[sacw] SACW | 20 April 03

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire  |  20 April,  2003

#1. The Politics of Religion in Pakistan: Islamic State or Shari'a 
Rule (Hassan N. Gardezi)
#2. Pakistan: An unholy alliance between the mullahs and the military 
? (Ammara Durrani)
#3.  Book Release |  Religious Intolerance: The Major Cause of 
Bloodshed  (Farah Khurana)
#4. Book Publication Announcement: The Second Assassination of Gandhi 
by Ram Puniyani
#5. India: Hatespeech Unlimited !!! (Subhash Gatade)
#6. India: Hindu nationalist linked to pogrom deaths is arrested (Peter Poph=
am)
#7. Togadia charged with damaging communal harmony in Rajasthan  (news updat=
e)
#8. URGENT  ACTION REQUEST! Please write to endorse secular action by 
the Rajasthan's govt. to stem fundamentalist hate speech and 
incitement to violence.

--------------

#1.

South Asia Citizens Web | 14 April 2003

The Politics of Religion in Pakistan: Islamic State or Shari'a Rule

by Hassan N. Gardezi

The Islamist parties in Pakistan, i. e. parties that use Islamic 
beliefs as the basis of their political agenda, initiated their 
demand for converting Pakistan into an Islamic state soon after 
independence in 1947. Although they were unable to generate popular 
support for their mission, the ruling elite did start a process of 
giving the Pakistani state an Islamic identity for reasons of their 
own political expediency. But for the first three decades of 
Pakistan's history all official measures in this direction were 
cosmetic exercises aimed at legitimizing authoritarian rule and 
keeping the vexatious mullahs happy.

Islamization

It was not until the Islamization project of Gen. Zia-ul-Haq that the 
concept of Islamic state began to acquire substance and the Islamic 
parties began to move to the center stage of Pakistan's politics. The 
General who had deposed an elected prime minister in 1977 and later 
had him executed by manipulating the judicial process could turn 
nowhere but to religious sanction to legitimize his dictatorial rule. 
Claiming to be divinely inspired he embarked on a frantic mission to 
"Islamize" Pakistan's state and society, with generous input from the 
coopted leadership of the Jamate-e-Islami.

The centerpiece of this Islamization process was a selective 
implementation of punitive shari'a laws. The Hudud Ordinance issued 
by him in 1979 laid down the so called Islamic penalties for a number 
of offences such as drinking, theft, fornication and adultery 
prescribing exemplary punishments of public floggings and hangings, 
amputation of limbs, and death by stoning. Although the more gory of 
these punishments remained few and far between, there was an orgy of 
public floggings not only for petty thefts, corruptions and alleged 
sexual offences but in a large number of cases for political dissent.

"Shari'a flourishes under the shadow of the sword," as the old adage 
goes. But this was not all that Zia left as his "Divine" legacy when 
he met his sudden death in the mysterious crash of his military plane 
in 1988. He left behind parallel shariat courts with wide ranging 
powers to declare any statute in the existing civil and criminal 
codes as un-Islamic, a draconian blasphemy law to be used as a tool 
of witch-hunting of religious minorities and secular intellectuals 
and a number of other legal innovations promoted as "Islamic" banking 
and taxation including the official collection of zakat, a charity or 
poor dues mandated by Islam. And most fatefully he implicated 
Pakistan in the US sponsored anti-Soviet Jehad (holy war) in 
Afghanistan after the 1979 abortive Communist revolution.

Zia's civilian successors, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif who ruled 
alternately between 1988 to 1999 as prime ministers without being 
able to complete their respective terms of office could do little but 
live with the dictator's legacy. Nawaz Sharif during his second term 
in office even tried to improve upon it by introducing a Shari'a Bill 
of his own, as 15th amendment to the Constitution, in the parliament 
where his Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz), PML(N), had over two-thirds 
majority. The purpose of the bill was to give himself the power as a 
Muslim ruler to adjudicate what was rightful Islamic conduct and what 
was not. Mercifully for the sinners, yet another military coup in 
October 1999 resulted in the dissolution of the parliament before his 
bill could be voted upon.

The Birth of Jehadi Islam

In the meantime the politics of Islam was undergoing a major 
qualitative change as a result of Zia's decision in 1980 to involve 
Pakistan actively in Afghan warlords' anti-Soviet jehad. As this 
involvement became deeper and deeper, Pakistan army's Inter-Services 
Intelligence Directorate, ISI, took over full control of implementing 
the state policy on this front. Initially the ISI operatives acquired 
the services of Jamat-e-Islami (jI) to funnel CIA procured arms and 
money to Afghan warlords masquerading as mujahideen (holy warriors). 
After the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan and the degeneration of 
Afghan jehad into a prolonged civil war, the ISI shifted its support 
to Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Islam ( JUI,), the more fundamentalist and 
sectarian of Pakistan's Islamist parties subscribing to the 
Deobandi-Wahabi doctrine. The Taliban militia that overran the 
strongholds of earlier mujahideen warlords in the mid-1990s and 
established the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan under Mulla Omar was 
mobilized from the religious schools (madrasas) of the JUI.. The JUI 
also had doctrinal affinity with the fundamentalist Wahabi Islam of 
Osama bin-Ladin and his Arab followers planted by CIA in Afghanistan 
to wage anti-communist jehad.

The co-optation of Islamist parties as jehadi arms of Pakistan army 
in Afghanistan sent out a clear signal that waging jehad was a 
legitimate political activity. All sorts of jehadi formations 
sprouted out of the existing Islamist parties, as well as 
independently, to wage their holy wars against "unbelievers." Flush 
with Arab oil money, public zakat collections diverted to them and 
private donations, the Islamists consolidated their power by 
glorifying jehad from their pulpits and public platforms, ran an 
extensive network of madrasas and military training centers to raise 
their youthful cadres, and mounted threats to Pakistan's ruling 
establishment to surrender to their "Islamic" dictates. The arena of 
Jehad expanded to free Kashmir from Indian control, as well as to 
free Pakistan from the rule of secular politicians.

