Bombings seem to be becoming another sad fact of urban life like traffic accidents and potholes. The fact that it was a simultaneous detonation again shows some planning and sophistication was involved.

I think its pretty obvious what needs to be done.

HMF
I think its pretty obvious what needs to be done.

Not to me, HMF, why don't you explain!

No problem, we get finally go after the group of Swedish Gymnasts with crop haircuts and purple earrings, lurking in India, living among the nascent population for nearly a century that have committed these attacks over and over again, but still haven't gotten the government to do anything about it.

Terrorists can strike at will, wherever and whenever they want. Sadly, in the end, they will win.

i'm sure more people died in traffic accidents today in bangalore

Way to keep things in perspective.

Terrorists can strike at will, wherever and whenever they want. Sadly, in the end, they will win.

Nopes, they won't. For three reasons. One, there are more people in India than terrorists, and will always be. Two, because support for terrorism is going down among the Muslim population. And three, the availability of arms is going down.

The last trend is particularly worth looking at. The bombings have steadily moved low-tech, going from RDX in the nineties to Neogel-90 in Hyderabad to Ammonium Nitrate and Urea now. Even in Kashmir, the recent attacks used grenades. Looks like the Pak-based outfits are starting to preserve the RDX for the sexier battles (Afghanistan, Iraq) and their local inter-Jihadi rivalries. Combine that with the lack of enthusiasm for Jihad among the Muslim youth in India (the SIMI chief captured in Indore confessed that it was getting harder to recruit people, and he himself was planning to quit SIMI), terrorism will soon peter out.

i'm sure more people died in traffic accidents today in bangalore

and your point is what?

i'm sure more people died in traffic accidents today in bangalore

That's irrelevant; traffic accidents don't inspire terror. Terrorism does.

ANNA: Nice to see you being regular again.

Sad news though.

That's irrelevant; traffic accidents don't inspire terror. Terrorism does.

Damn - in Madiwala of all places. Too close to home.....

you have not been to bangalore recently, I take it?

No, I have not, but I stand by my comment and the larger point I was trying to make. Minimizing these bombings is in poor taste, in my opinion.

We don't get heart-stopping, 3am phone calls from Bangalore if there's been a traffic accident.

It seems pretty obvious that there are LeT and related terror cells deployed in various cities around the country. The nuclear deal with the US is probably one of the terrorists' reasons to sow some fear around in addition to all their other motives.

That's irrelevant; traffic accidents don't inspire terror. Terrorism does.

But isn't that what the terrorists want. If we don't let it terrorize us and put it in context (by comparing it to the number of traffic deaths, for example), isn't that the best response to the terrorists?

To think that it's people and not necessarily economy per se that was attacked is disgusting. In the end it's all people but this is more evil in my eyes. Everyone in my family is alright. I had a bit of a panic about one of my friends who works for Goldman but he called eventually and said everything was OK but for now it was just chaotic and they were just managing security issues. I was happy to hear that.

UPS to your point you are trying to apply logic to something that isn't logical. Accidents happen and they are part of life all of us are forced to accept. Terror related deaths aren't logical don't just happen and we should never get used to them.

The problem with comparing the number to an accident really does take away from the depth of the situation. Your logic implies that terrorism like accidents is inevitable.

Jane:
What you get is a pliant population that can easily be manipulated like what happened in the U.S. that gives up civil liberties and is led into unnecessary wars.
You can feel bad for the victims and not be terrorized.

5 · Abdul said

Terrorists can strike at will, wherever and whenever they want. Sadly, in the end, they will win.

Terrorism will bring no winners, just too many losses.

4 · HMF said

No problem, we get finally go after the group of Swedish Gymnasts with crop haircuts and purple earrings, lurking in India, living among the nascent population for nearly a century that have committed these attacks over and over again, but still haven't gotten the government to do anything about it.

HMF,
Swedish Gymnasts LOL. Well your satire is appropriate because had you said anti-social separatist inhuman muslim terrorists, you would be targeted by the pseudo-secular junta. Also you would be targeted by the muslims who would try to make you feel guilty with quotes like "just because a few muslims did it, you cant blame Islam"
In the end we will have to get on with our lives hoping that the muslims will stop preaching and start acting.
Vande-Mataram (Oops.. Vande-mataram is anti-islamic and is banned in muslim run schools in India)

Alas, it is true, in a country that is crammed with many hundreds of millions of people belonging to different ethnicities, castes, and religions, there will always be some group or other with a grievance, willing to spread terror as a vent to its frustration. Afterward, it is relatively easy to melt back into the faceless hordes. With the crushing population density of India's cities, where people live packed cheek-by-jowl, it is ridiculously easy to commit almost "casual" atrocities affecting dozens, hundreds, and perhaps even thousands of people, without ever fearing reprisal. This is one of the great banes of India, and it will only worsen as the population continues to swell to 1.5 billion and perhaps beyond.

20 · Jeremiah said

Alas, it is true, in a country that is crammed with many hundreds of millions of people belonging to different ethnicities, castes, and religions, there will always be some group or other with a grievance

Really?? Maybe next time we should look for the minority Parsi and Jain terrorists who make our lives miserable in India LOL
Vande-Mataram (Oops.. Vande-mataram is anti-islamic and is banned in muslim run schools in India)

I think there are some terrorist enclaves bangladesh is allowing to fester that could use an airstrike or two. India loses face everytime it shows evidence of a neighbor's hand in a terrorist attack and then does nothing about it. I dont think an invasion is called for, but there has to be some loss felt by the perpetrators for them to even contemplate giving up support for terrorist groups.

it will only worsen as the population continues to swell to 1.5 billion and perhaps beyond.

No problem, at least the numbers blocked, and will continue to block, the type of annihilation/marginalisation of the locals seen in Hawaaii, Canada, Australia, Africa, Latin America, and a Thanksgiving country. What's a few bombs here and there, when the alternative would've been an Indian Reservation?

I hope the investigators go beyond the "ISI did it" refrain this time. Clearly this is something that would put smiles on their faces, but it doesn't mean it couldn't have been funded and planned within India. I think it's alot like how AQ is short hand for any Sunni terrorist group among lazy journalists/analysts.

Terrorism and road accidents have a different effect on the populace no doubt. But if you look for a common element I think it is a lackadaisical attitude on the part of the government and low expectations among the populace.

21 · Topcat said

Really?? Maybe next time we should look for the minority Parsi and Jain terrorists who make our lives miserable in India LOL

We can be as flippant as we want and make assumptions that have no basis.

South India has been a hotbed for Communism and Naxalism for decades, this movement while dying in the 90s is back with a big force in South India again. Thanks to the upswing in political power Maoists in Nepal, and economic upswing with the Reds in China, the Naxals are better funded now
http://www.thehindu.com/2008/07/02/stories/2008070255490300.htm

If you've forgotten there was Tamil - Kannadiga violence in Bangalore too, this could be a probable cause.

