Jihadi terror and the farce of war on terror in Hindusthan
We get sporadic reports of the type listed below and then life goes back to poverty as usual. Smas’aana vairaagyam. There is no concerted and sincere effort to realize that this is a war on jihadism and this has to be fought relentlessly as a war on jihadism and fought to win.
Empress’ chamchas provide periodic sound bytes and go back to their corruption chores. Empress is secure in 10 Janpath and this seems to be the be-all and end-all of ensuring national security, ensuring security for the helpless child in a marketplace who is targeted by the jihadi terrorists. Columnists and security analysts keep guessing what the message of jihadi terrorists is. It is simple, straightforward: it is ok to kill non-believers to achieve jihad. Read the texts which the jihadis believe in to realize this truth.
Kalyanaraman
Two suspected terrorists held in Chennai
28 Jul 2008, 1311 hrs IST,IANS
CHENNAI: The Chennai police on Monday arrested two suspected terrorists believed to be involved in serial bombings in Bangalore and Ahmedabad during the weekend.
The suspects, Qazi Rahim, 31, and K Abdul Kader, 27, were named by Sheikh Abdul Ghaffoor, who was arrested on Sunday in Tirunelveli, 600 km from Chennai.
Ghafoor was planning blasts in Tamil Nadu and other parts of India on Independence Day, police officials said.
According to the officials, on initial interrogation Ghafoor revealed that he was an operative of a terrorist ring that calls itself "believers in one god", whose kingpin is said to be Pakistan-trained P Ali Abdullah, arrested in 2003 and lodged in high security Puzhal prison, 20 km from here.
Police officials reckon this ring had worked out logistics of the serial blasts in Bangalore and Ahmedabad. The back-to-back synchronised bomb blasts hit the cities Friday and Saturday. The attacks claimed the lives of 46 people and left over 150 injured.
While Rahim is from Tirunelveli, Kader is from Chennai. The two were being taken to Tirunelveli for further questioning, the officials added.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/2_suspected_terrorists_held_in_TN/articleshow/3295751.cms
7 kg of explosives recovered in Channapatna
Karnataka Bureau (The Hindu, July 28, 2008)
Several persons detained for questioning in connection with blasts in Bangalore
Samples collected at blast sites sent for tests
Bangalore police alert their Kerala counterparts
BANGALORE: Even as the Bangalore police have detained several persons for questioning in connection with the explosions that rocked the city on Friday, the Channapatna police have recovered 7 kg. of explosive material from a blast site.
Though the explosion took place at Channapatna in Ramanagaram district on Thursday, no alert was sounded in Ramanagaram district or other parts of the State.
Director general and Inspector general of Police R. Sri Kumar, who visited the blast sites in the city on Sunday, said that the police were examining the explosive material recovered in Channapatna.
“Many persons are being questioned and we are in the process of gathering information from them. The investigations are progressing satisfactorily,” Police Commissioner Shankar M. Bidari told presspersons here on Sunday. Mr. Bidari said samples collected at the blast sites had been sent to the Forensic Sciences Laboratory.
The police have found that the explosives used in Bangalore and Channapatna were similar.
The Bangalore police have alerted their Kerala counterparts after a reporter of a local TV channel received a call from a person speaking Hindi who warned that Kerala was the next target and bombs were likely to explode across the State after 7 p.m. on Sunday.
http://www.hindu.com/2008/07/28/stories/2008072855460100.htm
Sleeper cells make all the difference to terror strikes
Vicky Nanjappa in Bengaluru | July 28, 2008 | 07:00 IST
Friday's serial blasts in Bengaluru and a day later in Ahmedabad are an indication that terror outfits are able to strike at will. And providing this capability, is a network of sleeper cells, say agencies involved with the probe.
The Intelligence Bureau says all terror strikes are executed through sleeper cells, with the latter either directly involved in the attacks or, two, by providing logistical support to those who carry out the attacks.
The IB provides the example of Afsar Pasha, a terror suspect arrested in Karnataka who disclosed a plan to blast the Vidhan Soudha and other key installations in Karnataka, to explain how the network operates.
