Posts tagged "Debate"

Why does the New World Order want a one world government if they already control everything and profit from?

every war in the current system of nation states?

Question for believers in the NWO, new world order, people who believe the goal of the global elite is a one world government.

I’m NOT one of them, just interested how they see this. Isn’t the belief this elite has total power in the current system of nation states and always profit a lot from wars contradictory to the notion that their goal would be a one world government?

Maybe they have a good explanation, maybe not. Very interested either way.
DJnCSprings. Sometimes their is possesive, othter times it means they are and in your case the word you’re looking for is there.

I don’t do American idol and did my research. I interpret those leaders who spoke about it differently as you do. I believe in a new world order but interpret those wishes of the elite very differently than a one world government. They don’t need a one world government to establish a new world order. If you don’t get that I’m very sorry

Your patronizing attitude doesn’t hide the fact you obviously have no explenation
imback_missme

Thanks, can’t say we agree on the details but apreciate the answer.
Do you think they absolutely need a one world government to achieve this new ‘World Financial Order". or total control for that matter?
What’s from their perspective preferable about a one world government out in the open over the same control in the current system of nation states? Why would they give up their shadowy excistence that’s sucsesful, again from their point of view, in favor of open dictatorship? What’s the upsdie of that? They can have the total control withtout calling it a one world government or ending nation states, can’t they?
Seriously, aprciate your answer, please elaborate if you have thoughts about this.
zenmeister. The European constitution was rejected by the Netherlands and France, they lost. Even that agreement would have not overridden our domestic constitutions. Then the bureaucrats quit calling it constitution and tried to push a watered down version under the name The Treaty of Lisbon. Ireland rejected it in the only organized referendum on the matter, France and the Netherlands simply ratified it in parliament to avoid the population. The treaty explicitely states it will have to be ratified by each Member State in order for it to come into force. Ireland killed it, the EU bureaucrats lose again for now

http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/countries/index_en.htm#

Still the facts are very different from your understanding, that undermines your credibility. Regrettable
Giordano. You clearly misunderstood my ideas. I can’t be held responsible. Maybe you should have payed attention or I should have explained myself better, maybe a little of both but that’s done.

I tend to be hostile towards those who present lies, misdirections and nonsense as facts because they take attention away from the real issues and often misdirect people I care about into the dead end street of conspiracism.
Your capslock does not impress me, especially since you apparantly don’t even understand the quotes you use to make your point.
"The powers of financial capitalism had (a) far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole"
Dominate the political system of EACH country, they don’t need a one world government. One world government fetishism is a distraction. They can win without the misdirected nationalists even noticing.
47, that’s a great answer. Thanks for taking the time. Your answer does tell how you see it and why it’s not nessecarily contradictory.
I also apreciate the fact you recognize they could very well give in on the semantic part of the issue which in my opinion also means those opposing this evil need to look further than words and terms. To try to say it in your terminology, the more people wake up about the new world order the more likely they will not sell their idea under that name. Another issue where this is very relevant is the whole Amero thing. You can have an effective monitairy union with fixed exchange rates without officially adopting one currency. In practise that’s also the same.
I just hope everyone continues to think, they will
DJnCSprings. I take being called a shill by you as a compliment. Thanks for the info. Why am I a shill though? Are your beliefs above questioning?
I question all things, including your ideas, my ideas, what governments tell, the people claiming to oppose the government and self proclaimed truth seekers say. I will accept no ideas unchecked, I’m not a sheeple.
I’m skeptical of all sides but give everyone a chance to express their view. Why is that a problem for you?
Truth is whatever survives the cleansing fires of skepticism after they have burned away error and superstition. The healthy growth of civilization depends on skepticism more than it does on faith. – Oliver Wendell Holmes
Giordano. Typical hostily and name calling for someone lacking ideas.
I didn’t ignore your first quote, I read it, it’s not news and not something we argue about. What’s there to say? What do you expect? Me saying that quote is false while it’s not? I’m not a liar.
I see you ignore the point I made. They can easily get all the control they want, an effective one world government in the shadows while out in the open continuing the illusion of nation states. It seems to work in the American electoreal system. Millions of Americans still believe they have free choice while the US is in fact already a dictatorship of the big banks and corporate interest and while most who voted for change Americans will get more of the same. I see as little reason for the elite to call themselves a one world government as for the US to openly call itself a dictatorship. The goal, total control, is more important than any name they use. The last point you make actually supports that notion
Giordano
That they can fool some or attempt to fool some by calling it something else is excactly the point of this whole question.
While you basically accuse me of shilling you fail to realize by insisting their goal is one world government, other people might be convinced they didn’t sucseed just as long as the US is called the US even at that time globalists/elitists, capitalists in my view, effectively control it all.
80 percent of Americans and possibly more around the world believe Obama is change. We both know better, we shouldn’t be fighting over the details where we disagree
Giordano for your and everyone elses information I’m against the CFR and other institutions like it. We do see their power and influence, even their goals, differently but we both reject them.
It’s like the whole Bilderberg group thing. My position is basically they will aproach and be able to effectively buy/ influence, steer any politician in the current setup because that setup is corrupt to the core while the conspiracists view is groups like bilderberg, CFR appoint their "agents" corrupting an otherwise legitimate system.
imback_missme, thanks for the edit. I happen to know zeitgeist and believe it’s full of inaccuracies (
But unlike with many other truth gurus I do believe the maker believes what he’s saying and addendum obviously appeals to me. Marxists like myself have been blaming the for profit system for decades. While Peter Jackson gets caught up in semantics I feel and denies Marxism is a solution his whole analysis testifies to the Marxist notion that the for prfit motive brings out the worst in humanity. I believe that and he usues footage of economic hitman, definetely a very good documentary
If I was a truther I’d be pro zietgeist but I’m not, loved the Alex Jones interview with Jackson, it’s recommended. If you like, respect zeitgeist but take Jones serious too you want to hear this.
Your contribution is very much apreciated
It’s Peter Joseph, not Jackson oops
Giordano, nothing stops you or anyone else from adding me as a contact or you from linking here to the answers you refer to. That would be the fastest way and that you don’t do that while sugesting they tell it all, says enough. I can’t read your mind and know what answers you refer to but yes I stand behind my answers in regards to conspiracism
You fail to understand my points and I don’t have to adress your quote, the one you don’t understand yourself or the other one. Your incoherent ramblings and accusations offer little insight into how you think and give me the impression your agenda is to surpress an open debate and discussion
Giordano. No I didn’t change my mind. The corruption comes from within, from the inherent faillure of the American political setup, that’s my position here and was my position there. I stand behind that answer, like I estimated you don’t understand.

Joining my contacts opens my whole Q&A, everyone knows that or can see for themselves, that’s enough
People with unfair power and privilege generally try to hold onto that unfair power and privilege. Sometimes they make plans that are not publicly announced. Sometimes they engage in illegal plots. Real conspiracies have been exposed throughout history. History itself, however, is not controlled by a vast timeless conspiracy. The powerful people and groups in society are hardly a "secret team" or a tiny club of "secret elites." The tendency to explain all major world events as primarily the product of a secret conspiracy is called conspiracism. The antidote to conspiracism is Power Structure Research based on some form of institutional, systemic or structural analysis that examines race, ethnicity, gender, sexual identity, class and other factors that are used to create inequality and oppression. Political Research Associates does not criticize conspiracism because we want to shield those with unfair power and privilege, but because we believe that conspiracism impedes attempts to
to build a social movement for real social justice, economic fairness, equality, peace, and democracy.

http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/index.html

Maybe you will understand the difference now but it’s very doubtful

First of all, everyone must understand that ‘profit’ is not the goal here. There are motives beyond simple greed, and I know it’s hard for anyone with a conscience to really imagine what must be going on in the minds of these elites. EDIT: They’re f*ckin psychopaths. It seems like they’re obsessed and compelled to play god, and recreate the world according to their vision.

Money is not the END, it is the MEANS. The same can be said of war. It IS all going somewhere. These people do not intend to use War as a geopolitical tool -forever-. EDIT: Albert Pike’s "three world wars" had a theoretical objective. He never mentioned a fourth (that I am aware of…).

Have you heard of the Iron Mountain Report? Whether real or a hoax, the question posed to this think tank was "how can we maintain Anglo-American dominance in a future devoid of war?" The consensus was that they would need a common threat (i.e. environmental) that the world could unite against.

Secondly, they don’t already have "total power" (it’s quite the contrary – they seem to be losing it!)

"Total power" is what they’ve always been after, that’s what they are using their money and their wars to get. If they HAD total control, then all their wealth could not buy them any more influence, could it? Then it would become worthless to them.

Moreover, if they DID already enjoy total global control, most of us would probably be dead right now, and we certainly wouldn’t be having this discussion.

Also, a "World Financial Order" …IS… a "world government" ! (for all intents and purposes)! If you attended the first day of NWO 101, then you should know the influence that central banking systems hold over national governments, and you should know that the difference between "World Financial Order" and "world government" is purely semantic.

"They can have the total control without calling it a one world government or ending nation states, can’t they?" EXACTLY. That is exactly what I expect them to do. They’re not going to just come out and announce one day: "Welcome to the New World Order! Here’s your new flag and your new money." Yes, nations will continue to exist (in name only) long after global governance has been established. That is a NECESSITY, or the people would obviously revolt.

Global dominance has been attempted by force before, and it did not succeed. Conquest by deception seems to be working far better, so far… and I expect the deception to continue, at least until the globalist institutions have become so strong that they can no longer be challenged.

So, no, there is nothing at all contradictory about the idea of using war and economic manipulation to steer the geopolitical landscape gradually towards "global governance" or whatever you choose to call it. It’s really the only way to accomplish this.

