For Pete's Sake

Elin Maria Pernilla Nordegren, a Swedish model and the ex-wife
of Tiger Woods encashed on her insecurity. (Cartoon By Mike
Lester,The Rome News-Tribune - 6/30/2010 12.00:00 AM;
©Copyright 2010 Mike Lester.). Click for larger image.

Iran in Stone Age

On the Islamic side of the world, in Iran, courts reopened a 2005 adultery case of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani. After the trial, it was decided that Sakineh would be stoned to death for her 'crime'.

This would have been just another case of Desert Bloc justice, till the French First Lady, Carla Bruni sprang to the 'defence' of this 'victim'. The case become more high profile, after Brazil's President, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, offered asylum to Sakineh - which Iran rejected.

Iran has reportedly sentenced Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani – the 43-year-old Iranian woman who faces execution after being convicted of adultery – to 99 lashes in prison for "spreading corruption and indecency" after allowing an unveiled picture of herself to be published in a British newspaper.

The claim, which could not be confirmed, comes from her family and a lawyer representing Mohammadi Ashtiani, based on reports from those who have recently left the prison in Tabriz where she has been held for the last four years. (via Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani to be lashed over newspaper photograph | World news | guardian.co.uk).

The "Free' Press had a gala time with a 'free' victim.
Cartoon by Joe Heller, Green Bay Press-Gazette -
4/16/2010 12.00.00 AM. Click for larger image."

On the other side

In the USA, over the last 12 months, we have a modern-day spectacle - The Hounding of Tiger Woods.

His crime?

Tiger Woods had sex with willing women. With a lot of willing women. No pedophilia, no rape or forced sex, no violence.

Just simple sex.

OK. May not be simple sex. Maybe in complicated 'kamasutra' positions, in unusual locations, with varied partners. But does all this, change the issue. Make it any different.

Guys, he just had sex.

Nothing more than sex. How can consensual sex be a sin, immoral, crime, shameful, and all that baggage of guilt? If there is an injured party, I can only see Tiger. All those willing and able women quite 'enjoyed' both the kissing, and the telling. Not to forget the money they made for both the kissing and the telling!

Mebbe ...

Coming from the land of kamasutra, where काम kaam (desire, including sexual) is my right, probably I am under-developed. Maybe these advanced, monotheistic Desert Bloc religions and societies are more advanced than the primitive culture I am from! Maybe, the social system of भारत-तंत्र Bharat-tantra has 'corrupted' me.

What exactly is it that Tiger Woods did? Cartoon by Mike Smith
from the Las Vegas Sun.

Who can object

Not Elin Nordegren.

She made US$400 million (or is it US$500 /600 /750 /1000). For her insecurity. That Tiger may abandon her and the children, while he is chasing all these women. A fear that is fair and legitimate. For a mother to two of Tiger's children.

Not a bad deal. Or is there something more? Am I missing something?

What's the difference

Now.
I really don't see a difference between Iran's stoning of Sakineh and the American stoning of Tiger Woods.

Except that the stones are different. The US and world media has tried to kill Tiger with stones made of words, ill-will and smear, imputations, cans of tar and brushes. All of them, ganged up, against one man. One lonely man.

Just because a married man had sex with a few women!

Did the world have to hound him for having sex? Cartoon
by Christo Komarnitski, Bulgaria - 4/9/2010 12.00.00 AM

Now Iran is doing much the same thing. The stones in Iran are different.

The Western world has made Desert Bloc ideals of shariat into Liberal-Christian dogma. Although the West has become 'educated', 'advanced', 'developed', 'civilized', rich - they have not given up. Stoning people.

God knows, Jesus tried.

Related Articles

• Iran Stoning Woman 'Faces 99 Lashes' (news.sky.com)
• Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani to be lashed over newspaper photograph (guardian.co.uk)
• Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani subjected to mock execution (guardian.co.uk)
• Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani's family turned away from prison visit (guardian.co.uk)
• Vatican says stoning in Iran adultery case 'brutal' (msnbc.msn.com)

Linguistics of the Jewish diaspora

Our knowledge of Jewish life in the second century B.C.E. comes mainly from Flavius Josephus (37/38-95/100 C.E.), the great Jewish-Roman historian who wrote in Greek, the scholarly language of his time. The hellenization of the Jews had been thorough.The King of Judea and the High Priest of Yahweh had Greek names. (page 240).

During the third century B.C.E., the Tobiads were the principal advocates of hellenization among the Jews (Grayzel 1969:49). The Jewish family called the Tobiads (the sons of Tobias) traced their ancestry to Tobias the Ammonite, governor of the Persian province of Ammon (now Jordan), east of Jordan River, during the tenure of Nehemiah in Judea in the fifth century B.C.E. One of them, Joseph ben Tobias, became very prominent during the second half of that century. (page 219).

By the beginning of the third century B.C.E. the Jews were being hellenized rapidly. They no longer spoke Hebrew or Aramaic, but Greek. Their religious services were conducted in Greek. Their personal Hebrew names were hellenized: Honio became Onias, Ezra became Esdras, Yeshua became Iesous (Jesus), and Joshua became Jason. Some Jews had Greek names only, such as Antigonus, Hyrkanos, Aristobolus, or Philon (Philo).The choice of such names by Jews for their children indicated the degree of their hellenization. (page 219).

During the reign of Ptolemaios Philadelphos (Ptolemy II, 308-246 B.C.E.), the Torah and other Jewish holy scriptures were translated into Greek by a synod of scholars. (page 215).

During the years that he was the High Priest and ethnarch (175-171 B.C.E.) Jason promoted Greek sports at the expense of Temple worship. Jason did not last long in the office of High Priest. He was unseated in 171 B.C.E. by Menelaos, a member of the noble Jewish Tobiads and a more extreme Hellenizer than Jason himself.(page 224-225).

By the first century, Greek had become the language of the Jews in the”diaspora”. The Jews of the Hellenic world spoke Greek the way present-day American Jews speak English. During the Greco-Roman and the Byzantine periods, from the late fourth century B.C.E., to the early seventh century C.E. most Jews were thoroughly Hellenized.(page 454).

By the third century B.C.E the Jews of Syria, Palestine, and Egypt had become thoroughly hellenized. They worshipped Zeus, Hera, and the rest of the Greek pantheon. There were images of Greek sun god Helios, the wine god Dionysos, and the demigod Heracles on Jewish synagogue floor mosaics at Sepphori an other Gallilean cities as late as the sixth century C.E. But the Orthodox Jews violently resisted Hellenism. The conflict between Helenism and Judaism, or rather between hellenized and Orthodox Jews, was to lead to major trouble in the second century BCE, after Palestine was captured from Egypt by the Seleucid Greeks of Syria. (page 215).

