In April 2016, two English news channels “broke” news on the same day about the two most heinous crimes against Hindus and the Hindu nation perpetrated by Sonia Gandhi’s puppet regimes UPA I and II; not that this was any deep and dark secret. This article provides an overview of the twin conspiracies and revisits what I wrote in 2008 immediately after 26/11, and what I wrote in 2011 when the NSA-Home Minister duo had successfully implemented the twin plot. Revisiting what I wrote in 2008 and 2011 is necessary because they were written at the very time these events were unfolding using news as reported in newspapers and television news channels. When I connected the dots of what was not reported as “news” and what I gathered from my talks with several persons, what took shape looked like the most heinous crime against Hindus on Hindu bhumi (soil) since vivisection of the Hindu nation in 1947.
MK Narayanan and P Chidambaram actively presided over the most evil conspiracy in post-independent Bharat – one, to undermine and compromise national security by passing off a Muslim female suicide bomber as a sweet young thing who with three of her young and innocent companion-jihadis was gunned down by the Crime Branch of the Gujarat Police in what UPA I labelled was a “fake encounter”; and two, to label Hindus as terrorists on their own bhumi. Notwithstanding the cancerous public discourse of secularists and anti-Hindu intellectual establishment which refers to this timeless Hindu civilization as “idea of India” – this is Hindu bhumi. The carefully plotted and successfully implemented twin conspiracies became a desperate necessity for Sonia Gandhi and the Generic Church in the context of several scandals plaguing the Congress party and its political allies in the government, and the rise and rise of Narendra Modi and consequently the BJP.
This Rasputinesque plot was hatched to entangle Narendra Modi and Amit Shah in the “fake encounter” legal mesh and also to incapacitate Hindu society and any future BJP government from dealing appropriately with domestic or foreign Muslim terrorism against the nation. The conspiracy to label Hindus as terrorists and coin a new phrase “saffron terror” was to force Hindus to stop using the phrase ‘Muslim terrorists’ or ‘Islamic terrorism’ and worse, to introduce the patently false and unconvincing axiom in national security thesis – terrorism has no religion. And all this was successfully accomplished by Sonia Gandhi’s two principal henchmen MK Narayanan and P Chidambaram by railroading/sabotaging/misdirecting the investigation into the June 15, 2004 Ishrat Jahan killing, Malegaon blasts 2006 and 2008, and the 18 February, 2007 Samjhauta Express train blasts which killed 68 persons besides injuring many others. Herein is the answer to P Chidambaram’s “purpose served” cryptic response in August 2010 when asked by journalists why he coined the phrase “saffron terror”.
MK Narayanan became National Security Adviser in 2005 replacing JN Dixit who died suddenly and in the most mysterious circumstances. MK Narayanan was a permanent fixture in the Rajiv Gandhi household and like all Nehru family minions transferred his loyalty after Rajiv Gandhi died, to Sonia Gandhi for which he was handsomely rewarded when Sonia Gandhi made him the NSA. Hindu nationalists have never doubted that Sonia Gandhi had an agenda of her own when she married the eldest son of the Bharatiya Prime Minister. After all, her mother-in-law’s climb to the top of the power ladder in the Congress party had more to do with whose daughter she was than any past reputation for political astuteness or even experience; and Sonia Gandhi knew an opportunity when she saw one. MK Narayanan and P Chidambaram with deliberate intent hatched and executed the plot in alignment with Sonia Gandhi’s agenda for the country; senior ministers in UPA I and II who remained mute witnesses to this anti-Hindu plot were no less guilty than the evil duo, of what is now unfolding to be treason against the nation; but most tragic of all was B Raman’s endorsement of P Chidambaram’s “saffron terror” slur. While B Raman bemoaned the fact that the investigations into the Malegaon blast case of 2006 and 2008 and the Samjhauta blasts case was botched up by the CBI and NIA, and regretted that the central investigating agencies had two different yardsticks by which they dealt with Muslim and Hindu suspects in the case, it is nevertheless a fact that Raman did add strength to Sonia Gandhi’s “saffron terror” plot.