When describing the level of control the globalist elite actually have over world events, I commonly use the metaphor of trying to steer a huge ocean liner at high speed in choppy seas.

I hope that answers your question.

International Company and Ethics

International Company and Ethics
The issue of business ethics is engaging companies more and more – both domestically and internationally. This trend is accentuated by high-profile examples of breaches of accepted standards of ethical behavior. For example, the recent Enron case where inadequate checks and balances within the firm enabled unethical behavior to occur, a development made easier by the failure of the external auditor to fulfill its role properly. Assumptions about ethics and business are influenced inevitably by fundamental beliefs about the role of business in society. On the one hand, there are those who believe that the sole social responsibility of business is to generate profit. For some proponents of this view, profit generation itself takes on a moral dimension whereas others see profits as the key to wealth generation – the main way of addressing social issues (Davies, 1997, p. 88). On the other hand, others believe that the role of business is much broader than that of profit generation and that all those who are affected by the way a company operates – shareholders, employees, customers, suppliers, the local community, future generations (especially in relation to environmental issues) – have a legitimate interest and stake in the way a company conducts itself.
Many of these concerns are relevant to business whether it is domestic or international in nature. However, international business poses particular challenges and questions over and above those facing purely domestic business. In order to reconcile doing business internationally and remain ethical, the company should follow the main principles of human rights, comply with legal norms related to labor, avoid corruption and correspond to standards of environmental protection. Even though it is not easy to combine making profit and adjusting to ethical principles, sometimes failure to comply with legal norms and standards my result in negative public image for the international company and loss of customers. Therefore, international company can suffer even more damages if it decides not to follow the ethical principles.
The first issue related to ethics is human rights. It is a generally accepted principle that international company should not engage in direct infringement of human rights the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is commonly taken as the appropriate benchmark. However, some people would go further, preferring companies to refrain from doing business in countries known to infringe human rights on a systematic basis. Opponents of this view argue that if an international company abstains from conducting business in a country with an ethically dubious regime, the only concrete result is to hand over business opportunities to companies without such reservations (Barlett and Ghoshall, 1998, p. 110).
On coming to office in 1992, for example, President Clinton proposed to withdraw MFN status from China as a result of the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989 in which many pro-democracy demonstrators were killed (Kepstein, 2001, p. 108). Such action would have provoked retaliation against US companies operating in China and US business lobbied hard to persuade the president to change his mind. They argued that US business interests would be irrevocably damaged in a rapidly growing market and that the outcome would not be an improvement in human rights in China but a boost to the business prospects of American business rivals in China. The lobbying campaign was successful: the link between trade and human rights was broken and replaced by the doctrine that the possibility of bringing about change is greater if business and other links and contacts are maintained.
International labor issues can be linked with human rights, especially regarding matters of forced labor and child labor. Ethical labor issues also occur outside the framework of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in circumstances where certain labor practices may be legal and commonplace in the host country but do not necessarily represent fair and equitable treatment of the workforce. The issue facing an international company is: does it maximize its competitive advantage by locating in a low-cost/low-regulation country and adopt local practices or does it refrain from reaping all the labor cost benefits by adopting higher standards and more ethical practices than strict compliance with local legal norms requires? A firm may choose to take the latter path and still experience significant competitiveness gains.
Corporate codes of conduct governing general corporate behavior and treatment of the workforce in particular are not new. Their modern manifestation began in the mid-twentieth century in the form of codes from the International Chamber of Commerce and other collective codes (Donaldson, 1989, p. 55). Their popularity surged once more in the 1990s in response to pressure from NGOs, the emergence of corporate social responsibility as a key consideration for firms and the phenomenon of socially responsible investment and shareholder action. Additionally, discussion of the possible inclusion of labour regulation under the WTO umbrella encouraged international firms to assume greater responsibility for their own labor standards, if only to demonstrate that international regulation was unnecessary. Corporate codes of conduct take many forms. Many international firms have developed their own individual codes to cover their own employees and those of their contractors and suppliers. Some industries have developed their own codes. Whatever form they take, codes are necessary for the positive public image of international company and they demonstrate that the company reconciles doing business and acting ethically. Codes need to comply with a number of conditions before they can be said to operate equitably and with credibility (DeGeorge, 1993, p. 88):
1.the contents of the code must be clearly worded and, at a minimum, comply with core standards;
2.the company adopting the code must be committed to it and be prepared to provide the resources to ensure its implementation, including training, information systems for monitoring and compliance and staff to implement new procedures;
3.knowledge of the code throughout the organization is essential to its implementation: in particular, employees of the firm and its subcontractors and suppliers must know of the contents of the code and a reporting system must be established that enables workers to report infringements without fear of reprisals;
4.the code should be subject to verification by independent assessors who have access to the site unannounced at any time.
The application of such codes can enhance internal governance and facilitate internal management across geographically dispersed sites. There is some evidence to show that real commercial benefits can be gained from the proper application of fair and equitable labor standards, although more widespread research needs to be done on this (DeGeorge, 1993, p. 111). Provided the code of conduct adopted by a firm has external credibility, it can both protect and enhance a firm’s reputation, particularly important these days when more is expected of firms in terms of corporate social responsibility.
Levi Strauss is one of the world’s largest brand-name clothes manufacturers and also one of the first international companies to adopt a corporate code of conduct to apply to all contractors who manufacture and finish its products and to aid selection of which countries in which to operate (DeGeorge, 1993, p. 118). The Code of Conduct has two parts:
1.Business partner terms of engagement: Levi Strauss uses these to select business partners that follow workplace standards and practices consistent with its policies and to help identify potential problems. In addition to meeting acceptable general ethical standards, complying with all legal requirements and sharing Levi Strauss’s commitment to the environment and community involvement, Levi Strauss’s business partners must adhere to the following employment guidelines:
-Wages and benefits: business partners must comply with any applicable law and the prevailing manufacturing and finishing industry practices.
-Working hours: partners must respect local legal limits on working hours and preference will be given to those who operate less than a 60-hour working week. Levi Strauss will not use partners that regularly require workers to work in excess of 60 hours. Employees should also have at least one day off per week.
-Child labor: use of child labor is not permissible in any of the facilities of the business partner. Workers must not be below 15 years of age or below the compulsory school age.
-Disciplinary practices: Levi Strauss will not use business partners who use corporal punishment or other forms of physical or mental coercion.
-Prison/forced labor: no prison or forced labor is to be used by business partners nor will Levi Strauss use or buy materials from companies using prison or forced labor.
-Freedom of association: the rights of workers to join unions and to bargain collectively must be respected.
-Discrimination: while respecting cultural differences, Levi Strauss believes workers should be employed on the basis of their ability to do their job
-Health and safety: Levi Strauss undertakes to use business partners who provide a safe and healthy working environment and, where appropriate residential facilities
2.Country assessment guidelines: these are used to address broad issues beyond the control of individual business and are intended to help Levi Strauss assess the degree to which its global reputation and success may be exposed to unreasonable risk. It was an adverse country assessment that caused Levi Strauss to cease its engagement in China in the early 1990s, largely on human rights grounds – a decision that has subsequently been reversed. In particular, the company assesses whether:
-the brand image will be adversely affected by the perception or image of a country among customers;
-the health and safety of employees and their families will be exposed to unreasonable risk;
-the human rights environment prevents the company from conducting business activities in a manner consistent with the global guidelines and other company policies;
-the legal system prevents the company from adequately protecting trademarks, investments or other commercial interests;
-the political, economic and social environment protects the company’s commercial interests and brand corporate image.
Levi Strauss is the example of the company that successfully combines doing business and following ethical practices. As we see, the company code of ethics demonstrates that Levi Strauss complies with the most labor norms and environmental standards; at the same time such actions of the company do not have any negative impact upon its business. On the contrary, since Levi Strauss has positive public image the customers should be more attracted to its products.
Some of the other important ethical issues that the company should consider is bribery and corruption. Bribery/corruption is not as clear-cut an issue as might first appear; indeed it can be rather a grey area. In some cultures, it is regarded as perfectly normal to give an official or host a gift (Asgary and Mitschow, 2002, p. 245). In others, only minimal value token gifts or no gifts at all are allowed. A problem arises when it is the norm for a contract to be signed only after the payment of a ‘commission’ to a key official or officials (Asgary and Mitschow, 2002, p. 240). Such circumstances place international companies in a difficult position: without payment of these commissions, the contract will not materialize and, if they do not make the payment, many other companies will (although that is not an ethical justification for going ahead with the commission). The position of the US is unequivocal about this: it regards all such payments as bribes and, as such, they are both unethical and illegal. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Law forbids US companies from making improper payments to foreign governments, politicians or political parties to obtain or retain business. Therefore, the only choice that American companies have regarding bribery is not to make any payments regarded as bribes; otherwise, it can be considered that a company violates the law.
The last ethical challenge that international companies face is related to environmental protection. Firms can encounter damaging publicity as a result of the environmental outcome of their activities as pollution attracts more and more media attention (Barlett and Ghoshal, 1998, p. 98). For many, environmental protection and corporate responsibility in this field has a clear ethical dimension. This debate is couched in terms of the ‘global commons’ in which all human beings have both a stake and a responsibility to ensure the well-being of the environment for future generations (Donaldson, 1989, p. 211).
In order to reconcile doing business and meeting environmental ethical standards an international company should comply with the following underlying principles in environmental policy.
The first norm refers to the “polluter pays principle.” It stipulates that polluters should pay the full cost of the environmental damage they cause (DeGeorge, 1993, p. 100). Environmental costs are often referred to as ‘externalities’ (for example, damage to health, rivers, the air, etc. arising from economic activity) that are not incorporated into the costs of a product but are borne by society as a whole (DeGeorge, 1993, p. 100). By making the polluter pay the full cost of its activities, including externalities, this principle provides an incentive to make products less polluting and/or to reduce the consumption of polluting goods. This internalization of external costs can be met through the use of market-based, policy instruments.
The other principle refers to prevention. If the company decides to follow the prevention principle it changes to products and processes to prevent environmental damage occurring rather than relying on remedial action to repair damage after it has taken place (Davies, 1997, p. 108). This implies the development of ‘clean technologies’; minimal use of natural resources; minimal releases into the atmosphere, water and soil; and maximization of the recyclability and lifespan of products.
In conclusion, international business adds an extra dimension to ethical issues within the firm. All organizations have their own culture based on common language and terminology, behavioral norms, dominant values, informality/formality, etc. This inevitably becomes more complex when an organization has a presence in more than one country. Some companies believe a strong corporate culture is a means of overcoming diverse national cultures whereas others evolve different cultures in different organizations and incorporate cultural diversity in their management strategy. Many organizations like Coca-Cola and McDonald’s do use core brands but still adapt their products for local markets and follow ethical standards, either out of necessity or to maximize returns. Ethics and corporate social responsibility are closely related. Debates about corporate social responsibility have been dominated by labor and environmental issues but a growing number of corporate governance scandals involving multinationals is increasing pressure for stricter regulation. International companies can reconcile doing business internationally and remaining ethical if they comply with labor and environmental norms enacted at the international level and establish and follow the code of ethics. In the long run, corporate commitment to sound ethical principles and socially responsible behavior is good for business.
Produced by ProfEssays ( www.professays.com ) – professional custom essay writing service: custom essays, custom term papers, custom academic papers, custom research papers, compositions, book reports, case study. No plagiarism, high quality, prompt delivery.

