President Obama has delivered the most important war speech of his presidency. But the surge of 30,000 of American troops along with 5000 of other allies; will it make any difference to the AFPAK theatre of operations? If numbers alone are the matter, then Obama would have provided another 100 thousand or even more whether General Machrystal wanted it or not. Then what is the war aim? The war is not going to be fought in the battle fields of Helmand, Kandahar,Kunduz or even on the mountains of Tora bora.

The battle field is the hearts and minds of AMERICAN STREET in mainland USA. Yes this is the battlefield.
That is why the deadline is July 2011 to cater for spillover upto 2012 American election. His speech very clearly put the onus of winning this war in America on Pakistan Army. The less body bags, and you get your crowns which may even include Mullah Omar in Kabul in place of Karzai! Zardari and Karzai have already been expended.

The take is on General Kiyani and GHQ of Pakistan Army. But the General himself made one very significant statement as Obama was talking in front of West point cadets.He told the Frontier constabulary that “Pakistan was achieved in the name of Islam and MUSLIM UMMA and the religion can Never be expelled from the country” . Why he made this significant statement when Pakistan and Afghanistan are both Islamic republics? Therein lies the concept of MUSLIM UMMA. Americans rarely understand this or care to understand .It is Muslim Umma which is protecting Osama in spite of nearly $ 1 billion price tag on his head or Sheikh Omar, the killer of Daniel Pearl or Dr.AQ.Khan from being extradited to USA or which allowed Ilyas Kashmiri of Brigade 313 or Rauf to escape.

This is what made General Musharaff, Zardari and MQM’s Altaf Hussein to flee Pakistan while General Hamid Gul(rtd) of ISI , AQ Khan has no fear about their life in Pakistan. It is this Muslim Umma which killed Benazir and also ordered the killing of both Begums in Bangladesh and continue to order selective killing of ANP leadership inside Pakistan along with some Brigadier Generals who might take over as Army chiefs in due course. Islamic bomb could never be in the hands of any Pakistani Army man who is even relatively close to USA.

Obama promised ” a partnership with Pakistan that is built on mutual interest,mutual respect, and mutual trust”. He also highlighted the fact that USA is the largest donor for those IDPs who are displaced in SWAT and South Wazirstan. Nobody in the world including Pakistani Army now believe in Obama’s take on Democracy after he ditched Nobel Laurette’s Aung sung chee of Myanmar and Dalai Lama of Tibet . They know that they have the remote to control the American 2012 election. Already the American body bags in November is less than October though the whole year count is the biggest of 8 year war.

During second Bush election the Obama tape manufactured by ISI was a big help to him in his reelction and now also the Haqqani group,Gulbudin Heketmayers Hizb-e-Islami and Quetta shura are all watching how General Kiyani will play out the demand for betrayal of MUSLIM UMMA. General Musharaff didnot betray them and i donot think General Kiyani will either.

Coming to Afghanistan war theater, Karzai is made to keep CIA/ISI asset Mohammad Gulab Mangal as Governor of Helmand whom Karzai brothers do not trust.The cosmetic deployment of extra troops will take atleast one year with logistics being a nightmare. NATO convoys will be targeted by Tehreek Taliban while the Quetta Shura will take its orders from Pakistan Army. General Gul is already gloating and telling his Afghan Taliban followers to keep patience so that when Americans head home with a fig leaf provided by ISI, they can take over.

Central to Muhamed Ibn al Wahab’s message was the essential oneness of TAWHID(GOD). They follow the cause which is known as AHL AT TAWHID or MUWAHHIDUN( Unitarians). Wahab’s instructions in the matter of extending Islamic teachings by force were strict. All unbelievers ( Christians,Hindus,Jews as well as those who did not accept Wahab’s interpretation of Islam and Holy Quoran is more supportive of him) were to be put to death.

He viewed votive offerings, praying at saints tombs and at graves (like Ajmer shereef), any prayer ritual in which suppliant appeals to a third party for intercession with TAWHID as objectionable.Even celebration of prophet’s birthday,Shia mourning ceremonies, Sufi Mysticism of Indian Muslims are particularly abhorring for his followers.

Whether Pakistani Army supported Taliban who are fighting US forces in Afghanistan or Tehreek Taliban of Pakistan which is fighting the Pakistani army inside Pakistan as well as NATO convoys to Afghanistan will inherit MUSLIM UMMA is the question which policy makers of the world should watch with interest.

Will America be safe from another 9/11 once the Afghanistan is taken over by anyone who is loyal to MULSIM UMMA AFTER 2012?It is educating the Afghan girls as shown below which will provide the security to the World.

The 10th World congress of World Association for Psycho social rehabilitation was held in Bangalore from 12-15th November 2009. There were nearly 52 countries represented in the congress from all over globe. The theme of the congress was One world/quest for integration. Even from developed countries the representation of Carers and consumers were almost nil. I found only one carer from Israel and one consumer each from Netherlands and USA apart from our own Anil Vartak from Pune.

But WAPR is the only worldwide organization which has members from carers, consumers apart from Psychiatrists, Psychologists, Psychiatric social workers and Psychiatric nurses. NGOs from India dominated the scene with their work and i found that mental health professionals from third world countries and even USA, Chinese experts appreciating the quality of India’s work with meager resources and almost nil help from Indian Central/state governments. The African and Sri lankan delegates told me that this is something which can be replicated in their countries with meager resources.

What impressed them most was the effort of Santosh of Maraiasadanam without any mental health professional training has raised an orchestra and theatre group from abandoned wandering mentally ill. Meet the expert, Invited Symposia, Proposed Symposia, workshops,scientific and poster presentations dominated the conference. Sometimes one has to chose between two similar symposia on a topic on which I am interested and has to give the miss to one. While sometimes i found topics which are heavy are also held simultaneously and found to be boring by ordinary carer like me and so i spend time at the coffee stall.

I always wondered why is it that human rights/ethical issues in administering ECT, modified ECT etc ( Biological Psychiatry) are discussed in these types of conferences in third world countries while ignoring human rights issues of Deep Brain simulation just because it may be administered by using anesthesia and is carried out in rich countries. ECT has helped many patients especially suffering from severe depression in India.

There was this topic about changing the name of Schizophrenia as the name is stigmatizing. This name is NOT known to many in India except those 3000 odd psychiatrists and another 1000 other mental health professionals and also some carers who are educated in English.People in India call everyone affected by Mental illness who show abnormal behavior as PAGAL. In fact this term is used in derogatory term for anyone who doesn’t show some basic common sense.Are we in India have to change this name? Britishers in India used to call all thosewho required Disability benefits in three broad terms. Lepers, Lunatics, Idiots and totally blind.No DSM IV, ICD 10 for them.

They put the lunatics behind bar in prisons and gave them food and shelter and didn’t allow them to wander the streets. Now due to a lobby of human rights lawyers these Lunatics ( now called Mentally ill) were released into streets of India without shelter and food. They had their so called Freedom and human rights lawyers got their medals but the lunatics roamed the streets with FREEDOM to beg and to be abused. WAPR must look at these issues with carers and consumers perspective instead of Human rights lawyers views.Russel D souza and Carlyle Perera, renowned disaster recovery experts of Australia gave their views and i found that RESILIENCE creation amongst the population who are prone to disaster prone areas in Bengal, Orissa which frequently face cyclones and Assam which faces floods.

Dr.Mushtaq A Marghoob from Srinagar University took the circuitous route of Earthquake in Kashmir and trauma to talk about conflict area trauma where innocent civilians are facing cross fire and suffer. India should be open about Trauma being faced by people living in areas like Kashmir, Manipur, Tripura where security forces and insurgents cause trauma to civil population. Soon we may have naxal affected areas facing Trauma.There was this debate for a proposition “”More mental hospitals not de-institutionalization is the need of LAMIC countries””. The debate was by eminent mental health professionals who did not understand the need of the Families and consumers.

We in India have not established a single new institution comparable to AIIMS of Delhi or NIMHANS OF Bangalore after 1950 and those mental health institutions which function have no adequate staff ,equipment, buildings etc. These were highlighted by NHRC study and NIMHANS study on various hospitals in India. Indian Psychiatric society or Indian Private psychiatric society could NOT succeed in convincing Government for more funds till the ERAWADY TRAGEDY in which 28 chained mentally ill persons perished in a fire. From 19 crores budget at the time of Erawady tragedy , today it has increased to nearly 1000 crores.

But patients from northeast and Assam continue to pour into Bangalore for mental health care due to presence of NIMHANS braving enormous cost and distance. In spite of SUPREME COURT RULING in that case (W.P.(C) NO 334 OF 2001 and interim order dated 5th feb 2002, most of the provisions of that order remain unimplemented especially inclusion of MENTAL ILLNESS in the NATIONAL TRUST ACT 1998, establishment of more institutions like NIMHANS.

Except the Home Minister of Karnataka who inaugurated the conference nobody in the Proposed symposia on legislation and human rights spoke about the changes being framed in India in the Acts involving Psycho social disability 1.The national trust act 1998 2. The Persons with disabilities act 1995 3.The Rehabilitation council act 1992.All the above acts and the ministry which is supposed to implement it SOCIAL JUSTICE MINISTRY of Central government and DISABILITY COMMISSIONER of state government were NOT REPRESENTED IN THIS CONFERENCE BY EVEN A SINGLE PERSON.

CLOZAPINE , a drug which evokes strong feelings from the Psychiatric community makes carers wonder about the so called study being conducted in various settings. Dr.Angelo Barbato presented a study in which he contrasted the benefits of various new age atypical medications like Quetiapine, Respiradone, Olanzapine with typical old age Haloperidol and concluded that there is no major benefit in prescribing the new age medications.

What i found rather intriguing is that CLOZAPINE was not part of HIS study!! His reason for the exclusion is that it involves blood tests involved in the study though he admitted it is more effective. The doctor from NICE, UK who presided over the session even used the word “poison” to Clozapine!! But Prof Mansfield Mela and his team of 7 researchers from Canada presented a paper in which they opined Clozapine promotes employability,reduces offending among mentally disordered offenders.They also opined the effect of Clozapine is long lasting.

For those who are interested in medicines and their prescription, please go to the following link for further information provided by NIMH. The study was conducted without involving patients who are suffering from Tardive dyskinesia while Clozapine was found to be very effective in treating TD which is major side effect of all anti/psychotics. My personal opinion after talking to some patients who take this drug is that it is very effective.Also the need for taking blood test to find total blood count decrease (which according to some scientists is common to ALL ANTI/PSYCHOTICS) is the major reason for its cost.

Whether the decrease in blood count is common to ALL anti/psychotics and whether it is significantly more in clozapine or NOT should be studied in India so that this MYTH is cleared for the benefit of all consumers of the world. Prof Wolfgang Krahl from Germany is the only Psychiatrist who advocated for Inclusion of Clozapine in the W.H.O essential drugs list.
http://www.catie.unc.edu/

5 key findings from CATIE phases 1 and 2

Olanzapine was more effective than the four other antipsychotics (risperidone, quetiapine, ziprasidone, and perphenazine) in phase 1.2
Perphenazine—a first-generation antipsychotic—was as effective as risperidone, quetiapine and ziprasidone in phase 1.2
Neurocognitive function was no different whether patients were treated with perphenazine or SGAs, but adjunctive anticholinergic treatment worsened cognitive function.8

In phase 2, clozapine was more effective than other SGAs in patients who discontinued phase 1 because of inadequate efficacy.9
Antipsychotics differed in their adverse effect profiles, but no significant differences were observed between perphenazine and the SGAs in EPS rates or use of anticholinergic agents.2

This congress is being held in India is due to the singular effort of Dr.T.MURALI and his team consisting of Prof Mathew Verghese, Dr.Ravi Shankar Rao and Dr. Ajit Bhide. So personally I was disappointed to see that the next President is from Philippines while the honour should have gone to India’s Dr.Murali. One cannot cover all articles by 300 odd Professionals.

Some of the snaps taken at the conference are below.I didnot know how to handle the Sony cyber shot which i purchased recently. Hope i take better snaps next time.