Just as in modern America most Jews use English rather than Hebrew in their religious services and rituals, so Greek was used by the Jews of Egypt, including Judea, in their religion (page 215).

Hellenic culture was much more attractive to the young Jews of Judea than the rigid strictures of their own religion. The Greek myths and deities, projections of the deepest infantile conflicts and family relations, etched into the unconscious mind of every person, deeply appealed to the people, just as the Canaanites myths had to their ancestors. The Tobiads led the wave of hellenization among the Jews. (page 220)

Jews always spoke the language of the land which was their home. When expulsions and persecutions eventually brought about a wider separation between the Jews and the non-Jews, the result was a growing dissimilarity between the intimate languages spoken by each group.(Grayzel quoted on page 458).

in the early fourth century, the Jews were divided into three main groupings. Those living in the Western Roman Empire of Italy, which comprised much of Western Europe, spoke mainly Latin, the lingua franca of the West, and the native European languages of the ethnic groups amongst whom they lived. The Jews of the Eastern Roman Empire of Byzantium, with its capital at Constantinople spoke mainly Greek, the language of the East. The Jews living in Sassanian Neo-Persian empire east of the Euphrates spoke mainly Aramaic. Hebrew continued to be spoken by Jewish scholars and by the people in their prayers. (page 337).

During the seventh and eighth centuries the lands inhabited by Jew in the Middle East and North Africa were conquered by the Muslim Arabs. Arabic became the language of the these Jews. (page 454).

Text extracts from A psychoanalytic history of the Jews By Avner Falk.

Judaism – an existential challenge

The Jewish population, followers of one of the oldest religions in the world, across countries and in Israel, today faces an existential challenge. With 0.25% of world population, i.e. less than 1.5 crore Jews left, in a world of more than 600 crore people, they have made enemies of their neighbours around their country.

The Jewish state, dependent on US largesse, hangs by a thin thread. Without Hitler, the world population of Jews would possibly have been not much better. Maybe 2.5 crores instead of 1.5 crores (at the risk of sounding insensitive). Maybe 0.5% of world population, instead of 0.25%. Also, must be remembered that Jewish studies in the modern context are affected by the ‘Jews as the eternal victims’ syndrome.

Genetic analysis of the Jewish populations

So, what is the reason for this fragile position of the Jewish population? One recent study states that

Admixture analysis based on binary and Y-STR haplotypes indicates a high mean proportion of ancestry from North African (10.6%) and Sephardic Jewish (19.8%) sources. Despite alternative possible sources for lineages ascribed a Sephardic Jewish origin, these proportions attest to a high level of religious conversion (whether voluntary or enforced), driven by historical episodes of social and religious intolerance, that ultimately led to the integration of descendants.

(from The Genetic Legacy of Religious Diversity and Intolerance: Paternal Lineages of Christians, Jews, and Muslims in the Iberian Peninsula by Susan M. Adams,Elena Bosch,Patricia L. Balaresque,Stéphane J. Ballereau,Andrew C. Lee,Eduardo Arroyo,Ana M. López-Parra,Mercedes Aler,Marina S. Gisbert Grifo,Maria Brion,Angel Carracedo,João Lavinha,Begoña Martínez-Jarreta,Lluis Quintana-Murci,Antònia Picornell,Misericordia Ramon,Karl Skorecki,Doron M. Behar,Francesc Calafell andMark A. Jobling, Copyright 2008 The American Society of Human Genetics, The American Journal of Human Genetics, Volume 83, Issue 6, 725-736, 04 December 2008).

Another study concludes that the Jewish population shares a high level of common paternal similarities.

Several lines of evidence support the hypothesis that Diaspora Jews from Europe, Northwest Africa, and the Near East resemble each other more closely than they resemble their non-Jewish neighbors. The only exception was the Ethiopian Jews, who were affiliated more closely with non-Jewish Ethiopians and other North Africans.

Second, despite their high degree of geographic dispersion, Jewish populations from Europe, North Africa, and the Near East were less diverged genetically from each other than any other group of populations in this study. At the most basic level, the genetic distances observed among Jewish and non-Jewish populations can be interpreted as reflecting common ancestry, genetic drift, and gene flow. The latter two processes will tend to increase genetic distances among Jewish populations, whereas admixture will also have the effect of decreasing genetic distances between Jewish and non-Jewish populations.

Our results suggest that common ancestry is the major determinant of the genetic distances observed among Jewish communities, with admixture playing a secondary role. (from Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes By M. F. Hammer, A. J. Redd, E. T. Wood, M. R. Bonner, H. Jarjanazi, T. Karafet*, S. Santachiara-Benerecetti, A. Oppenheim, M. A. Jobling, T. Jenkins, H. Ostrer, and B. Bonné-Tamir)

Of course, it begs the question, was the Jewish population ever a significant part of global population? One writer who has addressed this question is James Carroll, in his book, Constantine’s sword. He estimates,

Jews accounted for 10 percent of the total population of the Roman Empire. By that ratio, if other factors had not intervened, there would be 200 million Jews in the world today, instead of something like 13 million. (He goes onto recount that the) potential demographic crisis facing the Jewish people is defined by the loss of the murdered millions, not only in the twentieth century, but in all others. (from Constantine’s sword By James Carroll, page 26-27, texts in brackets, mine).

Population growth and changes (of not just the Jews) are subject to interplay of complex demographic factors – like assimilation, disease, migration, reproduction rates and proselytization. Since these factors affect all human populations, further analysis of these factors may just reinforce current red herring theories.

Jews – the eternal victims?

Of course, Jews have not been the only population group in the world who have had to face the problems of epidemics, migration, assimilation, and conversion. What could have been a significant reason for the decline in the Jewish population over the centuries?

A 2ndlook at history points out (extracts above) that the Jewish populations gave up their language and culture ab initio. Within a few centuries of its foundation, they were giving up on their culture.

Interestingly, and apparently, language plays an important and crucial role in the expansion and growth of populations – as the Jewish case seems to suggest.

Those who don’t learn from history …

The Jewish history has invaluable lessons for Indians. For one, all those who think that English is God’s special gift to India (and mankind), should look at the eclipse of the Greek language. I am yet to discover the logic which shows that English will fare better than Greek, Spanish, Persian or Urdu.

Reducing the role of the Indian State

The massive subsidy given by the Indian state towards English language education needs to be phased out. Indian languages (all of them) should start getting back on their feet. The people of India, each individual will choose their language. No bureaucrat, politician, ‘intellectual’ will decide that. Finito. Completo. Terminato. Endlich. Eindig. ändlig.