The 9/11 Windfall

Despite all the power flowing from their financial affluence and 
jehadi guns what the Islamist parties lacked thus far was some 
semblance of national legitimation through the ballot box. That 
opportunity opened up when Gen. Parvez Musharraf overthrew the 
elected government of Nawaz Sharif on October 12, 1999. After taking 
over as head of the state, Musharraf initially projected himself as a 
secular reformer, referring to Kamal Ataturk, the president and 
builder of secular Turkey (1932-38), as his role model. Despite the 
fact that he was not prepared to disengage the Islamist parties from 
their state condoned jehad forays into Afghanistan and Indian held 
Kashmir, he did voice his intent to curb religious bloodshed within 
Pakistan, check the abuse of blasphemy laws, regulate the curricula 
and funding of madrasas and enforce gun laws, all welcome news for 
the citizens constantly harassed by the armed Islamist vigilantes. 
Although his liberal rhetoric was never translated into action, it 
did put the Islamists on guard to defend the sources of their power 
and privilege. They began to close their ranks in preparation to meet 
any official threat to their assets and operational freedom.

While Musharraf was trying to accommodate the Islamists into his 
"liberal" scheme of things the events of September 11, 2001 brought 
him under fierce US pressure to cut Pakistan's ties with the Taliban 
regime in Afghanistan and stop the appeasement of jehadi formations 
inside Pakistan. Citing dire consequences of defying the Americans, 
he forthwith took a volte-face from Pakistan's long-standing 
Afghanistan policy and acquiesced to the use of Pakistani territory 
by American forces in their infernal onslaught to crush the Taliban 
regime and hunt down Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda jehadis now 
redefined as terrorists.

On October 7. 2001 the United States launched its devastating carpet 
bombing of Afghanistan provoking a wave of anti-American sentiment in 
Pakistan which swept the entire country. This anger at US action was 
felt and displayed much more acutely in the provinces of NWFP and 
Balochistan where people are ethnically closer to the neighbouring 
Afghans and the JUI has historically exercised stronger religious and 
political influence. Taking full political advantage of this 
situation the Islamist parties went on the offensive, staging 
anti-American demonstrations and denouncing the Musharraf government 
for compromising Pakistan's sovereignty by allowing US Air Force and 
=46BI agents to set up operations inside the country. At the same time 
their armed jehadi offshoots and holy warriors of various other 
nationalities fleeing into Pakistan to escape American fire in 
Afghanistan unleashed a new wave of bloody terrorist attacks on 
resident foreigners, Christian churches, Christian run schools and 
hospitals as well as minority Shia Muslims and their places of 
worship.

The Musharraf government, with its gaze fixed on the elections 
scheduled for October 2002, remained constrained and vacillating in 
dealing with this violent turn of events. While the Islamist parties 
and their jehadi offshoots were allowed to exploit the post-9/11 
political situation freely, the government was preoccupied with its 
maneuvers to undermine the two mainstream political parties, the PPP 
and the PML(N), that could pose a real threat to Musharraf's hold on 
state power in the approaching elections. By means of a series of 
decreed constitutional amendments, disqualification orders, ISI 
pressure on politicians, and raiding of the PML(N) to create a new 
"king's party," the stage was set to hold elections for restoration 
of a parliamentary democracy in the country to be presided over by 
Gen. Musharraf as the all-powerful head of state.

All these events converged to produce a windfall for the Islamist 
parties boosting their electoral fortunes. Unified into a six party 
conglomerate called Mutahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) or United Action 
=46orum, they entered the elections capitalizing on the upsurge of 
anti-American sentiment, while benefitting also from the officially 
erected roadblocks in the way of the mainstream political parties. 
When these stage managed elections concluded the MMA alliance walked 
away with 58 seats in a 342 seat federal parliament forming the third 
largest block in a house where no party was able to win a clear 
majority. The alliance also scored a major victory by winning a 
majority of seats in the provincial assembly of NWFP to form its own 
government. In the Balochistan assembly MMA won enough seats to 
become part of the ruling coalition. This was indeed a major 
breakthrough for the Islamist parties giving them a measure of 
control they never had before over the instrumentalities of 
parliamentary governance whatever its functional limitations under 
Musharraf's controlled democracy.

The Anglo-American invasion of Iraq on March 21, 2003 coming as it 
did soon after Afghanistan's ordeal will no doubt further enhance the 
political fortunes of MMA. This Anglo-American invasion of Iraq, 
condemned universally by people of all faiths including millions of 
Christians in Europe and North America, is portrayed by Pakistan's 
Islamists as a Christian war on Islam. Their simplistic logic 
presented through inflammatory sermons and speeches appeals to the 
mass of Muslim audiences more than the anti-imperialist discourses of 
secular politicians and intellectuals. The message of the Islamists 
is equally simple. The establishment of an Islamic state in Pakistan 
is the only way to help the cause of beleaguered Muslims everywhere.

The Islamic State or Shari'a Rule

Clearly, the project of converting Pakistan into an Islamic state 
initiated by Islamist parties that opposed the very creation of the 
new state has come a long way. But the basic question still remains 
to be addressed. Having gone through half a century of pursuing the 
celebrated objective at the cost of fracturing the civil society with 
violent religious, sectarian and ethnic conflicts, what kind of an 
Islamic state do they have in the works for Pakistan? Realistically 
speaking, there is no ideal-type model of an Islamic state to go by 
that can be derived from the political history of the Muslim world. 
What is sometimes referred to as the original pristine Islamic State, 
ending with the assassination in 661 AD of Ali, the fourth rightly 
guided Caliph, is a misnomer because the seventh century Hijaz was a 
tribal society in transition which had not yet evolved into a nation 
state. There is no consensus among the Islamists even on the basic 
question of whether the Islamic state is going to be a hereditary 
monarchy, a dictatorship or a democratic republic. The founder of 
Pakistan's Jamat-e-Islami and the chief theoretician of the Islamic 
state, late Maulana Maududi, maintains that the Islamic state will be 
a Caliphate (Khilafat), ruled by a caliph as the "vicegerent of God," 
whose duty it will be to enforce the "Laws of God." While the Maulana 
explicitly repudiates "Western democracy," he remains noncommital on 
the method by which the caliph of the Islamic state will be appointed 
to his exalted office.

