Congress!!! Does it know something other than Licking boots of Gandhi's & Nehru's!!!

Today I saw Kapil Sibal in Devil's Advocate with Karan Thapar on CNN-IBN.

It was a great experience and there were moments when I just couldnt believe to what nadir Congress as a party has touched.

And dont miss the mention of Ryan Gandhi, from Karan, he is really the big daddy of all!!!

Here is the full coverage of this show from the Show!!!

Congress party’s spokesman and Union Minister Kapil Sibal explains his party’s reaction on the outcome of Uttar Pradesh Assembly elections in an exclusive interview to Karan Thapar on Devil’s Advocate.

Karan Thapar: Mr Sibal, despite Rahul Gandhi’s extensive campaigning in Uttar Pradesh, the party lost three seats (from its kitty in 2002) and your vote share came down to 8.24 per cent. Can you concede that this is a disappointing outcome?

Kapil Sibal: Absolutely. It is a disappointing outcome. The only sense of solace is that whereas other parties have lost their vote bank substantially, at least we have maintained our vote bank.

Karan Thapar: Well, you didn’t have very much to maintain. It was 8.96 earlier and now it’s around 8.24 per cent.

Kapil Sibal: It is about the same. We started this election with 16 seats.

Karan Thapar: I thought it was 25.

Kapil Sibal: You are talking about the 2002.

Karan Thapar: But that’s the only fair comparison.

Kapil Sibal: No, not really. Nine of them left us. We started these polls with only 16 MLAs and we have got 22. It’s no solace for us, but I’m only saying that whereas the BJP has come down substantially, lost 50 odd seats, Samjawadi Party has lost 100 odd seats. We are still better.

Karan Thapar: You seem determined to find a silver lining to the dark cloud?

Kapil Sibal: No, it’s not so. I am disappointed.

Karan Thapar: All right then. Let us explore the disappointment. The truth of the matter is that in 2002, you won 25 seats and this time you have won 12 per cent less. In 2002, you had an 8.96 vote share, this time it has fallen by six per cent. What went wrong?

Kapil Sibal: Nothing went wrong. What went right for Mayawati is the question? Everything went right for her. She put up about 93 candidates in the reserved constituencies and she won 61.

Karan Thapar: Let’s not talk about what went right for Mayawati. Congress was fighting to do better, to improve your vote share, to win more seats. What went wrong?

Kapil Sibal: I told you. What went wrong with us is what went right for Maya. Namely, the vote-bank politics, Dalit politics with strategic alliances with Muslims, Brahmins and Scheduled Castes has worked for her.

Karan Thapar: Are you saying there is nothing that you could have done which would have improved your prospects and performance which you did not do? Were there no lapses at all?

Kapil Sibal: If you ask me, supposing where it all started in UP two years ago, we had people on the ground, which we did not have this time.

Karan Thapar: So you should’ve started earlier?

Kapil Sibal: Absolutely, there is no doubt about it.

Karan Thapar: Why didn’t you?

Kapil Sibal: I cannot answer that question. You know I was called to the election pretty late.

Karan Thapar: If you conceive that you should have started earlier, does this means that the managers who are responsible failed the target deadline?

Kapil Sibal: I’m not in a position nor do I wish to criticise. I’m being open and I’m saying, supposing we had more people on the ground, since we have been out of power for 17 years, it is difficult to build a base. All our workers since 1996 have actually moved away.

Karan Thapar: So you are saying three important things: You should have started earlier, you should have done more to build a base and you should have done so with more dedication.

Kapil Sibal: Absolutely, there is no doubt about it.

Karan Thapar: I take it that the lapses in all three areas lies with the UPCC president.

Kapil Sibal: No, this is not the issue. We are analysing an election result. We knew from the beginning that with an eight-nine per cent vote base, we are not going to get it to 30 per cent. We are a national party, so we don’t rely on caste. We thought we will give people an agenda. Our foremost objective was to remove Mulayam Singh Yadav and we have been able to do that.

Karan Thapar: You have not been able to do it, Mayawati has done that.

Kapil Sibal: Our attack helped the process as well.

Karan Thapar: Only marginally.

Kapil Sibal: That’s a matter of analysis.

Karan Thapar: Let us look at the facts. Rahul Gandhi chose the candidates personally, and led the campaign personally from the front. What share of the responsibility for not getting a better result falls on him?

Kapil Sibal: Like I said, this is not an anti-Congress, anti-BJP vote, it is an anti-Mulayam and pro-BSP vote. I am not here to tell you who’s responsible for what. I’m only telling you the ground reality. With the kind of response Rahul’s roadshows got, we are happy that we are building a base for the 2009 elections.



