Search blog.co.uk

Posts archive for: 07 November, 2007
  • The homeless in Sacramento

    The homeless in Sacramento
    Palash Biswas
    Contact: Palash C Biswas, C/O Mrs Arati Roy, Gosto Kanan, Sodepur, Kolkata- 700110, India. Phone: 91-033-25659551
    Email: alashbiswaskl@gmail.com">palashbiswaskl@gmail.com
    Comment: The homeless in Sacramento are actually our domestic refugees, a reflection of the homeless in Amerika and an example of the plight of homeless refugees suffering on a global scale. We are living under an unjust fascist administration, spearheaded by Fuhrer Bush, that can spend nearly a trillion tax-dollars in Iraq-nam in the Middle East. We should be creating homes for the homeless, providing survival programs for the people and helping people to help themselves. What good is a government that does not govern wisely with compassion and help its own people survive?
    The homeless will not just go away no matter where you shift them. The issues of the homeless are a harsh example of the survival issues facing millions of poor oppressed people in Amerika. Help the homeless!

    For Liberty and Justice for All!
    Peter S. Lopez, Humane Being
    Email: sacranative@ yahoo.com
    Sacramento, California
    ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +

    http://cbs13. com/topstories/ local_story_ 311071305. html

    Nov 7, 2007 4:03 am US/Pacific
    Homeless Could Get New Home in Posh Neighborhood
    (CBS) SACRAMENTO A group of homeless people evicted from a vacant lot earlier this week are being offered a new place to live.
    On Monday, police began ticketing people camped out on Union Pacific property on North B Street in Sacramento.
    Now, one of Sacramento's best known bail bondsmen, Leonard Padilla, is offerering to let the homeless move onto property he owns in the Natomas area. Padilla is offering 60 acres of empty land near Del Paso Road and El Centro.
    The problem is that the land is in the middle of a developing community surrounded by homes and businesses. People living near by are not happpy at all with this prospect. City officials say they are looking into whether or not Padilla is breaking any City ordinances by allowing the homeless to live on this land.
    ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
    http://www.sacbee. com/city/ story/470679. html
    City orders homeless to abandon tent city
    By Jocelyn Wiener - jwiener@sacbee. com
    Last Updated 1:48 pm PST Tuesday, November 6, 2007
    Story appeared in METRO section, Page B1
    Print | E-Mail | Comments (20)| Digg it | del.icio.us

    Irunmole Ibabatunde, 80, holds up a letter ordering homeless people to vacate Union Pacific railroad property near 7th and B streets in Sacramento. Advocates for the homeless say the ban on illegal camping is unfair, since affordable housing and homeless shelter space are in short supply. Paul Kitagaki Jr. / kitagaki@sacbee.">pkitagaki@sacbee. com
    See additional images

    Residents of an informal tent city that has cropped up on a vacant field along North B Street in recent months are packing up their campsites this weekend, saying city and railroad police have threatened them with citation and loss of their belongings if they do not leave by early Monday morning.
    About 60 tents remained in the dusty Union Pacific lot Saturday morning; homeless campers said some of their neighbors already had moved on in search of new sites.
    Advocates for the homeless

  • Let justice reign?

    Let justice reign?
    Palash Biswas
    Contact: Palash C Biswas, C/O Mrs Arati Roy, Gosto Kanan, Sodepur, Kolkata- 700110, India. Phone: 91-033-25659551
    Email: alashbiswaskl@gmail.com">palashbiswaskl@gmail.com
    News Updates from Citizens for Legitimate Government
    06 Nov 2007
    http://www.legitgov.org/
    http://www.legitgov.org/index.html#breaking_news
    2007 is deadliest year for U.S. troops in Iraq 06 Nov 2007 Five U.S. soldiers were killed in Iraq on Monday, making 2007 the deadliest for the American military in the Iraq war. According to a CNN count of Pentagon figures, 854 U.S. service members have died so far in 2007.
    Breaking: Panel Sends Mukasey Nomination to Senate Judiciary --Panel Votes to Recommend Mukasey's Confirmation to Full Senate 06 Nov 2007 The Judiciary Committee voted to advance the nomination of Attorney General-designate Michael Mukasey to the Senate floor Tuesday, virtually ensuring his confirmation before Thanksgiving. The 11-8 vote came after two key Democrats accepted his vow to enforce any law Congress might enact against waterboarding.

    Please forward this update to anyone you think might be interested. Those who'd like to be added to the Newsletter list can sign up: http://www.legitgov.org/#subscribe_clg.
    Please write to: signup@legitgov.org for inquiries.
    Let justice reign?
    From: aik_info-bounces@listi.jpberlin.de on behalf of Newsletter of the Anti-imperialist Camp (aik_info@listi.jpberlin.de)
    You may not know this sender. Mark as safe | Mark as unsafe
    Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 11:17:50 AM
    Reply-to: camp@antiimperialista.org
    To: aik_info@listi.jpberlin.de
    1) Call for tribunal on Israeli crimes2) On the negotiations between Taliban and Karzai govt3) Repeal Turkish chauvinism against Kurds4) Documentation Chianciano conference * 1) Let justice reignCitizen Tribunal on Israeli crimes against Lebanon and Palestine Proposal for setting up an international citizens’ tribunal on the deeds committed by the Israeli army and secret services in Lebanon and the occupied Palestinian territories The deeds committed by the Israeli army and secret services in Lebanon, as in the occupied Palestinian territories, constitute a violent affront to the universal human conscience. These are criminal acts, as many people feel instinctively. They are different from the acts that take place in all armed conflict committed by the aggressor as well as by the aggressed. But feeling is not enough. The facts must be established. They must then be assessed in the light of existing international law. This should be done with the detachment and rigour of a process that excludes any a priori conclusions, the results of which will convince all people of good will. See full call and list of first signatories:www.antiimperialista.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5376&Itemid=55 We call upon you to send your support to us: camp@antiimpialista.org * 2) Negotiations are in favour of the occupiers not of our resistanceby the Left Radicals of Afghanistan (LRA) We support negotiations in principle, but any negotiations that victimize the values and achievements of the brave struggle of the anti-occupation resistance would not be accepted by any independent anti-occupation forces of the Afghan resistance. A small part of the Taliban and some unsatisfied groups were busy in hidden negotiations with the Karzai government and occupier forces in particularly a month ago, but in practice their were no developments, instead heavy fighting, hundred of killings and casualties and tens of suicide attacks. Revolutionary left of Afghanistan on time strongly denounced the treacherous peace negotiation between Taliban and Kabul regime and called upon the resistance forces to widely expose the aims and hazards of such conspiracy. We know that the US to prepare an attack on Iran need a peaceful situation in Afghanistan, but it will be only a sweet dream for them, there will be consistent flames of resistance until complete liberation of Afghanistan. Full article:www.antiimperialista.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5375&Itemid=55 * 3) Turkish threats and Kurds playing with fire A comment by Lars Akerhaug, Norway Neither is it strange that a united Turkish public opinion now aims at Iraq and the PKK. Though it's hard to see that Turkey in any way would gain from invading their neighbouring country, making it more unstable, it's easy to see that in a country where a large majority of the citizens hold strong nationalist opinions, all big parties gain from promoting Turkish chauvinism. The black sheep is the Northern Kurdistan guerrilla PKK which has their military camps based in the Qandil mountains of Southern Kurdistan. Since 2002 the group has attempted to improve their relations to the West and America. Leaders from their sister party PEJAK in Iran have travelled to the United States and met American officials. In Turkey the group has attempted a moderate line with several unilateral ceasefires and attempts to follow the rules of parliamentary politics through running for elections with independent Kurdish candidates and setting up a legal parties. None of the attempts had much effect. Turkey hasn't softened up to the guerrilla. The US hasn't done anything and at the same time the secular nationalist movement is losing votes and popular support to the Islamists in Northern Kurdistan. So, it's nothing strange that the PKK broke the ceasefire this spring. Anything else would be a political suicide. Full comment:www.antiimperialista.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5374&Itemid=55 * 4) Documentation of Chianciano conference completed“With the Resistance, for a Just Peace in the Middle East” This conference held on last March 24/25 in Italy was a unique event. It has been the first time since the waging of the permanent and pre-emptive war led by the US that representatives of the resistance forces could speak out in Europe and could be listened to in personam. To make the conference possible required a years-long struggle which was faced with extraordinary repressive moves by the Italian government. That we eventually succeed is a strong political sign. Present were resistant forces first of all from Iraq, but also from Palestine as well as from Lebanon and Jordan. We do, however, not want to conceal that the conference displayed as well the difficulties of the different resistance movements to unify which is due mainly on the question of the role of Iran as well as of the sectarian conflict. From the side of the European solidarity movement we will not only continue our support campaign but also strive for the broadest possible unity. Transcripts, sound and video files of the speeches:www.iraqiresistance.info/speeches.php?l=en Final resolution:www.iraqiresistance.info/resolution.php?l=en ********Anti-imperialist Campwww.antiimperialista.orgcamp@antiimperialista.org******** If you do not which to receive this newsletter, pls. click here:http://listi.jpberlin.de/mailman/listinfo/aik_info _______________________________________________Aik_info MailinglisteJPBerlin - Politischer roviderAik_info@listi.jpberlin.dehttp://listi.jpberlin.de/mailman/listinfo/aik_info">ProviderAik_info@listi.jpberlin.dehttp://listi.jpberlin.de/mailman/listinfo/aik_info
    The Defining Moment of the Foolish Generation
    By Robert Weitzel
    Carlos Latuff/ MWC NEWS
    In the 2002 run-up to the Iraq War, President Bush stopped for a photo-op at the East Literature Magnet School in Nashville, Tennessee. Using the opportunity to justify his impending invasion of Iraq to middle and high school students, he shared with them his mangled version of a Texas truism,
    “Fool me once, shame on — shame on you.
    Fool me — you can't get fooled again."
    It seems a majority of us can get fooled again . . . and again . . . and yet again. In fact, a critical mass of the American electorate is taken in as easily as a photon of light is sucked down a black hole.

    Who would have thought that while the United States is embroiled in a war and occupation predicated on impeachable lies—that all but the comatose or Fox News devotees are aware of—a slight majority of Americans could be duped into supporting a pre-emptive attack on Iran based on “intelligence” provided by the Bush-Cheney administration.

