Thursday, March 25, 2010

The Curious Case of David Coleman Headley - By Amaresh Misra


 The Curious Case of David Coleman Headley


                                                          By Amaresh Misra



          With the row over India’s access to David Headley growing acrimonious each day, the CIA’s double agent saga seems all set to open up a can of incredible worms.
First, the case unmasks the pro-US face of the Indian English media. When the Headley saga first came to light, Vir Sanghavi of the Hindustan Times carried an editorial piece claiming that if `Headley is CIA, and knew about 26/11, the CIA knew about the attack.’ In other words, Sanghavi accepted the `conspiracy theory’—which in the eyes of the English media was `peddled’ by Aziz Burney and this author during the terrible aftermath of 26/11—that the event was a CIA/Mossad/RSS/ISI plot.
          In November-December 2008, Vir Sanghavi and his cohorts in the English media attacked both Aziz Burney and this author for spelling forth the `conspiracy theory’. Then after Headley’s name surfaced, they changed tune, without of course admitting their debt to Mr. Burney or this author.
          The fact of the matter is that in the 2009 Parliamentary elections, the English media was all set to project Lal Krishna Advani as India’s next Prime Minister. It was the feverish anti-RSS, anti-Mossad work done by Aziz Burney and this author that went a long way in ensuring the victory of Congress and secular forces. 
          Now when the CIA hand behind 26/11 is slowly being unraveled, the English media is seeing red. It is again trying to portray Headley merely as a Lashkar operative, severing thus his links with the CIA.
          This highlights the second point, that basicallyHeadley and the CIA cannot be de-linked. Thank God the government of India put into place the NIA, a new investigative agency. The NIA was set up, as the IB and other India agencies, especially the IB, had not only gone anti-Muslim—they had gone anti-India. This was proved in the case of Azamgarh boys picked up in and around the Batala House encounter on various bomb blasts charges. Most of the boys were products not of Madarsas, but modern schools. They were youngsters in their teens; they had made a mark for themselves in professional courses and were holding jobs in the new, professional sector of the economy.
          When Shri Digvijaya Singh, the General Secretary AICC and the most secular leader of the India, went to Sanjarpur (under the banner of anti-communal front) in Azamgarh to find out the facts for himself, he was shocked to find that Zeeshan, a boy from Azamgarh who on the fateful day of the Batala House encounter was giving his exams, had more than 50 cases slapped over him in more than 3 states—which meant that his parents could go on fighting cases for more than 100 years and yet Zeeshan would be in jail.
          There are dozens and hundreds of Zeeshans from Azamgarh and other districts of UP, Gujarat and Maharashtra languishing in various Indian jails on unsubstantiated charges. This in fact is India’s Guantanamo Bay story—that right here in the world’s largest democracy the Indian security services like the IB have secret detention and torture centers where innocent Muslim youths are tortured and put to death. The IB today has been infiltrated heavily by RSS, Mossad and CIA. In fact this one agency is an anti-national agency—it is obstructing the work of NIA and secular Indians like Shri Digvijaya Singh. Soon, in India’s interest, the IB will have to be closed down. All its communal officers will be hunted down and tried in a court of just law.
The IB knew about Headley—this is proved by the fact that the SIM cards used by the ten 26/11 terrorists were purchased by an IB informer. Till date, the investigations into the 26/11 case, which the IB is handling, has been unable to state as to how the ten terrorists got hold of the SIM cards.      
The State IB chief of Maharashtra told a very senior Mumbai Police Officer just after 26/11 that he was `entirely in the dark about 26/11 investigations as Delhi (meaning the chief IB office) was handling it’. Basic information about 26/11 was not shared with secular Indian officers. The Headley lead would never have come to the fore had the NIA not stepped in.
Now comes the news that the IB has set-up training camps in Gorakhpur, where it trains criminals—and then uses them to kill Muslim under-trials. The name of Chota Rajan is used as a convenient scapegoat. It is in this manner that dozens of accused in the 1993 Mumbai bomb blasts, several other such accused in other cases, Muslim businessmen and men of influence have been eliminated on a systematic basis in Maharashtra. The latest in the long list of victims killed allegedly by IB is Shahid Azmi, the lawyer defending the accused of the 2006 Mumbai train blasts. Shahid had hit upon evidence which proved the innocence of the accused—and that is why he was bumped off, again by criminals with Nepal-Gorakhpur links!
In fact, the state of Maharashtra holds the dubious distinction of almost institutionalizing the extra-judicial killing of Muslim youth and personalities.
Headley was in India months and years before the 26/11 attack; he even surveyed Pune where a blast took place as late as February 2010. It beats one imagination as to how the IB did not know about Headley and his movements. There can only be two scenarios: that the IB is totally incompetent—or that the IB is heavily infiltrated by CIA and Mossad: the agency knew about 26/11 and did nothing to stop it.
This places the IB at par with Headley, as executioners of 26/11 and mass murderers. There can be no other honest conclusion.
Headley holds the key to the fact that 26/11 was not just a mere Lashkar operation—that it was a joint Mossad-CIA operation, conducted with possible ISI and RSS help.
If the charge-sheet against Raj Kumar Purohit and Saadhvi Pragya, accused in the Malegaon and other blasts, is read, it is clear that there was always some sort of collusion between the RSS and the ISI. The so-called nationalists, the Hindutva forces took money to the tune of Crores of rupees from the ISI! The IB knows about this transaction but is keeping quiet!
The Headley saga has links to Abhinav Bharati and pro-Hindutva terror groups. The pro-Hindutva terror groups are widely believed to be behind the Pune blasts where a combination of RDX and Ammonium Nitrate was used. Right after the visit of Shri Digvijaya Singh to Maharashtra in February 2010, the state home secretary spoke of the possibility of the involvement of Hindutva groups in the Pune blasts. Other officers, including the ATS chief Raghuvanshi, purported to be a RSS/opportunist man also spoke of this possibility. But then RR Patil, the Maharashtra Home Minister whose role during 26/11 was disastrous and who was removed from his post in the wake of the attack on Mumbai (but who was restored after the 2009 assembly elections), made amazing statements `that those who take the name of Hindu organizations in the Pune blasts will be punished’!
How can a Home Minister make such a statement? Now we hear that Rakesh Maria, a notorious anti-Muslim officer, with pro-Israel links, a man who has killed and tortured innocents, has been made the new ATS chief and Raguvanshi has been promoted! Secular organizations in Maharashtra were demanding that Raghuvanshi be removed and that an honest, secular officer be made the ATS chief so that Hemant Karkare’s seminal work in cracking the shell of Hindutva communalism could be exposed.
But Rakesh Maria is even worse than Raghuvanshi. It seems that the NCP in Maharashtra has taken a clear anti-Congress, anti-national line. RR Patil, who is a third grade, uncouth, thoroughly communal, NCP leader should be removed from his post. The Maharashtra chief minister should act, because if the NIA gets access to Headley, the latter’s links with Hindutva organization—and the whole RSS-Mossad-CIA-ISI-IB nexus—will be exposed. This nexus is working overtime to destabilize the Congress government and overthrow the commendable done by the party under the secular leadership of Sonia Gandhi.  


