Far more than Prabhakaran, India ought to be arresting and prosecuting K. Subrahmanyam and not just for the killings of Indira and Rajiv Gandhi and hanging K. Subrahmanyam, not Afzal Guru. The Tamil Rakshas on Bharat-Rakshak forum I have referred to in another thread, who works for U. S. intelligence agencies and called K. Subrahmanyam “Bhishma Pitamah”, refers to “DIEnasty politics” killing Indira and Rajiv but it was not politics but C.I.A.-RAW and, specifically, K. Subrahmanyam who killed them, because of my ‘influence’ on them because of which India's strategic programs, aimed at defence against the United States, were started and re-started. Vajpayee shut them down, contrary to his stance in claiming 'credit' for the nuclear tests, carried out to deceive people because I wrote "Defence is not on the agenda" (see addendum of March 20, 2009 in my blog). Both RAW and the C.I.A. have been threatening me with a nasty death and other things; see threats to me -- along with an offer to transfer one crore rupees into my account within 48 hours if I was "willing to cooperate with us at RAW?" and saying "we are seeking your cooperation for a very important matter, i.e. the cause of Indo-US friendship. I am pleased to inform you that we will be awarding you handsomely for your cooperation. We will transfer the sum of INR 10,000,000/- (1 crore rupees) to your bank account within 48 hours of receiving confirmation of your willingness to assist us" -- posted by K. Subrahmanyam and the C.I.A. Director Michael Hayden on an article of mine on August 10 and 11, 2008 which was published, after totally altering it and eliminating all of the main points, under the title "Ridding India of foreigners for nuclear autonomy" (the title I had given it was "National Security: Ridding India of Firangis & Their Agents"; see addendum dated August 4, 2008 in my blog for the article as I sent it; the threats and the offer of one crore rupees are at
Ridding India of foreigners for nuclear autonomy ) because of which I have had to stop going out of the house for the past couple of months; these threats have been made with the fullest knowledge of India's politicians, government, media and others; is there any provision of "security", Z-plus or other, for me?
Illustrating what I have said in another thread about the Tamil Rakshasas being a constant conduit for the entry of India’s enemies into the subcontinent, “Obama only hope for Lanka issue: Vaiko: … MDMK leader Monday said US President … was “the only hope” to ensure a solution for the Sri Lanka Tamils issue and sought his intervention … in a letter sent to Mr. Obama … you (Obama) are the only hope for us, who can effectively intervene to stop the genocidal war [meaning the insurgency created by K. Subrahmanyam, as he later did in Punjab and elsewhere, as I have said; the language and ethnic issue, if any, was no more than what led to the creation of Haryana from Punjab; one can easily create an insurgency of left-handed people against right-handed people] of Sri Lanka and save our Tamils” … “ (PTI report in The Hindu, April 27 ‘09, Internet). A by-product of India’s nuclear destruction of the United States (see my thread titled 'Actual USE of nuclear weapons increases your power millions of times') will be India regaining control over India, not just up to the Hindukush (“Hindu-killer”
mountain ranges.
A C.I.A.-RAW operative who writes for the Hindustan Times says “The Congress … may play its final trump card and propose the name of … Shinde, a dalit, for PM. No political party will be able to reject his candidature … “. India must reject all politics and all politicians.
As for "security", Z-plus or other, for me, this is what I said about "security" on April 11 '09: "One of the tactics C.I.A.-RAW regularly uses -- most recently it did so with the ISRO chief -- is to announce a terror threat against an individual or institution and provide it with “security” -- the ISRO chief has been given ‘Z-level’ security -- which serves to give them ‘status’ -- as a bribe -- as well as intimidate them and bring them on the side of C.I.A.-RAW and the United States in the ‘war on terror’ and, by induction, for other purposes such as letting the U.S. participate in -- and thereby take control of -- India’s space program -- recently the ISRO chief had shown skittishness about such dependence, calling the spy satellite to be launched on April 20th an Indian satellite, because of my earlier negative comment about ISRO launching an Israeli spy satellite -- and thereby ‘neutralise’ me and keep India’s enslavement rolling along. The LeT and other entities from which the threats emanate are, of course, totally C.I.A.-RAW-sponsored and controlled entities. If the tactic does not suffice, C.I.A.-RAW can actually carry out an attack, as it has carried out hundreds of attacks in India since 1983, to keep the terror threats credible as well as for other purposes."
Is the father of India's strategic program, the greatest Indian scientist since ancient times and the greatest living Indian, under threat and harassment from C.I.A.-RAW for decades and now faced with an acute crisis and imminent threat to his life and limbs, entitled to "security"? But C.I.A.-RAW decides who gets "security".
