From the AP:
Seven explosions hit Mumbai’s commuter-rail network during rush hour Tuesday evening, ripping apart train compartments and reportedly killing or injuring dozens of people, a Western Railway spokesman said.
Police Chief A.N. Roy said as many as 100 people were killed in the blasts. A CNBC reporter in India said that it is believed that 250 people were injured. She added that six of the blasts occurred on trains, and one was reported to have occurred on the platform. Mumbai is India’s financial center and its commuter-rail network is among the most crowded in the world.
The railway official said all trains had been suspended and appealed to the public to stay away from train stations in the city as officials probed whether there were any other explosions planned.
There was no immediate claim of responsibility for what appeared to be bombings, but the blasts came in quick succession—a common tactic employed by Kashmiri militants that have repeatedly targeted India’s cities.
[…]
Mumbai, a teeming city of more than 12 million people formerly called Bombay, had remained largely peaceful throughout the sometimes acrimonious feuding between nuclear powers India and Pakistan and an outbreak of Hindu-Muslim riots in the neighboring state of Gujarat. Since 2002, however, a handful of violent incidents in the city’s suburbs have led police to suspect that one or more Islamic extremist groups are operating in the area.
Ya think?
Anyway, I for one am getting tired of reaping the whirlwind of Abu Ghraib and pulled pork sandwiches. And I bet the people of Mumbai are, as well. Damn you, George Bush. Damn you and your imperialist ambitions straight to hell!
(h/t Terry Hastings)
More on the story here, and at JihadWatch. Also, keep an eye on PJM, Hot Air, and Malkin, all of whom update frequently.
Also of note: India’s home minister said they knew the attack was coming, though they didn’t know of the specifics.
And the NYPD has raised security in the New York subway. Not because they fear we’re at war, though. It’s the Kashmiri “militants” going on a wilding that has them mildly concerned.
****
update: Glenn has more. See also, AJ Strata. 8 bombings?
Did I miss something? When did Bombay become Mumbai?
Yeah, but at least none of the victims’ phone calls were monitored.
Anybody seen Dr. Frisch lately?
I’m just sayin’.
Hey, everybody already knew this attack was coming.
The specifics are neither here nor there when dealing with terror.
Or of Ayodhya.
Actually it wasn’t George Bush who was the cause of all this muzzie rage. It was a used bookstore owner in Haddonfield, NJ named Oscar Bidwell who disrespected a Koran in 1989 by putting it on a lower shelf. That set off a firestorm of anger in the Muslim world (not reported here) which caused the first WTC attack, the bombing of the Cole, the war in Kashmir, 9/11, 3/11 and 7/7. I mean, curse you Oscar Bidwell! It’s all your fault. Didn’t he know that people are sensitive about their religion?
How long before that sentence goes down the AP Memory Hole?
Weak, Actus. If you want to support us… support us. If not leave us be. My heart is too fragile to be toyed with like this.
You know how it is Jeff; not all Muslims are terrorists, but the fact remains that most terrorists are Muslims. Yet still, even after the umpteenth bombing by the ‘Religion of Peace’, leftists believe that being a non-white, non-Judeo-Christian means never having to say you’re sorry.
So instead of blaming people with bloody hands, they blame America.
Is anyone else upset by the horrible underlying racism of bombing India on 7/11? I for one, am OUTRAGED that the noble victims of BushHitler’s imperialist policies would stoop to such an INTOLERANT tactic!
Do you have a breakdown of these numbers? That would help. Thanks. My guess would be that in the 20th century most terror was rather a-religious, what with all the dead from fascism and communism.
“Is anyone else upset by the horrible underlying racism of bombing India on 7/11?”
If you need someone to talk to, I hear that Sen. Biden is wise in the ways of Indians and 7/11’s.
Shank–
Yeah, and that thing about the Jewish guy being a vampire, too.
actus,
What don’t you understand about the present tense?