Amaresh Misra is a famed historian and chief of the Anti-Communal Front of the All India Congress Committee (AICC)          

                                     

                                              Press Statement

Sub: appointment of the criminal/communal Rakesh Maria as the ATS Chief of Maharashtra


          Amaresh Misra, President of the Anti-Communal Front of the All India Congress Committee (AICC) roundly condemns the appointment of Rakesh Maria as the Maharashtra ATS Chief.
          Mr. Misra further says that while investigating the 1993 Mumbai bomb blast case, Rakesh Maria is known to have tortured hundreds of innocent Muslims and secular Hindus.He created India’s Guantanamo Bay way back in the 1990s. He is a known communal man, close to the RSS. He is also close to the Israel lobby and the MOSSAD.
          According to Mr. Misra, during 26/11 Rakesh Maria was in the Police control room. Vinita Kaamte, the wife of Ashok Kaamte, the slain hero of 26/11, wrote in her recent book that Rakesh Maria was responsible for her husband’s death, as he did not attend to appeals that Karkare, Salaskar and Kaamte were lying wounded in the Cama hospital lane, very close to the Police Control room. Rakesh Maria is thus a killer of his own officers. And he is being made chief of the ATS! Raghuvanshi, the ex-ATS chief, who had all but throttled Karkare’s anti-Hindutva investigations in the Malegaon and other blasts, has now been promoted!
          Mr. Misra further emphasizes that a few days back RR Patil, the uncouth, communal NCP leader and Maharashtra’s Home Minister made the astonishing statement that names of Hindutva organizations should not be taken in the Pune blasts! This, when it is becoming clear that Abhinav Bharati and others might be involved as the RDX-Ammonium Nitrate combination—used in Malegaon blasts—was also used in Pune.
          Mr. Misra warns the Congress-NCP government of Maharashtra that they are giving free leeway to communal forces. Instead of going after Abhinav Bharati, they are harassing innocent Muslims.
Mr. Misra challenges RR Patil to come out openly for debate in any forum—Mr. Misra alleges that RR Patil is being used by RSS and MOSSAD. Both these forces, along with the CIA, are interested in destabilizing India.
Mr. Misra further warns that Delhi and 10 Janpath are eyeing the situation in Maharashtra with disquiet. The NCP is in league with the RSS and Shiv Sena and is trying to discredit the Congress and the secular work of Shri Dihvijaya Singh and Smt. Sonia Gandhi. The NCP-Shiv Sena-RSS want to destroy Congress in Maharashtra. Any Congressman who supports RR Patil or Rakesh Maria is a deshdrohi and a traitor to his party.
Mr. Misra exhorts Congressmen and all secular individuals of Maharashtra to oppose the appointment of Rakesh Maria through a mass movement if necessary. They should demand the resignation of the RR Patil if need be. The David Headley affair shows the hand of CIA and MOSSAD behind 26/11. David Headley was linked to Hindutva terrorist organizations. Rakesh Maria may also well be linked to Hindutva terrorist organizations—he might also have known David Headley much before 26/11.    
Mr. Misra assures the people of Maharashtra that they will have the support of Shri Digvijaya Singh and Smt. Sonia Gandhi, who are fighting infiltrators like Rakesh Maria, Raghuvanshi, and other anti-national, criminal and communal forces at all levels.    
                  