The Indian language basket also calls for diversification. India needs to learn more foreign languages. The great ’software success story is actually two countries – US and UK who give between 70%-80% of Indian software business? This is coolie labour! We are missing out on the massive Japanese, French and the Spanish markets because we have not invested in those foreign languages. And we have missed out on computing in Indian languages, because we have not invested there either.

Elections ... In The Land Of The Free

At the Toshogu Temple, Nikko, Japan, is the carving of the 3 monkeys. These three monkeys tell us to see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil monkeys - called sanzaru (三猿) or sanbiki no saru (三匹の猿). Their individual names are Mizaru (not see), Iwazaru (not say) and Kikazaru (not hear).

‘Mizaru' Obama

A viral email, doing the rounds, accusses Sen. Barrack Obama of a grave crime. It claims that Obama is a Muslim. The Associated Press report, says, "Presidential candidate battles misconception that he's a Muslim"

Poor Obama! He had to take time off from his campaign to fight innuendo and smear. Fight to remove the slur from his name. Desperately, he re-butted, "I've been to the same church, the same Christian church, for almost 20 years" He emphasised, "in the United States Senate, I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America." In case anyone gets such an email, "send it back to whoever sent it and tell them this is all crazy. Educate" the Senator earnestly advised.

Is it a crime in the land-of-the-free not to be a Christian? Does the US Constitution forbid non-Christians from holding the highest office in the land-of-the-free?

I am pretty uneducated about the land-of-the-free, Senator. In a backward country like India, voters don't bother about religion. Our recent President was a Muslim. I rather liked him. But I must be wrong. After all, I am from a backward country. And then the Indian voter is uneducated. Can you please educate me, Senator Obama. I have heard so much about your land-of-the-free.

‘Iwazaru' McCain

John McCain has written an inspiring book - Character Is Destiny: Inspiring Stories Every Young Person Should Know and Every Adult Should Remember, (co authored by Mike Salter, October 25, 2005). A review (From Publishers Weekly)says that McCain is "telling 34 stories of heroes ... and ... the pantheon is inclusive enough to hold Aung San Suu Kyi and Gandhi alongside Churchill and Eisenhower."

A few weeks later, after releasing this book, at the "Charlie Rose Show" Senator McCain informed the world that a Muslim had killed Gandhiji. I come from a backward country, Senator McCain. The backward school (in my backward country) I went to , told me that a Hindu killed Gandhi. Thank you for telling me the truth, Senator. I do hope you understand my disadvantage, Senator.

Only Americans tell the truth (especially if they want to become Presidents). It is not like that in my country, India. In my backward country, India, we have been told lies that Gandhi was killed by Hindus. Just imagine the lies. I am now sure that Rajiv Gandhi was also killed by Muslims and Indira Gandhi must have also been killed by a Muslim. Thank you, Senator. I can see the truth. For as they say, the truth will set you free.

‘Kikazaru' Clinton

Now we come to the friend of India - Hillary Clinton.

She is one helluva brave lady. Imagine a woman trying to become a President in the United States of America. The US has real men. They do not want to burden women with the Presidency.

Hillary Clinton, the Brave, has further threatened, all the caveman that they should not attack America. She has cautioned America, "We have real enemies who are sitting in some cave somewhere trying to figure out how to hurt us again." I now understand why millions of Red Indians were killed. The Red Indian Cavemen must have also done something. Otherwise, the peace loving, land-of-the-free, American nation, will not attack anybody.

American men are not backward like South Asia ‘men.' In fact South Asia does not have enough men. Otherwise, why does South Asia have so many women leaders. Tell me.

The Toshogu Temple

About 80 years ago, the Japanese sent a gift to Gandhiji. The Three monkeys from Toshogu Temple, Nikko, Japan. These three monkeys (imagine that, monkeys) tell us that we should not see, hear or talk evil. Gandhiji (that half naked ... apologies to Churchill again) loved these monkeys and carried them around.

I am sure that three American Senators, still in the Presidential race, have taken inspiration from these three monkeys - Mizaru, Iwazaru and Kikazaru.

See no evil, say no evil, hear no evil

‘Mizaru' Obama cannot see the evil of Islamic demonisation. It is not happening. ‘Iwazaru' McCain does not want to talk about the evil of Islamic demonisation. It is not happening. ‘Kikazaru' Clinton cannot hear the evil of Islamic demonisation. It is not happening.

God bless America, the-land-of-the-free.

My Plans

I have changed my plans. I was thinking of retiring to the caves, one day - in the Indian tradition. But, with Hillary's threat hanging over my head, I am afraid. Senators, looking at your source of inspiration, I also now understand, why the favorite Hindu god is a monkey.

What is likely to Happen

Who will 'actually' and 'finally' win this election. St.Barnum has a simple logic.

© with respective copyright holders. Copyright details embedded in the links.

Scrap The Sydney Test

Now that the One day Tri Series is over, and the Test series in Australia is also over, India needs to move. The Sydney Test should be scrubbed out of the record books. The Sydney was a was about racism and politics - and not about sports at all.

Australians cricket needs to fall in line with ’sporting norms’.

Background

Modern international sport is an Anglo Saxon construct. All modern games with international following were constructed, nurtured and administered by Anglo Saxons - for propaganda purposes. Basketball, Badminton, Cricket, Baseball, Football, Hockey - all of them. Being the creators of the sport, the Anglo Saxons always had a head-start - and ahead on the learning curve. They hate it when other catch up - and after that these mind games begin.

Sports As Propaganda

Afraid of losing the propaganda war, to Hitler’s ‘Aryan’ athletes, the first response of the Anglo Saxon Bloc was boycott. But Hitler was a babe in the woods - on the propaganda war that followed. The Germans put up a display without precedents. The Olympic relay torch, the press centre (with telex machines), television coverage were concepts that the Berlin Games organising comittee put up. But, good organising was not enough.

Jesse Owens was a master stroke. Blacks who otherwise were not allowed to drink or eat at the same facilities in America, suddenly became representatives of the land of the free - a propaganda tool. (This link leads to an article which talks about the false propaganda about the ‘imaginary’ snub that Owens received from Hitler). The use of Cathy Freeman by the Australians, an Aborigine, 60 years later was another instance of the same.

Post WW2, repeated Olympic boycotts against Soviet Russia in 1956, 1980 etc. had more to do with fear of losing. Soviets Olympic participation for the first time in 1956 sent shivers down the USA - who did not want to come out second. A win as a pseudo-military victory is best exemplified by Eisenhower’s involvement in the preparation for the 1956 and 1960 Olympics. The Anglo-Saxon bloc is the largest winner of Olympic medals in most years.

The USA and Australian focus on sports has propaganda motives (Hitler and Soviet Russia learnt from) - like the Boris Spassky-Robert Fischer title match.