When investigations into the above mentioned acts of terror had been fouled and tainted beyond repair, P Chidambaram let loose the phrase “saffron terror” in August 2010 at a meeting of Police Chiefs in New Delhi, secure in the knowledge that important sections even among Hindu organizations had been persuaded to believe that Hindus had turned terrorists. P Chidambaram banked on the fact that Hindus could be terrorised, victimised and frightened into silence and there was little danger of any spontaneous or organized protest by Hindus against being labelled terrorists, exactly as was the case when Jayalalithaa arrested Pujya Kanchi Acharyas in 2004 and almost destroyed the matham with no Hindu resistance and therefore with total impunity. Unlike Muslims and Christians who can let loose violence on the streets and/or bring international pressure to bear upon the country’s government, Bharat’s Hindus have little political sense and no sense of the power of their sheer numbers to respond to any slight, insult, humiliation and threat. MK Narayanan and P Chidambaram banked on Hindu cowardice and powerlessness and used Hemant Karkare and Col. Purohit to execute their dirty tricks. Soon after P Chidambaram injected the “saffron terror” venom into the nation’s public discourse, B Raman wrote thus in the January 17 issue of Indian Defence Review:
“I am proud to have sounded the wake-up call as early as in 2006 to the dangers of some angry members of the Hindu community taking to reprisal acts of terrorism against our Muslims if the Government does not take note of the perceptions in sections of the Hindu community that it has been soft towards the jihadi terrorists. I have been writing and speaking on this from time to time since then”. (Indian Defence Review, 17 January, 2011)
B Raman not only gave credence to P Chidambaram’s “saffron terror” pink elephant, Raman in fact designed and prepared the blueprint for “Hindu terror” when earlier he described ULFA as Hindu terrorists.
B Raman like Karkare saw the truth behind the evil plot only after the damage had been done and like Karkare carried the burden of his belated realization to the funeral pyre, a sad, disillusioned man whose scrupulous honesty and fearlessness to speak the truth proved to be his Achilles heel. If the Army, Military Intelligence, MATS, CBI, NIA, and above all else, B Raman’s integrity and fidelity to truth was just so much collateral damage, then Swami Aseemanand, Sadhvi Pragya and Col. Purohit were the evil duo’s prey.
Overview of unfolding evil
- JN Dixit who was made National Security Adviser in 2004, died in January 2005
- MK Narayanan, who was made Special Adviser on Internal Security to the Prime Minister in May 2004, replaced Dixit as NSA; with MK Narayanan was born the Dirty Tricks Department of Bharat’s intelligence services; what is yet to be established is whether the CIA Dirty Tricks Department had any hand in creating the Bharatiya variant.
- If Sonia Gandhi had an agenda, then MK Narayanan was the first and most powerful instrument of the agenda. Narayanan began to move the pieces step by measured step almost immediately after he took charge as NSA.
- The three agencies involved in the plot to create “Hindu terror” were the CBI, Maharashtra ATS and NIA while the Army and Military Intelligence (MI) were dragged into the evil plot, knowingly or unknowingly, which fact is yet to be placed in the public domain.
- The Maharashtra ATS (MATS) was formed in 2004 and KP Raghuvanshi was the first chief of MATS; Raghuvanshi was previously with the CBI.
- In January 2008, NSA MK Narayanan hand-picked Hemant Karkare to head MATS replacing Raghuvanshi.
- MATS and Mumbai police, before Karkare replaced Raghuvanshi, arrested several members of SIMI for the Malegaon blasts of 2006 while the Indian Mujahideen had proudly admitted that it was responsible for the Samjhauta Express train blasts; but after MK Narayanan took over as NSA and after P Chidambaram took over as Home Minister and after Hemant Karkare replaced Raghuvanshi as Chief of MATS, investigations into the same acts of terror was transformed into a witch-hunt for Hindu terrorists.
- Immediately after MK Narayanan took over as NSA and totally out of the blue, a new Hindu organization, Abhinav Bharat was formed in Pune in 2006 and Himani Savarkar, niece of Nathuram Godse who is also married to the nephew of Vinayak Savarkar, is elected President ofAbhinav Bharat
- Lt. Col. Shrikant Purohit, a serving officer in Military Intelligence (which fact was almost certainly kept secret) is one of the founders of Abhinav Bharat and is made Permanent Trustee of Abhinav Bharat Trust; which fact alone points all fingers in the direction of Sonia Gandhi and MK Narayanan.
