இதே குற்றத்திற்காக ஒரு முஸ்லிம் பிடிபட்டிருந்தால்....தக்க நேரத்தில் நாடு பிழைத்தது

http://vanjoor-vanjoor.blogspot.com/2008/11/blog-post_2502.htmlMonday, November 3, 2008இதே குற்றத்திற்காக ஒரு முஸ்லிம் பிடிபட்டிருந்தால்....தக்க நேரத்தில் நாடு பிழைத்தது! இதே குற்றத்திற்காக ஒரு முஸ்லிம் பிடிபட்டிருந்தால்.... கொஞ்சமும் வெட்கமின்றி நடுநிலை(!) நாளிதழ்களும் அவற்றைப் பிரசுரிக்கும்.அவ'னை' முகத்தை மூடி,பத்திரிகையாளர் கூட்டத்தைக் கூட்டி,ஆணி, சுத்தியல், டார்ச் பேட்டரி போன்ற 'பயங்கர ஆயுதங்கள்' நிரப்பப்பட்ட ஒரு டேபிளின் முன் அவ'னை' நிறுத்தி வைத்து ஃபோட்டோ எடுத்து,அல்-காயிதா முதல் லஷ்கரே தய்யிபா வரை தொடர்புடையவ'ன்' என்றும், இந்தியத் தலைவர்களைக் கொல்வதற்குக் காஷ்மீரிலும் பாகிஸ்தானிலும் பயிற்சி எடுத்து வந்தவ'ன்' என்றும் தக்க நேரத்தில் எடுக்கப் பட்ட காவல் துறையின் நடவடிக்கையால் நாட்டின் தலைவர்கள் காப்பாற்றப் பட்டனர் என்றும் பத்திரிகையாளர்களுக்கு அறிக்கை கொடுப்பார்கள்நல்ல குடும்பத்து நல்ல பிள்ளைகள்!காதலிச்ச பொண்ணு திரும்பிப் பார்க்கவில்லை. பாவம், மனசு நொந்து போயி இந்த மாதிரி ஒரு காரியம் செய்து விட்டார். மற்றபடி இவர் ஒரு நல்ல குடும்பத்தைச் சேர்ந்த நல்ல பிள்ளை"இது ஒரு திரைப் படத்தின் வசனக் காட்சியல்ல. இங்குத் தரப் பட்டுள்ள 'கைது-விடுதலை:3'இன் க்ளைமாக்ஸ் வசனம்தான் அது.கைது-விடுதலை : 1சில மாதங்களுக்கு முன்னர், ஜனாதிபதியைக் கொல்லத் தபால் குண்டு அனுப்பியதாக, திருவனந்தபுரத்தைச் சேர்ந்த முஹ்ஸின் என்ற முஸ்லிம் இளைஞரைப் பிடித்துக் கொண்டுபோய் 20 நாட்களுக்கும் மேலாகக் கஸ்டடியிலும் சிறையிலும் வைத்துக் கேரளக் காவல்துறையினர் கொடுமைப் படுத்தினர். நிரபராதியான அவரின் தாயையும் தந்தையையும் உறவினர்களையும் காவல்துறை கொடூரமாக வேட்டையாடியது.ஆனால், தீவிர விசாரணையின் பின்னர் உண்மையான குற்றவாளியான ராகேஷ் சர்மா என்பவரைக் காவல்துறை கைது செய்தது. அப்போது பத்திரிக்கையாளர் கூட்டத்தைக் கேரளக் காவல்துறை கூட்டி, "பொருளாதாரத்தில் பட்டம் பெற்ற ராகேஷ் சர்மா, மனநிலை பாதிக்கப் பட்டதாலேயே அவ்வாறு அனுப்பினார்" என காவல்துறை 'விளக்கம்' கூறி நற்சான்று வழங்கியது.கைது-விடுதலை : 2அதேபோன்று, சில மாதங்களுக்கு முன்பு, இதேபோல ஒரு மிரட்டல் விடுத்த பாஜகவின் மாணவர் அணி (ஏ.பி.வி.பி) உறுப்பினரான கோழிக்கோட்டைச் சேர்ந்த தேஜஸ் என்பவரது வழக்கையும் காவல்துறை மிகச் 'சாமர்த்தியமாக'க் கையாண்டு தேஜஸை நிரபராதி என விடுவித்தது.கைது-விடுதலை : 3கரூரில் உள்ள ஒரு வங்கியில் பணிபுரியும் ஊழியரின் மகனான அருண் சூர்யா என்பவரை, ஜனாதிபதி, இந்திய உளவுத்துறை 'ரா'வின் தலைவர், ஐ.பி அதிகாரிகள் ஆகியோருக்கு மிரட்டல் மின்மடல் அனுப்பியதற்காக காவல்துறை சென்ற வாரம் கைது செய்திருந்தது.தகவலறிந்து மாநகரக் காவல்துறை ஆணையரது அலுவலகத்துக்கு அருண் சூர்யாவின் பெற்றோர் வந்தனர். அவர்கள் காவல்துறை உயரதிகாரிகளுடன் பல மணி நேரம் 'ஆலோசனை' நடத்தினர். அதனைத் தொடர்ந்தே, பத்திரிகையாளர் கூட்டத்துக்குக் காவல்துறை ஏற்பாடு செய்து, கண்ணன் என்ற அருண் சூர்யாவின் கள்ளம் கபடமில்லாத குணத்தைப் பற்றி இந்தச் செய்தியின் முதற் சொற்றொடரில் நீங்கள் படித்தவாறு விவரித்தது."நவம்பர் 14 க்குள் காங்கிரஸ் தலைவர் சோனியாகாந்தியைக் கொலை செய்வோம்" என்றும் "மேலும் பல தலைவர்களைக் கொலை செய்யும் திட்டம் உண்டு" எனவும் "ஜனாதிபதி உட்பட அனைத்துத் தலைவர்களுக்கும் எச்சரிக்கை!" எனவும் மின் மடல் மூலம் கொலை மிரட்டல் விடுத்திருந்தார் அருண் சூர்யா.கடந்த அக்டோபர் 24 மாலை 5.15க்கு ஜனாதிபதி மாளிகைக்கு அனுப்பப்பட்ட மிரட்டல் மின்மடலில், "கொச்சி மற்றும் சென்னையில் 4 வெடிகுண்டுகள் வீதம் வைக்கப் பட்டுள்ளன" எனவும் "விரைவில் அவை வெடிக்கும்" எனவும் அவரது மின்மடலில் மிரட்டல் விடுக்கப் பட்டிருந்தது.இதற்கு முன்னரும் இதே போன்ற பல மிரட்டல் மின்மடல்கள் வந்திருப்பினும் இம்முறை சற்றுத் தீவிரமான மிரட்டலுடன் சென்னை மற்றும் கொச்சியில் வெடிகுண்டு வைக்கப் பட்டுள்ளதாக வந்ததால், ஜனாதிபதி மாளிகை உடனடியாக மிரட்டல் மடல் விவரத்தை ஐ.பி, கேரள, தமிழக உள்துறைச் செயலர்களுக்கு அனுப்பி இருந்தது.இம்மிரட்டல் மின்மடலை அனுப்பி, பிடிபட்டிருந்த அருண் சூர்யாவை, "எந்த விதமான தீவிரவாத குழுக்களுடனோ அமைப்புகளுடனோ தொடர்புடையவர் அல்ல எனவும் விளையாட்டிற்காகத்தான் அவ்வாறு ஒரு மின்மடல் அனுப்பியதாகவும்" கேரளக் காவல்துறை ஜனாதிபதி மாளிகைக்குக் கொடுத்த தகவலில் கூறியுள்ளது. மேலும் தொடர்ந்து விசாரணை நடந்து வருவதாகவும் அனுப்பப்பட்ட மின்மடலில் தெரிவிக்கப் பட்டிருந்த மிரட்டலைக் கண்டு பயப்பட ஏதும் இல்லை எனவும் கேரள காவல்துறை உறுதி கூறியுள்ளது.காதல் தோல்வியினால் விரக்தியடைந்த அருண் சூர்யா, காதலியின் பெயரைக் கெடுக்க வேண்டும் என்பதற்காக 'ரஹ்மத்துல்லாஹ் பரகத்' என்ற முஸ்லிம் பெயரில் மெயில் அக்கவுண்ட் திறந்ததேன்?முஸ்லிம்கள் மட்டுமே பயன் படுத்தும் அரபுமொழிச் சொற்கள் சிலவற்றை மிரட்டல் மின்மடலின் இறுதியில் இணைத்ததேன்?தீவிரவாத மிரட்டல் விடுத்த அருண் சூர்யாவை, "நல்லப் பிள்ளை; நல்லக் குடும்பத்துப் பிள்ளை; மனவேதனையில் அப்படி செய்து விட்டான்; அல்லாமல் இதன் பின்னணியில் வேறு எந்த நோக்கமும் இல்லை" என நற்சான்றிதழ் வழங்கும் காவல்துறையிடம் இதற்கான பதில்கள் இல்லை!இதே குற்றத்திற்காக ஒரு முஸ்லிம் பிடிபட்டிருந்தால்:அவ'னை' முகத்தை மூடி,பத்திரிகையாளர் கூட்டத்தைக் கூட்டி,ஆணி, சுத்தியல், டார்ச் பேட்டரி போன்ற 'பயங்கர ஆயுதங்கள்' நிரப்பப்பட்ட ஒரு டேபிளின் முன் அவ'னை' நிறுத்தி வைத்து ஃபோட்டோ எடுத்து,அல்-காயிதா முதல் லஷ்கரே தய்யிபா வரை தொடர்புடையவ'ன்' என்றும், இந்தியத் தலைவர்களைக் கொல்வதற்குக் காஷ்மீரிலும் பாகிஸ்தானிலும் பயிற்சி எடுத்து வந்தவ'ன்' என்றும்தக்க நேரத்தில் எடுக்கப் பட்ட காவல் துறையின் நடவடிக்கையால் நாட்டின் தலைவர்கள் காப்பாற்றப் பட்டனர் என்றும் பத்திரிகையாளர்களுக்கு அறிக்கை கொடுப்பார்கள்.கொஞ்சமும் வெட்கமின்றி நடுநிலை(!) நாளிதழ்களும் அவற்றைப் பிரசுரிக்கும்.நல்லவேளை, பிடிபட்டவர் நல்ல குடும்பத்து நல்ல பிள்ளையாக இருந்ததால் நாடு பிழைத்தது!நல்ல குடும்பத்து நல்ல பிள்ளைகள்!.

9 more bodies found in Assam

9 more bodies found in Assam, toll is 60http://www.asianage.com/presentation/leftnavigation/news/india/9-more-bodies-found-in-assam,-toll-is-60.aspxThursday, October 09, 2008BY MANOJ ANANDUDALGURI, ASSAMOct. 8: The violence has subsided but fear of fresh backlashes islooming large among those taking shelter in various relief camps. Thedeath toll in Assam carnage has gone up to 60, following recovery ofnine more bodies from the remote areas of trouble-torn Northern Assamdistricts since Tuesday.The security sources said that three bodies were recovered fromPanbari area of Darrang district, while two bodies each were foundfrom Paschim Hahiligaon in Tangla area, Mazbat and Jhargaon ofUdalguri district.There were reports of some more bodies being spotted in Kalaigaon, andRajapukhuri areas of Udalguri district. However, there was no reportof fresh violence from any part of the state.The superintendent of police, during whose tenure worst violence hitUdalguri district, Mr R.N. Prakash Tiwari told this newspaper that thepolice is maintaining a close watch over the situation and it waslimping back to normalcy.He, however, admitted that there were reports of more bodies spottedin some of the remote villages. "We are sending police teams in allthose areas wherever there are reports of unattended bodies. We aretrying to recover the bodies of all those killed in the violence atthe earliest as recovery of bodies after normalcy may becounter-productive and worsen the situation again," said Mr Tiwari,who was patrolling the area and interacting with the camp inmates toinstil confidence in them.Meanwhile, camp inmates in trouble-torn Udalguri district have raisedserious doubts over the role of Assam ministers and charged them ofprojecting the recent carnage as an ethnic clash between the immigrantMuslims and the NDFB, which is a largely Christian outfit.Assam minister Himanta Biswa Sarma was quoted as saying that the rebelNational Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB), fighting for anindependent tribal homeland, took advantage of the situation andresorted to large scale arson and killings.

