Recently, two pages from a book published in 2013 went viral on Indian social media.
The book in question was written by a conspiracy theorist and a Holocaust revisionist, Gregory Douglas. It contained, and is based, on telephonic conversations he allegedly had with the elusive Robert T Crowley (1924-2000), assistant deputy director of clandestine operations of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of the US.
Crowley was known as "Crow" within the agency and hence the title Conversations with the Crow. A Kindle edition of the book is available on Amazon.
The excerpt which went viral recently was based on the alleged conversation between the author and Crowley which the former had recorded on 5 July 1996.
In this conversation, according to Douglas, Crowley brags about how both the famous Indian nuclear scientist Homi Bhabha and Indian prime minister Lal Bahadur Shastri were eliminated by the CIA. While the veracity of this conversation is impossible to ascertain, what is unmistakable in the entire episode is the Hindu hatred:
We had trouble ... with India back in the 60s when they got uppity and started work on an atomic bomb. Loud mouthed cow-lovers bragging about how clever they were and how they too were going to be a great power in the world. ... And we did not want them to have any kind of nuclear weaponry because God knows what they would have done with it. Probably strut their stuff like a Washington nigger with a brass watch. ... Oh, yes and their head expert was fully capable of building a bomb and we knew just what he was up to. He was warned several times but what an arrogant prick that one was. Told our people to f*ck off and then made it clear that no one would stop him and India from getting nuclear parity with the big boys. Loudmouths bring it all down on themselves. ... Name was Homi Bhabha. That one was dangerous believe me. He had an unfortunate accident. At this point, Douglas intervenes to ask why the CIA thought it was appropriate to bring down a whole 707 with all its passengers. Why not just assassinate Bhabha alone?
Crowley brushed this aside, according to the book, and pointed out how they avoided blasting the plane over Vienna and exploded it over Alps. That way just a few mountain goats died. Douglas gets anxious at this point; there were more than just goats that died in the blast. But Crowley taunts him lightly for being a bleeding heart. It was an Air India Boeing (implying most or all of the passengers were Indians). So why bother.
The conversation continues: And we nailed Shastri as well. Another cow-loving raghead. ... Believe me, they were close to getting a bomb and so what if they nuked their deadly Paki enemies? So what? Too many people in both countries. Breed like rabbits and full of snake-worshipping twits. ... And then threaten us? They were in the sack with the Russians, I told you. May be they could nuke the Panama Canal or Los Angeles. ... (Shastri was) A political type who started the program in the first place. Bhabha was a genius and he could get things done, so we aced both of them. It is indeed a fact that both Shastri and Bhabha died in the same year — 1966. Though there is no direct evidence that the CIA had a hand in the deaths of either of the two Indians, this excerpt from Douglas' book is quite important. It tallies with the general perception of Hindus in the contemporary American society — not just the Bible belt Southerners but also those in the top echelons of power. There are striking parallels between this 'conversation' and two other descriptions of Hindus, made by powerful Western leaders-strategists; both the comments were made in the context of genocidal human misery.
1943 The first are the statements of Winston Churchill when he responded to the request of the then secretary of state for India, Leopold Amery, for relief for the Bengal Famine:
At the War Cabinet meeting the day after the memo was promulgated, November 10, 1943, the prime minister gave his own Darwinian twist to Cherwell’s Malthusian considerations. Amery made his plea, following which “Winston, after a preliminary flourish on Indians breeding like rabbits and being paid a million a day by us for doing nothing about the war, asked Leathers for his view.”
Churchill's Secret War: The British Empire and the Ravaging of India During World War II, 2018, p.205 Just months earlier the same year, Churchill had told Amery: "I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion."
One should note that these statements were made in the context of 1943 Bengal Famine that killed, by official estimates, 3.8 million Indians.
1971 The next is the context of 1971 Bangladesh War. Yahya Khan of Pakistan had sent the Pakistan army to suppress the Bengali uprising in then East Pakistan.
Earlier, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru had made sure that the trapped Hindus of East Pakistan would remain there as sitting targets of a prolonged genocide.
Soon, the Hindus of East Pakistan were facing the Pakistan army that started targeted killing of Hindus. During this period, Richard Nixon was the US president and Henry Kissinger his chief strategist. The US ambassador to Pakistan was Joseph Farland and the consul at Dhaka was Archer Blood.
Blood witnessed the selective killing of Hindus and other atrocities by Pakistan army. He sent descriptions of what was happening in East Pakistan to Washington.
Academician-author Gary J Bass in his acclaimed book on 1971 war, genocide and the US policy explains the mindset and response of the then US establishment:
The U.S. ambassador to Pakistan, Joseph Farland, proved to be a vehement supporter of Yahya's government. ... Once he crudely explained to Nixon and Kissinger that 'this problem goes back to about the year AD 712 when the Muslims first invaded the Sind. There’s been no peace on the subcontinent since that time because the Hindus and the Muslims have nothing in common what-soever. Every point of their lives is diametrically opposed — economic, political, social, emotional, despite their beliefs.
Gary Jonathan Bass, The Blood telegram : Nixon, Kissinger, and a forgotten genocide, Alfred A Knopf: New York, 2013.p.62, p.66
One prays to idols, the other prays to one God. One worships the cow; the other eats it. Simple as that.” (Nixon had his usual Pavlovian reaction to the mention of India: “Miserable damn place.”)... Nixon turned philosophical, pondering the uses of repression: “Well maybe things have changed. But hell, when you look over the history of nations 30,000 well-disciplined people can take 75 million any time. Look what the Spanish did when they came in and took the Incas and all the rest. Look what the British did when they took India.” “That’s right,” Kissinger concurred. ... Henry Kissinger, seemingly referring to past Muslim rulers of India, replied, "They didn't dominate 400 million Indians all those years by being gentle." Again, in July 1971, when Nixon and Kissinger were planning Nixon's visit to China: “The Indians are stirring it up,” he told his senior foreign policy team in mid-July at a meeting at the Western White House in San Clemente. Taking the lead, he said that it was vital that Pakistan “not be embarrassed at this point.” The Indians are “a slippery, treacherous people.” They “would like nothing better than to use this tragedy to destroy Pakistan.” Nixon admitted that he had 'bias' here — a fact lost on nobody in the room. Kissinger, the man of the hour, agreed that the Indians seemed “bent on war. Everything they have done is an excuse for war.” He called the Indians “insufferably arrogant.” ibid. p.177
In all the three responses, one finds a common worldview on Hindus. This includes characterising Hindus as "cow worshipers", "cow lovers", "snake worshipers", "people breeding like rabbits" and "beastly people with beastly religion".
This negative stereotyping of Hindus, not by illiterate or semi-literate lumpen elements, but by decision-making people in power in turn is derived from a worldview fortified by a narrative of history and deep religious prejudices against Hindus.
It was a bias that Churchill had and it was the bias that Nixon and Kissinger shared.
Hindus can delude themselves to think that this is a thing of past, but the truth is that Hindumisia is alive and well. It is a monster that has fed on millions of Hindu lives within the last 80 years. Beyond the conspiracy theories, it is to this that we must focus our attention now.
Read More at https://swarajyamag.com/ideas/historic-tragedies-and-hindumisia
Comments