Twenty-first Century India

The USA seems to be slowly becoming more and more ready to acknowledge the fact that Pakistan is the centre of the global Islamic terror network. India and post-Taliban Afghanistan have been protesting against Pakistani terrorism for several decades and years respectively.

One would hope that the Civilized World would act unitedly to wipe out the grave threat of regressive uncivilized Radical Islamic Medievalism before it destroys Civilization Humanity and Rationality worldwide.

The reason Islam has spread so far and wide (all over West and Central Asia, and vast parts of South Asia) in a mere thousand years, in an age when information travelled slowly and unreliably by word of mouth and people travelling across continents took several years to get to their destinations, was because of the uncivilized brutality of the methods followed by Radical Islam.

The religion grew out of uncultured Arab Bedouins -- people who had never built even a mud hut, never drawn even a cave painting, never had the slightest inclination to find out the first thing about science or mathematics, in spite of having been in contact with advanced Civilizations in Persia, Europe, and India that had made astronomical progress in all these areas -- architecture, art, science, mathematics, politics, philosophy, theology, economics -- and more.

As people get civilized, they become more peace-loving, and become less like animals in the jungle -- ruthless, cruel, violent, ferocious, blood-thirty, immoral -- and develop higher human values, like honesty, respect for diversity of form, belief, and opinion, and more trust in reason and less in violence for resolving disputes and disagreements.

When the civilized people (Parsis, Hindus, Buddhists, and Christians) of Persia, India, Central Asia, etc saw the onrush of the Allah-crazy blood-thirsty Radical Islamic mass-murderers like Timur, Nadir Shah, Muhammad Ghori, Mahmood of Ghazni, Babur, Aurangzeb, etc, they simply reacted like civilized people have always reacted to people who don't agree with them: by assuming that the new interlopers shared the same fundamental human values they held, and concluding that differences could be resolved through dialogue, compromise, and reasonable agreements.

Thus the Hindu rulers of India placated Allah-crazy blood-thirsty Radical Islamic invaders like Nadir Shah, Ghori, Timur, and Ghazni with diamonds, gold and pearls, assuming that when they had enough riches themselves they would get civilized, settle down and start doing useful work, produce useful stuff, and engage in trade to earn the gold and diamonds they wanted, rather than coming in to rob and kill honest and hard-working Indians every few years.

Sometimes, when the invaders came in to attack, lost, and got captured, they took full advantage of the knowledge they had of the rules followed by the civilized people of India. For instance, Prithviraj Chauhan, the last Hindu king of India, utterly routed the forces of Radical Islamic invader Muhammad Ghori in 1191 in the bloody First Battle of Tarain.

Muhammad Ghori saw that there was no way he could escape, so he threw away his weapons and was taken prisoner.

Ghori knew that the ancient Indian rules of war that governed the conduct of the highly civilized Kshatriya warriors of India decreed that as an unarmed combatant he could not be killed. So, after having invaded India and lost the war, he could still save his own life by simply throwing away his weapons.

Ghori also knew that unlike the practices of Islamic fighters (who, in full accordance of the teachings of the Koran, either killed or blinded castrated and enslaved -- to serve in harems as eunuchs -- captured male prisoners, and tortured and raped female prisoners into submission to serve as slaves in the same harems) the Hindus of India would simply exile him.

And he had guessed right. Prithviraj Chauhan -- magnanimous at heart to a unarmed captured enemy in full accordance of the Kshatriya rules of war -- simply released Ghori and forbade him to stay within the borders of India.

One year later, Ghori returned with vastly larger numbers of Allah-crazy blood-thirsty Radical Islamic soldiers in 1192. In the Second Battle of Tarain, Prithviraj lost.

Ghori showed Prithviraj none of the kindness magnanimity and generosity he had himself received one year earlier in the Court of Prithviraj in Delhi. Prithviraj Chauhan was killed, along with his entire family, and everybody who was suspected of the slightest loyalty to him. The streets of Delhi remained covered with blood for months and months.

In retrospect, Prithviraj should have reserved his civilized conduct only for others who were civilized themselves -- other Kshatriya or civilized Persian challengers, perhaps. Muhammad Ghori should have been killed in 1191.

Civilized human beings deserve to be treated like civilized human beings. Uncivilized animals should be treated like uncivilized animals. Prithviraj Chauhan's biggest mistake was to give an animal like Ghori the treatment meant for civilized Kshatriya warriors who shared his high moral values.

All two-legged creatures are not the same. Everybody who looks human isn't human.

