The Workshop sponsored by RAND? Or an anti-Hindu workshop?

[Guest guest]

"Mohan Gupta" <mgupta (AT) rogers (DOT) com><info (AT) a4india (DOT) com>The

Workshop sponsored by RAND? Or an anti-Hindu workshop?Thu, 18 Aug 2005

00:07:21 -0400

The Workshop sponsored by RAND? Or an anti-Hindu workshop by Rand?

Rand is a workshop that brings together intelligence analysts and experts on

religion with the goal of providing background and a frame of reference for

assessing religious motivations in international politics.

Recently Rand has published a report about Hindu religion, Hindu

organizations and Al-Qaeda. From the 84 page report available in pdf format

(only 0.2 mb) http://www.rand.org/pubs/conf_proceedings/2005/RAND_CF211.pdf,

It is clear that the philosopher providing the theology for identifying anew

group called New Religious Movements is Mark Juergensmeyer who has floated a

concept of 'cosmic war' which he claims to be 'a conceptual framework for

examining the larger-than-life confrontations that religious extremists are

engaged in today. This concept refers to the metaphysical battle between the

forces of Good and Evil that enlivens religious imagination and compels violent

action. The vast majority of NRMs are not violent, and so our concern is with

indicators, signposts that might indicate a turn toward violence by NRM.

"Cosmic war has roots in the theology of most religions...In Hinduism and

Buddhism, it is the perennial struggle to exit the Wheel of Existences

with its continuous cycle of rebirths in order to return to Brahman or achieve

Nirvana'. (p.13)The pundits add: (p. 16) "Sometimes referred to as cults, NRMs

(New Religious Movements) have two defining characteristics -- a high degree of

tension between the group and its surrounding society and a high degree of

control exercised by leadership over their members...NRMs can be found in

Hinduism (the Rashtriya Swyam Sevak Sangh, or RSS), Israel (Gush Emunim),

Christianity (the US-based Identity Movement) and Islam, including Al

Qaeda..."1. The report does not attribute to any original resource.

2. The only sources which might remotely be connected to India are by a UC Santa Barbara professor.

The attack of the report is principally on: RSS, Hindu, India in that order.

Reference to non-entities like Gush Emunim or Identity Movement is only for

'secular' reasons. The most devastating recommendation is: Christist-Islamist

bhai-bhai (brothers). Against whom community and religion and organization

Christist-Islamist are bhai-bhai (brothers)? RAND is a consultancy outfit out

to make money. They will write what the client wants them to write. I have seen

how the international consultancy firms behave at very close quarters for over

18 years. The key is to figure out who asked for the report. (That CIAate of Intelligence paid for it is only part of the story).

http://www.rand.org/publications/CF/CF211/index.htmlWho are these religious

experts? The workshop is sponsored by the Intelligence Policy Center of

RANDComments of some people on the Rand report:

"Radha Rajan" <radharajan7 >

Friends I did a quick reading of the report. The body of the report devotes just

one paragraph to the RSS. It states explicitly that the RSS is a violent

organization, uses terrorist methods against adversaries and insinuates that it

killed Gandhi.Now there is no point in saying the RSS is this or it is not this.

The question is 'why did the rand corporation mention the RSS when the report

itself does not provide the context for it? If it really wanted NRM should it

not have looked at Khalistanis and the Maoists? yes, Maoists. While the rest of

the report is input for the US government for thecurrent day, the paragraph on

the RSS is for the future. No point in engaging the rand corporation in a

dialogue. We must abuse them and then drop the issue. The battlefield is

elsewhere. I take the reference to the RSS as

a spitty finger to test the wind. We have to do what we have to do.

RAND reports are generally written at the request of Senators or powerful

Congresspersons. I know this because I was in Delhi recently to negotiate with

the India First Foundation about a book. I was asked to speak to a select

audience on the book and speak about the line that I have taken in the

introduction to the book.

One remark that I made had them deeply silent. I said Islam and Christianity

have historically fought murderous wars against each other and because they

both know that they can’t end each other, they have also declared periodic

cease fire.