1.Audience at my seminar including Susan Keter of Kenya

2. With delegates from SriLanka

3.A Delegate from Nepal, Prof Gayathri Ramaprasad from USA, Dr.Mrs.Mufti, a Dentist from Karachi Prof Khalid A Mufti of Pakistan PPS,captJohann

The following link gives the story of the shooting in American military base, Ft. Wood. The American nation is in such a trauma, that they are censoring the news, a sign of fear. They are not telling that the killer prepared carefully for the attack. He had his white cap and salwar Kameez on the day of attack. He also distributed the Holy Quoran to some of the neighbors before the attack. He also donated his furniture for free to whomever wanted it. He shouted “Allahu Akbar” before firing.

The first spin was that he might be suffering from PTSD which is not true as he was not posted outside USA ever. In fact his posting to Afghanistan is his first overseas posting. Now some experts are saying that he might be suffering from “Secondary syndrome’, due to his interviews with returning war veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan. Another baloney! America has to face up to suicide terrorism. The following you tube videos will educate the Americans to the threat their nation is facing.

I am pasting from a blog post in which a Pakistani Brigadier has given guidelines to his country’s police personnel to recognize suicide bombers. But these guidelines will apply only to those poor boys who are recruited for the cause for money or due to family circumstances and ready to die in Pakistan.

Security forces have released some guidelines as how to identify a suicide bomber. They are normally young boys of age bracket 18 to 25. They generally wear new shalwar qameez with new shoes. They normally have fresh haircut and freshly trimmed beard.

They look heavy in their appearance due to the suicide jacket underneath their shirt and they have red eyes due to sleepless night. They normally are observing fast and reading under their lips. They go straight to their target and don’t listen to anybody. Before the attack, they are accompanied by their handler who points out the target just before 10 to 15 minutes of attack.

Only Muslims can be called innocents and all non-Muslims are legitimate targets according to this British cleric. See the following BBC clip.

The following chat of Fox news in which the brother of the Killer gives his views is very illuminating. NADER HASAN: And I want to make sure everybody understands, he is a good American, and we are shocked. We just found out on the news that he was being deployed. He never even told us, because we’ve known for the last five years that was probably his worst nightmare. He deals with stories. He would tell us how he would hear things, horrific things.

But even before things from the war that was probably affecting him psychologically, he was dealing with some harassment in some of his — with some of his military colleagues and, you know, to the extent where he was — he hired a military attorney to try to have the issue resolved, pay back the government to get out of the military, if that was it. But he was at the end of — you know, trying everything to try to make everybody fair and reasonable and him get out of the situation. So I’m really — you know, I’m shocked, and I’m baffled. And if anybody wants to try to suggest it has something else to do with being afraid of wanting to go to war, that’s — that’s it.

SHEPARD SMITH: And when was it that he became disenchanted with the idea of being in the military? NADER HASAN: You know, I don’t think he was ever disenchanted with being in the military. I think he loved, and he was the one, like I said, who insisted on going into the military, even against his parents’ wishes. It was the harassment that I think was getting—was what got to him, was him being referenced from his Middle Eastern ethnicity, even though he was born and raised here and went to high school here in northern Virginia in Roanoke, Virginia, and went to Virginia Tech and, you know, never been in trouble. You know, just normal, played sports and, you know, never got in any trouble.”

It seems the Army major killer was even defending suicide bombers to his colleagues by equating them to a soldier who saves his fellow soldier by embracing a live grenade. Basically he is getting brainwashed into MUSLIM UMMA slowly. This DISAFFECTION is created very subtly by making America look like a monster because it supports Israel.

Being an American soldier he has to obey his nations constitution, which may require him to bomb even Saudi Arabia, Iran etc due to American security or economic interests. But he is slowly brain washed to believe that loyalty to any nation is evil. Democracy is evil and western society is evil because they accept homosexuality and kissing and female education. His loyalty should be to Allah only which slowly turns into loyalty to all Muslim nations at the expense of his own nation. So killing his brother soldiers becomes easy.

In India also this DISAFFECTION is created by political parties with vested interests. Everyone knows about 1984 Anti/Sikh riots. But a Sikh youngster of today does not know how Bhindranwale was created, what was the mayhem he was creating, how even a killer was made Jathedar of Akhal takht. How some Sikhs celebrated the killing of Indira Gandhi by lighting Diyas which provoked the Hindus.

Some congress leaders might have also played their part in the riots but the killing of Sikhs in Delhi, and surrounding areas was spontaneous outburst of anger of Hindus. Same is the case of Godhra riots. the burning of 55 Hindu pilgrims by some Muslim tea vendors and the TV footage created a Hindu backlash and the riots.

Whether Gujrat Government played a part in the riots is now before apex court. They must have played a part by turning blind eye to the breakdown of law and killing of Muslims. But continuously harping on these old wounds creates only DISAFFECTION.

We in India have many fault lines and creating DISAFFECTION is easy. But the BJP pointing out 1984 riots whenever it is cornered by Congress about Godhra riots is only creating DISAFFECTION amongst the affected and it is a handy tool for the enemies of our nation.

INCLUSION is the new slogan of disabled due to Mental illness in India.

The world remembers 10th Oct. as World Mental health day. In India in spite of Supreme court of India’s directive after the death of 25 odd Chained disabled due to mental illness persons at Erwady vide their order in case no W.P.(C). 334 of 2001 on 5th February 2002 to include Disabled due to mental illness in THE NATIONAL TRUST ACT 1999 as it is the only Act which caters for the following:-

The objects of the National Trust shall be - (chapter III)

(a) to enable and empower persons with disability to live as independently and as fully as possible within and as close to the community to which they belong;(

b) to strengthen facilities to provide support to persons with disability to live within their own families;

(c) to extend support to registered organisations to provide need based services during period of crisis in the family of persons with disability;

(d) to deal with problems of persons with disability who do not have family support;

(e) to promote measures for the care and protection of persons with disability in the event of death of their parents or guardians;

(f) to evolve procedure for the appointment of guardians and trustees for persons with disability requiring such protection;

(g) to facilitate the realisation of equal opportunities, protection of rights and full participation of persons with disability; and

(h) to do any other act which is incidental to the aforesaid objects. None of the state governments have established institutions to cater exclusively to mentally ill like NIMHANS as per supreme court order.

Nor the central government has bothered to include DISABLED DUE TO MENTAL ILLNESS (NOT Mentally ill who come to hospitals for treatment) who don’t recover after admission and treatment even in hospitals like NIMHANS. THE national trust is discriminatory in the sense that it does NOT include ALL THE DISABLED PERSONS AS PER PWDEA ACT 1995 WHO SATISFY THE ABOVE CRITERIA.

So disabled due to mental illness are abandoned in streets or abandoned in CHENNAI at the Banyan.

I request all who believe in the above objectives of the trust, please visit the following web page of the National Trust and vote for inclusion of Mental illness in the trust. The vote is taken at the bottom left hand of the Home page.

All those who are interested in families of Mentally ill can view the following podcast A very rare case of 7 year old schizophrenic. Watch the Oprah show in the this video.

1962 India/China war. Every Indian who experienced that Chinese perfidy just cannot forget the feeling of backstabbing . Of course because of the Nehru statement, it was made out as if it is India which started the war due Neville Maxwell’s book and our lack of vision to publish General Henderson Brooks report.

Actually India was bending over backwards to get a fair deal from China from 1960. Chou-en-Lai the wily Chinese Premier was orally promising so many things like “colonial past”, Historical mistake”,”maps will be rectified” etc.

Actually the Chinese at that time wanted not the territory alone but more important acceptance from International community as a credible strong independent nation which was NOT lackey of Soviet Union though it belonged to Comintern.They also envied India’s prestige due to pandit Nehru though they felt India did not have the backing of a credible Military Muscle to back its prestige among the comity of nations.

I was a novice in 1961 being recruited into Indo -Tibetan Border Force. Our training was curtailed due to the war and I was hoping my posting will come to Sikkim Border as it was considered a better place to live and also show one’s ability with locals living around. I was horrified when i learnt i was posted to Ladakh in 1964. I also feared the cold and i know Ladakh border had one of the coldest regions in the world. Acclimatisation,coat parka, Bukhari, Sleeping bag,Balaclava cap,Jule,Tashi Dalai are some of the terms one has to learn immediately.

But my boss Mr.Mistry was fond of reading and so he liked me a fellow bookworm. What i found intriguing at that time was that Chinese actually were conceding to India some odd sq miles of territory in Chumar area. As China has inflicted its will in 1962 a new line called LINE OF ACTUAL CONTROL has come into being. We were pushed back to a line which China actually claimed. But at Chumar which was lying at southern end of ladakh, the ambiguity remained. Whether it was rectified during the 12 round of talks i do not know.

The hue and cry about Chinese painting some rock with red paint brought me memories of Chinese perfidy when they killed three of my constables in 1965. We had a forward observation post at Dumchele from Dungti Checkpost for easy recce up to LAC and also for collecting some shikar of rabbits. We had only four personnel at that observation post.

After their successful Rann of Kutch operation The Pakistanis launched operation Gibraltar and India was fighting back especially after the Pakistani attack in Chamb was threatening Akhnoor Bridge. It is at this time an ultimatum was served by Chinese to give back their 2 Yaks and 80 goats or face severe punishment. This arrogance came out of their drubbing which they inflicted on us in 1962.

This ultimatum was to tie our Army located in ladakh and not to be shifted to Pakistani border. Though the ultimatum was in Nathula area, they showed their hand in Dumchele area. See the link below of google map. Dungti/chushul Google map .

They just entered well beyond the LAC and took up positions stealthily on a hillock nearby my Dumchele outpost. When the three constables went to ease themselves in the morning with water in rum bottles, they were killed in cold blood. Constable Ramprakash stood up with raised hand but the Chinese just pumped in bullets.

We lost Constables Phendo, Ramprakash and H. singh. But the Chinese did not expect another constable Ringchen who was there from Koyul post for some Shikar and has already was walking out when he heard the shooting and saw the killing in cold blood of constable Ram Prakash. He retaliated with his 303 rifle and could kill two Chinese soldiers and also injure some. I think this action of ringchen saved me and another havildar who were with me in the tent.

They didn’t attack our tent and went back. The Chinese were so infuriated with the killing of their soldiers that they equated it with 1962 conflict and lodged a strong protest with our foreign ministry which may be lying somewhere in Ministry’s moth eaten files. We hid our self in a Bush nearby till night fall and then trekked back to our main post Dungti. But very next day we went to the spot from where the Chinese fired their weapons and collected nearly 100 or so AK47 blanks.

From then on every night, the Chinese will fire very-light cartridges in the night. They continued this nearly for a month till ceasefire between India and Pakistan was signed. I correctly assessed at that time that Chinese will not attack as in 1962 but will do a psychological warfare with Red Very light. Some lessons learnt at that time.

1.Chinese will attack only if they feel we are weak and we are not ALERT. But when they see our weakness they will be ruthless and attack their enemies to kill. They will not respect any border if they decide to attack and their only consideration was teaching the enemy “A Lesson”. The same strategy was employed in Vietnam but there the Vietnamese battle hardened veterans and General Giap taught them the lesson.

2.They know Indian soldiers are from the villages and so try to impress the ordinary jawans with anything which is colourful like Flame throwers and Very light pistols. Now with their sophistication in fireworks and electronics, they might have developed things to Psychologically Impress Indians with their wizardry.

3.They prepare very hard for defence during peace time and build their bunkers really extremely strong. May be modern bunker busters of now will be OK with a direct hit but in 1965, their bunkers could have easily withstood 3 inch mortars or any of the infantry or artillery weapons we had at that time. Our sand bag bunkers and tin sheds stand no match to their defence preparation. They dig and dig and dig with explosives or by hand continuously and build caves in the high ground.

4.their OPs are also sophisticated with rectangular conical prism shaped so that from outside only a small hole is visible while the soldier manning the OP has wide view.