In practice, therefore, the introduction of shari'a laws torn out of 
their socio-historical context has become the sole defining feature 
of the Islamic state in post-colonial societies from Pakistan to 
Nigeria. With all the political gains they have made in Pakistan, the 
Islamists of the MMA have little to reveal in their plans of action 
other than widening of the punitive net of shari'a laws. Since their 
electoral victory of October 2002 elections, for example, the MMA 
government in NWFP has been busy proscribing singing, dancing, music, 
cinema, cable television, coeducation, tailoring of women's garments 
by men outfitters, in short whatever its clerics consider to be 
contrary to Islamic shari'a. It also lost no time to appoint an 
advisory body on the implementation of shari'a, the Nifaz-e-Sharia 
Council, which has already submitted its report to the provincial 
Chief Minister for a thoroughgoing substitution of all post-colonial 
laws with supposedly immutable Islamic laws.

Even if it is granted that an Islamic State can be created simply by 
introducing shari'a laws, a fundamental sociological problem remains. 
No legal system functions in a vacuum. The hudud laws of the seventh 
century Hijaz, for example, were the product of a tribal society. 
They were unwritten norms of conduct learned through primary 
socialization in self- contained family and kinship groups. There 
were no formal structures of law enforcement such as trained police 
forces and judges, courts, prisons and formalized rules of judicial 
procedure. People lived and worked in small communities where 
everybody knew everybody else, and they conformed to the norms of 
their society, not because of threat of punishment by formal state 
agencies, but as a result of strong group pressure and consciousness 
of kind, what Ibne Khuldun called "asabyia." Corporal punishment 
existed but rarely needed to be applied. Restitution was more common 
in cases of wrong doings leading to personal loss.

A simplistic and overzealous introduction of the laws of a totally 
different social formation into the socio-political fabric of a 
post-colonial, urbanizing, pluralistic society with increasing break 
down of primary group ties can neither serve to maintain peace nor 
meet the ends of justice. On the contrary it can breed violence and 
contempt for the existing legal system and rule of law.

The reason for this is quite simple. The idea that laws are divinely 
ordained and fixed for all time can easily be carried over to any set 
of archaic, traditional customs whether they fall within the orbit of 
shari'a or not. In such cases blind faith, superstition and even 
ulterior motives can outweigh the more rational considerations for 
conformity to the formally instituted legal system of a civil 
society, and give rise to vigilante justice meted out at the spur of 
the moment or administered by self-styled local assemblies such as 
"jirgas" to replace the rule of law and due process. It is no wonder 
than that the era of hudud laws and jehadi Islam has also brought 
with it in Pakistan an epidemic of honour killings, "karo kari" 
killings and mob executions of whoever happens to be accused of 
blasphemy. It is the price the society is paying for the fallacy of 
regarding the shari'a punishments as the essence of Islamic teachings 
instead of the universal human values which many Muslims believe to 
be the foundation of their faith. The fundamentalism of the Islamists 
consists of e xclusive preoccupation with establishing the identity 
of the Islamic state and its citizens by means of ritual conformity 
to certain fixed codes of conduct. It does not matter to them whether 
such conformity serves the interests of social justice, protection of 
human dignity, compassion, equality and peace. The Islamists and 
their mullah fraternity have for too long thrived on legislating 
ritual conformity to gender specific codes of conduct and appearance 
by the exercise of their traditional authority to issue fatwas 
(judicial decrees). The building of a just political order on Islam's 
transcendent values is neither compatible with their professional 
training nor with their vested interests.

Realizing the Islamic State

Against this backdrop it is not difficult to figure out the nature of 
the state the Islamists intend to establish in Pakistan. From all 
indications the model of Islamic state towards which Pakistan is 
being led at the moment is that of the now defunct Islamic Emirate of 
Afghanistan. This model in fact was the outgrowth of Wahabi-Deobandi 
madrasas and seminaries of Pakistan spread from Akora Khattak to 
Karachi, controlled by JUI factions. Its precipitation in Afghanistan 
was greatly assisted by Pakistan's ISI, contributions of the American 
CIA to the anti-communist jehad and the influx of Arab jehadis as 
noted earlier. It was imposed on the people of Afghanistan by the 
barrel of the gun wielded by Taliban. The repression carried out by 
them and their Amir, supreme leader Mullah Omar, is now too well 
known. The destruction of Buddha's statutes along with museums and 
works of art depicting living beings, the hacking of TV sets and 
VCRs, the burning of films and cinema houses, the banning of singing 
and dancing, stripping women of their jobs and confining them in 
homes and burkas (veils), punishments of death by stoning, massacres 
of Hazara shias and heterodox Tajiks and Uzbeks were by no means 
random acts of savagery. They were part of a plan to create an 
Islamic state by enforcing a comprehensive code of conduct which they 
thought was divinely ordained. The necessity of violence and blood 
letting arose because the inward looking normative Islam of their 
conception was not even compatible with Afghanistan's largely tribal 
society and culture.

Needless to say that the repatriation of this style of Islamic 
statehood to Pakistan is not going to be any less of a coercive and 
bloody project for several reasons. To begin with, Pakistan's society 
is too far removed in time and space from conditions under which 
shari'a laws ever operated. The 21st century Pakistan, except for the 
relative isolation of some tribal communities in NWFP and 
Balochistan, is very much exposed to the cultural influences of a 
global urban industrial civilization. These influences are now very 
much integrated in the social and cultural life of the people of 
Pakistan and cannot be eradicated without the use of a great degree 
of physical force and coercion. Today's Pakistan has a long history 
of living experience with British jurisprudence and its local 
adaptations going back to at least a century and a half. Compared to 
this, the enforcement of shari'a was never a tradition in any part of 
the country until Gen. Zia-ul-Haq issued his controversial hudud 
ordinance which still remains to be fully implemented because of its 
anachronisms.

It is also noteworthy that the orthodoxy of the Islamist political 
establishment in Pakistan, particularly the JUI brand of 
Wahabi-Deobandi Islam, does not have its roots in the soil. This 
brand of Islam is doctrinaire, virulently intolerant of diversity, 
misogynist and obsessed with jehad as opposed to the faith and 
spirituality of ordinary people of Pakistan which is syncretic, 
tolerant, devotional and blended in the mystical spirituality of the 
Indus Valley and its languages. Song, music and dance are very much 
part of this folk spiritual tradition. This populist tradition will 
have to be suppressed in order to establish the supremacy of the 
orthodox, normative Islam in Pakistan.

