RAW the rascal

[rubyjackass]

So? what if Mossad and RAW cooperate? even if was back in 1950. They understood that they both have to keep a watch on Pakistan.
Intelligence wars always happen even as we speak.
Even in the above scenario, every one acted in their best interests.

 

[Communist]

My curiosity is peaking at how does this Rupee News Funds itself? I see no advertiments on the news paper.

Maybe Mr. Communist can explain this better, since you subscrip to such newpaper.

So your curiosity is all about advertisements and not news!!!! Great!!! Jai Ho Slumdog (self proclaimed) Superpower..!!! What a consumerist saffron culture...!!!

Actually it was for the first time in my life, I discovered someone whose attention is confined within advertisements while reading any news paper...!! Please do not take offense, but it is a hilarious comment....

Ok... enough laughing...

Well the explanation is very simple, since the 'newspaper' does not publish news for the sake of sensationalism and since the 'newspaper' tries to expose the truth which is always bitter for some who prefer falsity over authenticity, the advertisement agencies are reluctant to give ads to the 'newspaper'. Or in other words, the motto of the 'newspaper' is anti-commercialism. But since I am a subscriber, I will try to convince them on behalf of you, if you want to publish ads there and without seeking any commission.

Hey dont mind pliz... my words are not meant for personal attack....

 

[Communist]

So? what if Mossad and RAW cooperate? even if was back in 1950. They understood that they both have to keep a watch on Pakistan.
Intelligence wars always happen even as we speak.
Even in the above scenario, every one acted in their best interests.

It would have been ok, had it been to keep a watch... but it has been to make trouble for Pakistan, China, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka.... and thus RAW+Mossad nexus has been very dangerous trouble maker as they try to wipe out all the entities that seem to them dangerous....

 

[rubyjackass]

RAW works under Indian government. You can see above what Indian government did after it got information.
Where did Bangladesh come from? If you mean creation of Bangladesh, it would be better to say Indian government did it, not RAW.


Whatever you say, my point stands: "Everybody acted in their own interest" even Pakistan. Do not add lies to whatever happened.

 

[Communist]

RAW works under Indian government. You can see above what Indian government did after it got information.
Where did Bangladesh come from? If you mean creation of Bangladesh, it would be better to say Indian government did it, not RAW.


Whatever you say, my point stands: "Everybody acted in their own interest" even Pakistan. Do not add lies to whatever happened.

Thanks for the confession as you admitted the fact that it was India government who made Bangladesh to take a third-class revenge from Pakistan as per the statement by Indira Gandhi after the surrender of Pakistani troops in East Pakistan, that she had taken thousand years old revenge. And RAW is an extension of your Indian government to execute plans covertly so that more Bangladesh will come out of Pakistan or to destroy the geographical existence of Pakistan.

Yes, "Everybody acted in their own interest", but India's vested interests point to the destruction of Pakistan, whereas Pakistan's interests point to the defense of Pakistan. The former is aggressive, while the latter is resilient. Hope you understand the difference.

 

[rubyjackass]

Thanks for the confession as you admitted the fact that it was India government who made Bangladesh to take a third-class revenge from Pakistan as per the statement by Indira Gandhi after the surrender of Pakistani troops in East Pakistan, that she had taken thousand years old revenge. And RAW is an extension of your Indian government to execute plans covertly so that more Bangladesh will come out of Pakistan or to destroy the geographical existence of Pakistan.

Yes, "Everybody acted in their own interest", but India's vested interests point to the destruction of Pakistan, whereas Pakistan's interests point to the defense of Pakistan. The former is aggressive, while the latter is resilient. Hope you understand the difference.

Please give links quoting Indira Gandhi. I doubt if she is even religious(she married a Parsi for instance), to talk about 1000 yrs revenge(if you are talking about Ghori-Chauhan war.In India it is not even taught of as a hindu muslim war, only as a war that marked advent of Islam in India). I think this is propaganda. That is one less reason for you to hate India, I hope. I mean it with warmth.

Just because the former was successful, does not mean the latter never tried. Don't you agree?



Btw I don't need to make the confession. WHo does not know Indian involvement in Bangladesh independence?


More about Indira Gandhi: She learnt a lot about world history from Nehru from his letters from jail. And Nehru is a secular author. Read Discovery of India and Glimpses of world history.
But logically, you still may have a plea that he might be a religious father inspite of the above. But come on!!

 

[Communist]

Please give links quoting Indira Gandhi. I doubt if she is even religious(she married a Parsi for instance), to talk about 1000 yrs revenge(if you are talking about Ghori-Chauhan war.In India it is not even taught of as a hindu muslim war, only as a war that marked advent of Islam in India). I think this is propaganda. That is one less reason for you to hate India, I hope. I mean it with warmth.