5.They do not waste their energy on patrolling like we do as they are confident of their superiority as inflicted on our psyche in 1962. If they indulge in patrolling then it is for some purpose, either they fear our deployment or look for opening in our defences.

6.Their communication trenches are also dug deep where a soldier can walk straight while in our trenches one has to crawl. Some of their communication trenches can even accommodate a jeep. They also were keeping the OP connected to their command post by land line in 1960s.

7.When they man an OP, it is manned with sincerity and detect an intruder miles in advance even during peacetime.

8.They always plan well in advance meticulously and so when something goes wrong, they cannot innovate and that is their weakness. When General Sagat singh in 1967 pounded them with our artillery and inflicted heavy casualties, this surprised them to silence. as was the case in Vietnam.

9.They do NOT wail when arms are given to India by west or Russia like our seminarists wail when Pakistan is gifted F16s by USA or they develop some missiles with Chinese/North Korean help.
They DEAL WITH THE PROBLEM THEMSELVES LIKE A SUPER POWER. We ask USA to help in punishing 26/11 perpetrators.

The Chinese may have 3000 front line fighters. But our Air force is superior in firepower and in the quality of our fighters and training. We must maintain this quality as Chinese are also rich enough to spend money for quality aircraft’s. It is here they depend on Pakistan for reverse engineering in Aircraft pods, HUDs, night vision devices, electronics etc.

Future wars are going to be fought by drones/missiles and Chinese are watching and collecting reaper technology from American drones deployed in Pakistan. They are also spending much effort in cyber warfare with Pakistani help especially those who are working in USA silicon valley. The modern Chinese is not an ideological slave like Mao’s PLA. They are Internet savvy and are forming opinion from western /Pakistani journals.

As there is very little people to people contact from Chinese side (20,000 Indians are studying in China while it is only 500 Chinese students in India for learning English and software), it is in India’s interest to open up our economy where the Chinese are competitive. As a democratic nation we must not fear the Chinese.

Lack of Democracy is their Achilles heel as they found out in Tibet and East Turkmenistan. They fear the next Dalai Lama will come out of Towang Monastery in Arunachal Pradesh. They have legitimised this by calling it Southern Tibet. But it is their target while Chumar may be a diversion. India can ask for Mount Kylas along with Manasarowar in exchange for Towang if they really fear that.
They say the strong remember while the weak tend to compromise.It is Indian nation’s take to be strong or weak.

“””Dear Jawahar,

I find that for some time past you have developed tremendous dislike for me. I say this because I find that you take up enthusiastically every possible point against me; what could be said in my favour you ignore. What my political opponents urge against me you concede, while you are almost blind to what could be said against them. In the course of what follows I shall try to illustrate the above.

Why you should have developed this strong dislike for me remains a mystery to me, On my side, ever since I came out of internment in 1937, I have been treating you with the utmost regard and consideration, in private life and in public. I have looked upon you as politically as elder brother and leader and have often sought your advice. When you came back from Europe last year, I went to Allahabad to ask you what lead you would give us. Usually, when I approached you in this way, your replies have been vague and non-committal. For instance, last year when you returned from Europe, you put me off by saying that you would consult Gandhiji and then let me know. When we met at Wardha after you had seen Gandhiji, you did not tell me any thing definite. Later on, you produced some resolutions before the Working Committee in which there was nothing new and there was no lead to the country.

The last Presidential election was followed by an acrimonious controversy in which many things were said – some for and some against me. In your utterances and statements every point was stretched against me. At a speech in Delhi you were reported to have said that you dislike that canvassing should have been done by or for me. I do not know what exactly was in your mind, but you were blissfully oblivious of the fact that my election appeal was made after Dr.Pattabhi’s appeared in the press (Dr. Pattabhi Sitaramaya contested against Subhas Chandra Bose for the Congress Presidential Elections of 1939 with Gandhi’s blessings. But still he lost the elections.) As for canvassing, you were, consciously or unconsciously, oblivious of the fact that there was much more canvassing on the other side and the fullest use was made of the machinery of the Congress Ministries in order to secure votes for Dr. Pattabhi. The other side had a regular organization (Gandhi Seva Sangh and All India Village Industries Association (A.I.V.I.A) ) which was immediately set in motion. Moreover, they had all the big guns and yourself against me, as well as the full weight of Mahatma Gandhi’s name and prestige – and the majority of the Provincial Congress Committees – was also in their hands. As against them, what did I have – a solitary individual? Do you know as I know from personal knowledge – that in many places canvassing was done not for Dr. Pattabhi, but for Gandhiji and Gandhism – though many people refused to be taken in by such disingenuous propaganda. Still, standing in a public meeting, you tried to run me down on what appear to be absolutely false grounds.

Then let me come to the resignations ( from the Congress Working Committee). Twelve members resigned. They wrote a straightforward letter – a decent letter – in which they made their position unequivocally clear. Considering my illness, they did not say one unkind word about me, though they could have criticized me adversely if they had wanted to. But your statement – how shall I describe it? I shall refrain from using strong language and simply say that it was unworthy of you. (I am told that you wanted your statement to be substantially embodied in the general letter of resignation, but that this was not agreed to.) Then your statement gave one the impression that you had resigned, as the other twelve members had done – but up till now, to the general public, your position remains a mystery. When a crisis comes, you often do not succeed in making up your mind one way or the other – with the result that to the public you appear as if you are riding two horses.

To come back to your statement of 22nd Feb. You have an idea that you are extremely logical and consistent in what you say or do. But other people are often puzzled and perplexed at the stand you take on different occasions. Take a few instances. In your statement of 22nd Feb you said that you were against my reelection and you gave certain reasons you mentioned in your statement of 26th Jan issued from Almora. You clearly shifted your ground. Then again I was told by some Bombay friends that you had told them previously that you had no objection to my standing, provided I stood as a candidate for the Left. In your Almora statement you concluded by saying that we should forget persons and remember only principles and our cause. It never struck you that you want us to forget persons, only when certain persons are concerned. When it is a cause of Subhas Bose standing for re-election you run down personalities and lionize principles etc. When it is a cause of Maulana Azad standing for re-elections, you do not hesitate to write a long panegyric. When it is a cause of Subhas Bose versus Sardar Patel and others, then Subhas Bose must first of all clear up the personal issue. When Sarat Bose complains of certain things at Tripuri ( viz. of the attitude and conduct of those who call themselves orthodox followers of Mahatma Gandhi), he is, according to you, coming down to personal questions, when he should be confining himself to principles and programmers. I confess that my poor brain is unable to follow your consistency.

Let me now come to the personal question, which in my case becomes so very important in your eyes. You alleged that in my statements I had wronged my colleagues. Evidently, you were not among them – and if I had made any allegation, it was against the others, so you were not speaking on your behalf, but as an advocate for the others. An advocate is usually more eloquent than his client. It will therefore surprise you to know that when I talked to Sardar Patel ( and Rajen Babu and Maulana) at Tripuri over this question he gave me the surprising news that his main grievance or allegation against me referred to the period prior to the Bardoli meeting of the Working Committee in January last. When I retorted that the general impression among the public was that the main grievance or allegation against me was in connection with my ‘election statements’, he said that that was an additional allegation. So, after all, your clients did not attach as much importance to the ‘aspersion affair’ as you did as their advocate. At Tripuri, since Sardar Patel and the others left for the A.I.C.C. meeting and did not return after the meeting although they had promised to do so, I could not pursue the mater further, with a view to finding out what exactly were the incidents prior to the Bardoli meeting of the Working Committee which they had referred to. But my brother Sarat had a talk with Sardar Patel on the subject and the later told him that his main grievance was about my attitude at the Delhi meeting of the A.I.C.C. in September 1938 when there was a walk-out of the Socialists. The allegation came as an utter surprise to both my brother and myself, but indecently it showed that in the minds of Sardar Patel and others, the ‘aspersion affair’ did not have the importance, which you lent it. As a matter of fact, when I was at Tripuri, several delegates (not my supporters, I may tell you) told me that the ‘aspersion affair’ had been practically forgotten, until your statements and utterances raised the controversy once again. And in this connection I may tell you that since the Prisedential election, you have done more to lower me in the estimation of the public than all the twelve ex-members of the Working Committee put together. Of course, if I am such a villain, it is not only your right but also your duty to expose me before the public. But perhaps it will strike you that the devil who has been re-elected President in spite of opposition of the biggest leaders including yourself , of Mahatma Gandhi and of seven or eight provincial governments, must have some saving grace. He must have rendered some service to the cause of the country during his Presidentship to be able to draw so many votes without any organization behind him and inspite of tremendous odds.

In your statement of 22nd Feb you said further, “I suggest to the Congress President that this was the first and the most essential point to be considered, but no attempt has so far been made to deal with it”. Before you penned these lines did it not strike you for once that in order to clear up this misunderstanding, it was necessary for me to meet Sardar Patel and the other members and that the time for doing so was the meeting of the Working Committee on the 22nd Feb? Or did you think that I avoided the meeting of the Working Committee? It is true that I did not discuss the ‘aspersion affair’ with Mahatma Gandhi on the 15th of February, though he mentioned it once. But then I was following your own dictum of attaching more importance to principles and programmes than to personal issues. Nevertheless, I may tell you that when Mahatma Gandhi told me that Sardar Patel and others would not cooperate with me on the same Committee, I told him that I would talk over the matters with them when we meet on the 22nd of Feb and try to secure their cooperation. You will perhaps, agree that the aspersions, if any, referred not to Mahatma Gandhi but to the members of the Working Committee and the matter had to be talked over with the later.

In the above statement you wanted me to define exactly in writing what I meant by my words Left and Right. I should have thought that you were the last person to ask such a question. You have forgotten the reports submitted by Acharya Kipalani and yourself to the All India Congress Committee at Haripura? Did you not in your report say that the Right had been trying to suppress the Left? If it is permissible for you to use the words Left and Right when necessary, is it not equally permissible for other people?

You have charged me further with not clarifying my policy in national and international affairs. I think I have a policy, whether that policy be right or wrong. In my short Presidential speech at Tripuri I gave an indication of it in the most unequivocal terms. In my humble opinion, considering the situation in India and abroad, the one problem – the one duty – before us is to force the issue of Swaraj with the British Government. Along with this we need a comprehensive plan for guiding the States’ people’s movement simultaneously throughout the country. I think I gave you a clear indication of my ideas even before when we meet at Shantiniketan and later at Anand Bhawan; What I have just written is at least a definite policy.

May I now ask you what your policy is? In a recent letter, you have referred to the resolution on National Demand passed by Tripuri Congress and you seem to think much of it. I am sorry that such a beautifully vague resolution, containing pious platitudes, does not appeal to me. It leads us nowhere. If we mean to fight the British Government for our Swaraj, and if we feel that the time is opportune, let us say so clearly and go ahead with our task. You have told me more than once that the idea of an ultimatum does not appeal to you. During the last twenty years Mahatma Gandhi has been repeatedly giving ultimatums to the British Government. It is only through such ultimatums and simultaneous preparation to fight if necessary that he has been able to get so much out of the British Government. If you really believe that the time has come for us to enforce our National Demand how else can you proceed, except through an ultimatum? The other day Mahatma Gandhi delivered an ultimatum over the Rajkot issue. Do you object to the idea of an ultimatum because I have been suggesting it? If so, why not say it clearly and with out ambiguity.

To sum up, I fail to understand what policy you have with regard to our internal politics. I remember to have read in one of your statements that in your view, Rajkot and Jaipur will over shadow every other political issue. I was astounded to read such a remark from such an eminent leader as yourself. How any other issue could eclipse the main issue of Swaraj passes my comprehension. Jaipur has a somewhat bigger area than Rajkot, but even the Jaipur issue is a fleabite when compared with our main struggle with the British Government. Moreover, we cannot forget that there are six hundred and odd states in India. If we follow the present piecemeal, tinkering and nibbling policy, suspending the popular struggle in every other state it will take us 250 years to obtain civil liberty and responsible government in the states. And after that we shall think of our Swaraj!

