Anna Hazare lands up in the camp of fifth columnists.

Anna Hazare is a simple and honest man, but he is also a fearless crusader against corruption. He had become a terror for the corrupt politicians and bureaucrats in Maharashtra as his  non-violent fight against corruption in the past had led to resignation of many such corrupt ministers and officials in the state. In early 2000s, a movement led by Anna Hazare had forced the state government to pass the Maharashtra Right to Information Act, which was later used by the Centre as a base paper for framing its own RTI Act. Hazare’s latest crusade against corruption was the fast unto death agitation that he had launched from April 5th, 2011 at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi with the backing of  civil society groups, seeking a stronger Jan Lokpal bill incorporating the recommendations from the draft bill prepared by civil society activists Prashant Bhushan, Arvind Kagrival and Karnataka Lokayukta Santosh Hegde. Earlier Anna Hazare and his civil society supporters had outrightly rejected the draft Lokpal bill prepared by the Group of Ministers appointed by the government, as toothless and ineffective. Meanwhile, senior cabinet minister  Sharat Powar had resigned from the Group of Ministers appointed for preparing the draft bill following strong criticism by Hazare over the inclusion of people like Sharat Powar in the Group of Ministers.

Anna Hazare’s fast unto death agitation seeking a strong Jan Lokpal Act to curb corruption had evoked spontaneous and nation-wide support from all across the country. In 100 cities across India , there were symbolic protest programmes on April 5, in support of Hazare’s  “India Against Corruption” agitation in Delhi . Civil society leader Medha Patkar led the protest demonstration in Mumbai, where as Mallika Sarabhai led the same in Ahmedabad. The press and the electronic media, especially the English media, had given wide coverage to the event and there were extensive debates over Hazare’s anti-corruption agitation  on every major TV channel in India . There was also running commentary on the progress of Hazare’s ‘fast unto death’ programme and related developments  on some of the important TV channels in the country. No other event in the recent history of India attracted so much public and media attention as Hazare’s fast unto death agitation in Delhi . Suddenly Hazare became a national icon and people from different parts of the country started pouring into Jantar Mantar in Delhi in support of his fast unto death agitation. The sudden emergence of Anna Hazare as a saviour of the nation gave him a larger than life image, and the UPA government looking for a way out, showed clear signs of panic. Finally on April 8th,  a jittery government conceded his demand to constitute a joint committee of senior ministers and civil society activists to draft a new bill to establish the institution of Lokpal at the Centre and a triumphant Anna Hazare ended his fast unto death agitation on  9th April, after the government issued a gazette notification constituting a ten-member joint Committee of senior ministers and civil society activists to draft an effective Lokpal Bill.

How is it that, Anna Hazare, whose popularity was hitherto confined only to Maharashtra , suddenly emerged as a national icon and how did his movement take the nation by storm? The truth is that the unprecedented media coverage of the event and the running commentary on the progress of Hazare’s ‘fast unto death’ agitation by the electronic media had almost paralyzed the nation for a week and it also helped to create a halo around Anna Hazare. The hype around Anna Hazare’s fast unto death agitation had also brought to light Hazare’s humble background and simple lifestyle and his successful fight against corruption in the past. Coming at a time when the people of India are extremely angry and agitated over the magnitude of corruption in India, as have been brought out through scams like 2G Spectrum, CWG and Adarsh Society, they were highly impressed by the honesty, simplicity and the past record  of Hazare as a crusader against corruption and they wholeheartedly supported his “India against corruption” movement. The turn of events not only elevated him to the status of a national icon, but a section of the media even started projecting  Hazare as a second ‘Mahatma’ in the making.

Civil Society Groups

Unlike the past agitational programmes of Anna Hazare, his present ‘India Against Corruption’ movement was totally planned and  organized by the civil society activists. But who are these civil society activists? It is the same NGO and human rights groups which were earlier known as social action groups or non-party political formations that are now projecting themselves as the so-called civil society organizations. Many prominent activists of these foreign-funded civil society groups were found actively associated with or supporting various militant and anti-national movements in the country. The civil society groups have a very powerful and growing network of highly educated and talented, but evil-minded, activists in the country.