Instead of inflamming communal tensions against what is still a very moderate and liberal south Indian Muslim population, those among us who are educated should actually be responsible and wait for more evidence.

Another Friday, another act of violence. Togadia for Home Minister.

23 · Populist said

What's a few bombs here and there, when the alternative would've been an Indian Reservation?

Reservation? The old bas%&$# (basket) Arjun Singh and VP.Singh have done enough of that to the point of driving brilliant students to suicide. That is the last thing India needs.
"Hamae tum par Fucker hai Arjun Singh, bahut Fucker hai"

He means Feather not Dot Indian reservation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_reservation

I can see the Naxals doing something this sophisticated, but neither Karnataka or TN are within their comfort zones. If it were in Hyderabad it would seem more likely. The Cauvery issue has lead to Tamil-Kannadiga mob bloodshed, but I don't see either party doing something organized like this against targets where anyone could have been killed

South India has been a hotbed for Communism and Naxalism for decades, this movement while dying in the 90s is back with a big force in South India again. Thanks to the upswing in political power Maoists in Nepal, and economic upswing with the Reds in China, the Naxals are better funded now
http://www.thehindu.com/2008/07/02/stories/2008070255490300.htm

If you've forgotten there was Tamil - Kannadiga violence in Bangalore too, this could be a probable cause.

and wait for more evidence

Sure, but Naxals have never bombed cities, or civilians. They mostly target the police and the army, only (Muslim/Sikh/Naga/ULFA) terrorists target pedestrians and shoppers, most of these folks are funded from across the border. Of these, only the Islamic radicals are present in south India. Circumstantial evidence is against them.

28 · RahulD said

He means Feather not Dot Indian reservation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_reservation

"Hamae uss par bhi bahut Fucker hai...
Naga, ULFA aur muslim bhaiyon par bhi Fucker hai....

"Sikh Terrorist" is an irrelevant term to this day and age, and should not be used without a thorough examination of our own nation's government's mistakes that led to the reaction. Please refrain from bringing that issue in.

But like you mentioned, Naga and ULFA, there is also the LTTE.

The Kannadiga violence was also due to the Veerapan kidnapping if I remember correctly.

There is a certain responsibility we have, as a Hindu, I'm assuming you are - the approach we should have to any issue is to pursue tangible evidence not circumstantial evidence and use a dispassionate way to get at it.

There are very few "Islamic Radicals" in India, even if they are, their reactions are very localized and are not a part of any global insurgency. Maybe they are associate with SIMI but that might be the worst of it.

Inflamming this issue without knowing the specific culprit and indulging in gross generalizations will turn the grenades eventually into IEDs. Please exercise restraint.

25 · RahulD said

Instead of inflamming communal tensions against what is still a very moderate and liberal south Indian Muslim population, those among us who are educated should actually be responsible and wait for more evidence.

Thank you, Rahul, for a sensible, appropriate and much-appreciated response.

.

Topcat, diverse, civilly communicated points of view are always welcome but your comments aren't productive. Your point of view has been made abundantly clear-- if you continue with this trend, you'll be more troll, less commenter. We get it. We know who you blame and how you think people who disagree with you are pseudo-secular douchebags. Loud and clear. Please, move on.

if you continue with this trend, you'll be more troll, less commenter.

strive for tromentator.

33 · A N N A said

Topcat, diverse, civilly communicated points of view are always welcome but your comments aren't productive. Your point of view has been made abundantly clear-- if you continue with this trend, you'll be more troll, less commenter. We get it. We know who you blame and how you think people who disagree with you are pseudo-secular douchebags. Loud and clear. Please, move on.

I know you get my point but some people apparently havent.... otherwise we wouldnt see them equating islamic terrorism with say Tamil-Kannadiga issue.
Islamic terrorism is a global problem(based on a primitive ideology) whereas the other is not. Thats it and I am out of here.
Vande-mataram

I'm glad to hear that those of you who have family members there are okay, and I'm sorry for those who have lost someone :(

We don't get heart-stopping, 3am phone calls from Bangalore if there's been a traffic accident.

Minimizing someone's loss or fears is never kind, but having a family member die in a routine way is no better than having them die in some kind of media spectacle. In some ways, I feel it's been worse.

But that's largely irrelevant to this discussion; people die all the time in myriad ways, and it is always sad and it is part of life. This "terrorism" highlights one kind of personal and community tragedy but not the "ordinary" kind that comes from heart disease, smoking, traffic accidents, domestic violence, floodings, poverty, wars, etc. For obvious reasons: because it doesn't give the blink-of-an-eye media fodder for publication, because it doesn't allow politicians to justify expanded power against people in general and targeted groups in particular, and because it doesn't allow pseudo-Hindu, and pseudo-Christian and pseudo-human people to highjack our emotions to instigate further violence for no ostensibly good reason.

So why allow that to happen when we have enough real problems to deal with? Makes no sense.

HMF, Swedish Gymnasts LOL. Well your satire is appropriate because had you said anti-social separatist inhuman muslim terrorists, you would be targeted by the pseudo-secular junta. Also you would be targeted by the muslims who would try to make you feel guilty with quotes like "just because a few muslims did it, you cant blame Islam" In the end we will have to get on with our lives hoping that the muslims will stop preaching and start acting. Vande-Mataram (Oops.. Vande-mataram is anti-islamic and is banned in muslim run schools in India)

As I'm sure everyone is aware, comments like this one are what provide political support for attacks on Muslims or Sikhs or doctors and adivasis. So I quite frankly couldn't give a damn how you feel, guilty or no, until you grow up.

23 · Populist said

No problem, at least the numbers blocked, and will continue to block, the type of annihilation/marginalisation of the locals seen in Hawaaii (sic), Canada, Australia, Africa, Latin America, and a Thanksgiving country. What's a few bombs here and there, when the alternative would've been an Indian Reservation?

I suppose that's one way of seeing India's glass as "half-full". However, the implication is that India is condemned to dangle between the Scylla of racial marginalization/annihilation and the Charybdis of devastating, runaway population growth. Hardly an enviable position to be in.

I'm gonna make a personal comment on myself: It is just funny to me that I'm being branded a Muslim Apologist on one thread and a Zionist Neoncon Hindutva proponent on another.

devastating, runaway population growth

Hmmmm? Not sure it is devastating, there is more devastation in places like Sub-Saharan Africa, where the numbers are less. I am not convinced that population growth is devastating always. On the other hand, it makes India interesting and vibrant. I will take that Charybdis over the boring Scylla of monoculture any day.

39 · Populist said

there is more devastation in places like Sub-Saharan Africa, where the numbers are less. I am not convinced that population growth is devastating always.