- How can a serving officer in Military Intelligence be associated with founding a new Hindu organization explicitly intended to give Hindus military training as counter-measure to increasing jihadi terror attacks against Hindus and Hindu temples? A Hindu organization which bore the name of Veer Savarkar’s Abhinav Bharat and whose first President was not only Nathuram Godse’s niece but was also related by marriage to Savarkar.
- Lt. Col. Purohit almost certainly was tasked to float this new Hindu organization which was intended to be the launching pad for Purohit to establish contact with the RSS eventually to infiltrate the RSS and other parivar organizations.
- The NSA or the army or MI or MATS or NIA or all of them convinced the RSS that they had credible intelligence reports that members of Abhinav Bharat had plotted to kill Mohan Bhagwat and other important RSS pracharaks. This was done to pre-empt and silence any protest when Sonia Gandhi and her henchmen would arrest Hindu religious leaders and members of Hindu organizations for the Samjhauta Express blasts and for Malegaon blasts of 2006 and 2008.
- The ploy worked exceedingly well. When MK Narayanan’s dirty tricks department dragged the Army and MI into the sordid conspiracy and arrested Sadhvi Pragya, Swami Aseemanand and Lt. Col. Purohit, violating all due processes of law, the RSS was mute; as was the BJP and the VHP; exactly as calculated by the Congress government and exactly as they were silenced earlier when catastrophe befell the Kanchi mutt in 2004.
- Lt. Col Purohit was used by Sonia Gandhi’s puppet regime to do two things – convince the most powerful Hindu organization, the RSS that it was the target of Hindu terrorists and simultaneously spread the canard that Swami Aseemanand, an RSS man was responsible for the Samjhauta train blasts. In one brilliant stroke the RSS was both victim of Hindu terror and Hindu terrorist outfit.
- And close on the heels of arresting “Hindu terrorists” in October 2008, totally unexpectedly, 26/11 happened in November 2008; Hemant Karkare died in the line of duty.
- Shivraj Patil resigned owning moral responsibility for the Mumbai terror attack and inexplicably, P Chidambaram, not Pranab Mukherjee, was made Home Minister.
- Speaking soon after taking charge as Home Minister, Chidambaram said he will put in the same principles and work ethic that he had used in the Finance Ministry.
- Knowing what we do now about P Chidambaram’s unscrupulous and downright treasonous decision to rewrite the entire Ishrat Jahan story where with a sleight of hand Chidambaram made Modi and Amit Shah the villains and Ishrat and her co-jihadis innocent victims, and knowing what we do now about the sordid corruption in the Agusta Westland VVIP chopper case, if P Chidambaram by his own admission has said he will put in place the same principles and work ethic in the Home Ministry as in the Finance Ministry, Modi sarkar must now investigate P Chidambaram’s tenure as Finance Minister.
- In December 2008 the NIA was constituted by an act of Parliament and the newly formed NIA conveniently had P Chidambaram for boss.
- If MK Narayanan presided over inventing Hindu terrorists, P Chidambaram presided over letting off known jihadis and jihadi outfits for terror acts and pinning them all on Narayanan’s newly minted Hindu terrorists.
- Having accomplished what they were tasked to do – create and arrest Hindu terrorists the Indian Intelligence Dirty Tricks Department had no more use for the fiction that Mohan Bhagwat and other senior RSS leaders were the specific targets of Hindu terrorists belonging to Abhinav Bharat, and they allowed the fiction to melt in the darkness. The RSS in its letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh dated February 8, 2011 raises this issue in no uncertain terms: “But despite being in possession of such explosive, critical and specific evidence of the plot the MATS took a “conscious decision” and told the Bombay High Court in July 2010 that, as there was nothing ‘”specific”, “no further action is required to be taken” on the alleged plot to kill the RSS leaders, “except to wait for the outcome of the pending trial”.
I rest my case.
