Re: India's Counterterrorism Failings
harmony
<simple.lan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:07c9afa1-5474-472a...@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> source:
> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121727252464290655.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
>
> In recent years few countries have changed their public image as
> dramatically as India. But though pictures of starving peasants and
> rutted roads have given way to those of svelte supermodels and
> bustling call centers, in at least one respect India remains more a
> basketcase than a potential great power. As Friday's bomb blasts in
> India's software capital, Bangalore, and Saturday's in the industrial
> city of Ahmedabad show, India is singularly ill-equipped to deal with
> the scourge of terrorism.
>
> The Bangalore and Ahmedabad bombings, which killed one and 49 people
> respectively and cumulatively wounded more than 200, are only the most
> recent in a spate of attacks. In the past two years terrorists have
> targeted the northern city of Jaipur, the high-tech hub Hyderabad, the
> temple town of Varanasi and India's financial capital, Mumbai.
>
> Officials have pinned the most recent attacks on Indian Mujahedeen, a
> homegrown group linked to the Bangladesh-based Harkat-ul Jihad-al-
> Islami and the banned Students Islamic Movement of India. Both
> Pakistan and Bangladesh -- carved out of British India to create a
> homeland for the subcontinent's Muslims -- give shelter and succor to
> terrorists. But the fact that the most recent attacks were carried out
> by a made-in-India group shows it's about time that India comes to
> terms with its own counterterrorism failings.
>
> Among India's worst mistakes is that instead of uniting behind the
> minimal goal of providing security for all citizens, India's
> constantly bickering politicians have played football with
> counterterrorism policy. In 2004, one of the first acts in office of
> the ruling Congress-led coalition government -- at the time supported
> by Communist allies -- was to scrap a national terrorism law that
> allowed for enhanced witness protection and extended detention of
> suspects in terrorism cases. This had the twin effects of demoralizing
> law enforcement agencies and signaling to terrorists that the Indian
> state lacked fight. The paucity of arrests and convictions in the
> string of bombings that have followed have only strengthened this
> perception. For its part, the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party has
> stalled the creation of a much-needed federal antiterrorism force.
>
> The problem is that India's counterterrorism effort falls between two
> stools. As a democracy, it cannot adopt the heavy-handed but effective
> measures favored by, say, Russia or China. At the same time, India
> lacks the sophisticated intelligence and law enforcement capacities
> that allow European countries such as France, Spain and, of late, even
> Britain to safeguard individual rights and yet uncover terrorist plots
> before they are executed.
>
> Yet although this may be an explanation, it's hardly an excuse given
> that other countries have surmounted their own counterterrorism
> hurdles. Even Indonesia, a Muslim-majority nation where public
> sympathy for terrorism in the name of Islam runs deeper than it does
> in India, has done an infinitely better job of protecting its
> citizens. Thanks largely to Detachment 88, a special police unit
> equipped and trained by Australia and the U.S., it has been nearly
> three years since the last major terrorist strike on Indonesian soil.
>
> Ultimately, though, terrorism is only the tip of the proverbial
> iceberg. The larger question is whether India's Muslims will embrace
> modernity like so many of their Turkish, Tunisian and Indonesian co-
> religionists, or reject it like increasing numbers of their militant
> cousins in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
>
> On this front too India's leaders have failed to get to the heart of
> the matter. The country tends to exercise a hands-off approach to its
> 140-million-strong Muslim community. Unlike in Europe or America,
> Muslims in India are governed by Shariah law in matters such as
> marriage, divorce and inheritance. This parallel legal system slows
> integration into the national mainstream and perpetuates backward
> practices such as polygamy and the neglect of education for girls. The
> result has been a disaffected minority, largely lacking the skills to
> compete in a modern economy and susceptible to calls for violence in
> the name of faith.
>
> If India is to live up to its potential -- and indeed to its hype --
> it must embrace both the short-term goal of upgrading its
> counterterrorism capability and the long-term goal of modernizing and
> mainstreaming its Muslims.
>
> India's Muslims have enriched national life in countless ways. The
> vast majority, like people of any faith, are nonviolent. But contrary
> to popular belief, Indian Muslims have not been immune to the rising
> global tide of orthodox practice and militant politics. Indian doctors
> played a role in last year's failed attacks in London and Glasgow. At
> home, Muslim groups have assaulted critics such as the exiled
> Bangladeshi author Taslima Nasreen. A survey by the distinguished
> Pakistani scholar Akbar Ahmed revealed that most educated Indian
> Muslims view as role models the late Islamist ideologue Abul Ala
> Maududi, the 19th century Muslim supremacist Sayyed Ahmad Khan, and an
> influential Bombay-based cleric named Zakir Naik, who eulogizes Osama
> bin Laden and calls for Shariah for all Indians.
>
> India's Muslims hardly have a monopoly on either violence or
> obscurantism. Nonetheless the challenges they face are particularly
> acute. Will the community be forward-looking, eager to seize new
> economic opportunities, and at peace with a rapidly changing world? Or
> will it forsake the future for an idealized past, foster a culture of
> grievance that condones violence, and view globalization as a mortal
> threat? Depending on the answer, the Bangalore and Ahmedabad bombings
> are either a passing event or a dark harbinger of things to come.
this a good article but not a great article.
the author first needs to be congratulated on bringing out the honest truth
that educated muslims look to their radicals as their heroes.
however, the vested interested parties in india and abroad, including usa,
keep hammering that modern education will change muslims.
if anything, the modern education has made muslims infinitely more dangerous
than uneducated muslims.
like nearly all articles i have read by well meaning authors, this one too
has fantasy and contradictions.
the article fails to realize that it is drilled into a muslim child from
very infancy that he is a committed muslim with a solemn duty to further the
cause of islam in kafir infidle lands.
modern education is not going to change that mindset, instead it will only
make the man behind such mindset more powerful and hence a huge threat.
one only needs to look at all acts of modern terror which amply prove that
it is the educated resourceful muslims who carry out such sophisticated
terror, not the uneducated muslims.
the author still holds out hope that modern education is going to make the
muslims at peace with the world. how silly?
the author also illserves his readers with this bailout statement that the
vast majority muslims are non-violent. how can they be assumed to be
non-violent if majority of their educated muslims have terrorists as heroes?
sorry that bs won't work.
the only way to protect a kafir infidle society is to quarantine its islamic
population, leaving islamics to their own paradize until the inevitable
shakeout makes it terror-free and hence eligible for interaction again. the
world is just plain tired of islam in its all forms, and it is time to call
spade a spade and insist islam needs to behave from top to bottom and left
to right and from all angles like the rest of the world.
simple.lan...@gmail.com
> to right and from all angles like the rest of the world.- Hide quoted text -
I agree 100% with your opinion, but I would like to add a few facts
and ideas:
Islam is a supremacist political ideology. The Arabs, especially the
Quraish tribe, are, according to Islam, the master race of the
universe. Other Arabs are their helpers, and the rest of us are called
kuffars. According to the sharia law, Arab women cannot marry non-Arab
men because Allah has chosen the Arabs above others. The word kuffar
is as pejorative as the word nigger; it means a non-Muslim beast in a
human form. Muslims who treat the kuffars as human beings are
apostates, so they must be killed, preferably by their own families.
(According to the hadith, a special reward in paradise is reserved for
the killers of apostates.) Muslims broke world records of genocide
(270 million victims), slavery, religiously sanctioned rape, abuse of
human rights, and prohibition of scientific inquiry. Two years after
Adolf Hitler became the Chancellor, the Haavara Agreement permitted
emigration of German Jews to Palestine. Haj Amin El-Husseini, the
mufti of Jerusalem, persuaded Adolf Eichmann and Adolf Hitler that
Jews should be killed before they flee Germany. Islam forbids Muslim
emigration to the lands of the infidels because a Muslim minority
cannot enslave the infidel majority. Despite this prohibition Muslims
emigrate to the West, not as migrants, but as conquerors. They live in
sharia mini-states and expand these mini-states by terrorizing infidel
neighbors and driving them out. Any society not willing to subjugate
itself to Islamic authority is, according to Islam, in a state of war,
or Dar al-Harb, with Islam. Arabic proverb says "first comes Saturday,
then Sunday." It means that Arabs are going to exterminate Jews before
they exterminate Christians. It also means that Israel is the first
line of defense against Islam. Another Arabic proverb (al-fikr kuffar)
says that the very act of thinking (fikr) makes one an infidel
(kuffar). Islam, like cancer, has the sole purpose of making more of
itself. It will kill our civilization unless it is cut, poisoned, and
radiated into remission.
Best ways to deal with Muslim invasion:
1. Deportation to countries of their origin.
2. Deportation to Muslim-only towns guarded by the police.
3. One child per family policy reinforced with sterilization.
4. Mandatory lessons about Muslim atrocities.
5. Very strict control of Muslim clergy.
Felix D.
<simple.lan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3247eb1f-cd31-40c5...@e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
6. Services in Mosques must be conducted in the local language, not Arabic.
The goal is to identify and weed out the haters.
Ooooh - that means we'd have to deport every Imam we can get our hands on,
but if that's what's necesary then so be it.
simple.lan...@gmail.com
> 6. Services in Mosques must be conducted in the local
> language, not Arabic. The goal is to identify and weed out the haters.
Muslims claim that Allah can hear their prayers only if they say it in
Arabic. This is not a big problem, because we can restrict their
prayers to standard prayers, number them, and publish their English
translation. Your idea is very useful when applied to Muslim sermons
(called khutbah) and religious instructions.
> Ooooh - that means we'd have to deport every Imam we can
> get our hands on, but if that's what's necesary then so be it.
According to various reports, at least 80% of U.S. Mosques follow or
are influenced by the Wahhabi sect of Saudi Arabia. Among other
things, this sect believes it is a “religious obligation” to hate
Christians and Jews and to think of the United States as “enemy
territory.” In 2006, Bernard Lewis, one of the world’s leading
scholars on Islam, called Wahhabism, “The most radical, the most
violent, the most extreme and fanatical version of Islam.” source:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/ (September 25, 2007)
In America, almost all the mosques are run by Wahhabite Imams, which
receive constant infusion of petrodollar from abroad and along with it
they receive instruction what to say during khutba on Sabbath day
prayer… It is crystal clear that the present-day Islam in most part of
the world including USA reflects pure Wahhabism. In short, there is
only one face of Islam, which is visible everywhere and that resembles
the old-face of Islam or Wahhabism. source:
http://www.islam-watch.org/JamalHasan/Wahhabism-Original-Islam.htm