinent at present – even though the “Hindus” of India may appear to be rich picking in terms of showing “scalp counts” at religious conventions to compete for funding. Money can be raised in various other ways, but fall of India to Islam will be accelerated if  Christianity spreads in India, which will ultimately unhinge the entire US strategy in Asia to prevent the formation of a continuous Islamic “Caliphate” running from North and East Africa, Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Myanmar,Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines.

Related post on conversions

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Delhi blasts and Jihadi takeover of government building in NW Pakistan – Islamic war is coming close to India

Posted on September 14, 2008. Filed under: China, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Kashmir, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, religion, terrorism, USA | Tags: |

After the latest in the string of blasts in India by Islamic militants at New Delhi, India’s capital, and with the consistent failure of the current ruling Indian government and its administrative setup to crack these cases and prevent Islamic Jihadi activities, Indians should start seriously thinking of what really lies ahead of them. Non-Muslims of India have already seen the strategy of Islam at work for a long long time. Communities remember by oral tradition what the Muslims have been doing for the last 1000 years – looting, raping and abducting women, converting under pain of death or crushing taxes, and massacres under any flimsy excuse. Non-Muslims survived by sheer number, determination and by militarily fighting back. In spite of the fact that some of Hindu elite were bending over backwards in the boot-licking of Islamic rulers to maintain their lands or their wealth, and collaborated in the inhuman torture of their “lower classes”, Hindus have survived – in this they were helped by the vastness of their country and the remoteness of many parts where they escaped into deep forests from the clutches of Muslim armies and in many instances carried on a guerrilla struggle that later on gained momentum into recapture of lands from Islam under the Mahrattas, the Sikhs, and some of the Rajputs.

The scale of blasts in India should make Indians realize that at least three crucial factors are needed for such terror activities to be carried on without any disruption – (1) the military training and material support of the army of  some militarily “modern” nation (2) deep community support to provide both material and intelligence cover (3) good connections within the administration and political setup that leaks crucial information and provides protection from any negative reaction.

The impression that is consistently gaining ground is that the UPA government is Islamo-phile, either because of historical reasons as a legacy of Nehru’s sole dominance of the Congress organization with the help of the British and Gandhiji – who combined their mettle in removing or neutralizing all potential rivals of Nehru within the organization, or because of growth of deep penetration of Islamic elements within the networks of the Congress and related parties, or a combination of both. Bengal terrorists during the British Raj did not succeed because the Bengali community as a whole did not support the “armed insurrectionists”, and this lack of support is indicated by the consistent emergence of detailed information from even the most insignificant of meetings by the revolutionaries – it was the Bengali community itself that was helping the British with intelligence.  The Punjab separatist insurrection in the 80’s did not ultimately succeed because the Sikh community decided to go against it. The Muslim community has so far not shown any indication of a similar sentiment against their Jihadi brethren. This is typical everywhere in Islam, because the core texts of Islam always teach about the necessity and “validity” of violent militant Jihad against non-Muslims – a fact now carefully suppressed both by Islamo-phile non-Muslims as well as Muslim theologians themselves in their public face towards non-Muslims – but intensively and authentically carried on within their own Islamic circles.

Now we come to the first factor mentioned above – that of the basic infrastructural support that can only be provided by the technological knowledge and sophistication of a modern army, [not necessarily that of a “modern” nation]. The most direct source of this for Indian Jihadis is that of Pakistan, and indirectly from groups operating in Pak-occupied Kashmir, Bangladesh, as well as eventual links back to the middle-East and Afghanistan, as well as possible indirect material help from China, Iran and funding from sources tolerated tacitly by Saudi Arabia. The ultimate source of all this is money from oil and natural gas, and the investment of the resulting capital in various non-Muslim economies.

Pakistan’s sole national project and now the only driving reason for its existence appears to be the capture of entire Kashmir, and subsequently as much of India as possible under the banner of Islam – as acknowledged by the dominance of public statements and debates by Pakistan’s politicians both inside and outside its legislature – whereas we would have expected more time devoted to making statements about combating terror within its borders. This campaign also helps Pakistan to gain support from the orthodox Islamic regimes sitting on oil wealth, and countries like China which have their own imperial axes to grind on India. As I have written before, Kiani would have sacrificed Musharraf, his mentor, only if the “elected” democratic government promised continued and perhaps even increased support for Kiani’s original organization, the ISI’s promotion of Jihadi Islamic violence across the border with India. The Pakistani government has recently concluded an understanding with the Taleban, and it is incapable or unwilling to fight back and annihilate the Islamic Jihadis based around the gateway to the Indian subcontinent – the Afghan-Pak border area known commonly as the NWFP or NW Pakistan. By all accounts, the Jihadis are gaining ground and they have already occupied a government building for some time before retreating. The official Pakistan government’s writ does not run in this grey-zone, and thsi perhaps necessitated a missile attack by the US led coalition leading to loud protests by the Pakistani army – either from loss of pride, or from the actual loss of “allies” with whom the Pakistani Aarmy has already come to an understanding to turn over Pakistan firmly into Jihadi hands.

India’s recent tie-ups with the USA has led to a panic in the Wahabi Islamic Jihadi expansionist agenda for the subcontinent – and they are striking back with the only weapon taught in the Quran and the Hadiths – Islamic Jihadi violence, surprise attacks and assassination on the innocent populations including women and children of non-Muslims whose lands, wealth and women are desired by the Muslims.  The islamic forces think that time is running out, and their Islamo-phile allies within India are perhaps no longer reliable enough to slow down the growth of Indian non-muslim’s power and further lapse of time will simply make it impossible for them to conquer India in the name of Islam. They are banking on the support from Muslim populations within India, who have always served as the fifth-column of invading Muslim armies in the historical past of India [ read my series on How Islam came to India]. The Pakistani army, whose lower ranks are being recruited from the society at large which has been increasingly radicalized with the worst form of Islamic Jihadism sponsored by oil-money through the madrassahs, and therefore increasingly sympathetic to the Jihadi cause, will collaborate and “appear to collapse” before the Talebani-Al Qaeda onslaught from the Afghan border. Pakistan stands to be dismembered not by the USA or India, but by the Army from within itself allied with the Taleban and Al-Qaeda. The entire northern Pakistan will fall, including NWFP and the Punjab. The war with India will take off from this point.

The non-Muslim Indian should immediately realize the weakness and essential betrayal of the Islamo-phile parties [who repeat the role of the Brahmin minister to Prithviraj Chahman, the minister who advised Prithviraj not to collaborate with the Chalukyas of Gujarat in annihilating the forces of Muhammad Ghori the very first time]. In the international arena, a military alliance should be formed by India with the USA and Russia. China should be kept out of this, as China will only betray, and leak information to the Pakistani forces. India should not buy into the pretensions of the current Pakistani government to offer “good news” on Kashmir – this is simply a tactic to buy time and deceive – in classic Islamic style of “deception is war, and war is deception”.  War is coming into India, whether India behaves like the proverbial turkey burying its head into the sand or not.

Delhi explodes

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Delhi explodes – price of India’s ruling elite’s love affair with Islam paid by the common Indian

Posted on September 13, 2008. Filed under: Bangladesh, Bengal, Christians, Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, religion, terrorism |

“Indian Mujahideen” claims responsibility  in an email for blasts that have left at least 30 dead and 100’s injured in the capital of India, New Delhi.

Many times have I written on the tolerance of Islam in India by a section of Islamo-phile non-Muslim elite and how none of the accumulated grievances in non-Muslims due to the historical rape, torture, massacre and exploitation by the Muslim elite have been ever acknowledged. I had already warned explicitly that even after the “capture” of a few suspects connected to the Gujarat blasts, and claims of catching key terrorists, these were most likely peripheral units, and the main network is under deep cover all over the western Indian hinterland. These terrorists can only function with a certain minimal support from local Muslim communities. [extract from original post dated 17th August]

While this pussyfooting is going on in Kashmir, the Gujarat police has claimed to nab the main culprits behind the Gujarat blasts, and identified them as a breakaway hardline faction of SIMI, calling itself the Indian Mujahideen. However sometime ago, in the aftermath of the blasts media leaks from officials appeared to project the theory that Indian Mujahideen did not really exist but was a “shadow name” of a Pakistan based outfit that specifically wanted to pretend to be “Indian”. Both cannot be true at the same time, and it is quite possible that neither of the two theories are entirely correct. It seems unlikely that the main culprits behind the Gujarat blasts have been nabbed. These are people still under deep cover all over the western coastal areas of India, with strong underground networks between Communist extremists, and ethnic separatists throughout India as well as groups based across the border not necessarily with Pakistan. The people nabbed are most likely to be the peripheral weak links. The ideological shortsightedness of these groups may make them itch in “righteous anger” to prove that the Indian authorities have barely even scratched their bottoms, and more public outrages or “show of strength” can probably be expected.”

I had also given a list of provinces in India whose Muslim population proportion was within a certain critical range – not too small so that sufficient social depth of cover is not available, not too high as then blasts jeopardize the existence of the Muslim population itself providing excuses for security forces to move in. Here is an extract from the original post dated 26th July. ” Now blasts have taken place in Ahmedabad, Gujarat, a day after blasts in Bangalore, Karnataka. It is interesting also that recently the three states which suffered from blasts are Rajputana, Karnataka, and Gujarat, all states which have recently come under BJP led state governments. It is quite clear now that these are Islamic extremists who are behind these blasts. These are states which have a small but significant Muslim population. We can look at the states with medium to low concentrations of Muslim populations (Census of India 2001):

(State – total population – percentage of Muslim populations)
Kerala 7,863,842 24.6969
Uttar Pradesh 30,740,158 18.4961
Bihar 13,722,048 16.5329
Jharkhand 3,731,308 13.8474
Karnataka 6,463,127 12.2291
Uttaranchal 1,012,141 11.9225
Delhi 1,623,520 11.7217
Maharashtra 10,270,485 10.6014
Andhra Pradesh 6,986,856 9.1679
Gujarat 4,592,854 9.0641
Manipur 190,939 8.8121
Rajasthan 4,788,227 8.4737

So the pattern indicates, the following factors, between 7-8% on the lower limit and 25% as upper limit on Muslim populations, with a BJP led government or where BJP may come to power in the near future through the electoral process, centres of commercial and industrial activity with current or future potential for FDI’s, are possibly ripe for continued “blast” violence. A much higher percentage of Muslim population’s religious leadership obviously feels secure enough that nothing against their religious agenda will be undertaken by the respective state governments. A much lower percentage simply does not have the community resources to provide cover for extremists.”

I had also warned that Musharraf’s departure will signal increased power of Kiani to carry on his activities from the time he was chief of the Pakistan ISI, and increase it with indirect material and resource help from the “democratic” political government. [original post dated 18th August] Added to this of course now the failure of Pakistan, China, and other nations who prize the Islamo-Chinese axis, to stop the NSG  waiver for India. These have made the Islamic Wahabi Jihadist leadership and networks  extremely anxious – and from now on India should expect increasing attacks from Muslim networks in the subcontinent. Indian governments have always been soft on Islam, especially the fundamental sources of Islamic expansion and growth in India – the countless Muslim religious trusts and Madrassahs which claim and are allowed the right to function completely unsupervised. Unlike any other educational institutions run by other religious groups, Islamic madrassahs function in a closed manner with complete immersion in Islamic propaganda and religious texts. In my blog posts I have tried tos how what is the real message and agenda of Islamic religious texts – loot, murder, terrorise, rape and enslave under deceptive war on non-Muslims with coveted resources – land, wealth, women and live off this resource like a band of marauding robbers.

Indian government does not have any financial supervision on the activities, funding and expenditure of these Muslim institutions – in fact whereas Hindu institutions are taxed normally, no Muslim institution is taxed or audited under government supervision. Additionally these institutions are funded or subsidized partly, using public money. The Indian government has proved its complete failure intelligence wise to deal with the Islamic terror threat. The Delhi police and the Home Minister, who just days ago had turned down a request from the Gujarat government to introduce tougher anti-terror laws – repeats the lines learnt by heart now – stay calm, don’t panic, don’t heed rumours, don’t add to social discord, we will nab the culprits and give them tough punishments – his main concern as always is the protection of “Islam” – see to it that no retribution takes place on the Muslim networks by popular anger. As always, he is never able to catch “the culprits”, his main concern being protecting Muslims. It is obvious why the Indian intelligence fails completely to break Islamic terror networks and only wisecracks after the blasts have already taken place: because these Islamic networks have developed political connections within the ruling elite and serve as conduit of critical information from the ruling side to the Muslim leadership and disinformation from the Muslim side to the government. Ruling elite’s conscious or subconscious involvement in the protection of Islam game is now so deep that almost nothing can be done without a complete rehaul of the political and administrative structure of India.

This terror will only stop if it can be shown to the Islamic networks that each such attack will actually decrease the “number of practising Muslims” – a call should immediately be given to the Muslim community and leadership in India, that they should offer to publicly declare and promise that each such attack by Islamic Mujahideen or other terror outfits will be met by pubic renouncement of Islam and coming out of the religion of Islam by a number equal to the number of non-Muslims dead or injured – only in this way can non-Muslims believe in the sincerity of Muslim’s claim of peaceful intent. Similarly, It is the Muslim communities themselves who must give up these terrorists, otherwise the entire Muslim community will be deemed to be in support of these terror tactics.

The soft border in West Bengal with Bangladesh, which allows coninuous unhindered infiltration by Islamic terrorists from Bangladesh with ultimate routes to the middle East whose petro-dollar now is pouring into Bangladesh at an accelerating rate to build mosques and madrassahs – all centres of Islamic propaganda and institutionally protected centres to store, train and serve as bases of Islamic terror when the opportunity arises – as in the Lal Mosque of Pakistan and many others [ Ibn Ishaq, and Tabari write how many of the initial jihadi calls for raids and assassinations of non-Muslims around Medina were given from within the mosque] and is a long tradition of Islam right from the days of its foundation – can only be checked by a state government that is not ideologically dependent or soft towards Islam. Both the Left as well as its current nemesis the Trinamool Congress have proved their complete failure in statesmanhip over the Tata nano plant. It is the need of the country as well as the common people of West Bengal that there is a regime change there that can fight the Islamic infiltration as well as industrialize – it perhaps should start looking for a Modi.

Ultimately in the long run, as long as Islam is practised in India and the Indian subcontinent, the terror threat will never go. The Islamic and Islamo-phile false propaganda that Islam is peaceful and has no evil intentions on the land, property, and women of non-Muslims and complete destruction of all non-Muslim cultures, have hidden for a long time the real reasons behind the rise of Islamic terror. Complete eradication of Islam as practised religion in the subcontinent must take place, and non-Muslims, mainly the Hindus, the Christians and the Judaic communities should come to an understanding between themselves to fight unitedly the common threat of Islam – its not very difficult to do, if the Quranic observation that “un-believers” are always torn by dissension and that they cannot take united action against Muslims, is remembered.

Jihad and coming of Islamic war to India

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Mumbai Masala from “God Remembers” : a source of Islamic propaganda protected by India -3

Posted on September 13, 2008. Filed under: Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Politics, religion, terrorism |

LIE 4: ISLAM DOES NOT ALLOW KILLING OF WOMEN, CHILDREN AND THE ELDERLY, OR CUTTING DOWN OF TREES, NOT EVEN IN WAR-ISLAM RATHER PROTECTS THE CHILDREN AND WOMEN OF THE DEFEATED

Killing women : The Murder of Asma bt. Marwan at Medina by Umayr b. Adiy al-Khatmi -March, 624CE

Immediately after his return from the victory at Badr, Muhammad felt strong enough to put a halt to his critics who were displeased at his arrival at Medina. During those days, poets served as mouthpiece of political and social satire.  One such poetess was Asma bint Marwan. She belonged to the B. Aws and did not hide her dislike for Islam. She was married to – Yazid b. Zayd, a man of Banu Khatma and had five sons and a suckling infant. After the Badr war, she composed some satirical poems. The verses spread from mouth to mouth and finally reached the ears of the Muslims and they were greatly offended. Muhammad could not at all endure satire or vituperation. Therefore, an incensed Muhammad decided that it was time to get rid of her.

In his mosque, at night, Muhammad sought a volunteer to assassinate Asma bt. Marwan. A blind man, Umayr b. Adiy al-Khatmi, belonging to the same tribe as Asma’s husband (i.e., Banu Khatma) stood up to complete the job. In the dead of night he crept into her apartment. Her little children then surrounded Asma while she slept. Hugging her bosom was her infant, suckling her breast. The blind man, feeling stealthily with his hand, removed the infant from her breast and plunged his sword in her belly with such a force that it passed through her back. This severe blow killed Asma on the spot. It was just five days before the end of the month of the sacred month of fasting, Ramadan when Muslims are not supposed to shed blood.[Ibn Ishaq]

After murdering Asma, next morning, the killer Umayr went to pray in the mosque while Muhammad was there. Muhammad was quite anxious to learn if the mission of Umayr was a success or not. He said to Umayr, the killer “Have you slain the daughter of Marwan?’ Commenting on this Ibn S’ad writes, “This was the word that was first heard from the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him.” When Umayr replied that the job had been carried out with success, Muhammad said, “You have helped God and His apostle, O ‘Umayr!’ When Umayr asked if he would have to bear any evil consequences, the apostle said, “Two goats won’t butt their heads about her.” Muhammad then praised Umayr in front of all gathered for prayer for his act of murder, and Umayr went back to his people. (Note: Some biographers suggest that Omayr was Asma’s former husband). Five days later, the Muslims celebrated the first Eid (the end of fasting)! [Ibn Ishaq]

When Omayr, the killer returned to Upper Medina, he passed the sons of Asma who were burying theirs slain mother. They accused Umayr of murder of their mother. Without hesitation, Umayr admitted the accusation boastfully and threatened to kill the whole family if they dared to repeat the lampoons that their mother had composed deriding the Prophet of mercy. This threat of terror worked wonderfully. The entire tribe of Asma’s husband (i.e., Banu Khatma) who secretly hated Islam, now openly professed their adherence, just to save their lives. Ibn Ishak writes, “That was the first day that Islam became powerful among B. Khatma. The day after Bint Marwan was killed the men of B. Khatma became Muslims because they saw the power of Islam”. [Ibn Ishaq]

Singing women killed:

Sunaan Abu Dawud: Book 14, Number 2678:       Narrated Sa’id ibn Yarbu’ al-Makhzumi: The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: on the day of the conquest of Mecca: There are four persons whom I shall not give protection in the sacred and non-sacred territory. He then named them. There were two singing girls of al-Maqis; one of them was killed and the other escaped and embraced Islam.

Later, Umar killed Sarah by causing his horse to trample her at al-Abtah. On the day of occupation of Mecca, Muhammad commanded that six men and four women be killed. The women were: 1. Hind bt. Utbah b. Rabiah, 2. Sarah, the freed slave girl of Amr b. Hashim b. Abd al-Muttalib; she was killed (waqidi) on the day of invasion. 3. Quraybah; killed on the day of invasion, 4. Fartana escaped death and lived until the Caliphate of Uthman.

The killings of polytheist women and children and old men are definitely sanctioned by Muhammad.
Sahih Muslim: Book 019, Number 4321: It is reported on the authority of Sa’b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him), when asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them.

Old Women killed : Raid against Umm Qirfa of B. Fazarah by Zayd b. Haritha/Abu Bakr-January, 628CE

After Zayd b. Haritha’s first raid at Wadi al-Qura ended in a failure, he conducted further raids. In one of these operations, he set out for a mercantile trip to Syria to do some border trading there. When he arrived at Wadi al-Qura, he again raided the inhabitants there. However, his caravan was waylaid and was attacked by B. Fazarah tribe. During the fighting B. Fazarah killed a number of Muslims including Ward b. Amr, one of Zayd’s dear comrade-in-arms. Zayd himself was wounded.[NOTE THE EASE WITH WHICH MUSLIMS COMBINED THE DUAL ROLE OF TRADER AND RAIDER]

After Zayd returned to Medina with his wound he vowed to avenge the death of his comrade by raiding B. Fazarah again. After his recovery from the injury Muhammad sent Zayd with an army against the B. Fazarah. He attacked them at Wadi al-Qura and inflicted heavy casualties on them. He took Umm Qirfa (her real name was Fatimah bt. Rabiah b. Badr), the wife of Malik b. Hudhayfah, the chief of B. Fazarah, as a prisoner. Umm Qirfa was a very old woman having a young and exquisitely beautiful daughter. She (Umm Qirfa) was the aunt of Uyeina and was married to her cousin, Malik, the uncle of Uyeina. They formed a branch of Fazarah, Fazarah tribe being a branch of the Ghatafan tribe. Zayd took her daughter as a captive and ordered a Jihadist, Qays b. Mohsin to kill Umm Qirfa. Qays tied each of her legs with a rope and attached the ropes to two camels. Then he drove the camels in opposite directions thus renting her in two. Rodinson writes that Umm Qirfa was torn from limb to limb by four camels. Two brothers from the same family were also brutally executed. When told, Muhammad fully approved this ferocious punishment meted out to a grand old lady. When Zayd brought Umm Qirfa’s daughter to Muhammad, he allocated her to Salamah b. Amr al-Akwa, a Jihadist who captured her. Then Muhammad found that one of his maternal uncles, Hazn b. Abi Wahb was eyeing on Umm Qirfa’s beautiful daughter. So he asked her owner, Salamah b. Amr b. al-Akwa, if he would give her to his (Muhammad’s) uncle. Salamah readily agreed to Muhammad’s request. This distinguished lady was then passed on to Muhammad’s uncle for his private use.

Another version of this story says that the leader of this raid was Abu Bakr b. Abi Quhafah (told by Salamah): Muhammad appointed Abu Bakr as the leader of this raiding party. When Abu Bakr arrived at Wadi al-Qura, he ordered his troop to rest there; then they prayed. After prayer, Abu Bakr made a raid on B. Fazarah. The Muslims killed a number of B. Fazarah people and captured a number of their women and children. Among them was Umm Qirfa, a very old lady, wearing a worn-out piece of leather coat. With her was her young daughter, the fairest of the Arabs. Abu Bakr gave Umm Qirfa’s pretty, young  daughter to, the Jihadist, who had captured her as a booty. After Salamah b. al-Akwa returned to Medina and met Muhammad at the market place, he (Muhammad) asked Salamah to give this pretty young lass to him. Salamah told Muhammad that he liked her but had not had sex with her yet. Then he offered her to Muhammad.

Quoting Salamah, Tabari (Tabari, vol. viii, p.97) writes: ‘When I returned to Medina, the messenger of God met me in the market and said, “Salamah-how excellent the father who begot you!-give me the woman.” I said, “Messenger of God, I like her, by God, and I have not uncovered her garment.” He said nothing to me until the next day, when he met me in the market and said, “Salamah-how excellent a father begot you!-give me the woman.” I said: “Messenger of God, I have not touched her garment. She is yours, Messenger of God.” The Messenger of God sent her to Mecca, and with her he ransomed some Muslim captives who were in the hands of the polytheists.’ Look also Sahih Muslim (Refer to: Sahih Muslim: Book 19, Hadith number 4345)

Killing Old Men: The Murder of Abu Afak at Medina by Salim b. ‘Umayr-April, 624CE

Abu Afak, a Jew of Medina was a very old man, about 120 years old. He was active in the opposition of Muhammad’s religion. He too composed some satirical verses that annoyed the Muslims. One month after his victory at Badr, Muhammad showed his limit of tolerance to his intellectual opposition by expressing his wish to eliminate this old man. At his mosque, the apostle of Allah sought the service of a volunteer killer, saying, ‘Who will deal with this rascal for me?’ A convert by the name of Salim b.‘Umayr, brother of B. ‘Amr b.’Auf from the B. Amr tribe came forward to do the job. He killed Abu Afak with one blow of his sword when the latter slept outside his house. (Some say that Abu Afak was murdered first then Asma). Ibn S’ad describes this gruesome murder in this way: “He waited for an opportunity until a hot night came, and Abu ‘Afak slept in an open place. Salim b. ‘Umayr knew it, so he placed the sword on his liver and pressed it till it reached his bed. The enemy of Allah screamed and the people, who were his followers rushed him, took him to his house and interred him.”