What I wrote in 2008
Hemant Karkare is dead allegedly while bravely fighting the terrorists and so we may never know the truth. But we can connect the dots, and the picture it makes causes grave disquiet. Some say he died of bullets to the chest, some say to the neck, some say bullet proof vests are useless against AK 47s and Kalashnikovs while others say Karkare had removed his bullet proof vest and was killed when he was seated in his car. Long before the Mumbai terror attack, I had expressed the view to two of my friends that the thrust of the investigations into the Malegaon blasts is not to find the accused guilty but to weaken any future BJP government’s measures to deal with jihad, jihadis and religious conversion undertaken by Islam and the Church and to question the government’s motives. Whoever master-minded the investigations and was directing the ATS did not want any change in the public discourse on terror or on the issue of the basis of nationhood. The entire investigation had the following fall-out –
- Bring disrepute to stringent laws like POTA by using a state law like the MCOCA against innocent Hindus to demonstrate cynically and contemptuously to the RSS and the BJP that we have shown you how a law can be misused.
- Bring disrepute to narco-analysis by forcing Hindus to discredit the method because Hindus perceived it as being used against Hindus to arrest them allegedly on the basis of what they ‘confessed’ under the influence of psychotropic drugs.
- Bring army intelligence agencies (Lt. Col. Purohit) into disrepute so that any action resulting from army intelligence against jihadis and jihad-sponsoring outfits and nations can be laid at the door of ‘Hindu extremists’ in the army.
- The resultant disrepute is that the Bharatiya Army is communalised and anti-Muslim by nature.
- Label Hindu sadhus and sanyasis as terrorists so that any resistance from Hindu society to jihad and religious conversion may, in future be labeled as acts of terror by “sangh-parivar outfits”. The national debate on Bangladeshi Muslims, the pan-national loyalty of all Muslims to the Ummah and religious conversion would thus conveniently acquire ‘Hindu terror’ dimensions.
- Undermine people’s faith in all institutions and organizations wielding great moral authority and influence, and this includes our police and armed forces.
To put it bluntly, the nature and direction of the Malegaon blasts investigation, which had become a witch-hunt for ‘Hindu terrorists’, was intended to weaken, defame and ultimately neutralise all centers of Hindu resistance to jihad and the evangelical church. The media has been reporting that Hemant Karkare died a very unhappy man. He is alleged to have expressed his deep unhappiness about ‘political interference’ into the Malegaon blasts investigations to two media persons of two English TV news channels. Karkare is also reported to have asked the Maharashtra Home Minister RR Patil, on the very day he died, to be transferred out of the ATS. Such was his unhappiness.
We have it from one of the media persons who spoke to Karkare the day before he died that Karkare told him that over 90% of the ATS had been diverted into the Malegaon blasts probe.This witch-hunt for Hindu terrorists has all the hallmark of having been conceived in the mind of a strategist for the Congress party or its President, and who was probably himself/herself being manipulated by string-pullers located elsewhere. The questions and suspicions that come to our mind –
- The Times of India, dated 27th November, 2008, on page 11 reported that Hemant Karkare met the National Security Adviser (NSA) MK Narayanan in Delhi.
- When the Prime Minister refused to accept the NSA’s resignation in the wake of the Mumbai terror attack, a functionary in the PMO declared that the NSA is “not expected to micro-manage national security”.
- If that be so, why was the NSA taking such intense interest in the Malegaon blasts probe?
- Why did the NSA summon the ATS chief Karkare to Delhi unless it was to seek an explanation as to why the ATS failed to get custody of Sadhvi Pragya and Lt.Col. Purohit in the MCOCA court.
- Why was MK Narayanan so anxious to know why the accused Hindus will not continue to remain in ATS custody?
- If Karkare had seven years of experience in R&AW, almost all of them overseas appointments, why was he removed from R&AW and appointed chief of ATS?
- Who chose Karkare for the job and why was he chosen when he had little or no field experience in tackling terror in Mumbai?
- If Karkare was unhappy about political interference in the Malegaon blasts probe, why did he not resign instead of submitting to lead the ATS on a wild-goose-chase?