It  is a well-calculated strategy of the civil society groups to infiltrate into all popular movements and social, academic and cultural institutions in the country and take control of the same. It is in accordance with this strategy that the control of some socio-cultural institutions like the Kalakshetra of Chennai, Yashwant Rao Chavan Academy of Development and Administration (YASHDA) of Pune, INTACH of Delhi and hundreds of other social, cultural and research institutions has been wrested by the civil society groups. The civil society activists also try to win over  influential social activists and crusaders into their camp through various means to expand and strengthen their movement and also enhance the image of the powerful civil society network in India . For instance, sometime around 1985, prominent civil society activist Medha Patkar and her associates had successfully lured an eminent social activist Baba Amte of Maharashtra into the civil society camp by allegedly helping him to win the coveted Ramon Magsaysay Award for the service he did among the lepers in the state. He even shifted his base from “Anandvan ashram” in Wordha to the bank of river Narmada in 1989 to become a full time activist of Narmada Bachao Andolan led by Medha Patkar. In the very next year ie 1990, he won the Templeton Award for his work among the lepers in the state. This award, carrying a cash component of  $279000, was instituted by the Templeton Foundation of U.K. Baba Amte died on February 9, 2008. Baba Amte’s son Dr. Prakash Amte and daughter-in-law Dr.Mandakini Amte, who are also part of the civil society now, also won the Ramon Magsaysay award in 2008, for community leadership.

Former IPS officer Kiran Bedi is another good catch by the civil society lobby. Even when she was in service, she had always remained in the public limelight not only for being the first woman IPS officer in India , but also for her knack of courting controversies. Though she was smart and intelligent and a skillful manipulator in  maintaining public relations, discipline was not one of her virtues. She was reportedly a big headache for all her superior officers, while in service. The civil society activists had correctly judged her potential as a future activist during her service days itself and had been cultivating her since long. No wonder, she won the Ramon Magsaysay Award in 1994 for her role in introducing jail reforms. When failed to get elevated as the Commissioner of Delhi Police, a dejected Bedi opted for voluntary retirement in December, 2007.  After her retirement, a documentary film on her life was produced by an Australian film maker Megan Doneman who also directed the film. This documentary titled “Yes, Madam Sir” which was screened at Santa Barbara International Festival in 2009 won two top awards, $100000 for best documentary and $2500 for Santa Barbara “Social Justice Award”. Narrated by Helen Mirren, the academy award winning actress, the 94-minute documentary tracks down Bedi’s tumultuous career in the police force. Kiran Bedi was present during the film’s screening in Toronto , Dubai and Adelaide . The so-called civil society had reportedly played a key role in producing this film for giving a big boost to Kiran Bedi’s image. Their efforts have not gone in vain. Ms. Bedi is a full-fledged activist of the so-called civil society now. The film “Yes, Madam Sir” is yet to be released in India .

The civil society activists have been trying to woo Anna Hazare into the civil society camp for quite some time and it appears that Hazare has fallen into the trap set by the civil society groups to lure him to their side with national level mobilization of support for his “ India against corruption” movement.  Apparently, the civil society activists wanted to exploit the clean image of Anna Hazare to launch a popular movement to get a draconian anti-corruption bill, in the form of the proposed Jan Lokpal bill, passed and control and dominate it by inducting their own nominees into it. But, does Anna Hazare know the real identity, personal credentials, true colour and ultimate objectives of these so-called civil society activists? A brief account of the views and activities of some of these civil society activists given, as under, would help to understand their true nature better.

Harsh Mander:

He is a prominent civil society activist and a member of the National Advisory Council. In a write up in Hindustan Times, dated 13th April, 2011, he wrote that he did not visit Anna Hazare at the venue of his ‘fast unto agitation’ in Delhi as he was disturbed by the large portrait of Bharat Mata that adorned the stage. He was further hurt when he saw some Hindu leaders like Baba Ramdev, Shri Shri Ravi Shankar and RSS leader Ram Madhav visiting Anna Hazare. Mander further added that later when Hazare praised Narendra Modi for the developmental work undertaken in Gujarat , he was convinced  that he took the right decision by not visiting Anna Hazare at Jantar Mantar.

 A. Padma, wife of Ramakrishna, state secretary of CPI-Maoist in Andhra Pradesh, was arrested by the Orissa police from Koraput district of Orissa on November 13, 2010. On interrogation by the police, it was found that she was working under the assumed name Sirishakka since October 2008 as a home manager cum tutor in “Rainbow” orphanage for girls, run by ‘Aman Biradari’, an NGO founded by Harsh Mander in Hyderabad . She was one of the Maoist leaders released by the Orissa government in exchange of abducted collector of Malkangiri district R.Vineel Krishna. Harsh Mander, a former IAS officer, who gets upset by the mere sight of a Bharat Mata portrait had no problem in giving shelter to a top woman Maoist leader.

