Saturday, October 29, 2005

The Religion That Dare Not Speak Its Name

 
If you read all the way through any of the current versions of the
Associated Press story about today’s bombing in New Delhi, two words are notably absent: “Islam” and “Muslim”.
    Bomb blasts in New DelhiWhile [Prime Minister Manmohan Singh] did not say who was suspected in the explosions, the Indian government faces opposition from dozens of militant organizations, from tiny fringe groups to well-armed Kashmiri insurgents who have previously attacked New Delhi, including a bloody 2001 assault on parliament. Some of those groups fiercely oppose the India-Pakistan peace process, which began early last year.
[…]
Pakistan condemned the multiple attacks in New Delhi.
Eventually some group will claim responsibility for this atrocity, forcing the MSM to mention the forbidden words for a brief moment before they return our attention to more important matters — such as the contents of Scooter Libby’s garbage can, or the drop of President Bush’s numbers in the most recent polls.

So let me state it for the record: Islamic terrorist groups have a long and bloody history of attacking Hindus and Sikhs in India, and Muslims carry out these attacks, ostensibly because of what India does in Kashmir. Pakistan is mentioned prominently in the above quote because Pakistan, officially or otherwise, has a habit of aiding and abetting these terrorists.

There. I’ve said it. Now the sky will fall.


Update — From The Counterterrorism Blog:

Walid Phares reports: “My monitoring of the chat rooms over the past few hours indicate that the Jihadists-Salafists are celebrating. High possibility that a Jihadi (either local Cashemire or al Qaida like) group will take responsibility in 24-48 hours… This note is sent with caution, as other leads are also followed. The Jihadi theory is the highest, but we do not rule out mafia related causes.”

(Hat tip: Andrew Scotia)

23 comments:

Pastorius said...

I have no doubt the terrorists are Muslim. Three coordinated explosions? C'mon.

Anyway, maybe you can help me out here. The Associated Press article on the New Delhi bombings contained the following paragraph:

"Officials blamed terrorists for the blasts, which came as India and nuclear rival Pakistan began unprecedented talks on opening their disputed and heavily defended Kashmir frontier to bring food, shelter and medical aid to victims of the Himalayan region's massive earthquake."

So, am I wrong, or is this article hinting that the Jihadis may have carried out these attacks because Hindu infidels are going to bring them quake aid in Kashmir?

What the ...?

Baron Bodissey said...

Pastorius -- I noticed that, too. But the author doesn't make it clear whether he's making a causal connection.

But I would assume that the Muslims in Kashmir are not happy that the filthy Hindus are helping them...

Jez said...

While it wouldn't be surprising if islamic fundamentalists claim responsibility, you should still be careful what you say. Hindu extremists have also a history of terrorist action aimed at muslims.

Baron Bodissey said...

Jez, how much money would you bet that it is eventually proved that Hindus carried out these simultaneous bombings in New Delhi? I'm serious.

I suggest US$50, payable to the charity of choice of the winner.

Pastorius said...

I'll take you up on that bet too, if your game, Jez.

Where'd you get that pic, by the way? I like it. Reminds me of Paul Bowles, for some reason.

Dymphna said...

Pastorius--

Don't tell them but the Baron got it from Fox. The lighting was dark so he brightened it enough to put up...

...otherwise he didn't fool with it. Ever since I saw that Condi picture I've been telling him he missed his calling. He doesn't use photo shop --wrote his own program to improve pictures so he could work with my inexpensive digital --like when I take pictures of thru the screen door of wild turkeys pecking their way across the yard.

But my heavens, imagine what he could do with Bushitler.

John Sobieski said...

Is everyone in the MSM living in their pretend world with its political correctness and multiculturalism mantra? They all write the same, the same euphemisms, the same obfuscations? Who owns all these mainstream medias? The Arabs? I know they have bought into Murdoch's media empire (FOX), Disney (ABC), have huge trade relations with GE (NBC), control BBC, but what about Reuters? How much of that do the Arabs own?

If not for the internet, any dissent from our islamization would be silenced. It's really quite amazing and, of course, troubling.

felix said...

OT,
Does anyone know if Tony Blair been successful in throwing any islamofasicst out of the UK. It's been about 2 months since his "the rules of the game have changed" speech.

Andrew Scotia said...

From the Counterterrorism Blog

http://tinyurl.com/anvd4

jeyi said...

Do keep in mind that the two assasinated Indian Prime Ministers were killed, respectively, by Sikhs and more-or-less-secular Sri Lankan Tamils. And that the awful Mumbai bombings of the late 1990s, of which the perps may well have been Muslims, were connected more strongly to players in the local underworld, rather than to any jihadis.

