In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful
MUSLIM MEDIA NEW YORK

American Leadership and Destruction of Humanity

Nuclear Israel: the threat to humanity!
(Jewish slave Jewish Berry Obama is not blind)
Posted: 09/25/2012.

Highlights
-   Israel has developed one of the most sophisticated nuclear and atomic and nuclear weapons systems.
-   Israel has the capability to respond to any nuclear attack.
-   Israel reserve arsenal are located five floors underground which would wipe the country of the enemy attacking it off the face of the earth.
-   Israel has nuclear warheads aimed at 68-70 different cities in the world, including cities in every Arab country in the Middle East.
-   Israel also has 200 atomic mines, even more than Britain has – located in holes on the Golan Heights.  
-   Israel had planted nuclear scientists in various atomic laboratories in different parts of the world.
-   Israel approaches China in its nuclear ability and threatens large part of the world.
-   Israel was ready to nuke Egypt twice and Iraq once.
-   Israel shipped and store tons of South Africa’s uranium.  
-   Israel was ready to supply nuclear weapons to Iran.  

Jafar Syed
M.A. LL.B.
Researcher – International Affairs
New York

Jewish Berry Obama knows that Israel has developed one of the most sophisticated nuclear and atomic weapons systems. Jewish Berry Obama knows that Israel has the capability to respond to any nuclear attack. Jewish Berry Obama knows that Israel reserve arsenal are located five floors underground which would wipe the country of the enemy attacking it off the face of the earth. Jewish Berry Obama knows that Israel has nuclear warheads aimed at 68-70 different cities in the world, including cities in every Arab country in the Middle East. Jewish Berry Obama knows that Israel also has 200 atomic mines, even more than Britain has – located in holes on the Golan Heights. Jewish Berry Obama knows that Israel had planted nuclear scientists in various atomic laboratories in different parts of the world. Jewish Berry Obama knows that Israel approaches China in its nuclear ability and threatens large part of the world.  Jewish Berry Obama knows that Israel was ready to nuke Egypt twice and Iraq once. Jewish Berry Obama knows that Israel shipped and store tons of South Africa’s uranium. Jewish Berry Obama knows that Israel was ready to supply nuclear weapons to Iran.

Above stated facts are not rhetoric. Here is the proof:  

TEL AVIV – A new book entitled Critical Mass describing Israel’s nuclear capabilities has propelled banner headlines in every major newspaper and raised eyebrows all over the country.

The book, which was written by Williams E. Burrows (a former correspondent for the Washington Post) and Robert Windrem, claims that Israel has developed one of the most sophisticated nuclear and atomic weapons systems, even greater than was assumed until now, and has the capability to respond to any nuclear attack.

The authors maintain that even if Israel is attack first by any atomic bomb which destroys its nuclear arsenal, Israel would still be able to respond with a reserve arsenal located five floors underground which would wipe the country of the enemy attacking it off the face of the earth.

The book further reveals that Israel has nuclear warheads aimed at 68-70 different cities in the world, including cities in every Arab country in the Middle East. Israel also has 200 atomic mines, even more than Britain has – located in holes on the Golan Heights. These mines have been prepared to counter a Syrian invasion of the Golan.

The book adds that although Israel’s capabilities have been revealed before, this is the first time that so many secrets have been exposed. According to the authors, Israel’s message to her enemies is: “One nuclear bomb that falls on Tel Aviv will surely cause irreversible destruction, but will draw a very sharp response from Israel.”

The book also reveals that for years Israel had planted nuclear scientists in various atomic
laboratories in different parts of the world. They succeeded in obtaining very valuable information and programs for Israel.

According to Critical Mass, Israel approaches China in its nuclear ability and threatens large part of the world.

The book states that Israel was on the alert for a possible nuclear attack three times: The first time was 10 days before the Six-Day War when Egyptian MIG-21’s managed to launch a reconnaissance flight over the nuclear reactor in Dimona. Israeli conventional missiles in Dimona failed to shoot it down, and the general staff, then headed by Yitzhaq Rabin, thought Egypt was planning to bomb the reactor. Consequently, then prime minister Levi Eshkol ordered the activation of two atomic bombs, The bombs were ready the first day of the war.

The second time that Israel was prepared to use atomic bombs was during the Yom Kippur War, and the third time during the Gulf War.

This book discloses, too, that one of Israel’s main suppliers of nuclear technology was Israeli film producer Arnon Milchen. It also describes the close ties Israel had with South Africa in the 70’s and affirms that Israel tested nuclear missiles there.

The book describes in detail the amount of uranium Israel received from South Africa: the two shipments were 50 tons each, and a third one of 500 tons, which South Africa asked Israel to store away for it until it was needed. In the meantime, South Africa allowed Israel to use the uranium for her own purposes.

Another chapter in the book describes a deal that Israel was supposed to carry out with Iran in 1977, in which Israel would supply Iran with nuclear weapon, but the deal didn’t go through because of the fall of the Shah. [1]

Jewish enslaved world, it was 1994 – eighteen years ago. No body knows that how much Jews have grown their nuclear since 1994. One fact is certain that they are not sitting idle.  

Notes
1.  Avrohom Lewin, Why is P.M. Rabin Afraid?
Israel’s nukes ready for action. Could wipe out all enemy countries, The Jewish Press, The largest independent Anglo-Jewish Weekly Newspaper, February 4, 1994.
 
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Iran next!
(Informer proposes the assassination of Saudi ambassador. Arabsour neither proposes nor agrees with the assassination plot) Posted: 10/17/2011. Updated: 10/20/2011. Updated: 10/24/2011

Highlights
- Would-be terrorist mastermind a 'hapless Jack' …. The Age
- Assassination plot for destroying Saudi Arabia and Iran
- Remember the destruction in Iraq- Iran war
-FBI plays “the” role in recruiting a US citizen for political objectives
- Informer of Drug Enforcement Administration initiates the plot to assassinate Saudi ambassador
- Official documents do not tell what happened in various meetings
- Informer recruits US citizen Mansour Arabsiar for implicating Iran through his cousin who is Iranian military officer
- American blood-thirsty leadership justifies its every naked aggression by wrapping itself with some moral slogan
- America or Israel attack on Iran for revenging the alleged plot against Saudis is a win, win situation for the anti-Muslim unholy alliance of America, Great Britain, France, and its regional partners Bharat and Israel
-Blood letting: If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible… Truman
- America “cares” for human rights but not human beings: Remember Deir Yassin massacre
-  America “cares” for human rights but not for human beings:  NATO genocidal continuous bombing has managed to exterminate 2 percent of the city of Sirte, including 1,000 children
- Terror industry needs terrorists badly: In this recession or depression, terror industry needs terrorist for keeping the terrorist industry in business.  It does not matter you drink a lot, failed in every business you started, do not observe religion, and love to call jack. The only thing that matter is that you have to do what your “informer” asked you to do.
-  Bomb Tel Aviv and Delhi and then watch how many homegrown Hindu and Jewish terrorists mushroom
- Understanding between Saudi Arabia and Iran is a must for saving the Muslim World from the anti- Muslim alliance that is led by the United States

Jafar Syed
M.A. LL.B.
Researcher – International Affairs
New York

While the Barack Obama administration vows to hold the Iranian government "accountable" for the alleged plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington, the legal document describing evidence in the case provides multiple indications that it was mainly the result of a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) sting operation, reports Gareth Porter in “FBI account of 'terror plot' suggests sting,” on 10/15/2011 in Asia Times.  Gareth Porter Gareth Porter is an investigative historian and journalist specializing in US national security policy. His latest book is Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam. 