The Boris Spassky-Bobby Fischer chess championships (early 1970s) which were projected as West versus East match by the ABC (America, Australia, Britain, Canada) press and media is a prime instance of this. Apart from Chess, much grandstanding was done by Fischer - starting with the opening ceremony. This distracted Spassky. This was much like the targetting of Ishant Sharma, Harbhajan Singh by the Aussies during the recent Test and One Day series. Steve Waugh, their former captain talked about ‘mind games’ leading to ‘mental disintegration’ amongst opponents.

After India (and Pakistan) dominated hockey for 50 years, the ABC Bloc saw one way out to break this win record. Change the rules. Indians did not see this coming. Using the pretext of making hockey more exciting, the Australians (with some other white countries) modified the game where skills became less important.The rest as they say is history.

Baron Pierre de Coubertin, a recognised anglphile, was supported in his olympic movement by Britain - as a propaganda measure. Says Stefan Szymanski, “… this mythology has been propagated internationally by the writings of de Coubertin and his followers. De Coubertin, for example, gave much of the credit for development of sport to Thomas Arnold at Rugby School, an attribution that has survived long; yet in reality Arnold seems to have had no noticeable interest in sport … the public schools played a significant role in creating to rhetoric of sportsmanship, which became do important to the self-image of the British and was so attractive to anglophiles such as de Coubertin …” (ellipsis mine From A Theory Of The Evolution Of Modern Spor By Stefan Szymanski).

Eight to One

As any statistician will tell you, when umpiring mistakes go against anyone in eight to one ratio (of the possible 24-28 top order dismissals), it stinks of bovine excrement. Interestingly, all the decisions that favored the Australians were against the Indian top order batsmen or in favor of the Australian top order batsmen.

33% (9 out of the possible 28) wrong decisions cannot be a co-incidence. It is not odds or an even chance. It is design - or a conspiracy. Deccan Herald said Anil Kumble’s side was on the wrong end of eight umpiring mistakes, which had affected the outcome.

A report filed by Alex Brown stands out. Brown’s criticism and reporting is completely devoid of the Indian standpoint. “Each time an Indian cricketer appeals, umpires are now compromised. Enrage the monster, and pay for it with your job” (italics mine) says Brown. Deftly, he changes the argument. Actually, each time an Australian appealed, the umpires raised their fingers. Each time an appeal against an Aussie top order batsman was made by Indians, the umpires turned it down. After 33% wrong decisions and a trumped up charge, Alex Brown thinks the Indian Monster Board is in the wrong.

What’s The Big Deal

This was not about cricket at all. It was another demonstration of Anglo Saxon political behaviour in its distilled form. To the Anglo Saxon Bloc, Sports is racial superiority by another means - and not entertainment or sport. (For further proof, click on this link and read this article).

Dhoni and Team have beaten Australians in Australia at their own game. The One Day Tri Series was convincingly won. The Test Series was also clearly an Indian victory - which was taken away by means that the Anglo Saxons are best at.

And scrubbing the Sydney test will remove the sheep’s clothing from the wolf back. And that lead to bigger things.

Slavery & Oppression - In The West and In India

The Moral Offensive

In 1901, Dadabhai Naoroji published his famous research - "Poverty and Un-British rule in India". Before that, his 1876 paper, "Poverty In India" traced the rise of poverty in India due to colonialism. This laid the background for India's Independence and shaped the strategy of Swadesh and Satyagraha. Fifty years later we were a Republic of the kind the world had never seen.

But ...

This moral offensive continued for the next hundred years - provoking Nixon's reaction during the Bangladesh War. "The Indians put on their sanctimonious peace Gandhi-like, Christ-like attitude," Nixon told former U S president George Bush Sr., then the USA ambassador to the United Nations on December 8, 1971. Nixon declared, "We can't let these goddamn, sanctimonious Indians get away with this. They've pissed on us on Vietnam for five years."

Harry & Kill - Lord Irwin's Peace Pact

The use of reverse-propaganda (a European tool) by the Congress against the British was singularly successful - and put the Colonial administration on the moral defensive. The British Colonial administration worn out by the "harry and kill" moral offensive of the Congress made peace. The British Viceroy, Lord Irwin brought some sembalance of propriety in colonial administration thereafter. Military war thereafter became less important.

The British response to that was 'divide et impera'. In the dying years of the Raj, the colonial administration put up issue of 'untouchability' and caste 'oppression'. Untouchability, the caste system, social prejudices remained significant issues in post colonial India - and it continues to be a much debated and a divisive issue. Harijans, Dalits, manuvadis are terms and names used freely.

How much of this is real - and how much a foisted petard?

Oppression - And Its Many Avatars

Oppression is eternal. Nature is not perfect. Human beings can be and are immoral. For any society to disclaim oppression is to claim human moral perfection by all its members. Social discrimination by the advantaged happens. Rich exploit the the poor. Majority oppression (maybe the poor) against a (rich) minority happens. Systems get "fixed". The important thing is how these issues morph and then subsequently are addressed.

To get some understanding on the oppression issue, a comparative examination may give a better perspective.

Wipe out of the Red Indian Population in North America

In 1492, when Columbus landed in the West Indies, the native American population was 3 million (in the what is currently USA) and more than 10 million in the Americas - and they spoke a 600 languages. 300 years later, they had become tourist attractions. The entire Anglo Saxon race was against the very existence of the native Red Indian.

The British and the independent Americans were equally brutal with the Red Indians. During the French and Indian Wars, Britain waged a biological warfare against the Red Indians by distributing small pox infected blankets to Red Indians. 70 years later, Andrew Jackson delayed (some say withheld) small pox medical supplies and vaccines from Red Indians.

During the American War of Independence, George Washington, on May 31, 1779 Washington sent his official Instructions to Major General John Sullivan:

Sir: The expedition you are appointed to command is to be directed against the hostile tribes of the six nations of Indians, with their associates and adherents. The immediate objects are the total destruction and devastation of their settlements and the capture of as many prisoners of every age and sex as possible...whence parties should be detached to lay waste all the settlements around, with instruction to do it in the most effectual manner; that the country may not be merely overrun but destroyed...

Reminiscent of George Bush threatening the world , either you are for us or against us , George Washington, made a similar remark more than 200 years ago. George Washington wrote to the President of the Continental Congress in 1776: In my opinion it will be impossible to keep them [Indians] in a state of Neutrality, they must, and no doubt soon will take an active part either for, or against us...

Thomas Jefferson view of the native Red Indians was equally dismissive. He (King George III) has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions... (Thomas Jefferson, Declaration of Independence, 1776).

Treaty after treaty was made with Red Indians - which were broken time and again. The whites coveted everything that the Red Indian had - but mostly, his life. This "land of the free" by all possible (and some impossible) means was soon made land free of the "natives and savages".