To be only slightly less devastated by population growth -and its attendant ills- than "a place like Sub-Saharan Africa" is still, by any objective measure, to be very devastated indeed. If one can only point to Sub-Saharan Africa and the like as places more severely afflicted than India, this rather goes to strengthen the impression that India is not in an enviable position at all.

It is just funny to me that I'm being branded a Muslim Apologist on one thread and a Zionist Neoncon Hindutva proponent on another

Thats just how it works, I've been branded a left-wing nut (on threads relating to white privilege and race relations) but a backwards conservative (on threads relating to gender relations) all the time. goes with the territory

I don't know how accurate this article is, but it makes some interesting claims about India's intelligence services (i.e., on why they haven't been able to penetrate and preempt, or identify and smash post-attack, terror groups/cells in India):

"Yet, the counter-terrorism apparatus does not inspire confidence. The IB, in charge of domestic undercover operations, is woefully understaffed, with a staff strength of 20,000 for a billion-plus Indian population.
Further, barely 10% of the IB is involved in actual tough and risky field operations, while the rest are involved in administration and management of the so-called force."

Sounds like the FBI. ;-)

Here's the link (sorry I can't hyperlink it properly--I'm on an Apple w/ Safari and don't see the usual buttons to add a link):
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/JE23Df01.html

41 · HMF said

Thats just how it works, I've been branded a left-wing nut (on threads relating to white privilege and race relations) but a backwards conservative (on threads relating to gender relations) all the time.

no hmf, i just think you are a self-pitying nut who thinks that everybody is out to get the brown male in america. occam's razor usually works.

No problem, we get finally go after the group of Swedish Gymnasts with crop haircuts and purple earrings, lurking in India, living among the nascent population for nearly a century that have committed these attacks over and over again, but still haven't gotten the government to do anything about it.

as a dark complexioned generally rage-filled male, i guess you are enlightened enough to subject yourself to cavity searches as a matter of public safety.

Wow.

The civility of debate on this board has degraded noticeably in the past few years. And I thought I was an ass.

In any case... it does actually make a lot of sense not to jump to conclusions. We all are aware of the kinds of major conflicts that exist in India, but there are always surprises, twists, and turns that veer from the dominant narratives if one pays attention. The blind search for the global Communo-Islamo-fascist conspiracy can lead to a lot of stupid mistaken assumptions about these kinds of situations... and unfortunately these are the assumptions that drive policy and voting patterns. *sigh*

actually I take that back. I think it's just me who's changed.

That's irrelevant; traffic accidents don't inspire terror. Terrorism does.

its natural that people became concerned about their relatives in bangalore given the way the story hit the international news wires. i dont want to trivialize the concern you have for your family out here.
i live in bangalore, and i haven't gotten the impression that any significant number of people are terrorized. i will assert that a single traffic accident can cause more "terror" than all nine of these bombings.
here's the scenario: bus knocks down pedestrian, or motorcyclist lethally. crowd gathers and torches bus. cops come and do next to nothing other than propose to file a report. mob forms and starts thrashing people within and burning other buses. couple more people die. happens fairly frequently here, and inspires quite a bit of terror.
a couple weeks ago a dead pig turned up adjacent to the compound of a masjid. it inspired some rowdy protestations in that neighborhood that spread to other areas. i drive through that area often, that day i reconsidered. more for the time delay it would have caused than anything else. but the fear of rioting is more more palpable than the fear of being a casualty to a bomb blast. i swear some of the firecrackers people use during diwali are pretty damn near bomb grade and intensity.
Rajkumar's death/kidnap saga, the cauvery dispute, and general kanadiga-tamil antagonism create more of an atmosphere of fear than anything else. riots are a time for people to settle old scores. in the chaos of it all you can get away with anything, sometimes even murder. these sub plots dont have to have anything to do with the political issue at hand.
the BJP has already blamed the blast on a "soft" state. they couldnt be happier about this. this event is going to be referenced in security dialogue far into the future, and used as a bogey to avoid addressing basic issues like infrastructure dev. these people are going propose taking away our privacy and civil liberties over this fear of violence that they themselves will foster, yet they wont even pay lip service to the REAL and daily issue of violence against women in this society. they will insult the victims before they acknowledge the problem. i cant have respect for these exhortations for greater security from people who are not sensitive at all to genuine social injustice.
lets condemn the attack, investigate it thoroughly, and after that thoughtfully consider its implications. lets keep in perspective the size and importance of the group responsible. i hope, however, we do not play the game of these fearmongering "hard" state proponents.

If one can only point to Sub-Saharan Africa and the like as places more severely afflicted than India, this rather goes to strengthen the impression that India is not in an enviable position at all.

Well, how about 19th century Europe with its two wars and a cold war that almost wiped out the entire planet? That was not because of any population explosion. Devastation can also arise from lesser populations.

Here is something else to ponder: four of the world's leading religions (Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism) have their roots in India. The three others (Judaism, Islam, Christianity) have their roots in West Asia. You can think of North India and West Asia as the two focal points of world theology/culture/politics. Now compare how they have evolved. How is West Asia, with its low population, doing as a society, compared to India?

Sure, India is definitely not in an enviable position. Envy is probably not something worth aspiring for anyway, particularly in Indian culture. India, however, is in an interesting position. It has the most complex society in the world, with all the world's religions, ideologies, and hundreds, if not thousands, of languages, cultures and ethnicities, all packed into a very geographically diverse land, with layers and layers of history, some good, some bad. With all that baggage, it still manages to hold together remarkably well.

You could well be right, the population growth may become devastating after a point, but India would handle that its own way as well. Much better than boring monoculture nations with little history would. So hold those lectures, or better, direct it some place less complex, say West Asia?

45 · yeti said

actually I take that back. I think it's just me who's changed.

Ah, but the old Yeti had so much spunk:

"...you're desperately confused. Either that, or you're a total nihilist..."

no hmf, i just think you are a self-pitying nut who thinks that everybody is out to get the brown male in america. occam's razor usually works.

then take it one step further, as someone who you continuously attempt to derail without any ability to address the points I bring up.

How long before comments are closed this time ?

Got nothing.. Going to watch www.contractthefilm.com

Will this maddening spiral of death and destruction ever stop? Is there a way out? Or are we condemned to live our lives in fear of a cowardly mass attack?

Can Bangalore & other places respond to these blasts and how. Careful before listening to Narrow Minded gutless People who support terrorism.

Wev'e a CM who has let down Karnataka by having Gujarat CM Modi at swearing in and now to follow Gujarat's model. Gujjus butchered certain minorities and celebrated. But silent of what happened to Gujjus in 4 other countries where Gujjus got it 10 times over. families slaughtered, properties earned over a 100 years or more seized (in one country more than 1 lakh Hindus-Gujjus lost entire savings, property and their women!!) and Gujjus quiet coz its a shame.
Is this what we Non-Gujjus want too?