Mr. Porter proves from the government-submitted documents that FBI played “the” role in turning an alleged sting drug operation through its once charged with narcotics informer into an assassination plot

“Although the document, called an amended criminal complaint, implicates Iranian-American Mansour Arabsiar and his cousin Ali Gholam Shakuri, an officer in the Iranian Qods force, in a plan to assassinate Saudi Arabian ambassador Adel al-Jubeir, it also suggests that the idea "originated with and was strongly pushed by an undercover DEA [Department of Drug Enforcement] informant, at the direction of the FBI.

 “On May 24, when Arabsiar first met with the DEA informant he thought was part of a Mexican drug cartel, it was not to hire a hit squad to kill the ambassador. Rather, there is reason to believe that the main purpose was to arrange a deal to sell large amounts of opium from Afghanistan.”  [1]

There is another fishy factor in this frame up. Official papers do not detail what happened in some of the meetings. Moreover, informant alleges about the assassination plot and not the alleged criminal. 

“The criminal complaint refers to an unspecified number of meetings between Arabsiar and the DEA informant in late June and the first two weeks of July. What transpired in those meetings remains the central mystery surrounding the case.

“The official account of the investigation cites the testimony of the informant (referred to in the document as "CS-1") in stating, "Over the course of a series of meetings, Arabsiar explained to CS-1 that his associates in Iran had discussed a number of violent missions for CS-1 and CIS-1's purported criminal associates to perform." [2]

Third important fact in this trap is that Arabsiar did not propose the assassination.

“The fact that not a single quote from Arabsiar shows that he agreed to assassinating the ambassador, much less proposed it, suggests that he was either non-committal or linking the issue to something else, such as the prospect of a major drug deal with the cartel. [3]

Why did DEA informant recruit Arabsiar in the sting operation? The answer is very simple for implicating Iran though his cousin who is a military officer in Iranian army.

“There is also circumstantial evidence that Arabsiar may have even been brought into the sting operation to help further implicate his cousin Gholam Shakuri in the terrorist plot.” [4]

Another astonishing thing happened. Arabsiar waves his legal right to have an attorney and confess.

“After his arrest on September 29, Arabsiar waived the right to a lawyer and proceeded to provide a complete confession.” [5]

American bloodthirsty leadership justifies its every naked aggression by wrapping itself with some moral slogan. Entry in World War 1?  To end the war forever. Entry in World War 2? To save the world from Nazis and fascists.  Nuking of Japan? To save millions of lives and to end the war quickly.  Entry in the Cold War? To save the “Free World.”  Destruction and butchery of Koreans and Vietnamies? To save them from the communist. Destruction of Iraq? To end the dictatorship. And occupation of Libya? To save the slaughter of Libyans by Col.  Qadafi.  

American entire history is replete with this type of slogans. Start with the occupation of America. 

And Jewish Berry Obama has another justification to destroy Iran. It is not Iran’s nuclear options; it is for not observing the norms of international law.
“President Obama pledged Thursday to hold Iran accountable for “dangerous and reckless behavior” in pursuing an alleged plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States.
“In his first comments on the purported murder-for-hire scheme unveiled Wednesday by the Justice Department, Obama described the U.S. allegations as well supported by evidence and said they would contribute to stronger enforcement of existing sanctions against Iran.” [6]
Saudis and Iranians, Remember Iraq and Iran War. Die is again cast. American or Israeli attack on Iran for revenging the alleged plot against Saudis is a win, win situation for the anti-Muslim unholy alliance of America, Great Britain, France, and its regional partners Bharat and Israel. Before hatching this plot, if America and Israel had attacked Iran, Muslim World would have reacted differently. Same situation existed when Senior Bush attacked Iraq. Muslim World was divided on the Kuwait issue. Attack at this moment, under the pretext of revenging the alleged plot, will again divide the Muslim World, and the anti-Muslim alliance will smile ear to ear. On the contrast, Muslim World would have reacted differently, if America or Jewish occupiers of Muslim Palestine have attacked Iran for denuclearizing it.

Anti-Muslim alliance will be laughing if Saudis and Iranians start cutting each other throats as Iraqis and Iranians did in Iraq-Iran war. In the vocabulary of anti-Muslim alliance, this trick is called bloodletting. Adoption of this bloodletting trick, also demonstrates that how much American leadership, champion of the human rights, cares for the human being.
 
“Bloodletting is a more promising variant of this strategy. Here, the aim is to make sure that any war between one’s rival turns into a long and costly conflict that saps their strength. There is no baiting in this version: the rivals have gone to war independently, and the blood-letter is mainly concerned with causing its rivals to bleed each other white, while it stays out of the fighting. As a senator, Harry Truman had this strategy in mind in June 1941 when he reacted to the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union by saying. If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible.’
“The United States also pursued this strategy against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan during the 1980s.” [7]