- If Karkare was heading the ATS why did he not equip the ATS with battle gear appropriate for fighting jihadis possessing sophisticated and contemporary arms, explosives and technology? After all the city of Mumbai has always been the chosen target of jihadis, besides Hindu temples.
- Why was Shivraj Patil made Home Minister and why was he not removed until the very end when the UPA is on its way out of Delhi?
- Who chose MK Narayanan as National Security Adviser when he had worked for the Ford Foundation funded American think-tank, Center for Security Analysis, just prior to his appointment?
We get the sinking feeling that the FBI and the Scotland Yard are here to “take charge” of the investigations only to make sure that their readings of all evidence will not point to Pakistan. The US and the UK need Pakistan for more reasons than one and it is my conjecture that their conclusions are going to be different from those of Bharatiya investigating agencies. And MK Narayanan has been retained as NSA probably because this government wants to make sure that the FBI and Scotland Yard are unhindered in their dubious mission. The UPA government too does not want war with Pakistan, jihad, jihadis or the evangelical church. The silence about why Bharat permitted the non-reciprocal measure of foreign investigating agencies to come to Bharat to “assist in the investigations” is also mystifying. While the media is going after Vilasrao Deshmukh, Achuthanandan, Ramgopal Verma and Shivraj Patil, it has kept its hands off the NSA. Who is pulling the media strings? (http://www.vigilonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1007:mumbai-terror-probe-silence-of-the-conspirators&catid=55:plainspeak&Itemid=71 Mumbai Terror Probe: Silence of the Conspirators)
What I wrote in 2011
The Congress-led UPA government is climbing up a neck-breaking slippery slope – to label Hindus terrorists on their own bhumi. B Raman was the first to blow this soap-bubble into public discourse when he described ULFA as Hindu terrorists. A retired bureaucrat and well-known counter-terrorism expert, Raman’s outlandish claim went unchallenged although the writer, in a private email to Raman expressed great disappointment over the thoughtless expression with the observation that ULFA could be labeled a Hindu outfit only if they claimed to be acting in the name of Hinduism to serve a Hindu cause. The writer carried the discussion further with the argument that if there was no Hindu objective to ULFA’s actions and if Raman’s bizarre logic were to be applied across the board then we would henceforth have to name all offences with a prefix indicating the offender’s religion – Hindu smuggler, Christian molester, Muslim history-sheeter, Jain shoplifter, Parsi goonda and so on. That effectively popped Raman’s ULFA Hindu terrorist soap-bubble.
It is a pity to stick a pin into Raman’s pride for what he thinks was his original insight; perhaps Raman should now seriously consider the possibility that the idea of Hindu terror may have been cleverly implanted in his mind from as early as 2005 by his own fraternity – either by intelligence officials in Bharat or foreign intelligence officials with clever suggestions, bogus facts and disputable, even fabricated ‘evidence’. After all this is the most evil, most functional and one of the busiest networks in the world, as exposed by Julian Assange to whom the sane world of ordinary people owes an eternal debt of gratitude.
Considering that Raman first floated this soap-bubble in 2006, had all this been above board, logically speaking, for a counter-terrorism expert like Raman there ought to have been at the very least two or three terror attacks prior to or up until 2006 with a discernible pattern which compelled him to conclude “as early as in 2006” that there existed a pink elephant called Hindu Terror.
- Attack on Bharat’s parliament – 13 December 2001
- Godhra Train burning – 27 February, 2002
- Attack on Akshardham Temple, Gujarat – 24 September 2002
- Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, terror attack – 28 December 2005
- Varanasi bombings – A series of bombings that occurred across Varanasi on 7 March 2006
- Mumbai Train Bombings – 11 July 2006 were a series of seven bomb blasts that took place over a period of 11 minutes on the Suburban Railway in Mumbai
- Malegaon blasts – September 28, 2006
- Incendiary explosion, Samjhauta Express – 18 February, 2007
- Mecca Masjid, Hyderabad blasts – 18 May, 2007
- Ajmer Sharif blasts – 15 October 2007
- Malegaon blasts – September 29, 2008
The UPA government and Sonia’s minions have held Sadhvi Pragya and Pujya Swami Aseemanand guilty (without an ounce of proof so far) only for the Malegaon blasts and the terror acts in 2007, as shown in the list above; but as per this list for Raman to have arrived at his original conclusion on Hindu terror in 2006, he could only have studied the attacks on Bharat’s Parliament, the burning alive of karsevaks in the Sabarmati Express at Godhra, the terror attack on Akshardham Temple, the IISc terror attack, the Varanasi bombings and the Mumbai suburban train serial explosions; these were the only acts of terror that preceded the Malegaon blasts of 2006.