So when are 1000 people going to rape, kick pregnant women, burn babies and when are Kannadigas going to get it back.

In Kargil 5 peaks are still with Pakis, more than 400 terrorists were given Safe Passage to end the Kargil Conflict, called a war for votes. Victory? Shame India Shame

In the Afghanistan plane hijack, the same govt let off Top Terrorists , no options considered, and they scream about how terrorism is all over the place - Wow, and people actually believe them...

...And we have to pay for it. Expect more and respond by not fearing and moving around, there will be much more as long as this government made up of cheap rabble are around.
Once again - is this what we want?

If you've forgotten there was Tamil - Kannadiga violence in Bangalore too, this could be a probable cause.

Thanks Sherlock Holmes. Could it be that Chennai is envious of Bangalore's IT success and Karunanidhi planted a few bombs in Bangalore?.

No, I have not, but I stand by my comment and the larger point I was trying to make. Minimizing these bombings is in poor taste, in my opinion. We don't get heart-stopping, 3am phone calls from Bangalore if there's been a traffic accident.

Unlike many Westerners who shudder at the thought of terrorism, most Indians just get on with their life. Shit happens. eg Bombs have gone off in Bombay - city is still very much alive.

Instead of inflamming communal tensions against what is still a very moderate and liberal south Indian Muslim population, those among us who are educated should actually be responsible and wait for more evidence

Thats right, Hindus are at mercy of "very moderate and liberal south Indian Muslim population" and if anything is said against these very moderate Muslims they may become extremists. Wah Bhai Wah.

Unlike many Westerners who shudder at the thought of terrorism, most Indians just get on with their life. Shit happens. eg Bombs have gone off in Bombay - city is still very much alive.

But is that necessarily a good thing? then should terrorist attacks just be considered a freak bad luck occurence? something like, falling down an elevator shaft, car accident or lightning strike?

I think an update is required.

Another set of bomb blasts in Ahmedabad. this is getting extra frequent than I expected. Hope the casualties are minimal.

i'm horrified at the bombs going off in ahmedabad and bangalore, especially since i grew up in ahmedabad. i'm also worried it'll spark off communal fighting in ahmedabad like there was in 2002. modi is still very powerful there. i'm not overly sympathetic towards muslims however those ahmedabad riots were aimed at very poor defenseless muslims which was not right.

This may not be over. The only good news is that the explosives so far have been very low-yield. I saw a picture of a bus and except for two rows of seats on one side, it was fully intact.

Both the terror attacks were made on BJP states. The one in Ahmedabad was in Maninagar, Modi's constituency. This will give BJP more political mileage. Point is that the BJP and RSS are not brianless muslim haters but reactionary movements against muslim atrocities.

i'm not overly sympathetic towards muslims

I like that sentiment. Why would one have any sympathy for the Indian Muslim carpenter, mechanic, rickshawdrive, fruit vendor. They are all usually plotting Global Jihad and planning to put Non-Muslim Indians under Dhimmitude.

Point is that the BJP and RSS are not brianless muslim haters but reactionary movements against muslim atrocities.

Good point brother. The R in the RSS stands for Resistance.

61 · Pagal_Aadmi_for_debauchery said

I like that sentiment. Why would one have any sympathy for the Indian Muslim carpenter, mechanic, rickshawdrive, fruit vendor. They are all usually plotting Global Jihad and planning to put Non-Muslim Indians under Dhimmitude.

A muslim fruit vendor might not have a direct hand in the explosion but the same fruit vendor will protest on the streets against Iraq war but you will not see him protesting against these terror attacks in his own country.

"Terrosism is not an act of individuals but of collective muslim consciousness"

http://in.rediff.com/news/2008/jul/26ahd3.htm

Minutes before the Ahmedabad serial blasts, an email was sent to the Gujarat police which is now in the possession of the Intelligence Bureau. It read: Stop us if you can.

Intelligence Bureau officials told rediff.com that the email had been sent out by the Indian Mujahideen, a less known outfit which was slowly trying to spread its tentacles in the country.

The Indian Mujahideen in its email also said its intention was to cause panic and fight political outfits which were opposed to Islam. The mail further read, 'We the Indian Mujahideen have carried out attacks and will continue to do so. Stop us if you can.'

"Terrosism is not an act of individuals but of collective muslim consciousness"

I believe terrorism is the third pillar of Islam, after prayer, charity and before the pilgrimage.

A muslim fruit vendor might not have a direct hand in the explosion but the same fruit vendor will protest on the streets against Iraq war but you will not see him protesting against these terror attacks in his own country.

Topcat: I like how you are so non-PC and say it like it is. We need patriots like you to stop the spread of Eurabia to America where it will be called Arabrica.
I also agree that every Indian Muslim fruit vendor and rickshaw puller is indirectly responsible for any acts of terrorism committed by Muslims.

I believe terrorism is the third pillar of Islam, after prayer, charity and before the pilgrimage.

I know you are trying to be sarcastic, but is 'jihad' one of the pillars of islam?.

but is 'jihad' one of the pillars of islam?

No.

What kind of terrorist worth his salt would set off low yield bombs designed to minimize casualties? Whoever did so should have his degree from the Bin Laden Institute of Terror revoked. Unless of course, it was an intimidation tactic used to whip up support for the BJP and right wing Hindu outfits...

68 · Johnny Valker said

What kind of terrorist worth his salt would set off low yield bombs designed to minimize casualties? Whoever did so should have his degree from the Bin Laden Institute of Terror revoked. Unless of course, it was an intimidation tactic used to whip up support for the BJP and right wing Hindu outfits...

The kind of upstart terrorist who does not have access to RDX, C4 etc. The BJP doesnt need to do anything more to win in Gujarat. Successive years of 11% growth and a hardline stance so far on terrorists will give it all it needs. What you are stating is inflammatory and without merit.

65 · Pagal_Aadmi_for_debauchery said

I like how you are so non-PC and say it like it is. We need patriots like you to stop the spread of Eurabia to America where it will be called Arabrica.

We need our own desi Bill Mahers and Stephen Colberts... Dont we? Its time to get out of the bollywood mentality where there is a deliberate attempt to build positive stereotypes of muslims (remember the movie Black Friday was not released for 4 years because it showed muslims as they are)

70 · Topcat said

remember the movie Black Friday was not released for 4 years because it showed muslims as they are

Well, even if you believed in the original sin of all Muslims ("as they are"), Black Friday was not released because it might affect a pending prosecution. And, ostensibly, to feed the persecution paranoia of "Bill Mahers and Stephen Colberts" such as you.

Pagal, why bother with the trolls?

Ahmedabad hit by terror again. 15 dead !!! (so far)

69 · anthroguy said

The kind of upstart terrorist who does not have access to RDX, C4 etc.

Pipe bombs don't require advanced explosives and cause far more damage than these bombs did. And my comments were no more inflammatory than some of the above posters claiming that all Indian Muslims in some way or another support terrorist attacks.