Anti-Muslim alliance cares for “human rights” but does not care for human beings. Proof? Here it is.
Slaughtering of innocent Libyans. NATO genocidal continuous bombing has managed to exterminate 2 percent of the city of Sirte, including 1,000 children. How in anyone's estimation can this be considered "protecting" civilians?
In truth, the only ones NATO is "protecting" are their terrorist criminal stooges. [8]
Another proof that America cares for “human rights” but does not care for human being.
Slaughtering of innocent Palestinians.  “Deir Yassin lay astride the approaches to Jerusalem. On April 9, 1948 Irgun irregulars attacked the village, slaughtering more than two hundred Arab men, women, and children and threw their mutilated bodies down the village well. The Haganah repudiated the deed, but Menachem Begin, the underground Irgun commander, stood by his men. For the Arab Palestinians, Deir Yasin was the fatal symbol. Street vendors peddled photographs of the victims through the street of Jerusalem’s Arab quarters; radios and word-of-mouth networks spread news of what the Arab populace could expect from Zionism triumphant. Palestinians Arab who could manage it fled to neighboring countries, expecting soon to return home behind victorious Arab armies. Jacques de Reynier, the Swiss representative of the international Red Cross, described the scene at the Arab city of Jaffa: ‘Every one was consumed with terror…. In the hospitals, the drivers of cars and ambulances took their vehicles, assembled their families, and fled …. Many of the ill, nurses, even physicians, departed of the hospitals wearing the clothes they had on. … For all of them the one obsession was to escape at any cost.’
“It was almost as Roosevelt had fantasized; Palestine was being left for the Jews, there was no Arab remaining – or rather, just a fraction of their previous majority. Looking back on it, Weizmann called the flight of the Arab Palestinians nothing short of a miracle, the latest of the many that had protected the children of Israel since Genesis, a ‘miraculous simplification of Israel’s tasks.’ …What matter in April and May of 1948 was that the Jewish settlers found at least 200,000 fewer Arabs to trouble them as they set about establishing their sovereign homeland.” [9]
Did President Truman, grandson of a Jew, vowed to revenge the slaughters of the innocent Palestinians? Answer is no. Where is the proof? Later.
Profile of an alleged terrorist: Note how desparate terror industry is to find a terrorist. Profile of a terrorist:
“The man accused of scheming to kill the Saudi diplomat is described by those who know him as a scatterbrained, hapless businessman who in college earned the nickname ''Jack'' for his affinity for whisky - hardly the type to mastermind a terrorist plot.
“A long-time associate and former business partner of Manssor Arbabsiar - also known as Mansour Arbabsiar - said the accused terrorist had owned a string of used car and other businesses in the Corpus Christi area. But he seemed absent minded and shifty.
''He was pretty disorganised, always losing things like keys, titles, probably a thousand cell phones,'' David Tomscha, who ran a small used-car yard with him, said. ''He wasn't meticulous with taking care of things.''
“News that Mr Arbabsiar was implicated in the terrorist plot surprised Mr Tomscha and others who knew him.
''He never spoke ill of the United States,'' Mr Tomscha said. ''I always thought he liked it here, because he could make money. He loved to make money.''
“Mr Tomscha said his acquaintance with Mr Arbabsiar, who liked to be called ''Jack'', went back more than a decade.
“Tom Hosseini, an Iranian whose friendship with Mr Arbabsiar goes back 30 years, went as far as calling Mr Arbabsiar ''a joke''. The two were roommates at what is now Texas A&M University-Kingsville, but Mr Arbabsiar dropped out after two semesters and finished his degree in Louisiana.
“It was Mr Hosseini who nicknamed him ''Jack'', for the quantities of Jack Daniels that Mr Arbabsiar would drink.
''Scarface'', another nickname, was for the lasting reminder of the time Mr Arbabsiar arranged for the then-college students to party with some girls, not knowing the girls' boyfriends would arrive wielding bats and knives. Mr Hosseini got away unscathed.
“Was he religious? ''He couldn't even pray, doesn't know how to fast. He used to drink, smoke pot, go with the prostitutes,'' Mr Hosseini said, laughing at his market in Corpus Christi. ''His first wife left him because he would lose his keys every other day. This guy is not a mastermind.” [10]
Website visitors, please give the reference of muslimmediany.org, muslimdailyny.org, jewishleadershipwatchny, org, and hinduleadershipwatchny.org whenever any excerpt is referred. Thank you
Notes 
1-5. Gareth Porter, FBI account of terror plot suggests sting, Asia Times, 10/15/2011
6. William Branigin, Obama vows to hold Iran accountable for alleged murder plot, Washington Post, October 13, 2011
7. “China will watch the destruction of Iran by the Jews.” “Red capitalists of China are friend of Israel,” muslimdailyny.org, 10/08/2011
8. NATO exterminates 2 percent of a populated city, Pravda October 13, 2011
9.  Peter Grose, Israel in the mind of America, p. 81
10. Lynn Brezosky, Would-be terrorist mastermind a 'hapless Jack', The Age, October 14, 2011.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Part 3. US secret documents: Nehru stands naked in the global square - 1948

Highlights
- The worst cover up in the diplomatic history. If one claims that Ambassador Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit was the “listening post” of America in the Moscow, nobody will believe (Muslim Daily, Obama policy shift worries Bharat) 
- Demonization of Russians is music to the ears of Truman. Nehru loves to play this music day and night
- Stalin is pressuring Nehru for joining the Soviet camp
- Stalin is directing clandestinely secret movements of Bharti Communists
- Stalin pressures Nehru to appoint representatives in eastern European countries
- Stalin uses issue of Kashmir to drag Nehru into USSR camp
- Other proofs of Nehru closet relations with Truman:  Ambassador Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit seeks advice of U.S. for shutting down Bharti mission in Moscow -- Nehru begged for B-25 in 1948 -- Truman asks for “Top Secret” information about Bharti military,  Nehru agrees
- India is maintaining an army of some 360,000 men and had appropriated 121 crores of rupees ($363, 0000, 000) for defense purposes … Sir Girja. Do not forget it is 1948. Even then Nehru needs B-25
- Bharat is one country on the sub-continent of India. It has no legal rights to call itself India

Jafar Syed
M.A., LL.B.
Researcher – International Affairs
New York

1948. In Part 2, US secret documents prove that Nehru was the secret agent of America. In part 3, US secret documents prove that Nehru was demonizing Stalin for strengthening his closet relations with Truman. In addition, some of US secret documents shine light on the nature of cooperation between US and Bharat. Third, US secret documents also prove that Nehru is trying to cash his services as a spy.

Nehru and Demonization of Russian

Demonization of Russians and communism was music to the ears of Truman. Nehru plays this music day and night.  Stalin was blamed for pressuring Nehru for joining the Russian camp, patronizing Bharti communists, appointing Bharti representatives in east European countries and using tragedy of Kashmir for black mail. 

Note what the Chinese Ambassador in Moscow reports to Chinese Ambassador in Bharat. It is about what he has learned from the “listening post” of America, Bharti Ambassador Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit.

Then the Chinese Ambassador in Bharat reports to American Ambassador in Bharat what he has learned from Chinese Ambassador in USSR. Then American Ambassador in Bharat reports to the US Secretary of State.

Catering of this information proves that Chinese Ambassador in Moscow and Chinese Ambassador in Bharat are also spying for Americans just like Ambassador Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit.

One fact should not be confused. It is 1948. Chinese Ambassador in Moscow and Chinese Ambassador in Bharat are not the ambassadors of Mao. They are the representatives of Chiang kei Sheik- a lapdog of America.
1. Stalin demands – Nehru join the Russian camp or?