In international affairs, your policy is perhaps even more nebulous. I was astounded when you produced a resolution before the Working Committee some time ago seeking to make India an asylum for the Jews. You were mortified when the Working Committee (with probably Mahatma Gandhi’s approval) turned it down. Foreign policy is a realistic affair to be determined largely from the point of view of a nation’s self interest. Take Soviet Russia, for instance. With all her Communism in her internal politics, she never allows sentiment to dominate her foreign policy. That is why she did not hesitate to enter into a pact with French Imperialism when it suited her purpose. The Franco-Soviet Pact and the Czechoslovak – Soviet Pact are instances in point. Even today, Soviet Russia is anxious to enter into a pact with British Imperialism. Now, what is your foreign policy, pray? Forthy sentiments and pious platitudes do not make foreign policy. It is no use championing lost causes all the time and it is no use condemning countries like Germany and Italy on the one hand and on the other, giving a certificate of good conduct to British and French Imperialism.
For some time past I have been urging on every body concerned, including Mahatma Gandhi and yourself, that we must utilise the international situation to India’s advantage and, to that end, present the British Government with our National demand in the form of an ultimatum; but I could make no impression on you or on Mahatmaji; though a large section of Indian public approved of my stand and the Indian students in Great Britain sent me a largely signed document approving of my policy. Today when you must find fault with me for not appointing the Working Committee forthwith, despite the shackles of the Tripuri resolution, the international situation suddenly assumed exaggerated importance in your eyes. What has happened today in Europe, may I ask, which is unexpected? Did not every student of international politics know that there would be a crisis in Europe in Spring? Did I not refer to it again and again when I pressed for an ultimatum to the British Government?

Let me now take another portion of your statement. You say, “This working Committee has for the time being ceased to be and the President, as he probably wishes, has a free hand to frame and put forward his proposals before the Congress. In accordance with his desire, no meeting was held here even to transact routine business.” I wonder how you could be guilty of such half-truths – or shall I say untruths? Twelve members of the Working Committee suddenly and unexpectedly throw their resignation at my face and still you blame me and not them on supposed ground that I probably wished to have a free hand in framing the resolutions. Then again, when did I prevent you from transacting routine business? Even with regard to the main task of framing resolutions for the Congress, though I suggested postponement of the Working Committee till the Tripuri Congress, did I not ask Sardar Patel, nevertheless in my telegram to consult the other members and wire their opinion to me? If you have any doubt on this point, please have a look at my telegram to the Sardar. My telegram was:

Sardar Patel, Wardha.

“KINDLY SHOW MY TELEGRAM TO MAHATMAJI. REGRETFULLY FEEL WORKING COMMITTEE MUST BE POSTPONED TILL CONGRESS. PLEASE CONSULT COLLEAGUES AND WIRE OPINION – SUBHAS.”

Seven days after the Tripuri Congress was over you sent me a telegram to the effect that I was responsible for causing a stalemate in the affairs of the Congress. With all your sense of fairness, it never struck you that the Tripuri Congress when passing Pandit Pant’s resolution knew full well that I was seriously ill, that Mahatma Gandhi had not come to Tripuri and that it would be difficult for us to meet in the immediate future. It never struck you that the Congress itself was responsible for the stalemate by taking out of my hands in an unconstitutional and ultra vires manner the power of appointing the Working Committee. If the constitution has not been wantonly violated by Pandit Pant’s resolution then I would have appointed the Working Committee on the 13th March 1939. You commenced a public agitation against me only seven days after the Congress was over, though you knew quite well the condition of my health and your telegram to me appeared in the press even before it reached my hands. When for a full fortnight there was a stalemate in the affairs of the Congress prior to Tripuri, caused by the resignation of twelve members of the Working Committee, did you utter one word in protest? Did you offer me one word of sympathy? You say in one of your recent letters that you speak and act for yourself alone and should not be taken as representing anybody else. Unfortunately for us, it never strikes you that you appear to others in the role of an apologist for the Rightists. Take your last letter, dated the 26th March, for instance. You say therein, “I have today read your statement in the press, I fear that such argumentative statements will not help much.”

At a time when I am being unfairly attacked from several quarters – being hit below the belt, as they say – you do not utter one word of protest – you do not offer me one word of sympathy. But when I say some thing in self-defence, your reaction is: “Such argumentative statements do not help much.” Have you said the same thing of argumentative statements written by my political opponents? Perhaps you gloat over them.

Again in your statement of the 22nd February you said, “There is a tendency also for the local Congress disputes to be dealt with not in the usual routine way, but directly from the top, with the result that particular groups and parties are favoured and confusion increased and Congress work suffers…It pains me to see that in the very heart of our organization new methods are being introduced which can only lead to local conflicts spreading to higher planes.”

I was painfully surprised to read such an indictment when you had not cared to ascertain all the facts. The least that you could have done was to have asked me for the facts, as I knew them. I do not know what exactly you had in mind when you wrote this. A friend suggested that you were thinking of the affairs of the Delhi Provincial Congress Committee. It so, let me tell you quite plainly that what I did with regard to Delhi was the only right thing for me to do.

In this connection, let me tell you that in the habit of interfering from the top, no Congress President can beat you. Perhaps you have forgotten all that you did as a Congress President or perhaps it is difficult to look at one self objectively. On the 22nd of Feb you charged me with interfering from the top. Did you forget that on the 4th of Feb you had written me a letter in which you had charged me with being a non-assertive, passive President. You wrote, “In effect you have functioned more as a speaker that as a directing President.” Most objectionable was your charge that I was acting in a partisan manner and was favouring a particular party or group. Did you not owe it to the official head of the Congress organization (if not to me personally) to make a proper enquiry before hurling such a serious allegation at him in the public press?

If one takes the election controversy as a whole, one would have thought that after the contest was over, the whole episode would be forgotten, the hatchet would be buried and as happens after a boxing-bout, the boxers would smilingly shake hands. But in spite of the truth and non-violence this did not happen. The result was not taken in a sporting spirit, a grievance was nursed against me and the spirit of vendetta set to work. You took up cudgels on behalf of other members of the Working Committee and you had every right to do so. But did it never strike you that some thing could also be said on my behalf? Was there nothing wrong in the other members of the Working Committee meeting in my absence and behind my back and deciding to set up Dr. Pattabhi for the Presidentship? Was there nothing wrong in Sardar Patel and the others appealing to the Congress delegates, as members of the Working Committee, to support the candidature of Pattabhi? Was there nothing wrong in Sardar Patel in full use of the name and authority of Mahatma Gandhi for electioneering purposes? Was there nothing full to the country’s cause? Was there nothing wrong in making use of the Congress Ministers in different provinces for canvassing votes?

With regard to so called ‘aspersions,’ I have already said what I have to say, both in the press statement as well as in the remarks which I made before the Subjects Committee at Tripuri. But I would like to ask you one question. How have you forgotten that when Lord Lothian was touring India, he remarked publicly that all the Congress leaders did not agree with Pandit Nehru their attitude towards the Federal Scheme? What is the implication and significance of this remark?

You have complained of an atmosphere of mutual suspicion and lack of faith at the top in your statement of the 22nd Feb. May I tell you that till the Presidential election, there was far less suspicion and lack of faith among the members of the Working Committee in my regime than in yours? We never came to the point of resignation in consequence there of as according to yourself , you did more than once. The trouble so far as I am aware, started with my success at the election contest. If I had been defeated, then in all probability the public would have not heard of the “aspersion” affair.

You are in the habit of proclaiming that you stand by yourself and represent nobody else and that you are not attached to any party. Occasionally you say this in a manner as if you are either proud or happy because of it. At the same time, you call yourself a Socialist – some times, a full-blooded Socialist. How a Socialist can be an individualist as you regard yourself, beats me. The one is the anti-thesis of the other. How socialism can ever come into existence through individualism of your type is also an enigma to me. By bearing a non-party label one can be popular with all parties, but what is the value of it? If one believes in certain ideas and principles, one should strive to translate them into reality and that could be done only through a party or organization. I have not heard of Socialism being established in any country or progressing in that direction, except through a party. Even Mahatma Gandhi has his party.

There is another idea on which you often harp, regarding which I would like to say some thing – I mean the idea of National Unity. I am all for it as, I believe, the whole country is. But there is an obvious limitation. The unity that we strive for or maintain must be unity of action and not unity of inaction. Splits are not an evil under all circumstances. There are occasions when splits are necessary in the interest of progress. When the Social Democratic Party of Russia broke up into Bolsheviks and Mensheviks in 1903, Lenin heaved a sigh of relief. He was removed of the dead-weight of the Mensheviks and felt that the path of progress was after all thrown open. When in India the ‘Moderates’ isolated themselves from the congress, nobody of a progressive frame of mind regretted the split. Subsequently, when a large section of Congressmen withdrew from the Congress in 1920, the rest did not mourn their secession. Such splits were really aids to progress. Lately, we have been making a fetish of unity. There is a potential danger in this. It may be used as a cover for weakness, or as an excuse for effecting compromises, which are inherently anti-progressive. Take your own case. You were against the Gandhi-Irwin pact 1931 but you submitted to it on the plea of unity. Again you were against the acceptance of office in provinces-but when office acceptance was decided upon, you submitted to it perhaps on the same plea. Supposing for argument’s sake that somehow the majority in the Congress agreed to work the Federal Scheme, then the anti federationists, in spite of their strong principles, may be tempted by the self-same plea of unity to accept the Federal Scheme against the dictates of their political conscience. Unity in a revolutionary movement is not an end in itself but only a means. It is desirable only so long as it furthers progress. The moment it tends to hamper progress it becomes evil. What would you do, may I ask if the Congress by a majority resolved to accept the Federal Scheme? Would you abide by that decision or revolt against it?

Your letter of the 4th February from Allahabad is interesting as it is showing that you had not then hardened against me as you subsequently did. For instance, you said in that letter. “As I told you, your contested election has done some good and some harm.” Later on, you came to hold the view that my re-election was an unmixed evil. Then again, you wrote, “This future we have to view from the larger view point and not in terms of personalities. Obviously it is not good enough for any one of us to get into a huff because matters have not shaped as one wished them to. We have to give our best to the cause whatever happens.” It is clear that you had not come to attach the importance of the ‘aspersion’ affair, which you did there after. Not only that; as I have already said, the agitation over the ‘aspersion’ affair that was fomented subsequently was largely of your own making. In this connection, you may perhaps remember that when we met at Shantiniketan, I suggested to you that if in spite of our endeavour we failed to retain the cooperation of the other members of the Working Committee, we should not shirk the responsibility of running the Congress. You then agreed with me. Later on, owing to reasons, which I cannot comprehend, you went over, bodily as it were, to the other side. Of course, you have every right to do so, but then what about your Socialism and Leftism?

In the letter of 4th Feb you have alleged more than once that vital questions like Federation were not discussed during my Presidentship. It is a curious charge to make when you yourself were out of the country for nearly six months. Do you know that when there was a storm over Shri Bhulabhai Desai’s supposed speech in London, I suggested to the Working Committee that we should reiterate our resolution against Federation and also carry on an anti-Federation propaganda in the country and that my proposal was regarded as unnecessary? Do you know that when the Working Committee met subsequently in September in Delhi, it was at last considered necessary to have a resolution condemning Federation and that this resolution was adopted by the All India Congress Committee?

Another accusation you made in that letter was that I adopted an entirely passive attitude in the Working Committee and that in effect I functioned more as a Speaker than as a directing President. That was a rather unkind statement to make. Would it be wrong to say that unusually you monopolized most of the time of the Working Committee? If the Working Committee had another member as talkative as yourself, I do not think that we would ever have come to the end of our business. Besides your manners were such that you would almost usurp the functions of the President. I could, of course, have dealt with the situation by pulling you up, but that would have led to an open breach between us. To be brutally frank, you some times behaved in the Working Committee as a spoilt child and often lost your temper. Now, in spite of all of your ‘nerviness’ and jumpiness, what results did you achieve? You would generally hold forth for hours together and then succumb at the end. Sardar Patel and others had a clever technique for dealing with you. They would let you talk and talk and they would ultimately finish up by asking you to draft their resolution. Once you were allowed to draft the resolution, you would feel happy, no matter whose resolution it was. Rarely have I found you sticking to your point till the last.