Cutting down trees of the “enemy”

The Ethnic Cleansing of B. Nadir Jews from Medina by Muhammad-July, 625CE

Bani Nadir Jews inhabited the fertile land in the vicinity of Medina. They were prosperous Jews, having vast tracts of land, on which they cultivated date palms. They were in confederation with the B. Amir people. Muhammad went to the Bani Nadir Jews to raise the blood money to be paid for the killing of two men of B. Amir, whom the professional killer, Amr b. Umayya al-Damri had killed by mistake.

So, Muhammad, with a few of his followers, including, Abu Bakr, Ali and Umar visited the village of B. Nadir, two or three miles away from Medina and requested the chief of B. Nadir to refund the blood money that he had already paid. The B. Nadir Jews received Muhammad courteously, asked him to sit down while they attentively listened to his demand and agreed to honor Muhammad’s request. Muhammad was quite unhappy when the B. Nadir readily agreed to his demand. In reality, he was expecting the B. Nadir Jews to reject his demand, so that he could have a good pretext to attack them and seize their land and property.

After agreeing to Muhammad’s demand for blood money, the B. Nadir Jews went for a private discussion among themselves.  While he was sitting by the wall of a house, he claimed that B. Nadir Jews wanted to kill him by dropping a stone from top of the house and claimed that Gabriel gave him this information. So, he suddenly stood up and left the place, as if to answer the call of nature asking others, including Abu Bakr, Umar and Ali not to leave the place until he returned. When his companions found that Muhammad’s return was very much delayed, they went out looking for him. On their way to Medina they met a man who told them he saw Muhammad was headed for Medina. When they met Muhammad at Medina, he told them his perception of treachery by B. Nadir and asked the Muslims to prepare to fight the B. Nadir.

With clear war and invasion of Jewish property in mind, Muhammad asked another of his professional assassins, Muhammad ibn Maslamah (He murdered Ka’b b. Ashraf) to go to the Banu Nadir Jews to announce to them the ultimatum to vacate Medina. He gave the Jews ten days to evacuate Medina and, if after this deadline any Jew was seen in the area, he would be killed. The B. Nadir Jews were surprised that Muhammad ibn Maslamah, who was hitherto very much on friendly terms with the Jews had to serve them the ultimatum. When the B. Nadir Jews expressed their dismay at the action of Muhammad b. Maslamah, he said, “ Hearts have changed, and Islam has wiped out the old covenants.”

When Abd Allah ibn Ubayy learned about the precarious situation of the B. Nadir Jews, he sent the message to them that he himself would be coming to their assistance with two thousand Jewish and Arab fighters. But the Banu Nadir Jews recalled that the same person promised to help the Banu Qaynuqa Jews, but in the end, betrayed. So, the Banu Nadir Jews, at first, decided towards removing themselves to Khaybar or nearby. They thought that they could still come to Yathrib (Medina) to harvest their crops and then return to their fortresses at Khaybar. Huyayy ibn Akhtab, their leader finally resolved against this view. He decided to send a message to Muhammad, declining his order of expulsion,. entered in their fortified fortresses, stocked them with enough supplies to last up to a year and got ready to defend themselves. So, no Jew left Medina after the expiry of the ten days ultimatum. Muhammad, immediately ordered Jihadists in his mosque to arm themselves and march forward to lay a siege on the fortresses of B. Nadir Jews. A band of Muslims, with Muhammad as their leader started marching against B. Nadir who had already taken shelter in their formidable fortresses. In the beginning, the Jews attacked the Muslim besiegers with arrows and stones and held out gallantly. Although not unexpected, they were greatly disappointed when no help came from Abd Allah ibn Ubayy, nor from any other previously trusted sources. The siege lasted for fifteen or twenty days, and Muhammad became very impatient. At last, to hasten their surrender, Muhammad, cut down the surrounding date trees and burned them. When the Jews protested about the breaking of sacrosanct Arab laws on warfare, he demanded a special revelation from Allah (59:4) that was promptly sent down, sanctioning the destruction of enemy’s palm trees. In this verse Allah gave generous permission to the Muslims to cut down the palm trees: it was not a destruction but the vengeance from Allah, and to humble the evil doers that is to say, it is alright to cut down cultivated land and burn crops in a war. The Muslim poet (or the war correspondent of those days) Hassan b. Thabit enjoyed this gutting of the livelihood of the B. Nadir Jews and composed lyrics on this savage acts of the Jihadists.. Here is a Hadith from Sahih Bukhari that describes Hassan’s mood :

Volume 3, Book 39, Number 519:

Narrated ‘Abdullah:

The Prophet got the date palm trees of the tribe of Bani-An-Nadir burnt and the trees cut down at a place called Al-Buwaira . Hassan bin Thabit said in a poetic verse: “The chiefs of Bani Lu’ai found it easy to watch fire spreading at Al-Buwaira.”

After Muhammad destroyed their only source of livelihood, the B. Nadir found their case completely hopeless, and finding no other alternative, they decided to surrender and abandon their lands. In exchange for this, they wanted Muhammad to spare their lives, on which he agreed, on condition that they could only take those of their property that they could carry on their camels. He stipulated that the Jews must surrender their arms. They were allowed to carry whatever they could stock upon their camels. The Jews agreed to comply with those humiliating conditions, loaded six hundred camels with their goods and departed from their ancestral land with fanfare, din and alacrity. Some of them, with their chiefs Huyey, Sallam and Kinana went to Khaybar [These were the Jews who were later captured, tortured as prisoners of war to death, and their wives taken over by Muhammad and his followers for their personal enjoyment]. The rest of them went to Jericho and the highlands of south Syria. Only two of them embraced Islam.

Attacking suddenly at night and killing :

Raid on B. Kilab at Nejd by Abu Bakr-July, 628CE
Sunaan Abu Dawud: Book 14, Number 2632: Narrated Salamah ibn al-Akwa’: The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) appointed AbuBakr our commander and we fought with some people who were polytheists, and we attacked them at night, killing them. Our war-cry that night was “put to death; put to death.” Salamah said: I killed that night with my hand polytheists belonging to seven houses.

As for fate of women and children in Islamic war :

Genocide of Bani Qurayzah Jews by Muhammad-February-March, 627

The Muslim soldiers marched toward the fortress of Bani Qurayza that lay two or three miles to the south-east of Medina. Muhammad rode an ass, while an army of three thousand Muslims, with thirty-six horses followed him. After twenty-five days of siege, the Jews grew desperate, exhausted and terrified at their future. They were on the verge of starvation.

Tabari writes: ‘When they saw him (i.e Abu Lubabah), [ A Muslim from a friendly tribe whom the Jews hoped to intercede on behalf of them] the men rose to meet him, and the women and children rushed to grab hold of him, weeping before him, so that he felt pity for them. They said to him, “Abu Lubabah, do you think that we should submit to Muhammad’s judgment”? “Yes”, he said, but he pointed with his hand to his throat, that it would be slaughter.”’ Haykal writes that the Jews thought that the former allies from al-Aws tribe would give them protection if they migrated to Adhriat in al Sham, and that Muhammad would allow them. Muhammad rejected their proposal and insisted on their waiting for his judgment.

In the morning, B. Qurayzah Jews surrendered. The male Jews were chained and kept in the fortress till a decision was made about their fate. The B. Aws were friendly with the B. Qurayzah Jews and pleaded with Muhammad for mercy and a fair judgment for their Jewish allies. On this, Muhammad proposed that the judgment be passed by Sa’d b Muadh who was the B. Aws leader, trying to recuperate from his eventually fatal wound in a tent at Medina. B. Aws and the B. Qurayzah both agreed on this proposal of Muhammad, hoping to have some mercy from Sa’d b. Muadh. Muhammad dispatched some B. Aws men to bring Sa’d to deliver his judgment. Many B. Aws people requested Sa’d to deal with the Jews with leniency and mercy. Sa’d then asked his people if they would accept whatever judgment he pronounced. The assemblage agreed.

On being asked by Muhammad Sa’d b. Muadh replied, “I pass judgment on them that the men shall be killed, the property divided, and the children and women made captives.” Muhammad praised Sa’d for proclaiming a solemn judgment of the Almighty and termed Sa’d’s judgment as fair and said, “You have passed judgment on them with the judgment of God and the judgment of His Messenger.” Sahih Bukhari records:

Volume 5, Book 58, Number 148: Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: Some people (i.e. the Jews of Bani bin Quraiza) agreed to accept the verdict of Sad bin Muadh so the Prophet sent for him (i.e. Sad bin Muadh). He came riding a donkey, and when he approached the Mosque, the Prophet said, “Get up for the best amongst you.” or said, “Get up for your chief.” Then the Prophet said, “O Sad! These people have agreed to accept your verdict.” Sad said, “I judge that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as captives.” The Prophet said, “You have given a judgment similar to Allah’s Judgment (or the King’s judgment).”

[Original Sahih Al-Bukhari] The women and children were then separated from their husbands, others were put under the care of Abdullah, a renegade Jew. All the goods and possessions of the B. Qurayzah Jews, their camels and flocks were all brought as spoils of war. The B. Qurayzah Jewish men were handcuffed behind their backs with their women and children having already been separated. They were placed under the charge of Mohammad ibn Maslama, the assassin of Ka’b ibn Ashraf, to be sent to Medina before their execution in batches. A long trench was dug in the marketplace of Medina. The Prisoners were then taken there, made to kneel down and beheaded in a group of five or six. Muhammad was personally present to witness this slaughter. Ali and Zubayr cut off the heads of the Jews in front of Muhammad. Sourcing from Al-Waqidi, Tabari writes:

“…the messenger of God commanded that furrows should be dug in the ground for the B. Qurayzah. Then he sat down, and Ali and al-Zubayr began cutting off their heads in his presence.” Ibn Ishaq writes that they were taken in groups to Muhammad for beheading in front of him.

Tabari further writes: ‘The messenger of God went out into the marketplace of Medina and had trenches dug in it; then he sent for them and had them beheaded in those trenches. They were brought out to him in groups. Among them were the enemy of God, Huyayy b. Akhtab, and Ka’b b. Asad, the head of the tribe. They numbered 600 or 700-the largest estimate says they were between 800 and 900. As they were being taken in groups to the Messenger of God, they said to Ka’b b. Asad, “Ka’b, what do you understand. Do you not see that the summoner does not discharge [anyone] and that those of you who are taken away do not come back? By God, it is death!” the affair continued until the Messenger of God had finished with them.’

Sir William Muir describes: ‘The men were penned up in a closed yard, while graves or trenches were being dug for them in the chief marketplace of the city. When these were ready, Mahomet, himself a spectator of the tragedy, gave command that the captives should be brought forth in companies of five or six at a time. Each company was made to sit down by the brink of the trench destined for its grave, and there beheaded. Party by party they were thus led out, and butchered in cold blood, till the whole were slain. One woman alone was put to death; it was she who threw the millstone from the battlements.’

Huyayy b. Akhtab, the banished B. Nadir Jewish leader was taken to the execution field. Tabari describes his execution:

‘Huyayy b. Akhtab, the enemy of God, was brought. He was wearing a rose-colored suit of clothes that had torn all over with fingertip-sized holes so that it would not be taken as booty from him, and his hands were bound to his neck with a rope. When he looked at the Messenger of God, he said, “By God, I do not blame myself for being hostile to you, but whomever God forsakes is forsaken.” Then he turned to the people and said: “People, there is no injury in God’s command. It is the book of God, His decree, and a battlefield of great slaughter ordained against the Children of Israel. Then he sat down and was beheaded.’

Only one woman of the B. Qurayzah, the wife of Hasan al-Qurazi and a friend of Aisha, was killed. Aisha’s narrated her story of beheading thus:

‘Only one of their women was killed. By God, she was by me, talking with me and laughing unrestraintedly while the Messenger of God was killing their men in the marketplace, when suddenly a mysterious voice called out her name, saying, “Where is so and so?” She said, “I shall be killed.” “Why?” I asked. She said, A misdeed that I committed.” She was taken away and beheaded. (Aisha used to say: I shall never forget my wonder at her cheerfulness and much laughter, even when she knew that she would be killed.).’

The Sahi (authentic) Hadith of Abu Dawud: Book 14, Number 2665: Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin: No woman of Banu Qurayzah was killed except one. She was with me, talking and laughing on her back and belly (extremely), while the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) was killing her people with the swords. Suddenly a man called her name: Where is so-and-so? She said: I I asked: What is the matter with you? She said: I did a new act. She said: The man took her and beheaded her. She said: I will not forget that she was laughing extremely although she knew that she would be killed.”

Ther very old Jewish man Az-Zabir had saved the life of a Muslim convert, Thabit b. Qays in the Bu’ath war. When Az-Zabir was about to be beheaded Thabit requested Muhammad to save the life of Az-Zabir and his family as a return to his favor. Muhammad agreed. Az-Zabir then asked Thabit b. Qays about the Jewish leaders such as Ka’b b. Asad and Huayy b. Akhtab, as he preferred to die rather than to live without them. Az-Zabir replied, “Then I ask you for the sake of the favor I once did for you to join me to my kinsmen, for by God there is no good in living after them. I will not wait patiently for God, not even [the time needed] to take the bucket of a watering trough, until I meet my dear ones.” So Thabit brought him forward, and he was beheaded. Abu Bakr commented “He will meet them, by God, in the Gehenna, there to dwell forever and forever.”

Muhammad commanded that all those Jewish men with pubic hair were to be executed. Hadith from Sunaan Abu Dawud:

Book 38, Number 4390: Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi: I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.
After executing all the adult male Jews, Muhammad sent Sa’d b. Zayd al-Ansari with some captive women and children from the B. Qurayzah to Najd to sell them in the slave market. While we do not have an accurate price of a female slave during that time, Ibn Sa’d writes that Khadijah, Muhammad’s first wife, bought her slave, Zayd b. Haritha, (who would later become Muuhammad’s adopted son), for four hundred Dirhams at the slave market of Ukaz, Mecca. [the price of young slave varied from five hundred dirhams to eight hundred dirhams – Sunaan Abu Dawud hadith numbers, 3946 and 4563]. Among the captive was a young woman called Rayhanh bt. ‘Amr b. Khunafah and took her as his concubine. It is said that when Muhammad offered to make her his wife by embracing Islam, she declined. She preferred to remain a concubine to becoming a Muslim and said, “Messenger of God, rather leave me in your possession [as a concubine], for it is easier for me and for you.” [Some biographers claim that Rayhana eventually accepted Islam].

Sir Willima Muir:

‘Having sated his revenge, and drenched the market-place with the blood of eight hundred victims, and having given command for the earth to be smoothed over their remains, Mahomet returned from the horrid spectacle to solace himself with the charms of Rihana, whose husband and all whose male relatives had just perished in the massacre. He invited her to be his wife, but she declined; and chose to remain (as indeed, having refused marriage, she had no alternative) his slave or concubine. She also declined the summons to conversion, and continued in the Jewish faith, at which the Prophet was much concerned. It is said, however, that she afterwards embraced Islam. She lived with Mahomet till his death.

part 2:

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Of Lipsticks, pigs, Presidents, and south Asia – the Right way forward?

Posted on September 12, 2008. Filed under: China, Christians, Communist, Hindu, India, Kashmir, Muslims, Nuclear, Pakistan, Politics, religion, terrorism, USA |

The American electorate is being fabulously entertained. It is fascinating to watch what the movers and shakers of American opinion demand that the American mind should think – lipsticks and pigs dominate proceedings – and with all adult-o-teens and perhaps half the unborn population deemed trained Freudian psychiatrists – lipsticks and pigs are just two words that spawn a billion networks of interpretations and interpretations of interpretations. But no one has told them that what the therapist interprets is also a revelation of the therapist’s own obsessions and paranoias, and in the patterns and passions of your looking for “others” secrets, your own secrets come out – especially about secret pleasures. Why should it matter whether a woman Vice-Presidential candidate has an affair or not or whether her daughter is pregnant or not? What should have been more relevant is whether she is good for what she is being asked to do – play the role of a deputy leader to the highest executive post in the country – if having an affair or her daughter’s supposed pregnancy doesn’t interfere with her state responsibilities  why should we bother? It is ridiculous to accept the pseudo-logic that her daughter if pregnant  represents her lack of control and leadership, given the fact that Americans champion personal freedoms and individual responsibilities especially in the realm of sex. And as for affairs, should we forget the two illustrious White Christian examples of ladies at the top seats of their realms – Queen Elizabeth I of England, and Tsarina Catherine the Great?  By most historical accounts, both ladies had their fill of affairs while proving themselves to be some of the best things that could have  happened to their nations in the very practical terms of statesmanship. Isn’t it time that opinion builders of America decide to grow up a bit? What should concern Americans more is what is happening in South Asia and the middle East. The Indo-US nuclear deal has drawn a lot of attention, and it comes as no surprise to me that the Democrats failed to send a woman as a Presidential candidate, and that all Democrat Presidents have gone against strategic strengthening of India at the cost of India’s Muslim neighbours. If we analyze the regimes that have put up women for the top post, they have invariably been leaning towards the Right, whereas the Left, from the Communists to the “Democrats” in spite of all their libertarian rhetoric always shy of women for the top posts and always land up ultimately in the camp of Muslims. Ex President Carter while in the USA is vehemently anti-Indian as far as nuclear strengthening of India is concerned, and frankly ridicules both India’s nuclear capabilities as well as its security concerns which he dubs “ambitions”. The same President Carter while in India however feels no shame in associating his name with remote Indian villages claiming that the Indian connection had been “good for him”.  Ex President Clinton, on his visit to India, demanded that both “India and Pakistan” respect the LOC, and pointedly refused to acknowledge Pakistani responsibility for the typically Islam recommended “deceptive” war of killing 35 Kashmiri Sikhs -one of many massacres of non-Muslims of Kashmir towards the ethnic/religious cleansing by the Kashmiri Muslim militants wearing Indian army uniform. Obama is aware of this pattern perhaps and has already consciously tried to neutralize the edge gained by the Republicans through the Indo-US nuclear deal, by highlighting Indo-“phile” Biden  and accusing Pakistan of diverting funds meant to fight “terror” towards preparing for war with India.

The coalition forces are not having a very good time in Iraq, or in Afghanistan, and the west should now realize that the centre of power of the Islamic Jihad is firmly in the middle East, with financial and ideological support maintained by the wealth of oil, and Wahabi Islamic fundamentalist clergy, and at least one unsupervised strategically important military establishment that has dubious attitudes to the Taleban – and has already come to an understanding with this patron of Al-Qaeda in the North Western Frontier Province of Pakistan – the corridor that connects Muslim Jihadi insurgents in Afghanistan through northern Pakistan right into Pakistan occupied Kashmir. Fall of India to Islam, either by cooperation or weakness from some of its Islamo-phile centre-left political parties or by outright aggression facilitated or spearheaded by Pakistan with tacit help from China, would mean the establishment of a continuous band of Jihadi Islam from Egypt, and Sudan through Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Indonesia (the smaller non-Muslim majority nations of Myanmar or Thailand may not prove a strong bulwark against Islam because of their Buddhism) establishing a stranglehold over the Indian Ocean and virtually over Asia itself, making American presence and control in the middle East virtually impossible..

It is crucial, that no weakness of the “leftist” sort comes in the way of consolidation of all non-Muslim ideologies and forces. Christians and Hindus have the potential of forming an effective alliance in this game of survival. The Right way forward…?

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

Mumbai Masala from “God remembers”- on a source of Islamic propaganda protected by India : 2

Posted on September 10, 2008. Filed under: Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Politics, religion, terrorism |

LIE 3: THE QURANIC EXHORTATION TO BRING DOWN VIOLENT RETRIBUTION ON THE UNBELIEVERS WAS ONLY IN THE CONTEXT OF URGING MUSLIM SOLDIERS TO FIGHT AGAINST MECCANS WHO HAD ATTACKED MUSLIMS:

We will see that the Quran carefully omits any mentions of who started this “war” – Meccans or Muslims, and deliberately does not give the history of the “war”. We will see what the nature of this “war” was – war as we understand even in the historical sense or simply ambushes and raids. To do this we first briefly recount the history of the quarrel with the Meccans as narrated in the Quran and the biographies. We will not deal with the other possible personal motivations in Muhammad as far as accusations of “deprivation” of an “orphan” from his “rights” are concerned, as these are not explicitly and directly stated in the Quran, and was also probably not intended to be revealed in the Quran as it might have detracted from the “spiritual” stance of the “revelation” and and revealed “mundane” “human” weaknesses of greed for property, wealth and women.

The Prophet had kept his mission concealed for three years after he received the first revelations. The Muslim brotherhood had functioned as a secret society. Ibn Ishaq gives a list of persons who had joined.[Ibn Ishaq],  “The advantage of the darkness for the first few years was great. The darkness saved it from being crushed at the outset. Ridicule and contempt could be more easily endured when some hundred persons were involved, than if the Prophet had been compelled to endure them by himself. It saved him, too, from the character of the eccentric sage (such as Waraqa and others had borne), investing him from his first public appearance with that of the leader of a party; it gave the Prophet time to secure over a reasonable number of people that influence which he could exercise to a reasonable degree.”[D.S. Margoliouth, Mohammed and the Rise of Islam, London, 1905, New Delhi Reprint. 1985 – p 112]. People in Mecca apparently took notice of the “deviation” quite early. From the first, Muslims had been directed by Allah to offer prayers in congregation. They could not do it inside the city so long as they were an underground organisation. “When the apostles companions prayed,” reports Ibn Ishaq, “they went to the glens so that people could not see them praying, and while Sad b. Abu Waqqas was with a number of the prophets companions in one of the glens of Mecca, a band of polytheists came upon them while they were praying and rudely interrupted them. They blamed them for what they were doing until they came to blows, and it was on that occasion that Sad smote a polytheist with the jawbone of a camel and wounded him. That was the first blood to be shed in Islam.” No reprisals from the pagan side are reported. Just as in modern societies, the pluralistic society at Mecca faced with an aggressive and determined minority, were incredulous that such ideologies could at all be propagandized by normal human beings. “People began to accept Islam, both men and women, in large numbers until the fame of it spread throughout Mecca, and it began to be talked about[Note that the amused tolerance of bigotry and hatred or provocation without an overwhelming immediate retaliation, encouraged the weak, the alienated, the bored  and those with a “grievance” against the existing system to veer towards this “empowering” ideology that promises not only the “heaven” and the “earth” but perhaps more of the latter – as in the rise of modern totalitarian regimes – so that later people wonder “if only we were not so tolerant”]. Then God commanded His apostle to declare the truth of what he had received and make known His commandments to men and call them to Him. Three years elapsed from the time the apostle concealed his state until God commanded him to publish his religion, according to information which has reached me. Then God said, Proclaim what you have been ordered and turn aside from the polytheists.”[Ishaq, Quran, 15.8-9, 94]

The ideology proclaimed was a quite simple inversion of the prevalent Judaeo-Chrstian traditions -Apocalypse-Qyamat, resurrection and Last Judgement, [from this point the inversion starts] only the believers in the “Ilah” named “Allah” as the only god and in Muhammad as the last Prophet will enter paradise for an everlasting life of the moset delectable of earthly pleasures; anyone assigning partners to “Allah” or denied Muhammad’s prophethood or did both will be subject to the worst of hell-fire and everlasting tortures. Right from the beginning, it was categorically stated that belief in Allah as the only God was not enough; it had to he accompanied by the belief that Muhammad was the only mediator through whom Allahs mercy could be sought or obtained. “To avow Islam meant to renounce publicly the national worship, to ridicule, and if possible to break down idols, and unabashedly to use the new salutation and to celebrate the new-fangled rites. For it must be remembered that Islam was in its nature polemical. Its Allah was not satisfied with worship, unless similar honour was paid to no other name; and his worship also was intolerant of idols, and of all rites not instituted by himself… Mohammed and Abu Bakr were planning an attack on the national religion, that cult which every Meccan proudly remembered had within their memory been defended by a miracle from the Abyssinian invaders and in their myths had often thus triumphed before. The gods they worshipped were, Mohammed and Abu Bakr asserted, no gods. For their worship these innovators would substitute that of the Jews whose power in South Arabia had recently been overthrown, and of the Christians with whose defeat the national spirit of Arabia had just awakened.”[D.S. Margoliouth, p. 118-19]. At first the “pagan”s led several delegations to Abu Talib, Muhammads uncle and guardian. They told him that his nephew had “cursed our gods, insulted our religion, mocked our way of life and accused our forefathers of error”, and requested him to restrain his nephew. Abu Talib was conciliatory and tried to persuade Muhammad to go slow. “Do not put on me a burden greater than I can bear”, he said to his nephew. But the Prophet “continued on his way, publishing Gods religion and calling men therein.”[Ibn Ishaq] Muhammad was married to a rich woman, Khadijah, and controlled her considerable wealth which he used for supporting his uncles family as well as in the service of the mission to which his wife also subscribed. It has to be kept in mind that at this stage, the pre-Islamic Arabs gave a lot of rights, liberties and positions of influence or power to women, and were quite “permissive” as revealed in some of the “sensual” Hadiths.

