Western Culture,

[mattd]

Brilliant post jya,Kudo's,props,major props(wtf are they,anyway?) A
cypherpunk first among sequals.I salute you.
The following is an extract on the pitfalls of  paternalistic western
racist culture and how the united snakes is going down slow.(Rome wasn't
burned in a day.)
Subject: The twice promised lands
The sheer Machiavellian hypocrisy of the Kashmir partition is perfectly
well documented. Britain, speaking through Viceroy of India Mountbatten,
made a fine proclamation in 1947 : the rulers of princely states should
decide about accession to India or Pakistan keeping in mind the
geographical situation of their states, ethnic composition of the
population and wishes of the people. People on both sides of the religious
divide welcomed this principle joyfully and were counting on it in deciding
where to live. Then, unexpectedly, at the intervention of Jawahar Lal Nehru
(a Kashmiri pandit and a paramour of Lady Mountbatten!) Britain reversed
her decision in a matter of 3 days in August 1947, and divided up the
Punjab state by giving several Muslim majority districts to India. This
violation gave India a border with Kashmir, an invasion route into it, and
caused about half a million deaths and 16 million refugees as people
scrambled to get onto the right side of the changed border. [1]
Kashmir was booby-trapped by the British in 1846, not 1946, in the Treaty
of Amritsar wherein England ceded this 80% Muslim land to a Hindu dynasty.
Previously, the Moguls were rulers over northern India, so that a Muslim
ruler often had Hindu subjects. In 1947, only three out of 562 princes who
were of a different religion from their subjects were reluctant to accede
to the nation their people desired. Two were Hindu states with Muslim
princes, which India simply invaded and annexed with British consent. In
the case of Muslim Kashmir, on the contrary, or should we say consistently
with millennial Western anti-Muslim policy, Britain and India plotted an
intrigue to absorb this gem and important water source into India.[2]
60,000 Muslims had returned home to Kashmir after distinguished fighting
for Britain against the Germans. In gratitude, they were banned from the
Kashmiri Army, which was manned instead with Hindus and Sikhs imported from
India. In Summer 1947 the Hindu Maharajah of Kashmir started a provocative
campaign of oppression, banning pro-Pakistani newspapers, applying onerous
new taxes and burning down villages.
When the inevitable insurrection started, the Maharajah, Pandit Nehru, Lord
Mountbatten and Clement Attlee executed a rapid-fire, obviously prepared
charade to sanctify an Indian invasion. Nehru promised the world that the
attack had nothing to do with annexation, but only with maintaining law and
order. Mountbatten issued a pearl of neo-imperialistic hypocritical prose
which is worth study, to help recognize the genre as you unravel the
ceaseless spin in todays media:
As soon as law and order have been restored in Kashmir and her soil
cleared of the invader, the question of the State's accession should be
settled by a reference to the people. Meanwhile action has been taken today
to send troops of the Indian Army to Kashmir.[3]
See the pattern? A high ideal is couched in terms of the impossible
fulfillment - law and order could never be restored once the Indian
invasion started, and the so-called invaders to be cleared of the soil were
the sons and tillers of that very soil! Simultaneously, with words shouting
louder than a revivalist preacher, acts and facts hit the ground. Britain
invaded Kashmir with Indian troops. And for fifty-four years she picks her
royal nose and looks on like it was none of her affair!
The same sick warp pervades the UN and international opinion fora. Reuters
baldly datelines stories from Srinagar, India in the revolt-racked
Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir - even though India needs 700,000 troops
to hold onto these Muslim provinces, which Nehru promised never to annex
when he and his cuckold buddy Mountbatten invaded them.
What look like olive leaves on the UN seal really come from a fig tree. UN
resolution #48 from 1948 calls for Pakistan to remove irregular
guerrillas BEFORE India removes its regular army - although Kashmir is
Pakistani by British and International rules, and the irregulars may or may
not be from outside Kashmir: they are just a convenient red herring. Such
conscience-numbing mumbo-jumbo resolutions are merely a guarantee of
eternal military occupation, a license for progressive ethnic cleansing and
eventual complete absorption by non-Muslim invaders.
Sound like the broken record we all know from Palestine? Until Arafat keeps
all kids indoors, Israel may continue to occupy, annex, oppress and make
refugees of the Muslim majority. Britains comment on it: What, me, worry?
Our American colonies will see the wogs off the property.