    But sadly, that’s exactly what we seem prepared to do. According to a recent Zogby Poll, 52 percent of those interviewed supported a military strike to prevent Iran from building a nuclear weapon—which experts believe will take at least another five years. Time enough for a diplomatic resolution.

    Granted, gullibility is inherent in our species and one can imagine its survival value in our evolutionary past. But we no longer live in caves or fight with clubs. Believing everything we hear or read does not enhance survival when smoking guns can turn into mushroom clouds.

    So how is it that we’ve let ourselves become such a Foolish Generation?
    "Who would have thought that while the United States is embroiled in a war and occupation predicated on impeachable lies—that all but the comatose or Fox News devotees are aware of—a slight majority of Americans could be duped into supporting a pre-emptive attack on Iran based on “intelligence” provided by the Bush-Cheney administration. "
    Is the root of our foolishness nourished by the fact that 70 percent of Americans actually believe there is a devil in hell? Given the mega-church mentality, with its crusader zeal and apocalyptic vision that has hijacked our generation’s collective conscience and political discourse, it’s not a large leap of faith to believe that Lucifer can turn his minions loose in Iraq or Iran or wherever.

    And if that faith is cynically exploited by corporate-owned Neocons bent on the conquest of the oil rich “Land of Evil” in the name of God and freedom, is our goose-stepping off to war really such a conundrum?

    President Bush raises the specter of World War III should Iran develop a single nuclear weapon (the U.S. and its allies have thousands), just as then National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice conjured up imagines of mushroom clouds in the march to war with Iraq.
    Carlos Latuff/ MWC NEWS

    Our attack on Iran could very possibly unleash WW III, but not for the reason Bush imagines. Nuclear-armed countries such as China, Russia, India, Pakistan and Israel, and all non-nuclear Muslim nations are inextricably bound in a web of strategic, economic and religious interests in the “Land of Evil” that cannot withstand our foolishness indefinitely.