Andrew Sandon
http://www.articlesbase.com/ethics-articles/international-company-and-ethics-67615.html

Cma-cgm: Jacques Saade’s Involvement in “damietta Gate”

Free translation of the article published in the egyptian daily « Massaeyat » of October 17th 2006

Jacques Saade’s involvement in “Damietta Gate”

New developments in the case of the Damietta company next November

The General Prosecutor launches new investigations in relation to public funds and other irregularities perpetrated after the arrest of Ali Massaad

The appearance of the accused and the lifting of the sequestrations are the main issues of this case

This case locally known as the “great corruption case of the Damietta Containers” and internationally named the “Damietta Gate” has shaken the Egyptian, Arab and international public opinion.

From the first audience, three of the six accused confessed, the third, the fifth and the sixth and acknowledged having been involved in the briberies paid to Ali Massaad, whereas the latter denied at the beginning the whole matter.

The six accused, Ali Massaad, chairman of the board of directors of the Damietta Container Company, Jihad Anis Dagher, employee of Leader Company, Nabil Elie Bassil, CMA-CGM regional Finance and administrative director, Mostapha Mohamad Khalil Abdel Monhem, Director of the Damietta subsidiary, Jamal Abdel Razek Abdel Sadek and Ahmad Mahmoud Ahmad Yacoub have been referred to the Penal Court by the General Prosecutor (financial section), and the second hearing is set for November 9th for a contradictory debate and confrontation with the prosecution’s witnesses who will appear before the court for corruption and misappropriation of public funds.

The most surprising aspect of this case it seems is that Ali Massaad’s successor as head of the Damietta Container Company is following the same methods as his predecessor, a matter which compelled the General Prosecutor to launch a second investigation pertaining to the period following Ali Massaad’s management of the company. This investigation has been postponed following the juridical holidays and the promotion of prosecutor Wadih Hanna Nached.

Ali Massaad, known as the “Bey”, is now in prison.

This case is about corruption, account manipulations, financial fraud and a plot between the Damietta Container Company and French company CMA-CGM presided by Lebanese national Jacques Saade whose corporate headquarters are in Marseille. The file that is being dealt with by the Court of State Financial Security in Egypt pertains to the misappropriation of funds that could reach up to 20 million dollars.

The main accused is being held in temporary custody while awaiting the outcome of this case.

This case is of major interest in its Egyptian, Lebanese and French ramifications.

The Egyptian media has released important pieces of information revealing that this is not an isolated corruption matter in the shipping sector in Egypt. The former General Prosecutor Maher Abdel Wahed has already ordered the chairman of the board of directors of the Damietta Container Company, Ali Massaad, to be placed in custody and his personal assets seized until the end of the investigation; the latter decision has been notified to the Central Bank of Egypt, the Finance Directorate and the land registry.

The General Prosecutor opened an investigation following a declaration presented by the president of the Central Accounting Agency regarding the statements of accounts pertaining to the company owned by the holding company for land and shipping transport presided by the General Mohammad Youssof already indicted in the case of the seizure of the “Salem 2” vessel in the port of Alexandria. The president of the Court of Appeal of the district of South Cairo, Adel Joumaa had set the next hearing to last May 29th in order to take a decision as to the verdict of the General Prosecutor.

The investigations have revealed a plot between engineer Ali Massaad and the managers of the foreign shipping company regarding the signature of an agreement according to which the foreigh company could benefit from exceptional rebates to the detriment of the Damietta Public Company that could reach up to 5,5 million dollars.

This scandal is worrying Egyptian public opinion as well as the political scene, as it happens to occur after other scandals such as the one related to the Directorate of Transport, the Bank of Cairo and the robbery of steal and other metals.

The investigations have proven the existence of a plot between the first accused Ali Massaad Saad and the President of the foreign shipping company, which resulted in the disappearance of 6 million dollars from the Egyptian treasury. It has been established, following the house search, that the accused regularly received briberies from France.

In a surprising rebounce, the investigation revealed that the managers of the international shipping company based in Marseille (France) reimbursed the amount of 3,1 million dollars by bankers cheque to the Damietta Company following a compromise aimed at smothering the case, after that the General Prosecutor started a legal action against this company and seized the assets of Ali Massaad. This payment did not put an end to the legal actions but led to the discovery of another aspect of this case namely the direct involvement of the French company in corrupting Egyptian officials.

Despite CMA-CGM’s denial of any involvement in this corruption case declaring that an internal investigation is underway in coordination with the Egyptian authorities, the Sunday Express newspaper revealed that CMA-CGM presided by Jacques Saade, paid 10,000 dollars per month to Massaad, and has reimbursed as reparation 3.1 million dollars to the Egyptian port of Damietta.

In a statement made by Jacques Saade to the same newspaper, he mentioned that these people were paid by the CMA’s Egyptian subsidiary, that no transfers were made by the French head office and that his company was investigating in coordination with the Egyptian authorities. Various managers were heard including the accountancy manager.

According to the Sunday Express, this is an extremely serious situation and other countries, including the United States, are being worried. It seems that political pressures have been exerted in order to prevent CMA-CGM from acquiring from the English company P&O its shares in the American port of Dubai for security reasons. The American authorities are undertaking an investigation regarding this matter.

Other pieces of information collected in parallel to the secret investigation indicated that many points in this case were still not clear. The most important element that has been discovered until now is the false contract -which is the main aspect of the investigation- signed by Farid Salem, CMA-CGM general manager and brother-in-law of Jacques Saade.

It has been revealed that Abdel Razek is the financial manager of CMA-CGM in Egypt, presided by Jacques Saade, as indicated by the social security registers.

All the evidence indicates that the financial offenses have been perpetrated by the chairman of the Damietta Company, in addition to the irregularities within the contract signed with the shipping line in Marseille.

In an Al-Ahram article of May 26th 2006, it seems, according to the investigations undertaken by the financial control services [official body], the principal accused perceived important amounts on a regular basis in exchange for those irregularities. The former General Prosecutor Wadih Hanna Nached issued search-warrants in the offices of the said shipping company (CMA-CGM) in Alexandria, which resulted in the seizure of numerous pieces of evidence confirming the transfer of important amounts from the accounts of the latter company in favor of the accused.

According to the “magazine Rose El Youssof” that published the result of a long investigation on the subject, the chairman of the Damietta Company is the owner of two palaces in the city of Damietta on the river Nile as well as a dozen estates and three villas in the touristic village of Yasmina in Port Said, in addition to five hectares of agricultural land in the latter city, 20 million Egyptian pounds deposited in bank accounts in his name, his wife’s and children’s and a number of bank accounts abroad which inventory is not yet known.

It was mentioned in the article that Ali Massaad had a nickname, “the Bey”, to the order of whom checks were drawn up.

The investigations revealed that the number of containers CMA-CGM sent in transit through the port of Damietta, did not exceed 70,000 teus for the last 12 months allowing the French company to benefit from rebates of the amount of 5,5 million dollars. This led them to illegally modify the contract with the Damietta Company by paying briberies in addition to the monthly remuneration of Ali Massaad.

Rose El Youssof added that Ali Massaad pretended that he made his fortune in Saudi Arabia, where he worked for 12 years, and in Bahrein, where he worked 5 years; but was not able to keep the evidence that would clear him.

A surprising aspect is that he appeared before the court, which ordered the seizure of his assets and his wife’s, wearing bad quality clothes, in an attempt to conceal his wealth. The most astonishing is that the law firm handling his defense is one of the major firms specialized in shipping matters in Egypt.

The investigation is moving forward with the hope to shed light on other thorny aspects of this case. There is a strong probability that the General Prosecutor would prosecute Jacques Saade, chairman of CMA-CGM; one more element that adds up to the conflict as to the ownership of this company and increases the legal stranglehold around Jacques Saade.

Damietta “Gate” to date is the last link in a series of legal proceedings facing Jacques Saade.

If this case is taking an official aspect in Egypt given that it involves a number of irregularities, corruptions and misappropriation of public funds, other legal proceedings have been launched in many countries in which the conflict between the brothers Jacques and Johnny Saade is raging around the ownership of CMA-CGM, the first shipping company in France and the third worldwide.