The US President, Andrew Jackson started by (December 8, 1829) posing as a Red Indian sympathiser. He proclaimed "By persuasion and force they (Red Indians) have been made to retire from river to river and from mountain to mountain, ... tribes have become extinct ... Surrounded by the whites ... which by destroying the resources ... doom him to weakness and decay ... That this fate surely awaits them if they remain within the limits of the states ... Humanity and national honor demand that every effort should be made to avert so great a calamity." (parts excised for brevity and ellipsis inserted; bold letters mine). His solution - remove the Red Indians.

In 1830, 40 years after George Washington became the President, the "land of the free", a law was passed to make the land free of the native Cherokee (Red Indian) population. The vast prairie lands were expropriated - and the Cherokee Indians were marched out by the US army. This march, Trail Of Tears, signalled the break of treaty by white Anglo Saxons. Land West of the Mississippi were to belong to the Eastern Indians ‘in perpetuity.'

The Red Indians resisted removal and forcible transfers. Their resistance was brutally crushed. By December 4, 1832, Andrew Jackson was saying, "After a harassing warfare, prolonged by the nature of the country and by the difficulty of procuring subsistence, the Indians were entirely defeated, and the disaffected band dispersed or destroyed. The result has been creditable to the troops engaged in the service. Severe as is the lesson to the Indians, it was rendered necessary by their unprovoked aggressions, and it is to be hoped that its impression will be permanent and salutary." (bold letters mine)

Gen. Winfield Scott was sent in May 1938, (with an army) to deliver the ultimatum to the Cherokees. Move or we will make you. At your cost.

President Woodrow Wilson echoes the ideology behind the alleged "genocide" - "The experience of Liberia and Haiti show that the African race are devoid of any capacity for political organisation... there is an inherent tendency to revert to savagery and to cast aside the shackles of civilisation which are irksome to their physical nature. Our industries have expanded to such a point that they will burst their jackets... Our domestic markets no longer suffice; we need foreign markets. "In the matter of Chinese and Japanese coolie immigration, I stand for the national policy of exclusion... We cannot allow a homogeneous population of a people who do not blend with the Caucasian race."

Just like Romani Gypsy and Australian aboriginal children were taken away from their parents, Red Indian children were also removed. In different continents, at different times, similar tactics were used by Europeans and the Anglo Saxons in the colonies.

Aborigines

In 1788, the estimated Aboriginal population was 7,50,000. By 1911, the survivors, were estimated at 31,000. Prior to the Anglo Saxon settlement, "Australia was an ‘empty land‘ because its inhabitants did not count as human". Today, the Anglo Saxon race prides itself for the building of Australia. Australia was a British colony and till date the Queen (or King) of Britain is the head of State for Australia.

Churchill, the British Prime Minister during WW2, one time Chancellor Of The Exchequer, had his views on Arabs, Indians, Aborigines, Red Indians - "I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race has come in and taken their place."

Churchill similarly had highly enlightened views on Arabs - "The Arabs are a backwards people who eat nothing but Camel dung."

One of the main causes of deaths was public health. In India, in the early 19th century, an estimated 25 million died due the cholera epidemic - as the colonial Government did not bother (to give them the benefit of any doubt). In Northern Ireland, during the Irish Famine, the then British Prime Minster with held supplies and essential aid from starving Irishmen. In USA, the Government delayed allocations to fight small pox, 20 years after similar actions for the whites. Similarly from the Australian aborigines.

From 1860-1960

Little changed in 100 years after the American Civil War - except the matter of 25 million missing Blacks. At the start of the Civil War, the White Population of North and South was 22 million. And Blacks was 5 million. By 1960, the White population had grown by nearly 800%, to 160 million. The Black population in the meantime had grown by only 400% - from 5 million to 20 million.

What happened to the missing 400% of Black population growth? Apologists (and defenders) use white immigration to explain away some of the difference. But that further compounds the problem - because there was also about 1 million of Black immigration from Haiti, Jamaica, Africa and other countries. Nett, nett - there are about 20-25 million Blacks missing - due to deprivation, poor health care and indifference.

Mortality amongst Blacks due to AIDS is higher than for Whites - 60,000 higher Black deaths every year. The New England Journal Of Medicine states."Among patients infected with HIV, blacks were significantly less likely than whites to have received antiretroviral therapy or PCP prophylaxis when they were first referred to an HIV clinic".

But rights and equality is something else

Black emancipation in the USA is a 1970s phenomenon, 30+ years ago event - and not 200 years ago as this article in New York Times seems to make out.

It took non-violent protests (Martin Luther King, inspired by Gandhiji) and violent threats (Malcolm X) for some kind of real emancipation and equity to come in. In the Cold War scenario, under international media glare, during the Little Rock School stand-off, Eisenhower (a Southerner himself) reacted. Reluctantly,in 1954, he sent in the National Guard to Little Rock, Arkansas for some kind of de-segregation. The Mayor of Little Rock, Arkansas closed down the school rather than de-segregate. The eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation during the Kennedy years produced the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Demonise, Genocide and Apologise

Now that there are a few Red Indians and aborigines left (they serve as tourist attractions), there is the ritual of regret and apology about their role in the genocidal past. Since, the "Jewish Problem" was solved by Hitler (there are hardly 1 million Jews left in Europe and 5 million in USA), the West and USA has no problems, anymore with the Jews.

In fact, Jews today serve a useful purpose to the West. After the Anglo-Saxon led alliance broke up the Ottoman Empire in the Middle East, the Israelis are the Western cat's paw. They have been suborned to the job of keeping a lid on the simmering oil rich, Middle East, and keeping it in check. What is the real cost to the USA- an inflated arms bill. What does it cost Israel - millions of precious Jewish lives, lost in the fight to keep the Anglo Saxons in luxury.

The demonisation (Shakespeare joined in with his anti-Semitic Merchant Of Venice) of the Jews has now been replaced by demonisation of Islam. Without taking responsibility for the destabilisation of the Islamic World by the liquidation of the Ottoman Empire after WW1 - perpetrated by Anglo Saxon countries and the French.

The Greatest Suffering

The Blacks in the USA and Europe have seen some justice - as they were an important constituency in the Cold War. USA propaganda was on the verge of losing Africa to Soviet Russia. The Jews have been very persistent and they have not let the world forget - or the perpetrators rest in peace.

The forgotten lot is that that of the Romani Gypsies. This one segment based in Europe and USA continues to remain on the fringes and discriminated. They have been hunted (like forest animals), their children kidnapped (to end their race and social system), they have been gassed (by Hitler along with the Jews), they have been galley slaves, In fact there was a time when they could be killed, if found alive!