Given the great dissonance between the political agenda of the 
Islamists and Pakistan's existing socio-cultural realities, one 
cannot escape the conclusion that the people of Pakistan will have to 
be subjected to an unbelievable scale of coercion, inward looking 
isolation and tribalization before the Pakistani state is given its 
Islamic identity by means of enforcing a nationwide uniform gender 
specific code of conduct which the Islamists consider to be divinely 
ordained. For such a project to be realized, the cultural mosaic of 
Pakistan will have to be destroyed, ethnic plurality eliminated, 
diversity of religious beliefs curbed and severe restrictions placed 
on forms of art and entertainment. What the MMA government has 
initiated in the NWFP is only a hint of things to come. The JI, a 
major component of the Islamist alliance is going to provide a more 
comprehensive, albeit a miniature, view of Pakistan's Islamic state 
through its shari'a-based city of "Qartaba" which it is planning to 
build some 80 km from Islamabad.

How far the Islamists can go to achieve their ultimate objective 
depends on how well they do in retaining and expanding their 
political power in the unfolding dynamics of Pakistan's internal and 
geo-political situation. There are a number of uncertainties 
ominously looming overhead at the moment What is the capacity of 
Islamist parties to stick together in the MMA alliance? How well can 
Gen. Musharraf and his government manage its balancing act of 
apprehending the al-Qaeda fugitives for the United States while at 
the same time appeasing the militant Islamists and jehadi formations 
at home? With its declared possession of weapons of mass destruction, 
warned against involvement in terrorist operations in Indian held 
Kashmir and accused by the Bush administration of trading nuclear and 
missile technology with North Korea, how long is the sole Superpower 
on earth going to wait before making another Iraq of Pakistan? To 
what extent is Gen. Musharraf and his military establishment willing 
to make peace with India and seek a political solution of the Kashmir 
conflict? The answer to all these questions is critical in 
determining the limits of power enjoyed by the Islamists and indeed 
the very fate of the Pakistani states as a sovereign entity.

_____


#2.

The News on Sunday, April 20, 2003

An unholy alliance

Religious forces continue to ride high, while the Musharraf regime 
turns its proverbial guns on 'secular' politicos. Does there exist, 
thus, an unholy alliance of convenience between the mullahs and the 
military? What impact would it have on the country's polity if the 
alliance gains strength at the expense of the moderates?

By Ammara Durrani

=46or all their quasi-medieval statements and shenanigans, there is 
little doubt that Pakistan's religious political parties and militant 
organisations currently enjoy an unprecedented level of national and 
international attention. One hardly finds a news report or research 
paper on contemporary political scenario of Pakistan, which does not 
give ample space to the Islamist or the jihadi 'factor'.

What had, hitherto, remained a nuisance element has now become a 
political force to reckon with. All eyes are fixed on the whirlwind 
that threatens to annihilate in its path every conceivable facet of 
'moderate' socio-politics of Pakistan. Would then the single most 
powerful political entity of the country, the army, attempt to rein 
in the mullahs who appear to threaten its carefully established 
status quo?

Hardly likely. So says a recent report titled "Pakistan: The Mullahs 
and the Military" released by Brussels-based International Crisis 
Group (ICG), which can be accessed at www.crisisweb.org. Far from 
confronting the clergy, the report asserts, President Musharraf's 
recent constitutional amendments have undermined the stature of the 
more secular, democratic political parties to the apparent advantage 
of the religious alliance of Muttahida Majlise Amal (MMA).

"Since the military takeover in 1999, the government has demonstrated 
neither the will nor the intent to pursue domestic policies opposed 
by the mullahs such as madressah regulation or changes in 
discriminatory Islamic laws," said Samina Ahmed, ICG's South Asia 
project director, according to a press release dated 20th March. 
"Theperpetual threat of war with India over Kashmir also brings the 
mullahs and the military close together."

ICG's report is based on two underlying speculations. First, given 
its anti-American stance MMA's rise may eventually prove harmful for 
American interests in the region, and also for its allies in the 
ongoing war against terrorism. Second, and more importantly, its rise 
would threaten the existing civil liberties, freedom of expression, 
legal reforms and religious tolerance in Pakistan-particularly with 
regards to the situation of women and minorities in the two provinces 
of NWFP and Balochistan currently under MMA's control. The 
possibility of the emergence of such a scenario would be in stark 
contrast to the agenda for liberal reforms undertaken by the 
Musharraf regime since its coming to power.

Yet, despite MMA's growing popularity and political clout, it seems 
that General Musharraf is little bothered with concerns increasingly 
expressed by the liberal factions within the country, as well as by 
international circles. Religious forces continue to ride high, while 
the Musharraf regime turns its proverbial guns on 'secular' 
politicos. Does there exist, thus, an unholy alliance of convenience 
between the mullahs and the military? What impact would it have on 
the country's polity if the alliance gains strength at the expense of 
the moderates?

With reference to the post-October 2002 elections, the reports 
asserts: "Despite a formal transition to democracy, the military's 
authority and policies remain impervious to civilian challenge"; 
while the MMA is "more than willing to play by the military's rules." 
Observing that both the entities worked together against common 
enemies during the Cold War and the Afghan jihad, and have identical 
views on Kashmir and relations with India, the report opines that the 
possibility of MMA's political confrontation with the military in the 
post-9/11 scenario is next to nil. This is primarily because of the 
historical linkages between Islamic politics and the military, which 
continue to prevail over the modern political system Pakistan. 
Indeed, the Pakistani state draws its very legitimacy from this nexus.

Sketching an informative historical background, the report says that 
the military remains the source of central authority and the guardian 
of state power. This is understood and accepted by the ulema because 
of the military's monopoly over the means of coercion and its image 
as the defender of an Islamic Pakistan against a Hindu India. "The 
religious right is, therefore," declares the report "the military's 
natural ally."

It says that the ally has been "rewarded" by the military, which has 
co-opted the religious sector along with its causes. Consequently, 
Pakistan's political, constitutional and legal development has hinged 
on how-and how much-its military-led establishment has integrated and 
rewarded various segments of the clergy in the name of Islamisation. 
The report observes that though the religious parties have never 
formed a national government, the Islamisation of laws and education 
in the country is already advanced.

Conversely, the military has made full use of the theological, 
sectarian and political differences that abound within the clergy 
itself. "Official adherence to vague notions of a religious system 
has led to unresolved political, cultural and ideological confusion," 
says the report. The resultant ambiguity, actually, serves the 
purposes of a Westernised civilian-military bureaucracy, which reaps 
the political and economic rewards that their strategic alliances 
with the US have brought to them in the past, and continue to do so 
today.