Hindu nationalism poses the biggest challenge to them both conceptually and as a

real physical threat, and therefore both forces will turn as one against any

individual, group or force which they think represents Hindu nationalism which

must position itself against not only Islam and white Christianity but also

western notions of pluralism and secularism.

Coalition against genocide - Marxist, Muslim and Christian coalition is one such

alliance. Magsay, Nobel and sundry human rights awards are intended to extend

moral and financial support for such anti-Hindu forces like Musharraf's moral

support for the freedom fighters of Kashmir.

The Magsay award has been instituted by the Rockefeller brothers foundation and

a very large part of the money for the award is donated by the ford foundation

members and relatives. Therefore the persons who get nominated for these

awards, who nominates them, the screening process or the panel which ultimately

decide the winners - all of these will be instructive about the forces at work.

And incidentally, all the Magsay say winners, human rights award winners in

Bharat have been avowedly anti-Hindu or anti-nationalist forces.

The western governments with their homogenizing and de-nationalizing mission are

as much a threat to Hindu India as the jihadis. So please take the report

seriously as an indicator of both contemporary and future foreign policy trends

of the US.

Its glib statement that religious violence is common to ALL RELIGIONS. Its

interpretation of cosmic war in Hinduism, with Rama and Ravana. Ravana is

labeled 'evil one' for easy comparison to the Christian and Islamic devil and

shaitan.

It calls Ayodhya a 'battlefield'. All Hindus know that Kurukshetra was the

battle field and not Ayodhya.It says in India NRMs (read RSS) have come into

being because of massive 'social displacement'. (Do they mean it is the lumpen

and society's riffraff which constitute the RSS?) That was the meaning of

lumpen, the socially displaced. Is this description of the RSS polite social

science or politically correct international politics?

Another point. The RSS is lumped together with apolitical paranoid religious

cults like the Branch Davidians of Waco and religious terrorist groups like the

Al Qaeda, some Christian and Jew groups. These are armed groups who believe

terrorism is the shortest route to their po0litical objectives. The RSS is

neither an apolitical religious cult nor a religious terrorist armed

organization. So why bring in Hinduism and the RSS. Was Hinduism and Srirama

included unnaturally just to provide the religious context for the RSS?The

whole thing about the RSS and Hinduism is conceptually faulty besides being

inaccurate in its details.

The CIA could have spent its money better in donating it to me for taking care of street animals.

RR

Jurgensmeyer may be small fry (I am not sure about that too) but the Rand

Corporation is not and neither is the CIA which funded it nor the US Defense

secretary and the military and intelligence establishments which commissioned

the report. Jihad is a convenient enemy no doubtbut that should not distract

our attention from the US which represents white Christian state power at its

most monstrous. The western governments with their homogenizing and

de-nationalizing mission are as much a threat to Hindu India as the jihadis.

So please take the report seriously as an indicator of both contemporary and

future foreign policy trends of the US. RRN.S. Rajaram <nsrajaram (AT) vsnl (DOT) com>

wrote:

"The western governments with their homogenising and de-nationalising mission

are as much a threat to Hindu India as the jihadis. So please take the report

seriously as an indicator of both contemporary and future foreign policy trends

of the US." I am not sure I agree. I have close ties with the U.S. military

among others and I don't see it that way. In any event, what is the

alternative? Not work with them but shun them as untouchables and cry among

ourselves? I have worked with RAND and nothing is accomplished by talking

among ourselves. Also I don't hold on to the belief that the U.S. is driven by

white racism. If anything, it is India that has excessive preoccupation with

white people-- be it Sonia Gandhi, Michael Witzel or Jean Dreze. None of them

would be taken seriously in the West. We are creating these white monsters. We

needn't scare ourselves so much. See how the Japanese defeated them, but

went and begged Mountbatten. We need to get out of this fear psychosis. As

Franklin Roosevelt once said:"There is nothing to fear but fear itself."

Whether it is just PR or not (NOT in my opinion, since no one reads these

reports), we need to make our presence in the think tanks and shift the focus

to Jihad. I feel it can be done. Otherwise, someone else will fill the vacuum.