Keep also in mind that India has a Muslim minority population well over 100 million, and at the hands of chauvinist, yea fascist Hindus, Indian Muslims have recently have received communal violence far worse than they had dealt... e.g., following the train-burning in Gujarat several years ago.

India has far more compelling reason than Europe not to unduly incite its non-Muslim majority

jeyi said...

Do keep in mind that the two assasinated Indian Prime Ministers were killed, respectively, by Sikhs and more-or-less-secular Sri Lankan Tamils. And that the awful Mumbai bombings of the late 1990s, of which the perps may well have been Muslims, were connected more strongly to players in the local underworld, rather than to any jihadis.

Keep also in mind that India has a Muslim minority population well over 100 million, and at the hands of chauvinist, yea fascist Hindus, Indian Muslims have recently have received communal violence far worse than they had dealt... e.g., following the train-burning in Gujarat several years ago.

India has far more compelling reason than Europe not to unduly incite its non-Muslim majority

Jez said...

Why would I want to bet? Truth is't a game for me.I'm merely interested in reminding people that life isn't black&white, good against evil, islam agaisnt the rest of the world.

Jez said...

furthermore, I don't wait to win a bet to help those in need.

Baron Bodissey said...

Andrew -- thanks for the link. Everyone should check out the update above.

Baron Bodissey said...

felix -- I don't have any info on that. Anyone else...?

Maybe if DP111 is lurking here, he'll give us the word.

Mussolini said...

"If not for the internet, any dissent from our islamization would be silenced."

If the US elects a democratic president, the UN will be controlling the internet.

Bush basically told the UN to kiss off when they requested. A democrat will want to "appease" the UN and the rest of the world by "gifting" control of the internet to them.

China, Iran, and others have expressed interest in controlling the content (the increasing politicization) of the internet. If we get an appeaser as president, kiss goodbye to this site and others like it. HERE and HERE. Note the language used. "Control." "Regulate." "Hate Speech." - How do you "control" "hate speech?" Any guesses? Who decides what hate speech is when the controlling country is Iran?

Duh, anything un-Islamic. Anything that exposes the truth of the violence and hate that resides in their religion.

There will be no outlet for truth if we elect a democrat. That's not chicken little squawking hysterical assumptions. Imagine a Hillary in office who has said we need to cozy back on up to the UN and that the UN needs to play a "bigger role." A bigger role in what?

Possibly taking over the internet to administer as a communication vehicle for a "free world," I'm sure the rhetoric would go... We may be reduced to short-wave in the event of a democratic president. Not a single dem candidate has expressed anything but fawning admiration for the UN amongst the current batch of most likely candidates.

And you know the UN is tops on their foreign policy list.

Always On Watch said...

Islamic terrorist groups have a long and bloody history of attacking Hindus and Sikhs in India...

Many social-studies textbooks gloss over the facts on this one. Could that be because Susan Douglass, a convert to Wahhabism, is a national consultant for nearly every publisher of such texts?

BTW, a similar principle has been in play in our nation's textbooks with regard to Chechnya. Then came Beslan!

Dymphna said...

Always on Watch -- From your keyboard to the ears of Prince Charles (check out LGF if you don't know what I mean).

Lord_Amey_of_Camberley said...

Quote:Hindu extremists have also a history of terrorist action aimed at muslims.

Hahaha Terrorist action... thats the most prepostrous accusation i've ever heard... Muslims have killed more than 3million Hindus in the subcontinent since 1947 and 60000 since the Jihad in Kashmir. Those Hindu "Terrorists" had only destroyed a disused mosque which was built upon a temple.

And if u are referring to Gujarat than lemme tell u THAT WAS A FREAKIN RIOT. It was prompted when Muslim burnt alive 59 Hindus women and children on train. Get ur facts straight mate.

Always On Watch said...

Dymphna,
I've been reading and ranting about Prince Charles's dhimmitude all this morning. He's been an advocate for Islam since 1994, but I didn't realize that fact until just now.

Never thought much of him anyway.

Now, if jihadists take down Buckingham Palace, maybe the Prince will pay attention.

Franze said...

Islam is tiring the world, they attack to everybody, someday, the people will react, criticising Israel is very easy, living like Israel is very tiring, terrorism all days, is frustating.

Jez said...

I have posted my views on my blog, at
http://globalikum.blogspot.com/2005/11/terror-anti-zionism-anti-semitism.html

DirtCrashr said...

When I was a kid living in India in the Mid-60's, the sectarian violence between both Hindus and Moslms in our region (Orissa) was fairly common, and it flowed to other religions also. Most of the time it was tit-for-tat, based on an unprovable injustice that each side alleged and the other denied. Usually a few people died/were killed each year and that satisfied the bloodlust, Kali would be proud.