 “1. Molotov [Vyacheslay Mikhalivovich Molotove,Vice Chairman of the Council of Ministers and Minister of Foreign Affairs) has expressed to Mme. Pandit [Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit, Indian Ambassador in the USSR] that world is divided into two camps, the democratic and the imperialist and it is now up to India to decide which side she is going to take. Soviet Russia has been disappointed by the indecision of the Indian attitude. She reports that now the Soviet Press has begun to attack India.”
“ TOP SECRET, 845.00/3-1848: Telegram, The Ambassador in India (Grady) to the Secretary of State, New Delhi, March 18, 1948 – 4 p.m., INDIA, DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE UNITED STATS AND INDIA CONERNING INIDA’S ATTITUDES TOWARD THE  UNITED STATES AND THE SOVIET UNION, AND INDIAN REQUESTS FOR FINANCIAL AND MILITARY AID, Foreign Relations, 1948, VOLUME V. P. 497)

How does Ambassador Pandit spy for Truman? Ambassador Pandit attends the meetings of the Soviet leadership, gathers information and then caters the information to the US representative   and U.S. lap dogs in the Soviet Union. This is the reason that American Ambassador in USSR labeled her “listening post” of America in USSR. (Muslim Daily, Obama policy shift worries Bharat)

2. Stalin pressures - Nehru appoints Bharti representatives to. Stalin is pressuring Nehru to appoint representatives in east European countries.

“Chinese Ambassador stated that he had also learned from same sources that Molotov had urged Pandit to request GOI to exchange diplomatic representation with Yugoslavia, Poland and other countries of Eastern Europe. She replied to that her government lacked personnel to do this.

“[Grady] All of information contained in above throws light on Nehru’s recent foreign policy speech. It would seem that he may have been answering Russia through the medium of general policy statement. It is to be noted that he said India was not afraid of military might of any great power and the Assembly cheered him. He also stated that India did not intend to increase her representation abroad.
“[Grady] Am endeavoring to get information here to substantiate what has been said regarding activities of Soviet Ambassador to India and shall report promptly any information I can obtain. Grady.”( TOP SECRET, “845.00/3-1848: Telegram, The Ambassador in India (Grady) to the Secretary of State, Foreign Relations, 1948, Volume V. P. 497-98)

3. Stalin has no respect for Bharti sovereignty. Ambassador Pandit leveled another allegation against Stalin. He is meddling in the internal affairs of the Bharti regime.

“After his arrival in Delhi Soviet Ambassador did not make serious attempts to get in contact with responsible leaders of government, but directed clandestinely secret movements of Indian Communists. This aroused indignation among the people of Congress. Some of the Congress leaders even suggested that Pandit [ambassador in the USSR] should be called.” (TOP SECRET, 845.00/3-1848: Telegram, The Ambassador in India (Grady) to the Secretary of Stat, Foreign Relations, 1948, Volume V. P. 497)

4. Stalin makes Kashmir tragedy a political football. H.V.R. Iengar Acting Secretary General External Affairs in Bajpai’s absence gives another proof that how Bharat is coerced to join the USSR camp. He informed the U.S. ambassador in Bharat Grady that Stalin is now using the issue of Kashmir to coerce Bharat for joining the USSR camp.

“ 235. Again saw Iengar last evening. He said GOI fearful a Noel Baker [Philip Noel- Baker, British Minister of State of Commonwealth Affairs] obstructing and adding to difficulty of arriving at agreement on Tsiang resolution. GOI does not believe he reflects attitude of Cripps [Sir Safford Cripps, British Chancellor of the Exchequer] and Attlee [Clement R. Attlee, British Prime Minister]. Iengar says Russians first expressed little interests Kashmir dispute other than that ‘interests of the people be properly safeguarded. They are now scolding Indian delegation, evidently to carry out present USSR policy of pressuring India into USSR camp. “TOP SECRET, 845.00/3-1848: Telegram, The Ambassador in India (Grady) to the Secretary of State, Foreign Relations, 1948, Volume V. P. 500)

Nehru closet relations with Truman. Here are some additional proofs of closet relations between Truman and Nehru which are buried in the secret documents. Some of them have already mentioned in Part 2.

Besides demonization of Russians, secret documents prove some other aspects of U.S. Bharat closet relations. These closet relations negate the lofty claims that Bharat is its own master.

False claim that Bharat is a master …. “Sir Girja [Sir Girja Shanker Bajpai, Secretary General of the Ministry of External Affairs and Commonwealth Relations, GOI] then turned to an exposition of Indian foreign policy which he states was the real purpose his visit to the United States and his calls at the State Department. He sketched first of all the present status of India pointing out that Indian people were now responsible for their own destiny, that British troops had withdrawn form Indian territory, and that practically no British civilian remained in Indian Government position. ... He said, however, that it had been necessary to retain British officers in the Indian Army as there simply were not enough trained Indian personnel available to staff the upper echelons. In short, India is now its own master. (Secret, 711.45/4-248, Memorandum of Conversation, by the Assistant Chief of the Division of South Asian Affairs (Mathews), [Washington,] April 2, 1948, Vol. V, P. 501

First, sovereign nations do not spy for other nations. Second, they do not beg that they should be allowed to keep their neutrality mask. Third, they do not seek advice to close their missions or not in a certain country.

Proofs of closet relations:

1. Proof No. 1 of closet relations. Seeks advice. Ambassador Pandit seeks the advice of the US Ambassador in Moscow on the issue of closing the Bharti mission in Moscow. 

“She [Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit, Bharti Ambassador in the Soviet Union] asked my [US Ambassador Smith in the Soviet Union] advice as to whether, in event public opinion in India further aroused, it would be good move for India to discontinue present relation with USSR, and said public opinion in India so aroused it would be probably be difficult to sent another chief of mission when she left. (Top Secret, The Ambassador in the Soviet Union (Smith) to the Secretary of State, Moscow, March 20, 1948 – I p.m., Foreign Relations, Vol. five, page 499)
2. Proof No. 2 of closet relations: Nehru agrees to give basic information about the Bharti military

“The specific incident which has caused him [I.S. Chopra, First Secretary, Embassy of India] to approach the Department on this occasion was explained as being the receipt of a telegram from the Government of India to the effect that Colonel Middleton, American Military Attaché, New Delhi had asked the Government of India for the following information, all of which is classified as “Top Secret” by India.
“1. Mobilization plan of Indian army
(a) The system and schedule of a mobilization of personal unit
(b) The total to be mobilized at the end of 30 days period, the 60 day period, the 90 days period; the 120 day period and the 180 day period
(c) A list of divisions and other units to be mobilized in each period

“2. Organization and mobilization of troops of Indian Army reserves.
  