Ofcourse wiki is not THE source.. But it claims jihad to be a pillar of Islam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_Pillar_of_Islam

Ofcourse wiki is not THE source.. But it claims jihad to be a pillar of Islam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_Pillar_of_Islam

But I hear it can be a struggle for self improvement (e.g. AA, Weight Watchers) & not just armed conflict.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_Pillar_of_Islam

Traditionally, in Sunni school of thought, there are five pillars of Islam. The sixth pillar aka Jihad is not mentioned in the hadith books which reference the other five pillars of Islam. I think adding jihad as the sixth pillar is still thankfully confined to terrorists and Islam disliking right wingers.

74 · Ponniyin Selvan said

But it claims jihad to be a pillar of Islam.

You omitted to mention what the article says: that the claimants are mostly Islamic Jihad terrorist organizations.

This is like saying that embracing pollution through cannibalism and necrophilia are tenets of Hinduism, or that group sex and incest are principles of Christianity.

But I hear it can be a struggle for self improvement (e.g. AA, Weight Watchers)

You omitted to mention that you also hear that's how the po' stateless Palestinians interpret it.

But I hear it can be a struggle for self improvement (e.g. AA, Weight Watchers) & not just armed conflict.

I think technically thats true and it has been used in Islamic text for purposes other than war. But in common parlance, I have always heard Jihad used as a concept of war, at least in the desi Muslim community. I cant speak for Arabs and other groups. Since 9-11, some Muslims in the US are trying to defend the term 'Jihad' as to mean 'struggle' but I think its mostly to stop the ridiculing of Islam.

I think the Shitte Twelvers also believe in 'Jihad' as an extended pillar of Islam though I am not sure about the context in which they include Jihad.

78 · Pagal_Aadmi_for_debauchery said

I have always heard Jihad used as a concept of war, at least in the desi Muslim community. I cant speak for Arabs and other groups

even this usage is a relatively recent revival of the term. When Bin Laden and the other Afghan Arabs were calling for jihad against the USSR, the majority of Muslims were perplexed because jihad in this sense had not been used since the early days of Islam. It would be analogous to American televangelists calling for a religious Crusade to oust the infidel from Christian land.

When Bin Laden and the other Afghan Arabs were calling for jihad against the USSR, the majority of Muslims were perplexed because jihad in this sense had not been used since the early days of Islam.

I disagree. I think the majority of Muslims were well aware of the term. I am not sure if we can Lexis the Muslim publications around the world, but I am sure this term was in usage before the Afghan war against the Soviets.

Man the endless analysis and inaction of people here is mind-numbing. You guys must be the kids of 'babus' from India, heavy of talk and little on action. This babugiri needs to end, enough already.

Confront your pakistani friend on their donations supporting jihad in kashmir, I have numerous times.

I have read Ayesha Jalal's recent book on Jihad. Partisans of Allah, Jihad in South Asia
Page 200 : Maulana Azad (so called Indian "secularist" "natinalist" Muslim ) on Jihad during the first world war:

Faced with Western political and cultural aggression, all believers had a duty to engage in Jihad in the way of Allah and must remember that while others were masters of their own lives, the lives of Muslims were the property of God".

Ponniyin: I think there are numerous references to Jihad in the last couple of centuries. Thats pretty well established. If we could do a Lexis search, the term will probably come up as being used pretty frequently.

Re 76:

Traditionally, in Sunni school of thought, there are five pillars of Islam. The sixth pillar aka Jihad is not mentioned in the hadith books which reference the other five pillars of Islam. I think adding jihad as the sixth pillar is still thankfully confined to terrorists and Islam disliking right wingers.

Yes, the notion of Jihad as a sixth pillar is considered heretical (or at best schism-producing) by most Sunni Muslims; while the idea is pushed by Islamic Jihad and terrorists now, it was initially introduced by a third sect, the Khawarij, which has largely died out. However, the Ismailis, a subsect of Shi'a Muslims, have seven pillars, of which the seventh is Jihad, but used in the inner struggle sense (even by the Druze, an Shi'a Ismaili sub-subsect, who have rather a martial reputation and history).

But it claims jihad to be a pillar of Islam. You omitted to mention what the article says: that the claimants are mostly Islamic Jihad terrorist organizations.

Excuse me. where did you find that info. in the wiki page I pointed?.

86 · Ponniyin Selvan said

Excuse me. where did you find that info. in the wiki page I pointed?.

Most Sunni Muslims believe there are precisely five Pillars of Islam, and consider the concept of a sixth pillar to be heretical. The idea of there being more than five pillars is not a mainstream idea; Sunni leaders have taught that there are only five major pillars of the faith.

A few Muslims, mainly some Kharijite groups in ancient times and the founder of Islamic Jihad recently, have taught that Jihad, or personal struggle, should be considered the sixth pillar of Islam. In this context, Jihad is viewed as external war against those perceived to be enemies of Islam.[citation needed]

Also read about the modern Kharijities in the wiki link.

81 · Pagal_Aadmi_for_debauchery said

I think the majority of Muslims were well aware of the term

True, but the concept of jihad as a religious battle with the kuffar was largely seen as anachronistic at the time. Remember that secular pan-Arabism and nationalism were far more popular from the 1940s-1970s than any sort of religious movements were. The use of the term "mujahideen" before this was largely confined to odd Marxist fringe groups like the Mojaheddin-e-Khalq that enjoyed little popularity.

Re 79:

I think the Shitte Twelvers also believe in 'Jihad' as an extended pillar of Islam though I am not sure about the context in which they include Jihad.

Pagal, I don't think it is the Twelvers; only the Ismailis -- but I could be wrong.

82 · DesiInNJ said

Confront your pakistani friend on their donations supporting jihad in kashmir, I have numerous times.

What about your family members that join Durga Vahini?

In 2006, women belonging to the Durga Vahini, leaded by Bajrang Dal activist Babu Bajrangi, beat up boys and girls at the Gujarat College and Sahjanand College in a Chetavani Abhiyan (warning campaign) acting as "moral police". Even those sitting in college canteens were also beaten. The women activists threatened the youngsters by waving hockey sticks and baseball bats. Babu Bajrangi labeled these Durga Vahini members as "the Rani of Jhansi" and said "I will not stop my drive against Muslims youths trying to defile Hindu girls". However they did not find any Muslim man and manhandled anyone sitting with a girl. Virendra Chauhan, the general secretary of the Gujarat College, who was also beaten up by the activists[13] said, "None of the students beaten up were Muslims. They asked for name or religion and went about beating up the youths".

Most Sunni Muslims believe there are precisely five Pillars of Islam, and consider the concept of a sixth pillar to be heretical. The idea of there being more than five pillars is not a mainstream idea; Sunni leaders have taught that there are only five major pillars of the faith. A few Muslims, mainly some Kharijite groups in ancient times and the founder of Islamic Jihad recently, have taught that Jihad, or personal struggle, should be considered the sixth pillar of Islam. In this context, Jihad is viewed as external war against those perceived to be enemies of Islam.[citation needed]

But the page never claims this

that the claimants are mostly Islamic Jihad terrorist organizations.

Anyways, according to Ayesha Jalal, jihad has been the part of Islam from early days though you know she claims it is the good "inner struggle" variety with occasional killing of infidels.. :-)

83 · Ponniyin Selvan said

Page 200 : Maulana Azad (so called Indian "secularist" "natinalist" Muslim ) on Jihad during the first world war:

So, PS, are you denying that Maulana Azad was a nationalist? If you think involvement in the Khilafat Movement made Azad partisan or non-secular, then I guess Gandhi could be labeled non-secular for his overt involvement in issues of Hindu reform or his appropriation of Hindu religious texts to inspire nationalistic thought and action within the public. There is really no need to conflate what Azad meant by jihad with what we understand it to mean today. This is pernicious revisionism.

notes from Wikipedia on Azad:

Azad became a leader of the Khilafat Movement during which he came into close contact with Indian leader Mahatma Gandhi. Azad became an enthusiastic supporter of Gandhi's ideas of non-violent civil disobedience, and worked actively to organise the Non-cooperation movement in protest of the 1919 Rowlatt Acts. Azad committed himself to Gandhi's ideals, including promoting Swadeshi (Indigenous) products and the cause of Swaraj (Self-rule) for India. He would become the youngest person to serve as the President of the Indian National Congress in 1923.

Azad was one of the main organisers of the Dharasana Satyagraha in 1931, and emerged as one of the most important national leaders of the time, prominently leading the causes of Hindu-Muslim unity as well as espousing secularism and socialism. He served as Congress President from 1940 to 1945, during which the Quit India rebellion was launched and Azad was imprisoned with the entire Congress leadership for three years. Azad became the most prominent Muslim opponent of the demand for a separate Muslim state of Pakistan and served in the interim national government. Amidst communal turmoil following the partition of India, he worked for religious harmony. As India's Education Minister, Azad oversaw the establishment of a national education system with free primary education and modern institutions of higher education. He is also credited with the foundation of the University Grants Commission, an important institution to supervise and advance the higher education in the nation.

Ponniyin: I think there are numerous references to Jihad in the last couple of centuries. Thats pretty well established. If we could do a Lexis search, the term will probably come up as being used pretty frequently

I think as I mentioned in my earlier comment, jihad goes back to early days of Islam and in the context of South Asia, not just the last couple of centuries, there are references to calling for jihad against infidels from Sheikh Ahmad Sirhandi (in the Akbar period) in the 17th, Shah Waliullah in the 18th century,and assorted imams in the 19th and continuing with Maududi in the 20th. I believe these guys are not street corner imams and according to Jalal quite influential and work up quite a few believers into frenzy. And many Muslim kings played along too.. I have heard Zia changed the motto of Pakistan army to jihad in the name of Allah or something like that. I'm not sure..

You omitted to mention that you also hear that's how the po' stateless Palestinians interpret it.

Checkpoint Fenster: I was in a contemplative mood after I got back from last night's festivities and I decided to wage war, or "jihad" if you will, against my own prejudices. I drunk dialed some experts in palliative care at Mass Gen and asked them to objectively rank (greatest pain at the top, descending order)several scenarios. These are the results:
a) Pain of Palestinians
b) Pain of having your thigh broken
c) Pain of child birth
d) Pain of a eight year old upon learning there will be no "Bouncy Castle" at her 10th bday
e) Pain of an MFA's "dark night of the soul"
f) Pain of Hindus displaced by Partition, Pak Civil War, Kashmir

Consider me "flipped"....let's get back on topic

88 · Johnny Valker said

81 · Pagal_Aadmi_for_debauchery said

I think the majority of Muslims were well aware of the term

True, but the concept of jihad as a religious battle with the kuffar was largely seen as anachronistic at the time. Remember that secular pan-Arabism and nationalism were far more popular from the 1940s-1970s than any sort of religious movements were. The use of the term "mujahideen" before this was largely confined to odd Marxist fringe groups like the Mojaheddin-e-Khalq that enjoyed little popularity.

Isn't all religion anachronistic? In the most authentic of the six hadith collections, the ninth-century Sahih Bukari mentions jihad 199 times, all in the context of warfare against non-Muslims in an effort to spread Islam.

Most of that pan-Arabism and nationalism you mention directly resulted from the influence of the rise of the Soviet Union, but religion was always there as a unifying political force. In the early 1940s look at the multi-national (Bosnian, Albanian, Palestinian, Syrian) Islamic division of the Nazi SS, put together by the then Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin Al-Husseini. It was tied into nationalism and anti-colonial sentiments, but religion was still a unifying undercurrent. Incidentally, relatively moderate Cairo must be the only city in the world today were copies of Mein Kampf is openly sold by booksellers on the streets.

So, PS, are you denying that Maulana Azad was a nationalist? If you think involvement in the Khilafat Movement made Azad partisan or non-secular, then I guess Gandhi could be labeled non-secular for his overt involvement in issues of Hindu reform or his appropriation of Hindu religious texts to inspire nationalistic thought and action within the public. There is really no need to conflate what Azad meant by jihad with what we understand it to mean today. This is pernicious revisionism.

I don't want to sidetrack the issue here. Anyways, since you asked the question, Maulana Azad said this way before Khilafat movement was started, infact even before turkey surrendered in the first world war. As far as I know, Gandhi never claimed jihad against non Hindus. If he has claimed so, I'd call him a religious nutcase just like I'd call Maulana Azad a religious nutcase.

You must be blind to not read what Maulana Azad was saying..

Faced with Western political and cultural aggression, all believers had a duty to engage in Jihad in the way of Allah and must remember that while others were masters of their own lives, the lives of Muslims were the property of God".

he..he.. This looks like what Al qaeda is saying now. :-)

Friday's blasts at Bangalore and today's (Saturday's) blasts at Ahmedabad is, to me, somewhat reminiscent of the bombs exploded by JMB in August 2005 in Bangladesh -- over 300 bombs exploded in 50 cities in the course of one day, and given the similarity in names (with the caveat that almost all Islamic terrorist outfits try to appropriate the word "Mujahideen" for themselves) and the relative weakness of bombs used, I wouldn't be surprised if both outfits were offshoots of the same organization.

That said, the goals appear to be different. In Bangladesh, it was designed to spread wholesale panic, paint the government and law enforcement agencies as ineffective, and serve as a shocking measure of their number and penetration of society (the capture, trial, and subsequent execution of many of the ringleaders mitigated this somewhat). The attacks in Bangalore and Ahmedabad, in BJP-dominated states, seem to be designed primarily to foment communal tensions.

53 · Ponniyin Selvan on July 26, 2008 07:59 AM

If you've forgotten there was Tamil - Kannadiga violence in Bangalore too, this could be a probable cause.

Thanks Sherlock Holmes. Could it be that Chennai is envious of Bangalore's IT success and Karunanidhi planted a few bombs in Bangalore?.

Tamil-Kannadiga violence a couple of years ago happened for the similar/same reasons that Shiv Sena protests against UP/Biharis and Telangana protests against Andhraites happened. Cauvery, the actor who got kidnapped, the filling up of government and private sector jobs by mostly non-Kannadigas. I was trying to make the point that instead of blaming things on "those Moslems" we had to look at all possible scenarios and not judge someone guilty before proven so.

I do not see why you felt that it was elementary to start your point with an insult ?

55. Qasim on July 26, 2008 09:25 AM

Instead of inflamming communal tensions against what is still a very moderate and liberal south Indian Muslim population, those among us who are educated should actually be responsible and wait for more evidence

Thats right, Hindus are at mercy of "very moderate and liberal south Indian Muslim population" and if anything is said against these very moderate Muslims they may become extremists. Wah Bhai Wah.

Are you serious? You found offense in what I said??!?! I'm just baffled, you just took the need for political correctness to a new level. I have to go tell this one lady that she has been bested; she once corrected my girlfriend for calling herself my "girlfriend" and told her to call me her "partner". Would you rather I have said that there are Hindus at the mercy of the Muslims because their life would be determined by when SIMI as going to have its next meeting?

65 · Pagal_Aadmi_for_debauchery on July 26, 2008 12:17 PM

I believe terrorism is the third pillar of Islam, after prayer, charity and before the pilgrimage.

79 · Pagal_Aadmi_for_debauchery on July 26, 2008 01:48 PM

I think the Shitte Twelvers also believe in 'Jihad' as an extended pillar of Islam though I am not sure about the context in which they include Jihad.

66 · Ponniyin Selvan on July 26, 2008 12:24 PM

I know you are trying to be sarcastic, but is 'jihad' one of the pillars of islam?.
This is an FYI and I'm not trying to be smart here...Ismailis do have the Lesser Jihad as a Pillar (I know someone said that it was the Greater Jihad, but if you look at the history of the Ismailis and the way they've used the concept it would probably fall under the lesser wouldn't it?), so do the Druze but they use "Jihad" in the sense that we must do good deeds to eliminate evil rather than eliminating the "evil" itself. The Twelvers follow the five pillars (different pillars they call the "usul"/morals) but have Jihad as one of the 10 rituals that is a responsibility as opposed to the Ismailis who believe it is a requisite.

77 · Checkpoint Fenster on July 26, 2008 01:40 PM

This is like saying that embracing pollution through cannibalism and necrophilia are tenets of Hinduism
I believe that the Aswamedha involved what can be termed as "simulated beastiality", part of it was in the sense a "fertility ritual" where the woman feigned having sex with a horse. Sorta like "When Seabiscuit met Sally"

80 · Johnny Valker on July 26, 2008 01:51 PM

even this usage is a relatively recent revival of the term. When Bin Laden and the other Afghan Arabs were calling for jihad against the USSR, the majority of Muslims were perplexed because jihad in this sense had not been used since the early days of Islam. It would be analogous to American televangelists calling for a religious Crusade to oust the infidel from Christian land.
I don't think that that is true, the concept of Akbar and Asghar Jihads has existed all through Islamic history if I'm not horribly mistaken and the concepts were used a lot. Even in India during Muslim Rule. The "Televageist" analogy is misplaced and most of their "fight back" tactics as illustrated in the "Bible Camp" movies involve using martial arts and sticks...all they need are short shorts and a khakhi Nehru hat and we will have yet another misplaced reactionary response. It also reminds me of some comedian making fun of the guy who had himself tied to a tree during a Hurricane because he felt that he was in great Physical condition and wanted to brave the Hurricane ...the line was "how the **** is the number of push-ups you do going to matter when you have a ******* car flying at you"

Tamil-Kannadiga violence a couple of years ago happened for the similar/same reasons that Shiv Sena protests against UP/Biharis and Telangana protests against Andhraites happened. Cauvery, the actor who got kidnapped, the filling up of government and private sector jobs by mostly non-Kannadigas. I was trying to make the point that instead of blaming things on "those Moslems" we had to look at all possible scenarios and not judge someone guilty before proven so.

Did you mean Tamil-Kannadiga violence happened in which both sides used bombs?. Rajkumar fans indulged in rioting during his death by stoning buses and not throwing bombs. We can certainly rule out certain elements while trying to figure out who could have done this. Tamil Kannada violence with the exception of 1991(or 2), I think never resulted in fatalities. Mostly the vehicles with the registration plates of the respective states were broken or prominent symbols associated with either state was broken. That's about it.

96 · Ponniyin Selvan said

he..he.. This looks like what Al qaeda is saying now. :-)

FYI...this reference to 'Western political and cultural aggression' is a nod to imperialism and associated political maneuvering. Anti-imperialist seems like nationalist to me, but maybe you've now started denying imperialism and Azad's denunciation thereof?

Like I said, Azad's statement was made in a different era and context, and you're being deceptively revisionist. From your commenting history, it seems like you are a veiled (sic!!!!) religious nutcase, erasing history to paint a homogeneous portrait of all Muslims through all time.

From the Maulana here:

If an angel were to descend from the clouds today, settle on the Qutub Minar of Delhi and proclaim from there that India will attain Swaraj provided Hindu-Muslim Unity is renounced, then I would renounce Swaraj and not sacrifice Hindu-Muslim Unity, because if Swaraj is delayed, it is the loss to India, but if Hindu-Muslim Unity is lost, it is the loss to humanity.

Will you take him at his word here?

I think anyone can be anti-imperialist without invoking jihad and the related fight against infidels. :-)

I don't really care about Hindu-Muslim unity. I'm bothered why they left out the Christians/Sikhs/atheists/agnostics out of the picture in the nationalist movement and are concerned only with Hindu-Muslim unity. Anyways that unity did not last long as we now know that we have two solid Muslim states in the neighborhood.

20 · Jeremiah said

With the crushing population density of India's cities, where people live packed cheek-by-jowl, it is ridiculously easy to commit almost "casual" atrocities

It just struck me that it took less than 24 hours to show that this poster's comments were devastatingly prescient.

23 · Populist said

What's a few bombs here and there?

I think after today's heinous bombings and their likely destructive aftermath, you have your answer.