Hence, Musharraf's U-turn on Pakistan's Afghan policy may have 
strained but not severed the military's links with its religious 
allies. Says the report: "While his government moves against 
non-Pakistani Islamic militants, Musharraf has given in to the agenda 
of the religious parties at home. Although he denounces Islamic 
militancy, his administration handles domestic extremists with kid 
gloves."

Terming the MMA as "an unnatural alliance", the report casts an 
investigative eye on the origins and rise of Pakistan's clergy, and 
how it came to stake its claim in the country's power equation 
vis-=FD-vis the military through a highly systematic approach and 
methodology. With formidable international links and an impressive 
national outreach, the MMA has broken into the corridors of power in 
an unprecedented manner. The report backs its assertions of the MMA 
given undue electoral advantages by citing numerous examples of how 
it received overt and covert support from the government-and even the 
media-during the last election. These political advantages seem to 
have taken their worst toll on the democratic and nationalist 
political parties, particularly in NWFP and Balochistan.

According to the report, the MMA has accepted the military's 
political preferences and aligned with the ruling party, ie PML (Q); 
and while it has not changed its anti-US rhetoric, it will not risk 
losing the military's patronage. "To justify a softer stance on 
co-operation with the US," it says "the leadership stresses that 
confrontation does not pay and has adopted political means of 
pressuring the government by raising the issue in the parliament." 
More importantly, the MMA leaders have not questioned the military's 
right to formulate national security policy, because they are well 
aware that the military has not abandoned anti-Indian policies or 
support for the Kashmir jihad. However, it cautions, such convenience 
would quickly evaporate if the MMA's followers accept their party's 
rhetoric at face value and opt for a jihad against US-led forces in 
Afghanistan. "For now," it observes, "the MMA has no choice but to 
rein in its jihadi cadre. To do otherwise could threaten the 
continuation of the military's support and attendant political and 
economic benefits. The question is how effectively it can control 
those who want to resume the jihad in Afghanistan."

The report critically appraises the clergy's current attitude towards 
women and minorities, and its drive for imposition of the Shariah law 
in the country. It argues that these areas need urgent attention 
given the fact that religious activism has become a function of the 
Pakistani state, as a result of the mullahs' successful bargaining 
and the military's tacit and overt support. In case of the MMA 
pressing to widen Islamisation, says the report, Musharraf and his 
Prime Minister will have two choices: either to resist or to 
acquiesce in the Islamisation agenda: "If it adopts the latter 
course, the government will set the stage for more social conflict, 
undermine domestic stability, and further erode its domestic 
legitimacy."

As a prescription for curing the dilemma that this queer alliance has 
generated for the rest of the population, the report concludes by 
making pertinent recommendations. Interestingly, these 
recommendations have been made separately to the Government of 
Pakistan, as well as the international community, particularly the 
donor bodies-an important reminder that domestic occurrences are no 
longer restricted to national actors, but that international actors 
have become highly influential in local politics.

Some of the important recommendations made to the government are:

* To revise the Legal Framework Order 2002 and other constitutional 
amendments made by the Musharraf regime, which target fundamental 
freedoms.

* To revise and revoke constitutional amendments, particularly the 
Islamic laws, discriminating against religion and sex.

* To prevent MMA provincial governments from pursuing policies, which 
violate basic constitutional rights.

* To devise and implement legislation to ban jihadi organisations, 
and to curb activities aimed at recruitment, fundraising and 
publication of jihad literature.

* To regulate madressahs and mosques so as to end their use for the 
promotion and propagation of extremist political and militant 
ideologies.

* To seek parliamentary action to widen the membership of the Council 
of Islamic Ideology to include the full range of Muslim opinion, 
including moderate scholars, lawyers, academics, women's 
organisations and financial experts; and

* To curtail the mandate and scope of the Ministry of Religious 
Affairs and limit it to public service issues.

To the international community, the report suggests:

* Monitoring and assessing the Musharraf government's compliance with 
obligatory domestic reforms;

* Conditioning aid to Pakistan upon fulfillment of its commitments 
under international law to protect women and minorities;

* Encouraging reforms by funding secular educational projects, by 
extending financial support to development NGOs in NWFP and 
Balochistan, and by providing economic and political support for 
democratic development programmes in the two provinces; and

* Monitoring the co-operation of Pakistani military, paramilitary and 
intelligence forces in preventing jihadis from moving across the 
Pakistan-Afghanistan border and into Kashmir.

"The dangers of inaction are evident," warns the report. "Should the 
MMA leaders continue to exploit anti-US sentiments to further their 
political ends, they might eventually even find it nearly impossible 
to curb the religious zeal of their followers to undo perceived 
wrongs in Afghanistan and elsewhere in the region. Should that occur, 
Pakistan could find itself isolated regionally and a target, as 
opposed to a partner, in the US-led war against terrorism."

_____


#3.

Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 16:54:00 +0500

RELIGIOUS INTOLERANCE: THE MAJOR CAUSE OF BLOODSHED

Religious intolerance had been the main cause of battles and bloodshed in
the world. This was a consensus of opinion at at a meeting held at the
Vision Hall Lahore on Saturday to launch the book, 'Kayenaat, Insaan Aur
Mazhab'(The Universe, Man And Religion).

The book is authored by Mr. Rehman Faiz who is currently the president of
Amnesty International Lahore (Pakistan) and the chairperson of Religious
Peace Research Organization. A Christian institute "Maktaba Enaveem
  Pakistan" has published the book, which is a self-explanatory example of
interfaith harmony.

Addressing to the ceremony, historian Dr. Mubarak Ali said that all
religions had brought a message of peace and hope for the mankind. But the
world peace had been disturbed and the battles fought to prove supremacy of
one religion over the other. He said religious intolerance and conversion
had been the main cause of battles between the followers of Christianity and
Islam and the crusades could be cited as an example. Conversion had resulted
in religious confrontation between the nations in the history. Though there
was no conversion in Hinduism, Hindus had started Shuddhi movement in the
subcontinent to convert those Muslims to Hinduism whose forefathers had
converted to Islam.