Six years after the signature of a contract on September 16th 2006 between the two parties aimed at ending the conflict but which deprived Johnny Saade of his legitimate rights due to a deceitful set-up, new facts could reveal unexpected developments in the coming months very probably in favor of the latter.

The internet site www.mistralholding.com owned by Johnny Saade’s company Mistral Holding s.a.l., contains a huge amount of documents, compromising reports and legal evidence, that explains in detail the conflict between the two brothers which is being reported at the top of the news in the Lebanese, arab and international press. Among these documents a report issued by the financial expert Antoine Gaudino explaining the circumstances that led to the said conflict.

One can read in the report that the conflict between the two Saade brothers as the major shareholders of the CMA-CGM Group is mentioned by the media as a family feud due to Jacques Saade’s statements, but Johnny, who owns 48.44% of CMA’s shares accuses his brother of hiding information in general and more specifically regarding transactions initiated by Jacques Saade in France and elsewhere.

The conflict actually starts by the lack of transparency during the acquisition of CGM by CMA, and Jacques Saade’s attempt at controlling the group for his sole personal benefit.

The preliminary investigations undertaken by Gaudino on August 29th 1997 at the request of Mistral holding, revealed that the management system established by Jacques Saade on behalf of CMA made Johnny Saade fearful, as major shareholder, of the company’s future.

With further investigations, various fiscal irregularities and others have been discovered, and are part of the conflict between the brothers.

The main historical stages of this conflict are the following:

The Limited company CMA (Compagnie Maritime d’Affretement) was created by brothers Johnny and Jacques Saade on September 8th 1986 and registered at the RCS of Marseille on April 8th 1987 under number 340 353 911.

The initial capital was FFr.250,000. It was to be increased following various share capital increases in 1986, 1987 and 1993 as well as on May 26th 1994 further to an extraordinary general assembly to reach FFr. 60,000,000 divided in 600,000 shares with a nominal value of FFr.100.

At the latter date and according to the shareholders’ registry, the shares were distributed between three Lebanese companies: Merit s.a.l., owned by Jacques Saade, 48.41%; Mistral Holding s.a.l., owned by Johnny Saade, 48.41%.

The six shares attributed to the “Jacques Saade Family” are held by Mr. Jacques Saade, his spouse Mrs Nayla Salem, his daughter Tania, his son Rodolphe, his brother-in-law Mr. Farid Salem and Mr.Tristan Vieljeux.

The three Lebanese companies are all registered at the Beirut registrar of Companies and domiciled in the same city and the same address.The company Rodolphe Saade & Co is owned by Jacques Saade and Johnny Saade, 50% of the shares each, respectively through Merit s.a.l. and Mistral Holding s.a.l.

CGM s.a. (Compagnie Generale maritime), with a capital of FFr. 1,275,948,600 and registered at the RCS of Nanterre under number 562 024 422, has been transferred by the French government to the private sector by ministerial decision on October 21st 1996.

The capital of CGM is distributed as follows: 90% of the shares came to be held by CMA, 6% personally by Jacques Saade and 4% between three other shareholders.

CMA got 96% of the CGM shares whereas the 4% remaining were held by three other shareholders; and Jacques Saade’s stake reached 51% whereas Johnny’s, through Mistral holding, did not reach 49.9%.

The first findings revealed a certain number of irregularities, the most important of which related to general assembly meetings.

An extraordinary general assembly was held at CMA head offices on December 12th 1996 without letting Mistral Holding s.a.l. have the opportunity to participate. This assembly was aimed at granting the board of directors the right to increase the share capital, in one or many times. This authorization to the board of directors was valid for a period of five years and aimed at increasing CMA’s capital from FFr. 60,000,000 to a maximum of FFr. 135,000,000.

The report added that until December 12th 1996 CMA’s management has always convened Mistral holding s.a.l. by rapid courier (DHL) and simultaneously by fax, given postage delays to Lebanon. In an unusual manner, the convening to the extraordinary general assembly meeting of December 12th 1996 was sent to Mistral Holding s.a.l. on November 26th 1996 by recommended letter with acknowledgement of receipt.

Everything was done in order to prevent Johnny Saade to be informed in due time and therefore to participate to the main decisions to be taken including the share capital increase.

It is within the above-mentionned context that Johnny Saade seized the Tribunal of Commerce of Marseille who designated on December 23rd 1996 a judicial “huissier’ in order to get the documents pertaining to general assemblies and board of directors held by CMA.

Following this judicial decision, Mr Johnny Saade was able to raise various irregularities. Four Board of Directors meetings were held on June 7th, September 20th and November 14th & 15th 1996 without Mistral Holding s.a.l. being ever convened whereas the minutes of meetings stipulated that Mistral Holding s.a.l. was “absent and excused”.

A general assembly was held on March 27th 1997 in cancellation of the share capital increase decided by the general assembly of December 12th 1996.

This did not however erase the irregularities due to the share transfers and the acquired majority to the benefit of Jacques Saade which jumped from 48,41% to 50,001%.

Irregularities were noticed regarding the presentation of balance sheets. It appears from CMA’s balance sheets in the offer for the acquisition of the CGM of October 3rd 1996, that CMA was in good financial health, that it increased its shareholders’ equity funds, reaching FFr. 700 million and the CGM acquisition project would allow the financial rehabilitation of the latter no later than 1999.

The findings made on certain accounting entries called in question the validity of the level of CMA’s shareholders’ equity which were lower than the reality. These shareholders’ equity funds were much lower than the FFr. 200 millions and CGM’s takeover was a juicy business deal that Jacques Saade wanted to keep for himself to the detriment of his brother Johnny.

This report mentioned, backed by the necessary documents and figures, that the filed balance sheets were false and did not reflect the truth about CMA’s accounts, a matter that was to jeopardize the future of the company and the interests of Johnny Saade, its main shareholder.

This report mentionned that Jacques Saade made his brother Johnny become a minority shareholder through successive steps and by premeditation in order to prepare the acquisition of CGM to his sole personal benefit; the report also summarized the various attempts of Jacques Saade to escape legal proceedings which were accumulating every day.

Of importance in this conflict is the re-opening of a financial investigation by the Paris Tribunal regarding the accounting irregularities and fiscal fraud perpetrated by Jacques Saade in managing CMA-CGM.

Other information indicate that Egyptian courts of law are entangled in an important corruption file involving the Port of Damietta since the 90s and are attempting to determine the scale of corruption involving the representatives of the French shipping line on behalf of their managers in France. While awaiting new developments, the director of the Port of Damietta has in the meantime been arrested.

On another level and following the penal lawsuit filed by Mistral Holding, Paris Tribunals (France) have launched legal investigation regarding the CMA-CGM balances sheets that are allegedly false. The investigation has been entrusted to two prominent magistrates in France. The aim of this investigation is to shed light on the possible fiscal fraud and concealment of the real profits, a matter that goes back to the signature of the contract that has put an end to the conflict between brothers Jacques and Johnny Saade.

Finally, we can add to this multi-faceted judicial file that is surrounding Jacques Saade, a matter that is worrying investigators near the General Prosecutor of Lattakia in Syria. It involves the falsification of official documents, the use of false documents and usurpation of legal capacity, involving Choucri el Khoury that seems to have acted on behalf of Jacques Saade.

andrew barns
http://www.articlesbase.com/business-articles/cmacgm-jacques-saades-involvement-in-damietta-gate-80435.html

Christopher Hitchens – The Tyranny of a Callous God

This panel was part of the Christian Book Expo of 2009. Here, Hitchens gives one of his signature rants against the Judeo-Christian god. This is Hitchens at his best. Be sure to watch the entire video.

I hope to upload many more videos related to atheism. So if you enjoyed this one, please subscribe!

Duration : 0:6:54

Read more…

Can someone recommend an alternative to CNN.com for news? Due to their bias against Ron Paul, I’m boycotting.

I’ve decided to boycott CNN after Anderson Cooper ignored, interrupted, and lied to (he said he’d come back to him regarding conservativism in 2 questions and failed to do so) Ron Paul at the Republican debate tonight. I wrote to CNN to explain this; I encourage others to do the same.

MSNBC for sure. Fox News sucks. Honestly, first he needs to get more delegate votes before they give him more time. I support Ron Paul, but if the delegates are going to the others, then the peoples interest lies there. We need to get him some delegates. Tuesday will tell.

Climate Change Corruption, Hacked CRU Emails: Dr Tim Ball

The Corbett Report talks with retired climatologist, Dr. Tim Ball about the recently leaked emails and documents from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at East Anglia University. The documents expose deceit, duplicity and collusion between climate researchers to maintain the fraud of the manmade global warming theory. Dr. Ball shares his insights on what they show and reveals stunning behind-the-scenes details about how this fraud has been developed and perpetuated.

More info:

Hacker leaks thousands of emails showing conspiracy to “hide” the real data on climate change:

http://www.corbettreport.com/articles/20091120_cru_hacked.htm

The Death Blow to Climate Science:

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/17102

Collusion, Corruption, Manipulation and Obstruction:

http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2009/11/20/3452/

Mike’s Nature Trick:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/20/mikes-nature-trick/

CRU’s unwillingness to share data with other researchers earlier Dr. Ball interview:

source:
corbettreport
November 21, 2009
http://www.corbettreport.com

Duration : 0:9:58

Read more…

Clarity Crafted From Common Sense!

Let’s face it; we are all liberals, no matter how conservative we may be. The Puritans who founded America conquered dangers and disasters to win religious freedom, but they were liberals. In 1754, Benjamin Franklin depicted a rattlesnake cut into eight sections in his Pennsylvania Gazette. The eight sections of snake symbolized eight eastern seaboard colonies and the caption said “Join or Die!” It was a call to arms during the French and Indian war. By 1776, an image of a coiled rattlesnake, with “Don’t Tread on Me”, became an American icon of independence and a battle cry engrained in the Spirit of ’76.