I don’t suppose you’ve ever heard of Hamas, the IRA, Eric Rudolph, Aum Shinrikyo, or any of Islamofascist groups that seem to form a virtually unending list?
Dude, what 20th century have you been living in?
TW: ‘Thinking’. Try it, you might like it actus.
Jeez Actus, weaker and ever weaker. Ramsey Clark is a much better supporter of Homocidal madmen that you can ever hope to be.
Hey, will one of you go over there and give my comment a thumbs up? I’m feeling needy.
http://regulus2.azstarnet.com/comments/index.php?id=137374
I get the present tense. Thats why I asked for present numbers. Because it doesn’t jibe with the past.
Hey, him and tom delay and I were all out there bitching, in various degrees, about the bombing of serbia. But maybe some of us were better at it, more successful with their lives after it.
They broke off part of India into Muslim territory decades ago. The naked agression of Islamicism couldn’t be more clear. They would have done better to have stayed underground. But I suppose it’s too tempting to try to divide and conquer the west by threatening any nation that allies itself with the US.
I wonder when the left is going to figure it out.
US: 9/11; Spain: 3/11; and now India: 7/11. Where does the terrorists’ fascination with the 11th day come from?
1) I’m surprised the AP said this might be “Islamic extremist groups.” The Canadian reports of last month, from the AP, all were “police trying to determine some common factors linking the attackers.”
2) Are there two sets of bombings? Some in Bombay, others in Kashmir?
3) What is it with the day of the month (11,) is there something special?
Face it, actus. It’s a quagmire. We should have let them deal with it themselves. It would have brought a better resolution. Not.
If only Bush would get out of India, this wouldn’t have happened. NO BLOOD FOR BOLLYWOOD!
Nice try Actus, but I know Ramsey Clark. Ramsey Clark is a friend of mine, and you are no Ramsey Clark.
A fine actus (noun, def: relativistic twaddle masquerading as deep to the point of inscrutability).
While it means the same thing, an actus is typically less controversial than “yes, killing 100s of people is (tw
clearly inappropriate behavior, but the perpetrators probably had good reasons” or “yeah, sure, the murder of 100s is bad thing, but that’s nothing compared to what Republicans do every day”.
Joe Biden makes a comment :
“You CANNOT go into a 7-11 or a Dunkin Donuts without an Indian accent.”
-and a week later India gets bombed on 7/11. Coincidence?
Actus, man.
Try and raise your game.
Anyone can do what you do here. Most people don’t try to because they understand how silly and labored their writing appears when they do (that guy from sophomore-year Humanities notwithstanding).
If you can do snark, then do snark. Goofy gainsaying isn’t snark, it’s just poor.
You might try good old-fashioned nutball trolling for a change of pace. I think you might be better at the CHIMPEROR IN CHIEF!!one thing.
What is the point here? To give validity to a caricature of a “leftist liberal”? Sure, it’s valid, of the caricature. Now if you could make a point about something that deals with reality. That would be a start.
Tehran embassy hostages.
Failure to retaliate in full measure continues to plague us to this day.
You know what my movement really needs? It needs a better class of western appeaser. That’s what it needs.
But that seems so boring. Ayodhya is so much more interest.
What are you talking about? Ayodhya, or serbia?
I’m sorry. But that dude creeps me out.
Have you ever heard a first-world city called “teeming”? Just sayin’….
OT: welcome back.
And if anyone should know creepy backwards and forwards…
Mumbai has been the official name by act of parliament since 1997. It’s closer to the way some of the inhabitants have always pronounced the name.
Naw, man, that’s nothing.
Mr. Bath Bear now—that’s some big time mojo.
McGehee—great, you’ve poked the headcase. That’s worse than giving actus attention.
That whole “axis of evil” speech . . .
Someone is harboring and providing support to these terrorists. Apart from the loony left, unfortunately, we have either no idea who it is or haven’t done enough to stop them.
O well.
