Indo-UK News & Discussion 9th Aug 2011

[eklavya]

Eklavya,

Since when people are required to put their opinion on Pass Port. What logic is that?

RamaY, I think the law enforcement agencies in the US, the UK and India will have a strong interest in people (possibly US citizens) who advocate India be cleansed of their ideological opponents (who they believe are collaborating with the British state).

[RamaY]

^ In which language "Honourable retreat for a political dispensations human assets" means "cleansing"? We have seen this tactic before on the forum. As soon as someone says India can be a Hindu nation, they immediately call it a call for genociding religious minorities.

This is some nonsense you can live without, for your as well as others benefit.

And you are telling us UK is the torch bearer of human rights when it comes to Indian Interests?

[eklavya]

^^^
RamaY, the operative words in brihaspati's statement are "leave for good". An "honourable retreat" is what a victor offers the defeated, the alternative being death.

brihaspati knows full well the meaning of his words. It was an undisguised statement of intent to rid India physically of his political opponents.

[brihaspati]

RamaY ji,
ekalavya is talking according to his handlers own interpretation of "honourable retreat" - the British imperialist interpretation of "either leave" or "death". For me "leave" is leaving politics and power. For eklavya the onlee good enemy is a dead enemy. Eklavya will execute his "hostile" opponent if his opponent does not "retreat" - just as the Brits of a bygone era insisted on. Note that he is always taking the most extreme physical side of state action, torture, execution, killing - as the sole interpretation of "state measures".

Actually eklavya practically justified whatever the Brits did on IRA as "exceptional circumstances". So his pious posturing as "holier-than-thou" is based on the hope that his tacit support of "illegality" of action would be acceptable because he onlee supports the Brit state action - conditioned to support "illegality" as long as such illegality is not helping India, or damaging enemies of India.

Here is his original post in support of bending the law -

By bringing up the treatment of the IRA, you have only highlighted that in exceptional circumstances governments occasionally end up on the wrong side of their own laws. If your yardstick for how the British state deals with Sikh separatists is how they dealt with the IRA, then you are being a bit naive. I was hoping that the US Government-IRA example would make you understand that each state has its own perceptions and interests and acts accordingly; to expect the British state to break its laws for the benefit of the Indian state is tilting at windmills, to say the least.

Note that for him it is not unnatural for the British state to break its "laws" in "exceptional circumstances" - he simply does not expect the British state to "break the law" in favour of India -and that for him law-breaking is dependent on "perceptions" of interests - and "acts" are according to those perceptions. He dares not condemn the British state in the same abusive language he freely hurls at those he thinks are Indians and therefore fit for such abuse [also he might be mortally scared of losing his job if he does not prove his devotion and loyalty by bashing up critical Indians] for the IRA situation.

Before I brought the Stevens report up - both he and Lisa never ever mentioned the existence of the report, while they were pretending that the law "so much" constrained the British state in its actions. Maybe he was hoping no one would bring the ref up.

eklavya, I know you are immensely inflamed at the non-kowtowing to your favourite idols and inspirations - by being viciously abusive and overzealous in whitewashing their image you might hope to gain favours in which nations you mentioned - India, UK and US - right? go ahead - your handlers will know me better than they know you. I do not need to place my views on my visa applications to several countries - because I do not need a visa to visit them legally. I have already placed my views at much higher levels than the embassies (and in perfectly legitimate settings) than you can imagine.

Just as people talk of "solving the Kashmir problem", people also talk of solving the "Khalistani" problem, and the "pak" problem, and so on, and some of those talking sessions are no holds barred - between academics and would-be-solvers. I think you don't realize where you are stepping into because you are committed to holding up and defending a certain image of the states/parties/regimes that is archaic.

Yeah take my views and your threat of state action, to your handlers - if you are expecting a bonus. You will be enlightened.

[brihaspati]

Since eklavya is so close to the state security apparatus of three nations - US, UK, India - he knows that there are formal laws against many aspects of surveillance and covert intervention needed to prevent serious "outrages". But a lot of progress is made when such surveillance is undertaken by "stretching" the law or even sometimes breaking them.

We might be breaking "laws" as of now even without torturing/maiming/killing. But if we break them - we might be able to go to a great length in preventing a serious threat. I had hoped my question on "why restrict onlee to legal" methods would set people in the right direction intended. Lurid imagination and perverted minds converged quickly to torture etc., and to be fair I wanted to see who converged where so encouraged such drifts.

A lot can be done in the gray zone between law and "un-law" - even without torture/death. I will rest it at that.

[brihaspati]

oh eklavya,
yes it is not onlee my opinion - that UK will benefit in the long run if it begins to think from now of an alternative to the Congress to look after the future of Indo-UK "friendship". Does the mere statement hurt you much - I am sorry! There is a lot of mutual benefits to be obtained - just that UK ruling circles have to reconsider their allies.

[Anand K]

So many agent provocateurs and agents of influence and security consultants here (in my younger days I thought Johann was a Front). Wonder if any sworn foreign citizen or Indian citizen mods/owners/members here are in the game?!
...

Hitchens (RIP) had written quite a bit about WHY London is hosting all this lowlife. Some say this is simply a way to get leverage and maintain communication channels all over the world. Some say this is the Britturds simply acting out their hardwired ceaseless meddling imperative. Anyway, this asylum/political hotspot thingie started with the French Revolution and the 18th century European upheavals, no? Even in the height of US-UK rivalry they had voluble organizations working for and against the Union side. IIRC, Karl Marx had a major role in gathering support for the Union and organizing workers against Confederacy shipbuilding contracts.