Islam’s impact on Meccan society was extremely disruptive as al-Walid b. al-Mughira, a man of standing in Mecca, observed, Muhammad looked like “a sorcerer who has brought a message by which he separates a man from his father, or from his brother, or from his wife, or from his family.”[Ibn Ishaq]. “The view prevalent at Meccah concerning Mohammad appears to have been that he was mad-under the influence of a Jinn, one of the beings who were supposed to speak through poets and sorcerers. That this charge stung Mohammed to the quick may be inferred from the virulence with which he rejects it, and the invective with which he attacks the bastard who had uttered it. He charges the author of the outrage with being unable to write and with being over head and ears in debt and threatens to brand him on his proboscis.[D.S. Margoliouth, p. 121]” Allah declared to his prophet: “You are not a mad man… And you will see and they will see, which of you is the demented. Therefore obey not you the rejecters, who would have you compromise, that they may compromise: Neither obey you each feeble oath-monger, detractor, spreader abroad of slanders, hinderer, of the good, an aggressor, malefactor, greedy therewithal, intrusive. We shall brand him on the nose.”[Quran, 68.2, 5-6, 8-13]. One day some Meccans were assembled in the precincts of the Kaba when Muhammad was passing by and made some remarks. Muhammad retorted that, “By him who holds my life in His hand, I bring you slaughter.”[Ibn Ishaq]. The Meccans probably thought this was due to some “demonic possession” as part of the beliefs of that time, for they sent Utba b. Rabia, one of their chiefs, to Muhammad. Utba offered psychiatric help to Muhammad , “If this ghost which comes to you, which you see, is such that you cannot get rid of him, we will find a physician for you, and exhaust our means in getting you cured, for often a spirit gets possession of a man until he can be cured of it.”[Ibn Ishaq] The Prophet’s reactions convinced Utba that Muhammad was quite sane and advised the Meccans to leave him alone. “If (other) Arabs kill him, others will have rid you of him,” he said.[Ishaq]

What were the questions which the Meccans posed against Muhammad’s faith and what were their observations? “The objections recorded and ostensibly answered in the Koran appear to have been directed against every part and feature of the new system; against Mohammed personally, against his notion of prophecy, against his style, his statements, his doctrines. It is impossible to suggest any chronological scheme for them.”[D.S. Margoliouth]. The manner in which the debate is recorded in the Quran is somewhat strange. The Meccans must have said what they said, to Muhammad and his Muslims directly, or among themselves. But the answers come invariably from Allah in the form of revelations. “The debate with which the earlier years were filled was conducted in a variety of ways. Occasionally the Prophet himself condescended to enter the arena, and confront his antagonists: he was indeed a powerful preacher and when he talked of the Day of Judgment his cheeks blazed, and his voice rose, and his manner was fiery; apparently, however, he was not a ready debater, and was worsted when he tried the plan. Moreover, his temper in debate was not easily controlled, and he was apt to give violent and insulting answers to questioners.  He therefore received divine instruction not to take part in open debate, to evade the question and if questioned by the unbelievers, retire.” [Margoliouth, Quran 6.67]. Muhammad’s biographers indicate that a debate took place during his “mission” at Mecca but their versions reflect only the side of Muhammad, apart from being sketchy. The points the Meccans made are preceded by “They say”, and Allahs rejoinders by the phrase, “Say”. Quite often, the debate is reported as having taken place between some earlier “prophet” and his people but implied to be similar to or a  It is obvious, however, that the participants meant are Muhammad and his pagan contemporaries, “More often then the controversy was conducted as it is… in election times, when different speakers address different meetings. The points are recorded and reported by members of the audience to the antagonists; who then proceed if they deem it worth while, in some manner to reply.”[Margoliouth]

To start with, the Meccans felt amused that a man like Muhammad, who was distinguished neither by birth nor breeding, should strut around proclaiming himself a prophet. Muhammad’s followers also came from classes and occupations which were not very respectable according to Meccan standards. Allah reports: “When they see you (O Muhammad) they treat you as a jest saying: Is he (the man) whom Allah has sent as a messenger?  He would have led us far away from our gods if we had not been staunch to them… Has he invented a lie concerning Allah or is there some madness in him? …Shall we forsake our gods for a mad poet? …Or one of the gods has possessed you in an evil way… Shall we put faith in you when the lowest (people) follow you? …We see you but mortal (man) like us, and we see not that any save the most abject among us follow you, without reflection. We behold in you no merit above us-nay, we deem you liars… We are surely better than this fellow who can hardly make (his meaning) clear… We do not understand much of what you say, and we see you weak among us… We are more (than you) in wealth, and in children… Why are not angels sent down unto us, and why do we not see our Lord? …If you cease not, you will soon be the outcast.”[“Quran 25.41-42. 34.8; 37.36; 11.54; 26.111; 11.27; 43.52; 11.91; 34.35; 25.21; 26.167.]

There is no reply from Allah about Muhammad’s birth and breeding. About Muhammad’ss followers he says that their past is not relevant after they have come to the true faith. He assures the Meccans that Muhammad is neither mad, nor a poet, nor possessed. He laments that the Meccans think too highly of themselves and are proud and scornful. He assures Muhammad that the time is fast approaching when it will be found out who is really mad, and that the disbelievers shall stand humbled.

Muhammad’s and his followers alleged low birth and lack of breeding appeared to the Meccans of the seventh century as in almost all contemporary societies, to be a disqualification to be a messenger from Allah. That Muslim biographers of Muhammad also gave a lot of importance to “distinguished” descent is revealed in their elaborate reconstruction of Muhammad’s descent from Adam. Margoliouth has cited several early Muslim sources to conclude that Muhammad’s grandfather, Abd al-Muttalib, was a manumitted slave who made his living by means which were not considered honourable in Mecca at that time, namely, lending money and providing water and food to the pilgrims for a consideration.[Margoliouth] But the Quran shows that, even Allah reacts extremely negatively to such taunts based on alleged “lowly origins” and indicates that “origins” were extremely important and significant in early Islam, as if they were not important they should have been no cause for anguish or retaliation.
Another point which provided amusement to the Meccans was the Prophets incapacity to perform miracles. He had himself invited the trouble by producing revelations in which the preceding prophets, particularly Moses and Jesus, had exhibited supernatural powers. Allah reports: “They say: This is only a mortal like you who would make himself superior to you… He is only a man in whom there is a madness. So watch him for a while… This is only a mortal like you who eats whereof you eat, and drinks of what you drink… If you were to obey a mortal like yourselves, you surely will be losers… What ails the messenger of Allah that he eats and walks in the markets? …You are but mortals like us who would fain turn us away from what our fathers used to worship… shall mere mortals guide us? …You are but a mortal man like us. RaHman has naught revealed to you but a lie… Is this other than a mortal man? Will you then succumb to magic when you see it? …So bring some token if you are of the truthful… If only some portent were sent down upon him from his Lord … If only he would bring us a miracle from the Lord… Why are no portents sent down upon him? …Why then have armlets of gold not been set upon him, or angles sent along with him? …We shall not put faith in you till you cause a spring to gush forth from the earth for us, or you have a garden of date-palms and grapes and cause rivers to gush forth therein abundantly, or you cause the heavens to fall piecemeal as you have pretended, or bring Allah and the angels as warrant, or you have a house of gold, or you ascend into heaven, and even then we will put no faith in your ascension till you bring down a book that we can read… Or why is not treasure thrown down unto him or why has he not a paradise from whence to eat? …You are following but a man bewitched…”[Quran. 23.24,25,33,34; 2S.6; 14.10; 64.60; 36.15; 21.3; 26.154; 13.7; 20.133; 29.50-, 43.53; 17.90-93; 25.8. The Meccans (36.15) have a fling at Rahman, the name which the Prophet gave to Allah quite frequently. They hated this name].
Allah assures the Meccans: “Your comrade errs not, nor is deceived… Surely he beheld him (the angel) on the horizon. Nor is he avid of the unseen…” He commands Muhammad: “Say: You are a warner only… Say: I am naught save a mortal messenger… Portents are with Allah and I am a warner only… Allah is able to send down a portent.  But most of them known not…” He reminds Muhammed that the Meccans are not likely to believe even if a miracle is shown to them. “The hour drew nigh and the moon was rent in twain. And if they behold a portent, they turn away and say: Prolonged illusion.” [Quran 53.2; 81.23-24; 29.50; 13.7; 54.1-2].
According to some commentators on the Quran, this revelation refers to an actual miracle performed by the Prophet. One night the moon had split into two and Mount Hara was seen standing between the two parts. But the Meccans dismissed it as an illusion. Other commentators, however, say that this refers to a future event when the Last Day will be near at hand. The Meccans stood firm by their gods; their faith in the gods was not at all shaken by Muhammad’s attacks. Allah reports: “When it was said unto them, There is no God save Allah, they were scornful, and said: Shall we forsake our gods for a mad poet?… And they marvel that a warner from among themselves has come.  They say: This is a wizard, a charlatan. Makes he the gods One God? This is an astounding thing… The chiefs among them go about exhorting: Go and be staunch by your gods. This is a thing designed (against) you. We have not heard this earlier in our religion. This is naught but an invention. Has a Reminder been revealed unto him alone among us?… Why not Allah speak to us, or some sign come to us?… Had Allah willed we would not have ascribed (unto him) partners, neither our forefathers… Had Allah willed we would not have worshipped aught beside Him, we and our forefathers, nor forbidden aught commanded from Him… We worship them only that they may bring us near unto Allah… He has invented a lie about Allah…”[Quran 37.35-36; 38.4-8; 2.183; 6.149; 39.3; 42.24]. Some of their observations were addressed to Muhammad, though reported by Allah: “Enough for us is that wherein we found our forefathers. Have you come to us that we serve Allah alone and forsake what our fathers worshipped? Do you ask us not to worship what our forefathers worshipped? We are in grave doubt concerning that to which you call us… Does your way of prayer command you that we should forsake that which our forefathers worshipped ?… We found our forefathers following a religion, and we are guided by their footprints. In what you bring we are disbelievers… O Wizard! Entreat your Lord by the pact he has made with you, so that we may walk aright…”[5.104; 7.70; 11.62; 11.87; 43.22,24,49].

The Meccans were obviously vehemently opposed to the name which Muhammad wanted to foist on Allah: “When they see you, they but choose you out of mockery: Is this (the man) who makes mockery of our gods?  And they would deny all mention of the Rahman… And when they are asked to adore RaHman, they say: What is Rahman?  Are we to adore whatever you bid us? And it increases aversion in them… And when the son of Mary is quoted as an example, behold! the folk laugh out, and say: Are our gods better, or is he?… They call our revelations false with strong denial… And when the Quran is recited unto them, they do not prostrate themselves.”[Quran 21.36; 25.60; 43.57-58; 78.28; 84.21]. But, as Muhammad persisted in reviling their gods, the Meccans decided to protest and said: “Muhammad, you will either stop cursing our gods, or we will curse your Allah.” having realized that the Allah whose will Muhammad was revealing was not the Allah they worshipped. Allah of the Quran felt concerned at this new turn and revealed, “Had Allah willed, they would not have been idolatrous. We have not set you as a keeper over them, nor are you responsible for them. Revile not those unto whom they pray beside Allah lest they wrongfully revile Allah through ignorance.”[Quran 6.108-109] Ibn Ishaq observes: “I have been told that the apostle refrained from cursing their gods, and began to call them to Allah.[Ibn Ishaq]

The Meccans, were not at all impressed by the revelations produced by the Prophet and they did not accept his claim that he received them from some higher source. They thought that he was inventing them himself. Allah reports: “They say: This is naught else than the speech of a mortal man… This is naught else than an invented lie… Nay, say they, (these are but) muddled dreams, he has but invented it; nay, he is but a poet… And when our revelations are recited unto them, they say: We have heard. If we wish we can speak the like of this. This is naught but fables of the men of old…”[Quran,74.25; 34.43 (also 11.13,35;32.3;34.43;46.8; 52.33); 21.5; 8.3l]. Muhammad threw a challenge to the Meccans. Allah prompted him: “Say: Then bring a surah like unto it, and call (for help) all you can besides Allah if you are truthful.”[Quran 10.38]. The challenge was accepted by al-Nadr b. Harith, a Meccan chief, who said: “I can tell a better story than he… In what respect is Muhammad a better story-teller?”[Ibn Ishaq],  He told several stories in verses which were like verses of the Quran. Muhammad felt outraged and never forgave al-NaDr. “The effect of the criticism must have been very damaging; for when the Prophet at the battle of Badr got the man into his power, he executed him at once while he allowed the others to be ransomed.”[D.S. Margoliouth]  Ibn Ishaq confirms that when the apostle was at al-Safra on his way back from Badr. “al-Nadr was killed by Ali…”[Ibn Ishaq],  But while the Prophet was still in Mecca, Allah thought it wise to pacify the pagans and revealed: “It is not a poets speech… nor diviners speech. And if he had invented false sayings, we assuredly had taken him by the right hand, and severed his life-artery, and not one of you could have held us off from him.”[Quran, 69, 41-42. 44-47]. The more knowledgeable among the Meccans suspected that Muhammad was only repeating what he had learnt from the People of the Book, Jews and Christians. Allah reports: “They say: And we know well that only a man teaches him… This is naught but a lie that he has invented and other folk have helped him so that they produced a slander and a lie… Fables of men of old which he has written down so that they are dictated to him morn and evening… One taught (by others), a mad man…” [Quran16.103; 25.4-5; 44.14. The Meccan allegation shows that Muhammad was not an illiterate as is asserted even in the Quran (29.46,49)]. There were several stories current in Mecca regarding the particular person or persons who coached Muhammad in biblical lore which, they said, was all that came out in the Quran. “One account says it was Jabar, a Greek servant to Amer Ebn al Hadrami, who could read and write well; another, that they were Jabar and Yesar, two slaves who followed the trade of sword cutlers at Mecca, and used to read the pentateuch and gospel and had often Mohammed as their auditor, when he passed that way. Another tells us it was Aish, or Yasih, a domestic of al Haweiteb Ebn Abd al Uzza, who was a man of some learning, and had embraced Mohammedanism. Another supposes it was Kais, a Christian, whose house Muhammad frequented; another, that it was Addas, a servant of Otba Ebn Rabia…”[George Sale, The Koran or Alcoran of Mohammed, London (n.d). p. 233, footnote 1.]

Having seen the People of the Book from close quarters, the Meccans found it difficult to believe that divine knowledge had been sent to the Jews and the Christians long ago, and that they themselves were deprived of it till the advent of Muhammad. Allah proceeds: “They say: The Scripture was revealed only to two sets of people before us, and we in sooth were not aware of what they read… If the Scripture had been revealed unto us, we surely would have been better guided than are they… Two magics which support each other… In both we are disbelievers… If it had been any good they would not have been before us in attaining it… This is an ancient lie.”[Quran, 6.157-58; 28.48; 46.11] It had also been noticed that Muhammad produced revelations according to his convenience in the debate. Allah complained: “And when we put a revelation in place of (another), they say: You are but inventing… Why is not the Quran revealed unto him all at one.”[Quran 16.101; 25.32]; Allah had himself revealed that the Quran was being read out from a “well guarded tablet” preserved in the highest heaven. Why was it then being doled out in bits and pieces? The Meccans suspected that the Prophet was inventing verses as occasion demanded and  their suspicion was confirmed in the so-called Satanic Verses. Tabari reports: “When the apostle saw that his people turned their backs on him and he was pained by their estrangement from what he brought them from God he longed that there should come to him from God a message that would reconcile his people to him… Then God sent down, Have ye thought of Al-Lat and al-Uzza and Manat the third, the other, these are the exalted Gharaniq whose intercession is approved.” The Meccans felt happy and thought that the strife was over, now that Muhammad had endorsed their Goddesses. But Muhammad had to face his own followers who felt betrayed. The verses were withdrawn soon after and replaced by another revelation. “So God annulled what Satan had suggested and God established His verses.”[Ibn Ishaq, Allahs replacement of the “Satanic Verses” are in the Quran. 53.19-17]

So the Meccans turned down the Quran totally and finally. Allah reports: “Their chieftains said: We surely see you in foolishness and we deem you of the liars… It is all one to us whether you preach or are not of those who preach… Our hearts are protected from that unto which you (Muhammad) call us, and in our ears there is deafness, and between us and you there is a veil… They say (to their people): Heed not this Quran, and drown the hearing of it.” [Quran, 7.66; 26.136; 41.5. 46.26.] Having reaffirmed their Gods and rejected Muhammad’s prophethood as well as revelations, the Meccans made fun of the Last Day (Yaumul akhir) which is described by Allah variously as Day of Resurrection (Yaumul Qiyamah), Day of Separation (Yaumul Fasl), Day of Reckoning (Yaumul Hisab), Day of Awakening (Yaumul Bal), Day of Judgment (Yaumul Din), Day of Encompassing (Yaumul MuHit) or simply as The Hour (As-Saah). [Quran 2.79; 77.14; 40.28; 30.56; 1.3; 11.85.]
“For Muhammad, a revivalist preacher seeking to strike terror in his hearers, the doctrines of resurrection and of the judgment were of the first importance, and the Quran, in consequence, is full of references to them.”[First Encyclopaedia of Islam,  Vol. IV, p.1018], on this day, the dead are to be raised, judged, and sent to eternal heaven if they were believers, and to an eternal hell if they were unbelievers. The pagan Arabs, on the other hand, believed in survival of the human personality after death as far as the retrievable outlines of the Sabateans belief and  they stood for transmigration of souls.[Encyclopaedia Americana, New York, 1952, Vol. XXIV, p. 77]. So “the notion of the reconstruction of the decayed body seemed to them in the highest degree absurd, and Mohammed’s promise of heavenly spouses occasioned mirth”[D. S. Margoliouth].  Allah reports: “They say: Shall we show you a man who will tell you (that) when you have become dispersed in death, with the most complete dispersal, still even then, you will be created anew. Has he invented a lie concerning Allah or is there in him a madness?… This is a strange thing: When we are dead and have become dust like our forefathers, shall we verily be brought back?  We were promised this forsooth, we and our forefathers. This is naught but fables of the men of old. Bring back our fathers if you speak the truth… When we are lost in the earth, how can we then be recreated?… Shall we really be restored to our first state: Even after we are crumbled bones?  Then that will be a vain proceeding… There is naught but our life of this world; we die and we live, and naught destroys us save Time… We deem it but a conjecture, and are by no means convinced… And they swear by Allah their most binding oaths (that) Allah will not raise him who dies…”[Quran, 34.7-8; 50.2-3; 27.67-68; 44.36; 45.32; 32.10; 79.10-12, 45 24, 32; 16.38. The reference to the earlier promise points to the Jews who had been proclaiming for a long time that the forefathers of the Arabs will be raised again and judged]. Allah replies in the Quran: “We know what the earth takes, and with us is a recording Book… Thinks man we shall not assemble his bones. We are able to restore his very finger… Surely it will need but one Shout, and they will be awakened… Those of old and those of later times, will all be brought together to the tryst of an appointed day. Then you the deniers, you will eat of a tree called Zaqqum, and will fill your bellies therewith and thereon you will drink of boiling water, drinking as the camel drinks. This will be their welcome on the Day of Judgment…”[Quran 50.4; 75.3-4; 79.13-14; 56.49-57].

The Meccans, however, were not cowed down by these threats. They challenged Muhammad to hurry up and bring down the doom upon them. Allah reports: “They say: You have disputed with us and multiplied disputation with us. Now bring down upon us that wherewith you threaten us, if you are truthful… O Allah! if this be indeed the truth from you, rain down stones on us or bring us some painful doom… Our Lord! Hasten us for our fate before the Day of Reckoning… They ask you of the Hour: When will it come to port?… When will the promise be fulfilled, if you are truthful? When is the Day of Judgment?… They say: The hour will never come to us…”[Quran 11.22; 8.32; 48.16; 7.187; 10.48; 32.28; 51.13; 34.3]. The Meccans threw this challenge repeatedly according to the Quran. Muhammad had to wriggle out of the situation. Allah reports: “Say: Knowledge thereof is with my Lord. He alone will manifest it at the proper time… It comes not to you save unawares… But Allah will not punish them while you (Muhammad) are with them… For every nation there is an appointed time… It is (only) then when it has befallen that you will believe… And it is in the Scriptures of the men of old. Is it not a portent for them that the doctors of the Children of Israel know it? …You are but a warner sent unto them… So withdraw from them and await (the event)…”[Quran 7.187.8.33:10.49,51; 26.96-87; 79.45].

“Thus then the years of the debate rolled on; in which parties increased in vehemence and antagonism, and in which the successful polemics of the Meccans on the new religion were met by ridicule and refutation of the religious notions current among the pagans. As has been said, the Meccan side is known only from the statements of the adversary, whose acquaintance with the Meccan religion may not have been very deep…”[ Margoliouth] The poet Abu Qays b. al-Aslat whose pseudonym was Sayfi summed up the pagan position in an appeal to an obviously approachable “Lord of all humanity” and not the particular “Lord of all Muslims”:
Lord of mankind, serious things have happened.
The difficult and the simple are involved.
Lord of mankind, if we have erred
Guide us to the good path.
Were it not for our Lord we should be Jews
And the religion of Jews is not convenient.
Were it not for our Lord we should be, Christians
Along with the monks on Mount Jalil.
But when we were created we were created
Hanifs; our religion is from all generations.[Ibn Ishaq]

Commenting on the last phase of the Meccan Suras, F. Buhl says: “It is the weakest part of the Quran, in which Muhammad’s imagination became exhausted, and he was content with tiresome repetitions of his earlier ideas and especially with the tales of the prophets. The form becomes discursive, and more prosaic… The passages belonging to it show clearly that Muhammad would have become intellectually bankrupt if the migration to Medina had not aroused him to a new effort…”[First Encyclopaedia of Islam, Volume IV, p. 1075]

The bulk of the Quran covers the Meccan period in the life of the Prophet. We do not find in any of the chapters even the hint of any physical method used by the Meccans towards Muhammad or his Muslims. The only violence we come across is in the language of Allah who frets and fumes and threatens the Meccans with dire consequences, all too frequently and for no other reason than that the Meccans refuse to accept what is written in the scriptures of the Jews and the Christians, and stick to their own ancient religion.  the only contemporary source available to us, namely, the Quran does not support even with a single instance the claim by the biographers of Muhammad, that while the Prophet argued his case with patience and in a reasoned manner, his opponents did not know how to meet the challenge and resorted to physical methods. We find no evidence for these stories in Quran. On the contrary, the biographers provide several broad hints of violence threatened or committed by the zealots of Islam in the streets of Mecca. For instance, when Umar became a Muslim, he went to the Kaba and proclaimed to his fellow citizens, “There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the apostle of Allah!  Whoever of you moves, I shall cut off his head with my bright scimitar, and shall send him to the Mansion of destruction.”[The Rauzat-us-Safa, or Garden of Purity by Muhammad bin Khavendshah bin Mahmud translated into English by E. Rehatsek, first published 1893, Delhi Reprint 1982, Vol. I, pt. II, p. 183.] Margoliouth observes: “The persons whose accession to Islam was most welcomed were men of physical strength, and much actual fighting must have taken place at Meccah before the Flight; else the readiness with which the Moslems after the Flight could produce from their number tried champions would be inexplicable. A tried champion must have been tried somewhere…”[Margoliouth]

We can take up the exact procedure of the “Migration” later on in a different context. There is comprehensive evidence, that the first followers of Muhammad were quite poor and had very little or no wealth and property at Mecca. There is no evidence even in the Quran that the Meccans physically “harmed” Muslims without any physical provocation on the part of Muslims. Even if the Meccans had reacted “physically” to all that Muhammad threatens the Meccans with, as well as his attacks on their beliefs and religious practices, it would have been entirely consistent with how Muslims have reacted to any verbal criticism on their own beliefs or claims by non-Muslims. We will take up the possibility that Muslim aggression and violence became so intolerable that the Meccans decided to simply ask the Muslims to leave, and Muhammad negotiated with tribes in Medina not entirely on friendly terms with the influential Meccan Qureysh, for asylum. More pertinent is the fact that, both by financial circumstance as well as lack of reference in the Quran, there is no evidence for looting, abducting for ransom, or killing of Muslims in Mecca by the Qureysh. The fact that all of Muhammad’s adherents, and himself could safely move from Mecca to Medina without any harm at all, including a few women, proves further the non-aggressive policy of the Meccans.