Another strange charge against me is that A.I.C.C. office has deteriorated greatly during the past year. I do not know what you consider to be the functions of a President. In my view, he is much more than a glorified clerk or even a glorified Secretary. As a President you were in the habit of usurping the functions of the Secretary, but that is no reason why other Presidents should do the same thing. Apart from this my chief difficulty was that the A.I.C.C. office was situated at a distance and that the General Secretary was not a man of my choice. It would be no exaggeration to say that the General Secretary was not loyal to me in the sense that a Secretary ought to be loyal to his President.( I am purposely putting the case very mildly.) As a matter of fact, Kripalaniji was thrust on me against my will. You may perhaps remember that I tried my best to have a part of the A.I.C.C. office transferred to Calcutta so that I would be able to supervise its work properly. All of you set your face against it and now you turn round and blame me for the defects of the A.I.C.C. office! If the A.I.C.C. office has really deteriorated as you allege, it is the General Secretary who is responsible of it and not myself. All that you can charge me with is that during my Presidentship there was less interference with the work of the General Secretary and that the later, in actual practice, enjoyed larger powers than before. Consequently, if the A.I.C.C. office has really deteriorated, it is the General Secretary who is responsible for it and not myself.

I am surprised that without knowing the facts you have alleged that I did not do my best to prevent the enactment of the Bombay Trades Disputes Bill in its present form. In fact, you have lately developed the art of making accusations, some times publically, with out caring to ascertain facts, where I am concerned. If you desire to know what I did in this connection the best thing would be to ask Sardar Patel himself. The only thing that I did not do was to break with him on this issue. If that be an offence, I plead guilty to the charge. By the way, do you know that the Bombay C.S.P. lent its support to the Bill in its present form? And now, coming to yourself, may I ask what you did to prevent the enactment of this Bill? When you returned to Bombay, there was still time for you to act and I believe you were approached by a number of Trade Unionists to whom you gave some hopes. You were in a much better position than myself, because you can always influence Gandhiji much more than I can. If you had exerted yourself, you might have succeeded where I failed. Do you do so?

There is one matter regarding which you often have a fling at me – the idea of a Coalition Ministry. As a doctrinaire politician you have decided once for all that a Coalition Ministry is a Rightist move. Will you kindly do one thing before expressing a final verdict on this question? Will you tour the province of Assam for a fortnight and then come and tell me if the present Coalition Ministry has been a progressive or a reactionary institution? What is the use of your sitting in Allahabad and uttering words of wisdom, which have no relation to reality? When I went to Assam after the fall of Saadullah Ministry, I did not find one single Congressman who did not insist that there should be a Congress Coalition Ministry. The fact is that the province had been groaning under a reactionary Ministry. Things were going from bad to worse and corruption was daily on the increase. The entire Congress-minded public of Assam heaved a sigh of relief and recovered confidence and hope when the new ministry came into office. If you scrap the policy of office acceptance for the whole country, I shall welcome it, along with Congressmen in provinces like Assam and Bengal. But if the Congress Party accepts office in seven provinces, it is imperative that there should be coalition ministries in the rest. If only you knew the improvement that has taken place in Assam, in spite of the various obstacles and handicaps since the Coalition Ministry came into office, you would change you opinion completely.

Regarding Bengal, I am afraid you know practically nothing. During two years of your Presidentship you never cared to tour the province, though that province needed your attention much more than any other, in view of the terrible repression it had been through. Have you ever cared to know what has happened to the province ever since the Haq Ministry came into office? If you did, then you would not talk like a doctrinaire politician. You would then agree with me that if the province is to be saved, the Haq Ministry must go and we should have the best government under the present circumstances, namely, a Coalition Ministry. But while I say all this I must add that the proposal of a Coalition Ministry arises because the active struggle for Purna Swaraj has been suspended. Resume this struggle tomorrow and all talk of a Coalition Ministry will vanish into thin air.

I shall now refer to your telegram of the 20th March from Delhi. You said therein, “In view of international situation and critical national problems formation of Working Committee Office arrangements urgently necessary” etc. Any one can appreciate the necessity of the early formation of the Working Committee – but what struck me in your telegram was the utter lack of sympathy for my difficulties. You knew full well that if Pant’s resolution had not been moved and passed, the Working Committee would have been announced on the 13th March. When that resolution was passed, the Congress knew full well that I was seriously ill-that Mahatma Gandhi had not come to Tripuri and that it would be difficult for us to meet in the immediate future. I can understand that if a month had elapsed without the Working Committee being appointed, people would naturally feel restless. But the agitation was started exactly one week after the Tripuri Congress was over and once again-as in the case of the “aspersion” affair – it was you who started the campaign against me. Was it easy to form the Working Committee without meeting Mahatma Gandhi? How could I possibly meet Mahatmaji? And did you forget that last year the Working Committee met about six week after the Haripura Congress? Do you think that the agitation started by a certain section of the public and the press against me, after your telegram appeared in the press, was an altogether bonafide one? Was I consciously causing a stalemate in the affairs of the Congress by deliberately refraining from appointing the Working Committee? If the agitation against me was not altogether fair, did you not, as a public leader, feel called upon to put in a word on my behalf at a time when I was laid up in bed?

I have already refered to your accusation that the A.I.C.C. has deteriorated under my Presidentship. I shall add a word in that connection. Did it not strike you that besides damning the General Secretary, you were, while trying to damn me, damning the entire staff as well?

In your telegram, you have referred to ‘critical national problems’ for which you want the Working Committee to be formed at once – though, as you say, you do not desire to be on that Committee. What are these “critical national problems” pray? In a previous letter, you said that the most critical problem was the situation in Rajkot and Jaipur. Since Mahatmaji has been handling these matters, they are in a way outside the jurisdiction of the Working Committee and the A.I.C.C.

Then again in your telegram, you have referred to the international situation. I noticed in the press that after you have mentioned this, several persons who have no international sense at all, who have no desire to understand international affairs and who have no intention of using the international situation to India’s advantage – suddenly became concerned over the fate of Bohemia and Slovakia. Obviously it was a convenient stick to beat me with. Nothing has happened in Europe in the last two months, which has not been expected. What has happened in Czechoslovakia recently is but a sequel to the Munich pact. As a matter of fact, I have been telling Congress friends during the last six months, on the basis of information, which I had been getting from Europe, that there would be a crisis in Europe in Spring which would last till Summer. I have, therefore, been pressing for a dynamic move from our side – for an ultimatum to the British Government demanding Purna Swaraj. I remember that when I spoke to you about the international situation recently (at Shantiniketan or at Allahabad) and used it as an argument for submitting our National Demand to the British Government, your cold reply was that the international tension would continue for some years. Suddenly you seem to have grown enthusiastic about the international situation! But let me tell you that there is no sign of any intension on your part or on the part of the Gandhian group to utilize the international situation for our benefit. Your telegram also says that the international crisis demands an early meeting of the A.I.C.C. to what end? To pass a long worded resolution or no practical consequence? Or will you change your mind and tell the A.I.C.C. that we should now push on towards Purna Swaraj and present the British Government with our National Demand in the form of an ultimatum? No, I feel that either we should take international politics seriously and utilize the international situation for our benefit-or not talk about it at all. It is no use making a show, if we do not mean business.

I am told that when you were at Delhi you carried a message to Mahatmaji to the effect that he should pay a visit to Allahabad to meet Maulana Azad. This information may be quite wrong. But if it is not-did you also suggest him that he could pay a visit to Dhanbad as well? When my Secretary telephoned to you on the 24th March to contradict the press report that Mahatmaji could not come to Dhanbad because of Doctor’s prohibition, you did not show any desire that he should visit Dhanbad, though you were awfully anxious that I should announce the formation of the Working Committee in accordance with Gandhiji’s wishes. Over the telephone you said Dhanbad was not his programme. Was it so terribly difficult for you to persuade Mahatmaji to come to Dhanbad? Did you try? You may say that he had to go back to Delhi for the Rajkot affair. But he had already finished his interview with the Viceroy. And so far as interviewing Sir Maurice Gwyer was concerned, that was for Sardar Patel and not Mahatmaji.

Apropos of the Rajkot affair, I want to say a few words. You thought a lot of the terms of settlement that terminated Mahatmaji’s fast. There is no Indian who did not feel happy and relieved that Mahatmaji’s life was saved. But when one analysed the terms of settlement with the cold eye of logic, what did one find? In the first place, Sir Maurice Gwyer, who is a part and parcel of the Federal Scheme, was recognized as the umpire or arbitrator. Did that not amount to a tacit recognition of that scheme (Federal) itself? Secondly, Sir Maurice is neither our man nor an independent agent. He is a Government man-pure and simple. In any conflict with the British Government, if we accept a High Court Judge or a Sessions Judge as umpire or arbitrator, the British Government will very gladly agree to it. For instance, in the matter of State prisoners detained without trial, the Government always boasts that the relevant papers are placed before the High Court or Sessions Judges. But we never accept that as a satisfactory settlement. Why then has there been a departure in the case of Rajkot?

There is another point in this connection, which I cannot understand and on which you will be able to enlighten me. Mahatma Gandhi went to see the Viceroy and the interview took place duly. Why is he still waiting there? It is Sardar Patel who has to wait, in case Sir Maurice Gwyer wants him. Does it not indirectly enhance the prestige of the British Government, if Mahatmaji lingers on in Delhi after his interview with the Viceroy? You said in your letter of 24th March that Mahatmaji was completely fixed in Delhi for several days and could not leave at all. I should have thought that there are more important things for Gandhiji to do now than wait in Delhi. The drift, stalemate etc. of which you complain so much could be brought to an end in no time, if Mahatmaji exerted himself a bit. But on that point you are silent and all the blame is reserved for me.

In your letter of the 23rd March you said, ‘I found later some vague talk among other people that a meeting of the A.I.C.C. should be held. I do not know exactly who were thinking on these lines and what their objective was in holding the meeting, except insofar as it might be a further clarification of the situation.” News travels fast and far and I got the information that some M.L.A.s (Central) were trying to get a requisition signed by members of the A.I.C.C. for an early meeting of that body – as if I was avoiding calling a meeting of the A.I.C.C. and was deliberately causing a deadlock in the affairs of the Congress. Did you not hear any thing of this sort – either at Delhi or elsewhere? If so, do you think that such a move was fair and honorable?

In the same letter (of the 23rd March) you refer to the National Demand resolution and Sarat’s opposing it. As for Sarat’s attitude, he will probably be writing to you about it. But it is not correct to say that apart from his opposition, the resolution was passed unanimously. I have heard from several people that they opposed the resolution- not because there was any thing inherently wrong in it – but because it contained nothing of practical significance. It was like one of those innocuous resolutions which towards the end of every Congress are moved and seconded and passed either unanimously or nem .con.

Really, I fail to understand how you can enthuse so much over this resolution. What practical lead does it give?

In this connection I cannot help remarking that in recent years Congress resolutions are often to verbose and long worded. One should call them ‘Theses’ or ‘essays’ rather than ‘resolutions’. Formally our resolutions used to be brief, pertinent and practical. I am afraid that you have had a hand in giving this new shape and form to our resolutions into lengthy theses.

More than once you have referred in your letters to the ‘adventurist tendencies’ in the Congress of today. What exactly do you mean? It strikes me that you have in view certain individuals. Are you against new men and women coming into the Congress and getting prominence? Do you desire that the top leadership in Congress should be the close preserve of a few individuals? If my memory does not betray me, the Council of the U.P. Provincial Congress Committee once adopted a rule to the effect that in certain Congress organisations, the same individual should not continue as an office-bearer for more than three years. Eventually if this rule was to apply to subordinate organisations and in the higher bodies, the same individuals could continue in the same post for decades. Whatever you might say, we are, in a sense, all adventurers, for life is one long adventure. I should have thought that those who regard themselves as progressive would welcome fresh blood in all ranks of the Congress organisation.