Different creatures need to be treated differently. For Civilization's own survival, it must be ready to mete out equally uncivilized and brutal treatment to its uncivilized and brutal enemies.

Anyway, back to the story of Ghori.

The Hindus and Buddhists of India were shell-shocked at the unreasonable and horrifying inhumanity, cruelty, animal-like low-ness, and mindless violence the invaders seemed to revel in.

And once again, they made the same mistake of thinking that if enough time went by, the uncivilized invaders would start to behave better -- more like civilized human beings, and less like uncivilized animals.

Almost eight hundred years have passed since then.

The Civilized World, especially the Muslim-vote-banking UPA government of India, today is making the same mistake Prithviraj Chauhan made in 1191.

Radical Islam needs to be wiped out from this planet, at all costs, as soon as possible. The uncivilized followers of Radical Islam cannot be defeated by playing by the soft humane kind generous and civilized rules of our Civilization.

Radical Islamists must be fought with the same ferocity, cruelty, and animal brutality with which they are fighting us.

That is why UPA committed a towering crime against the people of India by getting rid of the POTA anti-terror law.

And that is why USA is making a historic blunder by not aggressively fighting the horrifyingly uncivilized Radical Islamists who are alive and well in Pakistan and continue daily to plot newer and more infamous crimes against Humanity and Civilization worldwide.

The Times of India reports:

Pakistan hub of Al-Qaida web: US
[12 Jan, 2007 1156hrs ISTIANS]

WASHINGTON: US has identified Pakistan as the hub of a worldwide web of Al-Qaida connections while asserting that India, which has been a major target for jihadist due to insurgency in Kashmir, would remain a reliable ally against global terrorism.

Describing Al-Qaida as a terrorist organisation that poses the greatest threat to US interests, US intelligence chief John Negroponte told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on Thursday that its leaders are holed up in a secure hideout in Pakistan, from which they are revitalising their bruised but resilient network.

Pakistan has apparently been singled out for the first time in a Congressional testimony as the centre of the network accused of the Sep 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington that killed 3,000 people.

"They are cultivating stronger operational connections and relationships that radiate outward from their leaders' secure hideout in Pakistan to affiliates throughout the Middle East, North Africa and Europe," he said in his annual assessment of worldwide threats against the US and its interests.

In contrast, India's role in South Asia came in for fulsome praise from Negroponte, who became director of national intelligence in April 2005 and will soon leave to become deputy secretary of state.

"We expect that India's growing confidence on the world stage as a result of its sustained high rates of economic growth will make New Delhi a more effective partner for the US but also a more formidable interlocutor in areas of disagreement, particularly in the World Trade Organisation (WTO)," he said.

"New Delhi seeks to play a role in fostering democracy in the region, especially in Nepal and Bangladesh, and will continue to be a reliable ally against global terrorism, given the fact that India is a major target for Jihadist (people who fight in defence of Islam) in part because of the insurgency in Kashmir," Negroponte added.

Noting that the three-year peace process between India and Pakistan has lessened tensions in the region and both sides appear committed to improving the bilateral relationship, he said: "New Delhi's threshold for responding militarily to terrorist attacks has apparently increased since the two countries last approached the brink of war in 2002.

"Nonetheless, New Delhi's concerns about Pakistan's tolerance, at a minimum, of terrorist attacks on Indian soil remains a dominant theme in relations, and risk derailing rapprochement."

An attack on a high-profile target might lead New Delhi to take action to curtail militant capabilities in Pakistan or Pakistan-administered Kashmir and punish Islamabad for its continued support to Pakistan-based militants, he said adding, "We remain concerned about the potential that such a conflict could escalate."

The Mumbai train bombings last year disrupted but ultimately did not derail the composite dialogue and a mechanism for exchanging information on terrorist attacks has been established, Negroponte noted.

"Yet, the prospect of renewed tensions between the two remains despite these improved relations, and we are mindful that Pakistan was a major source of nuclear proliferation until our efforts disrupted A.Q. Khan's network," he said.

Although both New Delhi and Islamabad are fielding a more mature strategic nuclear capability, they do not appear to be engaged in a Cold War-style arms race based on a quest for numerical superiority, he said.

For its part, Pakistan is a frontline partner in the war on terror. Nevertheless, it remains a major source of Islamic extremism and the home for some top terrorist leaders, Negroponte said.

Meanwhile, democracy has not been fully restored since the army took over power in 1999. With elections expected later this year, Pervez Musharraf continues to be criticised for remaining both the president and chief of army staff, but there are no political leaders inside the country able to challenge his continued leadership, he said.