As soon as Muhammad  had migrated to Median, he engaged a few spies to supply him with the intelligence of the movement of Meccan caravans. However, the Quraysh caravans were always well protected with armed security guards, just to prevent it from the plunder of highway bandits. Muhammad wanted to try his luck, as those Meccan caravans were such richly laden with exquisite goods-no Jihadist could resist. Apologist biographers, like Hussein Haykal explain that the Muhajirs from Mecca were homesick and were looking for an opportunity to take revenge. Later, when Muhammad conquered Mecca, none of these ‘homesick’ Muhajirs decided to return permanently to their “beloved” home. Here follows a description of the first few of such many surprise/terror raids on the Quraysh caravan. There is a controversy as to which was the first raid on the Quraysh caravan by Muhammad. Ibn Ishak writes that Muhammad himself conducted the first raid, and it was the raid on a caravan at Waddan. Ibn Ishak’s book is scanty in giving a reasonable dating of these operations. Waqidi writes that the first raid was the raid conducted by Hamzah. Most other biographers agree with Waqidi’s version of the dating of Muhammad’s raids.

(1) The Raid on Quraysh Caravan at al-Is, or the Expedition of Sif al-Bahr by Hamzah ibn al-Muttalib–March, 623CE
The first raid/expedition against the Quraysh caravans took place seven or nine months after the Hijrah. Led by Hamzah ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib (Muhammad’s uncle), with thirty or forty men of the emigrants; the purpose of this raid, as stated earlier, was to plunder the Quraysh caravan. This raiding party of Hamzah assembled at the seacoast near al-Is, between Mecca and Medina, where Abu Jahl ibn Hashim, the leader of the caravan was camping with three hundred Meccan riders. Hamza met Abu Jahl there with a view to attack the caravan, but Majdi b. Amr al-Juhani, a Quraysh who was friendly to both the parties intervened between them; so, both parties separated without fighting. This very first adventure of Muhammad in war and plunder was a failure, Hamza returned to Medina and Abu Jahl proceeded towards Mecca. This raid failed as the Muslims were afraid to face such a formidable convoy of the Quraysh.
(2) Raid on Meccan Caravan at Buwat by Ubaydah b. al-Harith—April, 623CE
This raid took place nine months after the Hijrah, a few weeks after the first raid at al-Is. About a month after Hamzah’s abortive bid for plunder, Muhammad entrusted a party of sixty (or eighty) Jihadists led by Ubaydah b. al-Harith (a cousin of him) to conduct another terror operation at a Quraysh caravan that was returning from Syria and protected by two hundred armed men,. The leader of this caravan was either Abu Sufyan ibn Harb or Ikrima b. Abu Jahl. The Muslim party went as far as Thanyatul-Murra, a watering place in Hejaz. No fighting took place, as the Quraysh were quite far from the place where Muslims were in the offing to attack the caravan. Nevertheless, Sa’d b. Abi Waqqas, shot an arrow at the Quraysh. This was the ‘first arrow of Islam.’ The arrows thrown at them by the Medina party surprised the Quraysh. It was completely an unprovoked attack on the Quraysh that sent the strong message to them about what they could expect next. However, no fighting took place and the Muslims returned empty-handed. Some say that Ubaydah was the first Jihadist to carry the banner of Islam; others say Hamzah  was the first to carry the first banner. Some say that Muhammad commanded Ubaydah to conduct this raid while he (Muhammad) was returning from the raid of al-Abwa.
(3) Raid on a Meccan Caravan at Kharar by Sa’d ibn Waqqas-April, 623CE
The very brave act of Sa’d ibn Waqqas, to shoot arrows at the Quraysh greatly impressed Muhammad. Sa’d had been between twenty to twenty-five years old but in spite of his youth Muhammad deputed him as the leader of a plundering team to lay a siege, with only twenty other Jihadists (some say eight), on the Meccan caravan. All of them were from the Muahjirs (immigrants). So, one month later, the third raid took place under the leadership of a youthful Sa’d’s who set up an ambush in the valley of Kharrar on the road to Mecca and waited to raid a returning Meccan caravan from Syria. They planned a surprise attack but learnt that the ‘booty’ (the Meccan caravan) had already eluded them, just one day before they arrived at the place of plunder. The Muslims returned to Medina crestfallen.
(4) Raid on a Meccan Caravan and on B. Damrah at al-Abwa/ Waddan by Muhammad-August, 623CE
Muhammad personally, took charge of this raiding foray and led his followers.
This was the raid at al-Abwa, also known as the Ghazwah of Waddan. As said before, he himself conducted this raid, directed at Abwa, the spot where his mother lay buried. To his dismay, when he arrived at the site, the Quraysh caravan had already passed. Disappointed, he then raided the nearest tribe of B. Damra (a branch of B. Bakr) and forced them to conclude a treaty of no aggression (by B. Damra). This treaty was the first written accord of Muhammad with any foreign tribe. The agreement was of benefit to Muhammad, as it prevented the B. Damra to mobilize forces against him, nor could they assist Muhammad’s enemy who were principally the Quraysh. In return, Muhammad pledged not to wage any war against this tribe. This is an example of the success of economically non-productive nomadic raiding strategies on settled producers, as simply the constant threat of raids could disrupt the productive processes. Then Muhammad went as far as Waddan in pursuit of the Quraysh caravan, but it eluded him and he returned to Medina after fifteen days.
[Ghazwa means either a military force when an Apostle (Rasul) leads it or an Imam. It also means a sudden attack on a caravan or another tribe for the purpose of seizing property and women. Sariyah or brigade means a small force commanded by one of the Imam’s lieutenants.] Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 256: Narrated As-Sab bin Jaththama: The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, “They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans).” I also heard the Prophet saying, “The institution of Hima [protected/inviolate in Arabic] is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle.” This Hadith clearly shows that Muhammad did not spare the women and children of the infidels. This is a significant Hadith that is never brought up by the Muslim apologists.
(5) Raid on a Rich Meccan Caravan at Bawat by Muhammad-October, 623CE
A month after his raid at al-Abwa, Muhammad personally led two hundred men including some citizens of Medina to Bawat, a place on the caravan route of the Quraysh merchants, where a herd of fifteen hundred (1,500) to two thousand-five hundred (2,500) camels, accompanied by one hundred (100) riders, under the leadership of Umayyah ibn Khalaf, a Quraysh was proceeding. The purpose of this raid obviously, was the plunder of this exceedingly rich Quraysh caravan. No battle took place and the raid resulted in no booty. Muhammad went up to Dhat al-Saq, in the desert of al-Khabar. He prayed there and a mosque was built at the spot. This was the first raid where a few al-Usharayh Ansars participated with the prospect of  pillage.
(6) Raid on a Meccan Caravan at al-Ushayrah, in the district of Yanbu by Muhammad-November, 623CE
This was Muhammad’s third personal raid. Between one hundred-fifty and two hundred (note the increasing number of Jihadists joining in the robbery) followers joined this terror operation. They had thirty camels that they rode upon by turns. When they arrived at al-Usharayh in the direction of Yanbo, they expected to waylay upon a rich Meccan caravan towards Syria led by Abu Sufyan. Muhammad already had the intelligence report of this caravan’s departure from Mecca. He waited for a month for this caravan to pass. Unfortunately, it was too late; for, when Muhammad reached the intended spot of plunder, the Meccan caravan had already passed. The readers should keep in mind of this raid, as this was the same caravan that gave rise to the famous action at Badr (Badr II) during its return journey. In this operation, Muhammad entered into an alliance with Bani Mudlij, a tribe inhabiting the vicinity of al-Usharayh. He also concluded another treaty with Bani Damra. All those treaties established good political connections for him.
(7) Raid on Muhammad’s Milch Camels at Badr (Badr I) by Kurz ibn Jabir al-Fihri-December, 623CEthe first retaliatory raid from an ally of the Meccans
After those six unprovoked and hostile attacks on the Quraysh caravans, the Quraysh decided to retaliate and send a strong message to Muhammad that his highway robbery would not be tolerated. With this end in view, Kurz ibn Jabir al-Fihri, ally of the Quarysh raided the vicinity of Medina where Muhammad’s milch camels were pasturing. This was conducted ten days after Muhammad returned to Medina from his unsuccessful plundering attempt at the Quraysh caravan at al-Usharayh. Having heard of this attack, Muhammad swiftly went out looking for Kurz until he reached the Safwa valley, close to Badr. This was the first raid at Badr or Badr I. Kurz escaped the capture; Muhammad returned to Medina and stayed there for the next three months. It is said that later, Muhammad caught Kurz and he (Kurz) converted to Islam.
(8) Raid on Meccan Caravan at Nakhla by Abd Allah ibn Jahsh, the First Successful Plunder-December, 623CE
After his return from the first Badr encounter, Muhammad sent Abd Allah b. Jahsh in Rajab with eight emigrants and without any Ansar for another terror operation. Abd Allah b. Jahsh was a maternal cousin of Muhammad. The participants in this plunder were: 1. Abu Haudhayfa 2. Abd Allah b Jahsh 3. Ukkash b. Mihsan 4. Utba b. Ghazwan 5. Sa’d b. Abi Waqqas 6. Amir b.Rabia 7. Waqid b. Abd Allah and 8. Khalid b. al-Bukayr. Some historians say that there were between seven to twelve partakers in this raiding/plundering party of the Muslims. It will be useful to remember the names of these very first Islam’s terrorists, as we shall witness, later, that their names crop up in many other terror operations.

Muhammad gave Abd Allah b. Jahsh a letter, but not to be read until he had travelled for two days and then to do what he was instructed to do in the letter without putting pressure on his companions. Abd Allah proceeded for two days, then he opened the letter; it told him to proceed until he reached at Nakhla, between Mecca and Taif; lie in wait for the Quraysh and observe what they were doing. Abd Allah b. Jahsh told his companions that whoever chose martyrdom (read terrorism) was free to join him and whoever did not could go back. All the companions agreed to follow him (a few biographers write that two Muslims decided not to be martyrs and chose to return to Medina). Sad b. Abi Waqqas and Utbah b. Ghazwan lost a camel that they were taking turns to ride. The camel strayed and went to Buhran. So, they went out looking for the runaway camel to Buhran and fell behind the raiding party.
As instructed by the Prophet, Abd Allah and the rest of the party then proceeded, and soon they arrived at Nakhla. Nakhla was a valley to the east of Mecca, about halfway to Taif. It was the usual route to Syria for the Meccan caravans. Muhammad had the secret information that a rich Meccan caravan, lightly guarded, laden with dry raisin, wine leather and other goods was soon to pass by the route.

Four Quraysh men guarded this donkey caravan – Amr b. al-Hadrami the leader of the caravan, Uthman b. Abd Allah b. al-Mughirah, Nawfal b. Abd Allah b. al-Mughirah, Uthman’s brother, Al-Hakam b. Kaysan, the freed slave (Mawla)of Hisham b. al-Mughirah. Soon, the Meccan caravan arrived at Nakhla guarded by the four Quraysh men. When they saw the Muslims, they were afraid of them. One of Abd Allah b. Jahsh’s men, Ukkash b Mihsan, was shaven in head to hide the real purpose of their journey and to give the Quraysh the impression of lesser Hajj (Umra); for, it was the month (Rajab) when hostilities were forbidden. When the Quraysh saw the shaven head of Ukkash, they thought that the Muslims were on their way for pilgrimage and they felt relieved and safe and started to prepare food for themselves. That was how the first band of Muslim Jihadists deceived their prey. Due to the prevalence of a sacred month, either at the beginning of Rajab or at the end of it (the opinion among the historians vary), Rajab being one of the four sacred months when there was a total ban on warfare and bloodshed in the Arabian Peninsula, Abd Allah b. Jahsh was, at first, hesitant to attack the caravan. Nevertheless, after much deliberation, the Muslims did not want this rich caravan to escape their hand. So, they decided to kill as many Quraysh as they could and take a large booty. They attacked the Quraysh while they (the Quraysh) were busy preparing their food. In the short battle that ensued, Waqid b. Abd Allah killed Amr b. Hadrami, the leader of the Quraysh caravan. NawfalAbd Allah escaped. The Muslims took Uthman b. Abd Allah and al-Hakam b. Kaysan as prisoners. b.

.Abd Allah b. Jahsh returned to Medina with the booty and with the two captured Quraysh men. He had already decided to give one-fifth of the booty to Muhammad, and divide the rest among them. The prevailing share of the leader of a plundering party at that time was one quarter of the booty. It is not clear why Abd Allah b. Jahsh decided on one-fifth booty, as Allah did not yet decide the provision of ‘Khums’ (leader’s commission on booty of plunder/theft) for Muhammad in verse 8:41. This verse was released after the Badr war, which took place after the plunder at Nakhla.

008.041 And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah,- and to the Messenger, and to near relatives, orphans, the needy, and the wayfarer,- if ye do believe in Allah and in the revelation We sent down to Our servant on the Day of Testing,- the Day of the meeting of the two forces. For Allah hath power over all things”.

Since this bloodshed took place during a sacred month, Muhammad was quite unwilling to start an un-ending cycle of revenge killings. The Quraysh also spread everywhere the news of the raid and the killing by Muhammad in the sacred month. Therefore, he rebuked them (the Muslims) for fighting in the sacred month and refused to take any share from the booty. Then verse 2:217 regarding fighting in the sacred month was revealed.

002.217 They ask thee concerning fighting in the Prohibited Month. Say: “Fighting therein is a grave (offence); but graver is it in the sight of Allah to prevent access to the path of Allah, to deny Him, to prevent access to the Sacred Mosque, and drive out its members. Tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter. Nor will they cease fighting you until they turn you back from your faith if they can. And if any of you Turn back from their faith and die in unbelief, their works will bear no fruit in this life and in the Hereafter; they will be companions of the Fire and will abide therein.”

This revelation permitted Muhammad to conduct war during the sacred months. Then Abd Allah b. Jahsh divided the booty, one-fifth going to Muhammad. He also decided to make more money by asking ransom for the two captives. However, Muhammad refused to accept the ransoms from the Quraysh until the two of his men, Sa’d b. Abi Waqqas and Utbah b. Ghazwan returned from searching the straying camel. He was afraid that the Quraysh might kill them if they found them. When Sa’d and Utbah returned unharmed, Muhammad released the two Quraysh prisoners on payment of their ransom of one thousand six hundred (1,600) Dirhams (one Dirham = 1/10 Dinar; one Dinar 4.235 gm of gold) per head. It is reported that, soon after his release, Hakam b. Kaysan became a Muslim, probably after witnessing the profitability of Islam. Later, he was killed at the battle of Bir Mauna. The other prisoner, Uthman b. Abd Allah returned to Mecca and died as an unbeliever.

The Islamic name of this first successful plunder is ‘Nakhla Raid.’ It was also the first raid on which the Muslims seized the first captive, and the first life they took. Rightfully, Abd Allah was called the Amir al-Mominun, that is, the commander of the faithful. After the success of Nakhla raid, Muhammad felt militarily strong to formally legalize and legitimize plunder. This successful raid on the Quraysh caravans fully alarmed the Meccans, because their prosperity completely depended upon the regular and uninterrupted trade to Syria. The trading with Abyssinia and Yemen was of lesser importance. Even the trading caravan towards Abyssinia and Yemen did not look safe from the marauding army of Muhammad. The Nakhla attack also greatly unnerved the Meccans. They now believed that Muhammad had very little respect for life and absolutely no concern for the sanctity of the sacred months. So, the Meccans resolved to avenge the bloodshed. However, the Quraysh restrained their hostility. Muhammad still had a few of his followers residing at Mecca, including his own daughter, Zaynab. The Quraysh did not take any revenge on the remaining followers of Muhammad (including Muhammad’s daughter) at Mecca neither did they make any attempt to harass his beloved daughter, Zaynab. Muhammad, after the success at Nakhla, contemplated a more severe and mortal attack on the Quraysh. Allah now gave him the permission to fight the unbelievers in verses 22:39-42, 2:190-194. As well, the raid at Nakhla was justified by the ‘expulsion’ of the believers from Mecca. However, the true reason was “until the religion became God’s alone”. That meant, until all the Meccans (or the world) accepted Islam.

022.039 To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged;- and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid;-
022.040 (They are) those who have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right,- (for no cause) except that they say, “our Lord is Allah”. Did not Allah check one set of people by means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of Allah is commemorated in abundant measure. Allah will certainly aid those who aid his (cause);- for verily Allah is full of Strength, Exalted in Might, (able to enforce His Will).
022.041 (They are) those who, if We establish them in the land, establish regular prayer and give regular charity, enjoin the right and forbid wrong: with Allah rests the end (and decision) of (all) affairs.
022.042 If they treat thy (mission) as false, so did the peoples before them (with their Prophets),- the People of Noah, and ‘Ad and Thamud;

002.190 Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.
002.191 And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.
002.192 But if they cease, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
002.193 And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression.
002.194 The prohibited month for the prohibited month,- and so for all things prohibited,- there is the law of equality. If then any one transgresses the prohibition against you, Transgress ye likewise against him. But fear Allah, and know that Allah is with those who restrain themselves.

Those who were reluctant to join in the war of plunder were reproved. Allah’s revelation on this came down in verses 47:20-21. These verses granted paradise to those who fight (or terrorize and plunder) for Islam i.e., Jihad and are killed.

047.020 Those who believe say, “Why is not a sura sent down (for us)?” But when a sura of basic or categorical meaning is revealed, and fighting is mentioned therein, thou wilt see those in whose hearts is a disease looking at thee with a look of one in swoon at the approach of death. But more fitting for them-
047.021 Were it to obey and say what is just, and when a matter is resolved on, it were best for them if they were true to Allah.

Allah then asked the Jihadis to “strike off the heads of the unbelievers; to make a great slaughter and bind them fast in bonds” in verse 47:3-4

047.003 This because those who reject Allah follow vanities, while those who believe follow the Truth from their Lord: Thus does Allah set forth for men their lessons by similitudes.
047.004 Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been Allah’s Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost.

Furthermore, the true believers were expected not only to fight but also to contribute materially towards the cost of war (4:66-67, 9:88, 9:111), to kill and be killed. Those who did this were promised a higher rank in paradise (4:74, 4:95). The believers were asked to prepare with whatever force in their ability, troops, horses, etc. to strike terror into the hearts of the unbelievers.

004.066 If We had ordered them to sacrifice their lives or to leave their homes, very few of them would have done it: But if they had done what they were (actually) told, it would have been best for them, and would have gone farthest to strengthen their (faith);
004.067 And We should then have given them from our presence a great reward;

009.088 But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper.
009.111 Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.

004.074 Let those fight in the cause of Allah Who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah,- whether he is slain or gets victory – Soon shall We give him a reward of great (value).
004.095 Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-

009.073 O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell,- an evil refuge indeed.
009.123 O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him.
008.060 Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly.

These messages were promulgated within two or three years after Muhammad’s arrival at Medina. This promulgation was not only for the refugees (Muhajirs) but also to all the men of Medina. This is the history and context of the “rightful war” being referred to by Muslim apologists.

To be continued….

Part 1 : LIE 1 AND 2

part 3: LIE 4

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Mumbai Masala from “God remembers”- on a source of Islamic propaganda protected by India : 1

Posted on September 8, 2008. Filed under: Hindu, India, Islam, Islamic propaganda, Kashmir, Muslims, Politics, religion, terrorism |

I came across some interesting propaganda from an Indian from Mumbai. We have to keep in mind this is a Muslim from India, who is allowed to run an Islamic “research” organization to carry out his propaganda based on highly selective and edited quotations from a certain class of sources in Mumbai, the site of a string of blasts in the public railway system by Islamic terrorists in India, a country whose Muslims amount to less than one-fifth in the overall population, a country that was one of the first to ban the “Satanic Verses” by Salman Rushdie, a country where a provincial government was sacked for not being able to “protect” a Muslim mosque built on territory disputed by the Hindus as the site of a holy temple which has been recorded by Islamic chroniclers to have been destroyed by the Mughal adventurer Babur, a country which however remains completely silent when numerous ancient and archaeologically important Hindu sites in Kashmir are destroyed by Muslims, a country that gags the voice of a woman of Bangladeshi origin writing about the “shame” of Islamic atrocities on Hindu women in Bangladesh and now a refugee because of the “fatwaists” in her own country. Apparently such a propagandist who declares with glee and with a smile that even though the “method” of destroying the twin towers was wrong, the fact is that right after that “attack” a large number of Americans converted to Islam, is welcomed by a visa in western countries whereas the elected Chief Minister of a neighboring province from a “not-anti-Hindu” party in India is denied a visa to attend a conference. What drew my attention was that his claims have been reproduced word-for-word by a Muslim as “counters” to my posts on how Islam came to India. I saw that this person had actually tried to offer an open challenge to the Pope, so it was clear that, his greatest weakness lay in a deep insecurity that needed compensation by provoking through outrageous comments and lies, and ultimately trying to draw attention to himself. So in my new sequence of posts I am not going to name him – the one-who-has-no-name : but the common face of a string of lies not supported by facts usually hurled at non-Muslims. This particular Indian should be an interesting study for anyone trying to understand what really went on in the minds of the early founders of Islam, as I feel that similar motivations of insecurity and inferiority/deprivation complex turned into megalomania, move both this one and the founders. I have left enough hints in the heading for anyone with some knowledge of Hebrew or Arabic to figure out the actual name!

LIE 1: ISLAM TRANSLATES FROM ARABIC AS “PEACE” AS IT IS DERIVED FROM SALAAM WHICH MEANS “PEACE”

Here I will quote from a reader’s comment to another reader’s similar claim that “Islam literally translates as peace” to one of my posts:

“Actually “Islam” does mean “submission” and not “peace”.

“Islam” is derived from the triliteral root s-l-m. The root means to “submit”…Salaam means peace… Islam means submission. Some confusion exists because people don’t understand how the term “peace” is arrived at, from s-l-m. There will only be peace when one side “submits”. That is why Islam dedicates so much time to subjugation. Once an enemy is defeated, they will be subjugated, at which time peace will ensue. Islam, as in the religion means submission to God, not peace.