Monday, March 22, 2010

LETTER TO THE EDITOR: POLICE INSENSITIVITY


LETTER TO THE EDITOR

POLICE INSENSITIVITY:


A 14-year Muslim girl is 'arrested' from her home by Ghatkopar police in December last year, in connection with a supposed violation of Child Marriage Prohibition Act; as her relatives complaint to Police that she is underage and should not be married off. Instead of taking suitable action against her guardians or whoever is supposed to be answerable in such case, the arrest and detention of a young girl, can never be interpreted as anything other than high-handed justice meted out by the Police. How can she be confined to a prison like Child Welfare Committee institution against her will and become state ward in the true Dickensian fashion of convoluted justice, where her individual rights are so blatantly violated by the Police and other authorities. The police should know that she will be scarred for all her life and carry the stigma of a prison sentence for no fault of her and in the false pretext of protection of her interest. Is this the best a welfare state can do after 60 years of being liberated from the British standard of colonial justice?

Women's organisations too forget the plight of individuals that become the unwilling focus of wrangling between authorities and legalities, and keep barking up the wrong trees.

Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai




Bangalore Mirror

HC to ask minor if she was forced to marry

The High Court has also issued notice to Additional Solicitor General of the Union of India to decide the legality of the claim made by girl’s mother that Muslims can marry on reaching puberty

By Mumbai Mirror Bureau
Posted On Tuesday, March 23, 2010 at 02:24:55 AM

The Bombay High Court on Monday decided to interview the 15-year-old Muslim girl whose marriage was stalled by the Ghatkopar police in December last year after it received a complaint saying the girl was a minor and her marriage was in violation of the Child Marriage Prohibition Act.


The High Court has also issued notice to the Additional Solicitor General in order to decide the legality of the petition filed by the girl’s mother, Zakia Begum, in which she had contended that Muslims in India were entitled to marry on attaining puberty as per his or her choice, and that freedom was integral part of their fundamental rights.

The judges observed that this was an important issue that challenged certain provisions of the Constitution, and the Union of 
India should be made a party in this matter.
The girl, who was produced before the Child Welfare Committee (CWC) in Mankhurd, was sent to a welfare home in Andheri. Her parents had then moved the High Court.

A division bench of Justices D B Bhosale and A R Joshi will speak to the girl in their chamber next Monday afternoon and verify if she was forced into the marriage or consented to it before deciding to hand her over to her parents.

Senior lawyer Yusuf Muchchhala, appearing for the All 
India Muslim Personal Law Board (MPLB), sought the girl’s release from the private home in Andheri and requested the court that she be handed over to her parents. He argued that while the law clearly states that the girl’s interests must be protected, keeping her in the welfare home goes contrary to this as she is being punished.

“The girl has been lodged in the welfare home since December. She is a school-going child who is being punished for no fault of hers,” said Muchchhala. He also apprised the court of the willingness of the girl’s parents to give unconditional undertaking that they will not marry her off till she attains the eligible age. The lawyer requested the court to grant interim relief in this case and allow the girl to be with her parents.
Case background

Zakia Begum, the minor girl’s mother, had filed a petition in HC saying that as per the MPL (Muslim Personal Law), Muslims in 
India were entitled to marry on attaining puberty as per their choice.

Her daughter was scheduled to marry a Ghatkopar resident, but just a few hours before the marriage could be solemnised, Ghatkopar police took the bride in their custody. They booked the girl’s mother, maternal aunt, the groom and his parents under provisions of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.

Zakia Begum then moved the HC for quashing of the FIR, and is seeking relief from the court to bring her daughter home.

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Fwd: Thank you, Ghulam --- From: Barack Obama

A CIRCULAR EMAIL SENT TO WELL WISHERS OF THE WELFARE MEASURE TO MARK A HISTORICAL DAY IN AMERICA'S HISTORY. 

