Islamic Terrorism in India

Most Muslims are not terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslims

Archive for October 26th, 2008

Muslim Political Council of India- Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel was a terrorist

Posted by jagoindia on October 26, 2008

Row over ‘Patel a terrorist’ gathers momentum
Saturday, October 25, 2008

Durgesh Nandan Jha | New Delhi

Maharashtra Navnirman Sena chief Raj Thackeray may shut up; Muslim clerics from Delhi are ready to carry forward his venom, though in a different tone altogether. Muslim Political Council of India has said that Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel was a terrorist. Reason: He annexed Hyderabad forcibly and had deliberately allowed the massacre of Muslims in post-partition era when he was the Home Minister of India. Not only this, the Muslim outfit has demanded that present Home Minister Shivraj Patil should also be tried and declared a terrorist for his biased approach on Muslim terrorists.

“Sardar Patel was responsible for all the riots after partition, for lakhs of Muslims who were killed in the riots. He deliberately allowed them to be killed. He was a terrorist,” said Taslim Rahmani, chief of Muslim Political Council — a Muslim outfit formed in 2001 and registered in 2006. It has about 33 members and small units in most of the Muslim dominated areas of the country.

Rahmani had made similar comments about Patel on Monday while addressing the Muslim clerics meet in Azamgarh. He had said that Nathuram Godse was the first terrorist of Independent India and Patel the second one. “I stand by my comment. Besides, Patel issued Government order that Muslims were not faithful so they must not be given important positions in Government jobs. He acted against Muslim community, which as per the widely perceived definition of terrorism is a terrorist activity,” said Rahmani.

He went on to state that even Shivraj Patil is a terrorist as he has been deliberately concealing facts about the involvement of extremist Hindu outfits in terrorist activities. “The Home Minister pronounced the Muslims caught from Jamia Nagar as terrorists but he has failed to come public on the blasts in Mehrauli and other parts of the country where Hindu outfits are suspected to be involved,” he said.

In a suo motu Press statement, Secretary General of the All India Mili Council Mohammad Manzoor Alam, Secretary, Jamaat-e-Islami Hind among other Muslim groups condemned Rahmani’s views. “It was and deplorable to term Sardar Patel a ‘terrorist’,” read the statement. “He should apologise. One may differ with Patel in opinion, but cannot label him as a terrorist,” added Alam. Jama Masjid’s chief cleric Imam Bukhari said that he did not want to speak about Rahmani or his statements.

Posted in Indian Muslims, Islamofascism, Terrorism | 1 Comment »

Indian Media report on communal riots: partial to Muslims, biased against Hindus

Posted by jagoindia on October 26, 2008

Media: A contributor in communal violence

The website, after briefly reporting the communal clash, concluded with the news of Owaisi’s visit to the troubled area and concluded that he demanded a CBI enquiry in to the incident. This gives an impression that the clashes were ignited by Hindus and the Muslim community was the worst hit. It was, infact the other way round.

Rest. Click on this link

Posted in Hindus, Indian Muslims, Islamofascism, Media, Pseudo secularism, Riots/clash | 5 Comments »

Almost all non muslim countries with significant muslim populations have muslim problems

Posted by jagoindia on October 26, 2008

Muslim problem in Israel is similar to Muslim problems in other countries like Russia , India , Thailand ,Philipines , Nigeria , France ,etc

Reader comment on article: Israel’s Domestic Enemy
Submitted by Bengal (India), Dec 19, 2006 at 22:43

Israel has a big muslim problem , Which country doesn’t have muslim problems ??

Almost all non muslim countries with significant muslim populations have muslim problems. For example : Russia , France , Spain , India , Thailand,Philipines , Nigeria , Kenya , Tanzania , Former Yugoslavia , Lebanon,etc.

Wherever there are muslims , Problems , Poverty and Terrorism will follow.

We have to realise that Muslims are driven by allah’s orders in Koran which continuously motivates them to wage a Jehad and fight non muslims everywhere they live.