MAHARASHTRA: 5 days later, Dhule still under

MAHARASHTRA: 5 days later, Dhule still under curfewhttp://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articlelist/msid--2128838597,curpg-3.cms11 Oct 2008, 0405 hrs IST,Prafulla Marpakwar ,TNNMUMBAI: Days after communal clashes rocked the tribal Dhule districtin north Maharashtra, the area is still tense. However, no freshincidents of violence have been reported. According to reports,properties worth Rs 25 crore were completely razed to ashes in theviolence."We have clamped indefinite curfew in the entire district. There wereno fresh incidents of violence in the area on Thursday and Friday,"said Sanjay Chahande, Nashik divisional commissioner. Followingdirectives of Congress president Sonia Gandhi, not only chief ministerVilasrao Deshmukh, but even Union minister of state for homeSriprakash Jaiswal visited the trouble-torn district to see forthemselves the post-violence situation.On Tuesday, the situation was so tense that the state administrationwas planning to deploy the army. However, the proposal was abandonedfollowing strong opposition by the local police.Senior BJP leader Eknath Khadse has demanded a probe under theCommission of Enquiry Act. "I feel the probe should be conducted underthe Commission of Enquiry Act and pending the probe, both collector PLawangare and superintendent of police Sunil Kolhe should be asked toproceed on leave," Khadse said.Khadse was the first politician to alert both Lawangare and Kolhe onthe possibility of violence during a procession on October 5. Soonafter the process started, Khadse personally spoke to both thecollector and SP, saying more policemen should be deployed on theprocession route since he had specific information on the possibilityof violence. "Both assured me that adequate police bandobast will bedeployed, but unfortunately they did not take this informationseriously," Khadse said.Alleging that it was a complete failure of the law enforcing agencies,Khadse pointed out that the manner in which the districtadministration tackled the communal violence leads one to theconclusion that there was complete lack of coordination among thedistrict agencies. "Additional forces from neighbouring Jalgaondistrict rushed to Dhule, but they were sitting idle for well over 3hours as there were no instructions for them," Khadse said.A senior home department official on Friday admitted that there wascomplete collapse of the law and order situation in Dhule."We imposed curfew in the entire district, but for the first threedays, there were not enough officials to implement the prohibitoryorders. Later, it was implemented, but only in select areas, whichclearly reflected bias on the part of the police," the official said.

Clashes in AP killed 3

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/3_killed_in_communal_clashes_in_AP/articleshow/3581909.cms3 killed in communal clashes in Andhra Pradesh10 Oct 2008, 2212 hrs IST,TNN BHAINSA (ANDHRA PRADESH): Three people were killed and six seriously injured in rioting and clashes between two communities in Bhainsa in Adilabad district on Friday afternoon. The district police said the situation was tense but under control. Additional forces have been rushed and prohibitory orders clamped on the town. Clashes were also reported from Nirmal town in the district and police have imposed prohibitory orders there as well as a precautionary measure. According to police, the clashes occurred when a Durga Puja procession was passing by devotees offering Friday prayers at a mosque. "The Durga Devi shobha yatra (procession) reached Masjid Panjeshah in central market around 1.00pm when devotees objected to the Durga processionists playing songs when their prayers were under way. This led to stone-pelting by both the groups and grew into rioting, stabbing and burning of shops and vehicles," one official said. Police rushed to the spot and tried to cool tempers and get the groups to talk to each other but their efforts went in vain. The clashes did not stop even after police resorted to a lathicharge. Finally, they fired 35 rounds of ammunition in the air. In all, about 40 shops and 12 vehicles were torched by the rival mobs. The dead were identified as Afsar Ahmed, 24, Abdul Kayyum, 22 and Bhutan, said to be a Marathi immigrant."All three died because of stabbing," Adilabad collector Ahmed Nadim told TOI. Adilabad Congress MP A Indrasena Reddy too told TOI that he had seen the bodies and found only stab wounds and no bullet injuries. Abdul Majid, who sustained a serious bullet injury in the firing, was shifted to Nizamabad first and then to Hyderabad. He is in a critical condition. Peace committees belonging to the two communities have been set up to initiate a dialogue, the collector added. Referring to Nirmal, Nadim said a few people had gathered there but were quickly dispersed and ban orders clamped. Adilabad SP Anil Kumar told TOI that the situation was tense but under control and that Section 144 had been imposed on the town to ensure normalcy. Observers said there was a major bungling by the district administration in allowing the Hindu procession to cross a mosque on a Friday afternoon. Not only that, the Durga puja procession, which comprised about 500 people, was accompanied by only one circle inspector, one sub-inspector and four constables. "In a town which has had communal clashes in the past, such inadequate measures are shocking," said one senior official.

Autopsy: No Arabs on Flight 77

Autopsy: No Arabs on Flight 77
By Thomas R. Olmsted, M.D
http://www.physics911.net/olmsted
I am an ex Naval line officer and a psychiatrist in private practice in New Orleans, a Christian and homeschool dad. It troubled me a great deal that we rushed off to war on the flimsiest of evidence. I considered various ways to provide a smoking gun of who and why Sept 11th happened. Astute observers noticed right away that there were no Arabic sounding names on any of the flight manifests of the planes that “crashed” on that day.
A list of names on a piece of paper is not evidence, but an autopsy by a pathologist, is. I undertook by FOIA request, to obtain that autopsy list and you are invited to view it below. Guess what? Still no Arabs on the list. In my opinion the monsters who planned this crime made a mistake by not including Arabic names on the original list to make the ruse seem more believable.
When airline disasters occur, airlines will routinely provide a manifest list for anxious families. You may have noticed that even before Sep 11th, airlines are pretty meticulous about getting an accurate headcount before takeoff. It seems very unlikely to me, that five Arabs sneaked onto a flight with weapons. This is the list provided by American of the 56 passengers. On September 27th, the FBI published photos of the “hijackers” of Flight 77.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP), does a miraculous job and identifies nearly all the bodies on November 16th 2001.

The AFIP suggest these numbers; 189 killed, 125 worked at the Pentagon and 64 were “passengers” on the plane. The AA list only had 56 and the list just obtained has 58. They did not explain how they were able to tell “victims” bodies from “hijacker” bodies. In fact, from the beginning NO explanation has been given for the extra five suggested in news reports except that the FBI showed us the pictures to make up the difference, and that makes it so.
Now, being the trusting sort, I figured that the government would want to quickly dispel any rumors so we could get on with the chore of kicking Osama/Sadaam’s butt (weren’t these originally two different people?). It seemed simple to me. . .produce the names of all the bodies identified by the AFIP and compare it with the publicized list of passengers. So, I sent a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the AFIP and asked for an expedited response, because we were getting ready to send our boys to war on the pretext that Osama/Saddam had done the deed. Fourteen months later, a few US soldiers dead, many Iraqi civilians pushing up daisies, and I finally get the list. Believe me that they weren’t a bit happy to give it up, and I really have no idea why they choose now to release it.

No Arabs wound up on the morgue slab; however, three ADDITIONAL people not listed by American Airlines sneaked in. I have seen no explanation for these extras. I did American the opportunity to “revise” their original list, but they have not responded. The new names are: Robert Ploger, Zandra Ploger, and Sandra Teague. The AFIP claims that the only “passenger” body that they were not able to identify is the toddler, Dana Falkenberg, whose parents and young sister are on the list of those identified. The satanic masterminds behind this caper may be feeling pretty smug about the perfect crime, but they have left a raft of clues tying these unfortunates together.
The Passengers
In the foregoing, I presented evidence from the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP), that there were no Arabs on American Airlines Flight 77. This doesn’t really jibe with the official story, so someone isn’t telling the truth. This list itself is suspect because there is a special group of “bone guys” that are called in whenever the government needs an “adjustment” to their story.
About “bone guys”: No, we’re not talking folks that hang around secret Ivy League fraternities. On May 31, 2002, the Washington Post had this to say about ‘bone guys’:
“…When remains of the Waco dead or 9/11 Pentagon victims or Desert Storm casualties — or most recently Chandra Levy — need to be studied, the bone guys at the Smithsonian are called in. The bone guys read skeletons like intricate topological maps. Sometimes they can make identification from a skull fragment the size of a quarter. They can read race in the teeth and gender in the brow. They can tell you who had an asymmetric nose. They can tell you who may have been a factory worker, because bones grow more pronounced to accommodate certain muscles, and who may have been a weaver or a tailor, based on grooves in the teeth where thread was held….”
In other words, these were the fellows who helped tidy up the government’s story at Waco and are “studying” the Sept 11th remains as well.
By now you have probably heard that many of the “hijackers” named by the FBI are alive and well. The Information Times, an on-line publication, reported that Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal told the Arabic Press after meeting with President George W. Bush on Sept. 20: “It was proved that five of the names included in the FBI list had nothing to do with what happened.”
According to The Orlando Sentinel, the Saudi Arabian embassy confirmed that four of the five mentioned by Al-Faisal - Saeed Alghamdi, Mohand Alshehri, Abdulaziz Alomari and Salem Alhazmi- are not dead and had nothing to do with the heinous terror attacks in New York and Washington. (source: Christopher J. Petherick - American Free Press)
From photos of all of those that perished on that flight, it is clear that none are even “Arab looking.” This seems to rule out Arabs sneaking aboard under assumed names.
If you are familiar with Operation Northwoods (see Body of Secrets by James Bamford or thumbnail description here) then you know that the National Security Agency (NSA) has both the will and ability to orchestrate an “operation” such as Sept 11th if they decided it was for the “greater good.” Not saying that they choose to conduct September 11 attack, but they clearly have the ability. According to Bamford, “Operation Northwoods” was not planned by any “rogue element” but proposed by General Lemnitzer, himself, and then thankfully spiked by President Kennedy. Think also of FDR’s foreknowledge of Pearl Harbor as exposed by Robert Stinnett in his book Day of Deceit. Stinnett actually agrees with FDR’s decision to allow it to happen.
Brush up on the Lusitania hoax, the USS Liberty cover-up, the Gulf of Tonkin fiction, and the Gulf War I falsified satellite photos, etc. if you are not convinced that government officials are capable of stretching the truth (for our own good, of course). It is very hard to keep a secret of this gravity. One possible way to cut down chatter is to eliminate as many witnesses as possible, preferably during the crime itself.
Critics of “conspiracy theorists” have tried to nullify talk of remote controlled planes as being the talk of lunatics. Global Hawk (Raytheon) is a large military aircraft that has flown 7000 miles without a pilot as discussed in this Air Force public affairs article, and is being widely used in the current Iraq war.

They also make large commercial planes for FedEx that fly by remote control as reported by the Associated Press. The “success” of this operation depended on the planes reaching their destination. Would the planners (be they Arab or otherwise) trust poorly trained “pilots” when this technology was at their disposal?
Reported only in a Portuguese newspaper, The Portugal News Weekend Edition (May 8, 2002) , a group of US pilots deliberated nonstop for 72 hours in an independent analysis of the 911 story. The inquiry stated, “The so-called terrorist attack was in fact a superbly executed military operation carried out against the USA, requiring the utmost professional military skill in command, communications, and control.” Captain Kent Hill USAF Ret, a friend of Chuck Burlingame (the pilot of Flight 77), confirmed the ability of flying aircraft from the ground. An ex Vietnam fighter pilot said, “Those birds either had a crack fighter pilot in the left seat, or they were being maneuvered by remote control.”
The following list of passengers was gathered from many sources posted on the Internet:
Dong Lee, Ruben Ornedo, and Chad Keller all worked for Boeing. Lee also worked for the NSA. Stanley Hall, “the dean of electronic warfare,” (along with Peter Gay, David Kolvacin, and Kenneth Waldie on other flights), worked for Raytheon.
William Caswell was a particle physicist who worked for the Navy. His job was so classified that his family had no clue as to what he did and did not know why he was flying to California.
Charles Droz, LCDR USN Ret, was a software developer for EM solutions (manufacturer of Wide Area Networks).
Robert Penniger worked for BAE Systems, (”an industry leader in flight control systems”), whose Board is comprised of many from the intelligence community. BAE has apparently removed their Board of Directors page, but it list a “who’s who” of high level connections to the CIA, DARPA, and NSA. (See the appendix for a list of outside directors of BAE Systems that were not on Flight 77.)
Robert Ploger and his wife were added “late” to the original CNN passenger list. He is the son of Major General Robert R Ploger USA, Ret, another “flag” link. The other “late” addition was Sandra Teague, a physical therapist at Georgetown University Hospital.
John Sammartino and Leonard Taylor worked at Xontech (missile defense), another company connected to the intelligence community, also with ties to Boeing.
Vicki Yancey worked for Vreedenberg Corp, yet another company connected to the intelligence community. Her father describes her death as a “planned murder.” Her widower works for Northrup-Grumman.
Mary Jane Booth was in a position to know what was going on at Dulles Airport as secretary for American Airlines general manager.
John Yamnicky, 71, Capt USN Ret, was a defense contractor for Veridian who had done a number of “black ops,” according to his son.
The physicians, lawyers, biotech representatives, and “human interest” victims who were aboard, could also provide important clues, but in the interest of space, we will save them for future consideration.
Many readers recall a particular Fox Television TV show called “The Lone Gunmen” which was aired on March 2, 2001 [Download Episode]. In the show, the bad guys control a passenger airplane by remote control with intentions of flying it into the World Trade Center. The villains were a Pentagon insider faction; the motive to inflame the public and thereby legitimate new military budgets and operations. Life indeed imitates art.
It has been reported that some people were warned not to fly that day. One was reported to be Mayor Willie Brown of San Francisco. Another was author Salman Rushdie. The person on that flight MOST likely to be warned was Robert Speisman. He was an executive at Lazare Kaplan, a diamond merchant, and son in law of Maurice Templesman. Templesman was Jackie Kennedy’s long time lover and is highly connected according to Time Magazine. Time also reported about about his “special access” to the National Security Council. He has also “stepped out” with Madeleine Albright.
I attempted on three occasions to obtain a final passenger list from American Airlines. They refuse to give a list and in fact won’t even verify that they gave the first list to CNN. Since the list is in the public domain, I find it curious that they would not take ownership nor provide a current, “correct” list.
Would it even be necessary to “lure” all expendables onto the designated death flights? Why not just grab those you want to get rid of and then slip them into the pile later? Have you seen an interview with the check-in personnel for the flights who can tell us who actually got on any of these flights? Not a chance. In fairness, Washington, D.C. and it’s suburbs draw a great number of contractors for the military and intelligence communities in their normal course of business. It may be mere coincidence that these passengers were all on the same flight; however; the government refuses to release information which would relieve our concerns.
Appendix
List of outside diectors of BAE Systems that were not on Flight 77:
Richard J. Kerr former Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
Mr. Kerr served in the U.S. Intelligence community for 32 years - from September 1960 until March 1992. He started as a country analyst in the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and ended his career as the senior professional intelligence officer in the U.S. government serving as Deputy Director of Central Intelligence.
Dr. William Schneider, Jr. former Under Secretary State for Security, Science and Technology
Prior to serving on the board, Dr. Schneider was formerly Under Secretary of State for Security Assistance, Science and Technology (1982-1986). He served as Associate Director for National Security and International Affairs at the Office of Management and Budget (198l-2) prior to being nominated as Under Secretary by the President.
Dr. Robert S. Cooper former Director, DARPA
Dr. Cooper is currently President, CEO, Director and co-founder of Atlantic Aerospace Electronics Corporation. From 1981 to 1985, Dr. Cooper was Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Technology and simultaneously held the position of Director for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). As Assistant Secretary, he was principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense on the allocation of Department resources to research, exploratory development and advanced development projects.
General Anthony C. Zinni (Ret) former Commander-in-Chief, CENTCOM
Gen. Zinni was formerly Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Central Command. While in the Marine Corps he held numerous command and staff assignments that include platoon, company, battalion, regimental, Marine expeditionary unit, and Marine expeditionary force command. His staff assignments included service on battalion, regimental, division, base, and service staffs in operations, training, special operations, counterterrorism, and manpower billets. Gen. Zinni most recently served as the United States Special Envoy to the Middle East.
General Kenneth A. Minihan (Ret) former Director National Security Agency; Central Security Service
Lt. Gen Minihan served more than thirty-three years of active commissioned service to the nation before retiring from the U.S. Air Force in 1999. On his final tour of duty, he served as the 14th Director of the National Security Agency/Central Security Service, a combat support agency of the Department of Defense with military and civilian personnel stationed worldwide. As Director, he was the senior uniformed intelligence officer in the Department of Defense. He also served as the Director of The Defense Intelligence Agency.
Robert L. Prestel former Deputy Director, National Security Agency
Mr. Prestel served as Deputy Director of the National Security Agency (NSA) from 1990 - . He was the senior civilian presiding over this Defense Agency whose principal missions are the production of foreign Signals Intelligence and the protection of official U.S. Government communications and information systems.