Britain is only playing dead. She remains the all-time master of propaganda
warfare (remember the Belgian kids with their hands cut off by the Germans
on the phony posters that helped get US into WWI?) It is well within her
means either to take direct military action, as she did in the Falklands,
or to mobilize a military and diplomatic coalition to set matters to rights
in two countries she ruined, Palestine and Kashmir. The will is lacking. Why?
Hmm. The West singled out the Muslim world long ago as Enemy Number One,
and has made this a self-fulfilling prophecy. There are many aspects to
this. In the Western subconscious, there is the memory of the Crusades and
the defeat by Saladin. Further back, Christianity has a guilty conscience:
it swapped monotheistic purity for power and pagan lore, only to be crushed
by the fall of Rome, and eclipsed by the glory of Islamic faith, culture
and science for centuries. It was a millennium later that a materialist -
fundamentalist Europe picked itself up on arms and technology and avenged
itself on the planet.
The Islamic axis, extending from Morocco to Indonesia, lay athwart the
playground of world empire, blocking the Suez and Central Asian passages to
India. In 1840, when Britain fought a war to force Chinamen to remain
impassive consumers of Indian opium from British ships, she also eliminated
the upstart Ahmed Pasha in Egypt, who had dared to industrialize and start
the process of Arab unity by joining with Syria. Then the Afghans could not
be subdued, the Sudanese dervishes broke the British square, and Muslims
often revealed a dangerous immunity to Western consumerism.
Something scary about these Mohamedans. Enough to bury the hatchet with any
enemy that goes in with us against them. Start by giving those shiftless
Jews Palestine and some useful work to do by splitting the Muslim world in
half: even though it took half of the 19th century for Britains skunk
works to interest the Jews in the scheme - and about half a minute to get
the world to forget who dreamed up the fatal idea! Give Vladimir Putsch -
in a hand with genocide in Chechnya and a seat in NATO as an ally against
Islam. Why not, we have an infallible precedent from the 13th century, when
the Pope called Genghiz Khan brother for his services in bathing Muslim
Asia in babies blood.
Mah fellow fundamentalists, know today that Whoever is not with McWorld is
against it. Indifference will not be tolerated, certainly not from a
religion of peace!
The US-UK policy has been largely successful. Muslim nations remain
bitterly divided. They cant even manufacture their own weapons, by Jove.
Aside from a few hysterically unstable regimes (neat label, that R-word),
plutocratic neo-imperialism is the rule: you know, old boy, sort of
mercantilist remote control, with some of your local figurehead Oreos on
the take.
Yes, the West is a thundering success by its own measures - but humanity
will be a failure if those measures become universal. That is the only
reason to hope: this can not be Gods plan, or Darwins, whomever you
believe in.
Meanwhile, though, the massed mammon worshippers have been rewarded by
their deity with all the appearances of a comfortably superior position.
After detailing the tale of Britains responsibility, one Pakistani writer
only musters the courage to modestly propose:
To rid the 1200 million humanity (India and Pakistan) of its miseries
caused by a wrong act of British Indian Government, Britain should now use
her influence in the world and in the Common Wealth, and support/launch
initiatives in a meaningful manner for seeking a just solution of the
Kashmir problem.[4]
But Britain is not about to do this when she can sit and smirk by the
hearth instead. Kashmiris, Palestinians and their representatives should
file complaints and suits against Britain in every possible world forum,
and at least wipe away that snide sneer for awhile.
Deviousness is no defense in criminal cases. On the contrary. Even in
England, mind you.
Notes:
[1]. http://www.unol.org/messages/17765.shtml
[2]. http://www.klc.org.pk/klc/books/kashmir-3.htm
[3]. http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/kasmount.htm
[4]. http://www.unol.org/messages/17765.shtml
Mr. John-Paul Leonard is a free-lance writer and a regular contributor to
Media Monitors Network (MMN)
Source:
by courtesy & ) 2001 John-Paul Leonard
by the same author:
The Twice Promised Land
http://www.mediamonitors.net/leonard1.html
and
More in MMN 'Perspective' @
http://www.mediamonitors.net/perspective.html