(a) The number and types of reserve organizations now on duty.
(b) Planned reserve organizations.
(c) Method of organization.
(d) Method of calling to active duty in the event of emergency
(e) Number of trained services  by age groups
(f) Number of untrained reserves

“Mr. Sparks [Joseph S. Sparks of the Division of South Asian Affairs] was shown a copy of this telegram which concluded with a paragraph to the effect that Colonel Middleton had been informed that the GOI had no objection to making this information available to the U.S. should it be understood that such release would be made upon a reciprocal basis.” (Top Secret, 711.45/5-1048, Memorandum of Conversation by Mr. Joseph S. Sparks of the Division of South Asian Affairs, [Washington,] May 10, 1948, Vol. V, P. 509-510)
 

Free lunch. There is no free lunch in international politics. Nehru did not become Bernard Madoff of Asia for nothing. For his services as a spy, he was asking for B-25’s, less then a year of Bharat’s existence as a pseudo independent country. This request shows that the militaristic nature of Nehru dynasty. north … “Mr. Hare [Raymond A. Hare, Chief of the Division of South Asian Affairs] emphasized that, with respect to the B-25’s which Colonel Kaul [Former Indian Military Attaché in Washington] had requested, the position was that, quite aside from the policy, that type of plane simply was not available, there being none in this country excess to the needs of our air force. …Sir Girja urged that the US not persist in this policy; as it was of urgent necessity that India strengthen its defenses. The Indian air force lacked bombers, and there were many other essential military needs which could be met only by imports. He would like very much to send a military mission to this country to explore the possibilities of procuring essential military equipment.  (Secret, 711.45/4-248, Memorandum of Conversation, by the Assistant Chief of the Division of South Asian Affairs (Mathews), [Washington,] April 2, 1948, Vol. V, P. 505)

 Nehru had a standing army of 360,000,000 men. There was no need for B25’s

“Sir Girja (Sir Girja Shanker Bajpai, Secretary General of the Ministry of External Affair and Commonwealth Relations, GOI)  then pointed out that although India was maintaining an army of some 360,000,000 men and had appointed 121 crorers of rupees ($363,000,000) for defense purposes, it was no position effectively to resist aggression from the (Secret, 711.45/4-428, Memorandum of Conversations, by the Acting Secretary of State, (Lovett), [Washington,] April 2, 1948, Foreign Relations, 1948, Volume V, 506)

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Bharat secret alliance with America exposed
(America auctions Kashmir and Pakistan to pay its secret agent Bharat)

Highlights

- US-Bharat secret relations are the key factors in the continued occupation of Kashmir and dismemberment of Pakistan by Bharat 
- Ambassador Vijaya Lakshami Pandit was the listening  post of America in USSR (Muslim Daily, Obama policy shift worries Bharat)
- Churchill was wedded to Zionist ideology (Muslim Daily, Obama policy shift worries Bharat
-  Nehru had many reasons to become the secret agent of America
- American leadership was told again and again that Nehru was dyed-in the wool pro-American
- Nehru anti-America statements were made to fool Bhartis, Russians and to infiltrate in the anti-occupation camp led by patriotic forces
- Neutrality was a deceptive cloak for Nehru. It helped Nehru politically and militarily

- Nehru assured US to eliminate communist from the Indian government
- In fact, the US is the only country which is in a position to aid Bharat …Sir Girja
- Russian aggression and internal situation stop Bharat to ally publicly with America … Sir Girja
- In a third world war, India will side with America absolutely … I.S. Chopra
- He said that it was unthinkable that India should be on the Russia’s side in event of conflict between Russia and US … Sir Girja
- Nehru felt at present in view of Indian relative  impotence and fact that nation is still in swaddling clothes it would be ridiculous to talk publicly of military participation in event of war … Vijaya Lakshami Pandit
- India is not in Russian camp … Sir Girja
- Nehru sanctions the statements made by Vijaya Lakshami  Pandit, Sir Girja and Mr. Chopra
- India is a sub-continent. No country in the sub-continent has the legal right to name itself as India
- American leadership sold Poles down the river to Stalin    

Jafar Syed
M.A. LL.B.
Researcher – International Affairs
New York

1948. If anybody asserts that Bharti ambassador in Russia is spying for Truman administration, no body would believe. If any body asserts that Bharti ambassador is attending the meeting of the Russians as a trusted ally and then she is catering this information to America and its lapdogs of the “Free World, no body would believe. If anybody asserts that Nehru representatives are assuring the Truman administration that Bharat will side with America in third world war against Russians, no body would believe.

But these unbelievable assertions are demonstrable facts.

In addition, Nehru is informing President Truman that he is eliminating the communists from Bharti government. And Truman should also remember that Bharat supports its policies against Korea.

Nehru is also crowing the reasons that why Nehru will stand with Truman against Russian in third war. First, America is the only country that can help India in the military field. Second, Bharat share the American principles, values and aspirations.

As an ally of Truman, Nehru has one reservation, qualifier. Do not tear the mask of neutrality from the face of Nehru. Allow him to play the game of neutrality.

Why? There are so many reasons for playing the game of neutrality. (1) If Nehru side publicly with America, Stalin will take aggressive measures against Bharat. (2)  Internal situation does not allow Nehru to publicly side with America. (3) Nehru’s Bharat is in swaddling clothes. But time will come when Bharat will stand with America publicly, Nehru representatives fools the Truman administration.

Now think for a moment, if Nehru did not hide his face with the mask of neutrality, it would not have been able to get the trust of the Russians. Second, it would not have been able to infiltrate in the Russians camps. Third, it would not have been able to infiltrate in the non-aligned movement.  Fourth, Pakistanis and Kashmiris would not have been fooled for more than sixty years that American leadership is on their side.

View from any angle, mask of neutrality helped Nehru. 

It is necessary for the world, specifically for the Muslim World, to understand the nature and depth of alliance between Bharat and America. It is also necessary to understand the alliance between Bharat and the Jewish leadership of occupied Palestine. Because where American flag flies, Jewish flag flies also or vice versa.

Nehru Bharat (1947-1964) and Truman America (1945-1953)

Declassified documents prove that Nehru and Truman were joined by the hip. Nehru never criticized America and he never joined the Russian camp. He was always in the pocket of America.

“225. Re Embdesp 237 March 6. At his request I saw last evening H.V.R. Iengar, Acting Secretary General External Affairs in Bajpai’s absence. Prime Minister wished him to discuss with me recent statement on foreign policy which Prime Minister made in Assembly. Prime Minister wanted to be sure US did not misunderstand what he was endeavoring to convey. The speech he said was primarily for home consumption and to say certain things to Russia which he felt should be said. He said that it was unthinkable that India should be on the Russia’s side in event of conflict between Russia and US. American principles of democracy and those of India were identical. He wishes to maintain officially for his government a neutral position. I said that I did not see any objection to this policy but found it hard to understand the Prime Minister’s frequent reference to imperialism and that I had hear from reliable sources that Prime Minister had been critical of our government and America. Iengar said that as one who had been intimately associated with the Prime Minister for long time he found it hard to believe this as Prime Minister never criticized America to him. …
He stated further that Prime Minister is concerned about spread of Communism in India and said that very confidently measures are being taken to eliminate Communist from government. (The Ambassador in India (Grady) to the Secretary of State, Secret, New Delhi, March 20, 1948 – noon, Discussion between the United State and India Concerning India’s attitudes toward the United States and the Soviet Union, and Indian Requests for financial and military aid, Foreign Relation, 1948 Volume V, Page 498-499)