Dr. Mehdi Hasan said whenever Religion was exploited for political purposes
by the vested interests there had been riots and bloodshed. The message of
Religion was to give peace and hope to the mankind but they were misused and
exploited. He said anthropologists claimed that Man has been on the planet
for the past six million years and the human civilization and Religion were
not more than 6000 years old. How Man lived before the civilization
developed he asked the question and then gave the answer that since there
was no religion in prehistoric time, the people had not fought against one
another.

Writer Qazi Javed said every religion wanted an end to injustice, tyranny
and exploitation of man by man. The prophet of Islam had invited the
followers of various religions to forge unity against injustice and tyranny
and to establish peace in the world. Mr. Javed said as the mankind had
advanced in science and technology and was in possession of resources of the
earth, there was a greater need for peace than ever before. But the
resources were being used for war. He said that clash of civilizations was
in fact the clash of religions and the process was continuing. Religions
bigots had proved to be tyrant and cruel like US president Bush and Osama
Bin Laden in the modern times.

Theologian and the priest of St. Anthony's parish Lahore, Father Emanuel Asi
said that the need for peace and justice was never greater than now. No
development would take place without peace. He said a balanced religious
approach could ensure world peace. He said the book Kayenaat Insaan Aur
Mazhab as the milestone towards the great destiny of religious peace and
tolerance in the society. He emphasized to initiate by taking the last words
of the book as the start.

Bahai leader Mr. Riaz Shahid said it was not religion, which caused
bloodshed, but it were the people who had forgotten the religious teachings.
He said that Religion had been the greatest source of ethics and morality
throughout the history of mankind. Whenever Religion performed against peace
and humanity, actually it was being used by the materialistic and worldly
desires of the people.

Book author Rehman Faiz said scientific analysis of Religion divides it into
different phases. The first and the purest stage is the one when its founder
is introducing Religion. It is such a wonderful phase when whole the group
of people around the founder starts donating others with unconditional love,
unreserved service and even sacrificing self-desires over others=92 needs. H=
e
said it is entirely the opposite state of the selfish and worldly status of
greed, hatred and possession. He said the founder of Pakistan had in his
mind the idea of a state in which all the citizens would get their equal
rights and nobody would be deprived of his basic rights due to his colour,
race, creed or ethnic origin. Unfortunately, the extremist elements in
Pakistan gradually strengthened their grip on the socio-political system of
Pakistan and ultimately succeeded in developing a specific fundamentalist
religious approach as the rudiments of the state system. The process
severely affected the rights of the citizens outside the circle of this
narrow approach.

The participants called the book 'Kayenaat, Insaan Aur Mazhab' as the blow
of fresh wind in the suffocated environment of religious extremism and
intolerance. They also urged the progressive and positive minded people to
come into the field of research work on Religion so that religious tolerance
and peace should prevail in the society.


=46arah Khurana
Secretary Information
RPRO. P.O. Box 3032 Lahore


_____


#4.

Book Publication Announcement

The Second Assassination of Gandhi
By
Ram Puniyani

Editor-Prof. Richard Bonney

India gained Independence as a plural, democratic country. The freedom
Movement, which was led by Mahatma, was the mass movement in which all the
Indians participated irrespective of their religion, caste or gender. This
movement aimed at getting rid of British rule, contributed to formation of
India as a democracy based on the principles of Liberty, Equality,
=46raternity and was accompanied by the parallel movements for caste and
gender equality. Gandhiji, a devout Hindu regarded religion as a private
matter of the individual and for this belief of his, he was murdered by an
ideologue of Hindutva. Hindutva is not just Hinduism, it is an intolerant
sectarian politics based on Brahminical Hinduism.

Today this ideology of Hindutva, which remained aloof from freedom
struggle and National movement, is claiming to be the sole custodian of
patriotism. It is asserting intolerant version of Hinduism totally
against the Bhakti and Sant traditions of Hinduism, which Gandhiji
followed.

This book tries to highlight the contributions of Gandhiji and the tenets
which could make the bridges between the people of diverse identities to
build democracy, whose very existence is under threat due to onslaught of
different shades of Hindutva. Also it elaborates the formation of Indian
Nation and role of different political streams in the formation of Indian
Nation.


The Second Assasination of Gandhi
(First published by Center for History of Religios and Political Pluralism
Institute for the Study of Indo-Pak Relations
Leicester LE1 7RH UK)
Pages 127 , Rs. 125

Publisher
Media House
375-A Pocket 2, Mayur Vihar Phase I, Deldi 91 <India
Ph.011 2275 0667
e-mail-mediabooks@hotmail.com


_____


#5.

Mainstream, April19, 2003

Hatespeech Unlimited !!!

Subhash Gatade

A bid to eulogise the Killers of Graham Staines was rebuffed at the 
VHP protest rally here today. " We don't agree with whatever you are 
saying ." an apparently furious VHP chief Ashok Singhal said as 
"sadhu" Swami Khandeshwaranand, not only justified the brutal killing 
but also advocated that Christian priest be beaten up. (The Hindu Feb 
24, 2003)

According to press reports Ashok Singhal, while speaking at a 
function at the Shivala Bhaian temple in Amritsar on 3 September 
2002,said: "Godhra happened on February 27 and the next day, 50 lakh 
(500,000) Hindus were on the streets. We were successful in our 
experiment of raising Hindu consciousness, which will be repeated all 
over the country now." He reportedly spoke also of how whole villages 
had been "emptied of Islam" and how whole communitiesof Muslims had 
been dispatched to refugee camps, presenting this as "a victory for 
Hindu society".

  A national newspaper subsequently reported that on 11 October, 
during a press conference, Ashok Singhal stated that "what happened 
in Gujarat will happen in the whole of the country. Hindus were not 
born to be cut like carrots and radishes, and that the Hindukaran 
(Hindu conscience) of the people of Gujaratwas the direct result of 
the =91jehadi=92 mentality of Muslims".

Poor "Swami Khandeshwaranand" . This silly chap must not have 
gathered the courage to  counter the rebuff he publicly received at 
the hands of the International working President of VHP Herr Ashok 
Singhal. If any other sensible person would have been in his place he 
would have definitely cornered Herr Singhal quoting reams of his 
speeches he has been delivering since time immemorial ranging from 
the most recent ones which have helped draw the wrath of the Supreme 
Court.No doubt it was quite symptomatic of the politics of hate 
peddled by the acolytes of the Hindutva brigade that the day the SC 
issued a notice to the centre on a petition to prosecute Narendra 
Modi, Ashok Singhal for making "inflammtory speeches" ( 26 Feb 2003) 
one was witness to the way a "sadhu" was snubbed by the same Mr 
Singhal.