The Malegaon blasts of 2008 were followed by blasts in Modasa in Gujarat, serial blasts in Jaipur, on Ramjanmabhumi, last year in the German Bakery in Pune, and another near the Dasashwamedha Ghat in Varanasi and the nation is holding its breath waiting for the UPA government to pin these too on the RSS since no arrests have been made so far and no charge-sheet has been filed.
So much for prior cases and precedents; now let us look at the nature of these attacks and see if there is any pattern to them. Some of the striking features of these acts of terror are-
- Gun-toting and maybe explosives carrying terrorists as in the Parliament attack case, in IISc Bangalore and Mumbai 26/11
- Terror acts using explosives
- Terror acts using incendiary matter and inflammable cocktails containing RDX, ammonium nitrate and fuel oil
- Low intensity explosives like crude bombs
- High intensity explosives like RDX
- Pressure cookers
- Low casualty mortality rate as one or two individuals
- Medium casualty mortality rate between 10 and 50
- High rate of mortalities in the hundreds
The writer is not a terrorism or counter-terrorism expert but has enough intelligence which does not see a pattern here that points in the direction of Hindu terror. Crude bombs do not cause extensive damage and cause nil or very low mortality while medium and high rates of mortality are caused by use of two devices – high intensity Improvised Explosive Device (IED) or Timed Incendiary Device (TID). As their names suggest, the first uses explosives improvised to cause maximum damage accompanied by killing metal shrapnel and glass splinters; the second causes maximum damage by fire.
The Mumbai suburban train blasts and the Jaipur serial blasts were caused by IEDs while the terror attack in the Sabarmati Express at Godhra and Samjhauta Express have been caused by TIDs. Islamic jihadis seem to have used both IEDs and TIDs when they took Mumbai hostage in November 2008. Even before investigating agencies could determine what caused the Malegaon blasts in 2006, and notwithstanding the fact that SIMI took credit for the same, Raman gave credence to the Hindu terror fiction. One reason why other terrorism experts dismissed the Hindu terror theory was the fact that Hindus as individuals and Hindu groups do not have access to RDX and this is a critical factor in the argument. It is around this critical factor that the diabolic plot to label Hindus as terrorists on their own bhumi has been crafted and executed.
- RDX is a high intensity explosive and use of RDX even in miniscule quantities causes immense damage and destruction
- RDX can be used not only in bombs but also as a component along with ammonium nitrate and fuel oil, as reports suggest, to make TIDs
- RDX is therefore only available with the army in Bharat and is under army lock and key
- Every ounce is strictly accounted for and it is in the army’s interest and in the interest of the nation to declare any theft of RDX no matter how small a quantity
- Some Islamic states which use jihad as a weapon of foreign policy to serve Islam’s political objectives, allow non-state groups to possess RDX to be used in acts of jihad against target nations and peoples
- Therefore while it is possible for jihadi groups in Bharat to get hold of RDX through the seamless global jihadi network and the nation’s porous borders, it is next to impossible for Hindu groups to access RDX from jihadis or from the Bharatiya army
- The Bharatiya state and army have so far not allowed non-state actors to possess RDX in any quantity
When Raman blew the soap-bubble of Hindu terror in 2006 without a shred of hard evidence in which to root his claim, the time had come to put substance into the soap bubble. JN Dixit, a distinguished and highly regarded career diplomat whom the writer knew personally to be a well-cloaked fierce nationalist, was the UPA’s National Security Adviser when the UPA came to power in Delhi in 2004. After Dixit’s unexpected and sudden death in January 2005, MK Narayanan was appointed NSA. One of the first things that Narayanan did was to hand-pick Hemant Karkare as chief of Maharashtra ATS; a position for which Karkare had no experience. These questions deserve to be asked –
- Why did Sonia Gandhi appoint MK Narayanan, Intelligence Bureau (IB) man and more important, her family loyalist, to the extremely sensitive post of NSA (The writer is not even going into the mysterious circumstances causing JN Dixit’s sudden death which made it possible for Narayanan to be appointed to the post)?