What is different about the liberalism of the Puritans and the liberalism of the progressive movement in America today? In a word, the difference is morality. The Puritans personified deeply held, Bible based morality with their liberalism. When morality is stripped away from liberalism, the result is 30 million aborted babies over thirty years, legalized sodomy and the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), all protected by the immoral ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union).

Born in 1954, I was a classic Love Generation, anti-Vietnam War liberal, living at the speed of party! It is unbelievable; what our generation has lived through. The sexual revolution, women’s lib, the music revolution, the recreational drug awakening, the Civil Rights marches, the nuclear arms race, the space race, the information revolution spawned by the computer, the internet, satellites and cell phones are just part of what we have witnessed! What a wonderful life and evolution of our democracy, in our time!

Our choices for president in 1972, when I turned eighteen and got a draft card, were Richard Nixon and Hubert Humphrey. I did not vote that year. Most profound, perhaps, we stopped the Vietnam War to protect those poor rice farmers, from US troops. We quit and came home. Then, between 1975 and 1978, the Viet Cong and Khmer Rouge slaughtered about three million of those peasants who we demonstrated in US streets to protect, from US troops. How foolish we were!

The lesson is clear: really bad guys immediately fill the muscle void when good men stand down and go home. Those who rallied our utopian filled minds to stop the war were mostly silent about the genocide that ensued, after US troops were withdrawn. Our killed and wounded were sacrificed in great numbers. In the end, their mission and our allies were simply abandoned by Congress and our divided nation.

We grew up with Why We Fight, Victory At Sea, Combat, Black Sheep Squadron, Rat Patrol and other programs about WWII, the death camps and the cost of freedom on TV. This type of programming saturated the few over-the-air channels and we found it educational, entertaining and fascinating. Many of us still find it fascinating. It was all about the gritty, epic struggle between freedom and tyranny and it was very patriotic!

The Rifleman, Leave It To Beaver, Gunsmoke, My Three Sons, Bonanza, The Waltons, Wild Kingdom and All In The Family are just a few programs I recall that were favorites for lighter entertainment. And the Ed Sullivan show. It was all pretty wholesome fare and we loved it. The America of our youth is already gone forever, in case you missed its passing.

We watched in naive befuddlement while the Shah of Iran was overthrown by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard in Tehran, who used US hostages as pawns on TV for over a year beginning in 1979. Interest rates were sky high and lines at gas stations were longer than that. Our President at the time was a former peanut farmer and most of us watched, from afar, the rise of radical Islam without understanding it.

As a result of the gasoline shortages that followed, there was a lot of talk about energy independence. Certainly, the masses of us did not connect the dots between buying foreign oil and funding terrorism. Apparently, neither did our elected leaders who were most interested in re-election, as they almost always are above all else. In retrospect, what in God’s name were we doing? Oh yeah, partying! We watched while our secular, modern thinking but despotic ally was swept from power, our Embassy was overrun, our hostages were traumatized and the rest of us were slowly strangled at the gasoline pump. We were brain dead.

We watched our principled Ronald Reagan from a distance with admiration, as did millions worldwide throughout the 1980′s. When Ross Perot entered politics, he caught everyone’s attention by driving the national debate for a balanced budget and by opposing NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) with his famous “giant sucking sound” quote. Perot redirected enough conservative or moderate votes from Bush Forty One to put Clinton in the White House.

Bill Clinton really motivated me politically. When Clinton said that he did not inhale the marijuana he tried in college, it was obvious that he was a liar, a scrupulous manipulator and I was motivated against him immediately. The Adolescent President, Bubba, dragged us all into the abyss of political and moral relativism where anything goes, as Nixon had done decades earlier. It was more liberalism without morality.

Rather than recount the long series of terrorist attacks we suffered and mostly ignored, from Carter’s administration until 9/11, let it suffice to say that I was already paying attention to politics before 9/11 thanks to Bubba. Now we are aware that we are in the fight of our lives. We have let the radical ideology of our enemies morph into a giant violent network with global reach and influence and we even, indirectly, enabled it and still do.

Our strategic goal must be the triumph of human freedom over tyranny in Muslim countries, for our own safety too. It is in our interest, is moral and it will take a generation or two for freedom to achieve victory over this brand of fascism. For non-radicals like most of us, it is bigger than the cost of oil, revenge or even justice. Because of weapons technology, it is about survival for which radicals care not. Tactics, tools and diplomacy will need to adapt and be re-configured for each adverse circumstance until the right combination is found to achieve long term victory.

The hour is late. Since 1979 our enemies have been at war with us and teaching their children to be martyrs, en masse. Most of us were asleep at the wheel until September 11, 2001 and too many of us seem to have gone back to sleep again. Religious, ideological hatred and technology are growing against us, so America must fight for freedom for others once again. We can not maintain our freedom alone, we need allies.

While we are divided about the best ways to achieve the strategic goal of freedom over tyranny, it is clear to most of us that we must use all of our resources and tools, for generations. Clarity resulted from 9/11 for most baby boomers and that means war, and diplomacy.

Lightning fast global communications show our enemies a vicious political war internally which makes winning the wars of bullets and bones infinitely more difficult. Our political division emboldens our enemies to kill more Americans. They believe we will quit and go home, again. They have Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia as their proof and recruiting tools. Last but not least, our division demoralizes our own volunteer military forces.

A massive show of political unity at home is required because votes affect troop morale on both sides!

Purveyors of propaganda surround us. Seek and you shall find what our troops’ majority wishes are, but you must work at it. It is not easy if you prefer polling data of our military over logic. Polling questions will improve so answers cannot be so easily spun into interpretations not intended by the military volunteers questioned, if I have my way. When you are sure you know what our troops’ majority political wishes are, support them with your votes because only votes count. Our words of support, without our votes being aligned with our troops’ majority political wishes, mean nothing.

Our troops and our enemies have connected the dots between votes and troop morale, on both sides, can you?

Vote as if your life depended on it, because it very well might. This is how we found clarity, crafted from common sense; the hard way!

Average Joe Boomer
http://www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/clarity-crafted-from-common-sense-74364.html

Arundhati Roy: Mumbai Was not India’s 9/11

Arundhati Roy: Mumbai was not India’s 9/11

http://www.guardian .co.uk/world/ 2008/dec/ 12/mumbai- arundhati- roy

The Mumbai attacks have been dubbed ‘India’s 9/11′, and there are calls for a 9/11-style response, including an attack on Pakistan. Instead, the country must fight terrorism with justice, or face civil war.

We’ve forfeited the rights to our own tragedies. As the carnage in Mumbai raged on, day after horrible day, our 24-hour news channels informed us that we were watching "India’s 9/11". Like actors in a Bollywood rip-off of an old Hollywood film, we’re expected to play our parts and say our lines, even though we know it’s all been said and done before.

As tension in the region builds, US Senator John McCain has warned Pakistan that if it didn’t act fast to arrest the "Bad Guys" he had personal information that India would launch air strikes on "terrorist camps" in Pakistan and that Washington could do nothing because Mumbai was India’s 9/11.

But November isn’t September, 2008 isn’t 2001, Pakistan isn’t Afghanistan and India isn’t America. So perhaps we should reclaim our tragedy and pick through the debris with our own brains and our own broken hearts so that we can arrive at our own conclusions.

It’s odd how in the last week of November thousands of people in Kashmir supervised by thousands of Indian troops lined up to cast their vote, while the richest quarters of India’s richest city ended up looking like war-torn Kupwara – one of Kashmir’s most ravaged districts.

The Mumbai attacks are only the most recent of a spate of terrorist attacks on Indian towns and cities this year. Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Delhi, Guwahati, Jaipur and Malegaon have all seen serial bomb blasts in which hundreds of ordinary people have been killed and wounded. If the police are right about the people they have arrested as suspects, both Hindu and Muslim, all Indian nationals, it obviously indicates that something’s going very badly wrong in this country.

If you were watching television you may not have heard that ordinary people too died in Mumbai. They were mowed down in a busy railway station and a public hospital. The terrorists did not distinguish between poor and rich. They killed both with equal cold-bloodedness. The Indian media, however, was transfixed by the rising tide of horror that breached the glittering barricades of India Shining and spread its stench in the marbled lobbies and crystal ballrooms of two incredibly luxurious hotels and a small Jewish centre.

We’re told one of these hotels is an icon of the city of Mumbai. That’s absolutely true. It’s an icon of the easy, obscene injustice that ordinary Indians endure every day. On a day when the newspapers were full of moving obituaries by beautiful people about the hotel rooms they had stayed in, the gourmet restaurants they loved (ironically one was called Kandahar), and the staff who served them, a small box on the top left-hand corner in the inner pages of a national newspaper (sponsored by a pizza company I think) said "Hungry, kya?" (Hungry eh?). It then, with the best of intentions I’m sure, informed its readers that on the international hunger index, India ranked below Sudan and Somalia. But of course this isn’t that war. That one’s still being fought in the Dalit bastis of our villages, on the banks of the Narmada and the Koel Karo rivers; in the rubber estate in Chengara; in the villages of Nandigram, Singur, Chattisgarh, Jharkhand, Orissa, Lalgarh in West Bengal and the slums and shantytowns of our gigantic cities.

That war isn’t on TV. Yet. So maybe, like everyone else, we should deal with the one that is.

There is a fierce, unforgiving fault-line that runs through the contemporary discourse on terrorism. On one side (let’s call it Side A) are those who see terrorism, especially "Islamist" terrorism, as a hateful, insane scourge that spins on its own axis, in its own orbit and has nothing to do with the world around it, nothing to do with history, geography or economics. Therefore, Side A says, to try and place it in a political context, or even try to understand it, amounts to justifying it and is a crime in itself.