Just because the former was successful, does not mean the latter never tried. Don't you agree?



Btw I don't need to make the confession. WHo does not know Indian involvement in Bangladesh independence?


More about Indira Gandhi: She learnt a lot about world history from Nehru from his letters from jail. And Nehru is a secular author. Read Discovery of India and Glimpses of world history.
But logically, you still may have a plea that he might be a religious father inspite of the above. But come on!!

"......Remember Indira Gandhi’s emotion choked exultation before the combined Indian Parliament thumping their hearts out in joy after the surrender of Pakistani forces in former East Pakistan in December 1971, ‘Today we have avenged the thousand years of our dark history’. But in her haste, Indira, so typical of Hindu Brahmins could not help herself to empty boasting on self-assumed victory which could have never come by without the support and immense sacrifices of the Muslim Bengali fighters....."

http://www.geocities.com/pak_history/delusion.html

Also read the whole article and try to think independently. And please do not ask why this line you have not found on the pages of your school text books, because I believe you understand why it is absent there.

"...The Indian leaders chose the iron fist for probably two reasons. First they felt humiliated personally at having been out-manoeuvered by the Quaid, who had a much smaller and weaker political base than them. But, more important was their historical memory of the Muslims having ruled northern India continuously for over five hundred years. The Indian leaders wanted not only to absorb Pakistan but to do so on as humiliating terms as possible for the Muslims, so as to “take revenge” for history. It was not by chance that Indira Gandhi said in a public speech after the defeat of Pakistan in 1971 that she had avenged the “humiliation of a thousand years”...."

The ruling elite’s colonised mindset -DAWN - Encounter; September 20, 2008

Also read the whole article if you want to see the history from a different angle.


Former US president Richard Nixon apparently disliked Indira personally, referring to her as a "witch" and "clever fox" in his private communication with Secretary of State Henry Kissinger (now released by the State Department). Even Indira Gandhi was given corruption charges.

Indira Gandhi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And whom Indira Gandhi married is not the point to prove her religious view points. Please do not mind, but fact says Indira Gandhi was a sexually pervert woman. She was like an animal when any man came to her. I am not saying this, her biographer said this.

"...In fact the most perceptive observation about Indira Gandhi was once made by the singer-writer Sheila Dhar (Mrs. P. N. Dhar), who knew Mrs. G. well enough to notice that "Indira Gandhi had the developed instincts of an animal, she always responded to people with her skin". The political animal that was Indira Gandhi has long been known and done to death: there have been biographies by Pupul Jayakar, Zareer Masani and Inder Malhotra..."

The Hindu : The private life of Indira Gandhi


.....Indira Gandhi was known as a feisty young woman and a uber-hyper leader. She always had a biglibido, probably inherited from her father who had a line of affairs,the most famous with Un-Lady Edwina Mountbatten. Stanley Wolpert and other have provided proof that Jawaharlal Nehru was gay and he consorted with the gay Viceroy of India Lord Mountbatten. (Nehur’s tyrst with homosexuality. Nehru dated both Ediwina, and Lord Mountbatten.Menage de trois impacted independence) Indira had lovers
when she was young. She was friendly with Mohandas, and may have
participated in his infamous and perverted Bharamacharya sexual
experiments. Sex life of Mohandas Gandhi, his failures and sexual
perversion.....



SEX LIFE OF INDIRA GANDHI !!!!! CONGRESS IN DEEP EMBARASSMENT !!!!


Please read the full article. It is very interesting.

 

[Communist]

Just because the former was successful, does not mean the latter never tried. Don't you agree?


Read Discovery of India and Glimpses of world history.
But logically, you still may have a plea that he might be a religious father inspite of the above. But come on!!

Because the former was successful in its evil motive to split Pakistan, while the latter was unsuccessful in its trying to defend Indian aggressive penetration. And now it makes sense.

I read the two books several times. Unfortunately the two books do not reflect the activities of the author, rather reflect a masked person.

 

[rubyjackass]

That is what I am talking about. Somebody started this. Everyone else picked it up since it appears catchy for all Pakistanis. This must be from some hate speech back in 70s. So the quoting chain went on and on.