I feel that some people are giving too much importance to these small fry

like Jurgensmeyer (an obscure faculty member) and Heather Gregg (a struggling

graduate student). It was picked up be the Indian media while no one in the

U.S. bothers with them. It is we who keep these people alive. Let us be

pro-active and try to occupy some space.

New'"> Rajaram---------------

Nachiketa Tiwari nachiketa_t (AT) hotmail (DOT) com

Logic will not negate the report. We all know that from the standpoint of logic,

it will be a futile exercise for someone to try to prove that orgs like RSS are

extremist in nature.

Rather, the question and concern is, that there in all probability, reports such

as these are laying the ground-work to achieve something big. A report here, and

another one there, does not make a difference. Rather, what is concerning is the

overall emerging pattern, and the politics underlying it. I have strong feelings

that orgs are being goaded to cook up such reports, so that the "next steps"

could follow.

Many may view this as a PR problem. I do not see it that way. I view it as a

problem rooted in ideology (as in Clash of Civilizations) and the consequential

politics.

RAND maintains a database called “Terrorism Knowledge Base” which is fill with junk .

"Srinivasan Kalyanaraman" <kalyan97 >

I don't know what role the members of many advisory boards play apart from

eating cookies. That it is an appendage of the top policy brass of US is

obvious, with many Lt. Gens. donning research caps.Here is some info. from the

website www.rand.orgRAND is just a business outfits which hires scribes based

on who pays them. It has no independent stand. Their main job is fund

raising.----------

One might have seen headlines in Indian news papers stating that RAND Corp

study linked or equated RSS with Al-Qaeda. Of course our usual suspects'

characterization of this study since it concerns RSS, is misleading as

usual.Enclosed is clarification received from RAND in response to the note sent

to them.This is in reply to your note to RAND's vice president, Gene Gritton.

The study cited in the article in the Indian press is available at

www.rand.org.The press story is basically accurate, but its headline is not.

The headline implies we somehow link RSS and Al Qaeda. In fact,

what we say, and the story has accurately, is that many religious traditions

have spawned "new" religious movements, and we cite RSS as an example from

Hinduism, along with Al Qaeda as one from Islam, along with Jewish and

Christian examples. We also say, and the story quotes, that almost all of

these new movements are non-violent. There is nothing to imply any connection

at all between RSS and Al Qaeda.

Any action against Rand report MUST include a pointed exposure of Treverton's

lies, and RAND MUST suffer from adverse publicity about their fraudulent

'research'.

There are people working already on developing well-thought-out and

well-researched points to slam Treverton, and expose his motives as well as

those whom he collected for that "Workshop of Experts". Such an opportunity

does not come along often. If 'we' waste it again with some half-baked

response, it will really betray people who want to help and spend most of their

free time trying to help.

Treverton invited some Harvard Divinity School jerk as an "Expert" to come in

with Alice-in-Wonderland "Cosmic" theories to appease the terrorists and bring

in their bigoted agenda. Treverton must pay for that, and it must be ensured

that the "Cosmic" guru in question must never again find credibility in such

circles. We can turn this into a MAJOR coup and reduce the anti-RSS commie

cabal to utter ridicule if we show that RAND had to fire its "researchers" and

retract a report under exposure for fraud. The scope of this is tremendous. It

will also put egg on the faces of the Harvard Divinity

School types - which is vital to help us counter the Clooney Baloney. I view it

as a problem rooted in ideology (as in Clash of Civilizations) and the

consequential politics. Read Page 57 of the report, the very last paragraph:

"For the intelligence community, a different set of conceptual tools must be

employed to better understand this new reality. It requires both understanding

of religions and knowledge of non-Western culture and history as seen through a

non-Western lens. For an analyst who is American by culture and training, this

is a formidable task but one that is not insurmountable. The lens through

which one views cosmic war and state response can be helpful. The next steps in

building a framework for thinking about religion and conflict or violence might

be to look in more depth at the particulars of religious extremists - such as

their leadership or their patterns of education and indoctrination." It

appears that the recommendation is to target the leadership of Hindu

organisation. As was done recently with Shankaracharya who was identified as an

accused even before Sankararaman was murdered.