There is no reason for you to think (here I am referring to your letter of the 24th March) that Sarat’s letter was written on my behalf. He has a personality of his own. He got Gandhiji’s telegram asking him to write, after he returned to Calcutta from here. If Gandhiji had not telegraphed in that way, I doubt that if he would have written at all. I must say, however, that there are certain things in his letter to Mahatmaji, which echo my feelings.

Regarding your letter to Sarat, I have a few observations to make. I must infer from your letter that what he wrote about the atmosphere etc. at Tripuri came as a surprise to you. This surprises me. Though I could not move about freely, I had sufficient reports from independent-sources about the morally sickening atmosphere of the place. How you could have moved about the place without sensing it and hearing about it, beats me.

Secondly, you have remarked that at Tripuri personal issues coloured the consideration of other issues. You are right. Only you did not add that though did not speak on the subject either in the Subjects Committee or in the open session of the Congress-you did more than any other individual to accentuate these personal issues and make them prominent in the public eye.

You have said in your letter to Sarat, “It was absurd for any one to say that Subhas’s illness was a fake and none of my colleagues hinted at this to my knowledge.” You must be completely jaundiced to be able to make such a remark when before and at Tripuri, a systematic campaign to that effect was carried on everywhere by my political opponents. This is an additional proof that for some time past you have become completely biased against me (see the beginning of this letter). I do not think that what Sarat has said about the atmosphere etc. at Tripuri is any exaggeration at all.

You have referred to some unsavory reports, which you heard at Tripuri. It is somewhat strange and unbecoming on your part that only such reports impress you to go against us. Let me give you a few examples. Do you know that Bengal is not the only province against which complaints were made regarding the issue of delegates’ tickets? Do you know that a similar complaint was made against Andhra Province? But you mention only Bengal. Again, do you know that when duplicate receipts were issued by Bengal Provincial Congress Committee (B.P.C.C.) office on the ground that the originals were lost, the B.P.C.C. office warned the A.I.C.C. office about the matter and asked the later to be careful while issuing delegates’ tickets? Do you care to enquire as to who was responsible for the error- the B.P.C.C. office or the A.I.C.C. office?

Further, you have referred to large sums being spent in bringing delegates. Don’t you know in which side are to be found the capitalists and moneyed people? Have you heard of lorry-loads of Punjab delegates being brought from Lahore? At whose instance were they brought? Perhaps Dr. Kitchlew could through light on this. A reputed lady Congress worker from Punjab who saw me here five days ago, said that they had been brought under Sardar Patel’s instructions. I do not know. But surely, you should have some sense of impartiality.

Regarding the role of the Congress Ministers at Tripuri, I have two remarks to make. I had requests from a large number of A.I.C.C. members to the effect that voting should be by ballot. On my asking why, they said that if they openly voted against the Congress Ministers they would get into trouble. What is the meaning of this? Secondly, I have the idea of ministers canvassing in this partisan way. No doubt they have constitutional right to do so-but the effect of it will be that in every province there will be splits in the Congress Parliamentary Party. How can the Ministers carry out their work if they do not have the undivided support of all Congress M.L.A’s and M.L.C.s in their respective provinces?

Don’t you agree that at the Tripuri Congress (including the Subjects Committee), the Old Guard played a passive role in the eyes of the public and that the Ministers dominated the scene? Was Sarat wrong when he made this remark?

It is adding insult to injury – as they say –for you to remark in your letter to Sarat that “ The Tripuri resolution envisaged cooperation between the Congress President and Gandhiji.”

You claim in the above letter that you labored to bring about cooperation among Congressmen at Tripuri and before. May I tell you the unpleasant fact that other people hold a different view? In their view, you cannot be absolved of the responsibility for the gulf that the Tripuri Congress created between Congressmen and Congress-men.

I should now invite you to clarify your policy and programme-not in vague generalities but in realistic details. I should also like to know what you are – Socialist or Leftist or Centralist or Rightist or Ganshiist or something else?

There are two admirable sentences in your letter to Sarat, “What pains me most is the overshadowing of all political issues by the personal equation. If there is to be conflict among Congressmen, I earnestly hope that it will be kept on a higher level and will be confined to matters of policy and Principle.” If only you had adhered to your dictum, what a difference it would have made to our Congress politics!

When you say that you do not understand what obstruction there was at Tripuri, I cannot help admiring your ‘naiveté’. The Tripuri Congress, in reality, passed only one resolution, viz. Pant’s resolution, and that resolution was charged with the spirit of pettiness and vindictiveness. The protagonists of truth and non-violence had told the world after the Presidential election that they would not obstruct the majority party and out of a spirit of non-obstruction they resigned their membership of the Working Committee. At Tripuri they did nothing but obstruct. They had right to do so-but why did they make professions which they belied in practice.

I shall refer to a few other things before I finish this unusually long letter.

You referred to the trouble of issue of tickets to Bengal delegates at Tripuri. The other day I read in the papers that at a public meeting in Calcutta, it was stated by a member of the A.I.C.C. that he had heard from some U.P. delegates that similar trouble had taken place with regard to U.P. also.

Don’t you think that the fundamental motive behind Pant’s resolution was to pit Mahatmaji against me? Do you consider such a move to be an honest one, when no breach had taken place between Mahatmaji and myself, at least from my side? If the Old Guard wanted to fight me, why did they not do so in a straightforward manner? Why did they bring Mahatma Gandhi in between us? It was a clever artifice no doubt, but the point is if such a move accords with Truth and Non-violence.

I have already asked you if you consider it fair on the part of Sardar Patel to declare that my re-election would be harmful to the country’s cause. You never said a word that he should withdraw such a remark-thereby indirectly supporting his allegation. Now I would like to ask you what you think of Mahatmaji’s remark to the effect that after all, I am not an enemy of the country. Do you think that such a remark was justified? If not, then did you put in a word on my behalf to Mahatmaji?

What do you think of the trick indulged in by some people by publishing in the daily press, while we were at Tripuri, that Pant’s resolution had the full support of Mahatmaji?

And now, what do you think of Pant’s resolution? There was a rumor at Tripuri that you were one of the authors of it. Is that a fact? Do you approve of this resolution, though you remained neutral at the time of voting? What is your interpretation of it? Was it, in your view, a motion of confidence?

I am sorry that my letter has become so long. It will no doubt tire your patience. But I would not avoid it-there were so many things to say.

Possibly, I shall have to write to you again or issue a press statement. There is an unconfirmed report that in some articles you have been adversely criticizing my Presidentship. When I see your articles I shall be in a position to say some thing on the subject and to compare our work – particularly how far you have advanced the cause of Leftism in two years and I in one year.

If I have used harsh language or hurt your feelings at any place, kindly pardon me. You yourself say that there is nothing like frankness and I have tried to be frank – perhaps brutally frank.

I am progressing steadily, though slowly. Hope you are all right.

Yours affectionately,
Subhas “”””””

Suddenly Indians are wondering what hit them. They were comfortable with Bush but now this so called new Messiah of world Barack Hussein Obama, a black man to boot is asking India to do unthinkable things. Please read the New York Times article. It is very cleverly written. It asks India not to enhance its arms build up as it will lead to arms race with Pakistan while its arms merchants are at present in India selling their wares the F18 Super Hornet and F16 in Bangalore (Indians must understand these fighter planes throw flowers on Pakistan!!!). USA has found that it can influence India’s policy through its supporters in Politics, Industry,media and now they have learnt to infiltrate the Foreign office Bureaucracy and may be soon in Indian Armed forces and US can influence in a way that Indians can be fooled to sacrifice their NATIONAL INTEREST with verbose garbage.They have to be told that they are the Biggest democracy and their knees go limp(more than a fair maiden’s). When a rider comes that they are home to biggest Muslim population and are SECULAR they just go bonkers. So Indian democracy has no meaning for Obama is sending shivers through the spine of our politicians and seminarists who were comfortable with Bush.

Barack Obama in Moscow on 7 July said:

America cannot and should not 
seek to impose any system of government on any other country, nor would we 
presume to choose which party or individual should run a country ... State 
sovereignty must be a cornerstone of international order. Just as all
 states should have the right to choose their leaders, states must have the 
right to borders that are secure, and to their own foreign policies.

Hillary Clinton in Washington on 15 July explained further:

Our approach to 
foreign policy must reflect the world as it is, not as it used to be. It 
does not make sense to adapt a 19th century concert of powers, or a 20th 
century balance of power strategy ... Smart power translates into specific 
policy approaches in five areas. First, we intend to update and create
 vehicles for co-operation with our partners. Second, we will pursue
 principled engagement with those who disagree with us. Third, we will 
elevate development as a core pillar of American power. Fourth, we will
 integrate civilian and military action in conflict areas. And fifth, we
 will leverage key sources of American power, including our economic
 strength and the power of our example ... The architecture of cooperation
 we seek to build will advance all these goals, using our power not to 
dominate or divide but to solve problems.


The new US approach to the world is being shaped with Its 
pillars may be described as follows: 
the “concert of powers” of the 19th century and the “balance of power” of
 the 20th century are no longer acceptable in global politics. The
 establishment of “spheres of influence” of some major power at the expense
 of other states is also not to be tolerated.

The 21st century should 
become a century of “multi-partnerships” for the solution of global 
problems. Every country capable of transformation in line with the 
realities and needs of the 21st century is a potential partner.
The US will end “democratisation at gunpoint” - the responsibility for the
 promotion of democratic values rests with the leadership and population of
 any given country. States are sovereign in domestic and foreign
 policy and their path of development.
 The political systems of Individual states must be built on consensus and compromise.
 There is no more division into “our sons of bitches” and “not our sons of
 bitches.” All states are equal, free to make their own decisions but
 responsible for their own actions.
Well this perfectly matches the wishes of rulers of Pakistan and China.Democracy,human rights are just dirty words which will be used against weak nations like India,Myanmar,SriLanka but not against China,Pakistan or that biggest Democracies of Middleast Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

The Chinese government attaches great importance to the dialogue between China and the U.S. on enhancing energy, climate change and environment cooperation,” the state-run Chinese news agency Xinhua quoted State Councilor Dai Bingguo as saying. “Despite differences between our two countries in the basic national conditions, stage of development, historical responsibilities and our respective capacities, there exist conditions, common will, the necessity and broad basis for enhancing China-U.S. dialogue and cooperation on these areas.” China’s recent evaluation that the United States is overextended with wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, coupled with a perceived U.S. weakness in the wake of the financial crisis, could imbue Chinese policy makers with the confidence to be more assertive on the international stage in ways that may be consistent with American interests.From one Single hyper power to one super power with multiple great powers is what Chinese perceive.They are happy to be equated with Russia now but will give grudging recognition to South Africa and Brazil but not to India. They want re hyphenation of Pakistan with India immediately. Obama will summon Manmohan just like he summons Zardari,Karzai,Aso.Ofcourse Obama does not even summon Erdogan or Hugo Chavez!

1. China is a one party government. So also is USA where Obama’s democrats are ruling. India is a rainbow of rulers even withing UPA.
2. In China party bosses pick Politicians who rule. Ditto with USA. In India the role of party bosses is slowly eroding in Congress,BJP
3. In China Judges are appointed by Political bosses. Ditto with USA. In India the politicians have no say in appointment of Higher judiciary. In fact the the judges of India are even immune to declaration of assets which Indian Politicians have to do before their election.
4. Chinese Government Statistics are manipulated. USA does the same as the case of recent bubble bursts in Fanny Mae,Freddie Mac,AIG,GM shows. Indian statistics are much more
reliable in comparison.Sathyam may be an aberration.
5. Chinese communists are corrupt. So also US politicians. so also Indians
6. Chinese manipulate commodity prices by pumping money. USA is doing the same and is the major reason for speculation in commodity prices. Indians are pumping money into pockets of government salaried class and farmers by writing off loans.