Side B believes that though nothing can ever excuse or justify terrorism, it exists in a particular time, place and political context, and to refuse to see that will only aggravate the problem and put more and more people in harm’s way. Which is a crime in itself.

The sayings of Hafiz Saeed, who founded the Lashkar-e-Taiba (Army of the Pure) in 1990 and who belongs to the hardline Salafi tradition of Islam, certainly bolsters the case of Side A. Hafiz Saeed approves of suicide bombing, hates Jews, Shias and Democracy and believes that jihad should be waged until Islam, his Islam, rules the world. Among the things he said are: "There cannot be any peace while India remains intact. Cut them, cut them so much that they kneel before you and ask for mercy."

And: "India has shown us this path. We would like to give India a tit-for-tat response and reciprocate in the same way by killing the Hindus, just like it is killing the Muslims in Kashmir."

But where would Side A accommodate the sayings of Babu Bajrangi of Ahmedabad, India, who sees himself as a democrat, not a terrorist? He was one of the major lynchpins of the 2002 Gujarat genocide and has said (on camera): "We didn’t spare a single Muslim shop, we set everything on fire … we hacked, burned, set on fire … we believe in setting them on fire because these bastards don’t want to be cremated, they’re afraid of it … I have just one last wish … let me be sentenced to death … I don’t care if I’m hanged … just give me two days before my hanging and I will go and have a field day in Juhapura where seven or eight lakhs [seven or eight hundred thousand] of these people stay … I will finish them off … let a few more of them die … at least 25,000 to 50,000 should die."

And where, in Side A’s scheme of things, would we place the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh bible, We, or, Our Nationhood Defined by MS Golwalkar, who became head of the RSS in 1944. It says: "Ever since that evil day, when Moslems first landed in Hindustan, right up to the present moment, the Hindu Nation has been gallantly fighting on to take on these despoilers. The Race Spirit has been awakening."

Or: "To keep up the purity of its race and culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic races – the Jews. Race pride at its highest has been manifested here … a good lesson for us in Hindustan to learn and profit by."

(Of course Muslims are not the only people in the gun sights of the Hindu right. Dalits have been consistently targeted. Recently in Kandhamal in Orissa, Christians were the target of two and a half months of violence which left more than 40 dead. Forty thousand people have been driven from their homes, half of who now live in refugee camps.)

All these years Hafiz Saeed has lived the life of a respectable man in Lahore as the head of the Jamaat-ud Daawa, which many believe is a front organization for the Lashkar-e-Taiba. He continues to recruit young boys for his own bigoted jehad with his twisted, fiery sermons. On December 11 the UN imposed sanctions on the Jammat-ud-Daawa. The Pakistani government succumbed to international pressure and put Hafiz Saeed under house arrest. Babu Bajrangi, however, is out on bail and lives the life of a respectable man in Gujarat. A couple of years after the genocide he left the VHP to join the Shiv Sena. Narendra Modi, Bajrangi’s former mentor, is still the chief minister of Gujarat. So the man who presided over the Gujarat genocide was re-elected twice, and is deeply respected by India’s biggest corporate houses, Reliance and Tata.

Suhel Seth, a TV impresario and corporate spokesperson, recently said: "Modi is God." The policemen who supervised and sometimes even assisted the rampaging Hindu mobs in Gujarat have been rewarded and promoted. The RSS has 45,000 branches, its own range of charities and 7 million volunteers preaching its doctrine of hate across India. They include Narendra Modi, but also former prime minister AB Vajpayee, current leader of the opposition LK Advani, and a host of other senior politicians, bureaucrats and police and intelligence officers.

If that’s not enough to complicate our picture of secular democracy, we should place on record that there are plenty of Muslim organisations within India preaching their own narrow bigotry.

So, on balance, if I had to choose between Side A and Side B, I’d pick Side B. We need context. Always.

In this nuclear subcontinent that context is partition. The Radcliffe Line, which separated India and Pakistan and tore through states, districts, villages, fields, communities, water systems, homes and families, was drawn virtually overnight. It was Britain’s final, parting kick to us. Partition triggered the massacre of more than a million people and the largest migration of a human population in contemporary history. Eight million people, Hindus fleeing the new Pakistan, Muslims fleeing the new kind of India left their homes with nothing but the clothes on their backs.

Each of those people carries and passes down a story of unimaginable pain, hate, horror but yearning too. That wound, those torn but still unsevered muscles, that blood and those splintered bones still lock us together in a close embrace of hatred, terrifying familiarity but also love. It has left Kashmir trapped in a nightmare from which it can’t seem to emerge, a nightmare that has claimed more than 60,000 lives. Pakistan, the Land of the Pure, became an Islamic Republic, and then, very quickly a corrupt, violent military state, openly intolerant of other faiths. India on the other hand declared herself an inclusive, secular democracy. It was a magnificent undertaking, but Babu Bajrangi’s predecessors had been hard at work since the 1920s, dripping poison into India’s bloodstream, undermining that idea of India even before it was born.

By 1990 they were ready to make a bid for power. In 1992 Hindu mobs exhorted by LK Advani stormed the Babri Masjid and demolished it. By 1998 the BJP was in power at the centre. The US war on terror put the wind in their sails. It allowed them to do exactly as they pleased, even to commit genocide and then present their fascism as a legitimate form of chaotic democracy. This happened at a time when India had opened its huge market to international finance and it was in the interests of international corporations and the media houses they owned to project it as a country that could do no wrong. That gave Hindu nationalists all the impetus and the impunity they needed.

This, then, is the larger historical context of terrorism in the subcontinent and of the Mumbai attacks. It shouldn’t surprise us that Hafiz Saeed of the Lashkar-e-Taiba is from Shimla (India) and LK Advani of the Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh is from Sindh (Pakistan).

In much the same way as it did after the 2001 parliament attack, the 2002 burning of the Sabarmati Express and the 2007 bombing of the Samjhauta Express, the government of India announced that it has "incontrovertible" evidence that the Lashkar-e-Taiba backed by Pakistan’s ISI was behind the Mumbai strikes. The Lashkar has denied involvement, but remains the prime accused. According to the police and intelligence agencies the Lashkar operates in India through an organisation called the Indian Mujahideen. Two Indian nationals, Sheikh Mukhtar Ahmed, a Special Police Officer working for the Jammu and Kashmir police, and Tausif Rehman, a resident of Kolkata in West Bengal, have been arrested in connection with the Mumbai attacks.

So already the neat accusation against Pakistan is getting a little messy. Almost always, when these stories unspool, they reveal a complicated global network of foot soldiers, trainers, recruiters, middlemen and undercover intelligence and counter-intelligenc e operatives working not just on both sides of the India-Pakistan border, but in several countries simultaneously. In today’s world, trying to pin down the provenance of a terrorist strike and isolate it within the borders of a single nation state is very much like trying to pin down the provenance of corporate money. It’s almost impossible.

In circumstances like these, air strikes to "take out" terrorist camps may take out the camps, but certainly will not "take out" the terrorists. Neither will war. (Also, in our bid for the moral high ground, let’s try not to forget that the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, the LTTE of neighbouring Sri Lanka, one of the world’s most deadly terrorist groups, were trained by the Indian army.)

Thanks largely to the part it was forced to play as America’s ally first in its war in support of the Afghan Islamists and then in its war against them, Pakistan, whose territory is reeling under these contradictions, is careening towards civil war. As recruiting agents for America’s jihad against the Soviet Union, it was the job of the Pakistan army and the ISI to nurture and channel funds to Islamic fundamentalist organizations. Having wired up these Frankensteins and released them into the world, the US expected it could rein them in like pet mastiffs whenever it wanted to.

Certainly it did not expect them to come calling in heart of the Homeland on September 11. So once again, Afghanistan had to be violently remade. Now the debris of a re-ravaged Afghanistan has washed up on Pakistan’s borders. Nobody, least of all the Pakistan government, denies that it is presiding over a country that is threatening to implode. The terrorist training camps, the fire-breathing mullahs and the maniacs who believe that Islam will, or should, rule the world is mostly the detritus of two Afghan wars. Their ire rains down on the Pakistan government and Pakistani civilians as much, if not more than it does on India.

If at this point India decides to go to war perhaps the descent of the whole region into chaos will be complete. The debris of a bankrupt, destroyed Pakistan will wash up on India’s shores, endangering us as never before. If Pakistan collapses, we can look forward to having millions of "non-state actors" with an arsenal of nuclear weapons at their disposal as neighbours. It’s hard to understand why those who steer India’s ship are so keen to replicate Pakistan’s mistakes and call damnation upon this country by inviting the United States to further meddle clumsily and dangerously in our extremely complicated affairs. A superpower never has allies. It only has agents.

On the plus side, the advantage of going to war is that it’s the best way for India to avoid facing up to the serious trouble building on our home front. The Mumbai attacks were broadcast live (and exclusive!) on all or most of our 67 24-hour news channels and god knows how many international ones. TV anchors in their studios and journalists at "ground zero" kept up an endless stream of excited commentary. Over three days and three nights we watched in disbelief as a small group of very young men armed with guns and gadgets exposed the powerlessness of the police, the elite National Security Guard and the marine commandos of this supposedly mighty, nuclear-powered nation.

While they did this they indiscriminately massacred unarmed people, in railway stations, hospitals and luxury hotels, unmindful of their class, caste, religion or nationality. (Part of the helplessness of the security forces had to do with having to worry about hostages. In other situations, in Kashmir for example, their tactics are not so sensitive. Whole buildings are blown up. Human shields are used. The U.S and Israeli armies don’t hesitate to send cruise missiles into buildings and drop daisy cutters on wedding parties in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan. ) But this was different. And it was on TV.