To understand RAW's role in all of the above, see post # 1 in the following thread:-
http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/16042-raw-indias-external-intelligence-agency.html
India's biggest enemy is the United States and its C.I.A. as it is of the world. The C.I.A. and its associated intelligence agencies and their Indian slaves have been committing crimes against India and the world from before they started their crimes against India's greatest scientist and the greatest living Indian 32 years ago. Psychologist B. F. Skinner, with a fundamentally and grossly erroneous theory of human nature set the C.I.A. -- whose agenda has been set by ignorant and criminal Harvard professors rather than by U.S. presidents or Congress -- on this disastrous course. Through the C.I.A., he imposed his agenda on India and the rest of the world as well. Neither past nor the current Negro president of the U.S. seem capable of anything else, puppets of the C.I.A. as they are. It won't be long before the world is rid of this evil.
This is what I wrote in a letter dated April 28, 2006 to the press:-
"Regarding the case of a novel by an Indian sophomore at Harvard: a graduate student from the Indian subcontinent at Boston's Northeastern University was accused of plagiarism because the quality of English in assigned work she turned in for a course was incomparably superior to anything she was capable of writing and, to prove this, she was required to answer the same questions in the presence of a faculty member. She wrote about thirty pages in perhaps two hours which exactly reproduced what she had earlier turned in. The faculty member alleged she had copied from papers she had with her. In her rebuttal, the student wrote this faculty member was watching her like the proverbial "hawk" throughout this session and her charge of copying was a "damnable lie". She explained, in her rebuttal and to her faculty adviser, that she had "memorized" what she reproduced in the presence of the faculty member. The lying faculty member was obliged to leave the university.
The Harvard sophomore, an Indian-American, says (New York Times, April 27 '06, Internet) she had read the books from which she is alleged to have plagiarized three or four times, that she has a "photographic memory" and had last read the books some time before she wrote her own book. Psychologist B. F. Skinner, whose plagiarism I exposed (see letter dated February 26 '05 below), upon which he was awarded an honorary doctorate by Harvard and I was mugged in a Harvard seminar (see letter dated May 11 '05 below), wrote in his 'Notebooks' that the practice, several thousands of years old and still continuing, of Brahmin priests memorizing entire books (such as the Vedas) may have had a (genetically) "selective effect" endowing them with superior memory (and other cognitive abilities). Memorization of very long texts is still the standard way students learn, at all levels, in the Indian subcontinent and the practice is not limited to Brahmin priests (the Northeastern University student was Muslim). Such ability, commonplace to Indians, is astonishing to Americans. The Harvard sophomore, of Indian origin with near perfect SAT scores, can be expected to have genetically superior memory and her explanation of how she came to reproduce portions of books she had read is believable. This does not mean that she did not intentionally plagiarize, just that her explanation is credible.
Skinner, author of 'Verbal Behavior', describes playing the "sedulous ape" to established authors as a way budding authors learn. Examples of similarities between the Harvard sophomore's novel and the novels she read (Boston Globe, April 25 '06, Internet) would have fit this description if the similarities were intentional. The similarities could be unconscious yet intentional (there are unconscious intentions). But they could have been both unconscious and unintentional, because of the way a person's verbal repertoire is formed. Skinner's own plagiarism was infinitely more serious (see my paper in BEHAVIORISM, Spring, 1976). Skinner was voted by American psychology department chairpersons as the most influential living psychologist and, along with Sigmund Freud, one of the two most influential psychologists of all time. A survey showed that his world-wide reputation exceeded the combined reputation of the thirty or so Nobel prize winners in the Boston area. It was based on his position of 'radical behaviorism' which he defined in terms of his opposition to what he called 'mentalism' and Freud, of course, is the great mentalist. For his position to be viable, he had to provide an account of the so-called 'higher mental processes' such as language, which he did in 'Verbal Behavior'. By showing that his account of language was simply a refinement of the work of Freud, my paper in BEHAVIORISM eliminated any basic distinction between his position and Freud's and the basis for his claim to being a great and original thinker. In a question and answer session with thousands of his followers who packed the grand ballroom of the Hilton hotel in Chicago in May, 1977, he was very angrily denounced by his own followers, such as by one who stood up, livid with rage, shouting, referring to my paper and its implications ("SATISH CHANDRA HAS SHOWN..."), for the fraud he had perpetrated on them and the world; his world-wide reputation and appearance on TIME magazine's cover, etc., were due to the fundamental importance of the basic nature of human beings, for prescriptions on how they should live and be educated and governed, issues of freedom, etc., of whether they are machines or have a mind or soul and how they function. Skinner acknowledged "similarities" between him and Freud shown by "Chandra" in "BEHAVIORISM", but had no response beyond first emphatically and aggressively saying "Or Jesus Christ! Or B. F. Skinner!" in the same breath, then minimizing the importance of such matters by appealing to the general state of ethics and what is acceptable in academia with a light-hearted "what--Miller wrote it, Gallanter takes credit for it, Pribram believes it!" (these were co-authors of a book in cognitive psychology). Upto then, Skinner had had his critics such as Chomsky of M.I.T. but had, correctly, maintained that Chomsky's review of 'Verbal Behavior' was based on very poor scholarship and a misunderstanding of his position. He could not say that about my paper in BEHAVIORISM, the principal vehicle for theoretical work in radical behaviorism, whose editor called me with profound emotion about a day after he received it and wrote to me "Heartiest congratulations on what I regard to be a major contribution to work in the field". From Germany alone, more than two dozen psychologists wrote me requesting reprints, besides every behaviorist in the United States. That paper was effective in a way that Chomsky's was not and killed behaviorism ( the journal's name has been changed to 'Behavior and Philosophy'). Skinner himself wrote to me (see excerpts from his letter on my web page:
Psychotherapy - eBoard ) about that paper, before the above session with his followers, "...want to tell you, while the spell is on me, how much I admire what you have done. You have made a much more courageous use of the autoclitic and the atomic operant than I did, with breath-taking results. Seldom have I read a paper that seemed to me to contain so much that was new and forward-moving...", etc. But after the above session with his followers, his behavior was very different (see the letter sequence below).