Medha Patkar:

She is the top most leader of the anti-development lobby in India . The NGOs floated by her like the National Alliance of People’s Movememt (NAPM) and Narmada Bachao Andolan had played a stellar role in blocking or stalling hundreds of big development projects in India since last 25 years by raking up issues like rehabilitation, loss of livelihood and environmental pollution. The Narmada project which involves the construction of a number of small and big dams spread over four states is delayed by about 20 years because of the obstructionist activities of Medha Patkar. With the help of some international NGOs, she was also successful in blocking a $480 million loan sanctioned by the world bank and another $200 million loan sanctioned by the Japanese government for the Narmada project. She is also a staunch supporter of the Maoist movement and was twice attacked by the villagers of Chattisgarh for her open support to Maoists. In another development, the Supreme Court on April 5, 2011, has issued notice to Medha Patkar-headed NGO Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) on Madhya Pradesh government’s plea to initiate perjury proceedings against her NGO for filing a false affidavit in the court about the alleged  acquisition of five villages in MP  for Omkareswar dam project..

Arundhati Roy:

On March 6, 2002, Arundhati Roy was sentenced to a ‘symbolic’ one day in prison by the Supreme Court for her criticism against the court’s judgment in favour of the Narmada dam project. A two-judge panel had said that she was guilty of “scandalizing the court and lowering its dignity through her statements.”

Arundhati Roy is a staunch supporter of the Maoist movement and describes Maoists as Gandhians with guns. She is also of the firm view that Afzal Guru who was sentenced to death in the Parliament attack case is innocent and has criticized  the Supreme Court for upholding his death sentence without even giving him a fair trial. Addressing a massive anti-India rally organized by Kashmiri separatists in Kashmir valley on August 18, 2008, Ms.Roy had declared that India needs azadi from Kashmir as much as Kashmir needs azadi from India . On another occasion  participating in an anti-India seminar organized by the civil society activists in Delhi on October 21, 2010, she thundered that Kashmir should get azadi from the ‘bhooke-nange’ Hindustan . Arundhati Roy, who is a strong critic of India ’s nuclear ambitions, had expressed her shock and anger over the Pokran-II nuclear tests and had said that she was ashamed to be an Indian. She had further declared herself as an independent mobile republic and a  citizen of earth. She has written several articles in support of Kashmiri separatists, Maoists and also against the unjust death sentence given to Afzal Guru in the Parliament attack case.

Swami Agnivesh:

On March 26, 2011, Swami Agnivesh and his supporters who went to Dantewada area in Chattisgarh with some relief materials for the villagers whose houses were allegedly burned down by the police and Salva Judum activists, were roughed up and chased out of the area by angry villagers because of Agnivesh’s links with Maoists. Swami Agnivesh had also raised slogans hailing Maoists following the release of five abducted policemen of Chattisgarh by the Maoists on April 15, 2011, as per an affidavit submitted by the Chattisgarh government in the Supreme Court. This fake Hindu leader is notorious for his close links with the Maoists.

Aruna Roy:

Ms.Aruna Roy is serving as a member of the National Advisory Council (NAC) for a second time. She started her career as an IAS officer in 1968. She quit the IAS in 1975, opting to become a social activist along with her husband Sanjit Bunkar Roy at Tilonia, Ajmer district in Rajastan. She started working independently from 1983 and later founded the NGO Mazdoor Kisan Sakti Saghatana in 1990. In the name of empowering the marginalized sections of people, she was found promoting militancy among the Adivasis and Dalits. She is also a staunch supporter of the Maoist movement. She won the Ramon Magsaysay award in 2000 for her work done for the peasants and workers. She had also played a leading role in the enactment and implementation of the RTI Act.

Teesta Satalvad:

The Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team which conducted detailed inquires into various incidents of atrocities during the Gujarat riots had severely censured  rights activist Teesta Satalvad, Convener of the NGO “Citizens for Justice and Peace” for cooking up stories and fabricating evidence to dub Hindu activists as rapists and murderers, deliberately meant to incite anger and hatred among the Muslims. The SIT led by R.K.Raghavan, former director of CBI,  told the Supreme Court on April 13, 2009 about the involvement of Teesta Satalvad in fabrication of evidence against the riot accused. In a report submitted before a Bench comprising of Justices Arijit Pasayat, P.Sathasivam and Aftab Alam, the SIT alleged that many incidents of killings and  other acts of violence as alleged by Satalvad were actually cooked up, false charges were leveled and false witnesses were tutored to give evidence about imaginary incidents. Quoting from the SIT report, Gujarat c
unsel and senior advocate Mukul Rohtagi said that 22 witnesses who had submitted identical affidavits before various courts were questioned by the SIT which found that they had been tutored and handed over affidavits by Teesta Satalvad, although they had not actually witnessed any riot incidents. Pointing out a specific instance, the SIT said how the evidence of 22 witnesses was suspect, owing to the identical submissions made in their affidavits submitted to the court. The SIT found that all the 22 affidavits were drafted, typed and printed from the same computer giving sufficient grounds to believe that they were tutored. .(“NGOs,Teesta spiced up riot incidents: SIT”, TOI, dated. Aril 15, 2009)

When three catholic nuns were raped by about 20-24 tribals at Jhabua in Madhya Pradesh on 23d September, 1998, the so-called secular press and the civil rights activists initially put the blame on Hindu activists and conducted a campaign against the Sangh Parivar throughout India . In Mumbai, civil society activists Teesta Satalvad and Asghar Ali Engineer joined Archbishop Evan Dias in conducting a campaign against the Sangh Parivar. Catholic schools in Mumbai observed a bandh in protest against the incident and school children were used to conduct protest morchas. Finally when the investigation was over, it was found that the accused arrested in the case included 12 tribal Christians, and not a single Hindu activist was involved.

Teesta Satalvad was pulled up by the Supreme Court on January 11, 2011, for sending copies of communications addressed to Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the Gujarat riots to the UN Human Rights Commission. As in Sri Lanka and elsewhere, the civil rights activists in India also enjoy the patronage of the UN Human Rights Commission.

Ramachandra Guha:

On 23, June, 2010, during a lunch-time lecture on his book “India after Gandhi”organized by Nyenrode, the Netherlands Institute of International Relations and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, historian and civil society activist Ramachandra Guha asserted that despite its impressive economic growth, India will never become an economic super power. According to him, India ’s enormous economic growth contains a multitude of sins and he felt that beset with internal problems, fissures and contradictions, India is unlikely to survive as a nation. He expressed the view that India should not even dream of becoming a super power.

Lachit Bordolai and Hiranya Saikya

Civil society activists Lachit Bordolai and Hiranya Saikya figured in the 11-member People’s Consultative Group (PCG) appointed by the UPA government to hold peace dialogue with the ULFA leaders. Only civil society activists acceptable to both the Centre and the ULFA leadership are appointed as members of People’s Consultative Group.

Ironically, in February, 2008, PCG member and a prominent human rights activist Lachit Bordolai himself was arrested under the NSA by the Assam police in connection with an ULFA plot to hijack a plane from Guwahati to Pakistan in 2007. Another PCG member Hiranya Saikya was also arrested by the Assam police under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act on 22nd. June, 2008 for acting as a conduit for communicating messages and instructions from the ULFA top brass to the field activists. In fact all the civil society activists nominated to the People’s Consultative Group (PCG), including noted writer Indira Goswami, and accepted as mediators by the government are found to have  close links with the activities of the ULFA.

Rajinder Sachar:

     Civil society activist and retired chief justice of Delhi High Court Rajinder Sachar, through his Sachar Committee report on the status of Muslims in India had tried to convince the whole world  that the Muslims in India are mostly poor, backward and illiterate as there is wide-spread discrimination against them in the fields of education and employment. The report further said that their percentage in government service is disproportionately low and in the security agencies, it is even further lower. He used cooked up data, lies and half truths to arrive at this conclusion. The extent of damage done to the country by this report can be verified from the coverage of 2008 Mumbai attacks  by the international media. While commenting on the event, a substantial section of the western media extensively quoted from the Sachar Committee report to justify the terror attacks in Mumbai as a sort of retaliation for the ill-treatment of Muslims in India . Sachar, who is a supporter of various militant movements in India had organized press conferences in the past to condemn the arrest of Maoist leaders like Arun Pareria and Maoist supporters like Dr.Binayak Sen. In January, 2000, when Naga under ground leader Th. Muivah was arrested by Thailand police for traveling from Karachi to Bangkok on a fake passport, Rajinder Sachar had air-dashed to Bangkok to express his support and solidarity with the arrested Naga leader.

From the brief account given above about the so-called civil society activists in India, it is unmistakably clear that all the core activists of the civil society are simply a bunch of anti-nationals who are cultivated by certain western agencies to work as a fifth column to promote fissiparous tendencies in India. These activists do not believe in nationalism or national boundaries. In fact they do not even believe in the concept of India as a nation state. Their argument is that India was never a united and independent entity in the past and this conglomeration of warring kingdoms were brought together by the British for administrative convenience. They believe that India is still a conglomeration of different nationalities, who are kept suppressed by the brutal state power. Supported by the western lobby, these activists believe that several states in India are on the verge of a civil war and it is their duty to help the different nationalities in India to achieve their goal of independence. It is in accordance with such a dangerous doctrine that the civil society activists are indulging in various disruptive and antinational activities in India , as stated below.

The civil society activists support all militant and secessionist  movements in India , like Islamic militancy, ULFA, Maoist movement, Kashmiri separatists, etc.

They are opposed to India ’s nuclear and space programmes.

They are opposed to all development projects in India .

They are against allocation of more funds for strengthening our armed forces.

They promote militancy among the Adivasis and Dalits and also try to create differences and clashes between Dalits and upper caste people in the country.

They try to defame all nationalist forces in the country.

They particularly target Narendra Modi, a highly popular and dynamic leader and an efficient administrator who has the potential to become a strong and popular prime minister of India .

They are opposed to all stringent and effective laws meant to curb terrorism.

Civil society leader Rajinder Sachar was the main speaker at a convention organized by the left extremists and civil society activists in New Delhi on April 15, 2010, to condemn the genocidal war crimes perpetrated by the Sri Lankan government on Tamils in Sri Lanka and India ’s indifference to the plight of Sri Lankan Tamils.  One of the resolutions unanimously passed by the convention is reproduced below.

“The House condemns the Indian state’s war on the various nationalities fighting for self-determination”.

 

This resolution clearly shows that the civil society activists consider people in all insurgency-affected states in India as different nationalities and they have no inhibition or qualms of conscience in declaring their open, unambiguous and unashamed support for the various militant and secessionist movements in the country. It is in such a camp of fifth columnists that Anna Hazare has landed up now.

Conspiracy behind Anna Hazare’s “Fast unto death” agitation

Anna Hazare’s “Fast unto death” agitation in Delhi from April 5, 2011 was the result of a big conspiracy hatched by the civil society activists, pro-western English media and the National Advisory Council. The 2G, CWG and other scams and also the corruption charges raised by former Union Minister Subramanyam Swami directly against Sonia Gandhi had all sullied the image of the UPA government very badly and the UPA had started losing by-elections in different states. Baba Ramdev’s anti-corruption campaign was also gaining momentum. Addressing a mammoth rally against corruption organized by Ramdev’s supporters in New Delhi on February 27, 2011, Ramdev had openly attacked the Congress for encouraging corruption in India . Ramdev had planned more such rallies and the Congress leadership was clearly unnerved. They knew that something had to be done urgently to divert the attention of the people and to neutralize Baba Ramdev’s campaign against corruption and black money. The civil society activists who came to the rescue of Sonia Gandhi then used Anna Hazare to launch a ‘fast unto death’ agitation demanding a stronger Lokpal Bill with inclusion of civil society members in the drafting committee and assuring Hazare national level mobilization of support for him by the vast and powerful network of civil society activists. The agitation that lasted for five days had an electrifying effect on the nation because of the unprecedented  projection it got from the press and electronic media. The civil society activists organized protest demonstrations, dharnas, hunger strike and meetings in all major cities in India in support of Hazare’s agitation in Delhi . People in the cities were glued to different TV channels to know the latest development over Hazare’s fast. The hysteria created by the media over Hazare’s fast elevated him to the status of a national icon and he seemed to enjoy it. He probably started having hallucinations about becoming another Mahatma as indicated by his comment that had he continued his fast for another three or four days, the UPA government would have collapsed. Whatever it may be, the five-day ‘fast unto death’ agitation planned and executed by the civil society activists was a bigger success than they hoped for as it helped to divert people’s attention from various scams to the controversial Lokpal Bill relegating the issue of corruption to the back seat. It also gave a big boost to Hazare’s personal image placating him and cementing his integration into the civil society club and cleared the way for the adoption of a stronger and more draconian Lokpal Bill. The five-day drama also showed how Anna Hazare has already become a prisoner of the so-called civil society. Anna Hazare during one of his interactive sessions with the newsmen at his agitational venue in Delhi had praised the development work done by chief ministers Narendra Modi and Nitish Kumar in their respective states. The civil society activists like Medha Patkar and Harsh Mander had immediately taken objection to Hazare’s praise for Narendra Modi and drawing his attention to the role of Modi in the genocide of Muslims during the 2002 communal riots in Gujarat . Anna Hazare subsequently was forced to issue a clarification stating that he had only praised Modi’s development work in Gujarat , and not his role in dealing with the riots.