Principles Of Islamic Banking

Principles Of Islamic Banking[This article was published in the 10th issue of Nida'ul Islammagazine, November-December 1995] ________________________________For millions of Muslims, banks are institutions to be avoided. Islamis a religion which keeps Believers from the teller's window. TheirIslamic beliefs prevent them from dealings that involve usury orinterest (Riba). Yet Muslims need banking services as much as anyoneand for many purposes: to finance new business ventures, to buy ahouse, to buy a car, to facilitate capital investment, to undertaketrading activities, and to offer a safe place for savings. For Muslimsare not averse to legitimate profit as Islam encourages people to usemoney in Islamically legitimate ventures, not just to keep their fundsidle.However, in this fast moving world, more than 1400 years after theProphet (s.a.w.), can Muslims find room for the principles of theirreligion? The answer comes with the fact that a global network ofIslamic banks, investment houses and other financial institutions hasstarted to take shape based on the principles of Islamic finance laiddown in the Qur'an and the Prophet's traditions 14 centuries ago.Islamic banking, based on the Qur'anic prohibition of charginginterest, has moved from a theoretical concept to embrace more than100 banks operating in 40 countries with multi-billion dollar depositsworld-wide. Islamic banking is widely regarded as the fastest growingsector in the Middle Eastern financial services market. Exploding ontothe financial scene barely thirty years ago, an estimated $US 70billion worth of funds are now managed according to Shari'ah. Depositassets held by Islamic banks were approximately $US5 billion in 1985but grew over $60 billion in 1994.The best known feature of Islamic banking is the prohibition oninterest. The Qur'an forbids the charging of Riba on money lent. It isimportant to understand certain principles of Islam that underpinIslamic finance. The Shari'ah consists of the Qur'anic commands aslaid down in the Holy Qur'an and the words and deeds of the ProphetMuhammad ( s.a.w.). The Shari'ah disallows Riba and there is now ageneral consensus among Muslim economists that Riba is not restrictedto usury but encompasses interest as well. The Qur'an is clear aboutthe prohibition of Riba, which is sometimes defined as excessiveinterest. "O You who believe! Fear Allah and give up that remains ofyour demand for usury, if you are indeed believers." Muslim scholarshave accepted the word Riba to mean any fixed or guaranteed interestpayment on cash advances or on deposits. Several Qur'anic passagesexpressly admonish the faithful to shun interest.The rules regarding Islamic finance are quite simple and can be summedup as follows:a) Any predetermined payment over and above the actual amount ofprincipal is prohibited. Islam allows only one kind of loan and that is qard-el-hassan(literally good loan) whereby the lender does not charge any interestor additional amount over the money lent. Traditional Muslim juristshave construed this principle so strictly that, according to onecommentator "this prohibition applies to any advantage or benefitsthat the lender might secure out of the qard (loan) such as riding theborrower's mule, eating at his table, or even taking advantage of theshade of his wall." The principle derived from the quotationemphasises that associated or indirect benefits are prohibited.b) The lender must share in the profits or losses arising out of theenterprise for which the money was lent. Islam encourages Muslims to invest their money and to become partnersin order to share profits and risks in the business instead ofbecoming creditors. As defined in the Shari'ah, or Islamic law,Islamic finance is based on the belief that the provider of capitaland the user of capital should equally share the risk of businessventures, whether those are industries, farms, service companies orsimple trade deals. Translated into banking terms, the depositor, thebank and the borrower should all share the risks and the rewards offinancing business ventures. This is unlike the interest-basedcommercial banking system, where all the pressure is on the borrower:he must pay back his loan, with the agreed interest, regardless of thesuccess or failure of his venture.The principle which thereby emerges is that Islam encouragesinvestments in order that the community may benefit. However, it isnot willing to allow a loophole to exist for those who do not wish toinvest and take risks but rather content with hoarding money ordepositing money in a bank in return for receiving an increase onthese funds for no risk (other than the bank becoming insolvent).Accordingly, under Islam, either people invest with risk or sufferloss through devaluation by inflation by keeping their money idle.Islam encourages the notion of higher risks and higher returns andpromotes it by leaving no other avenue available to investors. Theobjective is that high risk investments provide a stimulus to theeconomy and encourage entrepreneurs to maximise their efforts.c) Making money from money is not Islamically acceptable. Money is only a medium of exchange, a way of defining the value of athing; it has no value in itself, and therefore should not be allowedto give rise to more money, via fixed interest payments, simply bybeing put in a bank or lent to someone else. The human effort,initiative, and risk involved in a productive venture are moreimportant than the money used to finance it. Muslim jurists considermoney as potential capital rather than capital, meaning that moneybecomes capital only when it is invested in business. Accordingly,money advanced to a business as a loan is regarded as a debt of thebusiness and not capital and, as such, it is not entitled to anyreturn ( i.e. interest). Muslims are encouraged to purchase and arediscouraged from keeping money idle so that, for instance, hoardingmoney is regarded as being unacceptable. In Islam, money representspurchasing power which is considered to be the only proper use ofmoney. This purchasing power (money) cannot be used to make morepurchasing power (money) without undergoing the intermediate step ofit being used for the purchase of goods and services.d) Gharar (Uncertainty, Risk or Speculation) is also prohibited.Under this prohibition any transaction entered into should be freefrom uncertainty, risk and speculation. Contracting parties shouldhave perfect knowledge of the counter values intended to be exchangedas a result of their transactions. Also, parties cannot predetermine aguaranteed profit. This is based on the principle of 'uncertain gains'which, on a strict interpretation, does not even allow an undertakingfrom the customer to repay the borrowed principal plus an amount totake into account inflation. The rationale behind the prohibition isthe wish to protect the weak from exploitation. Therefore, options andfutures are considered as un-Islamic and so are forward foreignexchange transactions because rates are determined by interestdifferentials.A number of Islamic scholars disapprove the indexation of indebtednessto inflation and explain this prohibition within the framework ofqard-el-hassan. According to those scholars, the creditor advances theloan to win the blessings of Allah and expects to obtain the rewardfrom Allah alone. A number of transactions are treated as exceptionsto the principle of gharar : sales with advanced payment (bai'bithaman ajil); contract to manufacture (Istisna); and hire contract(Ijara). However, there are legal requirements for the conclusion ofthese contracts to be organised in a way which minimises risk.e) Investments should only support practices or products that are notforbidden -or even discouraged- by Islam. Trade in alcohol, forexample would not be financed by an Islamic bank; a real-estate loancould not be made for the construction of a casino; and the bank couldnot lend money to other banks at interest.

Isn't the LTTE committing Genocide?

Isn't the LTTE committing Genocide? by Dushy Ranetunge in LondonThe deliberate targeting of civilians has been used as a weapon of war throughout the history of mankind with various degrees of success.Hitler deliberately bombed London targeting civilians, but Churchill had stubbornly and famously declared "we shall fight on the seas and oceans, ?we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be,? we shall fight on the beaches, ?we shall fight on the landing grounds, ?we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, ?we shall fight in the hills; ?we shall never surrender." 12 weeks before the surrender of the Nazi's, the British carpet bombed the German city of Dresden, resulting in an estimated 25,000 to 40,000 German civilian casualties.Hitlers targeting of British civilians and the British targeting of German civilians did not result in any significant military advantage to either party.However, it could be argued that the American targeting of Japanese civilians at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, brought that conflict to an end resulting in the surrender of the Japanese.After the war, the United Nations Charter, the Geneva Conventions and The Hague conventions, established and strengthened the laws of war and the targeting of civilians.This did not stop the targeting of civilians. In Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and more recently in Iraq and Afghanistan civilians have been targeted, sometimes deliberately but on most occasions as what is termed as collateral damage. The press has also been targeted. In 2001 the US airforce bombed the Al Jazeera office in Kabul. In 2004 U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld described Al Jazeera's coverage as "vicious, inaccurate and inexcusable." Al Jazeera was broadcasting live pictures of civilian casualties.In all the above instances, deliberate or otherwise, the targeting and civilian casualties did not belong to a particular ethnic group. In Iraq and Afghanistan Western military action did not seek out a particular tribe or ethnic grouping for specific targeting.However, the LTTE's recent target selection in Sri Lanka is increasingly indicating that the LTTE is deliberately targeting a particular ethnic community in Sri Lanka with the deliberate intention of causing harm to this ethnic community.The legal definition of genocide is found in the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Article 2, of this convention defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."In the Sri Lankan conflict civilians have been killed on both sides of the ethnic divide. But there is a distinction in conduct between the two sides.In the early phases of the conflict there was, one believes, deliberate targeting of civilians by both sides. In some instances, Government forces are suspected to have deliberately targeted Tamil civilians in the misguided belief that by putting pressure on Tamil civilians, they would pressure the LTTE to cease armed action. The writer is aware of one incident, before the IPKF intervention, when a senior officer of the air force ordered a pilot to release bombs over Nallur. The Pilot refused stating that he had friends living there and turned the aircraft back. During this period there are indications of a deliberate policy of targeting civilians, periodically.Since these early years the level of professionalism and training in the Sri Lankan armed forces have increased several fold.Even now, Air force action over the Vanni has resulted in civilian casualties. But there is no evidence to indicate that civilian casualties have arisen as a result of deliberate targeting of civilians. Unlike previously, today, the air force has far superior intelligence and disciplined intelligence led targeting. Tamilchelvan was a victim of this efficiency. One of the contributory factors of civilian casualties in the Vanni is the LTTE's deliberate policy of locating their bunkers close to schools and hospitals. There is for example a bunker under the government medical facility in Vakarai, built by the LTTE during their occupation of the area. A foreign national photographed this bunker and provided the evidence to this writer several years ago. The LTTE is also known to use ambulances and civilian transport to facilitate the movement of their leaders to evade military targeting. Some of these vehicles have been targeted over the years, but there is no evidence to indicate that these were deliberate targeting of civilians as policy by the state.If targeting Tamil civilians was the motive, there is no need for the army to risk the security of some of their best soldiers to carry out attacks deep in the Vanni against Tamil civilians, when it could be done far more easily in some other easily accessible places.The LRRP is deployed to seek out and destroy specific targets and targeting Tamil civilians not only compromises their entire operation, it also renders the entire operation quite useless. At a time when the strategy is to encourage alternative Tamil political formations in the East and now the North, the targeting of Tamil civilians is completely counter-productive and simply does not take place as a policy of the state.But there are indications that the LTTE is deliberately targeting the Sinhalese community. There is a general pattern that is emerging from the LTTE's targeting priorities.The LTTE retains the capacity to carry out bomb attacks in any part of Sri Lanka as the recent incident near the Sambodhi Viharaya in Fort demonstrates. The incident was in a high security zone. The Sri Lankan authorities had prior intelligence of a possible attack in the Fort area earlier that week and took the precaution of alerting traders in the Fort area to be on the lookout. The Fort area was saturated with intelligence personnel. Despite the prior intelligence and the precautions the LTTE succeeded in carrying out the attack utilising a motorcycle suicide bomber.There are indications that some pro-LTTE Tamils holding British and other foreign passports living in Colombo are increasingly being used to transport material and give instructions to LTTE operatives in the city. The pattern that is emerging is that the LTTE carries out specific targeting of Sinhalese civilians taking precautions to avoid other ethnic communities. The LTTE is deliberately targeting the Sinhalese Buddhist community that forms the support base of Mahinda Rajapaksa. The CMC today has a Tamil/Muslim majority. The targeting methods used in this area is more precise, targeting military personnel such as the army Commander Sarath Fonseca and the Defense Secretary Gothabaya Rajapakse or in the instance of the Sambodhi Viharaya, the attempt was on perhaps Pillaiyan or a Government minister. The Fort railway station is targeted as it is used predominantly by Sinhalese commuters.Outside the CMC area, the targeting is more general and the targeting is Sinhalese civilians in Sinhalese neighbourhoods: January 16th passenger bus in Buttala, February 2nd passenger bus in Dambulla, February 3rd Fort Railway Station, February 23rd passenger bus bomb in Mt. Lavinia, April 25th bus bomb in Piliyandala, May 26th Dehiwala passenger Bus Bomb, June 4th Wellawatta bus bomb, June 6th Moratuwa and Kandy bus bombs. Several other such passenger bus parcel bombs in Sinhalese neighbourhoods were detected and defused.All these incidences highlight the deliberate targeting of civilians of one particular ethnic community. This is not collateral damage as is found in Air Force action or LRRP targeting of LTTE leadership. This is planned deliberate action to target Sinhalese civilians and almost in all cases, the poorest and the most vulnerable sections of the Sinhalese community.In attacking what the LTTE perceives as being the Mahinda Rajapaksa's support base, the LTTE perhaps expects the government to stop its military operations.The LTTE is as usual shooting itself in the foot. With elections on the horizon the UNP is struggling to make cost of living the priority issue in the electorate. Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe participated in a tooting vehicle horns protest in Colombo trying to kick off a campaign of making the cost of living a priority to undermine the Rajapakse administration.The mode of this UNP campaign was a failure, as the photos published of UNP bigwigs tooting horns in their luxury vehicles are bound to make the Sri Lankan rural electorate hostile towards the UNP, rather than join hands with them. It would have caused more harm than good for the UNP. The photos of Mr Hakeem in a super luxury vehicle tooting the horn with Mr Wickremesinghe in the background will particularly send a negative message to the rural constituency. The behaviour of a senior Police officer during the protest highlighted that the Rajapaksa administration was concerned about the protest, but they should not have been, as the LTTE has come to the rescue of the government.By targeting Sinhalese civilians, the LTTE has negated the UNP's efforts to make cost of living a priority and given a fresh impetus to Rajapakse's anti-terrorism agenda.The bus bombs have enraged the Sinhalese constituency and more determined than ever to rally around the government's defence effort.http://www.island.lk/2008/06/09/features.html

Christian Fundamentalism, the Global Crusade and Muslims

Christian Fundamentalism, the Global Crusade and Muslims

Yoginder சிகாந்து

If Christian fundamentalists are to be believed, America's invasion ofIraq and the consequent brutal slaughter of thousands of innocentcivilians in that country are all part of a grand divine plan thatwill finally culminate in the 'second coming' of Jesus Christ.Establishing an empire that will extend all over the globe, Christwill rule like a powerful monarch, saving those who believe in him anddispatching non-believers, all non-Christians and non-conformistChristians, to everlasting perdition in hell. This is no childishnonsense for millions of Christian fundamentalists, who sincerelybelieve this to be predicted in the Bible. Not surprisingly, AmericanChristian fundamentalists are today among the most fanatic supportersof Bush's global imperialist wars, in Iraq and elsewhere, which theysee as in keeping with the divine mandate. They are no eccentric orlunatic fringe elements, for today Christian fundamentalists exercisea powerful influence in American politics. Among them is George Bushhimself, who insists that the American invasion of Iraq has beensanctioned by God, with whom he claims to be in personalcommunication.While the Western press is awash with stories, real and exaggerated,about 'Islamic fundamentalists', rarely is mention made aboutChristian fundamentalists, who, with their vast resources and closelinks with the current American administration, are a potentially moremenacing threat than their Muslim counterparts. According to newspaperreports more than a third of Americans are associated with one or theother Christian fundamentalist outfit, most of which are fiercelyanti-communist, anti-Muslim and are passionate advocates offree-market capitalism, global American hegemony and the myth of thecivilizing mission of white America. In recent years, thesefundamentalist groups have been engaged in aggressive missionary workin other countries as well, including in the so-called 'Third World'.Fired by a passionate hatred for other religions, which they dismissas 'false' and even 'Satanic', they are today among the mostwell-funded missionary groups in large parts of Asia and Africa.Crusading for Christ, these fundamentalist groups are not simply outfishing for souls. Rather, for them Christianity is only part of theagenda, which also includes aggressively promoting American andZionist interests. Today, these groups preach not only Christ but alsoPax Americana and even American-led imperialist wars, which they blessas holy causes to usher in the final arrival of Jesus.Texas-based author and preacher Michael Evans is one of the mostnotorious American Christian fundamentalist preachers today, apassionate advocate of war in the name of Christ. In a recentlypublished book, titled Beyond Iraq: The Next Move-Ancient Prophecy andModern-Day Conspiracy Collide (Whitestone Books, Florida, 2003), hespells out a grand design for American global hegemony, blessed in theguise of a holy global war. Key players in this 'divine' plot includethe CIA, the American government and army, and Israel, besides variousChristian fundamentalist outfits. The book is dedicated, among others,to what Evans describes as 'two old friends', Ehud Olmert, formerIsraeli Vice President, and the former Israeli Prime Minister,Benjamin Netanyahu. Equally revealingly, the book begins with aquotation which graces the lobby of the original headquarters of theCIA.Evans is no petty crank who claims to be God-possessed, although hiswritings might seem to suggest that. The jacket of the book describeshim as a 'TIME magazine best-selling author', who has appeared on theBBC and on American television channels and who has written for suchpapers as the Wall Street Journal and the Jerusalem Post. He hobnobswith the highest of American and Israeli politicians and religiousleaders, and is evidently taken very seriously in Christianfundamentalist circles. That Evans is also a passionate Bush-backer isamply evident in his clam that, 'I know, from a first hand, personalinterview with him that Bush is a man of faith who believes in theBible'.Evans is the founder of the 'Jerusalem Prayer Team', which, he says,he established after having been visited by God in a vision. Amongthose who participated in the inauguration of his outfit were suchnames as Franklin Graham, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, allnotorious American Christian fundamentalist leaders, Governor DickPerry and Representative Dick Armey, and Benjamin Netanyahu, formerIsraeli Prime Minister. Thousands of others in America and elsewhere,so he claims, have joined his movement in the aftermath of 11September, 2001. His ultimate aim, he writes, is to have one million'intercessors praying daily for the peace of Jesus and God'sprotection for Israel' so that 'demonic powers will be defeated byholy angels in a battle that cannot be seen with the natural eye'.A fierce Christian Zionist, Evans has close links with the Israeliestablishment. The book's jacket states that he received the'Ambassador Award' from the government of Israel and relates that hehas been 'a confidante to most of Israel's prime ministers and to bothof Jerusalem's mayors'. The jacket quotes Benjamin Netanyahu aspraising Evans for having 'consistently demonstrated the moral claritythat is necessary to defend Israel from the lies and distortions ofits enemies'. This is no empty boast: the book contains pictures ofEvans with Menachem Begin endorsing his first book, 'Israel: America'sKey To Survival', praying with Shimon Peres, comforting Jewish victimsof a bomb blast in Israel, launching the 'Jerusalem Prayer Team' alongwith Jerusalem's mayor, pledging support to Israel before YitzhakShamir along with half a million signatures of fellow Christians,championing Israel's cause at the royal palace in Madrid and keepingcompany with American soldiers in Lebanon and Somalia. *Christianity, War and the 'Defence' of IsraelFor Evans, and numerous other rabid Christian fundamentalist preachersof hate like him, one of the most crucial purposes of America'sinvasion of Iraq is the 'defence' of Israel, which he regards as asolemn Christian duty. If till recently Jews were routinely reviled bythe Church as 'Christ-killers', and, accordingly, hounded by Christianauthorities, many of today's Christian fundamentalists, like Evans,are passionate advocates of the state of Israel. This does not,however, represent any shift in their fervent belief, intrinsic tomainstream Christianity, that non-Christians, Jews included, aredestined for Hell. Rather, it is part of a wider conversion agenda.Jesus, they believe, will return to the world to rule only once theJews have 'returned' to Palestine and have rebuilt the temple of Davidthat was destroyed almost two thousand years ago. After this momentousevent, many Jews will convert to Christianity and those who refuse towill be sent to hell. Till then, Christian fundamentalists argue, theJews and their state must be passionately defended from their'enemies', who are invariably identified as Arabs and Muslims.The 'defence' of Israel, a central point in the Christianfundamentalist agenda, is typically argued in racist terms. Israel,Christian fundamentalists believe, are God's 'chosen people', and theyquote the Bible as making this claim, suggesting, therefore, thatnon-Jewish peoples are somehow lesser beings. Evans, too, makes thispoint and argues that according to the Bible 'God will bless those whobless Israel' and will 'curse those who curse it'. 'History records',he says, 'that God deals with nations in accordance with how thosenations deal with Israel'. Hence, in the 'defence' of Israel,Christians, Evans argues, have no choice. If they are true to theirfaith, he says, they must join hands with America in its war for'defending' Israel, and must 'support Israel in every possible way'.'We must either choose Mount Zion [Jerusalem] and be among those whoobey the voice of the Spirit of the Lord', he writes, 'or we will beleft to the passions of our flesh, drinking the wine of her [Bablyon'sor Iraq's] fornication'.The invasion of Iraq, and the broader American 'war on terror', is,Evans says, is akin to 'divine light [.] proclaiming like a trumpet aspiritual battle of monumental proportions', pitting Babylon, theBiblical Iraq, the 'spiritual centre of darkness', against Jerusalemor contemporary Israel, the 'spiritual centre of light'. But so thatthis 'divine light' should spread beyond the confines of Babylon,Evans pleads for America to extend its war all over the globe, toevery country that dares to challenge American supremacy and the stateof Israel. This war, he says, should aim at the elimination of all'terrorists', defined as those who refuse to support Israeli andAmerican interests. In this, the invasion and occupation of Iraq is ofvital importance, Evans says, because it will 'become a US base' todestroy 'terrorist' networks elsewhere in the Middle East andeventually to usher in what he calls 'the apocalyptic battle' ofArmageddon, 'the final battles of the ages' as allegedly 'prophesiedin Daniel, Jeremiah and Revelations', chapters of the Bible.America, as Evans sees it, must be ready to sacrifice itself toprotect Israel, because that, he says, is precisely what the ChristianGod wants. Hence, Palestinians resisting the illegal occupation oftheir land and all those who opposed to Israel and its imperialist andexpansionist policies must be crushed with the might of American arms,he insists. The Christian God does not brook any peace with suchpeople, he argues. The Bible, he announces, says that those who fightagainst Israel, God's supposedly chosen people and recipients of His'special blessing', would be destroyed by God Himself. He quotes theBible as declaring: 'And this shall be the plague with which the Lordwill strike all the people who fought against Jerusalem: Their fleshshall dissolve while they stand on their feet. Their eyes shalldissolve in their sockets. And their tongues shall dissolve in theirmouths'.Given this supposed divine backing, Evans exhorts America to invadeand subjugate all countries opposed to Israel, specifically namingLebanon, Syria and Iran. The ultimate agenda, he says, is to destroythese countries and establish what Zionists call Eretz or GreaterIsrael, extending to and including Iraq. This is because, Evans quotesthe Bible as saying, God allegedly gave this vast stretch of land,from the Nile to the Euphrates, to Abraham and his son Isaac and hisdescendants, ancestors of the Jews, as a covenant and as their'everlasting possession'. Echoing hardliner Zionists, Evans insiststhat there can be no peace with the Palestinians at any cost, because,he claims, the Christian God is opposed to this. If Israel and Americaare to faithfully abide by the Christian God's will, he says, theymust not let anything get in the way of the establishment of EretzIsrael. Thus, various peace proposals that involve any territorialconcessions on the part of Israel are ruled out. This is because, asEvans alleges, God has given the entire territory to the Jews tilleternity.Christianity and the New Anti-Muslim CrusadeAs for the Arabs and Muslims more generally, Evans seems to suggestthat the Christian God desires that they be humiliated, subjugated andcrushed. Thus, he quotes the Bible as saying that while God speciallyblessed Isaac and his descendants, the Jews, he had a different planin mind for the Arabs, descendants of Ishmael, Abraham's other son.Referring to Ishmael Evans quotes the Bible as saying, 'He will be awild man; His hand shall be against every man and every man's handagainst him'. This racist stereotype, so deeply rooted in traditionalChristian discourse about Muslims, is held by Evans to be what hecalls 'a fitting description of the Arab terrorist' and, presumably,as justifying the annihilation of the Arab people, as well as otherMuslims. Evans goes so far in vilifying Arabs and Muslims as to callMuhammad a proto-terrorist, alleging that he had banished and killedJews for not believing in him. 'Terrorism', he claims, is a logicalconsequence of Islam, and he argues that 'Muhammad set a sordidexample for his present-day disciples, the Qadafis, Khomeinis, Arafatsand bin Ladens and Husseins of this world'. Claiming knowledge of theunseen, he even announces that Islam is 'a malevolent manifestation ofa religion conceived in the pit of hell'.Evans thus equates Islam with the forces of the 'Anti-Christ', againstwhom he appeals to Christians to marshal all the resources at theircommand. Ironically, while spewing hatred and calling for a globalwar, he presents Christianity as peace-loving, contrasting it withIslam, which he equates with 'terrorism'. 'Christianity differs fromIslam as day differs from night', he claims, completely unmindful ofthe sordid and blood-soaked history of the faith he claims tochampion. In the same breath as he issues a general summons toChristians to wage war in the name of their faith he refers to theBible as instructing Christians to 'turn the other cheek' whenslapped, in order to argue that, unlike Christianity, Islam is aninherently vile religion, equating it with what he terms 'the law ofthe bullet, militancy, treachery, terrorism and violence'.Christianity, America and OilChristian fundamentalists are ardent advocates of free-marketcapitalism, having played a key role in America's war againstcommunism during the Cold War. Christ, capitalism and Americansupremacy go together, Evans believes, and so, while announcing thatan American-spearheaded global war is precisely what Christ mandates,he approvingly quotes Isser Harel, founder of the Israeli secretservices' organization Mossad, who speaks of the 'terror' threat toAmerica's 'freedom', 'capitalism' and 'power', and exhorts America totake appropriate defence measures. Evans goes so far as to advise theAmerica to capture all the oil wealth in Arab lands in order toprevent 'terrorists' from using oil wealth to target Israel, home toGod's supposedly 'special people'. A more ingenuous excuse to justifyAmerican greed could hardly be devised!Since Muslims, especially the Arabs, are branded virtually as agentsof the Devil, Evans argues that America, as self-appointed agent ofChrist, should have no qualms about invading oil-rich Arab lands. Thiswould, he says, break America's dependence on Muslim countries for oilwhich. If America seizes all Arab oil-fields, it would, he says,sharply reduce oil prices, forcing Muslim countries 'to their knees',giving them only two options: 'cooperate with the war on terror or gobankrupt'. At the same time as he exhorts America to invade and occupyall the countries, no matter what the human cost, Evans warns that itshould not be serious about its rhetoric of exporting 'democracy' tothe Middle East, for, he argues, it would lead to anti-American andanti-Israeli Islamists taking over.Invasion of Iraq and the Ushering in of Global Christendom and Pax-AmericanaEvans sees America's invasion and occupation of Iraq as the unfoldingof a divine plan for the world. It is not nothing less than what hecalls a grand 'spiritual battle', between Christianity and Satanicforces and 'demons', as represented by Muslims and othernon-Christians. Accordingly, he fervently welcomes America's invasionof Iraq and pleads that America should expand the theatre of war byinvading various other, mostly Muslim, countries.The murder and destruction that America has wrought in Iraq is nothingto grieve about, Evans seems to suggest. It is a price, he argues,that God is supposedly exacting from முச்ளிம்ஸ்