Karan Thapar: That is your interpretation, but UPCC President Salman Khurshid went on record to say that Rahul Gandhi came to UP to build the Congress. What is the outcome? The Congress tally of seats falls by 12 per cent, the vote share falls by six per cent. He has shrouded the Congress.

Kapil Sibal: Incidentally, Rome cannot be conquered in a day and you know that.

Karan Thapar: But you are losing ground and hardly advancing.

Kapil Sibal: It is hardly losing ground. We have not lost 12 per cent, that is factually incorrect.

Karan Thapar: Your vote share has also fallen by six per cent.

Kapil Sibal: That’s not a clear figure yet. In fact on several television channels, it’s said as far as Congress is concerned it has lost not any vote share.

Karan Thapar: The Times of India said on Saturday morning that it was 8.42 per cent compared to 8.96 per cent.

Kapil Sibal: The Times of India is not the gospel truth in this country.

Karan Thapar: Let us look at it like this. Given Rahul Gandhi came to build the Congress, but has instead shrunk it, is it because he failed to get support of the leadership in the UP Congress? After all, Salman Khurshid could not even get his wife elected.

Kapil Sibal: The proposition that Rahul came to build the party and lost is not true. We are the only party who has managed to maintain its vote share and seats. If you look at the BJP, they are now 17-18 per cent low on vote share. They have gone down from 106 to 50.

Karan Thapar: That’s because they had that much vote share to lose. But six per cent is terrible.

Kapil Sibal: I don’t agree with that figure, I’m sorry.

Karan Thapar: Let me explore with you the explanations you gave generously with what went wrong. Satyavat Chaturvedi, the General Secretary of the Congress Party, says was the Congress organisation. How badly lacking was your organisation?

Kapil Sibal: Remember what Rahul said when he entered the elections, “I’m here for the long haul.” So he knew that there were no miracles to be had in these elections. We ourselves knew that among the candidates we had put up, we were only in contention in some of the constituencies. And we were working hard in those constituencies.

Karan Thapar: Your fellow party colleagues, including ministers and other people like Salman Khurshid, claimed that they could get up to 40 or even 50 seats. So that was just vain boasting?

Kapil Sibal: No, your channels were boasting in a silly fashion.

Karan Thapar: Congressmen on those channels were endorsing it.

Kapil Sibal: What were the exit polls saying? So for somebody to say he expects 40 seats, there is nothing wrong, it is his perception. It went wrong. The exit polls of all your channels went wrong. So why blame Salman Khurshid for that?

Karan Thapar: As you say, you knew you were not going to get too many seats. As you said, to move from 8 per cent to 30 per cent was close to impossible. Given that you already knew this, was it wise to have fielded Rahul?

Kapil Sibal: Absolutely. Rahul is here to stay and he will lead the party in the next election.

Karan Thapar: In UP or the nation?

Kapil Sibal: I cannot say that. He has himself spoken about UP. It is something Rahul will decide.

Karan Thapar: He will decide?



Kapil Sibal: Of course, he has to decide whether he wants to concentrate in UP or go further?

Karan Thapar: This is not a decision his mother takes?

Kapil Sibal: This is a decision his mother takes in consultation with Rahul and vice versa. When I say Rahul, I mean the Congress party. He is part of it.

Karan Thapar:Rahul and Congress are synonymous?

Kapil Sibal: He is part of the Congress.

Karan Thapar: Before the UP elections, everyone said Rahul was a vote winner for the Congress. Has that image been damaged?

Kapil Sibal: Not at all. Rahul is a vote winner, will be one and will be the mascot of the party.

Karan Thapar: Before the UP elections, people said Rahul could be the miracle man who could win the 2009 elections for the party. Has that hope been damaged?

Kapil Sibal: I don’t think so. He is the miracle man for the party.

Karan Thapar: His image has not been dented at all?

Kapil Sibal: No. I’ll tell you why. It is because his sincerity, honesty, credentials and sense of purpose are all intact.

Karan Thapar: But has not his ability to deliver been badly dented?

Kapil Sibal: That has nothing to do with him. He is not on his own.

Karan Thapar: So Rahul is okay, but Congress went wrong?

Kapil Sibal: Always.

Karan Thapar: Kapil Sibal, let’s turn to Rahul Gandhi’s comments during the campaign in Uttar Pradesh which attracted not just controversy, but sharp criticism. Were they product of immaturity, inexperience or bad advice?