Muslims are only peaceful when they are weak and not able to do anything. As soon as they are in position to damage you they will strike you by all possible means . Muslim tribesmen have beheaded western jounalists by knives. Whereas Mohamad atta crashed aeroplanes into World Trade Center and murdered thousands. So Whenever they will get chance or means , they will use it against kaffir non muslims.

We have to go to the roots of problem , that is ideology of Islam in Koran.

Without recognising our real enemy , there is no sense in firing few laser guided missiles on few tents and caves. Enemy is Islam and which is in hearts & minds of 1.5 billion muslims which is getting stronger after every Terror attack and Friday sermons by Imams.

Any ways to counter , contain , combat and control this ?????

Posted in Islam, Islamofascism, Muslims, Non-Muslims, Quran, Terrorism | 5 Comments »

Debate or denial: the Indian Muslim dilemma — must read

Posted by jagoindia on October 26, 2008

Debate or denial: the Muslim dilemma

Jul 17, 2007,Hasan Suroor

More Muslims need to realise that Islamist terrorists are not simply “misguided” individuals acting on a whim but that they are people who know what they are doing and they are doing it deliberately in the name of Islam.

Judging from much of the Muslim reaction to the latest Islamist outrage — last month’s attempted bombings in London and Glasgow — the community seems to have talked itself into a default position in relation to violent Muslim extremism. The same old arguments are being flogged again betraying an unwillingness to acknowledge either the scale of the problem or its nature. The fear of making the community or Islam look bad has created a strange silence aroun d issues that lie at the heart of the Islamism debate.

Broadly, the Muslim argument is that it is all down to a host of external factors. Top of the list is the western foreign policy, especially with regard to the Palestinian issue, compounded by the invasion and continuing occupation of Iraq. Then there are social and economic reasons such as lack of education and high rate of unemployment in the Muslim community — again attributed to external causes such as racial or religious discrimination.

In other words: don’t blame us; it is all other people’s doing. We are only the victims. As someone who feels the same pressures as other Muslims, I wish this was true. But it isn’t. It not all other people’s doing. We are not just the victims.

I used the term ‘default position’ as an euphemism. There is a more robustly appropriate term, which is being increasingly used to describe the Muslim position: denial. The view that Muslims are in denial of the extent of the problem and their own responsibility in dealing with it is no longer confined to right-wing Muslim-bashers. Even liberal opinion has started to shift.

Appearing on an NDTV panel discussion last week, I was struck by how closely my two distinguished co-panellists — one in New Delhi and the other in Bangalore — stuck to the ‘default’ position. They kept refer ring to “looming images” from Iraq and Palestine; and to the frustration and “anger” bred by American and British foreign policy. There were obligatory references to social deprivation etc., etc. And as for the three Indian doctors suspected to have been behind the London-Glasgow plot, they were simply “misguided” individuals acting alone.

There was much hand-wringing when the anchor underlined the fact that Muslims had been behind all recent acts of terrorism. Yes, it was worrying. Of course, the community condemned any violence committed in the name of Islam, a peaceful religion. And, indeed, there was need for introspection and discussion. But all this was hedged in with so many “ifs” and “buts” that the whole debate seemed like a huge exercise in denial. At least up to the point where I was cut off because the satellite time ran out.

It is the response of a community that sees itself under siege and is irritated that every time a Muslim does something silly it is expected to stand up and apologise. Add to this the prevailing Islamophobia (it is pretty widespread, make no mistake about it), and it is not difficult to understand why Muslims are in this defensive mood. But how long will they continue to shy away from facing the truth? And the truth is that many of their assumptions about the underlying causes of extremism are flawed. Every fresh terrorist attack chips away at the idea that foreign policy and socio-economic factors are the sole drivers of Islamist extremism, making the Muslim default position more untenable.

Hassan Butt, a reformed British extremist, recalls how “we used to laugh in celebration whenever people on TV proclaimed that the sole cause for Islamic acts of terror like 9/11, the Madrid bombings and 7/7 was Western foreign policy.” Writing in The Observer, he said if he was still stuck in his old ways, he would be “laughing once again” at suggestions that the June 29-30 failed attacks were motivated by anger over British foreign policy.