for having been 'coerced'by Satan to 'loathe' the Jews, 'God's Chosen People'. It is also adivine punishment, he says, for Iraq having allegedly possessing'deadly chemical, biological or nuclear weapons', echoing the bogusclaim made by Bush, Blair and their henchmen which they used tojustify their invasion of that country. Weak-hearted Christians whomight disagree are advised to all in line, for, Evans says, this isprecisely what the Bible predicts and what God mandates. 'I will raiseagainst Babylon an assembly of great nations from the north country,for she has sinned against God', the Jewish prophet Jeremiah is saidto have announced, and Evans takes this as evidence of his claim thatthe American invasion of Iraq is demanded by God and that all Americais doing is to faithfully follow God's will.Iraq, the Biblical Babylon, Evans insists, represents the forces ofSatan, and hence deserves to be crushed by America, God's agent,through invasion and war. 'Babylon is fallen, that great city, becauseshe has made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of herfornication', he quotes the Bible as saying. 'I will rise up againstthem [.] I will cut off from Babylon her name and survivors, heroffspring and descendants [.] I will turn her into a place for owlsand into swampland. I will sweep her with the broom of destruction',Evans quotes the Biblical God as having declared. He marshals otherBiblical verses to press the argument about Iraq being allegedlyinherently 'evil' and hence deserving harsh repression at Americanhands. Eve and Adam are said to have committed the 'first sin' there;it was in Iraq that occult and astrology were invented;Nebuchadnezzar, ruler of Babylon, conquered Israel and enslaved theJews; the Babylonians built the Tower of Babel, thereby defying God bytrying to reach heaven without His permission; and the Bible describesBabylon as the 'seat' of the Anti-Christ and the 'Beast', the 'seat ofSatan's evil', in contrast to Jerusalem, the 'seat of God'srighteousness', against whom it is destined to be pitted in the finalbattle that will usher in Jesus' 'second coming'.In all, then, Evan argues, America is simply acting as the ChristianGod's handmaiden in wreaking destruction and death in Iraq. Instead ofbeing blamed or castigated for this, he argues, it should be praised.This destruction is Biblically mandated, he repeats, for the Bible hasannounced that, 'Babylon, the great, has fallen and has become adwelling place of demons, a prison for every foul spirit, and a cagefor every unclean and hated bird [.] Therefore, her plague will comein one day-death and mourning and famine. And she will be utterlyburned with fire [.] Thus with violence the great city Babylon shallbe thrown down and shall not be found anymore'.But this terrible destruction in Iraq is only the beginning of abloody trail of events mandated by a supposedly blood-thirsty andvengeful God. According to Evans' reading of the Bible, the Americaninvasion of Iraq is what he calls 'the dress-rehearsal' for the grandglobal battle of Armageddon between the forces of Christ and Satan.Prior to this battle, he quotes the Bible as saying, 'demons andspirits' bound up in the Euphrates in Iraq will be released, and, withan army of 200 million, will kill off a third of the world's totalinhabitants through nuclear war. This grand battle, Evans writes, isnot far off. Hence, he appeals to Christians to 'put on the armour ofGod' and 'engage in spiritual battle'. Now, is the time, he says, toprepare for the impending return of Christ. Presumably, after Iraq isdestroyed through the agency of the Americans, Christ will suddenlyappear in Jerusalem and establish his global empire, ushering in theend of the world as we know it.Horrendous as Evans' views are, they do find a powerful echo inChristian fundamentalist circles today, more so given their growinginfluence in policy-making circles in the West, particularly inAmerica. If the world is to be saved from the Armageddon that Evansand his ilk are bent on calling down from the heavens it is imperativethat Western imperialism and Christian fundamentalism be interrogated,challenged and opposed, particularly by sincere Christians themselves.

இந்திய குண்டுவெடிப்புகளின் பின்னணியில் அமெரிக்கா மற்றும் இஸ்ரேல் - JUNIOR VIKATAN ARTICLE

இந்திய குண்டுவெடிப்புகளின் பின்னணியில் அமெரிக்கா மற்றும் இஸ்ரேல் - JUNIOR VIKATAN ARTICLE