The History Of King Leopold-II & Congo

"Dr.Livingstone, I presume!" and that is how Henry Stanley made his name and the life of Congolese miserable. Based on this incident, he was given a contract by King Leopold-II to establish "trading posts along the Congo River". In time, like with other colonial possessions, with a mix of fraud, guile, deceit, force, massacre and other such ‘civilised' norms by ‘Christian' civilisers, Congo was also made into a colony. By King Leopold-II of Belgium, in his personal capacity.

King Leopold (current king's predecessor 3 times away) was murderer. Plain and simple.

What happened was that in 1871, King Leopold decided that he needed to get respect. So he called for the Brussels Conference. Plans were hatched. His colleague, Otto Von Bismarck, of Germany got into the act and called for the Berlin conference.

Based on Dr.Livingstone's propaganda, it was decided there that Europe will directly enslave the Africans - instead of the the Arabs. At that time 90%of Africa was was free. In the next 20 years, 90% of Africa was colonialised.

King Leopold's personally owned the Belgian Congo territory. His personal army-men and his personal agents killed more than 1 crore people. When hardly any Congolese were left, he sold Belgian Congo to his own country for GBP3.8 million. Congo was a major producer of rubber - and the King's agents kidnapped African families - and released them against collections of natural rubber from African forests.

To understand oppression better, we also need to look at the genesis of the various religions across the world.

The Desert Religions

Judaism, Christianity, Islam were all born within 500 miles of each other and share a common culture and history. Judaism can be said to have been born when Moses led the Hebrew slaves from the Pharoah (across the Red Sea) to freedom. This possibly happened around 500 BC at the latest to 1500 BC at the earliest. His earliest followers were the Hebrews and they were a significant part of the Middle Eastern history all through till today.

The next major religious reformer in the Middle East was Jesus Christ. For the first 300 years, Roman slaves were the major believers in his teachings. Emperor Constantine earned the loyalty of his Christian troops and won the war for Roman throne by his win over Maxentius at Milvan Bridge. Prior to Maxentius, for the previous 30-40 years, Christians had been persecuted by "rule of four' Tetrarchy reformists in Rome, headed by Diocletan. Hence, the Christian slave soldiers of Constantine were eager for victory - as the persecution under Maxentius would have been worse.

Liberated slaves were the founders and rulers of Islamic dynasties, (in India, the Slave dynasty - builders of Qutub minar). Thus all the three "desert religions" were first adopted by the slaves and only after gaining significant numbers of adherents, these religions became mainstream and commenced aggressive proselytising and conversions.

Whats Going On Here

Oppression of a different nature existed in India. Instead of economic slavery (trade in human beings) as it existed in the "desert bloc", it was social oppression that needed remedies in the "ahimsa bloc".

The first major reformer in India were the "ahimsa twins" - Gautama Buddha and Vardhamana Mahavira.Both of these were princes of royal blood - Prince Siddharth and Prince Mahavira.

Their first adherents were the rulers and their methods of proselytising was also aimed at the ruling class. Ashoka The Great sent missions with his daughter Sanghamitra to Sri Lanka - where Buddhism was established.

Guru Nanak Dev came from from the upper caste family and his focus was to end fueding on the basis of caste and creed. His first converts were from upper class families cutting across religions - and hence the opposition from some of the Mughal Kings.

Gandhiji was from the upper caste and the first item on his reform agenda was end to the "bhangis" carrying faecal refuse on their heads. His initial focus was social reform and less of anti-British activities.

Half the world today follows Indic religions and culture. The other half follows the “desert religions”. The development trajectories of these two halves has been significantly different. The motivations, behavioural and acceptable civilisational norms for these blocs are different - and mostly opposite.

Same difference?

Based on the above most notorious cases of oppression, there are some clear markers for to 'real oppression'.

Declining Populations

In all the cases above, Jews in Europe, Black population in the Africa and USA, the Gypsies across USA and Europe, the aborigines in Australia, The Red Indians in America, or the Belgian Congo, the 'marker' for oppression was the decline in population. And we are not talking about about a few percentage points here and there (which can be explained by many factors) but by multiples.

State Oppression versus Social Discrimination

In all these cases, these genocides were legalised - in USA with the Dredd Scott case. In Europe, anti-Gypsy laws existed till 1973 in Switzerland and other countries. The Red Indians and Aborigines were dispossessed in connivance with the State and enabling legislation. There were laws in Europe and Australia which allowed people to kidnap children of the oppressed and take them away from their parents.

Economic Rationale

All these cases of oppression are marked by a clear economic motive. Cotton plantations in the USA needed black slaves,West needed natural rubber from Congo, Red Indian landwas needed by the West, Gypsy and Aboriginal children were kidnapped by declining European and Australian populations. Europeans historically envied Jewish business success.

How much of the division of labour in Indian society was co-ercive, extractive or enforced - and how much is explained by Pareto's Law of Social Disequilibrium?

Majority Oppression Or Military Might

In all these cases, the majority oppressed the minority - or massacred them till the oppressed became a minority. Military might was used for oppressive purposes - like King Leopold-II in Congo, till such time, the oppressed became numerically weak.

Does this hold true for India?

What about Harijan massacres incidents. Two aspects - these massacres are not approved or condoned by law. Massacres and death of Red Indians, Aborigines, Jews, Gypsies were approved by law (yes, that is right! Click on links and other posts to get more info on that). There are equally massacres by the 'oppressed' in UP, Bihar, Rajasthan, J&K, MP - which shows a failure of the 'over-burdened' State rather than oppression.

The Oppressed Make The Laws In India

At the time of Indian Independence, the 'oppressors' (the 'ruling' Brahmin Hindus) gave the role of Constitution writing to the leader of the 'oppressed' - Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar. No 'oppressed' class has been 'given' such a position and responsibility in any country of the world - ever. No 'oppressor' lets the 'oppressed' write the laws.

And for the record, let me state, BR Ambedkar was NOT given that position - he earned it.

The Oppressed Population Grows Faster than the Oppressors

The population of the 'oppressed' is growing at a faster rate than the 'oppressors'. Thus the 'oppression' of the majority in India is resulting in a faster growth for the oppressed. A first in the history of oppression.

Reservations Of Opportunities

The US affirmative action (a dilution of the Indian reservation system) was a persuasive system - whereas India is the only country where the 'minority' oppressors are supporting a enforced, legally mandated system of reservations for the 'oppressed' majority. The whole world is fighting to steal, rob, snatch, kill and maim for opportunities -but in India the 'oppressors' are giving away opportunities.Thus we can see that there is no 'oppression' in any sense of the word in India.

What happens in India is social discrimination - which is a non-legal, historic, social bias and prejudice. That hurts - and that mode of behaviour is something that needs to be modified. By any stretch of the definition, in India it is not oppression as practiced anywhere in the world.