98 · RahulD said

I don't think that that is true, the concept of Akbar and Asghar Jihads has existed all through Islamic history if I'm not horribly mistaken and the concepts were used a lot. Even in India during Muslim Rule. The "Televageist" analogy is misplaced and most of their "fight back" tactics as illustrated in the "Bible Camp" movies involve using martial arts and sticks...all they need are short shorts and a khakhi Nehru hat and we will have yet another misplaced reactionary response.

You're right about the jihads being used throughout history; I should have said that "Military jihad was obsolete by the early twentieth century". My analogy was with a hypothetical group of Bible thumpers; not the present day ones who focus on the homosexuals (even though they hire gay prostitutes of their own), but ones who urge Christians to kill any non-Christian occupying Christian lands. If said group were to call for a religious war, it would be as ridiculous as Bin Laden's early comments were perceived.

"Islam huwa el Hal" (Islam is the solution) was never taken seriously in the last century until Khomeini overthrow Mr. Pahlavi and his Immortals. Didn't the RSS and VHP also become more prominent in the late 70s?

101 · Ponniyin Selvan said

jihad

There is only one ponniyin selvan sanctioned interpretation of the word 'jihad,' isn't there? How kind of you to clarify, even when it's patently clear that you aren't concerned with Hindu-Muslim unity.

The British policy of divide and rule (e.g. parochial education grants and separate electorates) led nationalist politicians to emphasize Hindu-Muslim unity as a matter of political relevance and survival( which was one of the thorniest issues during the freedom movement; cf. the partition of Bengal, separate electorates, the Muslim league & Hindu Mahasabha -- loyalist organizations that wanted to win concessions by exploiting religious fears).

And I don't see how Hindu-Muslim unity necessarily implies the exclusion of Sikhs, Christians, and agnostics in the national agenda. Even though it's pathetic when some Hindus clumsily subsume all other indigenous subcontinental religions within the Indic umbrella and then proceed to conflate them with Hinduism, despite their wildly divergent theologies.

Anyways that unity did not last long as we now know that we have two solid Muslim states in the neighborhood.

95 · Akut said

Most of that pan-Arabism and nationalism you mention directly resulted from the influence of the rise of the Soviet Union, but religion was always there as a unifying political force.

Nope, pan-Arabism was the idea of Christian Arabs who created it long before the Soviet Union even existed. They promoted this as a means to resist Ottoman rule, and also to be on equal terms with the Muslim majority. The Ba'ath Party was established by Michel Aflaq, a Christian. The early conflicts with Israel involved the clash of secular pan-Arabism vs. secular Zionism. Both the PLO and PFLP were secular and the latter was founded by a Christian (Dr. George Habash). Nasser and Assad may have been pro-Soviet, but that was for strategic reasons and not ideological. Marxism was never a strong force in the Arab world because even nominal Muslims and Christians wanted nothing to do with atheism. Religion only became prominent after pan-Arabism failed and Islamism succeded (in Iran and Afghanistan), which is why the Muslim Brotherhood was not too popular until the 80s.

P.S. the above post should have said "Khomeini overthrew" and not "Khomeini overthrow"

One blast was in Narendra Modi's constituency...
Wonder how he is going to respond to this? will be very interesting to see his reaction.
I don't think we have the infrastructure at this point for ensuring either a personalised i.d system or mass CCTV surveillance.
What is the way out? I think (without being too P.C.)that the answer should come from the muslim community itself. And some questions need to be asked. A lot of varied groups have grievances in India, but if all of them (even if just a crazy/misguided/radical/all of the above fringe) start bombing public places randomly, there is going to be civil war.
We may point accusatory fingers at the IB, CID and other intelligence agencies but truly, theirs is a thankless job. For every successful terrorist action, there must be many, many more which are averted without much publicity. Human int. comes from within the community. And for every terrorist that arises from the community there are 10 others who contribute actively and passively by either aiding and abetting or by simply closing their eyes and ears. Britain has recognised and partially contained this tendency, but our politicians are still too busy consolidating their vote banks. We need to actively encourage and empower modern,educated and secular leaders of the community to take charge.
On a very short term, some of the operational bases of a friendly neighborhood agency need to be taken out.

There is only one ponniyin selvan sanctioned interpretation of the word 'jihad,' isn't there? How kind of you to clarify, even when it's patently clear that you aren't concerned with Hindu-Muslim unity.

He-he.. It's my interpretation of "jihad" that is the problem here. Somehow those who explode bombs are following my interpretation which is so sad compared to the true "meaning" of jihad.. :-)

And it is wrong for me to assume that when Maulana Azad wanted jihad against the Brits, he meant some kind of a spiritual struggle, that is same as "satyagraha" and "non-violence" preached by Gandhi.. My bad.. :-)

105 · Johnny Valker said

95 · Akut said

Most of that pan-Arabism and nationalism you mention directly resulted from the influence of the rise of the Soviet Union, but religion was always there as a unifying political force.

Nope, pan-Arabism was the idea of Christian Arabs who created it long before the Soviet Union even existed. They promoted this as a means to resist Ottoman rule, and also to be on equal terms with the Muslim majority. The Ba'ath Party was established by Michel Aflaq, a Christian. The early conflicts with Israel involved the clash of secular pan-Arabism vs. secular Zionism. Both the PLO and PFLP were secular and the latter was founded by a Christian (Dr. George Habash). Nasser and Assad may have been pro-Soviet, but that was for strategic reasons and not ideological. Marxism was never a strong force in the Arab world because even nominal Muslims and Christians wanted nothing to do with atheism. Religion only became prominent after pan-Arabism failed and Islamism succeded (in Iran and Afghanistan), which is why the Muslim Brotherhood was not too popular until the 80s.

P.S. the above post should have said "Khomeini overthrew" and not "Khomeini overthrow"

I was responding to this statement of yours: "Remember that secular pan-Arabism and nationalism were far more popular from the 1940s-1970s than any sort of religious movements were." That is, I was addressing pan-Arabism in the 1940s-1970s, as you wrote. I'll add that this statement is simply not true: pan-Arabism was popular, yes, but mostly among an elite and educated class. At that same time Islamist movements were in ascendancy as well and, as far as sheer numbers go, were far more popular among the people. The transnational Muslim Brotherhood quickly became the largest political party in Egypt and many other countries.

As for Nasser and others being "pro-Soviet," I did not say that and didn't intend to imply it. My position is that such leaders were inspired by ideological liberation movements, the Bolshevik revolution being among the most prominent and successful at that time. The Islamic political world seems much closer to Fascism (hence my example of their alliance with the Nazis) and imperial colonialism than anything. The Arabization of the Maghreb and the southward Arabization in places like the Sudan, and the resulting slave trade and cultural genocide therein are attest to this.

Are there any commenters who were born in or live in America anymore? The anti-Islam, anti-Pakistan brigade tends to be either DBD or abroad. The "debates" on this thread are barely interesting to this second-genner (but much thanks to Pagal Admi for Debauchery for holding it down. shout-out to Yeti, too).