by John-Paul Leonard
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 the same author:
-