Here are some suggestions. It is excellent that someone contacted RAND's VP, and

clearly, Treverton has had his backside kicked. His response is essentially the

same as that advanced by the "Chief Librarian and Researcher" of the "Terrorism

Analysis" scam which was charging money to people to find out why they listed

them as terrorist. They were also lying. Of course, Treverton is not telling

the truth, as the reader of the RAND report can confirm. To me, the words in

the RAND report said very clearly that RSS was characterized as TERRORIST, with

HATRED as one of its characteristics. Also, exactly how is the RSS "NEW"? It's

almost as old as Communism, far older than the American Civil Rights Movement,

MUCH older than Independent

India, and definitely much older than the Moral Majority in the US - and much

older than RAND, Gritton and Treverton. It is evident that Treverton is a liar.

That finding should be analyzed, documented clearly and in bulletized form, and

conveyed back in the strongest terms to RAND's VP - and publicized along with

their weasel-worded slimy squirming when caught in the headlights of the truth.

This is a breakthrough. Either Treverton should come out with a PUBLIC

clarification and APOLOGY which RETRACTS the stupidly-worded statements in his

report, or the RAND VP must face the fact that he has a fundamentalist bigot

putting his religious agenda above his employer's policies and objectives. The

fact that Treverton is an idiot, and RAND have seriously erred in publishing a

report with such poor quality controls,

MUST be widely publicized. Please have someone look very carefully at this

issue, and lets not blow this golden opportunity to convey a deterrent lesson.

 

Many may view this as a PR problem. Many people do not see it that way. I view

it as a problem rooted in ideology (as in Clash of Civilizations) and the

consequential politics.

>From a long-term point, Westerners see Bharat (and China) as more of a threat to

their dominance vis-à-vis Islamic terrorists. While they perceive that Islamic

threat is short term in nature (and containable), the threat from China and

Bharat is more of a long-term type, more fundamental, and civilization in

scope. Those perceptions will drive them to adopt certain specific strategies.

Reports such as the one we are currently talking about are a very-very-very

small piece of their giant strategic puzzle. So, while it is good (and

desirable) to undertake measures against such reports, a long-lasting response

would be to ensure the emergence of a proud, prosperous and just Hindu Bharat

without relying at all on the doles from the

West.

"If anything, it is India that has excessive precoccupation with white people"

 

 

The fact is that India started its independence with a huge burden -- a morbid

sense of inferiority complex in relation to the white man!! My estimate or

guesstimate will be that 80 percent of educated Indians of that time suffered

from this complex. However, the new generation that has largely replaced the

first post-independence generation, is full of self confidence and knows it has

the ability to beat the white man in the global game that's unfolding. India's

is, therefore, now well set on the road to its tryst with destiny! Yet, I guess

probably 20 percent of the educated guys in India today may still be suffering

from that "disease". It's that section that one often comes across in various

walks of life including the media.

 

Ratan Tata and Lalita Gupta, Joint MD ICICI Bank (South Asian Cttee.) and Hemant

Shah, leading Indian-US entrepreneur, (terrorism, etc.) are on Rand Advisory

Boards. Just let's attack them as anti-Hindu and send them copies of our

accusations to create a fuss. Rand receives Arab money, almost certainly

instigated by the Pakis, who play this game in the US and rather effectively.

An apology might also be sent to Rand with a promise that the RSS will be urged

to imitate Al Qaeda to justify Rand's labelling. Also remind them that the

latter is a creature of the US and may have remained so for reasons that may

only become known in the future.

(It's a trick to make the Jihadis concentrate upon India alone and leave the

good White Christians and their greedy Multinational rapists in peace. We have

no choice but to realize that we are fighting TWO WARS at the same time. We can

do it if we refuse to be cowed down. Sandhya )

We need to break the habit of treating US Think Tank reports as authoritative,

and use the examples of ignorant and incompetent reports like this one, to

start depending more on Indian Think Tank reports. SAAG and SATP write good,

solid stuff.The report finds tortuous reasons to include Hinduism within the

framework of the violent abrahamic faiths.---------------

 

Start your day with - make it your home page