The central belief and action of Islam is submission to Allah, not “Peace”. Rendering Islam as “Peace” makes the term senseless in the way of naming a religion. If you studied Qur’anic Arabic, as I did, you should know this. It is a pretty simple concept of Arabic. And my guess is you spent your time memorizing Arabic, and not studying it semantics or syntax.” Ibn al-Rawandi

LIE 2: THE QURAN SAYS THAT IF ONE  INNOCENT HUMAN BEING [all muslims or non-muslims] IS KILLED IT IS AS IF ALL HUMANITY HAS BEEN KILLED, SIMILARLY IF ONE INNOCENT HUMAN IS SAVED IT IS EQUIVALENT TO ALL HUMANITY BEING SAVED [FROM AL MAEDA]

005.032
YUSUFALI: On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.
PICKTHAL: For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. Our messengers came unto them of old with clear proofs (of Allah’s Sovereignty), but afterwards lo! many of them became prodigals in the earth.
SHAKIR: For this reason did We prescribe to the children of Israel that whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men; and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men; and certainly Our messengers came to them with clear arguments, but even after that many of them certainly act extravagantly in the land.

Apart from the obvious quotation from Hebrew sources, and the fact that we have plenty of Hadiths and Ishaq’s biographical notes that show how far from truth the real practice of Islam was even by Muhammad himself  from this injunction, note that all three translations specifically mention “Children of Israel” – primarily the Jews. The propagandist always quotes this verse as a “proof” of peaceful intentions in Quran, but strangely they always drop the “Children of Israel” bit. If Muslims claim that by the various convoluted claims of descent, Arab bedouins were also children of Israel, then also this injunction becomes valid only for the identifiable Semitic ethnicities of the Jews and the Bedouins. A host of questions are not cleared, (1)  should we consider all Muslims as “children of Israel”? Does it mean then that all humankind are descended from the twelve tribes? If so then all humankind are “people of the Book”? Then no-one could be pagan by definition – including the early Meccans against whom Muhammad waged war – and different rules were applied to the “people of the book” and “pagans”? On the other hand if only the Arabs and the Jews are “Children of Israel”, then does this injunction apply to  Muslims who are not of Arab or Jewish origin?

Who interprets what “corruption”, “mischief” means? If we go by the Meccan episode, this could simply mean non-acceptance of Islam, or debating it, or challenging it verbally – as we can and will show in this sequence. This propagandist shouts a lot that the Quran is quoted without context, but he most carefully remains silent on the verse immediately following the above from the Quran.

005.033
YUSUFALI: The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;
PICKTHAL: The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom;
SHAKIR: The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement,

So we have the first clause for not being “innocent” – waging “war” against “Allah” and Muhammad : Note that nothing here states about who started the war – for example, if someone wages a “defensive” war to protect themselves from looting of caravans and settlements being raided and attacked it still deprives the “wagers” of this defensive war of their “innocence” and therefore liable for “Muhammad”ian punishments. In the next post I will describe at least six raids and attacks on the Meccan trade kafelas after Muhammad and his followers, who had began to physically attack their opponents in Mecca, were expelled or allowed to leave without any penalties on life, limb or property. Only after six such raids, did the Meccan Qureysh, took preparations to defend their life, property and means of livelihood – the “war against Allah” and his “messenger”. This will also be related to another big lie about the “context” of the so called “hate-murder-unbelievers” verses in Quran, so I will take it up in a longer next post.

Part 2: LIE 3

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

The fascinating case of religious Maoists in Orissa : especially Maoists who find only one religion evil and all others worth protecting

Posted on September 4, 2008. Filed under: Christians, Communist, Hindu, India, Politics, terrorism |

As I had proposed in my earlier post on the Kandhmal incident in Orissa, India,  after long speculation in the media about the stunning silence of the Maoists  about their “role in the assassination of Laxmananda Saraswati”, one week after the assassination suddenly a statement has appeared out of thin air – supposedly coming from the Maoists : The Central Committee of the Communist Party of India-Maoist (?)  declares “The Sangh Parivar leaders like Praveen Togadia have been trying to divert the people by uttering lies that it is not the Maoists but Christian organizations that had carried out the attack on the VHP leader…Saraswati was a rabid anti-Christian ideologue and persecutor of innocent Christians who was responsible for the burning
down of over 400 churches in Kandhamal district alone.” This “Maoist” statement warned the VHP of “more such punishments if it continued violence against religious minorities in the country” and called for a ban on groups linked to the Sangh Parivar, such as the VHP, its youth wing Bajrang Dal, right-wing Hindu political party Shiv Sena and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). This is a most unusual Maoist group indeed! A Maoist group that finds only one particular religion as the “persecutor”, finds all “Christians” innocent, deplores “rabid anti-Christianism”, and most significantly is absolutely against “burning down Churches” – and still calls itself “Maoist” – unbelievable!

The statement which uncannily resembles standard Marxist harangue from the Left leaning section of the Thaparite School of Indian History, and those that daily shout about the “danger of Hindu Right Wing” in mainstream Indian politics, became necessary as the involvement of “real” Maoists became suspect, and the Government was probably quite desperate. A section of the “well-wisher”s of the Christian leadership might also have thought that it was important to reinforce the arrow of suspicion towards the Maoists. This only shows that the statement originated from people who have never seriously studied or observed Maoist strategic thinking and their ideological framework. Even if local “Maoists” were involved, it is now more obvious that it was far from actual Maoism. For most authentic Maoist groups in India and abroad, their ideology requires them to treat all religions as “opiates of the people” – the Indian Maoists have traditionally been in fact more “Maoist” than Mao himself. In certain parts of the world, there have been attempts from within the Christian groups to align with radical movements – the radical Liberation Theology in the Latin American nations for example. But Church authorities have moved quickly enough to expel these elements whom they thought were getting too close to Communism.

What could have really happened? There are three possible scenarios :

(1) The major Maoist recruits could have initially come from the minority Panas group from which also a large number of conversions into Christianity took place. But the clan ties were stronger than both Maoism or Christianity and hence when it became crucial for the Panas community to try and regain their Scheduled status to get various State benefits [which they lost under the Indian constitution as in general just like the Majority caste Hindus or Muslims, for Christians too, reservation is not available based on religion, and these religions are not considered to be so “backward” as to need reservation]  the entire community pitched in and the “Maoist” clan brothers helped their non-Maoist brothers out.

(2) The Maoists have had a deal with suppliers of arms and ammunition, either from the Jihadi networks or from other foreign religious movements which have promised or delivered sophisticated arms and ammunition, in return for collaboration in elimination of their common threat – the Hindu organizations in the state. The dense forest cover allows the real identity of these “Maoists” and their alliances to be hidden.

(3) Or what could be most dangerous, that those who are operating in the guise of Maoists are no Maoists at all but simply an extension of various foreign interests. If a section of the Church has played into this, it will be most unfortunate, as I don’t think they realize the real processes of change in the “Hindu” attitude in India.

Suppose now a serious military campaign is unleashed against the Maoists whose main strategy has always been to use “inaccessibility of terrain” to “live like fish among the water of people” and expand fluid “base areas”, and have always failed in the face of determined “encirclement campaigns”, so that the Maoists face extinction in the state. My prediction is that there will be an immediate huge media campaign to denounce the “persecution of Christians in the name of tackling Maoist extremists”. But having started this game now, whoever wished well for the Christians did a great disservice to Christianity – first it has associated Christians with Maoist Communists, and second, they in reality will have no defence in case a strong Indian government at the centre decides to liquidate the Maoist threat forever, thereby also eliminating those the well-wishers are lobbying for.

On August 30 the Delhi based private news channel NDTV 24X7 quoted “unnamed government sources” as saying that their assessment was that Christians had no role in the killing of Saraswati, and that the probe was leading to Maoist culprits. I find it highly amusing that both bloggers as well as Indian media usually reports this statement from NDTV, and the Christian organizations reports of an “estimated 50,000 Christians” living in the jungles abandoning their homes in fear of attacks, while they remain completely silent that this same channel also showed a documentary, where they also showed violent attacks on “Hindu” tribals, destruction of their villages, and their women and children hiding out in open jungle to escape from fear of attacks by “Christians”. The documentary makers tried their best not to appear “pro-Hindu”, which implies that the evidence of attacks on Hindu villagers were too numerous to ignore completely and liable to show up NDTV as completely biased later on if not at least partially represented.

Wherever I have gone in India, I have almost always observed genuine respect and tolerance for Christians by Hindus – but I do not think that Christians in the West would show the same tolerance towards the Hindus if the Hindus practised items of their culture that the Christian West thought obnoxious [the issue of public slaughter of cows for festivals and eating beef nad hence also the related issue of illegal beef trade- which is not favoured by the Hindu tribals] or react most favourably to disparagement of Christian practices and beliefs by the Hindus. The role of Christian missionaries in education and healthcare in India is acknowledged by the Hindus with great warmth and genuine gratitude. But I think the modern Christian missions in India have to think carefully before they get involved in the fractures of Indian society. Many Hindus celebrate Christmas as their own festival, and many of the Bhakti sects of Hinduism in India have no problem in displaying Jesus as a manifestation of their “supreme lord”. The stereotypical portrayal of the Christian Missionary as a “benevolent father”  was and continues to be common in popular movies. I have never seen a similar religious accommodation of the “Hindu” within Christianity – where typically the best representation of the Hindu is that of a “poor ignorant bewildered fallen soul” “mired in darkness” and needing “salvation”.

This is a misunderstanding between Hindus and Christians, and is being exploited by forces that have their own designs on controlling India. A strong government that was determined in liquidating Maoism could actually ultimately prove beneficial for the image of Christianity in India, as otherwise these sort of media campaigns will only ultimately consolidate the so much “feared” “Hindu Right”.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Kandhmal-indictment of India’s reservation politics

Posted on August 31, 2008. Filed under: Christians, Communist, Hindu, India, Politics, religion, terrorism |

Swami Laxmanananda was actively involved in a contest to preserve indigenous tribal traditions from aggressive Christian evangelists in the state’s tribal belt since 1966. He was killed in his crowded ashram at Jalespata, Kandhmal district, while performing Janmastami prayers. The murder followed a threat letter warning he would suffer for preventing Hindus from converting to Christianity. As the Swami had been previously attacked on 25 December 2007 [he escaped four attempts on his life before falling to the last attack] for the same reason, he personally lodged a complaint with the police and enclosed the threatening letter along with the FIR. He sought police protection, but on Saturday, around 9.35 pm as the ashram was celebrating Janmashtami, when around dinner time, a group of 30-40 armed assailants surrounded the place.  Eyewitnesses reported that about four of the assailants carried AK-47s and many others had country made revolvers. Two of the four home guards stationed for security had gone to eat and only two of them were guarding the premises. The assailants tied down the two guards, and gagged them. They then searched out the Swamiji within the premises, lobbed a hand-grenade at the gathering of devotees, and fired indiscriminately with sophisticated weapons, killing Swami Laxmanananda and four ashram inmates, including Mata Bhaktimayee, on the spot. The recovered bullets show they were from an AK-47, the police said. The assailants then warned the guards not to raise an alarm and fled the scene. Within minutes of the reaching the crime scene, the district authorities declared that Maoists had carried out assassination of the Swami.

Orissa does have a “Maoist” problem. Recently, a boat-load of security forces combing the area for Naxalites [a local name for Maoist armed insurrectionists in India, originating from the name of a small town in Northern Bengal, where the first symbolic act of Maoist “agrarian violence” took place] were blown up. However assigning responsibility to the Maoists could be a typical tactical administrative ploy as in December 2007, the area suffered some of the bloodiest violence Orissa has even seen after the Swami was attacked by Christians. Although Indian media tried its best not to highlight violence on Hindu villagers in the ongoing conflict where both sides obviously targeted each other, and Christians had no less responsibility than the Hindus for atrocities, reports of Christian violence did leak out from time to time. The Christian inspired violence could be partially sought to be justified as reactions and defensive action against expressions of anger by Hindus retaliating indiscriminately for the violent attack on a man who has become their iconic representative. However even now the state has not been able to come out with a clear and credible report on how much the involvement of Christian militant action was in defense, on only the Hindus who had attacked them and not on innocent Hindu villagers, and how much of this action had been pre-planned to utilize the expected violent reaction by the Hindus.

Elections are due soon in the state and the administration has proved unwilling, or unable to curb the Maoist insurgency. The government could be hoping to get the Hindu majority involved in the hunting down and liquidation of the Maoists on a social scale and therefore the most effective one [as proved in Punjab]. There are severe problems with the Maoist theory.  Typically the central committee for the relevant Maoist group authorises the killings and the outfit issues statements owning up to the murders they commit – as they pick targets who they believe would in general be unpopular with the “repressed class” whose support they wish to obtain. Strangely the Maoists are keeping mum, and no statements have been forthcoming [although after this point is raised in the media, some statement may drop out of thin air]. The five attackers who the locals caught and handed over to the police are not Maoists and they are locals from the region.

Orissa police arrested one Pradesh Kumar Das, an employee of the Christian organisation, World Vision, from Khadagpur, while trying to leave Kandhmal at Buguda. Two other converts, Vikram Digal and William Digal were arrested from the house of Lal Digal, a local Christian, from Nuasahi at Gunjibadi, Nuagaan. They apparently admitted having joined a group of 28 other assailants.

The Maoists spared the policemen on duty when they usually execute any representative of the security forces present in their attacks.  The Maoists are usually quite disciplined and they try to avoid firing at women and children or lob grenades at them. An AK-47 is quite a costly weapon, and are more numerous among well-funded terrorist groups with possible access to hostile foreign governmental support such as the Islamic Jihadi terrorists. In uncanny parallels with Islamic terrorists, the assailants were wearing masks and hoods, whereas Marxists usually make such attacks high profile with faces kept uncovered. The indiscriminate firing and throwing grenades on children in an orphanage over and above killing the target, is one of the strongest possible indications that the order to assassinate could not have come from any  “central committee” and even if carried out by or with the help of Maoists were initiated from sources outside the Maoist movement.

Who had a reason to be angry with the Swami, or had sufficient reasons to benefit from his removal?  The Swami’s activities in the jungle were essentially based around the welfare of the tribals and the only way this could be problematic for the Maoists is if it prevented the tribals from joining the Communist struggle by partially satisfying their urgent problems. But by similar arguments leaders of Christian missionaries should have been the target of the Maoists too, and why is never a thought given to the possibility that the Maoists could be involved in the violence against Christian villages?  The Maoists have long claimed that most of Orissa falls under the ‘liberated zone’ and the  Kandhamal district with its dense forest cover is a haven for them. The Swami received an anonymous threat only a week before he was killed. The local SP did not even register a case after the Swami lodged a formal complaint. Would the government have gained from the removal of the Swami? The BJD would then lose votes to the BJP.  Would the Conrgress which has weakened in the state, have gained from it – only if it was foolish enough to think of hoping to gain Christian votes as defender and protector of Christian minorities, once communal tensions could be flamed up either voluntarily from angry Hindu reaction to the assassination or a little discreet and pre-planned prompting.

For a die-hard Maoist, all religions are equally suspect, and if these religions are providing “cosmetic relief” to the “oppressed” and saturating them with “religious opiates” then they are all equally to be attacked. The Christians know this very well in China. For some strange reason they do not appear to attack the Christian missionaries at Kandhmal! [Historically the only religion that the Chinese Maoists have been partial to was Islam and Mao’s love affair with Islam in his early struggling days at Yenan. Security forces are said to have seized 20 guns from 47 Maoists arrested in connection with the burning of villages inhabited by Hindus. In this respect, the murder of Swami Laxmanananda may be said to closely resemble the murder of Swami Shanti Kali ji Maharaj in Tripura in August 2000; he too was shot in his own ashram by gun-wielding assassins after several dire warnings for anti-conversion activities in the state’s tribal belt. Subsequently, Tripura Chief Minister Manik Sarkar admitted the involvement of a certain church-movement with the insurgency in the state. There has been reports suggesting that Swami Laxmanananda was also active in the movement against illegal beef trading, and was demanding a high level probe into an alleged illegal beef trading racket in Kandhamal.

The major reason behind this conflict in Kandhamal is actually due to India’s notorious reservation regime and politics. At the moment, almost half of desirable “social opportunities” are reserved one way or the other in India, resulting in a perpetuation and reconfirmation of social fractures, and the demand for their continuation and extension shows that reservations are self-defeating in their declared purpose – they never “uplift” and “empower” in concrete, socially tangible terms, for such empowerment actually weakens the case for “reservation” of the beneficiaries. The majority Kandha (Kondh) tribe which has Scheduled Tribe status was obviously alarmed at the second local group, the Scheduled Caste Panas [who by converting to Christianity lost the reservation benefits due to Scheduled Caste status under the constitution]  beginning to agitate for Scheduled Tribe status on the plea that they also spoke Kui, the mother tongue of the Kondhs, which is also the principal language of the district. The Hindus’ fears of lowered benefits due to competition deepened when the UPA-appointed Justice Ranganath Mishra Commission recommended extension of all reservation facilities to converts among the “Dalits”, which would include the Panas in Orissa.

Only if belonging to a special subgroup of Indians does not bring “special favours” over and above that of other Indians, will proselytizing religions or political parties cease to encourage and utilize the existing fractures within Indian society. What is needed is an all-inclusive developmental plan for all Indians that includes compulsory, uniform education, basic health-care, and economic opportunity irrespective of origin – combined with a clear recognition of a reward system of incentives to perform at all levels of society. Are Indians mature enough now to give and face the call “opportunities will be given unbiasedly – but you have to perform”?

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The heroic face of Islamic militancy in Kashmir- killing unarmed non-protesting civilians and taking children and women as hostage

Posted on August 27, 2008. Filed under: Hindu, India, Kashmir, Muslims, Politics, terrorism |

The great Gazis and Shahids and Jihadis of Islam in history have always used their Prophet’s injunction that “war is deception”, and a common tactic for Muslims has always been to capture something of great emotional value to non-Muslims and use that not only to preserve themselves from retaliation after unprovoked acts of looting, massacre and destruction but as a means of imposing Islam or enslavement. In Jammu, terrorists dressed as police entered a residential area and opened fire indiscriminately killing civilians. They then holed themselves up in a house and took children below the age of nine and women hostages. Using women and children as pawns in violence is a very old characteristic in Islam, and dates right from the very beginning of its advent in Arabia.

Here are a few relevant quotes from the Hadiths :

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 256:
Narrated As-Sab bin Jaththama: The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, “They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans).” I also heard the Prophet saying, “The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle.”

This Hadith is a very peculiar one : Hima normally in Arabic means “protected/inviolate region/territory/environment”. Mentioning this in the same context of night attacks possibly endangering women and chilldren of “infidels” can only mean one things that – women and children of “pagans” are not inviolate [ abstract use of the term Hima in other parts of the Hadiths are well established, implying that such an abstract association is allowed]
The Raid on Bani al-Mustaliq by Muhammad-December, 627CE
Bani al-Mustaliq was a branch of the Khozaa (Jewish) tribe. Two months after Muhammad returned from Dhu Qarad campaign, Allah suddenly told him that B. al-Mustaliq, under the leadership of Haritha b. Abi Dirar was mobilizing forces against him. B. al-Mustaliq were friendly to Muhammad but the rumour was spread that B. al-Mustaliq were now joining with the Quraysh to launch an attack against the Muslims. The Muslims even killed a man from B. al-Mustaliq alleging him to be a spy. On this pretext Muhammad rallied all the fighting men around him to assail the B. al- Mustaliq. B. al-Mustaliq were a prosperous Jewish clan who had immense wealth and property, and after the successful ethnic cleansing of the Jews in Medina the B. al-Mustaliq Jews took all precautionary measures to prevent such an invasion on them. They sought help from other clans as well. Muhammad gave no opportunity to this clan to embrace Islam before facing ethnic cleansing. On previous occasions, he used the rule that the infidels be given a three days reprieve to decide whether to accept Islam or face liquidation.

Sahih Muslim on this raid:
Book 019, Number 4292:
Ibn ‘Aun reported: I wrote to Nafi’ inquiring from him whether it was necessary to extend (to the disbelievers) an invitation to accept (Islam) before meeting them in fight. He wrote (in reply) to me that it was necessary in the early days of Islam. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) made a raid upon Banu Mustaliq while they were unaware and their cattle were having a drink at the water. He killed those who fought and imprisoned others. On that very day, he captured Juwairiya bint al-Harith. Nafi’ said that this tradition was related to him by Abdullah b. Umar who (himself) was among the raiding troops.
Further confirmation of this sudden pillage is referred in Sahih Bukhari: Volume 3, Book 46, Number 717: Narrated Ibn Aun: I wrote a letter to Nafi and Nafi wrote in reply to my letter that the Prophet had suddenly attacked Bani Mustaliq without warning while they were heedless and their cattle were being watered at the places of water. Their fighting men were killed and their women and children were taken as captives; the Prophet got Juwairiya on that day. Nafi said that Ibn ‘Umar had told him the above narration and that Ibn ‘Umar was in that army.
Ali b. Talib killed a few wounded B. al-Mustaliq people; among them were Malik and his son. Muhammad seized their cattle herd, took many as captives and divided them among the Jihadists. Two hundred families were taken as captives, two thousand camels and five thousand sheep and goats, as well as a huge quantity of household goods were taken as booty. Juwayriah, the young, beautiful and vivacious daughter of B. al-Mutaliq chief was one of those captives. The household goods were sold in an auction to the highest bidders. During the battle a Muslim was mortally wounded by another Muslim by accident. Muhammad allowed the Jihadists to rape the B. Mustaliq women captives. Here is a Hadith from Sahih Bukhari:Volume 5, Book 59, Number 459: Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, “We went out with Allah’s Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interrupt us, we said, ‘How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah’s Apostle who is present among us?” We asked (him) about it and he said, ‘It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist.”
After raping his captive-girl, Said al-Khudri took this young girl to the nearest slave market for a quick sale. Here is the continuation of the above story, as told by al-Waqidi (vol.i, p.413) and excerpted by Rodinson: “A Jew said to me: ‘Abu Said, no doubt you want to sell her as she has in her belly a baby by you.’ I said: ‘No; I used the ‘azl.’ To which he replied [sarcastically]: ‘Then it was lesser child-murder!’ When I repeated this story to the Prophet he said: ‘The Jews lie. The Jews lie.’”