Kapil Sibal: No, it’s neither. I think it’s a product of the fact that in the mode of election, you say a lot of things which are meant in the context in which you say them and, of course, the media has a fun day, sort of misinterpreting them or actually making them into something that’s never meant.



Karan Thapar: Let’s in that case look closely two of the things he said. To begin with, Rahul Gandhi claimed had the Gandhi family been in politics, the Babri Masjid demolition would not have taken place. That not only overlooks the fact that his father Rajiv began the 1989 election in Ayodhya, promising Ram rajya, but it also cast aspersions upon Narashimha Rao, former party president and Prime Minister.

Kapil Sibal: If we look back, forget what Rahul said — when I as a Congress man look back and I look back at the then government — I do feel that we could have perhaps done more in protecting the Babri Masjid. It’s like saying that there is a crime committed and the policemen reach the spot a little late.

Karan Thapar: So, you are saying that the Narashimha Rao government shares some of the culpability for the crime.

Kapil Sibal: No, they may have reached late. May be they did not anticipate the crime. They don’t share any part of the culpability, but sometimes it does happen that the information comes late or you don’t assess the information well enough and so you cannot reach their on time.

Karan Thapar: If this is what was in Rahul Gandhi’s mind, then the problem is that in casting aspersions upon the Narashima Rao government, he was also casting aspersions upon Dr Manmohan Singh, who was the then finance minister.

Kapil Sibal: Not at all. That has never happened and I have explained it to you.

Karan Thapar: He was a part of the government?

Kapil Sibal: I have explained it to you what was meant. That sometimes it does happen that the policemen reach late, not because they share part of the culpability.

Karan Thapar: But one of the policemen who reaches late was, in fact, of the government that included the finance minister.

Kapil Sibal: If you remember, Kalyan Singh assured the Supreme Court that nothing would happen, so maybe the then prime minister believed Kalyan Singh.

Karan Thapar: You can’t accuse Narashimha Rao.

Kapil Sibal: We are not accusing him.

Karan Thapar: Well, Rahul Gandhi seems to have done so.

Kapil Sibal: No, he didn’t. I am sorry. This is again the spin of the media. May I explain this spin? He never said that Narashimha Rao was responsible. In fact, he subsequently held Narashimha Rao in great respect and esteem



Karan Thapar: He may hold him in great respect, but had the Gandhis been in politics…

Kapil Sibal: Let’s be clear. I think his statement was absolutely correct and I will tell you why. At the time when this happened, Ms Gandhi was not in politics.

Karan Thapar: Dr Manmohan Singh was part of the government that reacted late…

Kapil Sibal: When he said if the Gandhi family had been in politics, it was not talking about Dr Manmohan Singh, he was not talking about Narashimha Rao.

Karan Thapar: In what capacity would the Gandhi family be in politics?

Kapil Sibal: May I explain what he meant? At that time, Rahul Gandhi was not in politics, Rajiv Gandhi was no more and Ms Gandhi was not in Congress politics. Therefore, he said had we been in politics, this may not have happened. What’s wrong with it?

Karan Thapar: Quite right, had we been there to steer the government, we would have made sure that the demolition would not have happened, which meant Narashimha Rao was inadequate and, therefore, the government was inadequate and, therefore, the Prime Minister of today was inadequate.

Kapil Sibal: This is your spin. All that he said was had we been there in politics, may be this would not have happened. It’s not blaming Narashimha Rao.

Karan Thapar: Let me take up the spin you are putting on it. Had we been their in politics, this wouldn’t have happened. That clearly suggests that the rest of the Congress doesn’t measured up Gandhi family’s high standards.

Kapil Sibal: That’s your spin. That’s not what it means.

Karan Thapar: It also clearly suggests that without a Gandhi at the top, the party is not a secular.

Kapil Sibal: My dear that’s your spin.

Karan Thapar: That’s the only logical interpretation.

Kapil Sibal: That’s your illogical spin.

Karan Thapar: It’s the only logical interpretation.

Kapil Sibal: It’s the most illogical spin. When you say I may have done it, it does not mean somebody else is to blame.

Karan Thapar: Every single newspaper in the country interpreted it in this way, except for you.

Kapil Sibal: It’s like saying if I have been an advocate in the case, I may have own it. But that does not mean that somebody else pleaded it badly.

Karan Thapar: No, it clearly suggests that the other person didn’t plead it as well…

Kapil Sibal: It is a ‘may’…

Karan Thapar: A ‘may’ in this instance still cast doubt upon Narashimha Rao, it casts doubt upon Manmohan Singh.