    And the mushroom clouds we’ll see over Iran will not be from jihadist suicide bombers, but from our tactical bunker-busting nuclear missiles, which are an integral part of the military’s attack plan.
    Lest we get fooled again:
    People will die in this new war in Iran as they are in Iraq, as they did in Vietnam—as people do in war—by the tens of thousands or millions . . . one irreversible death at a time.
    Families will be vaporized as they huddle together and cry and fowl themselves in fear and pray to whichever god they believe is listening. A child will die from a single bullet to the brain or in pieces. The dead will become carrion and the dogs and the rats and the crows will grow fat.
    And when the bombing stops and the blood and pieces of flesh and viscera are washed away and down the sewer, history will have been made and the Foolish Generation will be indicted.
    We will not be able to camouflage our culpability within the mottled grey of words such as “terrorism” and “genocide.” We will have committed the murder of innocent daughters and sons and mothers and fathers on a massive scale. There can be no mincing of words. It is mass murder. And our foolishness is no defense.
    "President Bush raises the specter of World War III should Iran develop a single nuclear weapon (the U.S. and its allies have thousands), just as then National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice conjured up imagines of mushroom clouds in the march to war with Iraq."
    During his warmongering at the East Literature Magnet School, President Bush stressed the importance of youngsters understanding history because it gives them “a better sense of what it means to be an American.” Imagine youngsters in Berlin in 1939 listening to a similar speech by their warmongering Furher. Now imagine their sense of what it meant to be a German in 1945, tainted as they were by the blood on their parents’ hands. History has not been kind to those youngsters.
    If our Foolish Generation cannot find a way to extricate itself from the black hole of history into which it is plunging, our children’s blood-spattered generation will face the court of world opinion with a weak defense:
    “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me . . . and my issue in perpetuity.”
    Zion-power and War: From Iraq to Iran. The Deadly Embrace
    By James Petras
    Nov 6, 2007, 11:43
    http://axisoflogic. com/artman/ publish/article_ 25444.shtml
    Editor's Note: Anyone wishing to argue against the crux of this
    article by James Petras will be faced with a formidable compendium
    of facts imbedded in Petras' characteristic flawless logic. From his
    tireless, in-depth research, he delivers what some readers on
    the "left" erroneously call "anti-semitism" and many others will
    simply fear to discuss in public. - Les Blough, Editor
    Introduction
    Explanations for the US attack on Iraq range from military-political
    pretexts to accounts focusing on geopolitical and economic interests.
    The original official explanation was the now discredited claim that
    Saddam Hussein possessed chemical, biological and other weapons of
    mass destructions (WMD), which threatened the US, Israel and the
    Middle East. Subsequent to the US military occupation, when no WMD
    were discovered, Washington justified the invasion and occupation by
    citing the removal of a dictator and the establishment of a
    prosperous democracy in the Arab world. The imposition of a colonial
    puppet regime, propped up by an imperial occupation force of over
    200,000 troops and irregular death squads, which have killed close
    to a million Iraqi civilians, forced over 4 million into exile and
    impoverished over 95% of the population, puts the lie to that line
    of argument.
    The latest line of justification revolves around the notion that the
    US occupation is necessary to `prevent a civil war'. Most Iraqis and
    military experts think the presence of the US colonial occupation
    army is the cause of violent conflict, particularly the US
    military's devastating attacks on civilians, their financing of
    rival tribal leaders and Kurdish mercenaries and their contracting
    of local police-military to repress the population. Since most
    Americans (not to speak of the rest of the world) are not convinced
    by these specious arguments, the Washington regime rationalizes its
    continued war and occupation by citing the need for a colonial
    military victory to maintain its world and regional status as a
    super-power, and to assure its Middle East client regimes that
    Washington can defend their ruling cliques and their hegemonic ally,
    Israel.
    The Bush White House and pro-Israel Congressional leaders claim a
    victory in Iraq will bolster Washington's image as a successful
    global `anti-terrorist' (anti-insurgent) regime. These post-facto
    justifications have lost credibility as the war drags on, popular
    resistance grows in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Lebanon, Somalia,
    Thailand, Philippines, Pakistan and elsewhere. The longer the war
    continues, the greater the economic cost and the demoralization and
    depletion of military personnel, the more difficult the task of
    sustaining the capacity to intervene in defense of the empire.
    If the official political and military justifications for the US
    colonial wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ring hollow and convince few,
    what of the other economic explanations for the war put forth mostly
    but not exclusively by critics of the Bush administration?
    The major focus of the economic determinists of the war centers on
    the issue of oil, as in `war for oil'.*
    These explanations in turn break down into several variants: The
    first and most popular is that the big US oil companies were behind
    the war, that Bush and Cheney were pressured by their Big Oil
    handlers into launching the war so that US oil companies could seize
    the nationally-owned Iraqi oil fields and refineries.
    A second, slightly modified, version argued that the White House was
    not pressured by Big Oil but acted on their behalf as a reflex
    action. (This is put forth to explain why the spokesmen for Big Oil
    multinationals were so conspicuously absent from the media and halls
    of Congress in the lead-up to the war.) (* see recent statements in
    September and October by former Federal Reserve Chairman, Alan
    Greenspan and US General John Abazaid among others)
    A third version argued that the US went to war to secure oil for US
    national security interests threatened by Saddam Hussein. This
    explanation cites the danger of Saddam Hussein closing down the
    Strait of Hormuz, invading the Gulf States, inciting revolts in
    Saudi Arabia and/or reducing the flow of Middle East oil to the US
    and its allies. In other words, the `geopolitics' of the Middle East
    dictated that a non-client regime was a threat to US, European and
    Japanese access to oil. This is apparently the latest argument put
    forth by Alan Greenspan, a former proponent of the WMD propaganda.
    The major advocates of the `war for oil' (WFO) argument fail several
    empirical tests: Namely that the oil companies were not actively
    supporting the war via propaganda, congressional lobbying or through
    any other policy vehicle. Secondly the proponents of WFO fail to
    explain the efforts by major oil companies to develop economic ties
    with Iraq prior to the invasion and were in fact, working through
    clandestine third parties to trade in Iraqi oil.
    Thirdly, all the major oil companies operating in the Middle East
    were mainly concerned with political stability, the liberalization
    of the economic policies of the region and the opening of oil
    services for foreign investors. The big oil companies' strategies
    were to advance their global interests through the on-going
    liberalization process in the Middle East and conquering new markets
    and oil resources through their formidable market power –
    investments and technology.
    The onset of the US invasion of Iraq was viewed with anxiety and
    concern as a military action, which would destabilize the region,
    increase hostility to their interests throughout the Gulf and slow
    down the liberalization process. Not a single CEO from the entire
    petroleum industry viewed the US invasion as a positive `national
    security' measure, because they understood that Saddam Hussein,
    after over a decade of economic and military sanctions and frequent
    bombing of his military installations and infrastructure throughout
    the Clinton years, was not in a position to launch any acts of
    aggression against Gulf oil companies or states. Moreover the oil
    companies had several real prospects of developing lucrative service
    and commercial oil contracts with Saddam Hussein's regime in the
    lead-up to the war. It was the US government pressured by the
    Zionist Power Configuration (ZPC), which pushed legislation blocking
    (through sanctions) Big Oil from consummating these economic
    agreements with Iraq.
    The argument that Big Oil promoted the war for its own benefit fails
    the empirical test. A corollary to that is that Big Oil has failed
    to benefit from the US occupation because of the heightened
    conflict, continuous sabotage, the predictable resistance of the
    Iraqi oil workers to privatization and the general insecurity,
    instability and hostility of the Iraqi people.
    The American Left jumped on Alan Greenspan's declaration that the
    Iraq war was about oil, as some kind of confirmation in the absence
    of any evidence. Yet everyday that has transpired since the
    beginning of the war five years ago, demonstrates that `Big Oil' not
    only did not promote the invasion, but has failed to secure a single
    oil field, despite the presence of 160,000 US troops, thirty
    thousand Pentagon/State Department paid mercenaries and a corrupt
    puppet regime.
    As of September 19, 2007 the Financial Times of London featured an
    article on the conspicuous absence of the `Oil Majors' in
    Iraq: "Big Oil Plays a Waiting Game over Iraq's Reserves' (September
    19, 2007). Only a few small companies (`oil minnows') have
    contracts in Northern Iraq (`Kurdistan' ), which has only 3% of
    Iraq's reserves. `Big Oil' did not start the Iraq war, nor has `Big
    Oil' benefited from the war. The reason why `Big Oil' did not
    support the war is the same reason they haven't invested after the
    occupation:
    "The level of violence is still unacceptably high…if anything the
    prospects of agreement appears to be receding as tensions between
    parties grow." (ibid)
    `Big Oil's' worst nightmares leading up to the Zionist-influenced
    war have all been utterly confirmed. Whereas `Big Oil's'
    negotiations and third party deals with pre-war Iraq provided a
    stable and consistent flow of oil and revenue, the war has not only
    reduced these revenues to zero, but has all but eliminated any new
    options for the next decade.
    Despite the war, liberalization elsewhere in the region has
    proceeded and US oil and financial interests have advanced despite
    the increased obstacles and hostilities, which have grown out of the
    US slaughter of Muslims.
    Big Oil, Texas billionaires, even big contributors to the Bush
    family political campaigns were no match for the ZPC when it came to
    Middle East war policy. They lacked the inside and outside power,
    the disciplined grass roots organization of Jewish community
    organizations to overcome the Zionist warmongering power over
    Congress, their position in strategic executive offices and their
    army of academic scribes from Harvard, Yale and Hopkins churning out
    bellicose propaganda in the US media.
    What is striking about the position papers and op-ed reprints in the
    Daily Alert is the total absence of any deviation from official
    Israeli pro-war positions: Whether it is killing children in Jenin,
    bombing population centers in Lebanon, shelling Arab families
    relaxing at the beach in Gaza, the Daily Alert simply echoes the
    official Israeli line and blatant lies about human shields,
    accidents, gunmen among school children, self-induced atrocities.
    Never in the entire period analyzed is there a single critical
    article questioning Israel's massive displacement of hundreds of
    thousands of Palestinians. No crime against humanity is too great
    for the Presidents of the Leading American Jewish Organizations to
    defend. It is this slavish obedience to the official Israeli policy
    that marks out the Zionist Power Configuration as something much
    more than just another lobby as its `left' apologists and even Walt
    and Mearsheimer claim.
    The ZPC is much more sinister both as a transmission belt for the
    policies and interests of a colonial power hell-bent on domination
    in the Middle East and as the most serious authoritarian threat to
    our democratic freedoms: no single individual who dares criticize
    can escape the long hand of the pro-Israel authoritarians.
    Book sellers are picketed, editors are intimidated, university
    presses and distributors are threatened, university presidents are
    blackmailed, local and national candidates are browbeaten and
    smeared, meetings are cancelled and venues are pressured, faculty
    are fired or denied promotion, corporations are blacklisted, union
    pension funds are raided, theater performances and concerts are
    cancelled. And the list of repressive actions taken by these
    authoritarian Zionist organizations at the national and local levels
    runs on, arousing fear among some, anger among many more and a
    slowly burning resentment and growing awareness among the silent
    majority.
    The second geo-political version of `oil for war' focuses on the
    national security issues. After the First Gulf War in 1991 and
    eleven years of economic sanctions and military disarmament, Iraq
    was an impoverished, weak nation partially dismembered by the US
    backed Kurdish enclave in the north and constant US bombing and over
    flights. Iraq was severely bombed several times during the Clinton
    regimes and over 1 million of its citizens, including an estimated
    500,000 children, died prematurely from conditions related to the US
    imposed deprivation of food and essential medical and water
    treatment supplies.
    Before the invasion in 2003 Iraq did not even control its
    shorelines, airspace or even a third of its national territory. As
    the US invasion demonstrated, Saddam's military lacked the most
    elementary capacity to mount any defense in a conventional war, not
    even a single fighter plane presented a threat to any offshore US
    client or to the Strait of Hormuz.
    The stiff resistance to the US came later in the form of irregular
    forces engaged in guerrilla warfare, not from any organized force
    established by the Baathist regime. In other words no matter how far
    the concept of `national security' is stretched to include US
    military bases, oil installations, client rulers and transport and
    shipping lanes in the Middle East, Saddam Hussein was clearly not a
    threat.
    If however the concept of `national security' is re-defined to mean
    the physical elimination of any potential opponent of US and Israeli
    domination in the region, then Saddam Hussein could be labeled a
    national security threat. But that takes the discussion of the
    explanation for the US war against Iraq to another terrain and a
    discussion of the political forces who manipulated the phony WMD
    and `War for Oil' propaganda to justify a war for US and Israeli
    hegemony in the Middle East.
    Even more important the disinformation campaign about who was
    responsible for the US invasion and occupation of Iraq is highly
    relevant to the current propaganda blitz driving us toward a war
    with Iran.
    From the Iraq War Cover-up on to Iran War Propaganda
    The pro-Israel power configuration beats the war drums for an
    assault on Iran with greater insistency and successfully induces the
    Democratic Congress and Presidential hopefuls as well as the
    Republican White House to "put the military option on the table."
    Parallel to overt war propaganda, a number of liberal critics of the
    Iraq war have published articles arguing that Israel "really opposed
    the Iraq war." Writers as diverse as Gareth Porter, ex-CIA analyst
    Ray McGovern, Colonel Wilkerson (Colin Powell's Aide), ultra Zion-
    Con Michael Ledeen and others claim that Israel opposed the war
    because they wanted the US to target Iran. Others argue that Israel
    had advised the US that an invasion of Iraq would have dire
    consequences for the Middle East, tipping the balance toward Iran
    and which they now claim to have predicted.
    These Israel-exonerators point to other culprits, namely Bush-Cheney-
    Rumsfelt or the American Neo-Cons (better known as the Zion-Cons)
    who, they insist, have acted independently of Israel or ignored
    Israeli priorities in the region.
    There is an alternative view, which argues that Israel promoted the
    US attack on Iraq, did all in its power through its US pro-Israel
    followers to design, propagandize and plan the war. This alternative
    view sustains that at no point did the Zion-Cons act contrary to
    Israeli state interests. In fact, Israeli officials worked on a
    daily basis with its US agents inside the government, particularly
    the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans to provide disinformation to
    justify the military attack. If, as we will show, Israel was deeply
    involved in pushing the US to attack Iraq and is behind the current
    disinformation campaign to provoke a US war against Iran, then anti-
    war forces and US public opinion must openly confront the `Israel
    factor'.
    We will argue that the exoneration of Israel is mainly an attempt to
    deflect US public hostility away from those Israel Firsters who
    manipulated us into this costly, bloody unending war. Exoneration of
    Israeli responsibility for the US invasion of Iraq allows the Jewish
    state and its US agents to escape any blame for the degradation of
    US forces in Iraq and provides them a `clean moral slate' for
    launching a new bloody US attack against Iran. Rather than seeing
    Israel as giving us a double dose of an incurable colonial disease,
    exoneration allows Israel and its agents to follow the same Iraq
    invasion pattern of manipulation and duplicity in leading us to war
    with Iran.
    The White House and Democratic Congress, echoing Israel, are using
    inflated threats of nuclear attack, demonizing Iran's leaders,
    financing low intensity warfare through the training and funding of
    violent Iranian exile-based clients, economic sanctions and `failed'
    diplomatic maneuvers … to lead up to a new war. Taking advantage of
    their liberal (Zion-lib)-led exoneration for their role in the
    invasion of Iraq, the Zionist Power Configuration, through such
    loyal mouthpieces as Senator Joseph Lieberman, blame the Iranians
    for the deaths of US soldiers in Iraq.
    It is not the Zionist pro-war officials in and out of the government
    who sent young American soldiers to die in Iraq at the behest of the
    Israeli state to whom the US public should direct its anger, but
    rather the Iranians who are accused of arming and training Iraqi
    resistance fighters. Leaving Israel out and bringing Iran into the
    debacle in Iraq serves the Israeli purpose of covering their
    backsides while inciting Americans into a new military adventure
    against the much larger and better-armed Iranians.
    The exonerators of Israel are not homogeneous in their political
    background or goals. Some liberals, fearful of arousing a powerful
    Zionist backlash, seek to whitewash Israel's lobby operatives in the
    US as a way of gaining sympathy among pro-Israel Congressional
    Democrats and financial backing from wealthy Jewish liberals
    critical of the Iraq war. Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean,
    following the new Israeli script declared during a visit to Tel Aviv
    in 2006 that the `the US invaded the wrong country!'
    The price of the `exonerate Israel' strategy is to overlook the
    powerful role that the Israel First lobby is playing in bringing us
    to a new war with Iran as part of a sequence of invasions promoted
    by Israeli strategists. These clever ploys are backfiring. Playing
    to the prejudices of the liberal pro-Israel crowd in the Democratic
    Party has lead to the current absence of any significant anti-war
    movement against the Zionist-led propaganda and war-mongering blitz
    against Iran.
    There is no question that some anti-war Zion-Libs are trying to put
    some distance from the Zion-Con/Israeli policymakers who promoted
    the invasion of Iraq. But this does not come from any opposition to
    another new and more dangerous military commitment. On the contrary,
    the Zion-Libs criticize the discredited Bush-Cheney- Iraq policy in
    favor of a new more aggressive war policy toward Iran.
    By exonerating Israel and its transmission belt of organized local
    and national Jewish and fundamentalist Christian organizations, the
    liberals have not found allies for peace – they have revived the
    powerful influence of Israel and its US apparatus which was being
    increasingly rejected by the US public and elements in the US
    military.
    By putting the blame for the debacle in Iraq exclusively on
    Bush/Cheney and their allies in `Big Oil' and excluding the role of
    Israel, the ZPC and their toadies among the Democrats in Congress,
    the liberal exonerators, open the way for a new cycle of war in the
    Middle East. To prevent a future Zionist and Israeli-orchestrate d
    US attack against Iran, we must be perfectly clear about who
    maneuvered the US into attacking Iraq.
    Israel, the ZPC and the Run-up to the Invasion of Iraq
    Analytically, the differences between Israeli state policy and the
    leading US Zionist organizations are, with very rare exceptions,
    indistinguishable. The run-up to the US attack on Iraq is a case in
    point. From the late 1980's, through the first Gulf War, the Clinton
    Administration' s sanctions, daily bombings and territorial
    separation of northern Iraq, `Kurdistan', from the rest of the
    country, to the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, the Israeli government
    pressured US Congress-people and senior policy makers toward
    bellicose policies toward Israel's `enemies'.