Media’s role

A substantial section of the English media, both the press and electronic, under the influence of certain western agencies has always been supporting all anti-social elements and forces in the country for the past few years. Such biased sections of media had unashamedly supported Maoist movement, Kashmiri separatists, Islamic militants, etc, in the past. It is the same section of media which went out of the way to project Anna Hazare as a new messiah of the people and ensured the success of his ‘fast unto death’ agitation, which makes its intentions suspect. Where was this media, when Baba Ramdev addressed a massive gathering in Delhi on February 27th this year as part of his drive against corruption and black money? It got hardly any mention in the media. The media which helped to elevate Anna Hazare to the status of a national icon also helped the civil society crooks to hijack the anti-corruption drive of Baba Ramdev, using Anna Hazare. The civil society activists were also able to snatch a major role in drafting the Lokpal Bill and ensuring majority representation for them in the proposed all-powerful institution of Lokpal.

 Jan Lokpal bill

The proposed Jan Lokpal bill, if accepted in the present form as drafted by the civil society activists, will be the most draconian piece of legislation. The bill demands that the members of the Lokpal be conferred with judicial and police powers. They also want the Supreme Court and Prime Minister also to be brought under the purview of the Lokpal. If this demand is accepted, the monster called Lokpal will have the power to dismiss even the Prime Minister and the chief justice of the Supreme Court. A selection panel comprising of following dignitaries will appoint the members of the Lokpal.

1) Chairpersons of both Houses of Parliament

2) Two senior most judges of  Supreme Court

3) Two senior most chief justices of High Court

4) All Nobel Laureates of Indian origin

5) Chairperson of National Human Rights Commission

6) Last two Magsaysay Award winners of Indian origin

7) Comptroller and Auditor General of India

8) Chief Election Commissioner

9) Bharat Ratna Award winners.

 If these are the guidelines for constituting the selection panel, then most of the members in Lokpal will be the nominees of the civil society. What better prescription is there for the decimation of India as a nation state.

The inclusion of Nobel Laureates of Indian origin and last two Magsaysay Award winners of Indian origin in the selection panel is interesting. Past experience shows that only nominees approved by the U.S. government can win the Nobel Prize. For instance, though many ardent fans of Mahatma Gandhi have won the Nobel Peace Prize, Gandhi himself was  denied this honour despite being nominated five times and short-listed thrice. Gandhi, who showed the world that anything can be achieved through ‘satyagrah’ and non-violence was nominated for the award in 1937, 1938, 1939,1947 and a few days before he was martyred in January 1948. Similarly, India ’s first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, also failed to win the Nobel Prize, though he was nominated for this coveted award 11 times. Probably the socialist views of Nehru and Gandhi’s criticism against the conversion activities of Christian missionaries were not to the liking of the Nobel Committee and the U S. While Gandhi and Nehru were denied the Nobel Peace Prize, those who won the Nobel Peace award include the master manipulator and war monger Henry Kissinger (1973), PLO leader and a terrorist Yasser Arafat (1994) and Mikhail Gorbachev (1990) who presided over the disintegration of the Soviet Union. The fact that some CIA-linked human rights organizations who support Maoist movement in India could mobilize the support of 44 Nobel Laureates to demand the immediate release of Dr.Binayak Sen, a jailed pro-Maoist human rights activist of Chattisgarh, further confirms the continued loyalty of Nobel Laureates to the various US agencies.

 As far as the Magsaysay Award winners are concerned, this award is an American award for Asians. These annual awards given to Asians under different categories, were constituted in 1957 by the Rockefeller Foundation in memory of Ramon Magsaysay, the former President of Philippines. The Magsaysay awards were earlier given to eligible people in five categories. In 2000, a new category, called emergent leadership, was introduced with the financial support from Ford Foundation and Aru

Responses