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Barack Obama <info@barackobama.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 10:09 AM
Subject: Thank you, Ghulam
To: Ghulam Muhammed <ghulammuhammed3@gmail.com>


Ghulam --

For the first time in our nation's history, Congress has passed comprehensive health care reform. America waited a hundred years and fought for decades to reach this moment. Tonight, thanks to you, we are finally here.

Consider the staggering scope of what you have just accomplished:

Because of you, every American will finally be guaranteed high quality, affordable health care coverage.

Every American will be covered under the toughest patient protections in history. Arbitrary premium hikes, insurance cancellations, and discrimination against pre-existing conditions will now be gone forever.

And we'll finally start reducing the cost of care -- creating millions of jobs, preventing families and businesses from plunging into bankruptcy, and removing over a trillion dollars of debt from the backs of our children.

But the victory that matters most tonight goes beyond the laws and far past the numbers.

It is the peace of mind enjoyed by every American, no longer one injury or illness away from catastrophe.

It is the workers and entrepreneurs who are now freed to pursue their slice of the American dream without fear of losing coverage or facing a crippling bill.

And it is the immeasurable joy of families in every part of this great nation, living happier, healthier lives together because they can finally receive the vital care they need.

This is what change looks like.

My gratitude tonight is profound. I am thankful for those in past generations whose heroic efforts brought this great goal within reach for our times. I am thankful for the members of Congress whose months of effort and brave votes made it possible to take this final step. But most of all, I am thankful for you.

This day is not the end of this journey. Much hard work remains, and we have a solemn responsibility to do it right. But we can face that work together with the confidence of those who have moved mountains.

Our journey began three years ago, driven by a shared belief that fundamental change is indeed still possible. We have worked hard together every day since to deliver on that belief.

We have shared moments of tremendous hope, and we've faced setbacks and doubt. We have all been forced to ask if our politics had simply become too polarized and too short-sighted to meet the pressing challenges of our time. This struggle became a test of whether the American people could still rally together when the cause was right -- and actually create the change we believe in.

Tonight, thanks to your mighty efforts, the answer is indisputable: Yes we can.

Thank you,

President Barack Obama



Paid for by Organizing for America, a project of the Democratic National Committee -- 430 South Capitol Street SE, Washington, D.C. 20003. This communication is not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.
This email was sent to: ghulammuhammed3@gmail.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Media confirmation of the news:

Breaking News Alert
The New York Times
Sun, March 21, 2010 -- 10:49 PM ET
-----

House Approves Landmark Bill to Extend Health Care to Millions

Congress gave final approval on Sunday to legislation that
would provide medical coverage to tens of millions of
uninsured Americans and remake the nation's health care
system along the lines proposed by President Obama.

By a vote of 219 to 212, the House passed the bill after a
day of tumultuous debate that echoed the epic struggle of the
last year. The action sent the bill to President Obama, whose
crusade for such legislation has been a hallmark of his
presidency.

Democrats hailed the votes as historic, comparable to the
establishment of Medicare and Social Security and a long
overdue step forward in social justice.

Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com?emc=n

Wednesday, March 17, 2010



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mahtab Alam 
Date: Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 11:35 AM
Subject: Analysis: ‘Mainstream’ Media, They did it once again


‘Mainstream’ Media, They did it once again

Submitted by admin3 on 16 March 2010 - 9:56pm.
 

By Mahtab Alam, TwoCircles.net,


New Delhi: On 7 March 2007, when more than 5000 activists of Tamilnadu Muslim Munnetra Kazagham (TMMK) marched to Parliament from various parts of the state to demand reservation for Muslims in government services and educational institutions, they could not make news for mainstream media at all as the march was completely blacked out. Three years down the line situation seems not to have changed. Yesterday, there were several rallies on Muslim issues here but ‘mainstream’ newspapers have just buried the news.

Jantar Mantar of Delhi, considered to be the barometer of Indian Democracy and the only authorized space in the national capital to put forward people’s demand on various issues, witnessed a historic scene yesterday. Thousands of people and dozens of organization, coming from different parts of the country rallied for reservation for Muslims and implementation of recommendations of both Sachar Committee and Ranganath Mishra Commission. But for mainstream media it was not the ‘news’ hence you will either find complete blackout or marginal reporting with misleading touch in today’s papers.



The Times of India in its 36-page issue could not spare even a single column to cover any of rallies, dharna and protests organized to demand Muslim reservation. While counterpart Hindustan Times, in its 38-page edition could only make it on page 16 with heading “Post-women’s bill: Huge Muslim rally for quota”. However, it writes in a confusing way: “Backed by prominent MPs opposed to women reservation bill, hundreds of backward Muslims and Christians on Tuesday demanded quota in jobs and education”.

Joining Times of India, both The Pioneer and The Asian Age spread over 16 and 36 pages respectively could not spare even a tiny space to inform their readers about demands of Muslims. The Statesman in 20-page edition only bothered to publish a small picture of protest demanding Minority Character of Jamia Millia Islamia. The Indian Express did the same, and that too on its page number 23 of 26-page newspaper.