- Why did MK Narayanan appoint the inexperienced Karkare as chief of Maharashtra ATS?
The second question is significant because the most important scene in the Hindu terror plot was shot in locales in Maharashtra, in Malegaon. Read this together with the RSS alleging that Col. Purohit, a serving army officer with Military Intelligence (first Intelligence Bureau, now Military Intelligence in the Hindu terror plot), began his machinations to divide and weaken the RSS from within in 2005[i] and what we get is no clichéd conspiracy theory but a diabolic plot to move Bharat in the direction of post-Hindu Bharat.
If we also read it in the context of Sonia Gandhi’s towering ambitions to become Prime Minister being foiled by an active campaign by Hindu nationalists opposing her on grounds of her foreign nationality, then what we get is a determined decision by whoever planted Sonia Gandhi on this unsuspecting nation, to politically dis-empower and decimate Hindu nationalists as was done in 1908. As in 1908, so in 2005 when the plot to label Hindus as terrorists was hatched, Hindu nationalism was sought to be annihilated only with the complicity of shameless Hindus in polity.
The core objective of the evil plot to break the Hindu spirit and keep Hindus in a state of turmoil seems to have been to launch a full scale attack against Hindu sanyasis, to defame and defile them and to physically annihilate the RSS – two institutions which best represent the Hindu nation and sense of nationhood and may be termed to be our immune system. Weakening any one of them is guaranteed to weaken the entire Hindu society vis a vis the Abrahamic religions and their agenda for a non-Hindu/post-Hindu polity in Bharat.
What follows is the writer’s interpretation of the facts which have been put in the public domain. The only note of caution that the writer sounds is that no corroborative evidence, has so far been presented by any of the state ATS, the CBI or the NIA to back these “facts” which have been given to us; nevertheless, it is possible as the writer hopes to prove, to present the same facts in a different fact-sheet. If the government has a better explanation, let it pass muster in the courts.
(http://www.vigilonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1491:purpose-served-chidambaram-but-not-the-way-you-think&catid=55:plainspeak&Itemid=71 “Purpose served” Chidambaram, but not the way you think)
There is growing feeling among the BJP’s staunchest supporters that the party and Modi Sarkar for some reason are not willing to make Pakistan, Sonia Gandhi, P Chidambaram and MK Narayanan pay for their crimes of omission and commission against the country and against Hindus. Like Aurobindo remarked astutely a hundred years ago, our beginnings are great and mighty but Hindus lack the stamina and the will to sustain the momentum and all mighty beginnings come to a whimpering stop. For Modi Sarkar to align itself with the aspirations of ordinary Hindus and Hindu nationalists it must do some very big things to restore the faith of Hindus in Modi and the BJP:
- Modi Sarkar must make Pakistan pay in a manner that ordinary citizens understand to be justice
- This government must neutralise/liquidate Dawood Ibrahim, Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi and Hafiz Saeed either inside Pakistan or remove them with force from Pakistan and bring them to Bharat where they will face our courts and our law for their crimes against Bharat and her people
- Investigate the twin heinous conspiracies labelling Hindus as terrorist and letting off known jihadis and jihadi organizations for their acts of terror from 2004 when Sonia Gandhi ruled the country till 2014 when Narendra Modi became Prime Minister, and fix blame where it lies and punish the guilty for not only compromising the nation’s efforts to deal with terrorism but also for high treason.
- Finally, Modi personally and his government must know that Pakistan is backed, funded and encouraged in its anti-Bharat terrorist ways not just by China but by America too. America, more than China gives Pakistan the temerity to take pride in being a terrorist state. Modi Sarkar must move out of the American orbit, must stop chasing its tail on foreign policy issues because the Generic Church sees Bharat as a potential destination for their capital and goods besides an important nation in their end-of-the-world Kingdom of God on Earth, while Islam sees Bharat as Dar-ul-harb destined to become Dar-ul-Islam. Pakistan-America partnership is the historical Church-Islam partnership against Hindus and Hindu Bharat.