Mmm… pulled pork sandwiches…
From Azstarnet:
23. Comment by Joan S. (#1726)  July 11,2006 @ 9:28AM
Rating: 0 Thumbs Up
After a fast look at the website, seems like a gender bashing version of Mad Magazine. All 5 year olds but grown up and educated, the message is the same, gender superiority. What a waste of their education and brains. Educated, smart and no common sense. Maybe a hint of some type of fine line of hate/love attraction to each other! lol
Rate this comment
24. Comment by Dan C. (Dan Collins)  July 11,2006 @ 9:42AM
Rating: 0 Thumbs Up
Not fair, Joan, and further, not true. I suggest you go back and read the site again. It hasn’t got anything to do with gender superiority. It mocks the whole idea. It mocks the labelling of so-called conservatives as gay-bashing hatemongers. If it’s a bit testosterony at times, I’m sorry that bothers you. People are still, as far as I know, free to associate with other people who find the stuff they find funny funny.
25. Comment by Joan S. (#1726)  July 11,2006 @ 9:52AM
Rating: 0 Thumbs Up
#24. Whats not fair Dan, my opinion? So far I have looked at a few of the websites, but now am not sure which one had all the silly sexual comments/pictures! Where did I say that any of this bothered me? Who is stopping you from anything? So please try not to tell me what I can think or post!!! As far as I know its a public forum/blog! Maybe I think that my post is funny funny also!!!
Rate this comment
26. Comment by Robbin S. (Tongueboy)  July 11,2006 @ 10:11AM
Rating: 0 Thumbs Up
What’s up with this comments section? I wanted to respond to LM’s post but now it has disappeared, along with Jeff Goldstein’s reply to this story and Joe B. (Carlos) corroboration of Jeff’s reply. I witnessed this entire brouhaha in real time except those exchanges that took place in the wee hours of the morning. Additionally, the record remains for all to see (between DOS attacks, that is) regardless the conspiracy mongering of some unfamiliar with such basic terms as “timestamp”, “IP address” and “Google cache”. I would like to congratulate Ms. Everett-Haynes on her ability to stretch, contort, beat, mutilate and playfully spank the written record until it is absolutely unrecognizable. You are a true credit to your profession which, in case you haven’t already guessed, is not a compliment.
Rate this comment
27. Comment by Dan C. (Dan Collins)  July 11,2006 @ 10:25AM
Rating: 0 Thumbs Up
>So please try not to tell me what I can think or post!!! As far as I know its a public forum/blog!< Oh, I’m sorry. I didn’t realize that your were Irony Challenged.
The first thing I thought of when I heard that India had been bombed on 7-11 was going out for a Slurpee. I am relieve to see that I am not alone in my depravity.
tw: see – as in what we have become.
Oh bro – you’re back. Thank goodness. I was having such a time of it deciding about Oregon. But I did pick up some brochures. What is an Ayodhya? Would I like it there. I thought you told me Clarke was your god. Ok, I’ll let you take it from here, all this point making wears me out and leaves me sooooo confused.
TW: Forcing the Typing Telephone Pole to make a point is like teaching a pig to tap dance. You just frustrate yourself and annoy the pigs parents.
actus,
You might call this hair-splitting, but I see a difference between terror and terrorism. Terror is an effect that can have many different causes, including governmental oppression as you mention.
To me, terrorism is a deliberate tactic to instill terror, usually by non-uniformed troops that strike against weak targets—often civilians—from concealment. The goal is to create sufficient terror as to render a society too weak to function, so that it collapses, creating a vacuum where the terrorists can take charge (or at a minimum, dictate policy). Whereas government oppression, even when it involves terror, is generally an effort to try to force the society to function in conformance with the government’s plan; but societal dysfunction and collapse are definitely not intended (though they may be unintended consequences).
Certainly, both are reprehensible, but I see a difference. I may be guilty of tailoring my definitions to suit my preconceptions, but I’m trying not to be. And based on my definitions, terrorists will almost always be societal outsiders or fringe members at best, because they’re the ones who need tactics like these to get a form of control on society.