Note what Bharti ambassador Vijaya Lakshami Pandit in Moscow is saying about the relationship between America and Bharat

“ She [Vijaya Lakshami Pandit] informed me Nehru and most Indian leaders had long since made up their minds natural alignments was with west, but that Nehru felt at present in view of Indian relative  impotence and fact that nation is still in swaddling clothes it would be ridiculous to talk publicly of military participation in event of war. Her belief, which apparently reflects that of brother, is that India’s present role in family of nations should be modest and relatively humble one until nation has solved own internal difficulties. (The Ambassador in the Soviet Union (Smith) to the Secretary of State, Top Secret, Moscow, March 20, 1948 – I p.m, Foreign Relation, 1948, Volume V, P. 500)

It was not only Ambassador Vjaya Lakshami Pandit who was assuring the Truman administration that Bharat would be on the side of America if war started between America and USSR, Sir Girja  and Mr. Chopra were also crowing the same assurance. 

“Sir Girja [Sir Girja Shanker Bajpai, Secretary General of the Ministry of External Affairs and Commonwealth Relations, GOI) said that he appreciated the importance of Mr. Henderson’s remarks [Loy W. Henderson, Director of the Office of Near Eastern and African Affairs] and was gratified that U.S. Government was aware of the basic democratic orientation of the Government of India. He went on to point out that India’s position had been more accurately reflected in the 1947 UNJA than in the 1946 session, citing India’s support of our stand with respect to Korea and other issues. This brought him to the principal point he desired to make. Should the world once again become involved in conflict, India could only associate itself with those nations holding the same ideals of freedom and democracy. However, his Government is not able to make an open declaration of its position as it could not now withstand the aggression from Russia or the internal difficulties which might ensure. (711. 45/4-248, Memorandum of Conversation, by the Assistant Chief of the Division of South Asian Affairs (Mathews), Secret, [Washington,] April 2, 1948, Foreign Relations, 1948, Volume V, P. 502-503)

In another meeting with the U.S. officials, Sir Girja gave the reasons that why Bharat was not in the Russian camp

“His [Sir Girja] real purpose in coming to Washington had been to explain to me [Lovett, Acting Secretary of State] and other US officials India’s position vis-à-vis the US and the USSR. He had the impression that there was a feeling in this country that India was somehow “in the Russian camp.” He wished to emphasize that this was not the case, as India did not rid itself of the British in order to accept domination from some other quarters. I commented that although irresponsible newspaper columnists might have speculated on the nature of India’s relations with the USSR, I was sure that there was in the US no informed opinion that India has
aligned itself with the Russians. Sir Girja expressed his gratification at my statement and pointed out that two fundamental considerations prevented Indian adherence to the Soviet Block. First, through its association with the British, unhappy as it had been in some aspects, India had acquired the ideals of democracy and individual liberty which were held by the US and other nations of the west. Second, India can expect no effective assistance from the USSR in its primary objective of developing and strengthening itself economically and militarily. In fact, the US is the only country which is in a position to aid India. I told Sir Girja that we were grateful to receive his assurance of the friendly disposition of his Government.

“Sir Girja stated that his remarks were being made with the full knowledge and authorization of Prime Minister Nehru, and that he hoped that the Prime Minister could himself visit the US in the not too distant future in order to clarify the Indian position. (711.45/4-248, Memorandum of Conversion, by the Acting Secretary of State (Lovett, Secret, [Washington,] April 2, 1948), Foreign Relations, 1948, Volume V, Page 506-507)
 
As the nature of US- Bharat relations, Mr. Chopra was more outspoken than Mrs. Lakshami and Sir Girja.

“AS have various other personal, informal, official representatives of the Indian Government during recent months, Mr. Chopra [I.S. Chopra, First Secretary, Embassy of India] stated parenthetically that despite public statements made by Indian Government leaders for domestic consumptions, there is no doubt at all as to which side India would take should there be a third world war – the United States count absolutely on having India at its side in such a conflict. (711.45/5-1048, Memorandum of Conversation, by Joseph S. Sparks of the Division of South Asian Affairs, Secret, [Washington,] May 10, 1948, Foreign Relations, 1948, Volume V, P. 509)

Palestinians, Kashmiris and Pakistanis, note what American leadership did to the Poles. They sold them down the river. Who was the buyer? Stalin. Proof?

“The President [Roosevelt] will do nothing for the Poles, any more than Mr. Hull did at Moscow or the President did himself at Tehran. The poor Poles are sadly deluding themselves if they place any faith in these vague and generous promises. The president will not embarrassed by them thereafter, any more than by the specific undertaking he has given to restore the French Empire. (The Memoirs of Anthony Eden, Earl of Avon, Vol. 2, The Reckoning (Boston, 1965), PP. 559-540) Quoted in Roosevelt and Churchill, Their Secret Wartime Correspondence, P. 554-555)

American history is history of selling nations.
(America auctions Palestinians, Kashmiris and Pakistanis Series No. 1)

 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Obama policy shift worries Bharat?

Highlights
- Muslim world should know that Bharti leadership champions the continued occupation of Muslim Afghanistan
- India military build-up exposes Gandhi as phony champion of non-violence. He wanted a united Bharat just like Hindu racist leadership. Only tactics were different
- Bharat has been the operational arm of U.S. worldwide occupation
- Bharat has been the “listening post” of America
- Churchill was wedded to Zionist policy
- After Bombay attack, it was not the U.S. diplomacy that stopped Bharti attack against Pakistan. Fact is that Bharati military was not prepared to attack Pakistan. Friends of India Zardari and  Newaz Sharif should know
- Chances of making Pakistan the lap dog of Bharat are brighter under the leadership of Zardari and under the leadership of opposition leader Niwaz Sharif. Both do not believe in the existence of Pakistan as a separate state. One believes in “borderless border world” and other views the partition as a Berlin Wall. 
-  Mr. B. Raman, India could not have exited without the US protective umbrella. Occupied Khalsas, Kashmiris and other occupied nationalities would have won freedom from Brahmin Raj. Do not brag that India could become a hegemon without US protective umbrella.  
- Bharti leadership bribed the Baby Bush to sign the nuclear deal by throwing the bone of arms procurement of $80b dollar   
- Bharat wants to achieve two objectives by purchasing $80 billion arms. First, it wants to counter china. Second, it wants to eliminate Pakistan
- In spite of $80 billion arms procurement, China-Pak relations worry Bharat
- Bharati spin doctors assert that Obama will not protect Bharti interests as Baby Bush did.
- Bharat is one country of sub-continent India. It has no right to call itself India. India as a country ended with the partition of 1947
- Bharti leadership waved the Soviet Union card to fool the world in Cold War; now its spins doctors are waving China and Pakistan cards to fool the world. America was told again and again that if Washington’s doors are shut, Soviet Union’s doors were open. Now China and Pakistani cards are being waved. Fact is that Bharat was the secret agent of America in Cold War. In the changed circumstances, secrecy is not required
-  Un-subdued- broad-hearted and broad-shouldered Pashtoons are one of the segments of anti-occupation forces who are still challenging the Bharti occupation of Kahmiris. They must be incorporated or destroyed. Remember London Conference
- China military muscles worries America and India
- Bharat will be an operational arm of America in the Indian Ocean
 
Jafar Syed
M.A., LL.B.
Researcher – International Affairs
New York

There is no more tussle between Pentagon and State Department about India’s regional and international role; China is no more “the” factor in US-India relations; and Pakistan has again emerged as a factor in U.S. India relations. These facts prove that Obama’s administration is drifting away form the policies of Bush administration, laments B. Raman in India Abroad of January 29, 2010.