Definitely the supreme court need to be thanked that it has 
ultimately taken a long awaited positive step to rein in the "lunatic 
fringe" of the parivar. National Human Rights Commission the supreme 
Human Rights body in the country had time and again also underlined 
the need to take firm action on "proactive statements which have the 
potential to incite communal tensions and violence."  Taking 
cognisance of numerous such statements emanating from the Togadias 
and the Modis which helped vitiate the atmosphere in the immediate 
aftermath of the tragic Godhra carnage the NHRC in its "Final Order 
on Gujarat dated 31st May, 2002", had already stated that it "had 
urged that these[statements] be examined and acted upon, the burden 
of proof being shifted to such persons to explain or contradict their 
statements."

As far as provisions in law are concerned they are clearly 
unambiguous. Under Indian Law promoting enmity between different 
groups on grounds of religion is a recognized criminal offence. 
According to a news release issued by the International Secretariat 
of Amnesty International  ( dated 16 th October 2002) ".. the Indian 
Penal Code (IPC) prescribes criminal prosecution for "wantonly giving 
provocation with intent to cause riot" (section 153); "promoting 
enmity between different groups ongrounds of religion" (section 
153A); "imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration" 
(section 153B); "utteringwords with deliberate intent to wound the 
religious feelings ofany person" (section 298); "statements conducing 
to publicmischief" (section 505 (1), b and c); and "statements 
creating orpromoting enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes 
(section505(2). Section 108 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 
inaddition, allows an Executive Magistrate to initiate actionagainst 
a person violating section 153A or 153B of the IPC." It may be noted 
that the Amnesty people had issued this statement in the immediate 
aftermath of the provocative statements made by Mr Singhal. It had 
added that the "Amnesty International believes that Ashok Singhal=92s 
statements,as reported, may constitute a criminal offence under 
Indian law. "

The "Guidelines to promote communal harmony" issued by theMinistry of 
Home Affairs in October 1997 also point at the precise responsibility 
of the state machinery to deal with potentially inflammatory 
statements in the context of communal tension.Guideline 15 states 
that "effective will needs to be displayedby the district authorities 
in the management of such situationsso that ugly incidents do not 
occur. Provisions in section 153A,153B, 295 to 298 and 505 of IPC and 
any other Law should be freely used to deal with individuals 
promoting communal enmity". Article 20 of the International Covenant 
on Civil and Political Rights, which India ratified in 1979, affirms 
that "Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that 
constitutes incitement to
discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law".

In an article "Fangs and Fury" which basically focussed on the way 
the "loony right" was upping its ante Mr. Prashant Bhushan, the 
famous lawyer was also quoted to have said that if the government of 
the day exercises political will then , "..relevant portions of POTA 
can easily be invoked against offenders." According to him, Section 3 
of the act clearly states that ..terrorist acts' cover whoever "with 
intent to threaten the unity, integrity...to strike terror in the 
people or any section of the people...or threatens to kill or injure 
such persons", and thus qualifies for indictment. "If SIMI activists 
can be booked under POTA, why not saffronites? Singhal saying openly 
that a successful experiment has been carried out in Gujarat and may 
be repeated in other parts of the country is a blatant act of 
terrorism. Why has no action been taken against him?" he 
asks.(Outlook, 4 th Nov 2002) * ( Note : This quote should not be 
construed as an attempt to legitimise a draconian legislation called 
POTA. This is just to underline the instruments which the state has 
to curb all such "inflammatory statements".)

Well, to be fair to Herr Singhal he is not the only one from the 
Hindutva Brigade who has achieved notoriety in making such 
provocative statements. Mr Narendra Modi who had rationalised the 
genocide in Gujarat by his "action reaction thesis"had during his 
Gaurav Yatra clearly stated that : "If Gujarat is to be developed, a 
system has to be developed where every child gets education, manners 
and employment. For this, those who are multiplying the population at 
a rapid rate will need to learn a lesson." Bal Thackeray the supremo 
of the Shiv Sena in his Dashahara speech had advocated formation of 
"Hindu suicide squads who can also create terror." Mr K.S. Sudershan 
the Sarsanghchalak of the Sangh Parivar day in and day out keeps 
peddling his pet thesis of " an epic war between the Hindus and the 
nonHindus in the near future." There is no doubt that tonnes of paper 
will be wasted if one starts enumerating the way the Togadias issued 
"death sentence to the pseudo secularists" or the cavalier manner in 
which the Giriraj Kishores' rationalised the killing of five dalits 
in Jhajjar claiming that ".. the Puranas accord more importance to 
the cow vis a vis human beings".

A key question naturally arises why the people in power apparently 
"failed" to act notwithstanding the fact that they had enough 
provisions at their hand and the Supreme Court itself had to 
intervene to protect the constitutional rights granted to each and 
every citizen of India . This simple query brings forth the way the 
Hindutva pantheon itself operates and the manner in which "method in 
madness" unfolds itself in the Indian polity. It also exposes the 
apparent battle of attrition which is played in public wherein the 
Singhals and the Togadias spew venom, ridicule minorities and call 
for the formation of Hindu suicide squads and the Advanis and the 
Vajpayees make salutary appeals for restraint. A veteran BJP leader 
shared with the "Outlook" team  the way the "larger gameplan" 
operates.According to him "Any practicing politician will tell you 
that there is overt and covert politics being played out. While 
people like L.K. Advani are overt politicians, Togadia is covert. 
There is not much difference in what they are saying. It is just the 
language that is different. Advani is in the government. Togadia is 
outside it. So Advani's speech has to be restrained, while Togadia is 
a free man. After all, people like Togadia, Modi and Singhal are 
basically doing our work, saffronising the scenario.The BJP itself is 
nothing but a patchwork of various Sangh platforms."( Outlook, 4 Nov 
2002)

Ofcourse under pressing circumstances it is difficult for the 
"moderates" to keep themselves cool and they have to risk their well 
cultivated image at the altar of political exigencies and deliver the 
not so well received "Goa Musings" and tell the "minorities to 
behave" lest they would be exposed to some revised edition of the 
Gujarat experiment. One is also witness to the stragne spectacles 
enacted by the "original incarnation of Sardar Patel " (before the 
advent of the Chhote and the semi Bade Sardars) who after defending 
his protege in Gujarat for "the excellet job done and controlling the 
riots in 72 hours" has no qualms in expressing remorse over the 
Gujarat happenigs on foreign soil.