End Of Slavery In Europe & USA

Haiti - First Slave Independence

14th August 1791. St Dominque. A black slave overseer killed a pig. And that signaled off the world's first successful slave uprising.

Boukman Dutty, a Voudou N'Gan (oungan, houngan, voodoo priest), killed a pig as a part of an African tribal ritual Bwa Kayiman, dedicated to his ancestors and Ogoun, god of fire, iron and war. Ogoun and Erzulie Dantor (Ezili Dantor), a Vodou l'wha (loa) a warrior spirit, responded to this call to protect these slave warriors.

25th August. Night of Fire.

50,000 slaves rose in revolt. More than 1000 sugar and coffee plantations were put to fire. Flames could be seen as far as Bahamas. From 31st December 1803, to 1st January, 1804, liberation brought about by vengeance was celebrated, and independence was declared.

St. Dominque, now called Haiti, was a French colony with 800 sugar plantations and 4,00,000 slaves from Niger and Dahomey (now Benin) in West Africa. Haiti, the jewel of French colonies, accounting for 40% of French GDP in 1700s, was the largest market for slaves in Atlantic trade. It was the largest producer of sugar in the world and competed with British colonies (like India) for indigo production and had thousands of coffee plantations.

Christopher Columbus was the first European who came to Haiti and started the exploitation of Haiti. What happened to the original population of Haiti? An estimated 1.3 million, may have been 3-4 million (admittedly not white, but nevertheless) people. Done to death by forced labour in silver mines over 10 years.

Imperial Opportunism

After the revolution in Haiti, Spaniards and the British rushed in to take advantage of this opportunity and to re-enslave the rebels. The newly freed slaves time and again beat back the new British and Spanish enslavers. "The army failed. Five years and more than 12,000 British deaths later, the redcoats withdrew. An army of rebel enslaved Africans had defeated the army of the world's superpower, and the largest slave-trading nation. The humiliation of this defeat sent a shock wave through the British establishment and, indirectly, strengthened the forces in parliament that voted to abolish the slave trade in 1807." (from William Wilberforce: The Real Abolitionist? By Adam Hochschild)

The Haitians, initially led by Boukman Douty, re-grouped under Toussaint Louverture, Georges Biassou, Jean Jacques Dessalines and Henry Christophe. On January 1st, 1804, Haiti declared themselves free and a republic. It was world's first black republic.

Haiti, (unlike today's Israeli Jews) supported liberation movements. Haiti's successful revolt and the defeat of the Spanish and British armies encouraged other colonies of South America to demand and fight for Independence. This fight was led by Simon Bolivar - after whom Bolivia is named.

After being expelled from Venezuela, it was Alexandre Petion, the Haitian President sheltered Simon Bolivar in 1815, who supported Simon Bolivar with arms, ammunition , a printing press and other aid - after a clear promise that all the freed countries of the South America would abolish slavery. This was a promise that Simon Bolivar did not keep - until significant pressure was put on him. In spite of winning freedom with the help of Black people, the newly freed countries of South America discriminated against the very Blacks who helped them get freedom. Moreover, in 1826, at the Congress of American States, under US pressure, Simon Bolivar did not invite Haiti.

Shivas dun mai spoiwne

Haiti's developments stampeded Europe and USA. Afraid that US slaves will follow the Haiti example, US did not recognise Haiti, till November 1864 - 60 years after Haiti declared Independence.

Restrictions on slavery were were discussed all over Europe and USA. The US placed restriction on import of slaves - which increased the price of existing slaves in the trade market. But slave traders like Jean Laffitte soon ran rings round this by smuggling slaves from Cuba. Jean Laffitte became a 'folk hero' in New Orleans for flouting restrictions against import of slaves (cheap slaves that white southerners needed). Merchants and traders protested against Jean Laffitte's smuggling of other products which finally closed Jean Laffitte's smuggling operations in 1821 - 14 years of successful slave smuggling. But it was 'patriot outlaw' image which got him his following. He was ostensibly seen as aiding the government during the 1812 war with the British - which was decided on the basis of his business interests.

Britain & Abolition Of Slavery

Britain technically abolished slavery in 1807, after the Haiti experience - and replaced slavery with indentured labour. Indentured labour was only slightly more expensive (initially) was far more cheaper in the long run. Indentured labour also came fewer issues related to capture, transport, trade and maintenance of slaves - with a veneer of respectability that was needed for propaganda purposes. Also, Britain had India - a huge colony to fall back on for indentured labour.

While slavery was supposedly abolished in 1807, trade in slaves continued. Slave ships and traders had to pay a fine of GBP100 per slave, if caught. The law was not seriously implemented. In the few cases where slave ships and traders were caught, slaves were simply thrown overboard.

Finally, further rebellions in Barbados (1816), Demerra (1823) and Jamaica (1831-32) forced the British hand. Freedom to British slaves came finally in 1833 after the British Government passed yet another law, to outlaw slavery, Slavery Abolition Act in 1833 - and paid 'compensation' to slave owners. An egregious and glaring example was the 'compensation' to the Bishop of Exeter and his partners of GBP12,700 to 'compensate' them for the 'loss' of 665 slaves in 1833.

How could the British afford to buy indentured labour? Bought with new gold discoveries in Canada and Australia.

Beggar Thy Neighbour

It was also economic warfare. Based on immediate colonial interests, promises were to American slaves by Britain. During the American War Of Independence, British Colonial forces, promised Black slaves to run away from their White masters. Property was promised to them in Canada and Sierra Leone. Some were sent to London. Based on these promises, an estimated 75,000-100,000 slaves abandoned their White American owners.

The key to Haiti's wealth - slave labour. Hence, the British efforts to ban slavery - as a part of their beggar-thy-neighbour strategy. Haiti was contributing major surplus to the French - and Britain had to undercut French economic gains from Haiti. The French efforts to get back into India against Britain through Tipu Sultan (during the Mysore Wars) had made life difficult for Britain - and hence they needed to undermine French economic resources.

It had nothing to do with human rights. While slavery was being abolished, the same Britons were committing genocide in Australia, New Zealand, and Africa.

The Rise Of Cuba

Spain took up the slack that the fall of Haiti created. Cuba within the next 50 years became the centre of Carribean trade. After the fall of Haiti, by 1860, Cuban production grew to 500,000 tons of sugar - nearly 1/3 of the world's production. Under Spanish rule from 1511, the indigenous population was annihilated and the island was populated by imported African slave labour. What did the 'statesmen' from the land of the free do? Henry Clay, Secretary Of State, in President John Quincy's administration,was clear that "This country prefers that Cuba and Porto Rico remain dependant on Spain ..."

