Indian RAW agent Kulbushan Jadhav sentenced to death
RAWALPINDI: Indian RAW Agent Kulbushan Jadhav who was arrested from Balochistan on espionage charges, has been sentenced to death through a Field General Court Martial, the ISPR said Monday.
Chief of Army Staff General Qamar Javed Bajwa has confirmed death sentence awarded by the FGCM under the Pakistan Army Act (PAA).
According to an ISPR press release, Kulbushan Sundir Jadhav alias Hussein Mubarak Patel was arrested on March 3, 2016, through a Counter-Intelligence Operation from Mashkel area of Balochistan for his involvement in espionage and sabotage actives in Pakistan.
Jadhav was believed to be an on-duty officer for the Indian Navy.
“The spy has been tried through Field General Court-martial (FGCM) under Pakistan Army Act (PAA) and awarded death sentence. Today, COAS General Qamar Javed Bajwa has confirmed death sentence awarded by FGCM.
“RAW agent Commander Kulbushan Jadhav was tired under GGCM under section 59 of Pakistan Army Act (PAA) 1952 and Section 3 of official Secret Act of 1923.”
“The FGCM found Jadhav guilty of all charges. He confessed before a Magistrate and the Court that he was tasked by RAQ to plan, coordinate and organize espionage/sabotage activities aiming to destabilize and wage war against Pakistan by impeding the efforts of Law Enforcement Agencies for restoring peace in Balochistan and Karachi,” said the press release.
Pakistan on Monday sentenced Indian spy Kalbushan Yadav to death.
“Indian RAW Agent / Naval officer 41558Z Commander Kulbushan Sudhir Jadhav alias Hussein Mubarak Patel was arrested on March 3, 2016 through a Counter Intelligence Operation from Mashkel, Balochistan, for his involvement in espionage and sabotage activities against Pakistan,” Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) said in a statement.
“The spy has been tried through Field General Court Martial (FGCM) under Pakistan Army Act (PAA) and awarded death sentence. Today COAS, Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa has confirmed his death sentence awarded by FGCM.
Yadav was tried by FGCM under section 59 of PAA 1952 and Section 3 of official Secret Act of 1923. FGCM found Yadhav guilty of all the charges, the statement added.
Further, Yadav confessed before a magistrate and the court that he was tasked by Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) to plan, coordinate and organise espionage/ sabotage activities aiming to destabilise and wage war against Pakistan by impeding the efforts of Law Enforcement Agencies for restoring peace in Balochistan and Karachi. The accused was provided with defending officer as per legal provisions.
Yadav, an Indian Navy commander, and agent of the RAW, was arrested in a raid near the Pak-Afghan border town of Chaman in March last year. He was earlier posted at Chabahar port in southeastern Iran where he lived with his wife and two children and possessed a genuine Indian passport but with a fake name, Hussein Mubarak Patel.
The bilateral dialogue process between Islamabad and New Delhi was suspended after Yadav’s arrest. Yadav, in a video confession circulated shortly after his arrest, admitted to carrying out subversive activities inside Pakistan for India’s premier intelligence agency.
India had sought consular access to Yadav, however, Pakistan refused its request.
Pakistan believes that India is using covert means to foment violence in the country with an aim to undermine the multi billion dollar ‘one belt, one road’ initiative of China. The recent surge in terrorist attacks in the country has once again brought the India intelligence agencies’ role in backing the terrorism in Pakistan to the spotlight.
Security officials claim that RAW was using certain militant outfits operating out of Afghanistan to carry out terrorist attacks in the country. The current Indian National Security Adviser Ajit Doval is considered to be the architect of this policy called ‘offensive-defensive’ that advocates a policy of supporting proxies to create trouble inside Pakistan.
Multiple questions were posed before participants during the survey.
(Web Desk) – India has topped the list of most ignorant countries in a survey carried out by Ipsos MORI, which includes information from 27,250 interviews of people aged 16 to 64 carried out between September and November, the Independent reported on Saturday.
Ipsos MORI surveyed people from 40 countries, with between 500 and 1,000 people surveyed in each.
Multiple questions were posed before participants; including their country population, healthcare spending, and home ownership. The findings were then collated to create the index.