That says nothing about the “most terrorists are Muslims” remark. While that remark fits the popular conception, it ain’t exactly hard data. You’re right to challenge it, in my opinion.
That’s because Bombay is from the name given to the harbor by the hegemonic imperialist Portugese explorers who “discovered” it. It means “good bay” (bom bahia) because it was a sheltered port for ships.
In this we can see the innate patriarchal lust of the European males, searching for a comfortable crevice to park their phallic ships in order to discharge…
Oh, sorry. I’ve been reading too much Dr. Frisch lately.
[ … ] 12 million people formerly called Bombay?
At least 2 million of them doctors.
“Come right away!”
Smartie.
SB: looking
for a cure
– Must be hell trying to page somebody for their ride pickup in an airport….
Eats. Shoots. Leaves.
Got comma?
– Oh look… actus’s twin made a funny… how cute….
There used to be mosque. Wikipedia will provide, like with most topics, a general introduction.
Thats a fine distinction. But it seems to me stupid to exclude from the definition people who are organized and open, since they often have a greater ability to terrorize. Specially since it seems to me the goal of government terror is to collapse all of society but what the government wills. Similar to how your weak concealed terrorists seek to collapse everything that stands in the way of their power.
There was one study that showed the biggest users of suicide attacks was the Tamil Tigers. It adds to the conception, but doesn’t really resolve it.
That’s why I acknowledge it may be hair-splitting. But there’s a difference between internal actors and external actors; and somehow, I just feel like different words are appropriate. But maybe I’m conflating the tactics with the actors. If “terrorism” is the tactic and “terrorist” is anyone who uses it, then I still feel like we need words to distinguish between terrorists in power and terrorists out of power.
I guess that the easy way to solve the “who are the terrorist” question is to determine what groups other than Muslim extremists are out there right now. Basque? PIRA? Aum Shiri Yo? Most of theose have called for cease fires. Theres lots of Muslim terror groups across Africa, the Pacific the Middle East and Europe. Besides some Algerians (AIAI) and other regional groups that may not qualify, the rest seem to be muslim.
Ayodhya is an interesting case. It was a rare case where Muslims were actually oppressed; an old mosque was torn down by a mob.
How often does this happen? Well, if you listen to CAIR and the ACLU, America is just a cauldron of hatred, and it’s a wonder those hayseeds haven’t burned down mosques nationwide. In reality-land, Muslims are well-treated. But that kind of reality doesn’t whip them up at the jihad rallies.
Facts seem to be coming in now. I distrust the early reports – too much guesswork and breathless assertion.
A local report (h/t Gateway Pundit) alleges capture of a ‘militant’ and states multiple cities involved.
Forgive this Christian for wishing them well and rapid vengeance on the perpetrators.
Am I the only one who preferred it when all the comments for one posting were on one page?
Amen JL. May the rest of these villains days be filled with excruciating pain and longing for death, which is years in the coming. No more mercy for crap like this.
Calls for cease fire are cheap. The devil is in the details, and in the compliance.
The IRA has been “at peace” for less than one year. ETA’s up to three years, more or less. I’m hopeful that both are sincere, but not convinced yet. Aum Shinrikyo is having internal conflicts between those who want political integration and those who want more violence, but the Japanese authorities are still keeping an eye on them.
Terrorism appeals to any radical group. Even if the majority of terrorists happen to be Muslims this year, that says nothing about next year.
OK, let’s have a contest. You & actus name a non-Muslim terror group or an attack perpetrated by such a group, and a sane person here will counter with a Muslim group. This month’s paycheck says you run out wayyyyyyyy before we do.
No doubt this was the work of Roman Catholics. Or perhaps Jews. Maybe Buddhists? Radical, militant Ba’Hai? Who on earth could it have been??