Verbal behavior is a far more complicated matter than either Skinner or Freud (or cognitive psychology) provide for. For example, person A can show induction from person B's verbal behavior without ever coming into contact (as conventionally understood) with person B's verbal behavior. The Harvard sophomore, though, had repeated, extended contact with the other author's books. In an example (Boston Globe, April 24 '06, Internet) both authors refer to "170 specialty stores". This puts a question mark on intentional plagiarizing, because an intentional plagiarizer would have changed the number to something other than 170."
U.S. conservative William F. Buckley who, after finishing Yale, worked as a C.I.A. agent in Mexico delivering envelopes full of cash to all and sundry, as he described, once wrote he would rather be ruled by the first 100 names in the Boston telephone directory than by Harvard professors. Unfortunately, the United States is ruled by Harvard professors.
Skinner once said to me: "This department is second rate. Lucky to have you here" after a jew physically assaulted me in a Harvard seminar when I said "I don't think conservation is a useful concept" regarding the explanation of an experiment's results using the concept of conservation; later I realised it was because a prominent jewish psychologist, Jean Piaget, prominently uses the concept of conservation to explain similar experimental results in his work. Skinner's calling the Harvard psychology department "second rate" was correct because a department's rating is determined by the best of the faculty there; Skinner was by far the best and he was second rate, as I explain below; the rest were third and fourth rate. Skinner wrote in an autobiographical essay in his Festschrift that at the beginning of his career an older psychologist told him "It takes one little idea to be a success in American psychology" and wrote 'he measured the idea with a thumb and forefinger' -- meaning a homunculus, a spirit or 'soul'. Skinner decided to be successful by radically denying the existence of any spirit or soul through his 'radical behaviorism'. Skinner's basic motivation was, in true American fashion, to be a "success" (as a businessman is called 'successful') which had no provision for intellectual integrity; this is what made him second rate. At the end of his 'Verbal Behavior' he says 'a science of verbal behavior makes no provision for "truth or certainty" though "we can't even be sure of the truth of that".' In other words, he was saying truth was not a useful concept in his science of verbal behavior. Skinner was considered a "giant", an all-time great in the history of human thought, towering like Plato and Aristotle and, for many, eclipsing them, because such psychological theories as to the basic nature of man underpin philosophy and religion as well and Skinner was all over these fields, particularly philosophy.
The Harvard psychology department, like other U. S. psychology departments, was dominated by jews and their primary motivation was maintaining jewish control over the field and over academia.
In his Festschrift essay, Skinner also wrote that perhaps he has tried to overcome his "early fear of theological ghosts" through his radical behaviorism. In my last meeting with him (on March 23 or 24, 1978), in which I brought up the concept of time and Einstein's twin paradox, I said (rhetorically as a question, actually as an assertion or proposition) "Is it true that everything exists at all times and that things 'pass' [mockingly with an American pronunciation and with a stern face implying disapproval of American negligence which cannot even preserve pronunciation over a few generations and was an indicator of general intellectual sloppiness and inferiority; compare the precision of pronunciation, not just words, with which the Vedas and other works have been transmitted orally over millenia] is an illusion?" -- because his fear of theological ghosts was also a fear of death, also shown by his emphasis on 'survival' as the ultimate value. Skinner dodged the question by asking, rhetorically, "Illusion??" but I heard him say several years later in a lecture in the Boston area "When I die, I will cease to exist", which was his answer to my rhetorical question. My reference to Einstein, who never conducted any experiments except 'thought experiments' and whose work was purely theoretical, was also a refutation of Skinner's position, both in his published work and to me personally, which held any one who has not done any laboratory experimental work has done no worthwhile scientific work -- and my paper in BEHAVIORISM was purely theoretical -- though, as I have said, my laboratory work with rats, which I was forced to stop in 1974, if and when completed, will revolutionise biology and medicine, as well as physics. Later, in a published account, his assistant, a jew who participated in crimes against me at Harvard, recalled Skinner's implied acknowledgment of the jew Einstein's superiority over him but Skinner never had the integrity to retract his crimes, through jews, through the C.I.A. and others, against me which have continued to this day. Once Skinner said to me "You don't get support because you are brilliant, or that you do brilliant work". When I asked him what, then, gets support, he replied "It's a business".
