Sue the British Bandits
by John-Paul Leonard | 28.12.2001 11:56
"..Britain has walked away scot-free from the hell her imperial architects put in place as part of their never-ending scheme to divide, conquer, neutralize and loot the world, not least the Islamic world - like a cunning criminal landlord, smirking as he leaves a house whose roof is set to fall in on its newly independent tenants..."
Sue the British Bandits
With murderous explosions opening the century in New York, Palestine and Kashmir, it is time for the world to fix the responsibility for this awful mess and require the culprit to clean it up. Britain has walked away scot-free from the hell her imperial architects put in place as part of their never-ending scheme to divide, conquer, neutralize and loot the world, not least the Islamic world - like a cunning criminal landlord, smirking as he leaves a house whose roof is set to fall in on its newly independent tenants.
Up to now, the Britons’ devious talent for cunning charades has allowed them to preach standards to their “Commonwealth”, while blaming its benighted natives for the ethnic mayhem that has followed once the Brits could lay down their white man’s burden for a well-earned rest, poor dears. Let George do it now, or whoever is minding the store under new American management for England’s past masters.
Odd, though, how the crushing burden of relieving subject peoples of their excess wealth lies so lightly and jauntily upon the stalwart shoulders of the new, improved imperialist US-UK partnership, as their McWorld brand tots up its trillions on the meter.
To return to the scene of the crimes: It is no coincidence that today’s flashpoints, Palestine and Kashmir, were occupied by Britain in the years up to 1947, when they were partitioned and occupied by anti-Islamic British puppet colonizers, steered by the connivance of British intrigue.
Instigating facts on the ground and hypocritically bemoaning them in public has been the stock US-UK charade in trade ever since. Like donating F-16’s to Israel’s aerial assassin squad and grandstanding a wet tongue-licking when they strafe the neighborhoods, only one of a myriad examples of this crocodilian behavior.
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 today’s 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. Britain’s 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 Britain’s 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 can’t 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 God’s plan, or Darwin’s, 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 Britain’s 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
Copyright © 2001 Media Monitors Network @
http://www.MediaMonitors.net
All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited
Up to now, the Britons’ devious talent for cunning charades has allowed them to preach standards to their “Commonwealth”, while blaming its benighted natives for the ethnic mayhem that has followed once the Brits could lay down their white man’s burden for a well-earned rest, poor dears. Let George do it now, or whoever is minding the store under new American management for England’s past masters.
Odd, though, how the crushing burden of relieving subject peoples of their excess wealth lies so lightly and jauntily upon the stalwart shoulders of the new, improved imperialist US-UK partnership, as their McWorld brand tots up its trillions on the meter.
To return to the scene of the crimes: It is no coincidence that today’s flashpoints, Palestine and Kashmir, were occupied by Britain in the years up to 1947, when they were partitioned and occupied by anti-Islamic British puppet colonizers, steered by the connivance of British intrigue.
Instigating facts on the ground and hypocritically bemoaning them in public has been the stock US-UK charade in trade ever since. Like donating F-16’s to Israel’s aerial assassin squad and grandstanding a wet tongue-licking when they strafe the neighborhoods, only one of a myriad examples of this crocodilian behavior.
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 today’s 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. Britain’s 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 Britain’s 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 can’t 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 God’s plan, or Darwin’s, 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 Britain’s 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 Copyright © 2001 Media Monitors Network @
http://www.MediaMonitors.net All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited
by John-Paul Leonard
e-mail:
Editor@MediaMonitors.net
Homepage:
http://www.mediamonitors.net/leonard28.html
Comments
Display the following 2 comments