The boy-terrorists’ nonchalant willingness to kill – and be killed – mesmerised their international audience. They delivered something different from the usual diet of suicide bombings and missile attacks that people have grown inured to on the news. Here was something new. Die Hard 25. The gruesome performance went on and on. TV ratings soared. Ask any television magnate or corporate advertiser who measures broadcast time in seconds, not minutes, what that’s worth.

Eventually the killers died and died hard, all but one. (Perhaps, in the chaos, some escaped. We may never know.) Throughout the standoff the terrorists made no demands and expressed no desire to negotiate. Their purpose was to kill people and inflict as much damage as they could before they were killed themselves. They left us completely bewildered. When we say "nothing can justify terrorism", what most of us mean is that nothing can justify the taking of human life. We say this because we respect life, because we think it’s precious. So what are we to make of those who care nothing for life, not even their own? The truth is that we have no idea what to make of them, because we can sense that even before they’ve died, they’ve journeyed to another world where we cannot reach them.

One TV channel (India TV) broadcast a phone conversation with one of the attackers, who called himself Imran Babar. I cannot vouch for the veracity of the conversation, but the things he talked about were the things contained in the "terror emails" that were sent out before several other bomb attacks in India. Things we don’t want to talk about any more: the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992, the genocidal slaughter of Muslims in Gujarat in 2002, the brutal repression in Kashmir. "You’re surrounded," the anchor told him. "You are definitely going to die. Why don’t you surrender?"

"We die every day," he replied in a strange, mechanical way. "It’s better to live one day as a lion and then die this way." He didn’t seem to want to change the world. He just seemed to want to take it down with him.

If the men were indeed members of the Lashkar-e-Taiba, why didn’t it matter to them that a large number of their victims were Muslim, or that their action was likely to result in a severe backlash against the Muslim community in India whose rights they claim to be fighting for? Terrorism is a heartless ideology, and like most ideologies that have their eye on the Big Picture, individuals don’t figure in their calculations except as collateral damage. It has always been a part of and often even the aim of terrorist strategy to exacerbate a bad situation in order to expose hidden faultlines. The blood of "martyrs" irrigates terrorism. Hindu terrorists need dead Hindus, Communist terrorists need dead proletarians, Islamist terrorists need dead Muslims. The dead become the demonstration, the proof of victimhood, which is central to the project. A single act of terrorism is not in itself meant to achieve military victory; at best it is meant to be a catalyst that triggers something else, something much larger than itself, a tectonic shift, a realignment. The act itself is theatre, spectacle and symbolism, and today, the stage on which it pirouettes and performs its acts of bestiality is Live TV. Even as the attack was being condemned by TV anchors, the effectiveness of the terror strikes were being magnified a thousandfold by TV broadcasts.

Through the endless hours of analysis and the endless op-ed essays, in India at least there has been very little mention of the elephants in the room: Kashmir, Gujarat and the demolition of the Babri Masjid. Instead we had retired diplomats and strategic experts debate the pros and cons of a war against Pakistan. We had the rich threatening not to pay their taxes unless their security was guaranteed (is it alright for the poor to remain unprotected? ). We had people suggest that the government step down and each state in India be handed over to a separate corporation. We had the death of former prime minster VP Singh, the hero of Dalits and lower castes and villain of Upper caste Hindus pass without a mention.

We had Suketu Mehta, author of Maximum City and co-writer of the Bollywood film Mission Kashmir, give us his version of George Bush’s famous "Why they hate us" speech. His analysis of why religious bigots, both Hindu and Muslim hate Mumbai: "Perhaps because Mumbai stands for lucre, profane dreams and an indiscriminate openness." His prescription: "The best answer to the terrorists is to dream bigger, make even more money, and visit Mumbai more than ever." Didn’t George Bush ask Americans to go out and shop after 9/11? Ah yes. 9/11, the day we can’t seem to get away from.

Though one chapter of horror in Mumbai has ended, another might have just begun. Day after day, a powerful, vociferous section of the Indian elite, goaded by marauding TV anchors who make Fox News look almost radical and leftwing, have taken to mindlessly attacking politicians, all politicians, glorifying the police and the army and virtually asking for a police state. It isn’t surprising that those who have grown plump on the pickings of democracy (such as it is) should now be calling for a police state. The era of "pickings" is long gone. We’re now in the era of Grabbing by Force, and democracy has a terrible habit of getting in the way.

Dangerous, stupid television flashcards like the Police are Good Politicians are Bad/Chief Executives are Good Chief Ministers are Bad/Army is Good Government is Bad/ India is Good Pakistan is Bad are being bandied about by TV channels that have already whipped their viewers into a state of almost uncontrollable hysteria.

Tragically, this regression into intellectual infancy comes at a time when people in India were beginning to see that in the business of terrorism, victims and perpetrators sometimes exchange roles. It’s an understanding that the people of Kashmir, given their dreadful experiences of the last 20 years, have honed to an exquisite art. On the mainland we’re still learning. (If Kashmir won’t willingly integrate into India, it’s beginning to look as though India will integrate/disintegr ate into Kashmir.)

It was after the 2001 parliament attack that the first serious questions began to be raised. A campaign by a group of lawyers and activists exposed how innocent people had been framed by the police and the press, how evidence was fabricated, how witnesses lied, how due process had been criminally violated at every stage of the investigation. Eventually the courts acquitted two out of the four accused, including SAR Geelani, the man whom the police claimed was the mastermind of the operation. A third, Showkat Guru, was acquitted of all the charges brought against him but was then convicted for a fresh, comparatively minor offence. The supreme court upheld the death sentence of another of the accused, Mohammad Afzal. In its judgment the court acknowledged there was no proof that Mohammed Afzal belonged to any terrorist group, but went on to say, quite shockingly, "The collective conscience of the society will only be satisfied if capital punishment is awarded to the offender." Even today we don’t really know who the terrorists that attacked the Indian parliament were and who they worked for.

More recently, on September 19 this year, we had the controversial "encounter" at Batla House in Jamia Nagar, Delhi, where the Special Cell of the Delhi police gunned down two Muslim students in their rented flat under seriously questionable circumstances, claiming that they were responsible for serial bombings in Delhi, Jaipur and Ahmedabad in 2008. An assistant commissioner of Police, Mohan Chand Sharma, who played a key role in the parliament attack investigation, lost his life as well. He was one of India’s many "encounter specialists" known and rewarded for having summarily executed several "terrorists" . There was an outcry against the Special Cell from a spectrum of people, ranging from eyewitnesses in the local community to senior Congress Party leaders, students, journalists, lawyers, academics and activists all of whom demanded a judicial inquiry into the incident. In response, the BJP and LK Advani lauded Mohan Chand Sharma as a "Braveheart" and launched a concerted campaign in which they targeted those who had dared to question the integrity of the police, saying it was "suicidal" and calling them "anti-national" . Of course there has been no inquiry.

Only days after the Batla House event, another story about "terrorists" surfaced in the news. In a report submitted to a sessions court, the CBI said that a team from Delhi’s Special Cell (the same team that led the Batla House encounter, including Mohan Chand Sharma) had abducted two innocent men, Irshad Ali and Moarif Qamar, in December 2005, planted 2kg of RDX and two pistols on them and then arrested them as "terrorists" who belonged to Al Badr (which operates out of Kashmir). Ali and Qamar who have spent years in jail, are only two examples out of hundreds of Muslims who have been similarly jailed, tortured and even killed on false charges.

This pattern changed in October 2008 when Maharashtra’ s Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) that was investigating the September 2008 Malegaon blasts arrested a Hindu preacher Sadhvi Pragya, a self-styled God man Swami Dayanand Pande and Lt Col Purohit, a serving officer of the Indian Army. All the arrested belong to Hindu Nationalist organizations including a Hindu Supremacist group called Abhinav Bharat. The Shiv Sena, the BJP and the RSS condemned the Maharashtra ATS, and vilified its chief, Hemant Karkare, claiming he was part of a political conspiracy and declaring that "Hindus could not be terrorists". LK Advani changed his mind about his policy on the police and made rabble rousing speeches to huge gatherings in which he denounced the ATS for daring to cast aspersions on holy men and women.

On the November 25 newspapers reported that the ATS was investigating the high profile VHP Chief Pravin Togadia’s possible role in the Malegaon blasts. The next day, in an extraordinary twist of fate, Hemant Karkare was killed in the Mumbai Attacks. The chances are that the new chief whoever he is, will find it hard to withstand the political pressure that is bound to be brought on him over the Malegaon investigation.

While the Sangh Parivar does not seem to have come to a final decision over whether or not it is anti-national and suicidal to question the police, Arnab Goswami, anchorperson of Times Now television, has stepped up to the plate. He has taken to naming, demonising and openly heckling people who have dared to question the integrity of the police and armed forces. My name and the name of the well-known lawyer Prashant Bhushan have come up several times. At one point, while interviewing a former police officer, Arnab Goswami turned to camera: "Arundhati Roy and Prashant Bhushan," he said, "I hope you are watching this. We think you are disgusting." For a TV anchor to do this in an atmosphere as charged and as frenzied as the one that prevails today, amounts to incitement as well as threat, and would probably in different circumstances have cost a journalist his or her job.

So according to a man aspiring to be the next prime minister of India, and another who is the public face of a mainstream TV channel, citizens have no right to raise questions about the police. This in a country with a shadowy history of suspicious terror attacks, murky investigations, and fake "encounters" . This in a country that boasts of the highest number of custodial deaths in the world and yet refuses to ratify the International Covenant on Torture. A country where the ones who make it to torture chambers are the lucky ones because at least they’ve escaped being "encountered" by our Encounter Specialists. A country where the line between the Underworld and the Encounter Specialists virtually does not exist.