PS: BTW, anybody here explored the Hindu Mahasabha/RSS/ityadi and the British Raj dynamics? Especially the phase of Malaviya/Moonje/Paramanand, the post 1937 phase, the WW2-Quit India phase etc? CT galore.

[Yayavar]

Kya kehte ho? Gandhi was enough ...the others need not be subverted. Chota-mota fish onlee.

[Sanku]

Yes, I would like UK to use all the methods at HMS disposal that it used for one set of terrorists, against other set of terrorists.

Where do Sikhs come into the picture at all?

You really need to stop this you know. You are being rather demeaning to all the Sikhs as well.

Sanku, brihaspati is saying that all the methods that were used against non-violent supporters of the IRA are also legitimate to be used against non-violent supporters of Khalistan (and a large number of Sikhs in Britain fall into this category).

Three things
1) B DID NOT say that, you are paraphrasing him and deliberately and specifically being mischievously untrue. He only said that Britian was selective in using both legal and extra-legal means (but allowed under special circumstances).

2) I do not understand what is the problem with the above bolded part anyway, shouldn't all terrorists organizations be treated equally, are you saying that there are good terrorists and bad terrorists?

3) From where do you pull out the allegation that a large number of Sikhs are terrorist supporters? That my boy is hate speech. Do you even know the meaning?

You are free to associate your views with that of brihaspati; I hope you understand what you doing.

[/quote]

Your petty threats are laughable you know? In fact it is you who should worry about what will happen to you if you continue lying like this in general in life and then threatening those who call out your lies.

In fact I wonder if HMS govt think about labeling Sikhs as Khalistani supporters in general? Is that not a racist abuse? Is racist abuse of this variety allowed in UK?

In India such filth would not be tolerated.

[brihaspati]

So many agent provocateurs and agents of influence and security consultants here (in my younger days I thought Johann was a Front). Wonder if any sworn foreign citizen or Indian citizen mods/owners/members here are in the game?!
...

Hitchens (RIP) had written quite a bit about WHY London is hosting all this lowlife. Some say this is simply a way to get leverage and maintain communication channels all over the world. Some say this is the Britturds simply acting out their hardwired ceaseless meddling imperative. Anyway, this asylum/political hotspot thingie started with the French Revolution and the 18th century European upheavals, no? Even in the height of US-UK rivalry they had voluble organizations working for and against the Union side. IIRC, Karl Marx had a major role in gathering support for the Union and organizing workers against Confederacy shipbuilding contracts.

PS: BTW, anybody here explored the Hindu Mahasabha/RSS/ityadi and the British Raj dynamics? Especially the phase of Malaviya/Moonje/Paramanand, the post 1937 phase, the WW2-Quit India phase etc? CT galore.

Yes. true. from even before French Revolution. Traceable as early as the Anglo-French Plantagenet time wars. Mainly mediated by the Dutch and Venetian financial networks.

As for RSS - I think I mentioned the possibility at some stage. But they obviously were found to be not useful - hence the kick with two birds with a single stone - the assassination of MKG.

[svinayak]

Some say this is simply a way to get leverage and maintain communication channels all over the world.

As for RSS - I think I mentioned the possibility at some stage. But they obviously were found to be not useful - hence the kick with two birds with a single stone - the assassination of MKG.

They have maintained links with all ethnic groups and families in all the parts of the world where they have set foot. This generational lines of communication is important for them to keep the balance in the world since they have created the power centers. They have few areas where they have not ventured and dont have direct links. They have proxyies for them

This elaborate system and the concept of dissent has been carefully nurtured by the British very successfully for 200 years



This guy with the British accent talks about India due to his knowledge of what British obtained from India in the last 200 years

But the most important part is the person who is interviewing him. The questioner is more concerned about Indians not giving respect to British and no longer 'look upon' the English people and the influence of the English people receding in India. That gives a lot of information.

[eklavya]

Three things
1) B DID NOT say that, you are paraphrasing him and deliberately and specifically being mischievously untrue. He only said that Britian was selective in using both legal and extra-legal means (but allowed under special circumstances).

2) I do not understand what is the problem with the above bolded part anyway, shouldn't all terrorists organizations be treated equally, are you saying that there are good terrorists and bad terrorists?

3) From where do you pull out the allegation that a large number of Sikhs are terrorist supporters? That my boy is hate speech. Do you even know the meaning?

brihaspati's statements calling for unlawful action against non-violent Khalistan supporters (in the mould of the unlawful action taken against non-violent IRA supporters) are clear and unambiguous; your filthy attempted cover-up is just a declaration of your moral and intellectual bankruptcy.

Non violent supporters and members of lawful separatist movements are not terrorists. The 2nd and 3rd of your statements suggest that your basic comprehension skills are fail-grade.

[eklavya]

A lot can be done in the gray zone between law and "un-law" - even without torture/death. I will rest it at that.

Olympic quality downhill skiing .... outdoing even the pakis 400%

[eklavya]

For me "leave" is leaving politics and power.

After all that bravado, brihaspati turns out to be a bog-standard scaredy puss. Only a half-wit who has taken leave of their senses would even attempt such a feeble cover-up.

[devesh]

ok, this is just stupid. there is not even a feeble attempt of a pretense of "rational" argument. it's down to one-liner insults without any substance...

[archan]

Start a fresh thread with a more focused discussion on current Indu-UK News and Discussion, please.