நாம் அன்றாடம் செய்து கொண்டிருக்கம் பல செயல்கள் பலரால் கண்டுகொள்ளப்படுவதில்லை. ஆனால், நாம் செய்யத் தவறிய அல்லது தவறாகச் செய்யும் ஒரு செயல் பலருடைய கண்டனத்துக்கு உள்ளாகிறது. குhல்பந்து விளையாட்டில் எதிரணியினர் போட மயலும் எத்தனையோ 'கோல்'களை ஒரு கீப்பர் எடுத்திருக்கலாம். ஆனால், அவர் தடுக்கத் தவறியதால் விழுந்த 'கோல்' மட்டுமே நம் நினைவில் வகிநிறது. ஆதைப் போலவே பயங்கரவாதத் தாக்குதல்களை காவல்துறை பலமுறை தடுத்திருக்கலாம். உளவுத்துறை மூலம் கிடைத்த தகவல்களின் அடிப்படையில் பயங்கரவாத செயல்களில் ஈடுபட இருந்த பயங்கர வாதிகளைக் கைது செய்திருக்கக்கூடும். ஆனால், பயங்கரவாதத் தாக்குதல்கள் நடந்தவுடன் அரசு தடுக்க தவறிவிட்டது என்ற எண்ணமே நம் அனைவருடைய மனதிலும் நிறைந்துவிடுகிறது.இந்த எண்ணம் சாதாரணமாக மக்கள் மனதில் எழுவதைப் புரிந்துகொள்ள முடிகிறது. ஆனால், அரசியல் கட்சிகள் இதுபோன்ற துயரமான நிகழ்வுகளைகூட அரசியல் ஆதாயத்துக்காகப் பயன்படுத்துவதைப் பார்க்கும்போது மனதில் வேதனை எழுவதை தவிர்க்க முடிவிதில்லை.கடந்த மே மாதம் 13-ம் நாள் ஜெய்ப்பூரில் நடந்த தொடர் குண்டுவெடிப்புகள் குறிந்து பாரதிய ஜனதா கட்சி எழுப்பிய கண்டனங்களில் மத்திய அரசு மீதான குற்றச்சாட்டும் இருந்தது. ஐக்கிய முற்போக்குக் கூட்டணி அரசு பலவீனமான அரசு என்றும், சிறுபான்மையினரின் ஓட்டு வங்கியைக் கருத்தில்கொண்டு பயங்கரவாதிகளுக்கு சதிராக உறுதியாக நடவடிக்கை எடுப்பதற்கு மத்திய அரசு தயங்குகிறது என்றும் மத்திய அரசு மீது குற்ற்ச்சாட்டுகள் எழுந்தன. முணி;டும் மீண்டும் ஒரே புகாரைச் சொல்லிக் கொண்டிருந்தால் மக்கள் அதை உண்மையென நம்பிவிடுவார்கள் என்று பீ.ஜெ.பி கருதுகிறது போலிருக்கிறது. போடா சட்டம் அமலில் இருந்த போதும் பயங்கரவாதத் தாக்குதல்கள் நடந்தன என்பதை இந்திய மக்கள் மறந்து பொயிருப்பார்கள் என்று அந்தக் கட்சித் தலைமை நினைக்கக்கூடும். இப்பொது கர்நாடக சட்டமன்றத்தில் ஆட்சி அமைக்கும் வாய்ப்பை பீ.ஜெ.பி. பெற்றிருக்கும் நிலையைப் பார்க்கும்போது அந்தக் குற்றச்சாட்டும்கூட கர்நாடக மக்கள் மத்தியல் எதிரொலித்திருக்கும் என்றே எண்ணத் தோன்றுகிறது.இந்தியவில் நடக்கும் பயங்கரவாத செயல்களில் அப்பாவி மக்கள் குறி வைக்கப்படுகிறார்கள் நம்முடைய மக்கள் கோயில்களிலும் மசூதிகளிலும் இறக்கிறார்கள். பேருந்துகளிலும் தொடர்வண்டிகளிலும் பயணம் செய்து கொண்டிலுக்கும்போதே மடிகிறார்கள். கடைவீதிகளிலும் பொழுதுபோக்குப் பூங்காகளிலும் சிதறி சின்னா பின்னமாகிறார்கள். எதற்கா சாகிறோம் என்று அறியக்கூட அவகாசம் இல்லாமல் அப்பாவிகளுடைய உயிர் பறிக்கப்பட்டு விடுகிறது. இவர்களில் பலர் அவர்களுடைய குடும்பத்தில் சம்பாதிக்கும் ஒரே நபராக இருக்கலாம். இவர்களுடைய மறைவுக்குப் பிறகு அந்தக் குடும்பங்கள் பலவிதமான துன்பங்களுக்கும் துயரங்களுக்கும் ஆளாகலாம். ஆனால், இவற்றைப் பற்றியெல்லாம் சிறிதும் கவலைப்படாமல் சிலர் இந்தத் துயரங்களில் அரசியல் ஆதாயம் தேட முனைகிறார்கள்.
ஒவ்வொரு குண்டு வெடிப்புக்கம் ஏதாவது ஓர் அமைப்புகாரணம் என்ற முடிவுக்கு வருகிறோம். அந்த அமைப்பைச் சேர்ந்தவர்கள் என்று யாராவது சிலர் கைது செய்யப்படுகிறார்கள்.மோதலில் சுட்டுக் கொல்லப்படுகிறார்கள். இருந்தும், அடுத்தடுத்து குண்டு வெடிப்புகள் நடந்து கொண்டுதான் இருக்கின்றன. அப்படி என்றால், முதலில் கைது செய்யப்பட்டவர்கள் அல்லது கொல்லல்ட்டவர்கள் தவிர, புதிதுபுதிதாக பயங்கரவாத இயக்கங்களில் உறுப்பினர்கள் சேர்ந்து கொண்டிருக்கிறார்கள் என்று பொருளாகிறது அல்லது கைது செய்யப்பட்டவர்களோ,கொல்லப்பட்டவர்களோ முந்தைய சம்பவத்துடன் தொடர்பில்லாதவர்கள் என்று அர்த்தமாகிறது.
இந்த பயங்கரவாத நிகழ்வுகளால் அரசியல் ஆதாயம் யாருக்குக் கிடைக்கிறது? இந்த சம்பவங்கள் நடைபெறவேண்டிய நாளைத் தீர்மானிப்பது யார்? அதில் ஏதேனும் அரசியல் இருக்கிறதா? ஒவ்வொரு பயங்கராவாத நிகழ்வும் வேறு ஏதாவது சம்பவத்துடன் தொடர்புடையதாக இருக்கிறதா? இவை எதுவும் அர்த்தம் இல்லாத கேள்விகளாக இருக்கலாம். அல்லது இவற்றில் ஒன்றிரண்டு கேள்விகளுக்கான விடைகளில் ஏதேனும் உண்மை ஒட்டிக் கொண்டிருக்கலாம். இந்த வினாக்கள் பலருடைய சிந்தனையில் எழுந்திருக்கக்கூடும். இருந்தும், தொடர்ந்து அவற்றுக்கான விடை தேடும் பணியில் ஒருவர் ஈடுபட முடியாமல் அவருடைய அன்றாடப் பணிகள் அவரை ஆக்கிரமித்திருக்கலாம்.அண்மையில் தற்செயலாக இணையதளத்தில் படிக்க நேர்ந்த ஒரு ஆங்கிலக்கட்டுரையில் இடம் பெற்றிருந்த சில தகவல்கள் இந்தக் கேள்விகளில் அர்த்தம் இல்லாமல் இல்லை என்ற உணர்வை ஏற்படுத்தின.சமீபத்தில் ஜெய்ப்பூரில் நடந்த குண்டு வெடிப்பில் சர்வதேச பின்னணி இருக்கக்கூடும். தேர்தல் மூலம் பாக்கிஸ்தானில் அமைந்த அரசின் வெளியுறவுத்துறை அமைச்சரை இந்திய வெளியுறவுத்துறை அமைச்சர் மே 20-22 தேதிகளில் சந்திக்க இருந்தார். இரு நாடுகளுக்கு இடையில் நல்லுறவு ஏற்பட்டால் யாருக்கு இழப்பு ஏற்படுமோ, அவர்களே இந்தத் தாக்குதலுக்கு காரணமாக இருக்கக்கூடும்.
1948ம் வருடம் மே 14 அன்று இஸ்ரேல் என்ற நாடு உருவாக்கப்பட்டு 60 ஆண்டுகள் நிறைவடைவதை ஒட்டி உலகமெங்கும் இஸ்லாமியர்களும் பாலஸ்தீன ஆதரவாளர்களும் ஆர்ப்பாட்டம் நடத்துகிறார்கள். அந்த செய்தியபை; பின்னுக்குத் தள்ளி 'இஸ்லாமிய பயங்கரவாதம்' என்ற செய்தி உலக ஊடகங்களில் இடம் பெறும் வகையில் ஜெய்ப்பூரில் குண்டுகள் வெடித்திருக்கின்றன. லெபனான் மீது இஸ்ரேல் போர் தொடுக்க ஜூலை 11, 2006 அன்று மும்பையில் தொடர்வண்டியில் குண்டுகள் வெடித்தன.
மேலும் இந்தியாவில் கர்நாடக மாநிலத்தில் சட்ட மன்றத் தேர்தலுக்கான வாக்கப்பதிவு நடக்க இருந்தது இதேபோல, குஜராத் தேர்தல் வாக்கப் பதிவுக்கு இரு மாதங்களுக்கு முன்தாக அஷhதாம் கோயிலில் பயங்கரவாதிகள் தாக்குதல் தொடுத்தனர். 2005, மே 2ம் நாள் அமெரிக்க அதிபர் இந்தியாவுக்கு வருகை தந்ததையொட்டி மிகப்பெரிய அளவில் எதிர்ப்பு ஆர்பாட்டங்கள் இந்தியாவில் நடந்தன. அதற்கு ஐந்து நாட்களுக்குப் பிறகு வாரணாசியில் பயங்கரவாதத் தாக்குதல் நடந்தது.
இந்திய-அமெரிக்க ஒப்பந்தம் குறித்த எதிர்ப்பு அதிகமாக இருந்த கடந்த ஆண்டில் ஹைதராபாத் பூங்காவில் குண்டுகள் வெடித்தன என்று அந்தக் கட்டுரை பட்டியலிடுகிறது.
அமெரிக்காவும் இஸ்ரேலும் பல நாடுகளில் தங்களுடைய பங்காளிகளுக்கு அரசியல் அதாயம் கிடைக்கும் செயல்களைச் செய்வார்கள் என்று அரசியல் தளத்தில் நிலவும் கருத்துக்கு வலுவூட்டுகிற வகையில் அந்தக் கட்டுரையின் உள்ளடக்கம் இருந்தது.இவையெல்லாம் ஒன்றுக்கொன்று தொடர்புடையவையா அல்லது மொட்டைத் தலைக்கும் முழங்காலுக்குதம் முடிச்சுப் போடுவது போல் இட்டுக்கட்டி சொல்லப்படும் அரசியல் வாதங்களா என்பதை நம்மைப்போல சாதாரண மக்களால் அறிந்துகொள்ள முடியாது. அதிகாரம் நிறைந்த ஆட்சியாளர்களுக்கும் அரசு அதிகாரிகளும்தான் இதற்கான முன் முயற்சியை எடுக்கவேண்டும். அவர்களால்கூட கண்டுபிடித்து நிரூபிக்க முடியாத வகையில் செயல்படும் வல்லமை சர்வதேச பயங்காரவாதிகளுக்கு ஒருவேளை இருக்கக்கூடும். அந்தந்தப் பகுதியில் இருக்கும் ஏதாவது ஒரு இயக்கத்தின் மூலம் தங்கள் திட்டத்தை நிறைவேற்றிக் கொள்ளும் வலிமை அவர்களுக்கு இருக்கலாம்.இந்நிலையில் இந்தியா முழுவதும் நடந்த பல பயங்கரவாத நிகழ்வுகள் குறித்து முழுமையான ஆய்வு நடத்தி விசாரிப்பதற்கு சுதந்திரமான ஓர் ஆணையத்தை இந்திய அரசு அமைக்க வேண்டும் என்ற கோரிக்கை எழுந்துள்ளதாக அறிய முடிகிறது. எப்பொதும் சொல்லப்படும் இந்து-முஸ்லிம், இந்திய – பாக்கிஸ்தான் போன்ற முரண்பாடுகளையும் தாண்டி வேறு யாருடைய கரங்களாவது இந்திய மக்களை பலிவாங்கும் பயங்கரவாதச் செயல்களில் இருக்கிறதா என்பதை மக்களுக்கு அறியத்தர வேண்டும்.நன்றி : ஜீனியர் விகடன்http://www.vikatan.com/jv/2008/jun/01062008/jv0503.asp

Aurangzeb's Treatment of His Hindu Subjects

Aurangzeb's Treatment of His Hindu Subjects
by Mohammed Ayub Khan

The Mughal emperor Aurangzeb is a highly contentious figure in Indian history and is widely reviled as a bigoted tyrant in academic literature as well as in popular imagination. He is accused of persecuting Hindus and Sikhs, destroying temples, imposing exclusive taxes on non-Muslims, and stifling all forms of religious freedoms. This paper will analyze these charges by surveying historical accounts on Aurangzeb’s relationship with his Hindu subjects with special concentration on temple desecrations. It will be shown that Aurangzeb’s behavior towards the non-Muslims was no different than other rulers of the age and that most of his negative engagements with non-Muslims were not guided by religious policy but were a result of calculated political and economic considerations. This will be done by first, briefly analyzing instances of temple desecration by warring Hindu rulers. This will show that the policy of destroying temples pre-dates the arrival of Muslim rulers. Second, the behavior of earlier Muslim rulers in India towards the non-Muslims from the beginnings of the Delhi Sultanate to the reign of Shahjahan will be discussed. Third, this paper will explore Aurangzeb’s alleged tyrannical behavior towards Hindus by examining his banning of Hindu festivals and customs, his re-introduction of jizya and the reasons behind its implementation, and his involvement in temple desecrations. Fourth, examples of Aurangzeb’s friendly attitudes towards the Hindus will be provided in detail to show that there are enough historical evidences which reveal that the last great Mughal was not the tyrant that he is usually made out to be. I will then conclude with observations on the materials presented in this paper.
To begin with it should be stated that Medieval Indian history is a contentious and controversial field. Looking at texts from a single framework restricts one from arriving at correct conclusions. The historical texts, especially the court chronicles, had a special agenda of praising the ruler and offer exaggerated accounts of their protagonists. Modern writers like Romila Thapar contend that the Turko-Persian accounts were often “fanciful and exaggerated.” [1] To complicate the matters it should also be noted that most of the translations of such texts into English were done by British colonial administrators who were hostile towards Muslims and whose intention was to create a schism in the Indian society. In order to arrive at a clearer picture this writer has attempted his best to tread with caution while utilizing these sources.
Temple desecration has been a common feature in India which predates the arrival of Islam. The deity of each temple was rooted in the local mindset and was considered a popular symbol of political power. Any harm or insult to the temple was considered to be an insult of the kingdom. Beginning in 6th century there are several examples of Hindu victors desecrating the temples of the defeated. For instance, in 642 AD the Pallava King Narasemhavan I looted the image of Ganesha from the Chalukyan capital of Vatapi. The exploits of Chola king Rajendra were so prolific that he decorated his capital with idols looted from a number of neighboring kingdoms. Kashmiri king Harsha reportedly raised the looting of temples to an institutionalized activity. Similarly, Hindu rulers attacked Buddhist monasteries and pillaged them[2]
The Muslim rule in India was consolidated in India in 1192 AD. The rulers at this time did not engage in any overt forms of discrimination like forced conversions or indiscriminate slaughter. Once order was restored and their power consolidated the Muslim rulers left the Hindus masses to themselves. Before that, however, continuing in the time honored Indian tradition they too indulged in temple desecration as part of their expansion initiative. From 1192-1393 AD Eaton lists a total of 23 desecrations by the armies of the Delhi Sultanate.[3] Towards the end of the Delhi Sultanate, orthodox Muslim jurists advised Sikandar Lodi, the ruler of Delhi, that “it is not lawful to lay waste ancient idol temples, and it does not rest with you to prohibit ablution in a reservoir which has been customary from ancient times.”[4] The Sultans generally did not interfere or tinker with the personal laws or sought any revolutionary change in the dominant and oppressive caste system.
After gaining stability the Sultans followed a liberal policy and not only protected temples but even allowed new ones to be constructed. They did, however, impose the jizyah (the poll tax levied on non-Muslims) but were for the most part tolerant. Hindus and Muslims mingled to such an extent that religious identity labels were not used. To quote historian N.E. Balaram:
Any careful examination will show that there were no Hindu and Muslim labels till the thirteenth century. They were two different faiths and they did not quarrel. The term Hindu was used by the Muslim rulers in early days to denote the zamindars, landlords and the Brahmin priests. The common people were not referred to as Hindus. Officers under the Delhi Sultanate in 14th century called the zamindars Hindus to denote more their aristocracy than their religion. Ziauddin Barani, a historian of the period in his book Fatwa-i-Jahandari uses the term Hindu in several places, mostly to desirable zamindars. The Hindu-Muslim identity came only gradually.[5]

This implies that there wasn’t any overt form of discrimination against the Hindu community under the reign of the Delhi Sultanate and that they were well integrated into the new political order. This does not negate the fact, however, that there were caste and class differences and the Muslims society also acquired a hint of such classifications.
In 1526 Babur defeated Ibrahim Lodi at the historic battle of Panipat and laid the foundations of the Mughal Empire. According to the authenticated text of his will he advised his son Humayun the following:
My son take note of the following: do not harbor religious prejudice in your heart. You should dispense justice while taking note of the people's religious sensitivities, and rites. Avoid slaughtering cows in order that you could gain a place in the heart of natives. This will take you nearer to the people.Do not demolish or damage places of worship of any faith and dispense full justice to all, to ensure peace in the country. Islam can better be preached by the sword of love and affection, rather than the sword of tyranny and persecution. Avoid the differences between the Shias and Sunnis. Look at the various characteristics of your people just as characteristics of various seasons.[6]