Among the lesser read, both The Hindu and tabloid Mail Today comparatively gave more space. But The Hindu covered only Dharna for Minority Character of Jamia Millia Islamia and Mail Today felt happy covering only Popular Front of India’s march to Parliament.

Hindi newspapers, not lagging behind their English counterparts reported the events with same ‘zeal’. In fact, Hindi papers took lead in not covering. Dainik Jagaran and Amar Ujala, most read papers of Hindi did not cover the events. Like Times of India, the same group’s paper Nav Bharat Times blacked out the news. Dainik Hindustan, following the pattern of group’s English paper Hidustan Times gave a marginal coverage. While Jansatta, one of the progressive but less read Hindi daily covered the events comparatively better, Hindi daily Nai Duniya only worried to publish small news demanding minority character of Jamia. However, Rashrtriya Sahara Hindi daily did it well.

What is most startling, even Urdu dailies did not cover the events prominently. Rashtriya Sahara, largest selling Urdu daily did not mind it publishing on front pages. The events could only find space on page number 8 and 9. Lesser known and read Sahafat and Hamara Samaj Daily made it on front pages. However, on the whole even in Urdu dailies the events got lesser attention, of course not up to their importance.

Interestingly, in almost every daily petty incident of clash in Jamia Nagar between Asif Mohd Khan, local MLA and Parwez Hashsmi, former MLA and Rajya Sabha MP has been over reported. In fact, some of the newspapers blew it out of proportion. Times of India reported curfew like situation giving heading – Jamia Nagar tense after MP, MLA groups clash and Dainik Jagaran reported, Clash between MP and MLA in Jamia Nagar, disturbances at Police Station. Urdu dallies also followed the line. What is more interesting, the people of Jamia Nagar heard about the ‘rioting and tension’ through the newspapers only. Even this writer, who lives not more than 500 hundred meters from MP’s residence and crosses both his residence and Police station at least twice in a day is ‘informed’ by newspapers only!


--
MD. MAHTAB ALAM
mdmahtabalam@gmail.com
Phone:+ 91-9811209345

Sunday, March 14, 2010

Full Page Advertisement( 18 February) by Ministry of Minority Affairs Misinforms Public & Hoodwinks Muslims .



ALL INDIA MUSLIM MAJLIS-E-MUSHAWARAT
[Umbrella body of the Indian Muslim organisations]
D-250, Abul Fazal Enclave, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi-110025 India
Tel/Fax: 011-26947346 Email: mushawarat@mushawarat.com
Full Page Advertisement( 18 February) by Ministry of Minority Affairs Misinforms Public & Hoodwinks Muslims
.
Statistics should be Community-wise & Year-wise to Carry Conviction.
New Delhi: 14 March, 2010 Mr. Syed Shahabuddin, President of AIMMM has issued the following statement.
‘
The full page Advertisement by the Ministry of Minority Affairs on 18 February, 2010 on its achievements under Prime Minister’s 15 Point Programme for the Welfare of the Minorities has been  designed to misinform the public and to bluff the minorities and particularly hoodwink the Muslims. Indeed, the Advertisement conceals more than it reveals.
Religious minorities constitute clearly 20 % of the national population, of which nearly 15 % are Muslims. The Advertisement speaks repeatedly of ‘minority concentration districts ( MCD) but to cover up poor performance in Muslims concentration districts or their proportionate under-coverage the Advertisement gives no information about Muslim concentration districts. This deliberate omission is evident from the following item-wise analysis.
I. Bank Branches
: 1562 public sector bank branches are claimed to have been opened since 207-08, but neither their location nor the community-wise break-up of the number of accounts and credit flow are revealed.
2. New Schools:
8764 new schools are said to have been opened upto 30.09.09. But whether they are primary/ middle / secondary schools is not mentioned nor their number in Muslims areas nor the extent to which they cover school deficit compared to national norms.
3. Institutional Allocation
: Increase in the Share capital of NMDFC and the corpus of Maulana Azad Education Foundation are given. But actual disbursement year-wise are not.
4. Multi-sectorial Devolvement Programmme:
807.01 Crores are said to have been released to States/ UTs up to 01.01.2010 for 90 MCDs but readers are not informed of how much has been actually utilized and the programme taken up, district-wise.
5. Increase in Plan Provision for Ministry:
It is well known that every year the Ministry has failed to utilize the allocation fully.
6. Earmarking of 15 % of Outlay for Muslims, Scheme-wise allocation and the number of total & Muslim beneficiaries are not provided
.
7. Awards of 22, 23,841Scholarships to Minority students
: The status of awards to Muslim community, state-wise, is not given nor the number of scholarships & amounts which have been actually disbursed.
8. Indira Awas Yojana
: 9,29,141 Minority BPL families are said have benefited but district-wise or community-wise break-up is not given.
9. Swarn Jayanti Shahari Rojgar Yojana
: 1,46,090 beneficiaries form minorities are claimed but the number of Muslims is not given.
10. Swarn Jayanti Garam Swarojgar Yojna
: 4,75,253 persons form minorities are said to beneficiaries but the number of Muslims is not given.
11. Free Coaching
: 14,966 students have been coached at the cost of RS 20.75 crore but the break-up, course-wise, state-wise or community-wise are not given.
12. Recruitment of Minorities Government
: The advertisement claims advance to 9.18 % share in recruitment in 2008-09 over one year but does not give the numbers total & of total & Muslim actually recruited in government or public sector, level-wise, Moreover, the cumulative representation of Muslims in any department or paramilitary force is not revealed nor their current % in the total.
CONCLUSION
The net impact of the advertisement confirms the doubts in the mind of the Muslims that they have made no real progress nor received their due share of development benefit or place in governance.
To remove the credibility gap, the AIMMM urges the Government  that the statistics should be transparent and give both the overall picture of total& Muslim share representation, as well as the increase recorded in given year over the last year.
It is also suggested that to establish its credibility, the Ministry should publish brochure on progress made by community in 2009-10, under UPA II.
As it is, this advertisement only serves to provide material for anti-Muslim propaganda by the communal forces. That Muslims are being appeased.
’