Kapil Sibal: Sorry, I do not agree with you, Karan Thapar.

Karan Thapar: All right, let’s then move to the second statement that Rahul made, which attracted controversy and created a lot of criticism for him. He claimed in a vain boast that the Gandhi family had set out to divide Pakistan and succeeded. That not only overlooked the job done by Field Marshal Manekshaw, General Arora, the Indian Army and the Mukti Bahini, but it convinces the Pakistanis that India have been deliberately interfering in that country’s internal affairs.

Kapil Sibal: Quite frankly, again you are blowing it out of context. What he meant was that the liberation struggle that took place and Mrs Gandhi’s firm action at that time has to be applauded. That’s all he meant.

Karan Thapar: That’s not what he said.

Kapil Sibal: That’s exactly what he meant.

Karan Thapar: What he then needs to say what he means rather than saying something else. The young man’s articulation needs to be improved.

Kapil Sibal: In the course of an election, if you heard Kalyan Singh what he said, if you heard Rajnath Singh what he said, you can give any spin to it. The heart of the matter is that this is exactly what he meant. And we all know it - you know it, I know it.

Karan Thapar: I don’t know it. I am pursuing you.

Kapil Sibal: As an intelligent man, you do. And Karan, you are far more intelligent than any of us.

Karan Thapar: That’s a flattering complement.



Kapil Sibal: Let you know it. You are doing it for media, which is fine.

Karan Thapar: Let me put it like this. Not only did Rahul Gandhi make a vain boast that his family holds the sole responsibility for the Partition of Pakistan, but he also claimed credit for the family for Independence, ignoring Mahatma Gandhi.

Kapil Sibal: Again, that’s not true.

Karan Thapar: Can I finish?

Kapil Sibal: Again, that’s not true.

Karan Thapar: He said so.

Kapil Sibal: No, no.

Karan Thapar: He said my family had set out to achieve Independence and did it. There was no mention of Mahatma Gandhi.

Kapil Sibal: Let us be clear. If there is one family in this country, I mean if you look at the Nehru family - Jawaharlal Nehru, Vijaylaxmi Pandit, Krishna Haathi Singh, Indira Gandhi - all went to jail, no exception - Motilal Nehru, Kamla Nehru…

Karan Thapar: What about Mahatma Gandhi? Is it fitting that a young 36-year-old inexperienced MP should put his family before the Father of the Nation?

Kapil Sibal: Again, you are putting a spin on it.

Karan Thapar: How can I put a spin on it? I am quoting him.

Kapil Sibal: You are. He has not talked about Mahatma Gandhi.

Karan Thapar: He should have.

Kapil Sibal: He didn’t say he is not the Father of the Nation.

Karan Thapar: When claiming responsibility for Independence, he shouldn’t have forgotten Mahatma Gandhi.

Kapil Sibal: Your argument is that, in an election when you make a statement about the contribution of the family, you must give historical treaties of contribution of all Congressman from Bal Gangadhar Tilak and HR Gokhle to Mahatma Gandhi and to Abdul Kalam Azad. I am sorry, in an election that doesn’t happen.

Karan Thapar: I am sorry, in an election when you are winning votes, you need to be accurate, precise.

Kapil Sibal: I am sorry, this did not lose Rahul Gandhi any votes, it didn’t lose Congress any votes.

Karan Thapar: It lost him credibility.

Kapil Sibal: On the contrary, it has emerged that Rahul Gandhi has emerged as a credible face of the Congress party in Uttar Pradesh and hopefully in India.

Karan Thapar: That’s what you say. Let me quote to you from The Hindu, the paper that normally supports you.

Kapil Sibal: I’m not going to respond to it.

Karan Thapar: Just hear it.

Kapil Sibal: Okay.

Karan Thapar: In an editorial entitled - The politics of Immaturity - The Hindu writes, “Mr Gandhi’s problems are two-fold: the inability to think beyond the first family and the lack of a cohesive vision.”

Kapil Sibal: I am afraid, I do not agree. This is one family that has a completely cohesive vision. We are the only party that doesn’t do caste politics the way you have seen it in Uttar Pradesh. We are the only party that leads our people under a social engineering umbrella. And I think Rahul Gandhi, Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi, Pandit Nehru served this nation with perhaps the excellence.

Karan Thapar: What about future Gandhis to come in generations ahead. Include them as well - the young Ryan Gandhi.

Kapil Sibal: Oh, absolutely. What, who did you say?