In fact, it is not even business but robbery of the worst kind. The C.I.A.'s Skinner-assigned agenda with respect to me is to steal my work through the 24-hour satellite surveillance of me, but denying me all 'reinforcement' -- that is recognition/reward/the wherewithal for life, etc. -- except of the kind through which laboratory pigeons are induced to peck a key tens of thousands of times for each grain of food, so their beaks are worn down to their skin and their face muscles swell, while inflicting the worst kind of verbal injuries (such as calling me delusional or schizophrenic, threatening to put me in a mental hospital, calling me ugly or stupid as K. Subrahmanyam does in comments he posted on my articles at merinews.com and C.I.A.-RAW operatives regularly do on any online forum I go to, etc. etc.) and material injuries (robbing me of career, life, any income, a place to live or work, as well as money, properties, etc. I already had in India, tampering with my eye medication in transit and making me blind for two years, etc. etc.) on me -- including by contacting people I come in contact with and, use rewards (examples of which I have given in my blog and include Amartya Sen, Subramanian Swamy, the Japanese academic, an Indian, Vinod Gupta, from my residence hall at I.I.T. Kharagpur who was made a bosom pal of the Indian president, Shankar Dayal Sharma, overnight, holding his wedding in Rashtrapati Bhavan, made a bosom pal of Bill Clinton when president, others in various walks of life including jounalists, politicians, etc.), harassment (such as blocking their mail and threatening to ruin their business or deprive them of their job or jailing them as in the case of the Editor-Publisher of the Indian newspaper in New York which carried front page reports with banner headlines on crimes against me, forcing the Indian Institute of Advanced Study in Shimla, by "a committee of secretaries" of the Indian government voting to force it out of the buildings it was housed in and I. I. T. Kanpur, by cutting the I. I. T. s' budget and putting a freeze on hiring, to abandon any plans to offer me a position) and, if necessary, murder (examples of which I have given in my blog, including the torture and murder of a muslim newspaper cartoonist in Delhi, of Rajiv and Indira Gandhi, of Indian and American scientists from whom I might have received support) to induce aggression, harassment or injuries by them toward me -- and RAW and all other Indians, in government, the media and elsewhere, have been participating in this with great gusto.
As I said in my letter to the press dated February 26, 2005 (in my blog) "American press reports 3-4 years ago referred to satellite-based technology the United States has had in place to monitor "the conversations of foreign leaders" (not just conversations over the telephone or other electrical/electronic media though it includes ability to monitor electrical/electronic communications of all kinds also). Since at least 1977, the United States has been able to keep individuals under 24-hour video and audio surveillance by satellite. Psychologist B. F. Skinner of Harvard made no secret of "my spies" keeping me under such surveillance, one use of which is a C.I.A. program started by Skinner to "control" a targeted individual's behavior by various verbal (including the use of conditioned stimuli, ratio schedules, etc.) and other means. I was targeted primarily due to Skinner's personal motivation flowing from the fact that I had exposed his plagiarism and destroyed his school of psychology but also because I have been the only threat to the United States' ability to keep India economically, technologically and militarily weak and under its boots (in part through my 'influence' on Prime Minister Indira Gandhi --about which Skinner asked "How about your political contacts on either side-- Mrs. Gandhi?" though I had not breathed a word about any such 'contacts' -- and former prime minister Rajiv Gandhi-- both of whom were assassinated for this reason by India's Research and Analysis Wing on the C.I.A.'s orders). But it would have been surprising if the United States had not used such surveillance and control over other foreign leaders.
An article in a Russian newspaper by an American capitalist consultant on Russia a couple of months ago referred to "the mysteriously self-destructive behavior" of Russia's leaders, referring to the dismantling of the benefits system (the same system of benefits can be administered by private contractors, if desired, who will be paid by the government and those who got free transportation before can still get free transportation), but such behavior started in the mid-eighties, with Mikhail Gorbachev. It is more than likely that similar surveillance and control has been used against Soviet/Russian leaders."
To see how this evil will be dealt with, see the following threads:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-...indias-legitimate-ruler-can-defend-india.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-...pons-increases-your-power-millions-times.html