Raid against Umm Qirfa of B. Fazarah by Zayd b. Haritha/Abu Bakr-January, 628CE
When Zayd b. Haritha’s first raid at Wadi al-Qura failed, Zayd conducted several raids. In one of these he set out for a mercantile trip to Syria to do some border trading there. When he arrived at Wadi al-Qura, he again raided i but his caravan was waylaid and was attacked by B. Fazarah tribe. During the fighting B. Fazarah killed a number of Muslims including Ward b. Amr, one of Zayd’s dear comrade-in-arms. Zayd himself was wounded. After Zayd returned to Medina with his wound he vowed to avenge the death of his comrade by raiding B. Fazarah again. After his recovery from the injury Muhammad sent Zayd with an army against the B. Fazarah. He attacked them at Wadi al-Qura and inflicted heavy casualties on them. He took Umm Qirfa (her real name was Fatimah bt. Rabiah b. Badr), the wife of Malik b. Hudhayfah, the chief of B. Fazarah, as a prisoner. Umm Qirfa was a very old woman having a young and extremely beautiful daughter. She (Umm Qirfa) was the aunt of Uyeina and was married to her cousin, Malik, the uncle of Uyeina. Zayd took her daughter as a captive and ordered a Jihadi, Qays b. Mohsin to kill Umm Qirfa. Qays tied each of her legs with a rope and attached the ropes to two camels. Then he drove the camels in opposite directions thus renting her in two. Rodinson writes that Umm Qirfa was torn from limb to limb by four camels. Two brothers from the same family were also brutally executed. When told, Muhammad fully approved this ferocious punishment meted out to a grand old lady. When Zayd brought Umm Qirfa’s daughter to Muhammad, he allocated her to Salamah b. Amr al-Akwa, a Jihadist who captured her. She belonged to a very distinguished Arab family. Then Muhammad found that one of his maternal uncles, Hazn b. Abi Wahb was eyeing on Umm Qirfa’s beautiful daughter. So he asked her owner, Salamah b. Amr b. al-Akwa, if he would give her to his (Muhammad’s) uncle. Salamah readily agreed to Muhammad’s request. This distinguished lady was then passed on to Muhammad’s uncle for his private use.
Another version of this story says that the leader of this raid was Abu Bakr b. Abi Quhafah (told by Salamah) and runs like this:
Muhammad appointed Abu Bakr as the leader of this raiding party. When Abu Bakr arrived at Wadi al-Qura, he ordered his troop to rest there; then they prayed. After prayer, Abu Bakr made a raid on B. Fazarah. The Muslims killed a number of B. Fazarah people and captured a number of their women and children. Among them was Umm Qirfa, a very old lady, wearing a worn-out piece of leather coat. With her was her young daughter, the fairest of the Arabs. Abu Bakr gave Umm Qirfa’s pretty, young and vivacious daughter to, the Jihadist, who had captured her as a booty. After Salamah b. al-Akwa returned to Medina and met Muhammad at the market place, he (Muhammad) asked Salamah to give this pretty young lass to him. Salamah told Muhammad that he liked her but had not had sex with her yet. Then he offered her to Muhammad.
Quoting Salamah, Tabari (Tabari, vol. viii, p.97) writes:
‘When I returned to Medina, the messenger of God met me in the market and said, “Salamah-how excellent the father who begot you!-give me the woman.” I said, “Messenger of God, I like her, by God, and I have not uncovered her garment.” He said nothing to me until the next day, when he met me in the market and said, “Salamah-how excellent a father begot you!-give me the woman.” I said: “Messenger of God, I have not touched her garment. She is yours, Messenger of God.” The Messenger of God sent her to Mecca, and with her he ransomed some Muslim captives who were in the hands of the polytheists.’
There is a similar Hadith from Sahih Muslim (Refer to: Sahih Muslim: Book 19, Hadith number 4345)

When Muhammad entered Mecca he granted a general amnesty to the Meccans except for eight people (or ten people, according to Ibn Sa’d). He ordered that those were to be killed even if they were found under the curtains of Kaba. Previously shedding of blood in the holy precinct was strictly forbidden by the polytheists. Muhammad proclaimed that Allah had permitted only him to cause bloodshed in the holy sanctuary, just for a few hours. Here is a Sahi Hadith from Sahhi Bukhari Volume 3, Book 34, Number 303:Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas: Allah’s Apostle said, “Allah made Mecca a sanctuary and it was neither permitted for anyone before, nor will it be permitted for anyone after me (to fight in it). And fighting in it was made legal for me for a few hours of a day only. None is allowed to uproot its thorny shrubs or to cut down its trees or to chase its game or to pick up its Luqata (fallen things) except by a person who would announce it publicly.” ‘Abbas bin ‘Abdul-Muttlib requested the Prophet, “Except Al-Idhkhir, for our goldsmiths and for the roofs of our houses.” The Prophet said, “Except Al-Idhkhir.” ‘Ikrima said, “Do you know what is meant by chasing its game? It is to drive it out of the shade and sit in its place.” Khalid said, “(‘Abbas said: Al-Idhkhir) for our goldsmiths and our graves.”
Sunaan Abu Dawud: Book 14, Number 2678: Narrated Sa’id ibn Yarbu’ al-Makhzumi: The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: on the day of the conquest of Mecca: There are four persons whom I shall not give protection in the sacred and non-sacred territory. He then named them. There were two singing girls of al-Maqis; one of them was killed and the other escaped and embraced Islam. Sarah was the freed slave-girl of one of the sons of Abd al Muttalib. Muhammad claimed that she used to molest him while he was in Mecca. It is reported that Muhammad eventually forgave Sarah. Hind bt. Utbah, the wife of Abu Sufyan b. Harb. She chewed the liver of slain Hamzah at Badr II. She accepted Islam and Muhammad pardoned her. Later, Umar killed Sarah by causing his horse to trample her at al-Abtah. Another source lists that on the day of occupation of Mecca, Muhammad commanded that six men and four women be killed. The women were: 1. Hind bt. Utbah b. Rabiah, 2. Sarah, the freed slave girl of Amr b. Hashim b. Abd al-Muttalib; she was killed (waqidi) on the day of invasion. 3. Quraybah; killed on the day of invasion, 4. Fartana escaped death and lived until the Caliphate of Uthman.

Sahih Muslim: Book 019, Number 4321: It is reported on the authority of Sa’b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him), when asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them.
Surprise Raid on B. Khatham at Talabah by Qutbah ibn Amir ibn Hadidah-August, 630CE
During this period Muhammad sent Qutbah ibn Amir at the head of twenty men to conduct a surprise raid on B. Khatamah, inhabiting Tabalah near Turbah, and no reason is given in any of the Hadiths. The Muslims killed a man who pretended to be dumb. Then they attacked the infidels while they were asleep. The Muslims slaughtered whomever they could and took a great number of camels, goats and women as booty.

Whatever be the claim of modern spokespersons of Islam as regards treatment of women and children of non-Muslims, we have to understand that core traditions of Islam use them as potential property – either as slaves, as future soldiers of Islam or for sex and reproductive resource, and their safety is not of paramount importance in Islamic warfare.

The non-Muslims should carefully read the principal Hadiths, and the biographies of the Prophet of Islam, either in the original unabridged form or translations made by western authors prior to the emergence of Communist power.

The only way this sort of Jihadist violence on unarmed and non-combatant civilians of non-Muslims and on their women and children can be stopped is to ensure that each such raid aimed at reducing the number of non-Muslims and increasing the number of Muslims results in an actual reduction of believers in Islam – not a physical liquidation a-la-Islam but creations of conditions where “muslims with a good heart” feel ashamed of remaining Muslims and come out of Islam. On the other hand if Muslims really believe in “peace” they should make such declarations in public that they will come out of Islam if any non-Muslim is killed in such violence – this perhaps could be the only starting point for restoration of trust between Muslims and non-Muslims. In reality the Islamic terrorists in Jammu have done a great favour to the struggling Hindus and non-Muslims of the state of Kashmir – it will only make their resolve harder, getting a reminder of what living under Islam means, and will go a long way towards the eventual cleaning of the subcontinent of the creed of Islam. It will be worthwhile for the non-Muslims to also consider the possibility that “deception is war and war is deception in Islam” – and such attacks simply could be part of a general strategy to draw security forces away from areas of infiltration just as the Pakistani army consistently shoots repairing team of Indians of the control fences at the LOC, and try to push in militants under cover of heavy shelling or firing.

related previous post on Kashmir

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

N-deal’s greatest hurdle to be crossed on US shoulders and Gujarat, Jammu shows Hindu political maturity

Posted on August 20, 2008. Filed under: India, Kashmir, Muslims, Nuclear, Pakistan, Politics, religion, terrorism |

As I had discussed before, the IAEA episode was actually a very small and rather the easier step compared to the current hurdles of unanimous passage through the NSG. The non-proliferation lobby is led by countries strongly dependent economically on NWS’s – the Nuclear Weapons States – US, UK, France, Russia and China. Therefore, their greatest pressure will be on countries like India. These countries will deliberately ignore that they are protected by the presence of NATO (even if not members always themselves of NATO) and NWS’s themselves in the event of military aggression from “enemies”, whereas India practically has no defence against military aggression from powerful and aggressive NWS like China, and the unofficial NWS Pakistan. It is possible that the Islam lobby as well as indirect Chinese pressure has effects on the NPT lobby’s stance. Some of the NPT lobbyists have important markets in the Muslim world, and India should perhaps consider this in its diplomatic efforts. India’s only hope of passing through the NSG with all it wants is based on riding on US shoulders as the NPT lobby will only be forced to accept India under US pressure. India’s nuclear weapons capabilities are crucial for India’s existence as a nation remembering that given half a chance the Muslim forces arrayed against India will try to overrun it with passive or active help from China – and India is the last homeland that the non-Muslim Indic cultures like Hinduism, Buddhism or Jainism can call its own.

Meanwhile it is a positive sign to see the first visible indications of the growth of a mature non-Muslim political identity in India. The current elite dependent on a fractured Indian society for their continuance in power will of course try to portray this as a “communal” development. But if one looks at the faces of the agitation in Jammu, where in addition to a jail-filling agitation participated in by large numbers of women, and the declaration of a civil disobedience  movement, one can see the Sikh headgear mingling in the forefront, and there are indications that Buddhists from the eastern part of the state have also participated. Islam is one of the factors responsible for the economic decline of India in the medieval ages, and the stagnation of its educational, academic and technological progress – compared to the brilliance of its intellectual achievements in the pre-Islamic period. Islam in a way has been the single largest factor in forcing modern India to involve a large proportion of its resources into defending itself against aggressors aligned along an Islamic axis (including China). Islam is still an expenditure for India on at least three major counts – (1) need to defend against Pakistan (2) need to tackle Islamic terror sponsored from within Pakistan and Bangladesh and probably financed and resources by a much wider network which may also involve petro-dollars. (3) subsidies needed to support Islamic religious  activities and  the social costs of backwardness imposed specifically by retrogressive and medieval Islamic practices.  Being the second largest population group in India, this imposes  substantial  resource diversion  for India.  It is a very very positive sign that the non-Muslims in Gujarat and Jammu are finally realizing what a truly mature political strategy that benefits the non-Muslim majority both in the short term as well as in the long term means. Instead of breaking up the Babari Mosque, the current strategy aimed at isolating Islam politically, and raising political consciousness of the dangers of continued existence of Islam on the subcontinent is a much better strategy. It is most important to emphasize and keep in mind that “Muslims” are Indians, that they are derived from pre-Islamic and non-Islamic cultures,  that they mostly converted under ruthless physical and economic duress, that everything should be done to encourage them and create conditions facilitating their return to the “fold”.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Musharraf resigns : strange days coming for Pakistan and India

Posted on August 18, 2008. Filed under: India, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, terrorism |

So Musharraf has finally resigned. What does this mean for Pakistan? This simply means that the coalition partnership between the emotional Nawaz and cold and calculating Zardari will now be increasingly under strain. In spite of Nawaaz being the more popular, his emotional approach to politics will ultimately put him in a very dangerous position, and once Musharraf’s eagle has been removed from overshadowing Zardari, it will now be a matter of time before each tries to oust the other. Will there be a return for Musharraf, possible but difficult – Kiani may want his own taste of the cake. Kiani also has a lot in stake in preserving the ISI and the Pakistan army’s cross border activities in India and Afghanistan – and perhaps not impossibly in a lot of other central Asian countries including the north-east of China. As discussed before in these columns, Kiani will ditch Musharraf only if Zardari-Nawaz can promise a higher price for ISI and the Pakistani Army and committment to support and provide resources for further continuation and escalation of the ISI-Army top-brass’s agenda to propagate Islamic dominance in the garb of Pakistani nationalism (or Pakistani nationalism in the garb of Islamic dominance) within the subcontinent.

The so-called return of democracy to Pakistan has little effect on India. This democratic government completely failed to rein in the ISI and had to beat a hasty and humiliating retreat. The situation will not improve in terms of relations with India, in spite of official “wish” to do so, as the establishment is practically now completely infiltrated at all levels by Islamic fundamentalists.

So Musharraf’s departure means increased availability of support for the ISI and the Pakistani Army to carry out cross border terrorism against “non-Muslim” (or Muslim governments not entirely following the hardcore Wahabi or Salafi Sunni expansionist agenda in Asia – such as the current Afghan government under Karazai) regimes. By doing this Pakistan’s army actually is doing a great disservice not only to the “Islamic” cause but also to its own country. As sooner or later, the current vacillating and weak government in India will be replaced by a much stronger will. Sooner or later, Russia, China, Afghanistan and India will have to form a coalition to disrupt the Islamic fundamentalist power base and network developing from Saudi Arabia through Central Asia and north Pakistan right into North Eastern China. Once this happens, it will be the end of Islam as we know it. Either Islam reinvents itself as so many other religions in the history of mankind have done as an up-to-date reconstruction or forced into oblivion.

No scope for complacency and feeling happy about the apparent exit of Musharraf for all those who know what Islamic fundamentalism really means for the non-Muslims.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Hurriyat pulls the strings and New Delhi dances while Gujarat catches small fish

Posted on August 17, 2008. Filed under: India, Kashmir, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, religion, terrorism |

Hurriyat did not realize that it was shooting itself in the feet when it took on the mantle of champion of economic rights of Kashmiri Muslims by demanding trade across the LOC in Kashmir. I had written awhile ago in these columns that for Pakistan to agree to open the trade routes across the LOC means a possibly serious economic drain. The not-so-robust economy of Pakistan, thanks to the Talebani dance of merry Islamic  militancy,  may ill  afford  a drain of resources across the border.  Trade across the LOC could also over the long term involve products that do not originate in the valley but are traded by Kashmiris in the valley sourced from the much stronger economy in the plains of India. This does not bode well for Pakistan.  And Pakistan is dragging its feet over allowing this trade across the LOC, as expected.  Hurriyat is looking for slogans that can rally the largest support in the Valley, and this has nothing do with its actual ideologically motivated agenda – doing its bit for the consolidation of Islam in the subcontinent. As with all ideologically motivated organizations, like that of the Communists, there are always blind alleys into which Hurriyat rushes headlong. Pakistan’s elite’s agenda is grabbing land, and this essentially ex-Hindu converted Muslim elite (who converted in the first instance out of economic and power motives in the first place to retain their land) only uses Islam as a pretext for its land-grabbing motivations. This elite is quite uncomfortable with unbridled Islamic consolidation movements which do not consider the economic or strategic realities. However, in this case Hurriyat is a creation of the Pakistani elite as much as it is a creation of Islamic fundamentalist proselytizing agenda. It will be an interesting exercise in diplomatic coughing and sneezing on the part of all three players in this Kashmiri roulette.

While this pussyfooting is going on in Kashmir, the Gujarat police has claimed to nab the main culprits behind the Gujarat blasts, and identified them as a breakaway hardline faction of SIMI, calling itself the Indian Mujahideen. However sometime ago, in the aftermath of the blasts media leaks from officials appeared to project the theory that Indian Mujahideen did not really exist but was a “shadow name” of a Pakistan based outfit that specifically wanted to pretend to be “Indian”. Both cannot be true at the same time, and it is quite possible that neither of the two theories are entirely correct. It seems unlikely that the main culprits behind the Gujarat blasts have been nabbed. These are people still under deep cover all over the western coastal areas of India, with strong underground networks between Communist extremists, and ethnic separatists throughout India as well as groups based across the border not necessarily with Pakistan. The people nabbed are most likely to be the peripheral weak links. The ideological shortsightedness of these groups may make them itch in “righteous anger” to prove that the Indian authorities have barely even scratched their bottoms, and more public outrages or “show of strength” can probably be expected.

The only strategy that will work in preventing aggressive Jihadi Islam is to frustrate the basic target of Islam, to increase the number of Muslims. There should be a sustained and intensive cultural campaign to revive the pre-Islamic roots of the modern Muslims, and climate created where truly “peaceful Muslims” would feel “ashamed” to remain a Muslim. The false propaganda, which has no support in any of the core texts of Islam, that a Muslim who “leaves” Islam (an “apostate”) has to be physically immediately killed, should be dispelled. Hindus have shown their intelligence in being sufficiently flexible to modernize as and when required – reflected in the sequence of reforms that Hindus themselves undertook and continue to undertake. It is the Hindu historian or politician who is allowed to oppose Hindus in favour of falsification in favour of Islam and get away with it by Hindus, a behaviour never seen in Muslims in reverse towards Hindus. Just imagine the freedoms that a Muslim woman or even a man can enjoy when she or he leaves Islam behind – the freedom to be able to negotiate and redefine and reconstruct their own lives rather than take life as a rigidly pre-ordered diktat from a non-negotiable entity speaking only through insecure and power hungry human voices! It is time the Indian Muslim grows up out of the fear and “submission” that is Islam, and their Hindu countrymen welcome them back.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

The wonder that is Kashmir : where Minorities become Majorities and Majorities become Minorities and then nonexistent

Posted on August 17, 2008. Filed under: Hindu, India, Kashmir, Muslims, Politics, religion, terrorism |

While speaking in the Rajaya Sabha on 17-08-2006 Dr. Farooq Abdullah had questioned the Government of India on the steps being taken by it after Pakistan refused to grant permission to Kashmiri Pandits for visiting Hindu Shrines or places of religious importance in Muzaffarabad. Dr. Man Mohan Singh appreciated Farooq Abdullah for raising the question and said that he would surely raise this question with Pakistan. Carvan e Aman Bus had first left for Muzaffarabad on 7 April 2005. Lt. General ( Retd ) S. K. Sinha had said in an an interview that the Bus will also carry the historical and spiritual message of Sheikh Noor-ud-Din Noorani and Lala Ded. After 60 years of accession of Jammu and Kashmir with India, spiritual message of Noor-ud-Din and Lala are still awaiting to be transported from one part of Kashmir to another, and the Kashmiri Pundits are still “Migrants” from Kashmir Valley.

For Marxists, or Thaparite Hindu historians, all terrorism in Kashmir or by Muslims stem from exploitation and economic hardship or enforced displacement. Why the Pandits did not become terrorists? Many lost everything they had and finally settled down in Jammu and not all were top bureaucrats or rich businessmen or professionals as they have been represented by historians, politicians and the media. They did not become militants because they were Indians, and they were not brought up in a religion whose fundamental principle is relentless “physical” warfare against “unbelievers” until they “submit”.

The regime dependent and supported political analysts, historians as well as sections of the media treated Kashmir as an “Islamic state” and therefore its “Islamic features” to be “protected” at all costs. This recognition and acceptance of “Islam” as the sole claimant of “Kashmir” immensely played into the hands of Islamic revivalists based in religious centres in India and Pakistan who had been carefully nurtured under the culture of “tolerance of minorities”. Islams agenda in Kashmir succeeded in confusing the common Kashmiri Muslim and their religious sentiments which contain early exposure and brainwashing with not only an inveterate hatred of all non-Muslims, but sanctions and exhortations of violence against them in opportune moments as natural and “Allah” ordered (thereby any personal human regret or conscience can be bypassed) together with a blatant falsification of Kashmir’s pre-Islamic past [in this their greatest allies were of course the Thaparite school of Indian history, who did everything possible to suppress the real role and mechanism of spreading of Islam, and paint pre-Islamic or non-Islamic cultures of India in the worst possible comparison with Islam]. These were exploited to create doubts about completeness of 1947 Accession to India.

The economic backwardness was explained to the poor and unemployed as a result of  being a Muslim living under Hindu majority “rule”. Hindu Thaparite historians were most prominent in describing militancy as being out of neglect, unemployment and communal hatred by Hindus. Kashmiri Pundits were blamed for their part in this mistreatment of “Islam” and just as in Bangladesh the “missing Hindu populations in the census” are tried sometimes indirectly to be ascribed to the “economic opportunism of Hindus and their hatred of Muslims and hence their stealthy migration” the Pundits’ mass migrations of flight to safety was represented as an opportunistic Hindu-communal betrayal. All of this had to be done because the Nehruvian strand of Congress politics [Nehru himself had declared that he felt himself culturally a Muslim] possibly also under Western pressure to encourage Islam as immunization against communism, took it upon itself to not only preserve Islam but also to try and help it grow in India. In the “Muslim majority” state of Kashmir, the “heart bleeding for the repressed minorities” political elite of NewDelhi could not recognize the Kashmiri Hindu Pundits or Buddhists as “minorities” – since doing so would have been an embarrassing contradiction and not suitable for their strategy of using Islam as a double whammy – something to tame Hindu pan-India cultural consolidation which would have gone out of the control of the small UP based coterie of Congress as well as an immunization against Left or progressive forces [Islam has proved to be the best antidote against modernization in social and human rights].

Our eminent historians of the Thaparite school of Indian history, never discuss the circumstances that made the campaign posters threatening Kashmiri Pundits a common sight in 1989-1990 in Kashmir Valley, showing the extent to which the anti-Hindu Islamic forces had been allowed to strengthen. The Kashmiri Pundits and many Muslims felt that the militants could actually carry out their threats where as they were not sure about the capacity or political will of the “democratic government” to guarantee security to life and property of those who did not support merger with Pakistan.

The Kashmiri Pundits were Hindu and neither believed in the two nation theory nor did they believe that there could be any thing like an independent nation of Jammu and Kashmir. Hence majority of Kashmiri Pundits left Kashmir Valley along with some Muslims who supported accession to India. Some from the Muslim ruling elite thought that Kashmir should have special constitutional status within India but did not accept the merger with Pakistan as well as Kashmir becoming an independent country. Hence many Muslims and political leaders of the National Conference and Congress also migrated from Kashmir Valley along with the Kashmir Pundits as they also felt unsafe in the Valley. Some Kashmiri Muslims had stayed continuously outside Kashmir Valley upto 1994 and thereafter they gradually returned to the Valley. Dr. Farooq Abdullah had remained in exile for many years under special personal security.

Dr.Farooq Abdullah always described himself as first an Indian and strongly advocated “greater autonomy ” and should be admired for his political courage to oppose militancy and pro-Pakistan groups at the cost of political losses to his party. His political dilemma comes out though on many occasions, such as his allegation that Mr. Jagmohan, a BJP MP, encouraged the Pundits to leave the Valley when he became governor of the state for the second time. Some separatist leaders from Kashmir Valley, some Kashmiri pro India leaders of local political parties and even sections of the Indian media have claimed that Jagmohan wanted Kashmiri Pundits to be out of the way to enable him to deal with militants. To understand this we have to realize that the Kashmiri Pundits never had the tradition of aggressive militant action to defend their rights as the Punjabi Hindus or Sikhs. This is the reason that Punjabi Hindus and Sikhs who have had to survive the worst forms of Islamic violence for at least fourteen hundred years (Sikhs from the Mughal period) did not give up in the face of separatist terrorism in Punjab. About 40000 Sikhs still manage to stay in the Valley.

The Kashmiri Pundits now in exile outside of the Valley, have been excluded from the negotiations on Kashmir. The wishes of the non-Muslim majority areas of Jammu and Kashmir should be taken into account. If this is not done, sooner or later India will have to wake up to a very stark choice – Kashmiri unification has to be then done militarily which may also necessitate the dismemberment of Pakistan, and a thorough wiping off of religious fundamentalist leadership and their cultural propagation systems on the subcontinent.

The Hurriyat wants trade across LOC, and a shaking New Delhi bleats weakly like a lamb that they also agree – only that Pakistan does not respond. This is as I had predicted in a previous post, that NewDelhi will appear increasingly the cornered fool dancing to pro-Pakistani Islamic revivalists’ demands. Indian non-Muslims, especially in the Kashmir and Jammu region should gear themselves for increased Islam sponsored violence and should begin thinking longer term about a permanent solution to the Kashmir problem that safeguards non-Muslim existence and interests indpendent of whatever the Islamophile bosses at NewDelhi promise or say. The ordinary Kashmiri Muslim is an Indian, by origin, by history, by cultural roots. Islamic violence only retreats before an overwhelming force that leaves no doubt about its will and capability to exterminate Islamic “leadership” [the “eradication of Islam” in Spain towards the end of the middle ages for example]- this is the lesson of history, for survival at any cost in order to preserve chances of future multiplication is a fundamental aspect of all Islamic strategy. The American attempt in the middle east is running uphill simply because they do not recognize that the main source of inspiration of Islamic violence utilized by Islamic religious leadership is a primitive greed for biological resources driven by extreme insecurities and intellectual incapability to deal with the complexities of modernizing societies. These religious “scholars” are the main source of selective and opportune interpretations from the core Islamic texts with a shrewd understanding of political manipulations that can satisfy their personal ambitions of power and influence in a world system that goes increasingly beyond their intellectual capabilities. Islamic religious mechanisms and institutions that pretend to preach “peace” for the benefit and division of non-Muslim opinions should have been the first target of the Western colonizing forces in the expansionist phase of European colonialism, and the world would have been spared a lot of pain if instead of concentrating their efforts on destroying the “pagans” they had targeted erasing these Islamic institutions from the face of the earth. Unfortunately we all have to bear the fruits of the West’s long love affair with Islam. But Indians may yet have a way out, as they have always had in the past in overcoming forces that had seemed invincible at first.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Ek gul Do Mali – (One bud nursed by two gardeners) – the new love story from Pakistan

Posted on August 15, 2008. Filed under: Pakistan, Politics, terrorism |

Musharraf and Nawaz (with the reluctant Zardari in tow) are now fighting it out like the “hirsute machos” of old Hindi and Urdu movies over the love of the shy bride the Pakistani army top brass under Kiani, who only talks in romantic whispers from behind semitransparent curtains into the ears of the eager Pakistani press. Is the girl now attracted to the charm of the handsome and flamboyant (who sometimes also sheds uncontrollable tears) “young prince” returned from exile or the hair-dyed “mature” strongman – a real and proven “man’s man”? In old Sanskrit, there is a line from a verse – “Kanya baryate rupam” (the bride goes for the beautiful and handsome groom/ the mother of the bride looks for wealth in the groom/ the father of the bride looks for wisdom in the groom/ friends look for new social “pickings”/and servants or dependents look for sweets). Is the army under Kiani going to choose the “handsome”  Nawaz over the  strongman  Musharraf?  The rational choice for the army as  in the case  of  a young bride is the very practical calculation of who is going to give the maximum “satisfaction” in the long term, and over long periods in the foreseeable future. The army has “lived” with the strongman for a while now, and has a very risky choice now between a known  “bed-fellow” and  an  untested  one.

