Washington, May 5 :    Washington, May 5:  After cremating the annual Congressional ritual of the 'Burton Amendment' to cut US aid to India at the behest of separatists in Punjab last year, the Indian establishment here is moving in for the kill against the Khalistanis in America. A highly damaging expose last week of deception and trickery by the proponents of Khalistan here in seeking Congressional support for the separatist movement may finally end the pretence on Capitol Hill that Punjab is waiting to ripen into another insurgency like Kashmir. The expose in The Hill, a publication which chronicles events behind the scenes in the US Congress, details how Gurmit Singh Aulakh, the self-styled president of the Council of Khalistan, has been printing pro-Khalistani letters on Congressional letterheads and then obtaining signatures of US legislators under patently false pretenses. Clearly visible behind the expose in the magazine, which is avidly read by Congressmen, their aides and all those who have dealings with the US Congress, are the hands of the Indian embassy here, Indian lobbyists and the Indian American community, though they are loath to acknowledge any role. What has riled these elements of the Indian establishment here is a letter signed by 42 American Congressmen and submitted to President George W. Bush in March calling for the release of Sikh political prisoners in India. The letter endorses a claim that there are 52,268 Sikh political prisoners in India and argues: 'This is occurring while India proclaims itself the world's largest democracy. Political prisoners are unacceptable in any country, but especially in one that proclaims democratic values'. Indians in the US are also upset by statements by two Congressmen just before Baisakhi celebrations in Punjab last month accusing India of 'occupation' of Punjab and other atrocities. The statements are now part of the US Congressional Record. Responding to the allegations, Lalit Mansingh, the Indian ambassador here, wrote to Congressman Edolphus Towns that his statement on Capitol Hill 'continues the pattern of false and hurtful statements that you have made in the past about my country in the pages of the Record'. Towns, a New York Democrat who is serving his tenth term in the US Congress, is also a member of the Congressional Caucus on India. In a similar letter to long-time India-basher Dan Burton, Mansingh said of the Congressman's source of information for his statement last month: 'The so-called 'Council of Khalistan' does not have any following within the state of Punjab or anywhere else in India. It is an organisation of self-serving people who are misusing US hospitality to indulge in false and baseless propaganda against a friendly country'. Burton, an Indiana Republican, is also a member of the House International Relations sub-committee dealing with South Asia. He has been the most trenchant critic of India on Capitol Hill for years. His annual tactic of moving legislative amendments to cut or deny US aid to India for alleged human rights abuses was once viewed with trepidation by the Indian embassy and the Indian community here. But over the years, they have fought off Burton with the help of the Congressional Caucus on India to the point where the Indiana Republican developed cold feet and did not move his amendment last year. In 2000, he tabled the amendment and withdrew it for lack of support. With that success in hand, the Indian establishment is now targeting the Council of Khalistan, which claims to be the Sikh government-in-exile and its twin patrons, Burton and Towns. The expose in The Hill will go a long way in achieving that goal. In its expose, the magazine says of Aulakh who went round collecting signatures from Congressmen on the letter sent to Bush last month. 'He's sort of grandfatherly,' the (Congressional) aide said. 'He says in a soft voice, 'I'm here for the Congressman's signature on this letter'. When we called up later, about a quarter of (foreign policy aides) genuinely did not have the foggiest clue they signed it,' the aide said, referring to one of Aulakh's previous letters. '(But) they're reluctant (to have the signatures removed) because they don't want to be seen as flip-flopping.'