As is evident the founder of the Mughal Empire knew well that in order to rule he has to take the non-Muslim majority of India into confidence and that it cannot be done through force or coercion. There is no evidence of Babur ordering the destruction of any temple.[7]This policy of religious tolerance was more or less followed by his successors. This reached its zenith during the reign of Babur’s grandson Akbar who showed great interest in Hinduism and religious syncreticism. He initiated the practice of marrying Hindu Rajput princesses, outlawed cow slaughter, and abolished jizya. In his zeal for communal harmony he even went to the extent of banning prayers in mosques for a period of time.[8]
However, this doesn’t mean that this policy was uniformly applied throughout the life span of the Mughal Empire. There is documented evidence of Jahangir and Shah Jahan being involved in twenty two and sixteen instances of temple desecration respectively.[9] Despite such occasional aberrations it is fair to say that the Mughal rule in India was tolerant of the non-Muslims when seen in the context of medieval times. Most scholars agree that until the time of Shahjahan this was indeed the case. Such scholarly consensus does not converge with regards to the religious policies of Aurangzeb to whose rule we now turn.
Those who claim that Aurangzeb was a religious fundamentalist who harbored anti-Hindu sentiments tend to cast him in such an image from the time of his youth itself. While it is true that Aurangzeb was extremely pious and observant of religious obligations he wasn’t as dry or colorless as he is made out to be. This assertion can be substantiated by the fact that he was madly in love with a singer named Hira Bai.[10] He had at least two Hindu wives Nawab Bai, daughter of Kashmir’s Raja Raju, and Udaipuri Mahal. These marriages were performed in his youth and there is no evidence to suggest that they converted to Islam. It may be suggested here that Aurangzeb had married these women under the pressure from his father. But this is countered by the fact that Aurangzeb himself arranged the marriage of his son Prince Muazzam to the daughter of Hindu Raja Roop Singh. Both his wife.[11] He had many Hindu friends and loyalists throughout his lifetime. He even pleaded with his father for the appointment of a Hindu to the post of a mansabdar despite the fact that Shahjahan wasn’t favorably disposed towards the person. Giving further credence to the claim of Aurangzeb’s youthful liberalism was his fondness for music. He was reportedly very proficient in playing stringed instruments like veena and sitar. [12]
Aurangzeb ascended to the throne in 1658 AD after a bloody war of succession which saw him face off with his father and brothers. He was able to grab the power by defeating, and later on killing, his elder brother Dara Shikoh at the battle of Samugarh and imprisoning his ailing father. Contrary to popular perceptions this war of succession wasn’t a struggle between religious orthodoxy and liberalism. Hindu and Muslim nobility, as well as the Shias, were equally divided between the two claimants to the throne.[13] Within one year of his succession Aurangzeb issued some orders which were overtly religious and were considered to be his initiation of Islamic orthodoxy. Some historians claim that Aurangzeb was influenced by the writings of the orthodox Muslim reformer Shaikh Ahmed Sirhindi. But such a claim is negated by the fact that Aurangzeb proscribed the Shaikh’s writings.
Aurangzeb’s religiously oriented orders include the formation of religious police, ban on the Hindu festivals of ‘Holi and Diwali,’ prohibition of the Hindu custom of widow burning, and the discontinuation of the Hindu custom of accepting offerings called ‘Jharoka Darshan.’[14] He also prohibited the practice of ‘tuladan’ were a person was weighed in gold or other precious metals which were later on distributed to the poor. However, a closer look reveals that these orders were not borne out of any religious intolerance but had administrative and financial motives.
The creation of religious police force, the Muhtasib, had no impact on the Hindu population as it had no jurisdiction over non-Muslims and its activities were limited to keeping an eye on the morality of Muslim masses. Regarding the prohibition on Hindu fairs and festivals, historians like Jaiswal claim that he only issued reformative orders and did not ban them outright. He reportedly only outlawed the custom of stealing wood, drinking, gambling, and indulging in anti-social behavior during these festivals.[15] Similarly, he banned the fairs because there were violent skirmishes between rival groups which led to frequent disturbances and threatened the peace of the kingdom. Moreover, this ban was not just limited to Hindu fairs and processions but included the Shi’ite Muslim processions in the month of Muharram.[16]
Aurangzeb did indeed issue orders for the proscription of the custom of widow burning on the deceased husband’s funeral pyre.This act can only be considered as laudable because it outlawed an oppressive custom. The ban was an interference with the Hindu personal laws but as Manucci and other European travelers have mentioned, it was rarely implemented.[17] The Hindu custom of ‘Jaharoka Darshan’ were the king appeared on his balcony in the early morning hours to greet the masses, was abolished because it was burden on the masses and served no purpose. This practice even led to the creation of a cult whose members didn’t eat or drink anything until they had seen the Emperor. The non-appearance of the king caused great discomfort to the followers of this cult who considered him to be an embodiment of God.[18] Additionally, it was also a cause of instability as the non-appearance of the King in the balcony led to rumors that the king had died which further caused frequent disturbances and rebellion.[19] The Hindu custom of ‘Tuladan’ was banned because it had degenerated into a vulgar display of wealth and power and the genuinely poor were not helped as had been originally intended. Despite the ban Aurangzeb himself weighed his princes in gold and had it distributed to the poor.[20]
One of the most prominent negative acts of Aurangzeb towards the Hindus was his reimposition of Jizyah which Akbar had abolished. This move according to historian Jadunath Sarkar was aimed at the establishment of a purely Islamic state (darul Islam) in India which implied ‘the conversion of the entire population to Islam and the extinction of every form of dissent…”[21] However, a closer look reveals that it wasn’t as it is made out to be by his critics. He re-introduced it a full twenty two years after his ascension to the throne in 1679 AD and it wasn’t universal.[22] The payment rate was 48 dirhams for the rich (those earning more than 10000 dirhams per year), 24 for the middle-class and 12 for the poor (those earning less than 200 dirhams).[23] Those who were unable to work due to poor health, the unemployed, women and children were exempt from the tax.
In the Al-Fatawa al-Alamgiriyyah, which set the rules of religious administration during Aurangzeb’s time, it is clearly mentioned:
It is mentioned in al-Idah that if a dhimmi is ill for the entire year such that he cannot work and he is well off, he is not obligated to pay the jizyah, and likewise if he is sick for half of the year or more…and no jizyah is imposed upon their women, children, ill persons or the blind, or likewise on the paraplegic, the very old, or on the unemployed poor, as is stated in al-Hidayah.[24]

In addition, he also suspended it during the time of crop-failure. In 1704 AD, Aurangzeb suspended jizyah for the duration of the war in South India. Historians contend that since the end to his war with the Marathas was nowhere in sight, it was tantamount to its abolition.[25] It was finally abolished in totality in 1712 AD at the insistence by Asad Khan and Zulfiqar Khan, two prominent nobles.[26] Moreover, he did not impose this on Hindus alone. Jews and Christians in his realm were also ordered to pay the tax.[27]This shows that he wasn’t particularly interested in targeting the Hindus. He went even further by trying to impose Jizya on the fellow Muslim kingdoms of Bijapur and Golconda whom he considered to be heretical.[28]
There is another interesting economic point which is often missed by historians. The above rates of jizya when taken as a whole give us a figure 2.5 % for the whole jizya-paying community. This figure is remarkably similar to the zakat payment rate for Muslims. From this we can infer that Hindu and Muslim citizens under Aurangzeb’s reign paid almost the same amount of taxes and that it would be wrong to call it an exclusive tax. It was the same tax which was collected under different categories.[29] The Hindu population which actually paid this tax did not exceed more than ten per cent at any time.[30]
From the above discussion it appears that the imposition of Jizyah had more to do with administrative and expansionary motives than with any real religious reasons. Despite such claims the fact remains that there is no evidence of any systematic or large-scale attempts at forced conversion during his reign. This is further substantiated by research which reveals that privately Aurangzeb complained of ‘the boastfulness and lack of manners of some of the new converts.’[31] If indeed his motive was simply to gain new converts he wouldn’t have displayed such irritability because of the behavior of the neophytes. The individual incidences of conversions which do exist show that that many of the converts had non-religious motivations behind their move and were initiated by themselves and not by the ruler. For instance, in April 1667 AD four Hindu judicial employees were suspended from service for indulging in usury. In order to escape the punishment they converted to Islam. In 1681 AD Raja Islam Khan converted to Islam so that his mansab of 250 soldiers can be raised to that of 400. The son of a mansabdar from Rampur converted to Islam in order to obtain a jagir.[32]
The inference that Aurangzeb levied the tax because of financial constraints also cannot be sustained. The proponents of this theory claim that he was oppressing the Hindus in order to run his state machinery. Contrary to such claims Aurangzeb had been facing financial difficulties from the beginning and would have implemented the tax in the year of his ascension and not twenty two years later. More importantly the amounts collected as jizya were not deposited in the imperial treasury but in a special separate treasury called ‘khazana-e-jizya.’ These amounts were mostly used for charitable purposes like the support of mostly Hindu orphans and widows.[33] This shows that the amounts weren’t utilized to boost up the imperial treasury but served only as a charitable venture.
Now we turn to the alleged involvement of Aurangzeb in Hindu temple desecrations. Aurangzeb’s vociferous critics like Koenraad Elst claim he had “thousands of temples destroyed.”[34] But they offer little direct evidence in support for their outlandish assertions. To support their claims they refer to certain passages from his court chronicles like the Ma’athir-i- Alamgiri and other exaggerated and laudatory accounts. Below are representative examples of such accounts which are often cited by a section of right wing Hindu historians:
a. Aurangzeb’s court chronicler writes, “All the worshipping places of infidels and great temples of these infamous people have been torn down and destroyed in a manner which excites astonishment at the successful completion of such a difficult task.” (Mir’at-e-Alam)
b. “In 1661 AD Aurangzeb in his zeal to uphold the law of Islam sent orders to his viceroy in Bihar, Daud Khan, to conquer Palamau. In the military operations that followed many temples were destroyed.” (Alamgir Nama)
c. “When the imperial army was encamping at Mathura, a holy city of the Hindus, the state of affairs with regard to temples of Mathura was brought to the notice of His Majesty. Thus, Aurangzeb, ordered the commander of the city, Abdul Nabi Khan, to raze to the ground every temple and to construct big mosques.” (Futuhat-e-Alamgiri)
d. In a letter to the governor of the Maratha region he wrote, “The hatchet-men of the government in the course of my marching do not get sufficient strength and power to destroy and raze the temples of the infidels that meet the eye on the way. You should appoint an orthodox inspector who may destroy them at leisure and dig up their foundations.”[35]

When read out of context these passages appear as though Aurangzeb ordered the wanton destruction of temples in his realm. But the fact that thousands of temples from his times exist to this day is a reminder that such orders were rarely followed or implemented and was only part of imperial rhetoric. More often than not there were other motives behind these instances of desecrations. To further illustrate this point I cite another passage which is again used as punching bag for Aurangzeb. This order issued in April 1669 apparently ordered the demolition of all temples in the empire. It reads:
Orders respecting Islamic affairs were issued to the governors of all the provinces that the schools and places of worship of the irreligious be subject to demolition and that with the utmost urgency the manner of teaching and the public practices of the sects of these misbelievers be suppressed.[36]