Musharraf’s one undoubted advantage is of course the long years as a central focus of authority in Pakistan. He is a known authoritarian. Why has his position weakened? Partly because of his own manipulations of both the West as well as as his native support base in Pakistan and the Army. By and large, if the Pakistani society has been getting more and more radicalized at the “lower strata” as a result of tactical encouragement by the elite as well as Western interests, it is also likely that over the years the the bottom rungs of the Army has been getting gradually replaced by more and more radical and Islamic fundamentalist elements. Sooner or later the Paksitani Army top-brass has to contend with this, and maybe they already do. Musharraf was in an unenviable position as he used Western eagerness to tackle Islamic fundamentalism in Afghanistan to balance the growing internal pressures towards fundamentalism unleashed again as a result of Islamic Jihadist expansionist ideologies taking root on the subcontinent with the help of Cold War politics.

Nawaz and Zardari will not be able to control the inevitable fundamentalist backlash. It would have been strategically wiser for Nawaz to leave Musharraf in power, but hanging under the threat of “financial investigations”. Musharraf could have been used against Kiani and the ISI to a certain extent using this pressure. Musharraf could also have been made the focus of the attention of the fundamentalists, thereby providing multiple targets for the Jihadists to disperse their efforts on. But Nawaz is the ultimate emotional hero – the tragic Greek one, who seals his own fate in one almost pre-destined foolishness after the other.

With the departure of Musharraf, the fundamentalists have one score less to settle, and they can chew up Nawaz and Zardari at their leisure. What will the Army do then ? Well does it really have to do anything at all – other than sit and enjoy the fanatical end it has worked so secretly and fervently to bring about?

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Jammu and Kashmir : needed an iron fist in velvet gloves

Posted on August 13, 2008. Filed under: India, Kashmir, Muslims, Politics, terrorism |

Untimely death is unacceptable. A leader of the Hurriyat conference had been shot dead among a score others. I don’t have any sympathy for the brand of Islam now being projected on the subcontinent, but my heart grieves for the ordinary Indian Muslim, whom I see only as Indians and not as Muslims. I see Kashmiri Muslims as most unfortunate since their ancestors were mostly peaceful Hindus and Buddhists, and who have been forced by the weakness of their Hindu rulers and elite to be divorced from their roots and culture. Kashmir resisted Islam for a long time, long after the Sun-worshippers of Multan, or the Hindu kings of Kabul and Zabul, or the sundry small princes who from time to time invited the likes of Islamic fortune seekers as Mahmud of Gazni into the Indian heartland for their own petty quarrels or jealousies. Even after being Islamized in the late 14th century, when the Delhi Sultanate was already beginning the the long decline to defeat at the hands of the Mughals in another hundred odd years, Kashmir’s Islam had a chequered history – and the brand of Islam that developed there had little in common with the various strands of orthodox Sunni fanaticism now being put up as the monolithic face of Islam. A curious Kashmiri version of Sufism developed, and even in the time of Mughals, ShahJehan – the fabulous prince now only represented as the grief-stricken husband and the doting father who built Taj Mahal (forget the dispute about its real constructor – but it was the countless artisans and skilled artists and architects, as well as the crores of Rupiah’s extracted from the peasantry – who were the real constructors of the Taj Mahal) – but in reality who has been chronicled to be a zealous Muslim bigot, had to formally decree that Kashmiri Hindu men who had been marrying Kashmiri Muslim women, had to convert to Islam or be beheaded. This sort of intermarrying must have been going on at a very significant rate to warrant the Mughal Badshah’s attention and personal intervention. It is quite likely, as at the entry of the Mughals under Akbar the “great” who tricked the ruling sultan of Kashmir under a false promise of safe passage using as his mouthpiece a Hindu Rajput courtier, Islam in Kashmir was a relatively new religious entry. Islam under Sufi garb perhaps had also pretended in its initial proselytizing phase as a “liberal” creed – revealing its fangs only later when sufficiently strong numerically. Thus the newly converted families and those who had not converted probably took their ancient lineal connections much more seriously than a new-fangled religion, one in a long chain of religious ideas and mini-ideological revolutions in Kashmir. Thus intermarriage was not such implausible after all. Not so in Islam, originally a desert based nomadic culture peculiarly obsessed with “perceptions of deprivation” – deprivation of the “yatin” or orphan, deprivation from “fertile land”, “water”, and “women” which others have possessed and which therefore its “God” promises to give them rights on. Islam is keen to hold on to its “women” as well as “women” of others – and therefore this insistence on only one-way traffic into Islam of women. ShahJehan was instrumental in using enslavement of Hindus, especially peasants to raise money, reduce the number of Hindus, and spread Islam. He is known to have expanded the slave trade in Hindu women and had a well recorded taste in stocking up his harem with an endless stream of “baandi”s acquired by all possible means, who regularly found themselves in his bed (all that for the “eternal love” for Mumtaj enshrined in the Taj Mahal). It is quite understandable that ShahJehan felt worried that Hindus in Kashmir were getting women from Muslims rather than the other way round.

If this was the picture even in the mid 17th century, we can pretty well understand, why the Sunni strands of Islam, most responsible for the current worldwide spate of sadistic violence in the garb or religious justification, would be so concerned about the “religious health” of Kashmir. I strongly feel, Indians should seriously think of the need for an iron fist in a pair of velvet gloves – a will strong enough to ignore religious machinations, and be ruthless in crushing militancy – the iron fist, and be immensely persistent in a no-holds-barred cultural and economic conquest of Kashmir and Jammu – the velvet gloves.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Musharraf’s departure will signal increased Pakistani support of terror in India, and Jammu agitators will be disappointed.

Posted on August 9, 2008. Filed under: China, Communist, India, Kashmir, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, terrorism |

It is possible that Kiani can decide to “divorce” his patron, Musharraf. Kiani rose through handling the ISI at a period when ISI had been the key inspiration, motivator, and maintainer of terror in India through Islamic militants as well as indirect connections to other separatist and insurgent groups. At the moment, Musharraf is perhaps just one man to be sacrificed and offered on a plate to the politicians in return for a free hand in “dealing” with India, with sufficient resources diverted from the tight domestic budget to support any expensive cross-border terror activity.

If Musharraf goes, it will only be a signal for further escalation of terror in India.

Why is the conquering of the Indian part of Kashmir so important for the Muslim elite of Pakistan?

The main reason is of course the geo-strategic importance of Kashmir for the jealous regional superpower China. Getting this region out of India’s hands allows China a a wider base and corridor through Pakistan to the Indian Ocean, cuts off India from the proximity to the Central Asian Republics, Afghanistan and Russia. For Pakistan this also means fertile river valleys with agricultural land, since Islam needs agrarian economy as the preferable mode which reduces the risk of “contamination” from modern science. China’s backpatting of India for its role in keeping the Tibetans under tight wraps should not be taken as sincere. China will negotiate and put pressure on India more to gain recognition of the Indian territories it had militarily occupied, as well as liquidation of the Tibetan independence movement – these could be secret conditions for China’s non-opposition at the NSG.

Kashmiri Muslims who now shout of Kashmiri nationalism, will quickly shut their mouths up once Pakistan manages to conquer the rest of Kashmir – since it is not nationalism but Islam, and a recent 20th century version of Wahabi/Sunni Islam and not the diverse historical and “diffuse” versions of Kashmiri Islam, that the Kashmiri Muslims want to establish. It is so significant to note that in none of emotional speeches of the Hurryiat leader’s mouths we hear anything about the “demographics” of “Muslim” Kashmir before the Islamic militancy, no mention of the Hindus living among Muslims forced to leave. It is the modern post-cleansing “demographics” that they are so “concerned” about “preserving” – obviously, it pays to be silent about “pre-Islamic” history as everywhere in modern Islam (or at most concede, that it was all a period of “absolute darkness”).

Once Indian Kashmir is occupied with Chinese help, Pakistan’s Muslim elite will promote Islamic militancy in adjacent areas of China, probably already even started secretly promoting militancy in Mao’s and CCP’s beloved Muslim tribal allies of Yunnan during the “Hunan” days. It will be great fun to watch the stolid beaming faces of the Chinese leadership as Islamic militancy increases in North-West China. Tibetans were easy to crush as they were spiritually motivated and tamed by Buddhism gaining respect for the human rights of “non-followers” of their religion. But these will be Muslim militants, who are exhorted to adopt any terror tactic they can think of in their core texts and not shy away from any relentless sadistic activity that can subjugate a “non-believer” with desirable resources – land, property, women. Communists have never managed to fight off Islam – let us see the “Sinification of Marxism” try and do it!

The “peace conference”, with the Amarnath Sangharsh Samity will probably end inconclusively. The UPA has strong components of pro-Islamic forces, but with the classic detachment of Indian non-Muslim elite from their own underclasses, which had always prompted them to rely on foreign powers more than their own communities, the UPA leaders will fail to understand the phenomenon in Jammu. They will now try the “ABCD” of management, “Avoid, Bypass, Confuse, Delay”, as they will be too scared in their fear that any concession to the Samity will go against the UPA prospects in elections – by appearing to strengthen the “Hindu” and by “alienating” the Muslims.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Musharraf, Nawaz-Zardari, Army – the classic love triangle

Posted on August 8, 2008. Filed under: Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, terrorism |

Musharraf, Nawaz-Zardari, Army – the classic love triangle in Pakistani politics. It is a “ek phool do mali” situation (one flower/flowering plant tended by two gardeners), where the “flower” – the lady is the Army, being hotly pursued by two macho suitors – Musharraf on one side, and Nawaz Zardari on the othe other side. The bride is acting shy, and keeping her preferences close to her heart. In orthodox Islam, and as per the Quran (there are some very confusing words though on this matter elsewhere in the Quran as well as pronouncements of Muhammad elsewhere as quoted in the Hadiths) after a formal Talaq (divorce), the ex couple cannot marry each other again a second time unless the woman has “tasted the honey of another man and husband, and that man has tasted the honey of the woman” (closest English translation of actual quotes from Muhammad – with some versions explicitly making it clear that the new marriage has to be “consummated”). This curious gem in Islamic Shariat is called Hila or Hilla (probably the source of the Bengali loan word “hille” used by many Bengalis and Hindi speakers in the sense “way out/ convenient arrangement for maintenance” without knowing the actual connotation).

Musharraf in a sense “separated” from the Army, but was it a real divorce ? Was the “third Talaq” actually pronounced? This however is not very clear. Musharraf left his “woman” in the hands of a trusted ISI chief – a man he had brought up himself, Kiani. It looks more like a trusteeship rather than giving up claims on the woman altogether. In Pakistan, the Army command structure reflects the upper semi-feudal class’s own social network. Which means Musharraf’s power basis is rather social, and mere rearrangements of Army interrelationships will not destroy his actual power base. In a sense, Zardari also represents the party of a man who had been given the Talaq by the woman – Zardari’s father-in-law who had brought up Zia-ul-Haq thinking him to be docile and undistinguished, was given the ultimate boot-out by Zia. (Maybe the new resulting woman also gave a Talaq to her new husband – by possibly allowing the most suspicious mid air explosion of Zia’a plane).

At the moment, both men are wooing the shy bride to be. But the bride is thinking about who will giver her the greatest “rewards”, freedom to pursue its own agenda and the resources to carry the agenda out. Lack of ordinary modern routes to dominance and political power within most democratic setups, are actually unavailable to a lot of ambitious young men from the Pakistani elite – and they gravitated to the army. Thus the politicians as well as the army compete for the same social base of power and the army cannot leave too much freedom into the hands of the politicians – who may also be more vulnerable to external pressures as well as accountability. The politicians may have to compromise officially at least on using Pakistani soil for resourcing Islamic terror, a weakness in the “man” the shy bride does not like.

Zardari-Nawaz have tried to correct this show of weakness, by retracting the takeover of the ISI. However it could have left the bride shaky – and it may yet decide to back up her “old man”. A crucial role will be played by the external suitors – the West , the Arab world, China and India. The army is probably already projecting its own “desirability” and the need to “pleasure itself” by increasing border incidents in Kashmir against India, and against the Afghan government in NWFP. It needs and wants a free hand and resources to indulge in its own “pleasures”. It all depends on who can promise this with credibility.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Musharraf’s impeachment, Loc violations, Kabul Indian Embassy blasts – all connected together?

Posted on August 6, 2008. Filed under: India, Kashmir, Muslims, Pakistan, Politics, terrorism |

I hope what I fear is not going to come to pass. There are strong rumours of a move to impeach President Musharraf of Pakistan by the PPP led by Zardari, with support from Nawaz Sharif.  A few days back, there was a blast at the Indian Embassy in Kabul, killing a diplomat and a security person from India among other local fatalities. There were prompt speculations about the USA and Afghan authorities having proof of the involvement of the ISI in the blasts, and the Afghan President confirmed this suspicion of involvement of the ISI at the SAARC summit. And now, the Pakistani army across the LOC in Kashmir is increasingly resorting to “unprovoked firing” as reported by the Indian army, apparently aimed at disrupting maintenance of physical installations that prevent infiltrations by Kashmiri Islamic jihadists. Even the Hurriyat Conference leadership has the guts to declare in New Delhi that they would be forced to “renew economic exchange” across the LOC if economic blockade continues – if economic trade can be carried out at will across the LOC, maybe the Indian army and the government should sit up and think who really runs Kashmir, or is economic exchange an euphemism for return to militancy?

It is possible, that all these three phenomena are related. On the one hand this is a message from Musharraf and the elite of the Pakistani Army, that it is the Army which runs Pakistan, and not any elected government. The ISI and the army is beyond the elected governments control. Any attempt at removing the formal army representation in the regular formal Pakistani governmental process, will lead to increased destabilization attempts within India or on objects connected to India, forcing India to try and help or allow Musharraf to continue as a more effective person to negotiate with.

Actual overthrow of Musharraf may lead to a serious conflict or outrage within Pakistan that will apparently be unrelated to the Army or Musharraf. It can lead to escalation of border tension with India. The Army and the fundamentalist agents in the Paksitani Army will now be going all out to finish off the half-hearted attempts at democracy within Pakistan. For Jihadi Islamists, democracy of the  western type is  “haram”,  Islamic theocratic dictatorship  is  “Pak” and “Jayej”. They will collaborate  with Musharraf from behind, as Pakistani army is simply a tool in their eyes to their eventual conquest and imposition of their dictatorship on the subcontinent.

Musharraf’s impeachment or attempted impeachment may herald  violent conflict one way or the other  in the subcontinent.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

SIMI – Sadistic Islamic Marauders of India – found not-guilty

Posted on August 6, 2008. Filed under: India, Muslims, Politics, terrorism |

SIMI followed Deobandi Islam’s revivalist movement that was the declared inspiration for the Taliban government. SIMI’s slogan is “Allah is our Lord, Qur’an is our constitution, Muhammad is our leader, jihad is our way and Sahahdat is our desire”. Among its various objectives, SIMI aims to counter what it believes is the increasing moral degeneration, sexual anarchy in the Indian society as also the ‘insensitiveness’ of a ‘decadent’ west. SIMI claims that the concepts of secularism, democracy and nationalism, supposed cornerstones of the Indian Constitution, are anti-Islam. They claim that their aim is to restore the supremacy of Islam through the resurrection of the Khilafat, emphasis on the Muslim Ummah and the waging of Jihad.

For the non-Muslims of India, jihad means looting of their property and lands, killing adult males and the rape, abduction and enslavement of their women and children, and systematic ruthless destruction of all their cultural icons. The khilafat was the excuse in whose name Mahmud of Gazni and numerous of his famished and destitute Muslim adventurer predecessors claimed to plunder, slaughter and enslave. The muslim Ummah was the rallying cry to organize, mobilize and justify riots against Hindus by sundry promoters of “Indian enrichment” like the Turko-Afghan Delhi Sultans and the Mughal emperors. So, SIMI’s declared intentions can be translated quite straightforwardly into non-Islamic terms – as that of Sadistic Islamic Marauders.

The third ban on SIMI was lifted by Delhi High Court Tribunal on 5 August 2008. “Material given by the home ministry is insufficient, so ban cannot be continued,” Justice Geeta Mittal, a sitting Delhi High Court judge, said while lifting the ban. This of course should have been expected. Ever since the Deobandi’s “fatwa” against “terrorism”, it was only a matter of time before the evidence of “violent crime” against their brainchild the SIMI would begin to “dry up”. Together with this there was the curious story of the switchover of support by the SP to the UPA for the passage of the N-Deal and the trust vote – for the SP is headed by Mulayam Singh Jadav, who had “grave doubts” about banning SIMI in the first place. The Deobandi connection is perhaps just a signal that elections are due next year, and the political elite is desperate.

In India, it is almost a treason to question the motivations of any Indian judge as to biases, since the judicial system typically takes strongest possible action against such “doubters” in amazing swiftness compared to the years it idles away casually to deal with that great underclass of India – the non-judiciary. So Indians must trust, that like the other great Hindu Indian lady of great intellectual honesty and stature, Prof. Romila Thapar, the Honbl Justice Geeta Mittal, also genuinely found “insufficient evidence” against Islamic violence. What happened to the Supreme Court, that it had to stay the lifting of the ban? There could be serious questions raised about the institution’s secular credentials if it did not favour Islam every time!

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Jammu : everyone wants to shout but no one wants to listen

Posted on August 6, 2008. Filed under: India, Kashmir, Muslims, Politics, terrorism |

The Amarnath Shrine board has partly dissolved itself in order to reinvent itself hopefully in a more acceptable and workable garb. But the two main agitation groups represented by the muslim Hurriyat Conference, as well as the pro-transfer Sangharsh Samiti are against the all party talks being held at New Delhi.

The Jammu agitation is proving to be a researcher’s delight : it has suddenly come to light that the controversial land was not really under the Forest department, it has a “graveyard”, parts of it are under the Revenue department, the infrastructure was there “before”, and is going to be there “after” the controversy – and 20,000 Muslims are “involved” who “manage” the Yatra.

The Samiti has a logic in their opinion that they have only come out in agitation after the political parties failed completely to respect non-Muslim wishes, and the Government of India has not invited them even though they are spearheading the agitation with obvious popular support – the same indications of popular support that stopped the government from being “firm enough” with the preceding Muslim agitation.

The Amarnath Lingam is supposed to represent Shiva. I do not think that Shiva needs the devotion of the Amarnath Yatris to exist and perform his tasks as the Father of the World. Perhaps Hindus should consider stopping going on pilgrimage to Amarnath until they have undisputed access to their iconic cultural places on the subcontinent which used to be “theirs” before the advent of Muslims. I am sure the Muslim leadership of Kashmir will enjoy the absolute delight of the loss of jobs and livelihood of 20,000 Muslims as well as the extra inflow of capital associated with the annual trek.

The hurriyat objects to the virtual “economic blockade” and the chief exports of Kashmir, its fruits and other agricultural products are definitely going to take a knock. Some transporters have indicated trying to risk crossing the LOC to try and sell their products in Pakistan. This solution of trading with Pakistan has two possible problems – (1) Pakistan is a much weaker economy than India with much lesser markets for the exotic products of Kashmir (2) it is undesirable for the Paksitani establishment, as it is Pakistan economy which then shells out money to Kashmiris.

Pakistan, like Bangladesh, as pointed out in my series on Islamic terror, will desperately continue to try to capture productive agricultural land to expand and meet the needs of its growing population, as the only way the semi-feudal ruling elite of Pakistan can maintain its hold within the Islamic framework is to stress on agriculture rather than industry. Industry requires modernization and modern scientific education that will definitely challenge Islamic doctrine at some point. So Pakistan will not encourage the traffic from India to Pakistan with economic drainage from its side across the border. Pakistan will intensify pressure on its agents in the various pro-Pakistan groups within Kashmir to destabilize as much as possible the Indian administration. Already one indication is the increased LOC ceasefire violations targeted at preventing repair of the physical obstructions to infiltration at the LOC.

The practical problem of Jammu in the short run could perhaps be solved by making it a separate state. However in the long run, the only solution is the consolidation of the crucial geo-strageic areas of Multani-Punjab right up to the border with NWFP under a strong secular subcontinental regime with sufficient political will to ignore “religious” sentiments. This unification will facilitate liquidation of fundamentalist retrogressive movements throughout North India, and will present Kashmiri Muslims with no choice at all – they have to acknowledge their deep roots in Indian culture and not in an imported Middle Eastern desert culture that has no psychological or contextual relevance for the subcontinent – however desperate the attempts might be on the part of “secular” Hindu scholars to establish otherwise.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Continued threat of terror inspired by Islam – 3 – the strange case of Bangladesh

Posted on July 30, 2008. Filed under: Bangladesh, India, Muslims, Politics, terrorism |

In 1971, at the end of what is typically referred to in Bangladesh as “Muktijuddho” or in the English language media as the Liberation War continuing in its “direct actions” stage for approximately 9 months beginning in March and ending in the official surrender of the Pakistani Army’s eastern command in December, East Pakistan formally was recognized as an independent nation called Bangladesh by among others, India. India’s involvement in this campaign has roots in quite complex and intricate historical and geo-political strategic considerations. India actively participated in the final phase of the campaign by directly invading East Pakistan, and forming a joint military campaign referred to by Bangladeshi media when at its gracious best, as the “Mitra Bahini” (or Allied Forces – to preclude any controversy, I am simply using standard military history terminology as applied in the case of Allied Forces in WWII – and as this term is typically translated in Bengali). Prior to this, India allowed a Provisional Bangladesh Government to be formed with its later headquarters in Calcutta, India. India also allowed one of its radio transmitter stations to be used for broadcasting under the aegis of “Swadhin Bangla Betar Kendra” (Independent Bengal broadcasting Centre). Apart from this, both countries allude to the existence of training camps for volunteer Bengalees from East Pakistan with the aim of producing guerrilla fighting units. East Pakistan’s extensive borders with India, in some of the most inhospitable and well “covered” terrain helped fluidity of guerrilla movements across the border. As will be noted later, this feature of the “border” remains a factor of crucial importance.

What happened in the roughly 9 months of the Liberation War has been highly controversial. Without going into the actual incidents, how this Liberation War has been seen and represented is highly relevant and illustrative for our current discussion. There are broadly three distinct classes of opinions within Bangladesh –

(1) The Liberation War was won by the “MuktiJoddha”‘s ( although the English translation of this term first were actually used by the Salvation Army) whom I will refer to as Liberation Soldiers (Some of them definitely aimed for “freedom” but freedom has a much wider connotation than “liberation” – freedom from parochialism, religious bigotry, etc) with some “tactical” input at the final stage from the Indian Army. The political leadership and inspiration of this struggle was from Sk. Mujibur Rehman. Three million “martyrs” (“Shahid” is the term actually used, and is reserved in Islam for fighters who die fighting in the cause of Allah, and are greeted in “Behest” or paradise with the “sherbet” of “Shahidi” as well as other “gifts and pleasures”) gave their lives and thousands of Bengali women were raped or enslaved in sex-slavery or enforced prostitution for the pleasure of the Pakistani Army. In this the Pakistani army was helped by a section of Bengali Muslims organized under the names of Rajakar, Al Badr or Al Shams (all Arabic words referring to important and significant phases in early Islam) as paramilitary forces with the political leadership being given by the “Jamaat” (originally an Arabic word meaning gathering, usually religious gathering) with deliberate massacres by the paramilitary to liquidate Bengali intelligentsia when facing defeat.