Pasha was the member of a sleeper cell in Karwar, coastal Karnataka, and worked as a mechanic. The IB says most sleeper cell operatives hold a regular job for most part of the year. Arrests across the country show that most of the youth who are part of sleeper cells work as mechanics, STD booth operators and, in some cases, insurance agents.
The IB points out that these jobs involve meeting a lot of people which in turn helps them gather data. Of late, there is also an increasing trend to recruit educated youth. However, their role is largely restricted to data collection and improvising techniques during terror strikes, says IB.
Mechanic Afsar Pasha revealed during his interrogation that his initial job was largely confined to gathering data and providing logistical support. However, as he gained more experience, he was directed to take part in field activities, meaning he had to actively take part in terror strikes.
The IB says based on the interrogation of several terrorists they have gathered considerable information regarding the working of sleeper cells. For the most part they remain inactive, apart from collecting data, training cadres and doing recruitments. The data is passed on to their supervisors through e-mail and/or on the telephone.
Once the decision is taken to strike, a couple of members from the sleeper cells are chosen to carry out the attack. The persons undertaking the attack are known as foot soldiers, the IB says.
A set pattern is that members of local sleeper cells are usually not the ones who carry out an attack in their jurisdiction. A person from another sleeper cell is sent in for this, with the local member only providing logistical support.
The IB also says members of sleeper cells work as a close-knit group. Normally, in a serial terror strike, nearly 10 people are involved. While a team of five would plant the bombs, two work as a back-up and the rest would provide data.
The IB says there is a general belief that the sleeper cells are housed away from the main city or town area, and in busy market areas so that the members can blend in with the crowds. An IB document states, 'It is not necessary for visiting terrorists to make a beeline to the... (local rendezvous points). The handlers from their intelligence agencies provide them with a blueprint of hubs or cells.'
The IB further states that the sleeper cells which are patronised by Pakistan are mainly involved in collection of geographical and geo-strategic information. Until a few years back these cells only undertook intelligence-related work, but with the Indianisation of jihad gaining ground, sleeper cells have been directed to carry out the attacks.
The IB says the functioning of sleeper cells could be summed up as:
Evaluation of intelligence input
Selection of target
Selection of volunteers
Preparation of bomb squads, usually three of them
Identification of targets in India
In case outsiders are doing the strike, their transportation
Providing safe houses
Putting together the explosives
Identifying talent within the cell to plant the device
Dispersal and evacuation
http://www.rediff.com///news/2008/jul/28vicky.htm
'Terrorists have sent a message that the claim of security is hollow'
Sheela Bhatt in Ahmedabad | July 28, 2008 | 11:23 IST
"We expected it earlier when other cities like Hyderabad and Jaipur were hit by terrorists," says poet Chinu Modi about the Ahmedabad blasts.
The surprise element was missing when Ahmedabad was rocked by 17 bomb explosions because at the back of people's mind many knew that the Gujarat riots of 2002 may lead to such a violent reaction.
Yet, the blasts of July 26 carry something more than the element of surprise. The act is shocking and incomprehensible because of the mastery of the strategic planning, the perfection of the execution and the bloody impact in terms of the political message it has left behind.
Since the blasts, Ahmedabadis are debating three issues:
1. Experts and common people are stumped to see the selection of the locations for planting the bombs.
2. The blasts were executed when a 'red alert' was declared in Ahmedabad after the blasts in Bangalore.
3. The extent of the involvement of local people and the secrecy maintained by the perpetrators of the act has shocked the residents of the city, which is still known as an 'overgrown village.'
"The blasts are part of the pan-Indian phenomenon and it is also aimed at the Bharatiya Janata Party government," believes Ghanshyam Shah, a former professor at the Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, and an authority on communal riots in Gujarat.
He argues that these blasts may not be exclusively connected to the riots of 2002 when more than 1,000 Muslims died in widespread communal riots after the Sabarmati Express was set on fire burning 59 Hindu passengers at the Godhra railway station.
Professor Shah says there was a surprise when after the violence of the majority, the minority community did not show their anger "in natural process."
He attributes it to the fact that the Muslims of Gujarat are diffident. "I see more and more diffidence in them. Muslims in Gujarat have realised that there is no solution of the issue (communal politics)."
However, he is not denying the involvement of Gujarati Muslims in the serial blasts. "The large terrorist group must have taken the support of local people. But I don't see the widespread support of Gujarati Muslims to such violence at all," he says.
To further support his argument that Gujarati Muslims by and large do not support the blasts to avenge the riots of 2002, he says, "In 1992, Surat witnessed communal riots (some Muslims were then burnt alive). Soon after, the plague spread in the city. At that time, Surti Muslims in the city were heard saying, 'Khuda e sajha kari' (God has punished them). But after the 2002 riots, I see an unusually high level of diffidence in them and we don't hear such remarks."
Professor Shah argues that when the Muslim community lives in isolation and in ghettos, it is easier for outsiders to get a handful of people to support their activity.
One of the surprises of Saturday's blasts was that except one blast in Sarkhej, all the blasts were executed in East Ahmedabad, which includes the highly communally sensitive walled city area. The accuracy of the planning suggests that a person with a complete grip on the social-political mindset of the city and its communal geography must be behind the blasts.
No one in this shaken city doubts that these blasts were planned by someone who has a thorough knowledge of the past 25 years history of communally sensitive areas and the Sangh Parivar's role in it.
The terrorists have targeted the constituencies of four veteran leaders belonging to the saffron brigade. Chief Minister Narendra Modi, Home Minister Amit Shah, Ashok Bhatt, one of the oldest faces of the communal friction in the city, and Dr Pravin Togadia, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad leader.
Four blasts occurred in Modi's constituency -- Maninagar. Sarkhej is in Shah's constituency while the Dhanvantri hospital in Bapunagar has been run by Dr Togadia for many decades. The blast in Raipur was right at the spot where Bhatt has held daily meetings with his supporters for the last 40 years.
"The planners knew where the victims would go for emergency treatment and they hit those hospitals. L G hospital was targeted because victims from the Maninagar blasts would obviously go there because it is close by. They knew the social geography very well," says Achyut Yagnik, the Ahmedabad-based socio-political thinker.
Yagnik is writing a book on Ahmedabad -- which will complete 600 years in 2011 -- along with fellow writer Suchitra Sheth. He points out that blasts were carried out in BJP-dominated areas of the working class and not in posh or middle class areas.
Secondly, the bombs were planted in places where Dalit and Muslims live side by side. Those well-versed with the communal history of Ahmedabad know how the Dalits and Muslims have been at loggerheads in these areas.
Bapunagar, Raipur, Sarangpur are areas that have seen communal tension in 1985, 1990-1992 and also during the 2002 riots.
"There is no doubt that Hindu-Muslim neighbourhoods have been targeted in these serial blasts," says Yagnik.
In Ahmedabad, the political movement to capture Hindu and Muslim minds is carried on by political parties inside these areas where Dalits and Muslims co-exist side by side. It is not difficult to decipher why these areas and hospitals have been hit by the terrorists.
"The terrorists have served twin goals. By hitting BJP-dominated areas, they have sent the message to the chief minister that his claim of security is hollow. In spite of a red alert in the city, they have shown their capacity to strike at places they want. Second, by hitting hospitals in a cruel and dastardly manner they have caused the maximum damage."
http://www.rediff.com///news/2008/jul/28ahd4.htm
Terror's scary face
The Pioneer Edit Desk
India pays for Congress's folly
Saturday's serial bombings in Ahmedabad, within 24 hours of the terrorist attack on Bangalore, serve to highlight the fact that our internal security situation is rapidly deteriorating even as the Union Government, under the Congress's tutelage and headed by a Prime Minister seemingly indifferent to national concerns, refuses to be distracted from the India-US nuclear deal which has become the symptom of the regime's obsessive compulsive disorder. It is obvious that the bombings -- both in Ahmedabad and Bangalore, and before that in Jaipur -- are aimed at creating panic and spreading fear; those behind the blasts have demonstrated that they can strike anywhere at any time. It is equally obvious that those who planned and carried out these acts of terrorism expect a blowback in the form of communal violence. A third factor which merits mention is that BJP-ruled States are being targeted for murder and mayhem; this perception naturally leads to the conclusion that a larger game is being played whose purpose does not require elaboration. Was the effort to instigate communal riots in Indore during the protest against the Sri Amarnath land issue a part of this conspiracy? In retrospect, it would seem so. Seen against this backdrop, the BJP Governments must rise to the occasion and meet the challenge with unwavering determination: Agent provocateurs will no doubt seek to exploit the situation; they must be spotted, exposed and firmly dealt with. Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi has rightly described the perpetrators of Saturday's outrage as "enemies of humanity". They must be neutralised and their network of evil should be destroyed.
Strangely, the Union Government has shown little or no interest in last weekend's terrorist strikes, apart from issuing proforma statements condeming the violence and appealing for peace. Union Home Minister Shivraj Patil, who has contributed the most to dismantling the anti-terrorism mechanism put together by the NDA Government, partly on account of the fact that he is unequal to his job and largely to implement the Congress's perverse agenda of appeasing Muslims by pandering to Islamic fanatics who define terrorism as jihad and are at ease with innocent people being slaughtered, has tried to pass the buck to the Governments of Karnataka and Gujarat. According to him, the terrible loss of lives and the resultant disquiet bear testimony to the 'abilities' of local authorities and the police; had he said anything different, there would have been occasion for surprise. The truth is that the chickens of the UPA Government's chicanery are coming home to roost. The Prime Minister and his aides -- among them Mr Patil and a National Security Adviser who, along with intelligence agencies, is busy helping the Congress achieve its political objectives -- have allowed the situation to come to such a sorry pass. They must be held accountable for the consequences; their pious declarations should not distract us from their monumental folly in allowing terrorists to spread their tentacles across the country. Having got rid of POTA and instituted a system that takes a libertine view of terrorism, the UPA Government is now bent upon hobbling the Governments of BJP-ruled States with the intent of preventing them from waging war on terror. Had this not been the case, the UPA Government would not have sat on the laws enacted by the State Assemblies of Rajasthan and Gujarat to combat terrorism and organised crime. Such cynical abuse of power is both a shame and a pity.
http://dailypioneer.com/indexn12.asp?main_variable=EDITS&file_name=edit1.txt&counter_img=1
Time to question
The Indian Express
Posted online: Monday, July 28, 2008 at 0048 hrs IST
Terror is pathology. But so it seems, in India, is the government’s response to terror. The one score and some serial bombs in Bangalore and Ahmedabad were met with cringe-inducing official harrumphs from Delhi that warnings had been given. It is time to ask what the Union government means when it says warnings were available. Is it the case that the Centre’s, or specifically the home ministry’s, radars are always buzzing efficiently with actionable information that is not acted upon by inefficient state governments? If so, why doesn’t the Centre say it straight? They have a duty to the nation to say it. And if that is not the case, as one strongly suspects is not the case, why take this, to put it bluntly, awful way to pass the parcel? It has to be said, in the context of this trait, that the UPA’s whole approach to terror has been scarily confusing.
The present home minister will demit office as having made a spectacular non-impression as far as his leadership of national security efforts go. It took the prime minister, that too after more than half of the UPA’s term in office was over, to say Naxalites were a high-priority threat to the idea of India. Can you recall the home minister taking political leadership of this national security issue? Can you recall him owning up to his remit as home minister vis-a-vis terror? And let’s remember that while strong and clear political positions are no guarantees against stopping terror, their absence severely weakens the government’s fight against it.
More than four years after the UPA took over, not a single terror attack has been brought to closure in terms of catching the perpetrators and putting them through the mills of justice. There’s investigative failure of a scale that would have in normal circumstances consumed the career of several ministers — but in the UPA the home ministry seems to have acquired immunity from even the most obvious of questions. It’s long been known that security agencies are in part handicapped by a certain absurd notion of political correctness — a notion that implicates the very people it professes to protect. The convenient political assumption in India is that voters don’t punish governments who appear to be ineffective against terror. This government really has pushed that assumption to its limit.
http://www.indianexpress.com/printerFriendly/341208.html
Monday, July 28, 2008
Monday, June 2, 2008
Jihadi terrorist? No. Call him hirabist (barbaric pirate).