How should those of us whose hearts have been sickened by the knowledge of all of this view the Mumbai attacks, and what are we to do about them? There are those who point out that US strategy has been successful inasmuch as the United States has not suffered a major attack on its home ground since 9/11. However, some would say that what America is suffering now is far worse. If the idea behind the 9/11 terror attacks was to goad America into showing its true colors, what greater success could the terrorists have asked for? The US army is bogged down in two unwinnable wars, which have made the United States the most hated country in the world. Those wars have contributed greatly to the unraveling of the American economy and who knows, perhaps eventually the American empire. (Could it be that battered, bombed Afghanistan, the graveyard of the Soviet Union, will be the undoing of this one too?) Hundreds of thousands people including thousands of American soldiers have lost their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan. The frequency of terrorist strikes on U.S allies/agents (including India) and U.S interests in the rest of the world has increased dramatically since 9/11. George Bush, the man who led the US response to 9/11 is a despised figure not just internationally, but also by his own people. Who can possibly claim that the United States is winning the war on terror?

Homeland Security has cost the US government billions of dollars. Few countries, certainly not India, can afford that sort of price tag. But even if we could, the fact is that this vast homeland of ours cannot be secured or policed in the way the United States has been. It’s not that kind of homeland. We have a hostile nuclear weapons state that is slowly spinning out of control as a neighbour, we have a military occupation in Kashmir and a shamefully persecuted, impoverished minority of more than 150 million Muslims who are being targeted as a community and pushed to the wall, whose young see no justice on the horizon, and who, were they to totally lose hope and radicalise, end up as a threat not just to India, but to the whole world. If ten men can hold off the NSG commandos, and the police for three days, and if it takes half a million soldiers to hold down the Kashmir valley, do the math. What kind of Homeland Security can secure India?

Nor for that matter will any other quick fix. Anti-terrorism laws are not meant for terrorists; they’re for people that governments don’t like. That’s why they have a conviction rate of less than 2%. They’re just a means of putting inconvenient people away without bail for a long time and eventually letting them go. Terrorists like those who attacked Mumbai are hardly likely to be deterred by the prospect of being refused bail or being sentenced to death. It’s what they want.

What we’re experiencing now is blowback, the cumulative result of decades of quick fixes and dirty deeds. The carpet’s squelching under our feet.

The only way to contain (it would be naïve to say end) terrorism is to look at the monster in the mirror. We’re standing at a fork in the road. One sign says Justice, the other Civil War. There’s no third sign and there’s no going back. Choose.

MUHAMMAD SHAKEER KS
http://www.articlesbase.com/news-and-society-articles/arundhati-roy-mumbai-was-not-indias-911-711720.html

The "inclusive" Revolution

The term “inclusive” has now acquired wide currency in our country. It is used to refer to the need for the incorporation of many backward ethnic groups into the mainstream of the country. But, I have used it in this article to refer to the need for something other than “the inclusion of backward ethnic groups”. More specifically, my indirect reference is to the need for the incorporation of many other revolutions in addition to the two revolutions-a political revolution and an economic revolution- into the purview of our leaders’ understanding of a set of revolutions that is a sine qua non for turning the old Nepal into a New Nepal. Though the need of our time is to struggle relentlessly to bring about a set of revolutions in many other realms besides the politics and the economics, the set of revolutions that our leaders talk about consists of the two above-mentioned revolutions only. Therefore, the kind of the revolution they advocate is not inclusive. Nowadays, most of us frequently say that Nepali society should be inclusive; there should be inclusive democracy. There is nothing to be worried about it. However, confining ourselves to the inclusive democracy by turning a blind eye to the need for what I call “inclusive” revolution is definitely something to be worried about. Establishing a New Nepal is impossible if we gloss over the inclusive revolution. It is therefore important that we advocate both the inclusive democracy and the inclusive revolution.

A need arises for a revolution in a certain area of a society when people do not benefit from the system under which it functions in many important ways. The system under which the political realm of Nepali society worked before Nepal was declared as a “Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal” was abhorred by a vast majority of people because it did not benefit them in many important ways for many reasons-both known and yet to be known. The “demonstrated” (probably not necessarily inevitable) lack of the link of this system with their overall welfare accounts for their active participation in the April 2006 People’s Uprising that culminated in the end of the kingdom that had been in existence for about 250 years in different forms. In our country, there are still many other areas beyond the two realms- politics and economics- that a majority of people are not benefiting from. It is obvious from this that there is a need for many revolutions in many areas of our society. Materializing our common goal of establishing a New Nepal requires our leaders to broaden the parochial purview of their understanding of the complete set of revolutions needed at the present stage of the history of our country.

Given the critical situation that our country now finds itself in, a detailed delineation of a complete set of revolutions in all of the important areas of Nepali society(e.g. education, health, communication, bureaucracy etc) that are a sine qua non for transforming the present Nepal into a New Nepal is a very important responsibility of intellectuals in our country. I think it is time for “real” intellectuals specialized in their respective fields of learning to analyze the various “ailing” areas of our society in order to conceptualize what I call “a complete set of revolutions” required to ensure the transformation of Nepal into a variously prosperous country. The present critical situation of Nepal is an opportunity to test themselves practically as a genuine intellectual. To them, this opportunity is very important because there are some people who doubt their identity as a real scholar. The government is responsible for creating a condition in which real scholars collaborate on the conceptualization of the complete set of revolutions in question.

In this article, I will endeavour to set forth a general outline of the revolution needed in one of the areas of the broad field of education-higher education. Higher education is one of the “ailing” areas that need to be rationalized in many important ways. One of the problems facing the sector of higher education in Nepal is the tendency for the intellectuals themselves- who are very important aspects of higher education-to act irresponsibly for their personal aggrandizement. I prefer to call it “intellectual corruption”. More specifically, I define intellectual corruption as a set of irresponsible behaviours shown by intellectuals as well as those who wield the official power to influence the educational sector, which make it impossible for what may be called “intellectual progress” to take place. For an analytical purpose, I define “intellectual progress” as a condition in which the intellectual community goes beyond the acquisition of knowledge already produced to produce new knowledge that would be a contribution to the existing cumulative whole of knowledge.

Some of the aspects of the intellectual corruption appertain to the way university teachers are appointed, the way they teach, and the way carry out their duty other than teaching.

Let me first discuss the intellectual corruption related to the way universities teachers are appointed. If we are to think without going beyond the fact that university teachers in Nepal are appointed through a competition, we may think that there is nothing wrong with the process involved in their appointment. To understand that there is something wrong with that process, we must go beyond this rather misleading fact, and take into account the question of what lies behind this competition. The kind of competition through which they are appointed is not the competition proper. This may perhaps be rightly described as “the so-called competition” because it is not intended to select the best of all the applicants aspiring to an academic career; it is no more than a seemingly appropriate tool to make an explicitly inappropriate decision to bring arbitrarily into the faculty those who use special influence to get employed as a university teacher without taking into account a set of comprehensive scientific criteria for assessing the suitability of an individual as an ideal university teacher. Nepotism, favouritism, and cronyism are the characteristic but hidden features of its selection process.

The other aspect of intellectual corruption relates to the way university teachers carry out their responsibility as a university teacher. A university teacher has a responsibility not only to teach knowledge already produced but also to produce new knowledge. Those university teachers who are not capable of producing new knowledge have no a moral right to occupy the intellectually most challenging position of a university teacher. Most university teachers in Nepal have not proved to the intellectually conscious people that they have contributed to the knowledge base of the academic discipline they belong to. Generally, it is true to say that they do not get involved in the process involved in the production of genuine future scholars. They neither think themselves nor cause the students to think. Here I have not used the term “think” in its widest sense in which everyone thinks. I have used it in the strictest sense in which logicians use it. According to them, thinking consists in pondering over a given set of facts so as to elicit their connexions.

Even when we judge them against another criterion, i.e. quality of teaching, most of them are blameworthy. Most of them do no more than teach a very insignificant portion of the course they are required to teach. By the “inadequate teaching”, I mean the kind of teaching in which they teach less than is practically possible within the period of time fixed in the course of study.

They explain their inadequate teaching by saying that it is the responsibility of an ideal student to learn independently what is left after they finish teaching. Their argument for the inadequacy in their teaching is built on a logic ostensibly created, which implicitly implies that it is not necessary for them to teach in a way that is “practically adequate”. “The deliberate inadequacy” in their teaching essentially results from two things-the arbitrary selection of university teachers that results in many disqualified people being employed as a university teacher and perception of a teaching profession as something like business guided by profit. The unfair selection of university teachers makes it impossible for most highly intellectually qualified people to pursue an academic career. It is not the disqualified teachers employed through arbitrary selection but the highly qualified teachers abstracted from a large pool of prospective university teachers who are capable of teaching the course in a way that is as complete as practically possible. The perception of a teaching profession as something like business guided by profit makes most of the university teachers only pay heed to what they can get in return in economic terms from their teaching, as opposed to what the students can get in intellectual terms from their teaching. Given the paltry amount of time they spend on their teaching profession, we feel as if they were a full-time employer in another place and a part-time employer at a university.

The above account gives an incomprehensive and broad panorama of the intellectual corruption that exists in the sector of higher education in Nepal. That my only intention here is to stir up an academic debate on what I call “the inclusive revolution” and its specifics accounts for the incomprehensive and broad nature of this article. There is a strong need for the end of the intellectual corruption, which is necessary but not sufficient condition for bringing about a revolution in the field of higher education. Making the higher education free from the intellectual corruption is a very important part of the broad attempt to bring about the broad educational revolution needed to ensure the educational progress, which is the engine of social progress because it is the head of the whole educational sector, so to speak.

Ajit Rai
http://www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/the-quotinclusivequot-revolution-692467.html

Total Proof of the New World Order

YES WE CAN! REAL HOPE FOR AMERICA!
http://campaignforliberty.com

Duration : 0:10:0

Read more…