Chinese are now the biggest buyers of gold surpassing Indians.
Call to take responsibility for one’s own actions is seen by Pakistan as early withdrawal symptom of USA from Afghanistan.Its F16s are bombing tribal areas in the name of hunting Taliban and killing women and children fits easily with Reaper drone attacks in wazirstan. Chinese have also killed nearly 190 Uighur and have arrested 1000 for ensuring stability. The photo above shows a Chinese engineer working feverishly to broaden the realigned KARAKORAM HIGHWAY, But Indians action in Kashmir or Manipur are human rights violations.

Why Indians are muzzled to support Gillani (who is backed by ISI)while a Zardari, who is much more friendly to India was given a dressing down in full public view at G8/G20 dialogue.

Zardari may be is on his wayout with NRO being resurrected by the Chief Justice of Pakistan at the prodding of USA.What changed in between the two summits that we are supporting an ISI backed man instead of a friend?

THINKING INDIANS MUST PONDER ABOUT THIS CHANGE IN US POLICY as well as India’s rulers to suit this US POLICY.

It was about 10 years back when I first started learning the basics of email; when one day I got a chat message from a stranger. I responded out of curiosity. That person thought I was some sort of councilor due to my advocating mental health issues.

He said he is a gay person and that his parents have fixed marriage with a girl and he wanted to know my view on the matter. He was able to tell me how when he was a young boy of 10 or 11, he was seduced and sodomized by a friend of his father and he has never confided it to anyone.

As he grew He has to learn karate to regain his manhood. He also had to seduce some boys and sodomise them to regain his scarred manhood. Throughout he felt guilty but he continued and started believing he is born gay. He was afraid of marriage to a woman and that he will not able to live a normal life.

He was also emotionally entangled with a male. I somehow convinced him that his perversion is not something natural but a reaction to his childhood abuse. He married and soon he was blessed with a daughter and he said the joy of fatherhood is the greatest blessing he had.

I asked him whether he felt the urge to seduce the boys again. He said he felt it but then he also suddenly felt the same with other unmarried girls. It is the same old human urge of conquest. But his feelings for that special male person still lingers but then he knows that he is slowly learning to love his wife while loving his daughter is natural and easy.

The decriminalization of Sec 377 has raised some questions. Why this criminal action is suddenly overturned by Delhi High court? A law of the land can be only changed by the parliament and we find here two judges of high court of a small state suddenly coming out with a new law of their own.

This has set a bad precedent in that any judge can call a law as bad even if it is in force for centuries. As our Parliament of India is either sleeping or in hibernation the two so called learned judges have taken on themselves to judge an issue which is prohibited by Christian and Islamic, Sikh holy texts. Even Baba Ramdev has opposed this decriminalisation.

Who are Gays and lesbians and where do we find them in India.

1.Normally we find them in cities amongst child hood sex abuse victims.

2.Among clergy of Catholic Priesthood, Jain Munies, Hindu priesthood, Buddhist monks etc which demand CELIBACY.

3.Prisoners in jail where there is forced celibacy.

4.Foreigners Pedophiles.

In foreign countries this is practised covertly mostly in Afghanistan,Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries while it is legalised in USA and some western countries.In Pakistan the Taliban Mullah who trains child suicide bombers almost always rapes the boys so that they are forced to aspire for heaven out of shame by suicide bombing.

The Delhi High court also has put in place another dichotomy in the law which it has created by making the age of consent for “Penile non vaginal sex” as 18 years. The IPC still stands as age of consent for “penile vaginal sex” as 16!!!. A woman can give consent for sex at 16 while a male boy can give consent for gay sex only at 18! Of course age of consent for a married woman is 15!

Who is driving this law change? Though the first group is vocally active, there is an unseen hand which seem to be at work. The UPA government even had a sitting of three Ministers involving Health,Law,home to decide on this matter.They never showed the same alacrity with regard to nearly 198 laws which are pending in the parliament sub committees which are crying for attention especially the archaic Indian Lunacy act of 1912(1987 Mental health law is same as old one in that it even claims Mental illness is CURABLE!).

“Consenting Adults’ doing an act which is prohibited in law in private has not been punished in any court of law in India. I know some child getting sodomized being punished. But I do not KNOW a single case in which gay sex between consenting adults being charged and punished in a court of law. for example even adultery is between consenting adults and is cited mostly as an evidence but not for prosecution when an aggrieved wife or husband brings up the case for divorce. Then why the hurry for decriminalizing this act of gay sex. who are behind it?

My view is those male rapists who seduce and sodomize young boys in high society are the motivating force behind this along with influential Pedophiles of west. Male Rape is a crime which is almost never reported due to the psyche of male whose manhood also gets demolished by the act of sodomy. A weaker sex can always report it if she can overcome the stigma associated with it as she is always overpowered by a tougher male.

In male rape the raped boy finds his psyche is also destroyed along with his physical scar. So the powerful Gays who seduce young boys used media to highlight the protest by Jamaat-e-Islam-Hind as one of Muslim theocracy while as per ancient Khajuraho sculptures Hindus practiced homo sexuality and so they are LIBERAL. Of course this 377 is a section created during British times and so the liberal opinion must support the change of this archaic law and so the argument goes. Does this have anything to do with prohibition of ragging? Ragging is actually male rapes in most of the south Indian professional colleges.

This law could not be complete without permission for GAY MARRIAGE and as such soon it will have this clamour by the jilted gay boys. When Delhi High court decriminalized the homosexual behavior it has raised some fundamental issues in our society. Section 377 of the IPC reads — “Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal shall be punished with [imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. Penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal intercourse necessary to the offence described in this section”.

Let the above section remain as decriminalization of the above behavior will damage our social fabric. Let this sexual behaviour between” consenting adults’ remain behind closed doors as adultery is.
Sex is for procreation anything else is perversion as the bees, birds, animals teach us.

Recently 46 Indian students have returned from Australia wasting lakhs of rupees and a year to their parents who wanted to have their children live instead of chasing utopia. I have few friends and relatives who live there and have studied there.Some of their views are below.What is worrying is Pakistani ISI supporting Racism of Australia.

Lynn a white Australian lady wrote—-

“”Yes....I can vouch for the fact that there is still a racist element in Australia. However, I am in two minds about the cause of recent attacks on Indians. I rather think that the main reason Indians are attacked is because the Indians who come here are not for the most part, aggressive people, and so are considered a “soft touch” (i.e. easy targets) for thugs who attack not only Indians but white Australians as well (we have a terrible problem with late night attacks on all groups of young people in the CBD at the moment).

Basically, these thugs are simply opportunistic thieves or drunks who become aggressive. And yes...some are racists as well, but this seems to be secondary to their main agenda, i.e. to rob people. To put the extent of the racist element into perspective: when the notoriously racist Pauline Hanson first ran for parliament, she secured only 27% of the vote in her home state of Queensland, the most conservative, right-wing state in Australia. However, the existence of racism at any level is, of course, totally unacceptable.

I should add that the thugs in question are of varying ethnic descent...it’s not solely a “white Australian” problem. Indeed, a couple of weeks ago I had a young Indian student who was working for a power company call to try to persuade us to change power companies. He became very belligerent when I wouldn’t consider even reading the literature he brought with him...because I am satisfied with my existing billing company.

However, he’s the only aggressive Indian I have encountered here. But I can honestly say that I have never seen an Indian prostitute during the seven years I’ve lived in Melbourne, nor have I ever experienced problems with Indian or Muslim taxi drivers in the CBD....they have always behaved in a gentlemanly manner, unlike one Greek driver who kept demanding my phone number, making me feel very uncomfortable.

Barbara is quite correct, re: the need for foreign students in this country. And I believe that if we are to continue to attract both foreign students and skilled migrants, then we have a duty to ensure that they are safe. And please rest assured that the authorities will continue to work towards this in Melbourne....the most ethnically-diverse and liveable city in Australia.”””

Kind regards,
Lynne.
———————————————————-
From: barbarathyabali whose 4 sons are studying there
Hello Dear Captain,

This is all a big joke on the international market.Without legal 900,000 Asian students, Australian $ will go with the wind!!!!!!!!!!!Another un accounted 999,000 Asian students all round Australia doing odd one month , three months and six months diploma courses just to be in Australia and gain the PR status on the long run, is being encouraged by whom????????????????

Racialism is the name of the game, and its a shame to deny this , here are two Australians who can tell you more, One an original Ozie: Mrs Lynne Hadley from Melbourne prowse@hotmail.com and here is an Indian born , Anglo Ozie called Mark Suares from Bangalore: marksuares@hotmail.com if you need many more Australians who can vouch that racialism is a problem in Australia then I can forward you more email.

On the whole, Australia is a fine country, and the government has to do something to stop this growth of racialism fast, or they will be sorry when the AUD $ stops or drops soon enough, with our Asian students backing out and returning to India to do their higher studies in due course of time.

Bye and God Bless, don’t forget to pray for the safety of our Indian students who are still there and have invested a great deal to get there and to remain there till date.

Barbara

bjsamuhanand wrote—

Hi all,

The following article appeared in a Pakistani Army supported website and also posted in UPI news site.
This could not be posted without collusion between Pakistan and Australian governments.

As friends having children studying at Australia or studied at Australia or relocated permanently in Australia, i will be thankful if what has appeared below is truthful? If not which part of it is lie? Even if what the report says is true, can Australians be justified in Attacking Indian students?
I like to have your opinion.
Thanks.

Do Australians hate Indians? by Moin ansari (UPI)

New York, NY, United States, June 04 — Many Australians say it takes two to tango. The Aussies believe that the carping in the Indian media is exaggerated and counterproductive. Australians react to the 80,000 (what they call) “smelly” Indians on campuses with “dot busting.”

Indian students are ubiquitous on Australian campuses, but they have not assimilated into the Australian way of life. On many occasions, they have violated their visa status and have started to permeate the landscape around the campuses in search of menial jobs. No less than 80,000 students on a few dozen campuses makes them highly visible.

In a slowing economy, there is a growing tide of anti-Indian feeling among the Aussies. Many Australians feel that complaints by Indian students are exaggerated and hide the real truth, which usually stems from domestic disputes, lewd behaviour, drunkenness or theft of property. The Australian police do not accept the Indian claim that racism is involved. Some of the female Indian “students” have been caught as prostitutes, and there is the general perception that many of the Indian students sell drugs in Australia. Some Australians have accused the Indians of using black magic for seduction purposes. Australian students also accuse Indians of cheating on exams and whispering answers in Hindi and other languages not understood by Australians.

A portion of the Australian population feels that they are being overwhelmed by India. Many Aussies accuse Indians of forcing their Indian culture onto campuses by celebrating their hundreds of festivals and cooking their foods in inappropriate places like hallways and TV lounges.

Sydney’s beaches are full of the drunk Indian students ogling and harassing the women. The Australians also accuse Indians of gender bias and mistreating female instructors. One of the “attacked” Indian males was soliciting sex for money. Being gay in India is frowned upon. Many gay Indian students visit the seedy parts of town seeking gay activity. Not knowing the Australian culture, sometimes they end up in the wrong part of town and end up in trouble.

Many Indian students do not own cars, so they walk on streets in the wee hours of the morning, something totally alien to Australian culture. They are sometimes mistaken for drug dealers or thieves. Many Australians are armed. There have been cases when the Indians tried to steal property and were caught up in vigilante justice.

The complaints against Indians stem from the living habits of the students. Hard up for cash, most of them cram together in small apartments where subletting from one student to another is the norm. Unlike most other Asian students, Indian students live in off-campus dilapidated apartments. One major source of complaint is the cooking habits of the Indians. The use of “hing” is unique to Indians. Not only does “hing” smell up the entire apartment complex, but when mixed with various other spices, the smell permanently camps out in the furniture and clothing.

Australia has about 400,000 foreign students. Malaysians, Sri Lankans, Bangladeshis and Pakistanis either live in the dorms or in apartments. Unlike the Indians, most of them also enjoy Australian foods. They do not face similar complaints. In a recent poll, most Australians had a negative view of the students from India whom they found obnoxious and very aggressive.