Mr. Butt criticised Muslims and liberal non-Muslim intellectuals and politicians for failing to recognise the “role of Islamist ideology in terrorism” — an ideology that, according to another lapsed extremist Shiraz Maher, preaches a “separatist message of Islamic supremacy” and seeks to establish a “puritanical caliphate.” Mr. Maher knew Kafeel Ahmed, the Indian who tried to blow up Glasgow airport and is now fighting for his life in a hospital in Scotland.

Both Mr. Butt and Mr. Maher were activists of Hizb-ut-Tahrir, one of Britain’s most controversial radical groups with a long and notorious history of recruiting potential jihadis in mosques and on university campuses. Mohammed Siddique Khan, who masterminded the 7/7 bombings, was a member of Hizb at the same time as Mr. Butt. The July 7 attacks were widely attributed to the invasion of Iraq and other west-inspired “atrocities” against Muslims. According to Mr. Butt, though many extremists were enraged by the deaths of fellow Muslims across the world “what drove me and many of my peers to plot acts of extreme terror within Britain, our homeland and abroad, was a sense that we were fighting for the creation of a revolutionary state that would eventually bring Islamic justice to the world.”

Arguably, defectors are not the most reliable of people and there is, inevitably, an element of exaggeration in what they say about the organisation they have left and of their own role in it. Yet, so long as we are careful to remember where they are coming from and don’t allow ourselves to be mesmerised by their insiders’ account, they remain our best guide to understanding the world they have left behind. It is only an ex-extremist who can help us get a glimpse of what goes on inside an extremist organisation and sometime that can change our perceptions of an issue in a fundamental way. So, when people like Mr. Butt and Mr. Maher debunk some of the most widely held assumptions about the nature of Muslim extremism it is important to pay heed. And they are not the only ones. Ed Husain, another ex-Islamist, has written a whole book (The Islamist) warning against complacency.

First and foremost, Muslims must acknowledge what Ziauddin Sardar, one of Europe’s most prominent Muslim scholars, calls the “Islamic nature of the problem.” Islamist extremism has not descended from another planet or been imposed on the community from outside. It breeds within the community and is the product of a certain kind of interpretation of Islam. And, in the words, of Mr. Sardar, terrorists are a “product of a specific mindset that has deep roots in Islamic history.”

In a seminal essay, “The Struggle for Islam’s Soul” (New Statesman, July 18, 2005), Mr. Sardar argued that Islamists were “nourished by an Islamic tradition that is intrinsically inhuman and violent in its rh etoric, thought and practice” and this placed a unique burden on Muslims as they tried to make sense of what their co-religionists were doing in the name of Islam. “To deny that they are a product of Islamic history and tradition is more than complacency. It is a denial of responsibility, a denial of what is happening in our communities. It is a refusal to live in the real world,” he wrote.

Mr. Sardar’s views are significant. He is a practising Muslim with deep grounding in Islamic theology. He was deeply upset by Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses and is often involved in verbal duels with Islamophobic commen tators. But as he points out because he is a Muslim and it is in the name of his religion that terrorists are acting, he believes it is his “responsibility critically to examine the tradition that sustains them.”

More Muslims need to realise that Islamist terrorists are not simply “misguided” individuals acting on a whim but that they are people who know what they are doing and they are doing it deliberately in the name of Islam. However perverted their interpretation it remains an interpretation of Islam and it is not enough to condemn their actions or accuse them of hijacking Islam without doing anything about it.

Let’s face it; there are verses in the Koran that justify violence. The “hard truth that Islam does permit the use of violence,” as Mr. Butt points out, must be recognised by Muslims. When Islam was in its infancy and battling against non-believers violence was deemed legitimate to put them down. Today, when it is the world’s second largest religion with more than one billion followers around the world and still growing that context has lost its relevance. Yet, jihadi groups, pursuing their madcap scheme of establishing Dar-ul-Islam (the Land of Islam), are using these passages to incite impressionable Muslim youths. Yet there is no sign of a debate in the community beyond easy platitudes, and it remains in denial.

Posted in Denial, Grievances, Islam, Islamofascism, Muslims, Terrorism | 1 Comment »