  • SPARKS

    SPARKS
    Palash Biswas
    Contact: Palash C Biswas, C/O Mrs Arati Roy, Gosto Kanan, Sodepur, Kolkata- 700110, India. Phone: 91-033-25659551
    Email: alashbiswaskl@gmail.com">palashbiswaskl@gmail.com
    Dear Friends,
    Jaibheem
    Welcome to the first edition of SPARKS, a monthly e-newsletter for and by Dalit Women. This is an effort by the Insight group in keeping with its vision and objective, to provide a platform for young Dalit women. This is our first and humble effort in this direction.
    SPARKS will be the voice of the young Dalit women of India.
    As in every other sphere, Dalit women are often co-opted into the mainstream and their specific issues, concerns and sensitivities are subsumed under either the "larger" concerns of the community or of women.
    Every edition of SPARKS will therefore include analytical articles, reports, poems, and other form of creative writings in which Dalit women figure

  • Busy Bush Has Time to Run the World!

    Busy Bush Has Time to Run the World!
    Palash Biswas
    Contact: Palash C Biswas, C/O Mrs Arati Roy, Gosto Kanan, Sodepur, Kolkata- 700110, India. Phone: 91-033-25659551
    Email: alashbiswaskl@gmail.com">palashbiswaskl@gmail.com
    Busy Bush Has Time to Run the World

    Ben Heine/ MWC NEWS
    President Bush has been a busy man. Even though the quagmire in Iraq threatens to worsen as Turkey prepares to invade the Kurdish north, Bush has time to undertake the arduous task of preventing World War III and begin the transition to democracy in Cuba. How does he do it?!
    The president is on a sticky wicket in northern Iraq. The Kurds have longed to unite with their brethren in Turkey, Iran, and Syria to form independent Kurdistan. The big powers, the United States included, have never been crazy about the idea. But that hasn

  • SEZ India!

    SEZ India!
    Palash Biswas
    Contact: Palash C Biswas, C/O Mrs Arati Roy, Gosto Kanan, Sodepur, Kolkata- 700110, India. Phone: 91-033-25659551
    Email: alashchandrabiswas@gmail.com">palashchandrabiswas@gmail.com
    Tax benefits available to SEZ developers include :-
    Exemption from customs/excise duties for development of SEZs for authorized operations approved by the BOA.
    Supplies from DTA to SEZ shall be exempt from payment of any Central Excise duty under Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Similarly, such supplies shall be eligible for claim of rebate under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 subject to the fulfillment of conditions laid there under. The provisions relating to exports under Central Excise Act, 1944 and rules made there under may be applied, mutatis-mutandis, in case of procurement by SEZ units & SEZ developer from DTA for their authorized operations
    List of useful links :
    http://www.cbec.gov.in/customs/cs-circulars/cs-circulars06/29-2006-cus.htm
    http://www.cbec.gov.in/customs/cs-circulars/cs-circulars03/cs-circ-idx-2k3.htm
    www.cbec.gov.in/customs/cs-sez-botm.htm - 30k
    http://www.cbec.gov.in/customs/cs-circulars/cs-circulars02/52-2002- cus.htm
    Section 10 (AA) of the ITA allows any SEZ unit which begins operations on or after April 1 2006 to make tax deductions equivalent to 100% of its income generated for a period of five consecutive assessment years from the time the SEZ unit commences operations, 50% for the next five assessment years, and tax deductions not exceeding 50% of the ploughed-back profits for the following five assessment years.
    Section 80-IA of the Income Tax Act.
    ......... http://incometaxindia.gov.in/Notifications/Incometaxact/2002/N_No_S.asp
    Exemption from minimum alternate tax under Section 115 JB of the Income Tax Act.
    .......... http://incometaxindia.gov.in/circulars/2001/circular2001-13.asp
    Exemption from dividend distribution tax under Section 115O of the Income Tax Act.
    Exemption from Central Sales Tax (CST) on inter-state purchase of goods.
    No CST if sale to SEZ - Sections 8(6), 8(7) and 8(8) have been incorporated to provide that inter state sale made to a unit in SEZ (Special Economic Zone) will be exempt from CST. The purchasing dealer has to submit a declaration in prescribed form. Consequential amendment is made by inserting section 13(1)(aa) to authorize Central Government to make rules to provide form and manner of furnishing declaration u/s 8(8). [CST Rule 12(10)(a) has have been subsequently amended on 16-1-2003. It is provided that SEZ unit will supply H form duly countersigned and certified by authority specified by Central Government authorizing establishment of unit in SEZ, - - Development Commissioner is the authority to allow setting up of SEZ unit]
    http://dateyvs.com/cst01.htm
    exemption from service tax under Chapter-V of the Finance Act, 1994 on taxable services provided to a Developer or Unit to carry on the authorized operations in a Special Economic Zone
    Tax benefits to the SEZ Units :
    The major incentives and facilities available to the SEZ Units include:
    Duty free import / domestic procurement of goods for development, operation and maintenance of the SEZ Units.
    100% Income Tax exemption for SEZ units under Section 10AA of the Income Tax act for the first 5 years, 50% for the next 5 years thereafter and 50% of the ploughed back export profit for next 5 years.
    Exemption from Minimum Alternate Tax under Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act. External Commercial Borrowing by SEZ units (within the permissible limits) in a year without any maturity restriction through recognized banking channels.
    ______http://incometaxindia.gov.in/circulars/2001/circular2001-13.asp
    Exemption from the levy of taxes on the sale or purchase of goods other than newspapers under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 if such goods are meant to carry on the authorized operations by the Developer or entrepreneur
    Exemption from Service Tax under Chapter-V of the Finance Act, 1994. http://www.eximkey.com/contents/showpage1.asp?pageid=8726
    Operating units are exempt under Section 54GA of the ITA from paying capital gains taxes arising from the transfer of capital assets, including machinery, plants, buildings, land or any rights related to these which would result in the relocating of a unit from an urban area to an SEZ. No capital transfer tax is thus levied on any transfer of capital assets to or from SEZs.
    Single Window Clearance for Central and State level approvals.
    Exemption from State sales tax and other levies as extended by the respective State Governments.
    Exemption from State Sales Tax and other levies as extended by the respective State Governments.
    Exemption from any duty of customs, under the Customs Act, 1962 or the Custom Tariff Act, 1975 or any other law for the time being in force, on goods imported into, or service provided in, a Special Economic Zone or a Unit, to carry on the authorized operations by the Developer or entrepreneur.
    Exemption from any duty of customs, under the Customs Act, 1962 or the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 or any other law for the time being in force, on goods exported from, or services provided, from a Special Economic Zone or from a Unit, to any place outside India.
    Exemption from any duty of excise, under the Central Excise Act, 1944 or the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 or any other law for the time being in force, on goods brought from Domestic Tariff Area to a Special Economic Zone or Unit, to carry on the authorized operations by the Developer or entrepreneur.
    Exemption from the securities transaction tax leviable under section 98 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2004 in case the taxable securities transactions are entered into by a non-resident through the International Financial Services Centre.
    Off shore banking unit & international service centre :
    Pursuant to Section 80-LA of the ITA, the gross income of an offshore banking unit of a scheduled bank or a unit of an international financial service centre (IFSC) in an SEZ is allowed a 100% tax deduction from the gross income of the concerned unit for five consecutive assessment years. Thereafter, 50% of the gross income is allowed as a deduction for the next five consecutive years.
    http://incometaxindia.gov.in/Notifications/Incometaxact/2003/29220031113.asp
    Incentives and facilities available to SEZ investors :
    Fiscal Benefits: Exemptions from the following duties, taxes or levies viz.
    Income Tax