The rwandan genocide killed almost a million no? I suppose al-qaeda and hamas have some catching up to do.
kyle, that’s not research. That’s not data. That’s just an excuse for you to be too lazy to answer the question. Nowhere did actus say the majority of terrorists aren’t Muslims. Nowhere did I say that. He simply questioned a bald assertion not backed by any data; and he entirely left open the possibility that the data existed. He even asked for the data. But you would rather insult than discuss.
It’s a sad day when actus is the grown up here at protein wisdom.
Their dream, of course, is Rwanda worldwide. As in, all Muslims end up dead.
I, for one, would like to see their plan short-circuited.
Has anyone thought to ask Arundhati Roy why the people of India are so hated?
Maybe people don’t like the BJP?
Oh, but you love your family, right actus?
So you won’t get mad when I say that you are your mom’s Lover, now will you?
Cuz, love is a verb and you happen to be loving her. All Night Long. Yeah! Rrrrarrrr. Woof Woof Woof.
Listen up, strawberry short cake: In Engrish, we have thing called, oh fucking words, and these fucking words actually have fucking meanings.
The word “terrorist” has already been spoken for. Jeffrey Dahmer was not a terrorist, but Zarqawi was. Chesty Puller was not a terrorist but UBL IS. Why? Well, lots o’ reasons but if you cannot piece it together, you are the 800 lb. idiot in the room.
Gee, terrorism = everything. Got it. Moron.
John, I think you mistyped. If you meant “Their” as in “al Qaeda’s”, then I think you meant non-Muslims, not Muslims.
And if you meant “Their” you meant the largely Catholic Hutus who committed the Rwandan genocide, well, I think they’re pretty much short circuited already.
Btw, actus, yee of the world’s lightest cranium-meat, thanks for ceding that all of the fighters in Iraq and Afghanistan are terrorists.
Appreciate it, fucktard.
I don’t think Jeffrey’s goal was to instill terror in populations, to control or eliminate.
The rwandan genocide seems so singular that hte last thing I would think about whem mentioning it is ‘everything.’ But as you say, in engrish, we use words, which are in dictionaries, and seem to apply to the rwandan genocide as being terror.
Its in these dictionaries that I look up the word ‘fucking’ and realize that you probably think it adds to your arguement. Because you’re just that intense.
Cede? Why would I be ceding that? They obviously fit the dictionary definition.
Ahem, the goal of genocide is [drumroll]…oh, fucking genocide.
This is not hard, actus.
TRY AGAIN.
“peacefull” islam strikes again.
Bombay, London, Madrid, Beslan, Jerusalem, Egypt, Jordan, Moscow, Bali, Khobar Towers, Nigerian Embassy, USS Cole, NYC I and II, Tel Aviv, Lebanon Marine Barracks, Tehran Embassy hostages. Should each of these be on this list? Are there others that I’ve missed?
Were these: insurgents, militants, IRA, ETA, […]? Were these isolated incidents? Were these a law enforcement problem?
Is nothing in common among these? Does anyone not think a pattern exists?
My nuuuuaannce organ is failing.
tw: design, as in “These appear to have a higher [].
actus is looking more and more mature with every comment—by the commenters, who would rather abuse than answer. If he could learn not to post at all, he’d be the grown up by default.
This, by the way, is some actual research (not juvenile assertions and name calling):
And more actual research:
And yet more actual research:
Sounds like terrorists to me. Well, me and the US government. But what do they know?
And in case anyone is interested in answering actus’s question, I’ve provided you enough links to make a go of it. But I know, I know, you’d rather insult than think.
TW: I kid you not: read, as in maybe you should learn to.
If pulled pork sandwiches are making them mad with us, well… obviously they have to be defeated.
Because I’m not giving up pulled pork for anyone.
Shoomaker.
Terrorists committed genocide or was it an organized campaign run by genocidaires? Take your time. It’ll come to you.
Please, make your point that Idi Amin and Stalin were terrorists. Then leave because it is a bone-headed point. They were quite different.