Wealth seemed to have less bearing on outcomes than one might expect. The USA, one of the richest has been ranked one of the most ignorant below many developed countries.
Here is the list of top 10 ignorant countries in the world:
In the modern times, to carry out an organized religio-ethnic cleansing and then to get away despite the present day media watching every event is indeed a great feat by any Goebellian standards. Keeping aside the question as to who was the prime mover of the Gujarat pogrom, the recent pronouncements of the special courts trying the major cases of violence like Gulberg Society, Naroda Patiya, Best Bakery, Sardarpura etc would undisputedly establish that the violence was lead by the saffron brotherhood. In the Naroda Patiya case, even the minister of Modi’s Government Mayaben Kodnani and the VHP leading activist like Babu Bajrangi etc have been convicted. Yet despite these and many other irrefutable evidence, the concerted effort by the rioters to paint the violence as a spontaneous reaction of the angry Hindu masses to the “barbaric” attack of the Muslims killing 59 Hindus in Godhra has found many takers and paid handsome dividends to BJP which presided over the violence.
The perception of the common man to willy-nilly accept theaction-reaction theorywas primarily because of the voluminous propaganda material that the rioters threw at the common man without any effective counter by the other political establishments in the country. We have tried to research the mode and manner adopted by the saffron brotherhood to dominate the cyberspace, and to our shock and surprise, we discovered thatNarendra Modi through his closest aides has created a network of websites to disseminate propaganda on variety of topics and subjects.
India272.com,GujaratRiots.com, NitiCentral.com, BJPOne.com etc – All these websites are being run by Rajesh Jain’s team who is officially appointed by Narendra Modi to run his IT campaign. Their common roots can be seen from the fact that each one of these websites reside on the same server with the IP Address 206.183.107.25. Rajesh Jain’s blog Emergic.Org is also one of these several sites sitting on this server. India272.com which is regularly endorsed by Narendra Modi on twitter also sits on this same server.
Modi Runs GujaratRiots.com through his IT Team
Having shown the above network of sites created under aegis of Modi, one of the websites which is immensely note-worthy for its distortion of facts is the GujaratRiots.comwebsite. The choice of the name itself is very diablolic since any netizen who searches for information on gujarat riots is likely to use phrases which includes the words “gujarat” and “riots”. As a result all the cursory searches will end up with visits to GujaratRiots.com site since it features very high in Google’s search results.
Gujarat Riots consistently ranks high on Google
Thus by an ingenious choice of name, the saffron brotherhood gets a netizen into their website and is fed with false and distorted information. A example of one such distortion is an attempt by the GujaratRiots site tojustify the complete inaction of Gujarat Police on 28th February 2002when the mobs went on rampage in the area of Naroda and Gulbarg Society. The site states that as on the second day of the riots, i.e. March 1st 2002, when even the army could not control the situation in Ahmedabad, how could the police control it on 28th Feb1.
How fallacious this argument is can be seen from the fact that both Naroda Patiya and Gulbarg Society arewithin a radius of 2 kms and come under a single police zone number 4 headed by DCP Gondia IPS. The said zone also comes under the Sector 2 of Ahmedabad police led by then Additional Commissioner of Police – Shri MK Tandon. Both these IPS officers Gondia and MK Tandon were accompanied by large contingents of Armed Policemen along with Special Task Force with modern weaponry. Besides them, those areas are also covered by the local police led by the respective police inspectors of each area namely Naroda and Gulbarg (KG Erda).
From the deposition of KG Erda in Nanavati Commission, the police inspector of the Gulbarg area it is clearly seen that since 12:00 noon on 28th February, the crowd had swelled from 10,000 to 20,000 around 2:45 p.m and had surrounded the Gulberg society.
Quoting from KG Erda’s deposition in Nanavati Commission:
(On 28.02.2002) Till 12.15 pm a mob of around ten thousand people had already collected.When I again reached Gulbarg society at 2 pm there were twenty thousand people and at that time there were a total of sixteen police men…it is true that at 2.45 pmI had sent a message to the control room that a mob of ten thousand people had set fire in the area of Gulbarg society and surrounded it and that police has also been surrounded and requested for the SRP force to be sent.