Musharraf's secular opponents are in disarray, and the main Islamic parties continue to suffer from internal divisions and an inability to expand their support base, said Negroponte.




BBC reports:

Al-Qaeda 'rebuilding' in Pakistan

Bin Laden and al-Zawahiri, left, are on the top of the wanted list

The head of US spying operations says the leaders of al-Qaeda have found a secure hideout in Pakistan from where they are rebuilding their strength.

National Intelligence Director John Negroponte said al-Qaeda was strengthening its ties across the Middle East, North Africa and Europe.

Pakistan rejected the comments, which are the most specific on the issue yet.

This week, the US carried out air strikes in Somalia targeting what it believed to be members of al-Qaeda.

The BBC's James Westhead in Washington says that until now the US has not been so specific about where it believes al-Qaeda's leaders are hiding.

Such a claim will be embarrassing for Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, who Mr Negroponte described as a key partner in America's war on terror, our correspondent says.

Afghanistan has welcomed the comments. President Hamid Karzai's chief-of-staff, Jawed Ludin, told the BBC that Afghanistan had long maintained that the Islamic militants operated from within Pakistan, and that Mr Negroponte's statement was refreshing in its honesty.

'Secure hide-out'

Mr Negroponte told a Senate committee that al-Qaeda was still the militant organisation that "poses the greatest threat to US interests".

"They are cultivating stronger operational connections and relationships that radiate outward from their leaders' secure hideout in Pakistan to affiliates throughout the Middle East, North Africa and Europe," he said.

We have captured or killed numerous senior al-Qaeda operatives, but al-Qaeda's core elements are resilient John Negroponte Is Pakistan helping Al-Qaeda?

"We have captured or killed numerous senior al-Qaeda operatives, but al-Qaeda's core elements are resilient. They continue to plot attacks against our homeland and other targets with the objective of inflicting mass casualties," Mr Negroponte added.

He did not say where in Pakistan the group's leadership was hiding, or refer to its chief, Osama Bin Laden, or his second-in-command, Ayman al-Zawahiri, who are wanted for masterminding the 11 September attacks on Washington and New York.

New job

But the unusually forthright statement by Mr Negroponte appears to be the first time the US has publicly singled out Pakistan, one of its key allies, as the current home of al-Qaeda's high command.

Previously, officials had spoken more vaguely about the group having bases in the mountainous border area between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Mr Negroponte is soon to take up a new role at the state department

"Pakistan is our partner in the war on terror and has captured several al-Qaeda leaders. However, it is also a major source of Islamic extremism," Mr Negroponte said in written testimony submitted to the Senate committee.

Pakistani foreign office spokeswoman Tasneem Aslam rejected the comments.

"Pakistan does not provide a secure hideout to al-Qaeda or any terrorist group," she said. "In fact the only country that has been instrumental in breaking the back of al-Qaeda is Pakistan."

Pakistani Interior Minister Aftab Sherpao also played down Mr Negroponte's comments as "too general", saying that Pakistan responded to specific information about al-Qaeda members and claiming that the movement was totally marginalised.

Difficult border

The head of the US Defence Intelligence Agency, Lt-Gen Michael Maples, said Pakistan's border with Afghanistan remained a haven for al-Qaeda and other militants.

The tribal areas on the border are thought to be where al-Qaeda leader Bin Laden and his deputy Zawahiri could be hiding.

Pakistan and Afghanistan share a 1,400-mile (2,250km) mountainous border which is extremely difficult to patrol.

Taleban and al-Qaeda fighters are thought to be operating on both sides.

The two countries regularly exchange charge and counter-charge over who is to blame for the violence.

Recently, Pakistan reiterated its intention to fence and mine sections of the troubled border.

Kabul particularly opposes the idea of mining stretches of the frontier, saying it will endanger civilian lives.

An Islamist insurgency spearheaded by the resurgent Taleban militia is at its strongest in the southern Afghan provinces bordering Pakistan.

Mr Negroponte took charge of the 16 US intelligence agencies in April 2005, but is shortly due to move to the state department where he will become Condoleezza Rice's deputy.

President George W Bush last week named retired Navy Vice Admiral Michael McConnell as the new US national intelligence director.

Mr Negroponte made the claims about Pakistan in his annual assessment of worldwide threats against the US and its interests.

BBC reports:

Pakistan and Afghan army soldiers arrest a Taleban fighter

The head of US spying operations says Pakistan is the base from where Al-Qaeda is rebuilding itself. So what is to be made of the Pakistan government's avowed war on militancy?