In 1844 Cuban slaves revolted unsuccessfully. 10th, October 1868, Carlos Manuel de Céspesdes released his slaves and El Grito de Yara War, (a 10 year campaign) against Spain started. General Valeriano Weyler, "The Butcher," was sent to stamp out the independence movement. He created modern history's first concentration camps. Hundreds of thousands of men women and children were put into concentration camps.

Modern Concentration Camps

In Havana city, 52,000 people died. The peasants retaliated by burning down vast Spanish owned sugar plantations. Weyler was recalled to Spain in 1879. October 7th 1886, slavery was finally abolished. Spain continued to rule Cuba - with greater repression.

"Seventy-five percent of Latin America's exports to the United States came from Cuba and half of the Latin American imports from the United States went to Cuba in 1894. The United States had well entrenched itself in the Cuban economy and did not want to lose a valuable market so close by. Spain clung to its remaining claim. Cuba was caught in the middle in the mid-1890's when the United States reduced sugar imports with the Wilson-Gorman tariff and Spain restricted United States imports to Cuba. Proponents of annexation and independence divided Cuba's population." by Brad Williford in The Cuban Revolution of 1895-98

The American Civil War

From 1861-1865, the American Civil War was started. Lincoln's War, after all was more about economics than about slavery. American propaganda states that this war was fought to free the American Slaves. But for the next 100 years, there was little change.

Yes, people could no longer be bought or sold, could not be captured or kidnapped. But in the land of the free, the Black man was still used - and abused. There was one use of the free Blacks. They were used to kill the Red Man - who called these Black Soldiers as Buffalo Soldiers.

Imperial Ambitions

125 years after Independence, US was developing colonial ambitions. The 'Monroe doctrine' was used to create colonies in the American backyard. "Yellow Journalism" was invented to whip up public sentiment. On April 25th 1898, the US Congress declared war. For the next 4 months, the US fought the Spanish American War.

On August 12th, 1898, Spain signed the peace treaty. On December 10th 1898, the treaty of Paris was signed. USA 'bought' Philippines, Guam and Puerto Rico and paid Spain US$2,00,00,000. Of course, the 'inferior' populations of these countries - Philippines, Guam and Puerto Rico were unfit for inclusion in the Paris negotiations about their future.

Cubans were nominally declared free but with many conditions. In 1915, again the Monroe doctrine was invoked to invade Haiti. In the 1960s-70s, Chedi Jagan and his struggle to break from (in the Caribbean) was sabotaged.

Black Freedom

In America, opposition to slavery was about race. What if the Black slave population in the American South became like Haiti? Just before independence, against a population of 400,000-500,000 Black Haitians, there were about 25,000 whites and 40,000 mulattos. What if the Black Population in the American South (nearly 80% at the start of the Civil War) rose to say, 150%. 4 million Blacks compared to 5 million whites in the American South at the start of the Civil War.

Another Haiti would have very well happened in Southern American South too. A truncated USA was a real fear - if not a certainty. None other than "Benjamin Franklin said with alarm that importing slaves had "blacken'd half America" ...

So, what did the white fathers do? They set up in Africa, Israel's predecessor - Liberia (another land of the free?) and the successor of the British black deportation to Sierra Leone. In 1816, the USA decided to colonise Africa. An artificial situation was created, where escaped, freed Blacks were sent to Liberia. The local population were of no consequence - like latter day Palestine.

From 1860-1960

Little changed in the next 100 years after the Civil War - except the matter of 25 million missing Blacks. At the start of the Civil War, the White Population of North and South was 22 million. And Blacks was 5 million. By 1960, the White population had grown by nearly 800%, to 160 million. The Black population in the meantime had grown by only 400% - from 5 million to 20 million.

What happened to the missing 400% of Black population growth? Apologists (and defenders) use white immigration to explain away some of the difference. But that further compounds the problem - because there was also about 1 million of Black immigration from Haiti, Jamaica, Africa and other countries. Nett, nett - there are about 20-25 million Blacks missing - due to deprivation, poor health care and indifference.

Mortality amongst Blacks due to AIDS is higher than for Whites - 60,000 higher Black deaths every year. The New England Journal Of Medicine states."Among patients infected with HIV, blacks were significantly less likely than whites to have received antiretroviral therapy or PCP prophylaxis when they were first referred to an HIV clinic".

But rights and equality is something else

Black emancipation in the USA is a 1970s phenomenon, 30+ years ago event - and not 200 years ago as this article in New York Times seems to make out.

It took non-violent protests (Martin Luther King, inspired by Gandhiji) and violent threats (Malcolm X) for some kind of real emancipation and equity to come in. In the Cold War scenario, under international media glare, during the Little Rock School stand-off, Eisenhower (a Southerner himself) reacted. Reluctantly,in 1954, he sent in the National Guard to Little Rock, Arkansas for some kind of de-segregation. The Mayor of Little Rock, Arkansas closed down the school rather than de-segregate. The eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation during the Kennedy years produced the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Demonise, Massacre and Apologise

Now that there are a few Red Indians and aborigines left (they serve as tourist attractions), there is the ritual of regret and apology about their role in the genocidal past. Since, the "Jewish Problem" was solved by Hitler (there are hardly 1 million Jews left in Europe and 5 million in USA), the West and USA has no problems, anymore with the Jews.

In fact, Jews today serve a useful purpose to the West. After the Anglo-Saxon led alliance broke up the Ottoman Empire in the Middle East, the Israelis are the Western cat's paw. They been suborned to the job of keeping a lid on the simmering oil rich, Middle East, and keeping it in check. What is the real cost to the USA- an inflated arms bill. What does it cost Israel - millions of precious Jewish lives, lost in the fight to keep the Anglo Saxons in luxury.

The demonisation (Shakespeare joined in with his anti-Semitic Merchant Of Venice) of the Jews has now been replaced by demonisation of Islam. Without taking responsibility for the destabilisation of the Islamic World by the liquidation of the Ottoman Empire after WW1 - perpetrated by Anglo Saxon countries and the French.

Splendid Isolation

Fear of success or opposition, in country after country of the Americas and Pacific, the USA has been involved in destabilisation and intervention. One time USA allies are now hot beds of terrorism.

The Greatest Suffering

The Blacks in the USA and Europe have seen some justice - as they were an important constituency in the Cold War. USA propaganda was on the verge of losing Africa to Soviet Russia. The Jews have been very persistent and they have not let the world forget - or the perpetrators rest in peace.

The forgotten lot is that that of the Romani Gypsies. This one segment based in Europe and USA continues to remain on the fringes and discriminated. They have been hunted (like forest animals), their children kidnapped (to end their race and social system), they have been gassed (by Hitler along with the Jews), they have been galley slaves, In fact there was a time when they could be killed, if found alive!