Hold on, kiddies, I think you, Shoomaker who is reasonable, and actus who licks windows, are playing with things that you might not fully understand. Like for instance:
Army. Militia.
Very different from terrorist groups.
Yep, I mistyped. Read what the Islamist radicals say. They don’t conceal their goal. Their message to non-Muslims is: convert or die. (And their definition of non-Muslim sometimes includes Muslim sects like the Sufis.)
Islam did not become the dominant religion in a band from Morocco to Indonesia by polite persuasion. Zoroastrianism used to be the main religion of Persia. Now, the few Zoroastrians left live elsewhere to avoid ending up dead.
Where’s Joe Biden?
You know, the guy that was on about Indians and 7-11?
Sorry.
This is what research looks like from a reputable source or two, not wikipedia*.
*Navy site–which did not back up the terrorist assertion btw–notwithstanding
India’s big problem with the Muslims is Gandhi–the so-called “Mahatma Gandhi”. When the Muslims wanted a separate country, Gandhi refused to insist that Muslims in India not relocate there. Gandhi’s idea was that you “tolerate” them and they would immediately become peace-loving. This is not to paint everyone in India who is Muslim with broad brush strokes, but Gandhi’s erroneous, idealistic notion of tolerating what amounts to intolerance is what is enabling Muslim terrorists to, practically speaking, operate with a free hand in India.
Although Gandhi’s idea of non-violence is quite different from Western liberal multiculturalism, it nevertheless has the same effect–it shelters those who would use that tolerance against those who believe in it.
If the Indians can figure out how to discredit Gandhi, the radical Muslims will truly have something to fear.
Correction: “refused to insist that Muslims in India not relocate there”
should read
“refused to insist that Muslims in India relocate there”
Verc,
So your form of “proof” is to ignore and impugn sources with which you disagree. Even when it’s the US government declaring the group to be a terrorist, you won’t accept it, because they can’t be terrorist.
This thread is giving me a whole new respect for actus. Why should he try to be reasonable, when this is the response reason gets?
Attempts to obfuscate notwithstanding, I’ll bet these terrorists are not Hutus, Tutsis, Aum, IRA, or even Tamil Tigers.
Very broadly speaking, the terror organizations mentioned throughout (e.g., the IRA, the Tamil Tigers, etc.) have very specific beefs with very specific entities. Their tactics, as psychotic as they are, seem to be in service to a goal to increase their power within the current political structures.
The worrying thing to me about Islamic terror groups are their inchoate nature and, what’s more, indiscriminate focus in the service of a very ambitious goal: The transformation of the entire world.
Off the top of my head, here are the groups with which the Islamists have a problem, and against whom they are willing to commit the worst of atrocities (some of which are returned in kind, of course):
Hindus
Christians
Jews
Buddhists
Other Muslims
Secularists
Animists
Socialists
Capitalists
Thais
Americans
Britons
Spaniards
Israelis
Turks
Egyptians
Iraqis
Soldiers
Civilians
Men
Women
Children
Sudanese
Somalis
Serbs
Russians
Argentinians
Indians
Filipinos
Afghanis
I guess the saving grace here is that at least we know it’s not personal, Sonny. It’s strictly business.
That’s only telling part of the story. Actus, care to tell us why the Hindu extremists tore down the Ayodhya mosque?
TW ‘deep’ – that’s a clue Actus.
Steve, I’ve heard they don’t like dogs either.
This thread is giving me a whole new respect for actus. Why should he try to be reasonable, when this is the response reason gets?
– A better question is “Which political group needs to minimize the threat of terrorism, to the point of becoming apologists, dis-informers, and arguing lexicon rather than dealing with the treat like adults?” A parallel to the old India saw: If you meet a terrorist on the Road and call him Mr.Terrorist, He will nod and smile, and still cut your head off.
– Another “better question” is why the hell are all the NY Liberals screaming about needing more homeland defense money. I thought there was no war on terror. Which is it?