(2) The Liberation War was won by the “MuktiJoddha”‘s led by the rebel breakaway regiments of the East-Pakistan Army under the command of Maj. Zia and General Osmani[ there was some unfortunate oversight about the then military rank of this superb military talent causing some protocol problems with the Indian Army – authors comments]. The Indian Army joined this liberation campaign because of its own strategic considerations in its on-going war on the western front with Pakistan. Three million “martyrs” gave their lives and thousands of Bengali women were raped or enslaved in sex-slavery or enforced prostitution for the pleasure of the Pakistani Army. Some “misdirected” Bengalees helped the Pakistani Army.

(3) The Indian Army overran Bangladeshi territory. There is now “nothing wrong” in the “then” formation of Bangladesh, but the greatest danger was the possibility of “colonization” by India. This was “rightly” opposed by the truly “patriotic” and “properly Islamic” leadership of the “Jamaat”. Many Bangladeshis gave their lives in this fight between India and Pakistan. Bengali women were not raped or enslaved in sex-slavery or enforced prostitution for the pleasure of the Pakistani Army, or even if they were, it was not done by Rajakars, Al Badrs or Al Shams. This “fact” is proved by the inadequacy of evidence as well as the failure of succeeding Bangldesh governments to “make their case” in courts of law.

On the whole, the dominant regime sponsored opinion in Bangladesh has remained heavily inclined towards (2) and (3). We can see that in all three major trends, India is cause for lots of unease. The fact that all Bangladesh governments, including those led by the “followers” of Sk Mujib (his assassination “miraculously” made the way clear for his erstwhile follower Khondokar Mushtaq who happily collaborated with the Army leadership involved in the assassination) as well as the current “care-taker” government (“backed” or “not-backed” by the Army, depending on “occasion” and “spokesperson” ), have managed not to bring alleged perpetrators of atrocities to trial in spite of the issue being a strong theme in the public consciousness as reflected in the media implies one thing only – the overwhelming social, political and military clout of sections represented by opinions (2) and (3).

I have seen media interviews where (1) those from the military typically react quite angrily to any suggestion that links atrocities with Islamic name bearing groups – implying that any group bearing Islamic name cannot be involved in “atrocities” (2) a well known Bangladeshi intellectual comments with a beaming face, that a British “Lord” praised Sk. Mujib’s greatest achievement to be his ability to “force” out the Indians after the liberation of Bangladesh. It is interesting to note that the Indian Muslim’s (apologies Titumir, Ashfaqulla or Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan and his Khudai Khidmatgars) admiration and courting of the British has not changed its nature right from the days of the Partition -leading to the sheer audacity and lunacy of implying that India wanted to annex East Pakistan (without any concrete proof and given completely opposite indications in India’s real actions such as recognizing the independent state of Bangladesh or recognizing a provisional government in exile etc) and gloating in the certificate of a doyen of an Imperialist regime famous in history for its “extreme reluctance” to leave any conquered territory before sucking it dry.

Like Pakistan, the essential grip of Islam over the society of Bangladesh has not loosened substantially over the last 60 years. Given the continued development and trends in Bangladesh society, we can infer that (1) in 1971, the forces for liberation of Bangladesh as a separate cultural entity distinct from Pakistan with the cultural element overriding the only link with Pakistan, Islam, were more or less evenly balanced against the forces identifying with the driving principles of Pakistan – reorganization of society on Islamic lines (2) India’s entry into the campaign tilted the instantaneous military balance in favour of the “cultural supremacy” pro-liberation component (3) as in any revolutionary campaign, the forces for change usually suffer greater casualties, and even if successful almost inevitably come out with a depletion of the most dedicated and the most revolutionary among its ranks, for these are the people who are foremost in the battle-lines. Survivors have a greater proportion of fence-sitters and opportunists than before the revolution. This was true also of the pro-liberation movement.

Thus once India was removed from the scene, with a weakened revolutionary force, the balance shifted in favour of orthodox Islamic resurgence, and it has continued to grow in strength. Some would try to say that there were economic motivations behind the liberation movement. Yes to a certain extent, but if it was economic motivation alone, the overwhelming exploitation of the East Pakistan should have led to the triumph of the spirit of the “Muktijoddhas”, as collaborators or “compradors” benefiting from this exploitation would have been few. A significant economic motivation in maintaining hostility towards India however could be the continued enjoyment of “enemy properties” of Hindus on the part of some. There will be continued hostility towards Indian culture, by portraying Indian culture as monolithic, “Hindu”, Hindi and mainly “Bollywood” , decadent and therefore distinct from, “pure”, Islamic and “Bengali” culture – (the latter, “Islamic+Bengali” therefore subtly merged together to bridge the distinction that led to the fracture between Pakistan and Bangladesh). There are sometimes attempts to portray the “Kolkata” language as no longer “Bengali”, etc. At the same time there are conspicuous attempts at avoiding Bengali words from Sanskrit roots and try to substitute as much as possible by words of Arabic or Persian origin. (A cliche would be the persistent use of “pani” for water, a word shared by Hindi and Urdu but not used by the non-Muslim Indian Bengali, similarly words for social relations etc). This type of Arabic or Persian admixture is noted much more in the elite of West Bengal society (probably from historical contact with Turko-Afghan/Mughal administration) rather than the general West Bengal non-Muslim population – e.g., use of “Saran” (from Sanskrit/Prakrit “Sarani” meaning road) among the non-elite rural populations in some regions compared to the more common elite usage “rasta”.

Some would even try to say that the recent capture of some of the leadership of Islamic extremists supposed to have been behind blasts killing hundreds, and their almost secret trial, and execution points to determination to move away from the Islamic Jihadist path. Not really, as a large number of these extremists are likely to be hiding in India, as well as being protected or covered by sympathetic forces within Bangladesh. It is even more likely that extremists are regrouping with proper “help” using the complacency sought to be generated after the executions. The supporting networks were never revealed or evidence for liquidation of these networks provided.

The Bangladesh elite attitude towards India continues to be hostile. Media appears to equate “India” with “Hindu”, and only softens its language when Indian help is badly needed. In general the popular entertainment items project Hindus as “inferior”, with “sampriti” (harmony) typically manifesting only in situations like a Hindu girl falling in love with or marrying a Muslim boy (never the other way round) – or being designated by the disparaging “malaon” (probably referring to the importance of garlands in certain Vaishnavite sects of Hinduism – the most popular form in East Bengal – unfortunately the rosaries of Catholics also contain the same number of beads as in the Hindu and Buddhist “japamalas” – 108, and the “Tasbi” in certain Muslim sects are also connected to religion and have similar functions). Proportions of Hindu population in Bangladesh will continue to decrease as revealed in “missing populations”, most likely to be explained as basic “hatred” Hindus have towards Islam and therefore their unpatriotic flight to “India”.

Thus the balance of forces, including the military, the lumpen proletariat, and the elite is overwhelmingly in favour of classic Islamic attitude towards non-Muslims, and Hindus in particular – probably because of the typical excessive zeal in distancing from the parent culture of the newly-converted (the “Hindu” Bengali adage “natun Mussalman goru khawar jom” – a newly converted Muslim is an extra-avid beef eater). India can expect continued covert support of Islamic radicals and extremists from powerful sections within Bangladesh society and establishment. Formally the issues under which this agenda will be carried out are “border incidents” – resulting from impossibly difficult to demarcate boundaries on extremely fluid eco-systems, cross-border smuggling of both animals and humans -(animals from India and humans from Bangladesh – both persistently denied by Bangladesh and insisted on by India), sharing water resources, and extraction of economic favours from India.

Typically the language used by the media and the elite is quite revealing in these issues – the India bashing is carried out in popular media including the printed in the total absence of any voice or views from the Indian side. These bashing campaigns are usually dominated by essentially political personalities – for example, the most ardent discussions on water sharing will be led not by hydrologists, and even if they are present they will carefully avoid the scientific issues of effect of climate change on overall precipitation in the Himalayan catchment areas and blame shortfalls in water supplies entirely on India, the issues of landgrabbing and unplanned constructions within Bangladesh that cause flooding will be carefully avoided and flooding blamed entirely on India, and sometimes this will reach to the level where India’s own huge populations and its needs are completely neglected with the demand being placed that amounts to demands for guaranteed maintenance of whatever Bangladesh wants and when it wants. The elite knows quite well that such demands are unrealistic and will never be met.

Bangladesh will demand investment from India but if such investments are actually initiated, they will be vehemently opposed, and any presence of anything connected to India will be immediately equated with “Indian Imperialism”. By this duality, Bangladesh maintains its propaganda for its sympathisers in the West that India is “hostile” towards it by not “investing”, and reveals its real ideological considerations that override real economic considerations – its essentially Islam inspired hostility towards “Hindus”. Similar imperialist charges are not leveled at initiatives coming from “proper Islamic” sources – for example buying up Bangladeshi financial institutions from the Middle East were welcomed even if the offer finally did not materialize but Indian industrialists such as the Tatas would be vehemently opposed. In the case that an “Islamic” investor turns out to be a failure, there will be no criticism at all – but the harshest of propaganda reactions will be reserved for India if the Indian investor withdraws.

These are the indications of an essentially ideological hatred against India and its majority community, the Hindus. And there is no reason why this should actually decrease. India should expect much more sophisticated collaboration of powerful sections of Bangladeshi society with the Pan-Islamic movement now shaping up. Deception, pretension, and protestations of peace and harmony will be employed only until militant, terroristic strength to overcome non-Muslim populations on the subcontinent has been achieved. It will be a huge mistake on India’s part to be lulled by such protestations of innocence.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Continued threat of terror inspired by Islam – 2

Posted on July 29, 2008. Filed under: India, Muslims, Politics, terrorism |

Following the blasts killing innocent bystanders, relatives of blast victims attending hospitals, and simply people going about their daily business, 18 more bombs have been recovered from Surat. The “Indian Mujahideen” have claimed that these bombs were meant to show the ease with which they could penetrate Indian society and civilian life with their threats. Muslims have also been killed in these blasts – and Muslims must surely be realizing the cost of allowing terrorists surviving among themselves. This could in the coming days be a big step towards getting the cooperation of sections of Muslims themselves in providing intelligence, and might even have been responsible for the information leading to exposure of the bomb sites.

An interesting but expected development is the capture of two Laskar-e-Taeba (LET) operatives who were acting under cover from Murshidabad in West Bengal. Murshidabad is a border district of West Bengal, and before the partition the Muslim League tried desperately to include it within the then proposed Pakistan. Murshidabad has a majority of Muslims. It was an important centre of Mughal administrative and military power, and grew in importance under the semi-independent later Nawabs of the unified Subahs of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa (the two other older centres of pre-Mughal Turko-Afghan Islamic power still surviving under the Mughals were the Faujdari of Hooghly and the subsidiary Nawabi around Dhaka-Bikramanipur). It remains an important transit centre for Islamic terrorists using Bangladesh as a natural supporting society flourishing on the well fanned anti-India-anti-Hindu sentiments of a large section of Bangladeshi Muslims.

Bangladesh hosts the second largest Islamic faith gathering in the Islamic calendar, the “Vishwa (World) estema” or religious gathering. The major driving force behind the hatred of India and Hindus in the politics of Bangladesh stems from the pre-Bangladesh period, when it was still under Pakistan. The partition aimed at creating a land for Muslims. There has been a lot of deliberate confusion created by Muslim apologists for the formation of Pakistan – not the least by the chief verbal face of the Pakistan movement – M.A.Jinnah. Jinnah kept the formal face of an inclusive state, where non-Muslims are officially tolerated. But the same double-dealing as to interpretation and reconstruction of the Islamic faith texts for the consumption of non-Muslims were in action at the formative stages of Pakistan. The British collaborated in this, for a variety of political and military goals, and some very short-sighted unstatesmanlike and revengeful tendencies always inherent in British Imperialism being forced to retreat. The actual actions of the Pakistani state with regards to non-Muslims, and especially Hindus, reveal the real intentions as well as consistency with the actual strategies enjoined in the Quran and the Hadiths to be employed on non-Muslims – capture Hindu lands, evict or liquidate Hindu populations to possess their property, (with a formal state support for this quintessential Islamic demand in the form of the Enemy Property Act – which remained in place even in the independent Bangladesh formed with the help of India and its “Hindus”), forced marriages or “lifting” of Hindu women, and forced conversions and destructions of Hindu shrines under any pretext. This trend has even continued in present day Bangladesh with some obvious clues in demographic indicators (the well know case of “missing population” acknowledged even by Bangladeshi demographers) of the displacement and reduction of Hindu populations in Bangladesh.

We can understand the basic desire and target of the elite of Pakistan and Bangladesh simply by looking into the targets of early Islam and the strategic recommendations in the Islamic faith texts. Islamic religious leadership and elite understand that they can only retain power if they can reproduce the societal conditions existing in the first millennium Arabia and the middle East – this will imply a natural contradiction in unlimited progress of modern methods of seeking and processing knowledge and the inevitable fallout of such knowledge going against the faith teachings and pretensions. Islam therefore cannot go very far in the technology direction without weakening its hold and therefore it will seek agrarian resources, and try to impose the millennial desert cultures to justify its hegemony. To ensure compliance it will need to systematically destroy and eliminate all secular and modern institutions of learning and research which can be potential centres of rebellion and resistance.

India provides a thorn in the sides of Islamic dominance on the Indian subcontinent as it continues to provide ideas and examples that bring into question the basic demands and claims of Islam. At the same time India retains vast agrarian resources. India’s productive lands, and other basic biological resources including human reproductive resources, are a lucrative target for the elite in both Bangladesh and Pakistan. Until these two regions survive as Islam dominated societies, they will continue to breed, and support terrorists – as the only way they can survive with their problems of huge populations and low-surplus economies keeping the Islamic framework intact is that of conquering Indian lands and populations and impose Islam.

Bangladesh may seem a contradiction to this prediction because of its greater proximity to Hindu Bengali culture and supposed “links” from the Liberation War but there are concrete societal conditions which will continue to disrupt this oversimplified picture of cultural “affinity”.  We will discuss Bangladesh specifically in a subsequent post.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Continued threat of terror inspired by Islam

Posted on July 28, 2008. Filed under: India, Muslims, Politics, terrorism |

One of the primary mistakes, intentional or otherwise, in trying to understand the reasons behind terror under the banner of Islam is the failure to realize the ideological motivations provided by the theological structure of Islam itself.

Why do people make these mistakes :

(1) Deliberate mistakes both on the part of certain clerics and intellectuals from across the Muslim as well as non-Muslim groups in the hope that (a) no retaliation on and deconstruction of Islam itself takes place as Islam can be painted to be a religion of peace (b) the practical hope that maybe some of the potential converts to extremism will desist from extremism by believing in the “peace” theory

(2) Unintentional ones, resulting from a lack of thorough understanding and reading of the core texts of Islam, lack of knowledge of independent archaeological and historical analysis of the times and regions of formation of Islam, and comparing the teachings and diktats with that of actual Islamic behaviour since its formation.

(3) A deliberate misconstruction of Islam as a much desirable alternative to the non-Muslim apologist’s own culture from which he/she feels alienated (White European ex-Christian converts to Islam such as the really good ex-singer Cat Stevens)

With increased access to the translations of the core texts, more and more people can now read the various versions of these texts. Some of these translations were made at a time when European colonialism was sufficiently powerful and sufficiently romantically indulgent towards the “Orient” to not shy away or edit away too much of the horror of what is described in the core texts of Islam. Definitely translations done by Guillaume, or Muir (even Muir says he left out portions he thought were too gross and too sensuous) would not have found press today, as both governments and interested pressure groups would successfully lobby to preserve the “oh so good” image of Islam being reconstructed all over the world.

The problem that non-Muslim elite never understands is that even if Islam is painted as a peaceful and non-violent faith for the consumption of non-Muslims, the core texts are always taught in the Muslim educational system through their original language, Arabic. There are of course some important versions in old Persian. None of these two languages are widely known to non-Muslims. The Arabic language versions of the Quran or the Hadiths or the Sirah, are not edited clear of the references to recommendation of violence towards “unbelievers” or “hypocrites”. This is one of the primary reasons that Muslim communities everywhere insist on teaching its young Arabic, and goes to great lengths in establishing faith schools. Where it has the means and is allowed to get away with it, it targets secular schools (such as in Indian Kashmir, where almost no secular school has been left intact in the Muslim dominated part, so that children are forced to go to the Madrassahs or Muslim theological schools).

For the consumption of the non-Muslim public only isolated verses or Suras from the Quran are broadcast and quoted with great emotion and fanfare to try to establish that Islam is extremely peaceful towards non-Muslims. These are typically quoted out of context, without mentioning which chapter of the Quran they are coming from and the verses before and after it, without explaining the links to the events they refer to, etc. The reason apologetics can get away with this is because (1) non-Muslims do not have access to full, unabridged, unedited Islamic texts as well as chronological and historical/narrative details (2) the confusion about the interpretations of the words meaning “unbeliever” or “hypocrites”.

Those who try to paint Islam as peaceful, usually refer to two or three Suras that appear to talk of Allah’s displeasure on shedding innocent lives, or that non-believers can under certain conditions (such as paying taxes or protection money or a short term peace treaty which however can be overturned at will at any time by Muslims) be treated as “dhimmis” – protected. When they are confronted with Sura after Sura of violent indictment on “unbelievers” or “hypocrites”, they try to explain it away as only referring to a particular group in Arabia at the time (those refusing to submit to Muhammad’s authority – in almost all case of authority in the Quran – submission is required to both Allah and his Messenger, simultaneously), and not applicable to subsequent times or peoples. However nothing is said in the Quran that specifically declares that in the future these interpretations cannot be applied to other peoples, where in fact the Quran definitely speaks of future behaviour – such as the banning of the remarriage of the widows of Muhammad – (the ban being specifically for Muhammad’s case only – widow remarriage in general is recommended, and some of Muhammad’s own wives were war-widows). The “peaceful” Suras have to be interpreted as meaning a desirable behaviour towards “believers” and not towards “unbelievers”, in the context that unbelievers are almost never mentioned without indictment of violence, either that of Allahs’ or that of Muslims. This becomes clearer from the Hadiths.

The key to understanding the core of the revealed traditions is to model their origins as philosophies of small minority groups, struggling to survive in unproductive regions of the world, at a low level of technological and intellectual sophistication, and with over-exceeding jealousy of the “good life” of technologically, culturally sophisticated urban societies. So their faiths are overwhelmingly obsessed with obtaining and securing biological resources – thus their “Gods” guarantee them their rights over the agriculturally productive lands of “others”, the “women” of the “others”, the minor children of the “others” (who can be brainwashed and absorbed to swell the numbers) – their “Gods” require them to eliminate the “males” of the others (as chief obstacles to dominance ), and the whole societal system is based on the “primitive natural hierarachy” – where men have power over women, the community has power over other communities, etc. Such a culture will also jealously guard its valuable biological resources be they their own or of others which they have looted – typically we should expect an overwhelming obsession in their legal injunctions (which of course comes from their “God”) with sexual “deviance” (as this can reduce reproductive capacity) and sexual “offences”, insistence on “one way traffic” of women into the group, a violent repression or penalty for crimes that would be considered small in a more well -off or economically richer society, and supreme penalty for not believing in the “commander” (just as the importance of court martial for insubordination in an army). These tendencies will increase inversely in proportion to the starting cultural level of the group – the Jews may not show these tendencies to the extent of Muslims.

The main target of Islamic terrorists is increasing the number of Muslims. There is also no doubt about it that Islam recommends continuous unrelenting militant Jihad to spread Islam. Such an ideology will appeal to a large number of youth who do not have the inclination or capacity to face the challenges of a modern education system together with its technological complexity in order to succeed in the modern economies. Everything associated with modern societies will be a threat to them – independent, educated, capable women with sexuality not under male control, an increasingly complex system and body of knowledge, the enforced use of intellect and not mere muscle power, lack of physical, testosterone driven adventure (which have all been converted to the virtual world).

Maybe we can suggest to Muslims themselves to think of abandoning Islam, to become agnostics, or convert into one of the other faiths which do not require Jihad as the supreme duty. In the Quran, there is not a single Sura that says that a Muslim who goes out of Islam has to be immediately killed physically. (I am sure Muslim theologians know what I mean). A public promise by the leaders of Muslim communities to convert into other religions if blasts or killings occur of non-Muslims by Islamic fanatics, would go a long way towards defeating the target of Jihadists – the message will be clear, “if you do not behave, your numbers are actually going to decrease rather than the increase you hope for”.

It is hard to believe that the Indian State authorities which could so easily and ruthlessly crush the Sikh militants, or the early batch of Bengal Naxalites, are not able to crush Islamic militancy – does the state find it rather useful to protect Islamic militants for some reason or somehow the word Islam gives a tug at its heart strings?

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Bangalore blasts: outrage with a difference

Posted on July 25, 2008. Filed under: India, Politics, terrorism |

In general there has always been the shadow of suspicion on the government of a country in allowing “public outrages” to happen at a convenient time, when it is politically difficult for it to pass a law or an act which it wants to pass – but that the outrage will help swing public opinion in favour of the law or act. There seemed to be a pattern during the British Raj, when “outrages” by terrorist “freedom-fighters” always happened when the India Govt. needed or wanted to pass a particularly repressive or exploitative measure but faced opposition from the Home Office or the British Parliament. Typically, all those supposedly involved were caught quite quickly, and in the court, all their preparatory meeting details, and detailed day to day activity were placed as evidence. This pattern continued even during the later days of open, mass Congress politics, and there exists a White Paper published by the British Govt. of India which details speeches given in a closed AIWC session, about how Gandhiji himself was not so “pacifist” after all. The British police knew exactly what went on within the higher committees of the groups and parties publicly opposed to it, and they made short shrift of those groups it considered particularly obnoxious – whereas people who suddenly “switched” to a moderate, cooperative attitude to the British government after “realization” in jail, appear to have survived and risen to prominence in the latter phases of the Congress led movement. We can isolate these leaders as those who took great pains to distinguish between the British as a nation, and the particular British government they were fighting against. These were leaders who emphasized that they wanted India to remain a “close friend” of Britain, and in fact were in favour of the administrative system imposed by the British, but simply wanted control of the system. This is why most of the administrative people, or army officers who had been extremely loyal to the British authorities, and helped suppress or defeat Independence movements survived and flourished under the post Independence government.

To a certain extent, this policy probably continues even now in the West. There are trails in sometimes released old internal documents, (such as a particular heavily inked out doc released by the US government which indicates that someone close to Indira Gandhi was passing on daily briefs to the US secret services during the 1971 Indo-Pak war). A typical strategy would be to infiltrate into groups, (with agents who have either been blackmailed or enticed) and in fact encourage outrages or help organize them. This is the reason, these cases are so quickly solved, with the group caught quite easily – the secret services had in fact probably helped plan the whole “outrage”.

Could a similar thing be happening in the states of India? No. For one thing, India is a much larger country with a much larger population and diversity than the US or the UK. The hold of the centre into the minutest corner of the provinces are not so strong as in the US or UK. Organizing explosions of the scale carried out in Mumbai, Rajasthan, Bangalore, Hyderabad, require support by a secret service funded by the resources of a national government, or a force which has similar resources at its disposal. Thus Al-Qaeda controlling substantial portions of Afghanistan and Pakistan, or Pakistan itself, could be likely candidates in supporting these acts.

I had already predicted that outrages in Indian cities will increase after the trust vote as the forces which have their own ambitions of controlling India will panic. The targets will be common people, and crowds, and commercially and economically important centres – especially those which could