Taking into consideration the symbiotic relationship which exists 
between the different member organisations of the "Parivar" and the 
way they are feeling vindicated and emboldened a la the "successful 
experiment" in Gujarat would it be improper to say that the days 
ahead are not going to remain peaceful despite sincere wishes from 
all of us ?

While reposing full faith in the wisdom of the Supreme Court and 
sincerely expecting that one day or the other,  justice would be done 
in all such cases of provocation. intimidation and violence , one 
cannot expect that the "fire spitters" can be dealt only at the legal 
level. There is need to understand that not only there is greater 
acceptance of the views of the "loony right" among  a significant 
section of the Hindu majority but also that these hatespeeches serve 
the core constituency of the Hindutva brigade in very many ways.

Social scientists have rightly noted that the nineties have brought 
in a rightward shift of the Indian polity. Definitely the need of the 
hour is to understand that a coutrywide mass movement not only to 
defend the secular, democratic ideals enshrined in the constitution 
but also to defend the right to life and livelihood of ordinary 
citizens can only stop the juggernaut of the Hindutva Brigade and 
silence the fire eaters once for all.

At this juncture one cannot help but recall the infamous "Rivers of 
Blood"speech in England by Enoch Powell in 1968 and the way he was 
stigmatised and the way he became a parliamentary leper. When will 
the day arrive when the Indian incarnations of the Powells' would be 
similarly stigmatised and turned into not only political but social 
lepers.


______


#6.

The Independent (UK)

Hindu nationalist linked to pogrom deaths is arrested

By Peter Popham

17 April 2003

A fiery Hindu nationalist leader linked to the pogrom in the western 
state of Gujarat two years ago that killed hundreds of Muslims has 
been charged with sedition. If found guilty he could face life 
imprisonment.

Praveen Togadia was arrested in Ajmer, Rajasthan, the state bordering 
Gujarat to the north that is ruled by a Congress Party-led coalition. 
The Congress Party is the secularist adversary of the Hindu 
nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which governs both in 
Gujarat and at the centre in Delhi.

Mr Togadia is the demagogic spearhead of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad 
(VHP) or World Hindu Council, one of the hardline militant branches 
of the Hindu nationalist movement of which the BJP is the political 
arm. The movement's main symbolic goal is the building of a temple to 
the Hindu god Ram in Ayodhya, on the ruins of a mosque torn down by 
Hindu fanatics 10 years ago. But its grand political aim is the 
creation of a "Hindu rashtra" in India, a state in which Hindus will 
rule unimpeded and the rest, notably Muslims and Christians, will be 
expected to bend the knee.

Mr Togadia was arrested after handing out short, sharpened tridents, 
a symbol of the god Shiva, at a rally on Sunday. He was charged with 
handling illegal weapons. But now the Rajasthan government has raised 
the charge to the far more serious one of sedition or "waging war or 
attempting anti-national activity". Another senior VHP leader, 
Giriraj Kishore, claimed that the more serious charge was brought 
merely to deny Mr Togadia bail.

Rajasthan's government fears that Mr Togadia and his colleagues 
intend to whip up the same sort of communal hatred in Rajasthan that 
served them so well in Gujarat. Though widely condemned, the pogrom 
in Gujarat served the the Hindu nationalist chief minister, Narendra 
Modi, very well, uniting an election-winning majority of the state's 
Hindus behind his communalist banner and securing him a second term 
in office.

_____


#7.

The Hindu, April 20, 2003
Rajasthan: Togadia charged with damaging communal harmony
AJMER, APRIL 19. The much-awaited hearing on the bail application 
moved by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad general secretary, Praveen Togadia 
- who has been in judicial custody since April 14 - was postponed 
till Monday by a sessions court ...
http://www.hinduonnet.com/stories/2003042003071000.htm

_____


#8.

URGENT  ACTION REQUEST!

PLEASE WRITE LETTERS TO THE CHIEF MINISTER OF THE INDIAN STATE OF 
RAJASTHAN TO CONGRATULATE HIM AND SUPPORT HIM FOR FIRM ACTION TO 
ARREST THE LEADER OF THE HINDU FAR RIGHT FOR INCITING VIOLENCE AND 
=46OR DISTRIBUTING ARMS. THERE IS BIG PRESSURE ON THE RAJASTHAN 
ADMINISTRATION TO PUT AN END TO ITS STERN ACTION AGAINST THE 
=46UNDAMENTALISTS. So please do write to say that you warmly endorse 
secular action by the Rajasthan to ensure social peace.

The contact details of the Rajasthan CM are:
PHONE: (India Country Code i.e. 91)  +  141-2381212 and 141- 2381213
=46ax: (India Country Code i.e. 91)   +    141-2227687
EMAIL: cm@raj.nic.in



--------------------------Sample Email/fax-----------------------
To: Shri Ashok Gehlot,
Chief Minister of Rajasthan

We write to congratulate your administration on upholding the law and
arresting VHP General Secretary Pravin Togadia for distribution of
trishuls.  We urge you to ensure that the due process of law is carried
out and the case against Mr. Togadia is processed with utmost seriousness
and firmness.

Media reports indicate that your government is under considerable pressure
from the VHP and the BJP for arresting Mr. Togadia. We urge you and appeal
to you NOT to succumb to these pressures. It is imperative that the due
process of law be carried out and all those making hate speeches be
arrested and prosecuted.

We also wish to remind you that though the bodies like the VHP may be more
visible and louder than those who oppose them -- the majority of Indians
do not support politics of hatred. Further, there is worldwide experience
that divisiveness and violence retards investment and thereby economic as
well as social progress. We look to leaders like yourself to uphold the
law and secure a prosperous and peaceful future for the people of
Rajasthan and India.

Signed:


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

SACW is an informal, independent & non-profit citizens wire service run by
South Asia Citizens Web (www.mnet.fr/aiindex).

DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not
necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers.