Nepal Maoists Chief Dahal’s new family members are RAW and CIA: Badal

[mosfeld]

Nepal Maoists Chief Dahal’s new family members are RAW and CIA: Badal


http://thenextfront.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/prachanda-new1.jpg (http://thenextfront.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/prachanda-new1.jpg)
Vice Chairman Mohan Baidya Pokharel ‘Kiran’ of Unified Maoists Party revealed while addressing a meeting of his panel at the Krishnabhog Party Palace in Baneshwor, September 21, 2011, that Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’ had in fact met with officials of India’s notorious intelligence agency, RAW while he was recently in Siliguri.

“We were together in Gorkha. He told me that he had some familial problems to sort out in Biratnagar. He took me for a ride. But, he met with the RAW agents in Siliguri (India).
”
Chairman Dahal was last spotted at the Biratnagar Airport Friday September 9, 2011 before his mysterious two day disappearance. He was later found by security personnel in Biratnagar on Sunday September 11, 2011.

“Dahal held talks with the Indian agents on deployment of air marshals at the International airport and signing of the extradition treaty”, Baidya was quoted as saying.

Cutting joke at Chairman Dahal, General Secretary Ram Bahadur Thapa ‘Badal’ said, “I think Comrade Kiran is mistaken. Comrade Prachanda had in fact disappeared to sort out his familial matters. India’s RAW and US CIA has now become his family members. It is his inherent right to meet his family members. Our protest has no meaning”.

Prachanda exposed from within.

Thapa went even one step further and said, “His family members are RAW, CIA, some Madhesi leaders and people like Ajay Sumargi. It is under their wise counsel; the Dahal-Bhattarai panel is well on its course of Bhutanizaiton, Fijiization and Sikkimisation of Nepal.”

Is Thapa hell bent on proving both of his party seniors as Kazi Lendhup Dorje of Sikkim annexation fame?

Recalling a past instance said Badal, “Chairman Dahal after the Dhobighat meet told me that both of us were langotiya friends (Childhood). He said that I should not have joined the Dhobighat meet. I instead told him that I was always with him rather it was Prachanda who had left in the mid ocean.”

Thapa commented on Prime Minister Bhattarai,(sic), “Bhattarai was always a rightist. Let us not criticize him for betraying us. He had gone where he had to go (towards India implied).”

It was now the turn of leader Dev Gurung to criticize the one and only revolutionary Chairman Dahal.

“He also took me for a ride. He toed on to the line of the Nepali Congress and the UML. He is in favor of an anti-people constitution. The decision to handover key(s) that he made was in fact as per the suggestion of his RAW friends- whom he met in Malaysia.”

Frontal attacks on Prachanda from within his own party colleagues. By the way, the Indian regime is also being exposed.

Netra Bikram Chand Biplav finally concluded, “Our respected leaders (looking towards Baidya and Gajurel) will devise strategies and we the youths will lead a revolt under your leadership.”

Krishna Bahadur Mahara who was also scheduled to attend the meeting but did not come.

The absence of Mahara too has some meaning.

http://thenextfront.com/politics/it-is-from-telegraphnepal-com-but-the-next-front-was-not-invited.html

[RED DAVE]

All cool except recall this: (a) one year ago, according to Maoists Prachanca shit chocolate and pissed lemonade; (b) guess what Kiran was eating and drinking.

A year ago, Nepalese Maoism was the poster child for Maoism all over the world. Now, it's opportunistic roots, the block of four classes and so-called New Democracy, are exposed for the crap that they are.

Question: Which Asian world leader from a very large country met with the leader of world imperialism, and the person to who the Director of the CIA reported to, during the climax of the War in Vietnam?

Hint: His name in English begins with "M."

RED DAVE

[The Vegan Marxist]

God damn you Trots are whiny.

[mosfeld]

Just put die-hard reactionaries like RED DAVE, agnixie and ComradeMan on ignore -- makes this forum so much more bearable.

[Smyg]

Anti-Maoist = Reactionary? :rolleyes:

[RED DAVE]

God damn you Trots are whiny.
Just put die-hard reactionaries like RED DAVE, agnixie and ComradeMan on ignore -- makes this forum so much more bearable.Screw you Maoist motherfuckers. You sold out the Nepalese Revolution, and all you can do about it is claim that people who accurately predicted this are "whiners" or put them on ignore.

You haven't got the guts to face up to what your own super-duper party did in Nepal.

RED DAVE

[t.shonku]

I think I will have to agree with Dave on this one at least to a certain extent , Prachanda is in fact a opportunist and power hungry individual, history at least tells us that, back in 2006 he was making deals with Indian govt via CPI(Marxist) and was ready to go to bed with CPI(Marxist),he went on a photo shoot with Yechury and Karat of CPI(marxist), he forgot that CPI(Marxist) is an arch enemy of CPI(Maoist) , this kind of explains his nature, next a few years back he was praising capitalism and speaking all sorts of non-sense from his a**. And yes I don’t only suspect but I am sure he is working with RAW (India’s intel agency ) and CIA after all both RAW and CIA needs Nepal within their sphere of influence to counter China.Or else why would he go into Siliguri which is a place full of Indian Military presence and bases and close to China. Besides recently the Nepali government has been helping the Indian government in rounding up Indian rebels hiding in Nepal, I am sure Prachanda’s Swiss bank account is swelling for being such a nice pal of India and USA. But Prachanda is a SOB he flip flops and changes sides often according to his own necessity,he can't be trusted. That is why Indian Maoists generally keeps mum on him or give negative comments.

Actually Nepal historically has always been a satellite state of India. Therefore any one who wishes to capture Kathmandu has went to bed with Indian leaders and capitalists , Indian capitalists basically control the Nepalese economy to a large extent. The locals don’t like it, I remember there was a time the Nepalese people protested against India and in response Indians started an economic blockade of the country and Kerosine oil became a scarcity that time in Nepal within weeks the anti India protests died down.



But one thing is for sure and that is Prachanda was never a poster boy for Maoism , becoz Indian Maoists have been doing quite well without his poster, bedises Maoist desn’t need any poster boy they have people .

Nobody should pay attention to this Prachanda that backstabber will be lost in history and the people of Nepal and the Nepali proletariat will teach him a lesson for being a sell out . The Maoist revolution in other parts of South East Asia will go un-hindered so nothing to worry .

I have told this in past and I would like to repeat this again the success of Maoist revolution in South East Asia will totally depend on success of Maoism in India

Comrades don't pay attetion to Dave he will speak without logic , he has not idea about south east Asia socio-economic-political condition but he will open his mouth that is bcoz he hates the Maoists, it's got all to do with his ego so don't pay attention to him and waste ur time. There is a reason he is on my ignore list

[RED DAVE]

This is the kind of stuff Maoists were posting about Prachanda less than a year ago:


Maoists supremo Prachanda today called on his cadres to make “final preparations” for a people”s revolt, amid a power struggle to take control of key ministry of Nepal”s new communist government.http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2036113&postcount=180

RED DAVE

[The Vegan Marxist]

This is the kind of stuff Maoists were posting about Prachanda less than a year ago:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2036113&postcount=180

RED DAVE

Yes, amid the calling of a possible "people's revolt". Instead, Prachanda betrayed the movement and those who originally supported him. Of what relevance does this attain in your desperate anti-Maoism world? Maybe you see everything in static formation, rather than through a materialist perspective. After all, you Trots are known for your religious-stricken idealism.

Maybe we should point out that a great portion of the UCPN(M) are in opposition to the reactionary attacks from within the party. Yet, you solely point out the negativity taking place, and then apply it to the Maoist party as a whole. Excuse me while I refrain from taking your pessimistic bullshit seriously. You Trots are all the same.

p.s. I'm not a Maoist, just in case you try countering what I said with another "Fuck you Maoist!" ;)

[ProletarianResurrection]

Screw you Maoist motherfuckers.

Yes please! I need a good shag! :blushing:

Why though are you blaming Mosfeld for selling out the Nepalese revolution?

[Who?]

Screw you Maoist motherfuckers. You sold out the Nepalese Revolution, and all you can do about it is claim that people who accurately predicted this are "whiners" or put them on ignore.

You haven't got the guts to face up to what your own super-duper party did in Nepal.

RED DAVE

I remember you dodged my points about Trotskyist irrelevance in the study guide thread, RED DAVE. Maybe the Maoists aren't the only ones dodging facts on this forum. ;)

[RED DAVE]

This is the kind of stuff Maoists were posting about Prachanda less than a year ago:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.p...&postcount=180 (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2036113&postcount=180)
Yes, amid the calling of a possible "people's revolt".Nonsense. The problem is that Maoists and their supporters believe their own press.

There was no indication that, rhetoric aside, the Nepalese Maoists were seriously preparing for a revolt. What they were preparing for was to enter and be a part of a fully capitalist government. Every faction in the party was agreed on this.


Instead, PrachandaAnd Bhattarai and, yes, Kiran ...


betrayed the movement and those who originally supported him.Gee, that's awful. The leadership of the party for who knows how many years all of a sudden, out of nowhere, sells-out, along with the rest of the top leadership. Gee.

The question then becomes: Why did this happen? It's a replay of what happened in the Chinese Communist Party when the party, instead of being the leadership of a proletarian revolution, became the midwife for capitalism in China.

The fact is that within Maoist theory and practice is a built-in sell-out: the block of four classes. This puts the working class into an alliance with its worst enemy: the bourgeoisie.

The Maoists make an artificial distinction between the so-called native bourgeoisie which allegedly has an interest in the revolution and the comprador bourgeoisie, which has no such interest. In fact, of course, the native bourgeoisie will, in the end, side with the compradors, the international bourgeoisie, and any other bourgeoisie it can find to defeat the working class.

This puts the Maoist leadership, sitting on top of this block, into an intolerable situation: they have created a situation which must, rhetoric aside, lead to the defeat of the working class as happened in China and has happened in Nepal (and Vietnam and now Cuba and North Korea under slightly different conditions). The force that is supposed to lead the working class to power through the strategy of the block of four classes, in fact becomes, as was inevitable, the leadership of the drive to capitalism.

This what has happened in Nepal. In fact, it was predicted by people on this board and denied, over and over again, by our resident Maoists, who were busy posting pictures of last year's general strike which was actually called to secure the Maoist leadership's seat in the bourgeois government.


Of what relevance does this attain in your desperate anti-Maoism world?What it shows is that, one more time, Maoism had led to capitalism.


Maybe you see everything in static formation, rather than through a materialist perspective. After all, you Trots are known for your religious-stricken idealism.Stop being silly. If you want to make political points, make them. Political cursing, "religious-stricken idealism," serves no one, least of all you.

There is nothing static about the analysis of Nepalese Maoism here. The Maoist analysis insisted, over and over again, for years, in spite of the obvious sell-out of the Nepalese Maoists, that the Nepalese revolution was headed towards some kind of a workers state. There was no recognition, using a class analysis, that, in fact, what was being constructed, under the guise of New Democracy, was in fact a fully capitalist state.


Maybe we should point out that a great portion of the UCPN(M) are in opposition to the reactionary attacks from within the party.There is no evidence that such an opposition in fact exists to any large degree. It may, in fact, concretize in the future, but, if the leadership of such opposition is Maoist, it will have no real analysis of what happened and no way of preventing it from happening again.


Yet, you solely point out the negativity taking place, and then apply it to the Maoist party as a whole.That is because the sell-out involved the party as whole. The roots of the sell-out go back to Maoist theory itself, with the notion of the block of four classes and New Democracy as the fig leaf that covers this up.

Even at this juncture, when the magnitude of the sell-out is obvious (and was predicted), there is no split in the party. The fact is that the Nepalese Maoist party is a Menshevik party. This direction was evident years ago. A truly Marxist analysis, as Lenin made of Menshevism, would have shown this and have prepared for a split as Lenin prepared.


Excuse me while I refrain from taking your pessimistic bullshit seriously. You Trots are all the same.Stick your head in the sand and engage in political cursing all you want. The fact is that beyond noting, very belatedly, that Prachanda and Co. "betrayed" the Nepalese Revolution, you have no analysis whatsoever as to why it happened.


p.s. I'm not a Maoist, just in case you try countering what I said with another "Fuck you Maoist!" ;)What you are acting as is an apologist for the Maoists while trying to keep your own political hands clean.

RED DAVE