There can be no two opinions about the fact that Pakistan's decision to support America's war on terror in September 2001 was taken under duress.

This gave rise to a duality in the Pakistani strategy that has defied clear definition and encouraged al-Qaeda and Taleban elements as much as it has curbed them.

Almost overnight, the country faced the prospect of rolling back the entire operational and logistical apparatus it had put in place in the Pakistan-Afghanistan border region over the preceding decades.

The role of the Pakistani intelligence agency, ISI, in organising Afghan resistance against the Soviet troops during 1980s is well established.

The country's diplomatic, material and strategic support to the Taleban regime that took the stage in 1990s is well documented by the US state institutions and intelligence services.

Military supplies

To get this huge apparatus and the mindset attached to move in reverse gear has been a slow process, exposing Islamabad to allegations of complicity with the Taleban as early as 2002.

Media reports from that period quote incidents in which the Pakistani intelligence operatives were accused of protecting al-Qaeda and Taliban fugitives or sneaking into Afghanistan with military supplies for the Taleban fighters.

Pakistan was also finding it hard to roll back the Islamist insurgency in Indian-administered Kashmir, which was an extension of Pakistani strategy in Afghanistan and served the crucial objective of keeping the disputed valley instable.

President Bush tries to calm differences between the Pakistani and Afghan leaders

Top officials in the American administration, aware of the fact that Pakistan was crucial to their engagement in Afghanistan, started making concessions to Islamabad.

They seemed to believe that as long as Pakistan remained resolute, they could afford to be slow in Afghanistan.

This gave the Pakistani government the crucial breathing space needed to handle the issue more tactfully.

But analysts point out that this also renewed the urge among some sections of the establishment to desist from actions that could harm the country's interests in Afghanistan.

Sanctuary

The American shift to the war in Iraq further eased the pressure.

The year 2004 can be considered as a watershed.

During that year, Pakistan started toning down its activity on the Line of Control in Kashmir. This came to a complete halt following the October 2005 earthquake in Kashmir that killed nearly 80,000 people.

In the tribal areas bordering Afghanistan, Pakistan started the year with hyped up military operations but ended it with peace deals in South Waziristan, leaving the district virtually in the hands of pro-Taleban militants known for harbouring Arab as well as Uzbek and Chechen fugitives.

Western observers believe that a similar deal with the militants in the neighbouring North Waziristan district turned a large swathe of Pakistani territory into an extended sanctuary for al-Qaeda and Taleban militants.

Taleban fighters in southern Afghanistan

To a lesser extent, Islamabad's writ has also withered in the tribal districts north of Waziristan, notably in the northern-most district of Bajaur.

In Pakistan's Balochistan province, while the military has focused on a Baloch nationalist insurgency, a sense of urgency in securing the ethnic Pashtun belt along the Afghan border has been lacking.

Western, as well as some Pakistani media, have described this belt as the largest sanctuary for al-Qaeda and Taleban elements in Pakistan.

On the Kashmir front, the presence of a strong state, India, forced the militants into a tight spot, reducing their room for manoeuvre.

In Afghanistan, the writ of the state runs thin, and the presence of foreign troops helps the militants reinforce their ranks endlessly.

Nato air strikes, or ground actions, that have caused civilian casualties have also fuelled recruitment to the militants by angry survivors of the attacks.

Unsavoury options

Last year has been particularly difficult, with close to 200 Western troops killed in action. Casualties among the Afghan government forces and civilians ran into thousands.

And many fear that the forthcoming spring offensive by Taleban may be even worse, causing unacceptably large Western casualties.

British soldier participating in NATO operation in Afghanistan

Analysts believe that this will leave the Western coalition forces with two options, both highly unsavoury.

They either carpet-bomb Pakistan's tribal areas and create a political turmoil in the region, or quit Afghanistan, as some of Pakistan's influential former intelligence operatives have been predicting.

But there is a third option as well.

If Nato and Pakistani officials are to be believed, Thursday's attack that killed a large number of Taleban fighters in the Barmal area of Afghanistan was the result of intelligence sharing and operational cooperation between the two sides.

From Nato's viewpoint, this is a tangible piece of action from Pakistan which has hitherto defined its role in the fight against terrorism in terms of the al-Qaeda operatives arrested or the number of troops deployed in the tribal areas.

If such pro-active cooperation extends over the next year, Taleban and al-Qaeda activities may be curtailed.

But if preparations for the forthcoming election in Pakistan divert the attention of the rulers away from its border region with Afghanistan, the al-Qaeda and Taleban are certain to do more damage next spring than they did last year.