Solution? Fool China and Pakistan by “reviewing”  Bharat-China and Bharat-Pakistan relations. 

“There is definitely a need for such an examination in respect of our relations with China. As the scope for convergence of US-India perceptions and policies relating to China gets increasingly reduced during Obama’s term in office, it is important for us to strike out our own in refashioning our policies towards China. 

“Even in respect of Pakistan, the time has come to have a re-look at our policies to decide to what extent our fixation with certain issues has served us well. It is possible to give a strategic depth to our relations with Pakistan?” (B. Raman, Strategic course correction, India Abroad, January 29, 2010)

Mr. Raman also brag that “India’s relevance and acceptability as a major Asian power will not be determined by continuing to hang on to US coat-tails.”

It is the time-tested trick of Jewish and Hindu leadership to paint the American leadership as the enemy of Israel and Bharat (one country of Indian sub-continent). Using this trick, Jewish and Hindu leadership fool the world by muffling pro-Israel and pro-Bharat acts of the American leadership.

Applying this time tested trick, Bharti spin doctors are manufacturing a myth to fool the world. They claim that Obama is less inclined to serve the Bharti   interests than President Bush.

“Under Bush, Gates was a supporter of the multi-dimensional strategic relationship with India, covering civilian nuclear cooperation, military supply relationship, networking between the armed forces of the two countries, a high-profile role for India in maritime security and maritime counter-terrorism  and an important role for India as a respected US interlocutor in assessing the implication of China’s rise as a modern military power in the wake of its rise as an economic power aspiring for a parity of status with the US.” (B. Raman, “Strategic course correction, January 29, 2010)

The fact is that Obama administration might prove more pro-Bharat than Bush administration.

Proof? Who wants the butchery of Afghans to continue? India. Remember, in his recent visit, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh demanded publicly that Obama should not end the occupation of Afghanistan. Obama buckled under the pressure.

“America’s premature exit form Afghanistan is one of New Delhi’s biggest worries.
“Kabul, Islamabad and Beijing dominated Defense Secretary Robert N. Gates’s New Delhi visit, in that order. He assured Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that the United States will not pull out by 2012 if the Afghanistan region is not stable.
“Gates and before him Richard Holbrooke, on their visit to New Delhi, assured the Indian establishment that America will not exit from Afghanistan in 2011.” (India ready to dance if the music is right, Sheela Bhatt, India Abroad, January 29, 2010)

View from another angle US- Bharat relations under Obama administration. Will there be any change in military, economic and political policies under Obama administration? Answer is no. Will Obama administration challenge the occupation of Kashmir by Bharat? Answer is no.  Will encirclement of China by Obama administration continue?  Answer is yes.

Why does the so-called shift worries Bharti spin doctors?

Fact is that there is no shift in U.S. policy as Bharat is concerned. U.S. and Bharat are brothers in arms. The only thing that has changed is the political map of the Muslim World.

Obama’s inherited-world is different from Bush’s  inherited world. When Bush inherited the world, Sadam was the greatest threat to Jewish occupiers of Palestine. He had to be eliminated from the political scene. After his elimination and destruction of Iraq, Jewish occupation of Palestine is cemented. Now what Bush administration did for the Jewish occupiers of Palestine, Obama administration has designed to do for Hindu occupiers of Kashmir.

To achieve this purpose, every entity must be destroyed which stands for the rights of occupied Kashmiris. Destruction of anti-occupation forces will   give free ride to Bharti occupiers.

Un-subdued- broad-hearted and broad-shouldered Pashtoons are one of the segments of anti-occupation forces who are still challenging the Bharti occupation of Kahmiris. They must be incorporated or destroyed. Remember London Conference

So-called shift in China policy by Obama administration is opportunistic. Spin doctor B. Raman knows this fact.  To put a chook-hold around Iran economically, politically and militarily, China endorsement is a must. To neutralize China, overtures must be made to fool the Chinese leadership.

Spin doctor B. Raman is complaining this so-called policy shift. He knows that US and Bharat are joined by the hip.  The moment Iran is destroyed, China containment by US-Bharat will surface again.

View destruction of Iran from another angle.  Destruction of Iraq guaranteed Bush second term as a president. Destruction of Iran will guarantee Obama’s second term in office as president. 

Third, will Obama administration do any thing to cripple the Bharti military machine of death and destruction? Answer is no. It will do every thing in his power to feed Bharti military machine of death and destruction. Proof?

“In the last few years, the prospects of US supplies of military hardware to India have increased. We have seen recently that the Indian Air Force is placing an order to buy 10 Boeing C-17 advanced airlift aircraft via the foreign military sales program for over $2.4 billion. The letter of request was issued in January 8. It’s the biggest-ever deal with the US surpassing the P-81 long range maritime re-connaisance aircraft of last year for $2.1 billion. The Indian army is going to buy artilleries as well for the first time in many years. The US is fast emerging as a favored weapon supplier. Since 2001, it has clinched deals over 3.29 billion supplying India 12 Thales-Raytheon Systems AN/TPQ-37 (V) Firefinder artillery radar , the USS Trenton – renamed INS Jalashwa – and six embarked second-hand UH-3H Sea King helicopters. Six C 130 J Super Hercules military transporters are also added to the purchase list. (Rahual Bedi, The strategic expert discuses India’s military status with Sheela Bhatt, India Abroad, January 29, 2010)

Will Obama administration cancel existing military contract? Answer is no.

Will Obama administration not ink future military contract with Bharat. Answer is no.