Karan Thapar: Congress may have lost vote share in Uttar Pradesh. They may have failed to win seats. Rahul Gandhi has lost credibility.

Kapil Sibal: I disagree with you entirely. That is your perception.

Karan Thapar: He is seen as an immature, 36-year-old who speaks without knowing, who makes silly boasts.

Kapil Sibal: That’s your line on Devil’s Advocate, Karan. And my line is that it’s completely wrong.

Karan Thapar: You’re saying to me that Rahul Gandhi stands heads and shoulders above anyone else?

Kapil Sibal: Did I say that? He stands as a leader who is going to lead the Congress party in Uttar Pradesh as he has committed.

Karan Thapar: Kapil Sibal, a pleasure talking to you on Devil’s Advocate.

Kapil Sibal: Thank you.

The whole conversation has been picked from some site.

The loser is one who does nothing; not the one who is defeated!!!

TSR Krishnamurthy who is a retired IAS officer came out with a book, I do not clearly remember the name of that right now,but I got a chance to read a few pages from that,as I borrowed it from library.

Here is My Assessment of the situation.

I read his book and there he wrote of some errant politician, whom TSR was accompanying,that politico asked the captain of flight to take it back to Delhi coz he has to change his PAAJAMAS according to(That Politician), were not looking good on him.

A Cabinet Secretary so he was right up on the ladder to the last step, where one IAS can ever reach, although political submission can get him to become Governor or something in legislative assembly too.

TSR has mentioned innumerous instances where, saw such behavior time and again. He bogged down to relentless pressure and came out with this book, to show his resentment. These days he can be seen at various shows on Political news keeping up the discussion.

But there is on idom in Hindi "saanmp nikal gaya aur lathi mar rahe hai". The same thing is what he is doing. While he had all the resources and power he didn't come forward and say a word against such stupid idiosyncrasy of our "Dhoti Chaap" politicians. Now he is found singing all songs that are cacophony to political ears. People can be seen saying "one who afraid of fighting injustice is the one who is with it and a bigger crime monger". But how many of us
really believe in that has to be seen.

There is another instance of Arun Bhatia, Who is a former IAS too. I m saying that he is a former IAS not coz he has retired but he has retired the whole system, he functioned for, from his kind presence.
"It is not enough to say 'I am honest.' You should enforce your honesty and confront the system. That's the bottom line." When Arun Bhatia utters these lines, it is not for effect. An officer of the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) with a career spanning over 30 years, he has earned a reputation for exposing the shortcomings of and corruption in the very system he works for. Bhatia has paid a price for his actions - regular transfers, insignificant postings and juniors being promoted ahead of him. But nothing has deterred this bureaucrat; he just carries on digging out carefully guarded skeletons from within the institutions of governance".

He says:"This is the time for anger. A time to commit yourself to good candidates. Not corrupt parties. Enough of analysis and pontification. Somebody has to enter the fray. Support those who do. So do become angry.Perceptive Indians realize that unless we improve our governance the democratic world will not respect us. Outsiders wonder how Indians function and eat their breakfast like normal people in the midst of deprivation and corruption. Therefore when we vote for honesty it gives us a personality that the civilized world understands."

He adds "What a travesty is it to be out of the system and abuse establishment, because you were more worried of being slaughtered while you were part of it, I know one who tries meets bitter fate but I am in no mood to be angelic cherub"


Direct Quotations from Mr.Arun have been picked up from some sites and TSR part is composed by me!!!

Hezbollah builds a Western base

CIUDAD DEL ESTE, Paraguay - The Iranian-backed Hezbollah militia has taken root in South America, fostering a well-financed force of Islamist radicals boiling with hatred for the United States and ready to die to prove it, according to militia members, U.S. officials and police agencies across the continent.

From its Western base in a remote region divided by the borders of Paraguay, Brazil and Argentina known as the Tri-border, or the Triple Frontier, Hezbollah has mined the frustrations of many Muslims among about 25,000 Arab residents whose families immigrated mainly from Lebanon in two waves, after the 1948 Arab-Israeli war and after the 1985 Lebanese civil war.

An investigation by Telemundo and NBC News has uncovered details of an extensive smuggling network run by Hezbollah, a Shiite Muslim group founded in Lebanon in 1982 that the United States has labeled an international terrorist organization. The operation funnels large sums of money to militia leaders in the Middle East and finances training camps, propaganda operations and bomb attacks in South America, according to U.S. and South American officials.

U.S. officials fear that poorly patrolled borders and rampant corruption in the Tri-border region could make it easy for Hezbollah terrorists to infiltrate the southern U.S. border. From the largely lawless region, it is easy for potential terrorists, without detection, to book passage to the United States through Brazil and then Mexico simply by posing as tourists.

They are men like Mustafa Khalil Meri, a young Arab Muslim whom Telemundo interviewed in Ciudad del Este, Paraguay’s second-largest city and the center of the Tri-border region. There is nothing particularly distinctive about him, but beneath the everyday T-shirt he wears beats the heart of a devoted Hezbollah militiaman.

“If he attacks Iran, in two minutes Bush is dead,” Meri said. “We are Muslims. I am Hezbollah. We are Muslims, and we will defend our countries at any time they are attacked.”

Straight shot to the U.S.
U.S. and South American officials warn that Meri’s is more than a rhetorical threat.

It is surprisingly easy to move across borders in the Triple Frontier, where motorbikes are permitted to cross without documents. A smuggler can bike from Paraguay into Brazil and return without ever being asked for a passport, and it is not much harder for cars and trucks.

The implications of such lawlessness could be dire, U.S. and Paraguayan officials said. Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said Hezbollah militiamen would raise no suspicions because they have Latin American passports, speak Spanish and look like Hispanic tourists.

The CIA singles out the Mexican border as an especially inviting target for Hezbollah operatives. “Many alien smuggling networks that facilitate the movement of non-Mexicans have established links to Muslim communities in Mexico,” its Counter Terrorism Center said in a 2004 threat paper.

“Non-Mexicans often are more difficult to intercept because they typically pay high-end smugglers a large sum of money to efficiently assist them across the border, rather than haphazardly traverse it on their own.”

Deadly legacy of a lawless frontier
Since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the Tri-border has become a top-level, if little-publicized, concern for Washington, particularly as tension mounts with Iran, Hezbollah’s main sponsor. Paraguayan government officials told Telemundo that CIA operatives and agents of Israel’s Mossad security force were known to be in the region seeking to neutralize what they believe could be an imminent threat.

But long before that, U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies regarded the region as a “free zone for significant criminal activity, including people who are organized to commit acts of terrorism,” Louis Freeh, then the director of the FBI, said in 1998.

Edward Luttwak, a counterterrorism expert with the Pentagon’s National Security Study Group, described the Tri-border as the most important base for Hezbollah outside Lebanon itself, home to “a community of dangerous fanatics that send their money for financial support to Hezbollah.”

“People kill with that, and they have planned terrorist attacks from there,” said Luttwak, who has been a terrorism consultant to the CIA and the National Security Council. “The northern region of Argentina, the eastern region of Paraguay and even Brazil are large terrains, and they have an organized training and recruitment camp for terrorists.”

“Our experience is that if you see one roach, there are a lot more,” said Frank Urbancic, principal deputy director of the State Department’s counterterrorism office, who has spent most of his career in the Middle East.

A mother lode of money
Operating out of the Tri-border, Hezbollah is accused of killing more than 100 people in attacks in nearby Buenos Aires, Argentina, during the early 1990s in operations personally masterminded by Hezbollah’s military commander, Imad Mugniyah.

Mugniyah is on the most-wanted terrorist lists of both the FBI and the European Union, and he is believed to work frequently out of Ciudad del Este.

For President Bush and the U.S.-led “war on terror,” the flourishing of Hezbollah in the Western Hemisphere demonstrates the worrying worldwide reach of Islamist radicalism. In the Tri-border, Hezbollah and other radical anti-U.S. groups have found a lucrative base from which to finance many of their operations.

Smuggling has long been the lifeblood of the Tri-border, accounting for $2 billion to $3 billion in the region, according to congressional officials. Several U.S. agencies said that Arab merchants were involved in smuggling cigarettes and livestock to avoid taxes, as well as cocaine and marijuana through the border with Brazil on their way to Europe. Some of the proceeds are sent to Hezbollah, they said.

Many Arabs in the Tri-border openly acknowledge that they send money to Hezbollah to help their families, and the man in charge of the local mosque in Ciudad del Este, who asked not to be identified by name, declared that Shiite Muslim mosques had “an obligation to finance it.”

But the U.S. government maintains that the money ends up stained with blood when it goes through Hezbollah, which is blamed for the bombings of the U.S. Embassy and the Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, in the 1980s, as well as the kidnappings of Americans, two of whom were tortured and killed.

Patrick M. O’Brien, the assistant secretary of the Treasury in charge of fighting terrorist financing, acknowledged flatly that “we are worried.”

“Hezbollah has penetrated the area, and part of that smuggling money is used to finance terrorist attacks,” he said.

In Paraguay, looking the other way
The biggest obstacle in the U.S. campaign to counter Hezbollah close to home is Paraguay, whose “judicial system remains severely hampered by a lack of strong anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism legislation,” the State Department said in a “Patterns of Global Terrorism” report.

Since 2004, a draft bill to strengthen money laundering laws has been stalled in the Paraguayan legislature, and the government of President Nicanor Duarte has introduced no draft legislation of its own.

Hampering reform efforts is an endemic reluctance in Paraguay to acknowledge the problem.

Interior Minister Rogelio Benitez Vargas, who supervises the national police, claimed that Hezbollah-linked smuggling was a relic of the 1980s. Today, he said, the Triple Frontier is a safe and regulated “commercial paradise.”

But authorities from the U.S. State and Treasury departments to Interpol to the front-line Paraguayan police agencies all paint a different picture. Eduardo Arce, secretary of the Paraguayan Union of Journalists, said the government was widely considered to be under the control of drug traffickers and smugglers.

Without interference, thousands of people cross the River Parana every day from Paraguay to Brazil over the Bridge of Friendship loaded with products on which they pay no taxes. As police look the other way, he said, some smugglers cross the border 10 to 20 times a day. Earlier this year, Telemundo cameras were present as smugglers in Ciudad del Este loaded trucks headed for Brazil. They could have been laden with drugs or weapons, but no authorities ever checked.

Direct link to Iran alleged
José Adasco knows better than most why Hezbollah has the region in a grip of fear.

In 1992 and 1994, terrorists believed to be linked to Hezbollah carried out two attacks against Jewish targets in Buenos Aires, the Argentine capital. In the first, a car bomb exploded at the Israeli Embassy, killing 29 people. Two years later, a suicide bomber attacked the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association, a Jewish community center, killing 85 more.

Adasco, who represents the Jewish association, has never been able to forget that day and the friends he lost.

“Really, to see the knocked-down building, [to hear] the screams, the cries, people running — it was total chaos. Chaos, chaos. It is inexpressible,” he said.

An investigation by Interpol and the FBI found not only Hezbollah’s involvement, but Iran’s, as well. The Argentine prosecutor’s office said the Iranian president at the time, Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, ordered the attack to retaliate against Argentina for suspending nuclear cooperation with Iran.

A warrant for Rafsanjani’s arrest remains outstanding, and the prosecutor’s office continues its investigation 13 years later.

Hezbollah tells its story
Alberto Nisman, the Argentine district attorney leading the investigation, said the connection between the Hezbollah attack and the Tri-border is unquestionable. Among other things, he said, the suicide bomber passed through the area to receive instructions.

In the intervening years, Hezbollah has spread throughout Latin America.

On their Web page, local Hezbollah militants in Venezuela call their fight against the United States a “holy war” and post photographs of would-be suicide terrorists with masks and bombs. There are also Web sites for Hezbollah in Chile, El Salvador, Argentina and most other Latin American countries.

“The Paraguayan justice [ministry] and the national police have found propaganda materials for Hezbollah” across the hemisphere, said Augusto Anibal Lima of Paraguay’s Tri-border Police.

And it is not only propaganda. In October, homemade bombs were left in front of the U.S. Embassy in Caracas, Venezuela, which is next to a school.

Police arrested a student carrying Hezbollah propaganda in Spanish. One of the pamphlets showed a picture of children and said, “Combat is our highest expression of love and the only way to offer a healthy and uncorrupted world.”

Caracas police were able to detonate the bombs safely. Police Commissioner Wilfredo Borras said they appeared to be “explosive devices made to make noise and publicity” — very different from what would be used if the United States attacked Iran.

“In [the] United States, there are many Arabs — in Canada, too,” said Meri, the Hezbollah member who spoke with Telemundo. “If one bomb [strikes] Iran, one bomb, [Bush] will see the world burning.

“... If an order arrives, all the Arabs that are here, in other parts in the world, all will go to take bombs, bombs for everybody if he bombs Iran.”

From inside South America’s Tri-border area, Iran-linked militia targets U.S.

Thanks to Mr Amitabh VW Mittal for this story.

Zombie in Ayub Khan!!!

Former Pakistan military ruler Ayub Khan, whose diaries have been published posthumously in the form of a book, had accused former prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto of declaring himself as an Indian citizen in courts till 1958 to get compensation for the property left by his parents in India before Partition.