  • Bilkis Bano's quest for justice and Hi-tech BJP campaign in Gujarat

    Bilkis Bano's quest for justice and Hi-tech BJP campaign in Gujarat
    Palash Biswas
    Contact: Palash C Biswas, C/O Mrs Arati Roy, Gosto Kanan, Sodepur, Kolkata- 700110, India. Phone: 91-033-25659551
    Email: alashbiswaskl@gmail.com">palashbiswaskl@gmail.com
    Bilkis Bano's quest for justice
    http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20070031945&ch=11/6/2007%204:51:00%20PM
    Radhika Bordia
    Tuesday, November 6, 2007 (Gujarat)
    As the storm rages on the Tehelka expose on the Gujarat riots the focus could soon be on another battle for justice - the case of Bilkis Bano, who witnessed a group of rioters butcher her family before they went on to gang rape her.
    Three years ago the Supreme Court intervened to ensure her case was transferred out of Gujarat to Mumbai.
    Now, as her case reaches a critical stage Bilkis breaks her silence. She spoke to NDTV in an undisclosed location in Gujarat to describe the threats and dangers, she faced for daring to tell the truth.
    ''The pain in the past five years has been endless. We have had to shift our home time and time again,'' said Bilkis Bano.
    She is one of the faces of the Gujarat riots but for Bilkis Bano to give an interview is rare.
    Bilkis is under threat because her case is of immense legal significance.
    She was five months pregnant in 2002 when she was brutally raped and saw 14 members of her family being butchered by the same mob that raped her.
    But Bilkis has not given up the fight telling her story before the court despite the threats.
    ''They killed 14 of my family and even snatched by two-year-old daughter from me and smashed her on the stone. I kept telling them to stop, reminding them that they were from my village but they wouldn't stop. They raped me repeatedly,'' said Bilkis.
    Because of her testimony it's the one of the few cases in the riots where the prosecution has managed to get 12 of the accused, including six policemen, behind bars even as the case continues.
    ''When I reached the police I thought I would get support but instead I got threats. They told me that if I named people they would give me a poison injection to kill me,'' said Bilkis.
    But it's been a terrifying journey - threats, dodgy medical check ups and the Gujarat government closing her case.
    Except that the evidence was just too powerful the Human Rights Commission heard her case.
    The CBI got involved and along with the Zaheera Sheikh her case became one of the few to be transferred by the Supreme Court to Mumbai.
    Drawing cynicism
    Even then the pressure didn't let up. Zaheera did many U turns drawing cynicism and there was immense pressure on Bilkis to also retract.
    Adding up the intimidation, the defence lawyer in the case, Gopal Gandhi is a strong contender for a BJP ticket from Godhra.
    ''People threatened me, others advised me to drop the case or that I could risk losing the rest of my family. But how can I forget, my whole family was killed, so much has happened with me, how can I just leave it,'' said Bilkis.
    But now, her case has reached a critical stage. The Mumbai sessions judge hearing the case has been transferred but the Supreme Court has stayed the transfer for two months saying he has to finish the case before he leaves.
    Will her courage and her resilience be rewarded with justice?
    Even if it is, what of the human costs of the fight for justice, that she has had to endure and what of her haunting question on why the search for justice had to be taken out of Gujarat, away from her own home.
    Hi-tech BJP campaign in Gujarat
    In an elaborate plan drawn up by the ruling BJP, the party envisages to use both the traditional and modern tools of communication to reach out to the voters.
    The Gujarat assembly elections are to be held on December 11 and 16.
    ''The campaign plan was finalised during the two-day visit of BJP's election in-charge Arun Jaitley, who left for Delhi later today. It will be put into action after the Diwali and Gujarati New Year holidays,'' the party sources said.
    ''The campaign theme rests on things like Chief Minister Narendra Modi's leadership, his image, Hindutva ideology and developmental issues and work completed during the BJP's rule,'' sources said.
    ''We will try to reach out to the people by using the traditional as well as modern tools of communication'', they said.
    ''Audio and video CDs with BJP's message will be shown and distributed to the people. We will be sending material to the Election Commission for clearance by tomorrow,'' they said.
    ''Advertisement on television channels and newspapers will be based on our theme issues. Besides, FM radio channels too is being thought as a good medium to propagate the party's message,'' they said.
    ''Internet and mobile services will also be widely used for campaigning. MMS and SMS will be sent to voters urging them to vote for the BJP,'' the sources informed.
    Pamphlets like always will be made use of in good measure, they said.

    From: ShivaShankarIW

    "... There was another pertinent question: if people rushed to vote for
    Mr. Modi, enthused by images of extreme violence done to one community,
    what sort of a people were they? .."

    The sting in its social and ethical context
    Vidya Subrahmaniam
    The Tehelka sting on Gujarat 2002 is a credible effort. Yet it is
    difficult not to question its timing and the exploitative manner of its
    presentation.
    One of the ironies of the Tehelka sting on the 2002 anti-Muslim riots in
    Gujarat is the way it has been received. Narendra Modi's supporters,
    though denouncing it as a "Congress-secular conspiracy," seem nonetheless
    convinced that it will strengthen him before a crucial election.
    In the case of Mr. Modi's detractors, the logic works in reverse: They
    worry that images of the riots, made worse by the insensitive manner of
    their presentation, will revive the raw passion of 2002, helping to seal
    the widening cracks in Mr. Modi's Hindutva vote bank. Civil rights
    activists find the reaction unfathomable and are distraught that so
    courageous and spectacular an investigation should be measured for its
    immediate, rather than long term, impact.
    In one sense the activists are right. For years those who felt revulsion
    at the 2002 pogrom had fretted about the apparent hopelessness of it all.
    In Mr. Modi's Gujarat, the calendar might have stopped at Godhra 2002,
    judging by the prevailing notions of justice and injustice. In this
    narrative, the horror aboard the Sabarmati Express was injustice but not
    the horror that followed it. Consequently, the victims were always those
    killed on the train, never the thousands brutally, revengefully killed in
    the aftermath.
    For years, those despairing of the situation had waited for just the kind
    of clinching, incontrovertible evidence that Tehelka produced to establish
    the macabre truth of that time ? a truth known to everybody, documented
    previously, acknowledged by the apex court, and yet unfailingly dismissed
    as so much fabrication by the Modi administration and the Chief Minister's
    legion of admirers. Now finally it was out in all its gory detail ? told
    by the perpetrators themselves in their own words. With frame after
    chilling frame of the pogrom dramatically unspooling before them, those
    claiming to be "politically conscientious" ought to have rushed to embrace
    the Tehelka team. Instead, they reacted in dismay. The questions, "why
    now?" and "why like this?" soared above the audio-video effect of the
    sting, undercutting what was billed by Tehelka as "the most important
    story of our time."
    Rights activists feel let down by the reaction. Yet there are aspects to
    the sting that are discomfiting. For those of us in the media who go by
    the label "pseudo-secularists," the Tehelka scoop was a difficult moment
    to confront. The swirl of emotions we were caught in spawned questions and
    counter-questions, all springing from within, each with its own unclear
    answer. Surely, the dilemma underscored the complexity of a problem that
    was inseparable from its political and ethical dimensions.
    Overused phrase
    Tehelka unveiled its latest sting at a time when the phrase was in bad
    odour from overuse. Too many fake stings had damaged way too many
    reputations, and it was with some trepidation that viewers approached the
    latest script, theatrically narrated television-style. By the end of it,
    though, there was no doubt that the investigation was first-rate; the
    footage was the end product of a search that led from one gut-wrenching
    story to another, each unashamedly told to a camera candidly capturing the
    depravations of that time.
    The journalist behind the veil was the anti-thesis of the high-flier,
    armed, as he was to recollect later, "with nothing more than a couple of
    spycams and some daredevilry." Ashish Khetan had been part of several of
    Tehelka's operations, yet few knew him. He put his anonymity to good use,
    spending six tortuous months under cover, fearing all the while that the
    lid would be blown off his impersonation of a Hindutva sympathiser. What
    started as an aimless quest turned into a most astonishing discovery, as
    quarry after quarry turned up to speak to the camera ? from the Bajrang
    Dal, from the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, from the State Government's legal
    department.. The men were unrestrained, almost garrulous, as they narrated
    how cold bloodedly they committed their crimes.
    Some of us watched this incredulously. Why would anyone go this far to
    implicate himself? But then strange things happened in Gujarat. In an
    environment where support for the 2002 pogrom was treated as a given,
    confessions of this kind were presumably quite in order. Asked about this,
    the Bharatiya Janata Party did not allege the tapes were doctored. The
    spokesperson dismissed the evidence as "bragging." This prompted a
    journalist to ask: "What sort of people do you harbour that brag and boast
    about committing heinous crimes?"
    The unease about the Tehelka sting does not stem from doubts about its
    credibility. It stems from the timing of its release, and the exploitative
    manner of its presentation. The Tehelka tapes hit the television screens
    just when Mr. Modi's Hindutva base appeared to be splintering. Five years
    after the pogrom, the parivar's disillusionment with the man, once beloved
    of them all, seemed near-complete. In 2002, the VHP and the Rashtriya
    Swayamsevak Sangh hailed Mr. Modi as a hero, and conferred upon him the
    title, "Hindu hriday samrat." The same parivar now threatened to boycott
    him, led by the VHP's fire-breathing Pravin Togadia, and joined in by a
    myriad other saffron outfits, all accusing Mr. Modi of straying from the
    Hindutva path, and issuing daily bulletins on his misdemeanours.
    The anti-Modi rebellion in Saurashtra, previously made up of a handful of
    BJP malcontents, and therefore easily containable, was now a full-blown
    threat to Mr. Modi, having become the focus of any and all discontentment
    in the region. The rebels, always blessed by the former Chief Minister,
    Keshubhai Patel, and now fortified by the entry into their fold of veteran
    Suresh Mehta, were in the middle of evolving a joint strategy with the
    Congress, when Tehelka aired the sting.
    Operation Kalank revisited the wounds of 2002 and in the process held up a
    mirror to the Congress which had taken the rebels in its embrace,
    forgetting the role they played in the riots. The sting unarguably saved
    the Congress from a major folly: Gordhan Zadaphia, Minister of State for
    Home in 2002, and leader of the BJP rebels, was among those expected to
    join the Congress. He retreated. But the sting also closed the window of
    opportunity provided by the division in the saffron ranks. In 2007
    Gujarat, the only way to undermine Mr. Modi was to separate him from his
    post-Godhra image. Indeed, the parivar's annoyance with Mr. Modi flowed
    from his perceived departure from the path he had himself shown in 2002.
    In reviving the memories of 2002, Tehelka revived the memories of saffron
    togetherness forged on a felt need to fight Muslims. The sting clubbed the
    guilt of Mr. Modi with that of the VHP and the Bajrang Dal at a time of
    debilitating tension between the Chief Minister and his ideological
    family.
    Flawed argument
    Undoubtedly, this line of argument is repugnant to the very notion of
    justice. This amounted to consciously, premeditatedly excluding Muslims
    and the injury done to them from the election debate. There was another
    pertinent question: if people rushed to vote for Mr. Modi, enthused by
    images of extreme violence done to one community, what sort of a people
    were they? The Tehelka team made a persuasive case to view the sting from
    a larger perspective: the aim of any investigation was to bring out the
    truth, and this truth could not be sacrificed at the altar of electoral
    calculations. Yet others said if the sting strengthened Mr. Modi, enabling
    his re-election, it had also caused long-term damage to his national and
    international image.
    Perfect reasoning. However, it was also in some sense lofty and removed
    from the reality of Gujarat ? where Muslims faced the prospect of five
    more years in isolation. Of what use was a journalistic investigation that
    brilliantly captured their suffering yet expected them to endure it in
    their own alleged interest?
    Finally, there is the matter of how the sting was presented. The
    television channels chose the thriller format for a footage that was so
    graphic in itself that it required no further embellishment.
    Yet in the hand of its exploitative anchors, the gore and death became a
    voyeuristic melodrama, complete with teaser-trailers that promised more
    and commercial breaks that stretched on and on ? in evident admission that
    somebody's misery was somebody else's bottomline.
    Perhaps the sting will make no impact. Perhaps the rebellion against Mr.
    Modi was illusory anyway. Nonetheless, there is no getting away from the
    singular important question the sting has posed: can you separate an
    investigation, however important, from its social and ethical context?

    GUJARAT KA SACH
    by
    B. P. SINGHAL, IPS. (Retd.), Ex-MP Rajya Sabha.

    They-THE SECULARISTS - are at it once again.

    "It was a well planned 'GENOCIDE'", "it was 'POGROM'", "it was state sponsored 'TERRORISM'", is what they had said in screaming headlines day after day after day in 2002, in the Delhi based "SECULAR" English dailies and the "SECULAR" electronic media. So complete was the Goebblesian propaganda and so effective was the concealment of truth, that even the Supreme Court lost its judicial balance and without verifying what steps the Government of Gujarat had taken, it went on to write on page 72 of its judgement in the Best Bakery Case that, "The modern day NEROS were looking elsewhere when Best Bakery and innocent children and helpless women were burning ...........".

    It was media power at its worst that caused this unwarranted outburst from the Hon'ble Supreme Court. All the Gujarat language dailies were giving truthful accounts which were at complete variance with the Delhi based Media.

    "The Hindu", the leading-most South India daily reported on 1st March 2002 : "The Chief Minister Modi frantically asked for the Army units to be called in." On 2nd March 2002 'The Hindu' reported : "Unlike February 28 when one community was entirely at the receiving end, the minority backlash on 1st March has further worsened the situation .......... and the Army staged a flag march in Ahemedabad on 1 st March 2002 at 9.00 A.M."

    It was therefore truly shocking that on 25.8.2007, "Aaj Tak" harped on the same old refrain that "Modi did not call the army until three days had passed". Even more outrageous was their insistance on this point. When "Aaj Tak" contacted me on phone to get my response, I told the anchor that the GODHRA carnage took place on February 27th 2002, that the Hindu backlash commenced on February 28th and the Army was doing flag march on the forenoon of March 1st ............ He cut me short by saying that "this is exactly what we had said, no action was taken by Modi on 29 th, 30th and 31st thus giving three clear days to the murderers ........" I had to cut him short by reminding him that the date 28 th was 28th of February 2002 and there was no 29th, 30th or 31st in that month. The phono was of course disconnected. However, it has to be said to the credit of "Aaj Tak" and "Headlines Today" that they called me for a full length studio debate from 9.15 P.M. 11.45 P.M. next day. But the details of that debate shall have to wait. For the present, however, it is imperative that certain facts are stated to prevent perpetuation of the LIES propagated in 2002.

    Fact 1: That SHOOT AT SIGHT ORDERS had been given by the Government on 28th itself.

    Being an Ex-DGP and also a Member of Parliament at that time, I was personally in touch with the office of DGP Gujarat and the Commissioner of Police Ahemedabad. I was keen to tell them, (a) To call in the Army atonce and (b) To issue "SHOOT AT SIGHT" orders to all officers of the rank of Sub-Inspectors and above. It was very comforting to learn that the Government of Gujarat had already taken both those steps by 2.30 P.M. on 28 th February itself. In fact the State Government had also requested for Armed Police reinforcements from neighbouring states, besides calling for the Army.

    Fact 2: On the 28th February itself 10 Hindus had been shot dead and 16 Hindus had been wounded by POLICE BULLETS.

    Fact 3: On the next day i.e., 1st March an additional 24 Hindus were shot dead and 40 Hindus wounded by POLICE BULLETS.

    Fact 4: In the entire period of riots total Hindu casualties were 80 shot dead, and 207 wounded by POLICE BULLETS alone. (But no Delhi-based media showed any interest in giving coverage to these casualties.)

    Fact 5: The Muslim counter attack which commenced from 1st March 2002 was no less ferocious. In the first three days alone, out of a total of 611 deaths, 101 were caused by POLICE FIRING. Of these, 61 were Hindus and 40 were Muslims.

    Fact 6: As on 5th of March, as many as 40,000 Hindus had had to be given shelter in Relief Camps. (There was plenty of media coverage given to the plight of Muslims in relief camps but no Delhi-based media covered any Hindu relief camps.)

    Fact 7: In answer to the Parliament questions, the UPA Home Minister gave the figures of casualties during Gujarat riots. There were Muslims killed 790, Hindus killed 254, wounded 2500 in all missing 223. Thus this proves the lies that what happened in Gujarat was a one-sided affair for every three Muslims who died in Gujarat, one Hindu was also killed.

    Such heavy casualties in riot control are UNPRECEDENTED in the entire history of Indian Police. The figures of casualties caused by Police firing in the first three days alone indicate the FEROCITY of Police action. (And the "SECULAR" PARTIES and their MEDIA cohorts even to this day proclaim unabashedly that Modi ordered the Police "to look the other way" to give a free hand to murderers for three days). If they have any respect for TRUTH, they can cross-check the casualties with the records of the concerned hospitals. The Police is duty bound to carry the dead or the wounded in Police firings to the concerned Government hospitals.

    With the Muslim counter attack commencing from 1st March onwards till the riots were quelled altogether, what took place in Gujarat was a full-fledged Hindu-Muslim Riot. It was no GENOCIDE, or POGROM, or STATE TERRORISM against the Muslims of Gujarat. "No modern day 'NERO' was looking elsewhere". The modern day Chief Minister was dealing with the situation as best as was possible with the highly limited forces at his command.

    Because of the spontaneous conflagration at scores and scores of locations, it is entirely possible that the Police or Fire brigade may have failed to reach a scene for hours, OR, having been spread so thin, the posse of Police that did reach the scene was deterred from intervening by the sheer ferocity of violence at that point in time. But to say that Police was restrained as a measure of Government POLICY is completely belied by the sheer immensity of casualties caused by Police firings.

    The insane FEROCITY and BRUTALITY with which Ram Bhaktas including "innocent children and helpless women" were roasted alive at Godhra set the benchmark for the equally insane ferocity of the Hindu backlash and the ferocity of the Hindu backlash was followed by an equally insanely ferocious counter attack by the Muslims.

    The Delhi-based media made out as though the whole of Gujarat was in flames. It concealed the fact that out of 18,600 villages, 240 Municipal towns and 25 Districts, the number of locations that were affected by riots was just 60. Not a single man-day was lost in the 200 odd Industrial townships by any Industry in Gujarat because of the riots. The examinations in Schools, Colleges and Universities were conducted as per schedule during the period of riots.

    Irrefutable confirmation that it was a Communal RIOT and not a GENOCIDE or POGROM, came from the verdicts of Courts in POST-GODHRA riots cases:

    (i) Deccan Herald reported on May 2004: Conviction of 3 confessing Muslims for 7 years for attempted murder.

    (ii) Indian Express dated 19.03.2006 reported: 7 Muslims convicted for life for the murder of Mukesh Panchaal.

    (iii) Indian Express dated 29.03.2006 reported: 9 Muslims convicted for attempted murder and Arms Act with sentences ranging from 10 years to 18 months.

    (iv) Indian Express dated 19.05.2006 reported: 4 Muslims nailed by DNA tests and convicted for LIFE.

    While the "SECULAR" PARTIES and the "SECULAR" Delhi-based Media singled out the Hindu backlash for mega-publicity, they BLANKED OUT the Godhra carnage, as well as the Muslim counter attack for reasons best known to them. Nevertheless, not only the MINORITY community of Gujarat, but the entire population of Gujarat had been well aware of "GUJARAT KA SACH", ALL ALONG. As a result, all the Goebblesian propaganda had to bite the dust when the BJP was not only returned to serve Gujarat for a second term, by an overwhelming majority in the legislature, in the Post-Godhra-Post-Gujarat elections, but also continued to win the Corporation, the Municipal and the Gram Sabha elections with overwhelming margins. In a DEMOCRACY, THE PEOPLE KNOW WHO IS WHAT. AND THE PEOPLE ARE THE FINAL ARBITERS.

    Tehelka and the sponsors of Tehelka have once again tried to vitiate communal harmony not only of Gujarat but of the entire country. People overwhelmingly believe that the Tehelka "sting operation" was sponsored by the Congress. If it is so, then, this would be the third major attempt of the "SECULAR" Congress to stoke the communal flames in the country. The first major attempt was made through the Sachar Commission who ordered a headcount of Muslims in India's Defence Forces. Thanks to the Army Chief who firmly put his foot down to prevent the communal virus from infecting the Army. The second attempt was made when the Government of India filed the affidavit in the Supreme Court, in the Sethusamudram case wherein it QUESTIONED the very existence of Sri Ram. Now by sponsoring Tehelka, "Sting operation" it made a despicable third attempt to communalize the Indian Polity. What Tehelka "Sting operation" has done, clearly attracts Section 153A of the IPC and if Congress has not sponsored this "Sting operation" then it should not hesitate to prosecute Tehelka u/s 153A IPC. As Tehelka as well as the T.V. Channels who aired those tapes are headquartered at Delhi, it is the Delhi Police and consequently the Government of India to take the legal action against them u/s 153A IPC.

    Nobody could have had any grouse if "Tehelka" and the T.V. Channels had passed on those tapes to the Supreme Court, for suitable action, or even telecasted the so-called confessions of VHP activists or the BJP MLA for the information of the people. And, if indeed, those confessions are genuine and have any evidentiary value in them, then the law must take its course against those whose guilt is stablished. The real MISCHIEF that attracts Section 153A IPC is the JUXTAPOSITION AND INTERSPERSION of rising flames and bellowing smoke with the earlier recorded bytes of the Gujarat riots, accompanied with crashing cymbals, beats of drums, screaming voices, and the highly provocative comments of the 'anchors' of the channels that aired those tapes.

    There is a clear intention to inflame communal passions through what all was telecast in the name of "Gujarat ka Sach", and it would be dangerous for the future of the country if such a nefarious act goes unpunished by default of the UPA Government.

    Date: 29.10.2007
    (B. P. SINGHAL)
    IPS. (Retd.), Ex-MP Rajya Sabha
    All those who want to know the full identity of the criminals who were responsible for massacre of Sikhs in 1984 must read it. It is reproduced from the book-UNDOING INDIA: THE RSS WAY

    Shamsul Islam.
    In the following is reproduced in full a shocking document justifying the massacre of Sikhs in October-November 1984, authored and circulated by a luminary and veteran of the RSS, Nana Deshmukh. In the aftermath of the killing of Indira Gandhi on October 31, 1984, by her two security guards who happened to be Sikhs, hundreds of innocent Sikh men, women and children were burnt alive, butchered, and maimed throughout India. Hundreds of Sikh religious places were destroyed, with countless commercial and residential properties owned by Sikhs.
    It has been a general belief that the Congress cadres were behind this mayhem. This may be true but there were other fascist and communal forces also which actively participated in this massacre, whose role has never been investigated. This document may help in unmasking the whole lot of criminals who played Holi with the blood of innocent Sikhs who had nothing to do with the killing of Indira Gandhi. This document may also throw light on where the cadres came from, who meticulously organized the butchering of Sikhs. Those who were witness to the genocide and mayhem of 1984 were stunned by the swiftness and military precision of the killer marauding gangs (later on witnessed during the Babri mosque demolition, burning alive of Dr. Graham Steins with his two sons and recent pogrom of the Muslims in Gujarat) who went on a burning spree of the innocent Sikhs. This was beyond the capacity of the Congress thugs. Nana

  • India, Russia to sign Kudankulam N-pact and Left Declares No Threat to Centre!

    India, Russia to sign Kudankulam N-pact and Left Declares No Threat to Centre!
    Palash Biswas
    Contact: Palash C Biswas, C/O Mrs Arati Roy, Gosto Kanan, Sodepur, Kolkata- 700110, India. Phone: 91-033-25659551
    Email: alashbiswaskl@gmail.com">palashbiswaskl@gmail.com
    India and Russia to sign Kudankulam N-pact and left declares no threat to the Centre Government of india! Was there any threat ever!
    Meanwhile, in Washington,United States has said that broad-based partnerships between America and India are critical and more important as compared to Pakistan, as New Delhi is growing as a potential power with global influence.
    "The US-India strategic potential is very, very profound," Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defence for South and South East Asia James Clad told online journalists and bloggers during a conference call from the Pentagon.While India's sometimes contentious neighbour, Pakistan, continues to search for Osama bin Laden and help wage the global war on terrorism, Clad explained, the US-Indian relationship is more important in the long run.
    "India simply must, as a long term consideration, matter more for us than Pakistan," Clad has been quoted as saying in the American Forces Press Services.
    "India is seen as a potentially a power with global reach," Clad said.
    "It's been slow in coming - I think it will be slow in coming in the future - but it is steady. The trend lines are unmistakable," he said.
    Clad said India is on a major course to ramp up its military infrastructure with a multi-billion budget at the ready to purchase, among other equipment, 126 multi-role combat aircraft.
    "It is the largest external-announced defence procurement budget in the world. And people are obviously interested in this," he said, adding 52 US defence corporations, including Boeing, Lockheed-Martin, Ratheon, Honeywell and General Electric, have all set up offices in India.
    The Communist Party of India-Marxist on Wednesday said the United Progressive Alliance government at the Centre will face no threat if the Indo-US nuclear deal remains suspended.External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee has given an assurance that no step would be taken towards finalisation of the deal till talks with the Left parties for a consensus on the issue was on, CPI-M politburo member M K Pandhe told reporters in Bhopal.
    "There is no threat to the UPA till the deal remains suspended," he said.
    In fact, leaders and members of Parliament of Congress and constituents of the UPA are also not in favour of a mid-term poll and would like the government to complete its five-year term, Pandhe said.However, the exact stand of Congress would become clear during the UPA-Left meeting on the deal scheduled on November 16, he said.The Left parties, providing crucial outside support to the Manmohan Singh Government, have adopted a firm stand -- that the agreement adversely affects India's interests and it should remain suspended, the CPI-M leader said.Voicing concern over soaring prices, Pandhe, a prominent trade union leader, said it was a result of the UPA government failing to implement the common minimum programme.On the reported statement of Dr Singh about problems faced by a coalition government, he said, "It is against the dignity of coalition politics."
    The stalled India-US nuclear deal will not prevent Russia from signing an agreement with India for building four more nuclear reactors at Kudankulam that is likely to be concluded during Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Moscow beginning on Sunday.NDtv reports.
    ''India's ongoing civil nuclear energy cooperation in Kudankulam will be independent of the fate of the India-US nuclear deal. Russia has already spoken to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and other relevant players for this,'' a top Russian source, who did not wish to be named, said.
    ''Four additional power units at Kudankulam will be an extension of what we have already been doing with India. It shouldn't be a problem,'' the source added.
    ''The Kudankulam agreement should take place during the Indian prime minister's visit. Had the India-US deal gone through, it would have made things easier. But we are going ahead,'' the source said.
    He said this when asked whether the derailing of the nuclear deal due to compulsions of coalition politics in India has affected enthusiasm in Moscow for doing business with New Delhi.
    If all goes well, the agreement, which will also lay down guidelines for long-term cooperation in nuclear energy, will be signed after Manmohan Singh holds talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday.
    Bilateral nuke deal
    India and Russia, however, can't sign a comprehensive bilateral civil nuclear cooperation pact until the NSG clears the India-US nuclear deal.
    ''India-Russia relations are stronger than ever. Nothing will affect this enduring and time-tested relationship,'' he said when asked about some media reports that alluded to protocol differences and speculation about a chill in India-Russia ties.
    During Putin's visit, India and Russia signed a memorandum of intent for the latter building four additional nuclear power plant units at Kudanakulam.
    A joint statement on the promotion of peaceful uses of nuclear energy was also adopted after the talks.
    Russia was one of the first few countries to promise its support in the powerful Nuclear Suppliers Group after India and the US struck the historic nuclear deal in July 2005.
    Atomstroyexport, Russia's nuclear power equipment and service export monopoly, started building the Kudankulam plant in the southern province of Tamil Nadu in 2002.
    India and the then Soviet Union signed an agreement in 1988 on building 2000 MW power plant at Kudankuam which is now nearing completion. An addendum was signed ten years later.
    Neutron reactors
    Manmohan Singh, who goes on a two-day visit to Moscow on Sunday, is likely to send the message across that his government was still hopeful of pushing the stalled nuclear deal which Russia has backed in the hope of earning billions in business.
    The decades-old Russian civil nuclear industry was enthusiastic about the opening of India's nuclear business and hoped to get first mover advantage after the NSG approved rule change in favour of India.
    Russia is also willing to build fast neutron reactors for Indian power plants after international sanctions are lifted against New Delhi in civil nuclear cooperation.
    But now with the deal stalled and India yet to negotiate a safeguards agreement with the IAEA, some noticed a dampening of enthusiasm in Moscow.
    The Kudankulam agreement will dispel that impression and put a new bounce in India's energy ties with Russia.
    Ahead of Manmohan Singh's visit, there were, however, some jarring notes. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov did not meet External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee when he visited Moscow last month, saying he was too busy with other meetings.
    Mukherjee was also frisked at the Moscow airport on his way back, according to some media reports, which were denied by the government.
    However, some senior officials said that too much is being read into these reports and denied that relations were cooling off between the two countries.
    Seeking to quell reports that the party may cosy up to government on the Indo-US nuclear deal, the Bharatiya Janata Party on Wednesday made it clear that the accord should be renegotiated and not hustled through as it 'compromises' with the country's long-term strategic programmes.After a meeting of its core group, attended by top leaders, including L K Advani and BJP chief Rajnath Singh, the party said it was opposed to the deal and accused the government of making a 'significant strategic blunder' by turning it into a kind of an icon of India's relations with the US.The statement issued by Advani, Singh and Jaswant Singh assumes significance in the context of media reports that the BJP was diluting its opposition and may not be averse to supporting the deal as the party was not ideologically opposed to the US unlike the Leftists.The statement also noted that over the last few days former American Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, US Ambassador to India David Mulford, National Security Advisor M K Narayanan and Atomic Energy Commission Chairman Anil Kakodkar had met the three leaders and were informed of the BJP's position.
    The statement said:
    The BJP has been and continues to be of the view that the UPA government has made a significant blunder by turning this deal into a kind of an icon of India's relations with the US.

    The BJP has consistently stood for close Indo-US cooperation and strategic partnership as between two equal sovereigns.

    We stand opposed to the deal because in our view it compromises long-term strategic programmes of India, vital for country's security, neither will it help meet our energy needs of future.

    Therefore, the BJP strongly recommends that this deal must be renegotiated and not hustled through as the UPA government is attempting to.
    Emphasising that the nuclear deal could not be the sole benchmark of Indo-US relations, party spokesman Ravi Shankar Prasad said the saffron party was firm that the country's minimum deterrence could not be sacrificed for 'illusory nuclear needs.'
    The national strategic interests are of primary importance and energy needs are secondary, he said outlining the party's view which appeared to contradict that of former National Security Adviser Brajesh Mishra.
    Mishra, who served under the BJP-led government, had said the deal was the best one could get and he could allow it to go through if he was given guarantees about protection of the country's strategic interests.
    On BJP's approach to the issue during the upcoming Parliament session, Prasad said the strategy will be fine-tuned by the party's Parliamentary Board. "But BJP will expose the stand of Left on the issue," he said.
    Bush is a fool: Karat
    US President George W Bushon Wednesday came under severe attack from the Communist Party of India-Marxist, which described him as a "fool" for comparing Russian leader Lenin with the likes of Osama bin Laden and Adolf Hitler [Images].
    "He (George Bush ) is a fool. I have heard that a few days ago he said Lenin, Hitler and Osama Bin Laden were alike," CPI-M general secretary Prakash Karat said addressing a function in Delhi to commemorate the 90th anniversary of Russia's 1917 October Revolution.
    "The world knows he is weak in the knowledge of history, but now it has also been established that George Bush is also a fool," the Communist leader said after unveiling a bust of Lenin.
    Karat asked the party cadres to take a pledge to weed out imperialism from the world.
    New Delhi: India should draw a lesson from the situation in Pakistan, which "compromised" its foreign policy for an alliance with the US, the CPI(M) said today and observed that siding with America could be "harmful" for national sovereignty.
    "Those who feel that US imperialism cannot be a threat to a country like India, should look at the situation in Pakistan now" when American officials are hinting at a change in the ruling establishment in Islamabad, party General Secretary Prakash Karat said at a function here to commemorate the 90th anniversary of the October Revolution in Russia.
    Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf's pro-US policies have made him so unpopular that he is now left with no option other than imposing emergency and suspending the Constitution, he said.
    Karat said Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's remarks that the US was "not putting all our chips" on Musharraf indicated that the Pakistani ruler, who was the strongest American ally in its fight against terror, could be "dispensable".
    "It is a signal from the US that Musharraf could be removed ..., this is what happens when you compromise with your national sovereignty," he said.
    Observing that American diplomats were holding consultations with "big parties" in India to pressurise them on the nuclear deal, Karat said "we are not worried because the democratic forces in the country are strong", though several "compromises" were made by the erstwhile Atal Bihari Vajpayee government with the US.

    India should draw lesson from situation in Pakistan: Karat
    Russia offers to set up arms depot in India
    In a bid to help India meet an acute shortage of spares for its armaments, Russia [Images] has offered to set up a depot in the country, the first of its kind, to cater to the requirements of the three defence services.
    The proposal of the Russian government was being examined by the government, official sources said.
    During his visit to Russia last month, Defence Minister A K Antony raised the issue of shortage of spares for various armaments in the inventory of the Indian Navy, Army and Indian Air Force, following which the proposal came from Moscow [Images].
    The defence ministry is now discussing the Russian proposal and some positive response seems to be emerging. It is being felt that the time consumed in getting crucial spares will be saved through such an option and it will be cost effective too, the sources said.
    India has several arms and equipment in its inventory, which have been manufactured by Russia. Many of them are being co-produced in India. These include MiG and Sukhoi fighters, T-90 and T-72 tanks, AN-32 planes, the Ilyushin (Gajraj) aircraft, submarines, vessels and missiles.
    According to the proposal, Russia would set up a depot where spares of various Russian armaments as well as those of equipment produced by companies in the erstwhile Soviet Union will be stored, the sources said.
    Though in principle, New Delhi was not averse to such a move it will wait till a formal proposal is sent from the Russian government in which the finer points about the management of the depot are sorted out.
    Russia has also assured that it would provide spares of other such equipment, which had been purchased from other countries of the erstwhile USSR, they said.
    The depot, they said, will be cost effective as at present, India has to pay huge price for every spare part purchased either directly or through Rosoboronservices (India), a joint venture company of Russian and Indian Arms companies.
    This would also curtail frequent visits by Indian officials to various CIS countries hunting for spares, the sources said.
    Rosoboronservice (India) had earlier planned to create a bonded warehouse in Mumbai for spares and maintaining the Indian naval assets of Russian origin.
    This would have become a 'one-stop shop' for all after-sales service, repair, maintenance, upgrade and training needs of all assets of Indian Navy of Russian origin.

    An envoy of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will travel to Switzerland [Images] to provide a brief on the Indo-US nuclear deal as the European country on Wednesday sought details of the agreement before it could finalise its position on the issue.The issue came up during talks between Dr Singh and visiting Swiss President Micheline Calmy-Rey with the prime minister seeking support of the key Nuclear Suppliers Group member for the deal.Calmy-Rey sought details of the agreement that can be implemented only after NSG approves it.
    "I requested the prime minister to have an Indian expert to explain the Indo-US nuclear deal," Calmy-Rey told reporters in Delhi when asked about Switzerland's position on the Indo-US nuclear agreement.
    The prime minister said "someone" will travel to Switzerland to brief her government on the deal, she said.Besides being a member of the NSG, Switzerland is a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors.After conclusion of the 123 agreement with the US, India is required to negotiate a safeguards agreement with the IAEA and approach the NSG to seek changes in the guidelines that regulate international nuclear trade.

    http://www.truthout .org/docs_ 2006/110607L. shtml
    Nuclear Fallout From Imploding Pakistan?
    By J. Sri Raman
    t r u t h o u t | Perspective
    Tuesday 06 November 2007
    A wide range of observers, from then-US President
    Bill Clinton to peace activists everywhere, saw South
    Asia as the scariest place on earth in the early
    months of 2002. The eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation
    of a million Indian and Pakistani troops across the
    border in Kashmir seemed to threaten an imminent
    nuclear war. Events in Pakistan alone have sufficed
    now to make the subcontinent the scariest spot in the
    world, and for a very similar reason.
    The Musharraf-declared martial law in Pakistan has
    created a situation full of agonizing uncertainties
    ahead. The most horrendous prospect, however, is of a
    nuclear fallout.
    Many analysts have mentioned this particular
    possibility in passing. The general tendency, however,
    has been to shy away from what specifically it can
    mean.
    The subcontinent, of course, has never been free
    from nuclear insecurities ever since both India and
    Pakistan proclaimed themselves nuclear-weapon states
    in 1998. Right from the morrow of India's nuclear
    weapons test in May that year, militarists of the
    country have been threatening the neighbor with dire
    nuclear nemesis. Islamabad, for its part, adopted a
    nuclear doctrine that retained the first-strike
    option.
    Pakistan's president, General Pervez Musharraf,
    said in May 2002 that Pakistan did not want a conflict
    with India, but that if it came to war between the
    nuclear-armed rivals, he would "respond with full
    might." This statement was widely interpreted to mean
    that, if pressed by an overwhelming conventional
    attack from India, with superior conventional forces,
    Pakistan might use its nuclear weapons.
    In January 2003, the general came out with the
    startling confession that he had been all set to
    unleash "an unconventional war" on India, had a single
    Indian soldier crossed the border into Pakistan during
    the previous year's tense standoff.
    Less widely noticed, nuclear threats freely traded
    between India and Pakistan during the armed conflict
    in Kargil, in the Himalayan region of Ladakh, conjured
    up nightmarish prospects for Indians and Pakistanis
    who did not quite see it all as a computer game.
    According to a newsman who kept a tab, the nuclear
    threat was exchanged no less than 13 times during the
    conflict.
    The fears voiced following Musharraf's declaration
    of martial law, which he and his flock prefer to call
    an emergency, are not about an India-Pakistan nuclear
    flashpoint. They are about Pakistan's nuclear weapons
    falling into terrorist hands or those of warring
    Pakistani groups.
    Reports in the media, reflecting official Western
    opinion, talk particularly of the opportunity offered
    by Pakistan's current instability to al-Qaeda hordes
    keen to lay their hands on the nuclear weapons. At
    least some reports, however, now recognize the added
    threat of nuclear-weapon thefts in view of faintly
    visible rifts in Pakistan's army. Some see the threat
    enhanced by the armed ethnic conflicts raging in the
    country's tribal areas, which supply about a quarter
    of Musharraf's soldiers.
    How real is the possibility according to available
    literature and information? Pakistan is estimated to
    have an arsenal of 30 to 55 nuclear weapons, with 24
    to 48 nuclear warheads based on highly enriched
    uranium (HEU). Pakistan's official claim is that these
    nuclear weapons are not assembled and thus
    comparatively safe. They insist that the fissile cores
    are stored separately from the non-nuclear explosives
    packages, and that the warheads are stored separately
    from the delivery systems. General Mirza Aslam Beg,
    former chief of army staff, once told a reporter that
    "mating them would take two to three days." This,
    however, would seem to contradict the other claim of
    ready-to-use weapons - a claim made more than once in
    relation to India.
    According to experts, Pakistan's primary reliance
    on HEU makes its fissile materials particularly
    vulnerable to diversion. HEU can be used in a
    relatively simple gun-barrel-type design, which could
    be within the means of non-state actors who intend to
    assemble crude nuclear weapons.
    The security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal became
    a major concern of the Washington-headed West, which
    had been far less bothered about South Asia's nuclear
    fate despite all its lip service to the cause of
    nonproliferation, in the days following 9/11. Within
    two days of the tragedy, Pakistan's military, under
    the watchful eye of a Musharraf favorite,
    Lieutenant-General Khalid Kidwai, relocated the
    weapons described as the country's "crown jewels" to
    six "secret locations." General Musharraf was then
    claimed to have sacked his intelligence chief and
    other officers and detained suspected retired nuclear
    weapons scientists, in an attempt to "root out
    extremist elements that posed a potential threat to
    Pakistan's nuclear arsenal."
    Lt.-Gen. Kidwai has ever since been a regular
    visitor to Washington, presumably with a mission to
    offer periodical reassurances about the security of
    Pakistan's nuclear weapons. Islamabad, however, has
    also consistently claimed that it was not ready to
    compromise security by cooperation with even the
    George Bush administration in this regard.
    But serious doubts have been raised about the
    much-vaunted secrecy. The known links of Pakistan's
    intelligence agencies, past and present, with the
    Taliban and other extremists do not constitute
    reassurance in this regard.
    The suicide bomb attack of November 1 on an
    airbase in Sargodha, the site of major missiles, was
    not, of course, directly related to an extremist
    nuclear mission. But it did demonstrate the
    vulnerability of military installations and facilities
    under the strictest security to militant attacks.
    The claim to nuclear secrecy faced a far more
    formidable challenge in August 2007. A CNN report,
    obviously based on official briefing, said that
    Washington and the Pentagon knew of Pakistan's secret
    nuclear sites. The motive behind the disclosure has
    been a matter of debate in intelligence circles. So
    has been its impact on Islamabad. At least some
    observers suspect that the "leak" may have led to yet
    another relocation of the sites which, according to
    experts, may include mines and tunnels.
    The claim also raises questions about the threat
    to the security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenals from
    the leader of the world's "anti-terror alliance," of
    which Musharraf's Pakistan is a major part.
    As early as October 2001, David Albright of the
    Institute for Science and International Security
    (ISIS), envisaged scenarios of US interventions in
    situations closely similar to Pakistan's current
    nuclear context. "During times of relative political
    and social normalcy, the security of Pakistan's
    nuclear arsenal is probably adequate," he argued in a
    paper, "(but) fallout from Pakistan's decision to
    cooperate with the United States following the
    September 11 terrorist attacks may severely test
    Pakistan's security system throughout its nuclear
    weapons complex. Instability in Pakistan could make
    its nuclear weapons and stocks of nuclear explosive
    material dangerously vulnerable to theft."
    He went on: "If domestic ins