At that time me and other six constables had got encircled by the mob and smoke was coming out from the houses in Gulbarg society.
During this period Erda had desparately sought for police reinforcement to disperse the mob and had made several phone calls to the Police Control room as well as Mr Gondia and Mr Tandon. The phone calls shown in the images below were obtained from the phone call data submitted in Nanavati Commission. The first image shows the desperate phone calls of KG Erda to the Police Control Room asking for police  reinforcement. The second image are the phone calls between Erda and DCP Gondia/Joint Commissioner Tandon.
KG Erda’s calls to Police Control RoomKG Erda’s calls to Gondia and MK Tandon
While on one hand a massive crowd was surrounding the Gulberg Society making Erda desperately ask for police reinforcements, on the other the hand the analysis of the locations of Joint Commissioner Tandon establish that he along with his task force had come to the Naroda/Gulbarg area around 12 noon and had hurriedlygone away with his task force to a distant area called Revdi Bazarand hung around there  till 4 p.m. despite there being no major rioting in those areas.  By the time MK Tandon went back to Gulbarg Society at 4 p.m, the mob had already burnt down the entire society along with 64 men, women and children including Ehsan Jaffrey with only Erda and his few policemen being silent spectators to the whole massacre. Similarly DCP Gondia reaches Gulbarg only at 4 p.m. when the society had been already burnt down. This clearly shows how Police along with their task forcemoved away from areas of rioting.
MK Tandon’s Location GraphGondia’s Location Graph
It can therefore be seen as howNarendra Modi through GujaratRiots is trying to mislead the nationby providing distorted account of Police Action and much more. Truth Of Gujarat therefore finds it necessary to go into details to disabuse the wrong perception being created by the saffron brotherhood to justify violence that was nothing but an organized pogrom against the Muslims.
We will deal with the other ‘myths’ being circulated by GujaratRiots.com site and demystify them in the coming days.
Update: Continuing our research into Modi’s IT conspiracy, we found many more websites running on the same IP Address, all promoting one man – wanting us to believe that all the websites springing up are spontaneous support for him – Infact they can all be tracked back to one man – Rajesh Jain. Read More At: – Modi Appointee Rajesh Jain Spamming the Cyberspace With NaMo Lies
Update2:
India272.com promptly changed its IP Address from 206.183.107.25 to180.149.244.132 after our exposure. You can see that the change was detected on 06 Oct 17:38 GMT i.e 11:08 p.m. IST. We published the post at 8:08 p.m. IST. Is Modi feeling shy now?
The Great Emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir-Muslim History Distortions by Hindus in India
It is High Time for India to Discard the Pernicious Myth of its Medieval Muslim Rulers as ‘Villains’
By
Audrey Truschke
Whatever happened in the past, religious-based violence is real in modern India, and Muslims are frequent targets. It is thus disingenuous to single out Indian Muslim rulers for condemnation without owning up to the modern valences of that focus.
The idea that medieval Muslim rulers wreaked havoc on Indian culture and society – deliberately and due to religious bigotry – is a ubiquitous notion in 21st century India. Few people seem to realise that the historical basis for such claims is shaky to non-existent. Fewer openly recognise the threat that such a misreading of the past poses for modern India.
Aurangzeb, the sixth Mughal Emperor (r. 1658-1707), is perhaps the most despised of India’s medieval Muslim rulers. People cite various alleged “facts” about Aurangzeb’s reign to support their contemporary condemnation, few of which are true. For instance, contrary to widespread belief, Aurangzeb did not destroy thousands of Hindu temples. He did not perpetrate anything approximating a genocide of Hindus. He did not instigate a large-scale conversion program that offered millions of Hindu the choice of Islam or the sword.
In short, Aurangzeb was not the Hindu-hating, Islamist tyrant that many today imagine him to have been. And yet the myth of malevolent Aurangzeb is seemingly irresistible and has captured politicians, everyday people, and even scholars in its net. The damage that this idea has done is significant. It is time to break this mythologized caricature of the past wide open and lay bare the modern biases, politics, and interests that have fuelled such a misguided interpretation of India’s Islamic history.