- As always the Hindu nation was betrayed only by renegade Hindus from within.
‘Sufficient evidence’ linking processed meat to colorectal cancer.
The World Health Organization (WHO) announced on Monday that it has classified processed meat as a human carcinogen.
Red meat also was classified as a probable human carcinogen, according to the release by WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).
The group cited “sufficient evidence” linking processed meat—such as bacon and sausage—to colorectal cancer, and noted associations with stomach, prostate, and pancreatic cancers. Processed meat is preserved by smoking, salting, fermenting, or by the addition of chemicals, and the category includes bacon, sausage, deli meats, and hot dogs. The red meat category includes beef, veal, pork, and lamb.
The IARC evaluates substances suspected of causing cancer in humans, and arrives at its classifications byconvening a working group of international experts to review and assess the strength and quality of the evidence—in this case, more than 800 studies. Although the meat classifications have no regulatory impact in the United States, they are likely to further intensify the already heated debate about meat-eating, which has made headlines since February, when the committee charged with updating the US Dietary Guidelines recommended that Americans should eat less meat.
It’s also possible that the classification could fuel lawsuits. Another recent IARC report, which classified the herbicide glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen, has promptedsome law firms to seek out cancer sufferers who were exposed to the chemical, to file suit on their behalf.
The American meat industry, understandably, takes strong issue with any suggestion that meat is something consumers should eat less of. The North American Meat Institute (NAMI) immediately issued a statementdeclaring the classification as defying “both common sense and dozens of studies showing no correlation between meat and cancer and other studies showing the many health benefits of balanced diets that include meat.” In fact, many of the studies NAMI references do show correlations, but describe them as “inconsistent” or “weak.”
Like much of the research on how diet affects health, the research on the link between meat and cancer has enough ambiguity that it’s possible to cherry-pick a research list that supports either position, but many reviews of research on the best-established link between meat and cancer—colorectal cancer—find, as this 2014 review published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition does, that there is a convincing association between meat eating and colorectal cancer. The question, though, is whether the meat eating causes the cancer, or whether meat eaters, who are different from non-meat eaters in many ways, are eating or doing other things that put them at risk.
The National Cancer Institute’s position is that the preponderance of the evidence does find a correlation between meat consumption and cancer risk, but it cites inconsistent results and confounding factors as barriers to a definitive conclusion. “The evidence is inadequate” to determine whether eating less meat would cut colorectal cancer incidence, the group says.
In an interview with Fortune, Shalene McNeill, executive director of human nutrition research for the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, acknowledged the association between cancer and meat, but pointed to those confounding factors as the culprit: “Red meat is being consumed in the context of an unhealthy diet,” she said, and pointed out that meat-eaters are more likely to smoke and be overweight. David Klurfeld, National Program Leader for human nutrition at the USDA and a participant in the IARC process, wrote in a recent paper that meat-eaters also exercise less, drink more, and eat fewer fruits and vegetables. Controlling for these things is a tricky business, and there are undoubtedly other behaviors, not included in the data, that can’t be controlled for at all.
The IARC acknowledges the difficulty of determining causality, but their report concludes that, “the consistent associations of colorectal cancer with consumption of processed meat across studies in different populations, which make chance, bias, and confounding unlikely as explanations.” On red meat, though, “Chance, bias, and confounding could not be ruled out with the same degree of confidence.”
In light of all this, it’s not surprising that scientists do not speak with one voice on this issue. Leaning toward the IARC position is Andrew Chan, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School whose research focuses on colorectal cancer prevention. “I think the evidence is reasonably supportive of that position,” he toldFortune of the IARC classification. He acknowledged that “many studies are flawed,” but nevertheless said that if you look at the preponderance of the evidence, the IARC conclusion is “a reasonable one.” He notes that the evidence for processed meat is stronger than that for red meat.
Tamar Haspel is a journalist on the food and science beat. She writes the James Beard Award-winning Washington Post column, Unearthed, and farms oysters off Cape Cod.