Marty, Marty, Marty. I wasn’t being lazy, nor was I being insulting. I was simply asking you and RTP to share the burden of ‘research’ – as though it takes a lot – with me, as I have limited spare time at work.
My other beef was with your, we’ll generously call it ‘loose,’ definition of terrorist, but others have already addressed it.
Anyway, so you came up with a non-Muslim ‘terror’ group, although as Verc pointed out, instituionalized and public genocide hardly fits the modern definition of terrorism. Go here to see one of our (admittedly evil) government’s lists of terror groups. See a pattern?
OK. Now compare that list with recent terror activity. Pattern get any clearer? Sorry if it isn’t enough *research* for you, but it’s all I’ve time for right now.
actus has two arguments:
1. There isn’t any difference between A and B.
2. What about Z? (some obscure factoid, hallucination, non sequitur or typo)
And he’s great at it: he can hold you off for hours. People have reached the point where they’re just plain tired of him, Martin.
– Well actus, if there are only a few “rare cases” of actual Muslim’s being abused then what does that say about your sides defense “for all the oppression by the West”. I’m thinking you can’t answer without using the words “oil” or “Isreal”
Report are that the Student Islamic Movement of India might be involved. Guess what their goal is?
In its political pronouncement SIMI gave a call for restoration of the Caliphate for the unity of Ummah (Muslim community as a whole) by rejecting the concept of nationalism, democracy and secularism.ÂÂ
Shocker, huh?!
Or here, though I realize that one’s from the eeeeeevil Brits. Perhaps I can find a list of organizations that the Syrians consider terroristic. Would that be helpful to you?
Or this from the infidel Aussies.
But maybe it’s just because of global Islamophobia.
Well, since Actus has gone all coy on us, a little background on Ayodhya. Prior to the Muslim conquest, it was the site of a very important Hindu temple, said to be the site of the birthplace of Rama. The Muslim conquerors, in an all to typical act of cultural and religious imperialism, destroyed the Hindu temple and built a mosque on its exact site, marking their territory and humiliating the subjugated Hindus.
In 1992, a mob of Hindus gave the Muslims a taste of their own medicine.
Those poor oppressed Muslims. Boo hoo.
You’re really going to make this distinction? So if Al-qaeda’s goal was to wipe out the west they would no longer be terrorists? That makes no sense.
Maybe they could have a hindu nationalist assasinate him. As it was 14 million people relocated, and up to 1 million died in hte partition. You can imagine that ghandi’s problem with this result. And its not “tolerating intolerance.”
I don’t know the story. That wasn’t my quote you were responding to.
I’m sorry, but a definition of terrorism that includes more people as victims doesn’t really minimize it.
I don’t know. Ask the dude who wrote about ‘rare cases.’
Maybe if there was a site that gave us numbers, so we could compare the threat from Cumann na mBan to others on that list.
you can’t go for a swim without it having some meaning around here.
Where ‘own’ is separated by how many centuries?
A large number of Indian Muslima ARE integrated. India has one of the largest Muslim populations out there. India’s President is a Muslim; he’s the guy who led their guided-missile program. India was founded as a secular nation. A much larger secular India that includes all of Pakistan and Bangladesh could have come to pass had not Jinnah and a SUBSET of Muslims rejected a single nation; imagine what such a nation, with more people than even China, could have accomplished by now!
Muslims in India, with some exceptions, are well-tolerated. The few remaining Hindus in Pakistan are not. Pakistan was organized as an Islamic nation from the start.
I know a person who’s family originally came from Sind. Now that’s in Pakistan. Her family, not being Muslim, left rather quickly at the time of Partition; their house was burned later that day.
This is a routine practice. The Dome of the Rock is a similar case. The Palestinians are now doing it to Rachel’s Tomb.
That was the gandhi plan. I don’t know how well the BJP or hindu nationalists are keeping to it.