A recent article on this website cites a series of inflammatory claims about Indo-Muslim kings destroying premodern India’s Hindu culture and population. The article admits that “these figures are drawn from the air” and historians give them no credence. After acknowledging that the relevant “facts” are false, however, the article nonetheless posits that precolonial India was populated by “religious chauvinists,” like Aurangzeb, who perpetrated religiously-motivated violence and thus instigated “historical injustices” to which Hindus can rightly object today. This illogical leap from a confessed lack of reliable information to maligning specific rulers is the antithesis of proper history, which is based on facts and analysis rather than unfounded assumptions about the endemic, unchanging nature of a society.
A core aspect of the historian’s craft is precisely that we cannot assume things about the past. Historians aim to recover the past and to understand historical figures and events on their own terms, as products of their time and place. That does not mean that historians sanitize prior events. Rather we refrain from judging the past by the standards of the present, at least long enough to allow ourselves to glimpse the logic and dynamics of a historical period that may be radically different from our own.
Going back more than a millennium earlier, Hindu rulers were the first to come up with the idea of sacking one another’s temples, before Muslims even entered the Indian subcontinent. But one hears little about these “historical wrongs”
In the case of Indian Muslim history, a core notion that is hard for modern people to wrap our heads around is as follows: It was not all about religion.
Aurangzeb, for instance, acted in ways that are rarely adequately explained by religious bigotry. For example, he ordered the destruction of select Hindu temples (perhaps a few dozen, at most, over his 49-year reign) but not because he despised Hindus. Rather, Aurangzeb generally ordered temples demolished in the aftermath of political rebellions or to forestall future uprisings. Highlighting this causality does not serve to vindicate Aurangzeb or justify his actions but rather to explain why he targeted select temples while leaving most untouched. Moreover, Aurangzeb also issued numerous orders protecting Hindu temples and communities from harassment, and he incorporated more Hindus into his imperial administration than any Mughal ruler before him by a fair margin. These actions collectively make sense if we understand Aurangzeb’s actions within the context of state interests, rather than by ascribing suspiciously modern-sounding religious biases to him.
Regardless of the historical motivations for events such as premodern temple destructions, a certain percentage of modern Indians nonetheless feel wronged by their Islamic past. What is problematic, they ask, about recognising historical injustices enacted by Muslim figures? In this regard, the contemporaneity of debates over Indian history is crucial to understanding why the Indo-Islamic past is singled out.
For many people, condemnations of Aurangzeb and other medieval Indian rulers stem not from a serious assessment of the past but rather from anxieties over India’s present and future, especially vis-à-vis its Muslim minority population. After all, one might ask: If we are recognising injustices in Indian history, why are we not also talking about Hindu rulers? When judged according to modern standards, medieval rulers the world over measure up poorly, and Hindu kings are no exception. Medieval Hindu political leaders destroyed mosques periodically, for instance, including in Aurangzeb’s India. Going back more than a millennium earlier, Hindu rulers were the first to come up with the idea of sacking one another’s temples, before Muslims even entered the Indian subcontinent. But one hears little about these “historical wrongs” for one reason: They were perpetrated by Hindus rather than Muslims.
Religious bigotry may not have been an overarching problem in India’s medieval past, but it is a crucial dynamic in India’s present. Religious-based violence is real in modern India, and Muslims are frequent targets. Non-lethal forms of discrimination and harassment are common. Fear is part of everyday life for many Indian Muslims. Thus, when scholars compare medieval Islamic rulers like Aurangzeb to South Africa’s twentieth-century apartheid leaders, for example, they not only display a surprising lack of commitment to the historical method but also provide fodder for modern communal fires.
It is high time we discarded the pernicious myth of India’s medieval Muslim villains. This poisonous notion imperils the tolerant foundations of modern India by erroneously positing religious-based conflict and Islamic extremism as constant features of life on the subcontinent. Moreover, it is simply bad history. India has a complicated and messy past, and we do it and ourselves no justice by flattening its nuances to reflect the religious tensions of the present.
Audrey Truschke is a historian at Stanford University and Rutgers University-Newark. Her first book, Culture of Encounters: Sanskrit at the Mughal Court will be published by Columbia University Press and Penguin India in 2016. She is currently working on a book on Aurangzeb that will published by Juggernaut Books.