Authorised for Publication (Abdul Waheed)
Office Secretary
New Delhi, 14 March, 2010

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Book Review : KATHLEEN CHRISTISON: Zionism Laid Bare - M. Shahid Alam's 'Israeli Exceptionalism'


A Review of Shahid Alam's "Israeli Exceptionalism"
Zionism Laid Bare

By KATHLEEN CHRISTISON

The essential point of M. Shahid Alam's book, Israeli Exceptionalism: The Destabilizing Logic of Zionism, comes clear upon opening the book to the inscription in the frontispiece. From the Persian poet and philosopher Rumi, the quote reads, "You have the light, but you have no humanity. Seek humanity, for that is the goal." Alam, professor of economics at Northeastern University in Boston and a CounterPunch contributor, follows this with an explicit statement of his aims in the first paragraph of the preface. Asking and answering the obvious question, "Why is an economist writing a book on the geopolitics of Zionism?" he says that he "could have written a book about the economics of Zionism, the Israeli economy, or the economy of the West Bank and Gaza, but how would any of that have helped me to understand the cold logic and the deep passions that have driven Zionism?"

Until recent years, the notion that Zionism was a benign, indeed a humanitarian, political movement designed for the noble purpose of creating a homeland and refuge for the world's stateless, persecuted Jews was a virtually universal assumption. In the last few years, particularly since the start of the al-Aqsa intifada in 2000, as Israel's harsh oppression of the Palestinians has become more widely known, a great many Israelis and friends of Israel have begun to distance themselves from and criticize Israel's occupation policies, but they remain strong Zionists and have been at pains to propound the view that Zionism began well and has only lately been corrupted by the occupation. Alam demonstrates clearly, through voluminous evidence and a carefully argued analysis, that Zionism was never benign, never good—that from the very beginning, it operated according to a "cold logic" and, per Rumi, had "no humanity." Except perhaps for Jews, which is where Israel's and Zionism's exceptionalism comes in.

Alam argues convincingly that Zionism was a coldly cynical movement from its beginnings in the nineteenth century. Not only did the founders of Zionism know that the land on which they set their sights was not an empty land, but they set out specifically to establish an "exclusionary colonialism" that had no room for the Palestinians who lived there or for any non-Jews, [
 http://www.counterpunch.org/israeliexcp.jpeg] and they did this in ways that justified, and induced the West to accept, the displacement of the Palestinian population that stood in their way. With a simple wisdom that still escapes most analysts of Israel and Zionism, Alam writes that a "homeless nationalism," as Zionism was for more than half a century until the state of Israel was established in 1948, "of necessity is a charter for conquest and—if it is exclusionary—for ethnic cleansing."

How has Zionism been able to put itself forward as exceptional and get away with it, winning Western support for the establishment of an exclusionary state and in the process for the deliberate dispossession of the native population? Alam lays out three principal ways by which Zionism has framed its claims of exceptionalism in order to justify itself and gain world, particularly Western, support. First, the Jewish assumption of chosenness rests on the notion that Jews have a divine right to the land, a mandate granted by God to the Jewish people and only to them. This divine election gives the homeless, long-persecuted Jews the historical and legal basis by which to nullify the rights of Palestinians not so divinely mandated and ultimately to expel them from the land. Second, Israel's often remarkable achievements in state-building have won Western support and provided a further justification for the displacement of "inferior" Palestinians by "superior" Jews. Finally, Zionism has put Jews forward as having a uniquely tragic history and as a uniquely vulnerable country, giving Israel a special rationale for protecting itself against supposedly unique threats to its existence and in consequence for ignoring the dictates of international law. Against the Jews' tragedy, whatever pain Palestinians may feel at being displaced appears minor.

The ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians that came as the result of Zionism's need for an exclusivist homeland was no unfortunate consequence, and indeed had long been foreseen by Zionist thinkers and the Western leaders who supported them. Alam quotes early Zionists, including Theodore Herzl, who talked repeatedly of persuading the Palestinians "to trek," or "fold their tents," or "silently steal away." In later years, the Zionists spoke of forcible "transfer" of the Palestinians. In the 1930s, David Ben-Gurion expressed his strong support for compulsory transfer, crowing that "Jewish power" was growing to the point that the Jewish community in Palestine would soon be strong enough to carry out ethnic cleansing on a large scale (as it ultimately did). In fact, the Zionists knew from the start that there would be no persuading the Palestinians simply to leave voluntarily and that violent conquest would be necessary to implant the Zionist state.

The British knew this as well. Zionist supporter Winston Churchill wrote as early as 1919 that the Zionists "take it for granted that the local population will be cleared out to suit their convenience." In a blunt affirmation of the calculated nature of Zionist plans and Western support for them, British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour, like Churchill another early supporter and also author of the 1917 Balfour Declaration, which promised British support for the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, wrote that Zionism "is rooted in age-long traditions, in present needs, in future hopes, of far profounder import than the desires and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land." It would be hard to find a more blatant one-sided falsity.

Alam traces in detail the progression of Zionist planning, beginning with the deliberate creation in the nineteenth century of an ethnic identity for Jews who shared only a religion and had none of the attributes of nationhood—neither a land, nor a common language or culture, nor arguably a common gene pool. Here Alam covers briefly the ground trod in detail by Israeli historian Shlomo Sand, whose book The Invention of the Jewish People, appearing in English just months before Alam's book, shattered the myths surrounding Zionism's claim to nationhood and to an exclusive right to Palestine. But Alam goes further, describing the Zionist campaign to create a surrogate "mother country" that, in the absence of a Jewish nation, would sponsor the Zionists' colonization of Palestine and support its national project. Having gained British support for its enterprise, Zionism then set about building a rationale for displacing the Palestinian Arabs who were native to Palestine (who, incidentally, did indeed possess the attributes of a nation but lay in the path of a growing Jewish, Western-supported military machine). Zionist propaganda then and later deliberately spread the notion that Palestinians were not "a people," had no attachment to the land and no national aspirations, and in the face of the Jews' supposedly divine mandate, of Israel's "miraculous" accomplishments, and of the Jews' monumental suffering in the Holocaust, the dispossession of the Palestinians was made to appear to a disinterested West as nothing more than a minor misfortune.

Addressing what he calls the "destabilizing logic" of Zionism, Alam builds the argument that Zionism thrives on, and indeed can survive only in the midst of, conflict. In the first instance, Alam shows, Zionism actually embraced the European anti-Semitic charge that Jews were an alien people. This was the natural result of promoting the idea that Jews actually belonged in Palestine in a nation of their own, and in addition, spreading fear of anti-Semitism proved to be an effective way to attract Jews not swayed by the arguments of Zionism (who made up the majority of Jews in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries) to the Zionist cause. Early Zionist leaders talked frankly of anti-Semitism as a means of teaching many educated and assimilated Jews "the way back to their people" and of forcing an allegiance to Zionism. Anti-Semitism remains in many ways the cement that holds Zionism together, keeping both Israeli Jews and diaspora Jews in thrall to Israel as their supposedly only salvation from another Holocaust.

In the same vein, Alam contends, Zionists realized that in order to succeed in their colonial enterprise and maintain the support of the West, they would have to create an adversary common to both the West and the Jews. Only a Jewish state waging wars in the Middle East could "energize the West's crusader mentality, its evangelical zeal, its dreams of end times, its imperial ambitions." Arabs were the initial and enduring enemy, and Zionists and Israel have continued to provoke Arab antagonism and direct it toward radicalism, to steer Arab anger against the United States, to provoke the Arabs into wars against Israel, and to manufacture stories of virulent Arab anti-Semitism—all specifically in order to sustain Jewish and Western solidarity with Israel. More recently, Islam itself has become the common enemy, an adversary fashioned so that what Alam calls the "Jewish-Gentile partnership" can be justified and intensified. Focusing on Arab and Muslim hostility, always portrayed as motivated by irrational hatred rather than by opposition to Israeli and U.S. policies, allows Zionists to divert attention from their own expropriation of Palestinian land and dispossession of Palestinians and allows them to characterize Israeli actions as self-defense against anti-Semitic Arab and Muslim resistance.