Need I tell you how Americans regard Nixon? Heard of The Blood Telegram?
Nixon used those terms often. Just like we use the f words. If you read
Indians are bastard anyway - Nixon described indians as a slippery treacherous people

HUA HIN, Thailand - Indians are "a slippery, treacherous people", said president Richard Nixon. "The Indians are bastards anyway. They are the most aggressive goddamn people around," echoed his assistant for national security affairs, Henry Kissinger. The setting: a White House meeting on July 16, 1971, during the run-up to the India-Pakistan war which ultimately led to the birth of Bangladesh, erstwhile East Pakistan.
In India, US ambassador Kenneth Keating also made it clear that "military aid to Pakistan is just out of the question now while they are still killing in East Pakistan and refugees are fleeing across the border". He told Kissinger on June 3, 1971: "We are on the threshold of better relations with the one stable democracy in that part of the world. They are making real progress and want to be more friendly with us." Replied Kissinger: "In all honesty, the president has special feelings for Yahya. One cannot make policy on that basis, but it is a fact of life."
Kissinger's assessment: "While she was a *****, we got what we wanted ... She will not be able to go home and say that the United States didn't give her a warm reception and therefore in despair she's got to go to war." Replied Nixon: "We really slobbered over the old witch." After she got home, the "old witch" wrote to Nixon: "I sincerely hope that your clear vision will guide relations between our two democracies and will help us to come closer. It will always be our effort to clear any misunderstanding and not to allow temporary differences to impede the strengthening of our friendship."

Need I say more? Read about what Kissinger said too. So whats your point calling at Nixon's words?
He assumed that India was going to attack and invade West Pakistan too all along. And he was a fan of Yahya Khan. Even disregarded his ambassador's assessment. Anyway this does not matter for my point here.




Come on dude!! their wierd sexual practices, if at all, only show that they are modern and did not care about their religion much. Also both were educated abroad.

 

[Communist]

That is what I am talking about. Somebody started this. Everyone else picked it up since it appears catchy for all Pakistanis. This must be from some hate speech back in 70s. So the quoting chain went on and on.


Need I tell you how Americans regard Nixon? Heard of The Blood Telegram?
Nixon used those terms often. Just like we use the f words. If you read
Indians are bastard anyway - Nixon described indians as a slippery treacherous people

Need I say more? Read about what Kissinger said too. So whats your point calling at Nixon's words?
He assumed that India was going to attack and invade West Pakistan too all along. And he was a fan of Yahya Khan. Even disregarded his ambassador's assessment. Anyway this does not matter for my point here.




Come on dude!! their wierd sexual practices, if at all, only show that they are modern and did not care about their religion much. Also both were educated abroad.

Yes I know the cow boy culture, they maltreat women, and particularly of other countries using slangs whenever they feel like. And they feel proud of their masculinity!! Pata nehi, agar kisi auratki behermuti karna masculinity hain, toh masculinity ka definition badalna parega shayad... I did not use Nixon's comments in that sense. I just wanted to show Indira Gandhi was infamous too for her policies.

They might have been liberal in practicing sexuality, but were they really liberal in religiosity? I think, they were not.

"...As they were of different faith's the only legal way for them to marry in India was under the Adi Dharm Law. Indira therefore converted to Adi Dharm and ever since these Adi Dharm rites have been used in Gandhi-Nehru marriages..."

Indira Gandhi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why such ambiguity?

 

[Omar1984]

RAW the Rascal....the perfect wording for India's intelligence agency.

 

[M_Saint]

RAW works under Indian government..

Yes or No. RAW's mission is leaned toward the creation of RAM RAJJAY. Where ever it sees GOVT's hurdle in it, doesn't follow. Please read R B Raman's 'COWBOYS OF RAW' to vouch my claim. RAW never followed Ghandi's congressional CREDO but fascist/saffronist one of Hindutavya.

 

[DarkStar]

Are you suggesting that RAW has been infiltrated by RSS and VHP operatives? Or that RAW is propping up the saffron brigade?

 

[M_Saint]

Yes, "Everybody acted in their own interest", but India's vested interests point to the destruction of Pakistan, whereas Pakistan's interests point to the defense of Pakistan. The former is aggressive, while the latter is resilient. Hope you understand the difference.

Couldn't have been said better. You are one heck of a rationalist, brother communist. Keep up good work. A big thumg up, infect hundreds up for your GR1 job, thanks.

 

[M_Saint]

Are you suggesting that RAW has been infiltrated by RSS and VHP operatives? Or that RAW is propping up the saffron brigade?

It's not only RAW but also the Indian politicians ( Be it Congressional or BJPian) are two parts of same Hindutavya coin. Congressional uses secularism as a veneer whereas BJP doesn't hide it face in practicing fascism. From the very beginning of RAW's emergence, it has been defying Ahingshabad of Ghandi but why doesn't congressional coruntain its activities? That is enough to show the similar physic of Indian politicians & RAW that play God and Bad cop but sleep together in dark.