When taken out of context this imperial order does indeed support Elst’s claims but a closer reading reveals that it was a limited order. In the opinion of Eaton it does not state that all schools or places of worship be demolished, but rather that they be subjected to demolition, implying that local authorities were required to make investigations before taking action. Eaton further elaborates:
More importantly, the sentence immediately preceding this passage provides the context in which we may find the order's overall intent. On April 8, 1669, Aurangzeb's court received reports that in Thatta, Multan, and especially in Banaras, Brahmins in "established schools" had been engaged in teaching "false books" and that both Hindu and Muslim "admirers and students" had been travelling over great distances to study the "ominous sciences" taught by this "deviant group." We do not know what sort of teaching or "false books" were involved here, or why both Muslims and Hindus were attracted to them, though these are intriguing questions. What is clear is that the court was primarily concerned, indeed exclusively concerned, with curbing the influence of a certain "mode" or "manner" of teaching within the imperial domain. Far from being, then, a general order for the destruction of all temples in the empire, the order was in response to specific reports of an educational nature and was targeted at investigating those institutions where a certain kind of teaching had been taking place.[37]
The above mentioned “false” books and teachings according to Shibli Numani were propagated by a certain cult from the time of Shah Jahan. Emboldened by Dara Shikoh’s religious syncreticism these schools actively sought out Muslim students and taught un-Islamic teachings. These schools often operated from or were attached to their temples. It was only to curb such activities, which an observant Muslim ruler could not tolerate, that he issued an order for their closure and destruction. It was in no way a general order. Only the temples and schools of this particular order were subjected to it and other Hindu groups were exempt.[38]
When taken in their proper context the imperial records do not reveal that Aurangzeb ever ordered a general destruction of temples. But this still leaves open the question as to how many temples he destroyed and why he destroyed them.
As far as the number of temples destroyed or desecrated by Aurangzeb is concerned there is considerable disagreement. Eaton cites five such instances. Shibli claims that he was involved with the desecration of fourteen temples.[39] Even if we take the higher figure into account that still leaves him short of his predecessors (Shahajahan and Jehangir)’s exploits. Instead of labeling him as the great temple desecrator it should instead be applied to his father and grandfather.
The two most prominent examples of Aurangzeb’s involvement in temple desecrations are the Kashi Vishwanath of Benares and the Keshavrai of Mathura. One popular theory regarding the desecration of the Kashi Vishwanath is that once Aurangzeb was travelling to Bengal along with his courtiers and the entourage included Hindu nobleman and their wives. When they reached near Benares, his Hindu nobleman requested that the caravan halt for a day and that their wives be allowed to proceed to the holy city to perform their puja. Aurangzeb agreed to the request and provided an armed escort for the pilgrims. At the end of the day all of them returned except one Rani. After an intense search she was discovered in a concealed basement under the Kashi Vishwanath temple. She claimed that she was molested and robbed by a priest of the temple. When Aurangzeb discovered this he reportedly ordered the statute of the chief deity of the temple to be removed to another place and that the temple be razed to the ground as it had been despoiled.[40] At the insistence of the victim he built a mosque on the ruins. While being popular this theory fails the historical test as it is not found in the contemporary records. There is also no evidence of Aurangzeb ever going to Bengal or that a large number of his Hindu generals along with their wives were part of his entourage.
A more plausible theory is offered by Prof.K.N.Panikkar who observes that Aurangzeb had political motivations for the destruction. “It appears that a nexus between the sufi rebels and the pandits of the temple existed and it was primarily to smash this nexus that Aurangzeb ordered action against the temple,” he writes.[41] This sounds like a more plausible theory as there was increased rebel activity in that area around the time the temple was desecrated.
Regarding the Keshavrai Temple of Mathura, historians contend that it was also a political and military move. It had become the headquarter of Jat rebels who were using it as an armoury and were planning to launch an attack on the capital from its premises. When these attacks became relentless Aurangzeb finally ordered his army to attack and bring down the temple. Even then he was careful enough to advise his armies not to molest the priest or destroy the statue of the chief deity. The statue was later on safely transported to and installed in Gujarat. If there were any religious motives behind this move he wouldn’t have been so sensitive for the safety of the priest and the statue. For almost all cases of temple desecration political motivations can be attributed. For nine years after the destruction of the Keshavarai temple there were no other desecrations. This coincides with the relative peace in the kingdom. They were once again revived when rivalries with certain Rajput chiefs reached a violent stage. During this time Aurangzeb ordered the desecration of several temples in Rajasthan that had become associated with his military rivals. These included temples in Khandela; temples in Joshpur patronised by a former supporter of Dara Shikoh; and the royal temple in Udaipur and Chitor patronised by Rana Raj Singh after it was discovered that he had withdrawn his loyalty to the Mughal establishment.[42]
While destroying the temples of his political Hindu rivals Aurangzeb wasn’t forgiving towards his Muslim rivals as well who were using the sacred precincts for political and military purposes. When Aurangzeb learned that the Muslim ruler of Golconda hasn’t paid his tribute to the Mughal Empire and instead hoarded it in an underground vault and built a mosque over it, he ordered its immediate destruction and the retrieval of buried wealth.[43] It can be asked here as to why Aurangzeb did not destroy as many mosques as he did the temples. A simple explanation for this would be that contrary to the Hindu temples, the mosques were generally not associated with the power of the ruling sovereign. They were dedicated to the one God and their status was unaffected by the changing political constellations. In the occasional instances when they did acquire political or rebel identity Aurangzeb did not hesitate in destroying them as well.
The charge that Aurangzeb was a temple destroyer can be further countered by the fact that Aurangzeb built more temples than he destroyed.[44] His orders granting lands, revenues, and other grants for Hindu and Jain temples, and Sikh Gurudwaras exist from places as far as Allahabad in the North to all the way in Guwahati on the east. Following is a representative selection of his grants to Hindu priests and temples: (1) In an imperial ordered dated 16th March 1660 he grants a stipend of three tinkas per day for the chief priest of Mahakaleshwar Mandir. (2) In 1693 he paid for the construction of a spiritual retreat for Jain monks at the insistence of one Lal Vijay Nagi. (3) In his tenth year of ascension he revived the stipend of thirty rupees and other facilities to the priest of Umanand Temple of Guwahati and his son. He also strictly ordered his administrators to not to levy any taxes on the priest or to trouble him in any manner. (4) In Dehradun he granted Jagirs for Sikh Gurudwaras despite the fact that he wasn’t on good terms with them. (5) He granted a stipend of Rs.100 for Kalyan Das, priest of Tatlamai temple in Multan. (6) For the maintenance of the retreat and temple of Baba Jagannath Gosain in Hissar district he gave a tax-free land grant. (7) For the upkeep of the Sitapur temple he granted the revenues of several villages. (8) For the priest of temples in Chitrakot he granted seven villages for his services in offering the daily bhog ritual. [45]
As is evident from above Aurangzeb’s generous acts towards Hindu temples are more numerous than his instances of temple desecration. While it is true that he had no intrinsic hatred towards the temples, it is also a fact that he did not allow the construction of new temples as a matter of principle. Being an orthodox Muslim ruler he stated that while no new temples can be permitted to be built, old places of worship can be repaired because ‘building cannot stand forever.’[46] That said however it can be stated with confidence that Aurangzeb’s temple desecration policy wasn’t guided by any religious motivations. All such instances were directly connected with rebel activity. If the converse had been true than he would have destroyed several temples in Deccan. Despite the fact that he was in the region for twenty five years not a single temple was desecrated here. In the area of Aurangabad, where Aurangzeb died, there are several ancient temples in Ajanta and Elora. These temples are intricately decorated with the images and statues of Hindu goddesses. Despite his closeness to the area and knowledge of these temples Aurangzeb did not harm them. The author of Ma’athir Alamgiri, who appears to have taken to much delight in narrating temple desecrations, describes the temples in an adoring manner.[47] What is even more revealing is that Aurangzeb did not touch a single temple in the Deccan despite being in continued conflict with the Hindu Marathas. From the above discussion it can be decisively concluded that Aurangzeb viewed the preservation of prominent temples as a guarantee of a reciprocal good conduct from the Hindus. He went out of his way to please them. But when these places of worship began to be treated as launching pads of rebellion he wasn’t shy of desecrating them.
Critics of Aurangzeb level the charge that as soon as he came to power he dismissed Hindus from prominent positions and always preferred Muslims over them. Some go as far as to say that he issued orders for the immediate dismissal of all Hindus from governmental services. Thus, we see Elphinstone citing an imperial order to all officers stating that no Hindus be appointed in the services under them and that active steps should be taken to recruit Muslim officers.[48] Numani says that this order wasn’t general in nature and was limited to selected jobs. He reportedly issued the order in 1082 AH after a series reports emerged about malpractices in the revenue department. It just so happened that the department was mostly populated by Hindus of the Kayasth caste about whom there was a prevailing stereotype that they indulged in bribery. Even this order couldn’t be implemented and it was later amended. For each Hindu revenue officer, an additional Muslim officer was also appointed. This way they could keep check on each other.[49]The order had nothing to do with religious discrimination but was purely an administrative matter.
As have been mentioned earlier that Aurangzeb always had a good number of Hindu friends and confidantes. Hindu military commanders and nobles had played an important role in his ascension to the throne. Even unsympathetic contemporary European observers admit to this fact. French traveller Francois Bernier who was in India between 1656-1668 AD made the following observation:
Who then can wonder that the Great Mogol, though a Mahometan, and as such an enemy to the Gentiles, always keeps in his service a large retinue of Rajas, treating them with the same consideration as his other Omaras, and appointing them to important commands in his armies?”[50]
This comment by Bernier is telling because he usually casts Aurangzeb as a religious bigot. That there should be truth in it becomes more apparent when we see that the number of Hindus in nobility during the second half of Aurangzeb’s reign almost doubled forming about one third of the total. These numbers were certainly better than the reign of Shajahan. The following table based on Dr.Athar Ali’s research would further illustrate this point:

Percentage of Hindu Nobles Under Shahjahan & Aurangzeb
Mansabdar
Nobles
Shahjahan
(1628-58)
Aurangzeb
(1658-78)
Aurangzeb
(1679-1701)
5000 and above
24.5%
19.6%
32.9%
3000-4500
25.0%
20.0%
27.1%
1000-2700
21.3%
22.3%
33.1%
Total
22.4%
21.6%
31.6%




(Source: Athar Ali: Mughal Nobility Under Aurangzeb)[51]
That the numbers were comparatively low in the first half of Aurangzeb’s reign is explained by the coincidence that there just happened to be more Hindus in his rival Dara Shikoh’s camp. But once things stabilized their numbers once again rose significantly. The Rajput community of the Hindus always had a prominent position in Aurangzeb’s nobility. Known for their chivalry on the battlefield they occupied leading posts in Aurangzeb’s army and were in the forefront in his wars against the Marathas who happened to be fellow Hindus. In 1665 AD Mirza Raja Ajai Singh was appointed as the governor of Deccan. This was significant as until that time this position was usually filled by a senior prince. Ajai Singh played a leading role in the wars against Sivaji and was instrumental in forcing him to sign the Pirander peace pact. [52] Maharaja Jaswant Singh of Jodhpur was the second leading Rajput in Aurangzeb’s nobility. Despite his treachery on several occasions Aurangzeb held him in high regard and gave him the prestigious mansab of seven thousand riders and seven thousand foot soldiers. He was twice granted the governorship of the prosperous province of Gujarat. The third prominent Rajput under Aurangzeb was Maharana Raj Singh. Their relations were tense but they were always able to resolve them amicably until Raj Singh actively began to support the Rathore rebels.[53]
Aurangzeb’s relationships with the Hindu Marathas were amicable despite his long drawn out wars with Sivaji. During the latter half of his reign he inducted a large number of them into his service. Of the ninety six Marathas who held ranks of one thousand foot soldiers and above between 1679 and 1707 AD, sixteen held ranks between three thousand and four thousand and sixty two from one thousand to twenty seven hundred. As a collectivity their numbers surpassed those of the Rajputs. Despite their increasing numbers they were not given sensitive posts due to the obvious ongoing war with Sivaji.
Aurangzeb’s conflict with Shivaji has attained legendary status with right wing historians trying to give it a communal tinge. But the fact remains that their war wasn’t religious. While Aurangzeb’s armies had many Hindus, Sivaji’s camp was also staffed by a good number of Muslim soldiers. Even during the height his wars with Sivaji a large number of Hindus fought on Aurangzeb’s side. An even more startling fact is the existence of close relatives of these Sivaji in Aurangzeb’s camps. Thus, we find that Achlaji (son in law of Shivaji), and Arjuji (first cousin of Shivaji’s father) occupying the mansabs of five thousand and two thousand respectively in Aurangzeb’s army.[54] A large number of Hindu Rajputs, Marathas, and Jats continued to serve in Aurangzeb’s army until his death.
From the above discussion it can be conclusively stated that Aurangzeb’s relationship with his Hindu subjects was instrumental and realistic. He wasn’t an oppressor or a chauvinistic tyrant. He wasn’t a benevolent ruler either. He was a pragmatic ruler. His treatment of the Hindus, or for any other subject for that matter, was guided by strategic considerations. While it is true that he was puritanical in religious orientation his public policies weren’t extra-ordinarily aimed against non-Muslims. For all the accusations the conditions of certain segments of the Hindu society, like the nobility, actually improved under his reign. In conclusion, far from being a bigot Aurangzeb appears to be himself being a victim of bigoted historians whose sole purpose remains to create division and discord between Hindus and Muslims. An Urdu couplet by an unknown poet admirably sums up the historical vilification of the last great Mughal:
Give and take, this much we remember from history;
That Aurangzeb was a tyrant, oppressor, and temple desecrator.

All the good deeds that he had done remain forgotten as though they never existed.








Bibliography

Al-Fatawa al-Alamgiriyyah = Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyyah fi Madhhab al-Imam al A‘zam
Abi Hanifah al-Nu‘man. Beirut: Dar al-Ma‘rifah, 1973). English translation @ http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/southasia/History/Mughals/Aurnag_fatwa.html, (Accessed on March 22, 2008).

Bernier, Francois. Travels in the Mogul Empire, A.D. 1656-1688. Westminster:
Constable, 1891. http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/digital/collections/cul/texts/ldpd_6093710_000/pages/ldpd_6093710_000_00000013.html. (Accessed on March 12, 2008).

Chandra, Satish “Reassessing Aurangzeb,” Seminar, no.364, (1989): 22-46.

Chandra, Satish Medieval India (Vol 2), New Delhi: Har-Anand, 2008.

Eaton,Richard M. “Temple Desecration and Indo-Muslim States,”
Frontline 2, no.26 (2000): 70-77.

Elst, Koenraad. Decolonizing the Hindu Mind. New Delhi: Rupa, 2001.

Elst, Koenraad “Why did Aurangzeb Demolish the Kashi Vishvanath,”
http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/ayodhya/kashivishvanath.html (Accessed March 20, 2008).
Falahi, Masood Alam ہندوستاں میں زات پات اور مسلمان,, New Delhi:
Al Qazi, 2008.

Ghazi,Abidullah ed. Babri Masjid: After the Destruction. Chicago:
Indo-Islamic Foundation of America, 1992.

Goradia,Prafull. Hindu Masjids. New Delhi: Contemporary Targett Prafull, 2002.

Jaiswal, Akhilesh. اورنگزیب کے ہندووں کے ساتھ تعلقات . Patna:
Khuda Baksh Oriental Library, 1996.

Khan, Iqtidar Alam. “Akbar’s World View,” Social Scientist 20, no.9/10 (1992): 16-30.

Metcalf, Barbara D. Islamic Contestations. News Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Pershad, Omprakash اورنگزیب عالمگیر. Lahore: Fiction House, 2000.

Shibli Numani,, اورنگزیب عالمگیر. Lahore: Fiction House, 2000.

Thapar,Romila. Somnatah: The Many Voice of History. New Delhi: Viking, 2004.