Alam treats the Zionist/Israel lobby as a vital cog in the machine that built and sustains the Jewish state. Indeed, Theodore Herzl was the original Zionist lobbyist. During the eight years between the launch of the Zionist movement at Basel in 1897 and his death, Herzl had meetings with a remarkable array of power brokers in Europe and the Middle East, including the Ottoman sultan, Kaiser Wilhelm II, King Victor Emanuel III of Italy, Pope Pius X, the noted British imperialist Lord Cromer and the British colonial secretary of the day, and the Russian ministers of interior and finance, as well as a long list of dukes, ambassadors, and lesser ministers. One historian used the term "miraculous" to describe Herzl's ability to secure audiences with the powerful who could help Zionism.

Zionist lobbyists continued to work as assiduously, with results as "miraculous," throughout the twentieth century, gaining influence over civil society and ultimately over policymakers and, most importantly, shaping the public discourse that determines all thinking about Israel and its neighbors. As Alam notes, "since their earliest days, the Zionists have created the organizations, allies, networks, and ideas that would translate into media, congressional, and presidential support for the Zionist project." An increasing proportion of the activists who lead major elements of civil society, such as the labor and civil rights movements, are Jews, and these movements have as a natural consequence come to embrace Zionist aims. Christian fundamentalists, who in the last few decades have provided massive support to Israel and its expansionist policies, grew in the first instance because they were "energized by every Zionist success on the ground" and have continued to expand with a considerable lobbying push from the Zionists.

Alam's conclusion—a direct argument against those who contend that the lobby has only limited influence: "It makes little sense," in view of the pervasiveness of Zionist influence over civil society and political discourse, "to maintain that the pro-Israeli positions of mainstream American organizations . . . emerged independently of the activism of the American Jewish community." In its early days, Zionism grew only because Herzl and his colleagues employed heavy lobbying in the European centers of power; Jewish dispersion across the Western world—and Jewish influence in the economies, the film industries, the media, and academia in key Western countries—are what enabled the Zionist movement to survive and thrive in the dark years of the early twentieth century; and Zionist lobbying and molding of public discourse are what has maintained Israel's favored place in the hearts and minds of Americans and the policy councils of America's politicians.

This is a critically important book. It enhances and expands on the groundbreaking message of Shlomo Sand's work. If Sand shows that Jews were not "a people" until Zionism created them as such, Alam shows this also and goes well beyond to show how Zionism and its manufactured "nation" went about dispossessing and replacing the Palestinians and winning all-important Western support for Israel and its now 60-year-old "exclusionary colonialism."

Kathleen Christison is the author of Perceptions of Palestine and the Wound of Dispossession and co-author, with Bill Christison, of Palestine in Pieces: Graphic Perspectives on the Israeli Occupation, published last summer by Pluto Press. She can be reached at 
kb.christison@earthlink.net.

--
M. Shahid Alam
Professor of Economics
Northeastern University
Boston, MA 02115
http://us.macmillan.com/israeliexceptionalism
http://aslama.org

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

Comments posted on The New York Times article:Uproar in India over Female lawmaker quota By Lydia Polgreen:

Comments posted on The New York Times article:Uproar in India over Female lawmaker quota By Lydia Polgreen:


Ghulam Muhammed
Mumbai, India

March 10th, 2010
10:54 am
Wednesday, March 10, 2010


\"Caste based\" political parties in fact are protecting the majority of lower caste people of India, which are cleverly sidelined by the Brahmin caste comprising of mere 3% of the population together with the other upper castes of Kashtriya and Vaish, and have been ruling India in the name of a fake majority. The stranglehold of these highhanded upper castes is directly linked and strengthened by the new much publicized women's reservation bill.


The Bill in practice will make it that much impossible for lower caste political groupings to get even a proportion of their proportion of voting strength in Parliament and State Assemblies. So the propaganda of women's rights should not fool anybody.


The line up of 3 major political parties --- Congress, BJP and Communists --- to pass the bill is proof enough that all these Brahmin led political parties have ganged up to drive out the lower caste parties like Samajwadi Paty, RJD and BSP from the political arena. This is an open coup d’etat camouflaged as ‘Women’s Reservation Bill’.


The high-caste commentator with The Times of India, Dileep Padgaonkar translated his triumphalist comment to herald the 'last gasps of Mandalisation' --- Mandal reservations gave the lower caste the chance to enter the political arena.


It is shameful of Congress, the opposition Hindutva extremist BJP and the so-called secular Communist parties, to defraud the people as well as the world at large, by moving this retrograde anti-democratic legislation in the name of women. Only the high-caste women will end up further strengthening the upper caste stranglehold in India's power politics. The deprived cannot hope for any remedy from India’s skewed democracy and may resort to violent protests.