This sort of diplomatic aggressiveness will boomerang. Already there are signs that Australians are tired of the carping. Privately, Aussies are seething at the attitude of many Indian students. Being “in the wrong place at the wrong time,” with Australia being the wrong place, is often used as a euphemism for “Indian, go home.”

Australians complain that the Indians never take baths and smell of sweat and spices, leaving their aroma everywhere indoors. Unlike other Asians, many Indians are very fond of loitering in front of their apartment complexes with loud music, blaring the latest out of Bollywood. Another unique feature which puts them at odds with the Australians is the fact that most of the Indian students, living away from family restrictions, are very fond of drinking. Australians think this invites trouble for them.

“Dot buster” was a term invented in New Jersey in the ’80s. It has now become a derisive term used for Indians in Australia. In England, all Indians became “Pakis”, and in the USA they were call “elephant jocks” as well as “Smelly Niggers.” One dot buster said, “Nothing worse than a smelly drunk Indian trying to entice Australian women.”

The Indians do not have much of a choice than to study overseas. Apart from a few institutions, most Indian universities are overcrowded and do not offer either the instructional facilities or the curriculum needed in the modern world. Many religious institutions in India have opened science and technology institutes, but the main thrust of their education remains Ram Raj.”””

Non Proliferation Agenda of Obama

The re-hyphenation has began. The US media which is a policy arm of that nation has got into the act. The link shows the policy that they are going to follow.

Why India should be wary of the new Obama administration? When this new American administration believes that what everything did by Bush is wrong, then we in India have a problem. It believes that Indo/US nuke deal is wrong. It believes democracy promotion by Bush was wrong. By giving dollars to Pakistan this administration believes, it will not only help in defining Indian nukes as well as Pakistan’s.

Lots of scare stories are being bandied about Pakistan becoming a failed state etc. The Non resident Pakistanis along with PML(Q) leaders are getting into the act of “we in Pakistan will sign the NPT and remove our nukes if India does the same”. They are killing their own citizens and even increasing the body count for the sake of American dollars while the actual Taliban go scot free to Waziristan. If nearly 20 Lakh people get out of harms way and become IDPs then there is something wrong with the policy of Pakistani government.

The very same citizens were living comfortably (with all the so called floggings, burning of schools etc.) under whatever dispensation before. Now they are running away from their own army! The lower level ORs are not comfortable about this fight at all just like Lal Masjid operation. The ruling elite of Pakistan is desperate to keep their nukes but for that they want to raise their own bogeyman which is India. The new administration of Obama is comfortable with this as they are ideologically aligned with Chinese hegemony in the subcontinent.

At last in the new UPA government, the US administration has its own men in Majority in the cabinet. But they cannot see how cleverly Musharraf used US aid to gain second strike capability for its nation and Muslim Umma. India can expect a chorus of articles like the one below from SARAS and other sources with wink from ISI and CIA.

INDIA: NUCLEAR-CHEMICAL-BIOLOGICAL THEFTS OR SMUGGLING
Saman Malik
5/19/2009

The international media remains toujours preoccupied with fears of NCB-material thefts from Pakistan’s installations. There are some feeble voices, like that of US Congressman Ed Markey who, nevertheless, occasionally expresses concern at fragile security of India’s WMD materials and technology. Markey considers that India’s installations are very porous and offer scope for theft, and by corollary, proliferation.

Concern about India is corroborated by her historical record. Let us have a bird’s-eye view of a few incidents. Four containers of phosphorous penta - sulphide were detained by Sri-Lankan authorities at Colombo Port, en-route Bombay to Israel (1994). These containers contained ingredients for manufacture of a deadly nerve gas. In 1989, India publicly confirmed that Yellowcake was being smuggled from Jaduguda Uranium mines in the Singhbhum region of southern Bihar to Nepal. Yellowcakes are manufactured from Uranium powder that could be converted into radiological-dispersal devices, commonly known as dirty bombs. The notorious smuggler, Maheshwar Deo Singh was caught by Indian police and 1.8 kg of Uranium was recovered from his possession in 1989. In the Uranium market of Kathmandu, one kg of Jaduguda Uranium costs Rs 1 crore. On being interrogated, Deo confessed that his network of couriers have been carrying on the `businesss’ for the past several years. He disclosed that a courier gets the minimum of Indian Rs 25,000 for successfully carrying a consignment from Jaduguda to various dumping centres in Bihar and West Bengal. From there the inter-country `dealers’ smuggled Uranium to Katmandu.

In 1990/1991, two shiploads, containing Nuclear Biological and Chemical (NBC) materials from India were on their way to Syria, but the vessels were called back. However, later in 1992, India succeeded to deliver such consignments to Syria. India supplied thiodyglycol and some other chemicals to Iran in 1992. Again in 1993, the United Phosphorous Ltd of India supplied 30 tonnes of trimethyl – phosphate to Iran. During November- December 1993, India made an abortive attempt to ship chemicals to Iraq through Jordan. The shipment embarked from Madras Port. The information about this shipment was received by American Government, which protested to Jordan and the ship was turned back. In 1994, four containers of phosphorous penta – sulphide were detained by Sri-Lankan authorities at Colombo Port, en-route Bombay to Israel. The consignment contained ingredients for manufacturing a deadly nerve gas.

Three persons, with eight kilograms of Uranium were arrested by India’s Central Bureau of Investigation in Tamil Nadu in July 1998. The stolen material contained six kilograms of natural Uranium. The contraband was sent to Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research for analysis. It confirmed that the recovered material contained Uranium 235 and 238. On 31 July 1998, two engineers were arrested by police. They were carrying 2.31 kilograms of Uranium from. From the samples, 1.40 percent and 2.20 percent of enriched uranium was extracted, confirming that the recovered Uranium was neither an ore, nor a depleted compound. Mumbai Police seized 8.3 kilograms of uranium, confirmed by Bhaba Atomic Research Centre to be radioactive, on May 1, 2000.
In 1994, a shipment of beryllium and other material worth over US $ 24 million, useful for making an H-bomb, was caught in Vilnius. This catch confirmed the late 1980s CIA assessment that India was trying to develop a Hydrogen bomb.

Let us quote a few more incidents. An Indian national, Sitaram Rai Mahadevan, having Canadian citizenship and permanently residing in the USA, was arrested in October 2003 for sending blueprints of specialized nuclear valves to North Korea. Twenty-five kilograms of radioactive uranium were recovered from smugglers on November 5, 2000, and fifty-seven pounds of uranium on November 7, 2000. On 13 Nov 2000, three uranium rods were recovered from smugglers, according to an IAEA report. On August 27, 2001 West Bengal police arrested two men with more than 200 grams of semi-processed uranium. Radioactive Cobalt-60 rods were stolen from the Tata Steel factory in Jamshedpur on August 15, 2003. Seven hundred and fifty kilograms of Uranium was stolen during transportation from Jadugora Uranium Mines (Bihar) to Hyderabad in January 1999.
Delhi based M/S NEC Engineers Private Limited shipped 10 consignments of prohibited material, worth $ 791,343, to Iraq between September 1998 and February 2001.

The exports included titanium vessels, spherical aluminum powder, titanium centrifugal pumps and industrial cells with platinum anodes that can be used in the manufacture of rocket propellant. Protech Consultant Private Limited supplied NBC-weapons-related material to Iraq as well as Iran. This shipment violated USA-imposed sanctions on NEC Engineers and Protech Consultant Private Limited of India.

Taiwanese customs authorities recovered 1,000 tons of Aluminum Oxide from a North Korean container ship in August 2003. The Aluminum Oxide found aboard the ship had been manufactured in India. The substance when mixed with other materials could be used for making shells. Twenty-nine Titanium Alloy Rings, worth Indian Rs 22.50 lakh, used in rocket engine were stolen from the highly-guarded Liquid Propulsion Systems Centre in Bangalore (February 6-12, 2004). Two persons, Khurshid and Aslam, were arrested by Bareilly Police with 254 grams of weapon-grade Uranium.
That‘s not all.

Akhtar Hussain Qutbuddin Ahmed, an Indian businessman working in Dubai was deported on 12 June 2004, on charges of trying to sell India’s nuclear secrets to various diplomatic missions. He was accused of offering nuclear secrets which he had acquired from his brother who was working as a senior scientist at Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC). He was interrogated by police and security agencies for over 40 hours and later handed over to India, on arrival he was arrested at Mumbai airport.

An Indian national Sitaram Rai Mahadevan, having Canadian citizenship and permanently residing in USA, was arrested in October 2003 for allegedly sending blueprints of specialized valves, a critical part for nuclear plants to North Korea. On 30 September 2004, US State Department announced imposition of sanctions against two Indian nuclear scientists; Dr C Surrender and Dr. Y S R Prasad for transferring unconventional weapons and missile technology to Iran.

On 23 March 2007 US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) arrested two Indian citizens Parthasarathy Sudarshan and Mythili Gopal in South Carolina, USA. They were involved in smuggling to India US-made electronic components for use in missile-guidance system.
The above incidents are only tip of the iceberg. Indians even advertised on websites dual-use (nuclear) equipment. It is unfortunate that the world community seldom shifts its focus, away from Pakistan, to India.

The covert arm of CIA can even cause a major/minor explosion or sabotage some Indian reactors so that they can prove that Indian nukes are not safe enough just like Pakistan’s.Even they can encourage the ISI to carry out a 26/11 type of operation against one of those coastal reactors. A loss of few thousand Indian lives for the sake of elimination of Indian nukes is a cold blooded option for the new Obama administration about which Indian security establishment must be continuously on guard.

The Pakistanis are telling Obama that

1.We have killed 10,000 fellow Muslim Palestinians in Jordan for the sake of the King Hussein who was your asset.

2.We have trained and sent our Army along with Taliban to fight the Russians which resulted in the destruction of Soviet Union.

3.We have given you access to China through Kissinger.

4.For the sake of one mistake by a section of alquaeda in Afghanistan during 9/11(which a section of our Army believes to be a Jewish operation), the US has allowed the Taliban to be defeated and Northern alliance to take over .

We have paid for that mistake enough and your 15 billion dollars for the recent operation we are doing for you is just peanuts.We want Kashmir and also Siachen and also a regime which is pliable in Afghanistan. We want Heketmayer in place of Karzai if Mullah Omar could not be accommodated. Saudies are with us in these demands as can be seen their connivance in Benazir killing.
Pakistan’s greatest gambit is that it will sign the NPT/CBDT once India signs it because Pakistan knows that India will never sign it.Obama is so obsessed with placating Muslim nations that he even bowed before Dictator Saudi King, a thing never done by any President of America.

The two bows of Obama (click to view you tube)
The American lobby with its Big business Indian clients has ensured before the election that Ms.Sonia Gandhi will not have an option of selecting the Prime Minister of India. The Nehru/Gandhi family always did have this option from the time of independence. But today it has to succumb to the selection of ManMohan singh who is from Rajya Sabha.

The Hindutva forces were actually helping this section of Indian national congress and weakening the hold of Ms.Sonia Gandhi as they feel she is of foreign origin.The patriotism of Indians is mainly according to the faith of the Indians according to them. A myopic view.Now they have started pointing their arrows at Rahul and Priyanka Vadhra by using some obscure citizenship laws.

This American lobby can even use our Defence forces for their ends is well known as they have used them in Pakistan,Middleast,Japan etc etc.Our forces can be subverted in the guise of Seminars and foreign jaunts like any other Indian civil bureaucrat must have opened their eyes during the joint Military exercises.The top brass in any third world country falls for the view “Defense brass must have a say in making of foreign policy of a country” just like in Pakistan, Philippines, Thailand etc etc

Indian civil society must be on guard against various machinations of Hyper powers. It is not only USA but Soviet Union, China, UK, France have a vested interest in not allowing any new entrant into Permanent Five of the Security council as can be seen in their ganging up against North Korea, Iran, Pakistan and India except Israel which has kept its deterrence in ambiguity. The entry pass to P5 is of course are the nukes.