"Up to the time he became a minister in 1958, Bhutto had been declaring before the Indian courts that he was an Indian citizen residing in Karachi. The object was to get some compensation for the property left by his parents in India," Khan wrote.

In a noting in the new book Diaries of Field Marshal Mohummad Ayub Khan from 1966-1972, being released here on May 4, Khan wrote on June 30, 1967 "an awkward question was asked in the National Assembly."

"In fact, he was selling his soul for about Rs 1.50 lakh. All this was not known to us till recently when the matter was discussed in Indian Parliament and came out in the press," Pakistan's first military ruler, who took over power in a bloodless coup in 1958 and relinquished power under intense pressure to another military ruler Gen Yahya Khan.

Throughout his diaries, Ayub poured scorn on Bhutto whom he detested intensely. Ayub also accused him of offering to United States to spy on other delegations in United Nations during a meeting with the then US Secretary of State.

In another noting, Ayub accused Bhutto of trying to become another Krishna Menon.

"Demagogy became his stock in trade. Several warnings went unheeded. So, there was no alternative but to tell him to go. Besides, he started drinking himself stupor and led a very loose life. It is pity that a man of considerable talent went astray. I offered him a foreign assignment, but he was not interested," he wrote about Bhutto.

After he lost power, Ayub carried on with his tirade against Bhutto who was hanged by another military ruler Zia ul Haq in 1979.

In one of his notings in the diary in January 1971, Ayub wrote that Bhutto in his talks with Mujibur Rehman, the founder leader of Bangladesh, would actually encourage separation of East Pakistan from the west.

"Bhutto whilst wanting separation and even encouraging it would act in such a manner as to put all the blame on Mujibur Rehman, though that would not do any harm to the latter's image. Rehman will be bigger hero in Bengal at least to begin with until reality dawns.

"However, Bhutto's purpose would also be served by having West Pakistan all to himself in conjunction with Yahya. How long he will last is another matter. I have a hunch that one day this game is bound to come to sticky end", Ayub Khan wrote.

Bombshell!!!

New Delhi: Were the Indian Army headquarters and the Defence Ministry in the 1950s and 60s riddled with Pakistani spies?

That's a clear impression one gets while reading the diaries of Pakistani Field Marshal Mohammed Ayub Khan.

Published in Pakistan on Friday, Diaries of Field Marshal Muhammad Ayub Khan: 1966- 1972, have sold out within hours.

Speaking to Karan Thapar on CNBC-TV18 show India Tonight, Ayub Khan's son Gohar Ayub Khan - whose own book will be released in July - all but named the man who he claims sold India's war plans to Pakistan.

The man is India's most revered general, Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw.

Though Ayub refused to name the Brigadier, he revealed several pointing details. "The Brigadier was from the first batch of the Indian Military Academy, commissioned in the 4th Battalian of the 12 Frontier Force, wounded in the Burma campaign in 1942 for which he was awarded the Military Cross and rose to the highest possible rank in the Indian army," Gohar said.

When Thapar told Gohar that his description fitted former chief of Army Staff Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw - currently recuperating in the military hospital in Coonoor - Gohar played safe.

"I would not name him, the individual. You possibly can fit the cap from what you have heard (from me)," he said.

On the defensive

The audacious claim has sent shockwaves across India’s defence fraternity and India has termed it an absurd and malicious lie.

The most vocal in their dismissals were former Army Chief Gen Shankar Roychowdhry and Bangladesh war hero Lt Gen J F R Jacob who described the remarks as "scrullous, malicious and nonsense".

“This is not a revelation but an allegation and that too a baseless one. Unless this is proved, it should be dismissed by highest order of contempt,” Roychowdhry told CNN-IBN.

Jacob said since Manekshaw couldn't be present to defend himself, it was his responsibility to defend the ailing armyman.

"Sam Manekshaw is an honourable soldier loyal to the country. I cant understand why gauhar ayub has made these malicious remarks. He should withdraw them immediately," Jacob said.

The history

The controversy has resurfaced two years after Ayub’s son Gohar claimed that his father had given him the name of an Indian Director of Military Operations from the 1950s who had sold the country’s war plans to the Pakistanis for Rs 20,000.

However, at that time the claims were dismissed, though media kept the issue abuzz and zeroed in on six Army officers who had served as DMO during the period.

The officers were brigadiers Manekshaw, Daulet Singh, RB Chopra, KS Katoch, DC Mishra and Amrik Singh.

But despite media speculation, Gohar refused to name the officer.

News courtesy CNBC TV-18