“The Indian military has embarked on a huge modernization drive. In just the next three to four years India will spend $30 billion. By 2022, India is posed to spend another $50 billion; $80 billion is a huge amount of money.” (Rahual Bedi, The strategic expert discuses India’s military status with Sheela Bhatt, India Abroad, January 29, 2010)

Bharti leadership bribed the Baby Bush to sign the nuclear deal. “Also, an implicit provision of the nuclear deal was the payback factor. When there is a recession in the US arms industry is also affected. In view of it such Indian purchases do matter to the US-India military, defense procurement ties will grow over the 10 years.(Rahual Bedi, The strategic expert discuses India’s military status with Sheela Bhatt, India Abroad, January 29, 2010)

And note the difference between the words and the deeds of non-violent Bharat of Gandhi. Rahul Bedi, strategic expert, is not ashamed of that Bharat has become the global bazar of arms. He is proud of Bharti shopping of arms “The fact is everyone has opened the shop in India because nobody buys as India does. India is in the process to buy 197 helicopters. In 10 years times, India will need 600 helicopters. India is looking for 3,600 artillery guns worth about $12 to 14 billion.” (Rahual Bedi, The strategic expert discuses India’s military status with Sheela Bhatt, India Abroad, January 29, 2010)

Bharat wants to achieve two objectives by buying  $80 billion arms. First, it is determined to counter china, and its second objective is to eliminate Pakistan.

“The Chinese are growing not only in assets but also in terms of operation. That is worrying the Americans and worrying the Indians a lot. So, the Indian modernization plan is to meet China. If they meet the Chinese at some level it will take care of Pakistan.” (Rahual Bedi, The strategic expert discuses India’s military status with Sheela Bhatt, India Abroad, January 29, 2010)

Bharat will be an operational arm of America in the Indian Ocean.

“Also, the Indian Navy is important for America. The India Ocean is going to become a zone of conflict because 60 to 70 percent of world commerce passes through here. The US has said in many research papers that the Indian Navy could be the stabilizing agent. Without the assets of the Indian Navy, security of India Ocean is difficult. (Rahual Bedi, The strategic expert discuses India’s military status with Sheela Bhatt, India Abroad, January 29, 2010)

One of the most startling facts surfaced in the interview. It was not the US diplomacy which stopped Bharat to invade Pakistan. It was that Bharti army was not ready to invade Pakistan. Zardari, friend of Bharat, should know this fact. Niwaz Sharif who does not believe in Pakistan existence should also know this fact. 

“Definitely! As everyone knows, defence preparedness was found wanting after the 2008 Mumbai attacks. When the war council was called after the Mumbai attack, the air force is the only wing that is supposed to have expressed its ability to bomb targets across the Line of Control in Pakistani occupied Kashmir. The India army was very hesitant because they said that if the India force goes for this bombing then there will be reaction from Pakistan and the army may or may not be able to take care of that spread." (Rahual Bedi, The strategic expert discuses India’s military status with Sheela Bhatt, India Abroad, January 29, 2010)

In spite of $80 billion arms procurement, China-Pak relations rattle Bharat. “The Indian defense establishment is always worried when American supplies go to Pakistan but these days the defense forces are more worried about Chinese supplies to Pakistan. The Chinese are supplying frigates, warships, tanks, combat aircraft, tanks, missiles and artilleries. They are supplying the entire range of military equipment. They have robust joint development programs in all the three services. The Indian vice chief of the air staff has said that Pakistan’s exports of military goods are far ahead of Indian exports.” (Rahual Bedi, The strategic expert discuses India’s military status with Sheela Bhatt, India Abroad, January 29, 2010)

The last world. Christian, Jewish and Hindu leadership are united to destroy the Muslim World.  As the Christian and Jewish leadership is concerned, their destructive policy did not start today. Note: Churchill was wedded to Zionism.

“I hope you will let me see beforehand the text of any message you are thinking of sending me upon the anniversary of the Atlantic Charter of August 14. We  considered the wording of that famous document line by line together and I should not be able, without mature consideration, to give it a wider interpretation than was again agreed between us at the time. It proposed application to Asia and Africa requires much thought. Great embarrassment would be caused to the defence of India at the present time by such a statement as the Office of War Information has been forecasting. Here in the Middle East the Arabs might claim by majority they could expel the Jews from Palestine, or at any time forbid all further immigration. I am strongly wedded to the Zionist policy, of which I was one of the authors. This is the only one of the many unforeseen cases which will arise from new and further declaration. (Roosevelt and Churchill, Their Secret Wartime Correspondence, Edited by Francis L. Loewnheim, Harold D. Langley, and Manfred Jonas, Doc. 155, Churchill to Roosevelt, August 9, 1942, P. 244)

The Hindu leadership became the listening post of America after the establishment of Bharat in 1947.

“Can confirm information given by Chinese Ambassador New Delhi to ambassador Grady on statements of Mrs. Pandit. She has had similar confidential conversation with me and, I believe, with heads practically all mission in Moscow except Soviet satellites.

“She is obviously much concerned at Molotov’s change in attitude, but there is no real reason why she should be as both British Ambassador and myself has warned her honeymoon period for her would be last few months and thereafter she would have to take bitter with sweet, with emphasis on former.

“She asked my advice as to whether, in event public opinion in India further aroused, it would be good move for India to discontinue present relations with USSR, and said public opinion in India so aroused it would probably be difficult to send another chief of mission when she left. I told her I thought it would be tactical disadvantage, as India so close to USSR it should be decided advantage to maintain adequate listening post Moscow.

“She emphasized her brother [Prime Minister Nehru] had been deeply affronted by actions and attitude of Soviet Ambassador New Delhi. She herself now restricts her attendance at Soviet Officials functions to about fifteen minutes.

“She informed me Nehru and most Indian leaders has long since made up their minds natural alignment was with West, but that Nehru felt at present in view Indian relative impotence and fact that nation is still in swaddling clothes it would be ridiculous to talk publicly of military participation in event of war. Her belief, which apparently reflects that of brother, is that India’s present role in family of nations should be modest and relatively humble one until nation has solved internal difficulties. “TOP SECRET, The Ambassador in the Soviet Union (Smith) to the Secretary State, Moscow, March 20, 1948 – 1 p.m., Foreign Relations, 1948, Volume V, P. 499-500)        

World must know by this time that acrobats-policy-shifts are part of the American leadership. With the shifting sands, it is ready to sleep with Stalin and Mao if it serves its world wide occupation. Even Hitler was acceptable if he had invaded Sovie as the ally of America. Sadam was acceptable when he turned against the Iranians. Iran was acceptable when U.S. was butchering the Talibans. Iran was also acceptable when Iraqi were butchered to oust Sadam.

As a student of history, you want to go back. Spain and France were allies to oust Great Britain in the so-called war of independence. The moment Great Britain was kicked out of occupied America, policy changed towards Spain and France. After World War 11, Soviet Union of Stalin became the No. I enemy of the “free world.” After the elimination of Sadam Hussain, Iran became the greatest threat to the Israel and American allies in the region.

But there are two exceptions. They are Jews and Hindus. In any circumstances, US leadership has been there to extend its protective umbrella for these occupying races.   Why?

 

 

Website Builder