Jihadi terrorist? No. Call him hirabist (barbaric pirate).
June 2, 2008 Op-Ed Contributors (New York Times)
What Do You Call a Terror(Jihad)ist?
By P. W. SINGER and ELINA NOOR
IMAGINE if Franklin D. Roosevelt had taken to calling Adolf Hitler the “leader of the National Socialist Aryan patriots” or dubbed Japanese soldiers fighting in World War II as the “defenders of Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere.”
To describe the Nazis and the Imperial Japanese Army in terms that incorporated their own propaganda would have been self-defeating. Unfortunately, that is what many American policymakers have been doing by calling terrorists “jihadists” or “jihadis.”
While the State Department recently circulated an internal memo advising foreign service officers to avoid such terms, President Bush, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and members of the news media continue to use them.
The word “jihad” means to “strive” or “struggle,” and in the Muslim world it has traditionally been used in tandem with “fi sabilillah” (“in the path of God”). The term has long been taken to mean either a quest to find one’s faith or an external fight for justice. It makes sense, then, for terrorists to associate themselves with a term that has positive connotations. For the United States to support them in that effort, however, is a fundamental strategic mistake.
First, to call a terrorist a “jihadist” or “jihadi” effectively puts any campaign against terrorism into the framework of an existential battle between the West and Islam. This feeds into the worldview propagated by Al Qaeda. It also serves to isolate the tens of millions of Muslims who condemn the violence that has been perpetrated in the name of Islam.
Second, these words locate the ideological battle exactly where the extremists want it to be. The terms of discussion are no longer about the murder of innocents in terrorist acts; they are about theology.
Third, when American leaders use this language it sends a confusing message to the Muslim world, showing ignorance on basic issues and possibly even raising doubts about American motives. Why, after all, would we call our enemy a “holy warrior”?
If we want to say what we mean, what terms better describe Qaeda members and other violent extremists? “Muharib” or the more colloquial “hirabi” or “hirabist” would be good places to start. “Hirabah,” the base word, is a term for barbarism or piracy. Unlike “jihad,” which grants honor, “hirabah” brings condemnation; it involves unlawful violence and disorder.
Of course, it’s probably best not to engage in these nuances at all. Which is why American leaders would do best to call terrorists by their rightful name: “terrorists.” The label may seem passé, but terrorism is an internationally recognized word for an internationally recognized crime. If we want to win a war of words, we would do well to choose the ones we use with greater care.
P. W. Singer is a fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington. Elina Noor is an analyst at the Institute of Strategic and International Studies in Malaysia.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/02/opinion/02singer.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
June 2, 2008 Op-Ed Contributors (New York Times)
What Do You Call a Terror(Jihad)ist?
By P. W. SINGER and ELINA NOOR
IMAGINE if Franklin D. Roosevelt had taken to calling Adolf Hitler the “leader of the National Socialist Aryan patriots” or dubbed Japanese soldiers fighting in World War II as the “defenders of Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere.”
To describe the Nazis and the Imperial Japanese Army in terms that incorporated their own propaganda would have been self-defeating. Unfortunately, that is what many American policymakers have been doing by calling terrorists “jihadists” or “jihadis.”
While the State Department recently circulated an internal memo advising foreign service officers to avoid such terms, President Bush, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and members of the news media continue to use them.
The word “jihad” means to “strive” or “struggle,” and in the Muslim world it has traditionally been used in tandem with “fi sabilillah” (“in the path of God”). The term has long been taken to mean either a quest to find one’s faith or an external fight for justice. It makes sense, then, for terrorists to associate themselves with a term that has positive connotations. For the United States to support them in that effort, however, is a fundamental strategic mistake.
First, to call a terrorist a “jihadist” or “jihadi” effectively puts any campaign against terrorism into the framework of an existential battle between the West and Islam. This feeds into the worldview propagated by Al Qaeda. It also serves to isolate the tens of millions of Muslims who condemn the violence that has been perpetrated in the name of Islam.
Second, these words locate the ideological battle exactly where the extremists want it to be. The terms of discussion are no longer about the murder of innocents in terrorist acts; they are about theology.
Third, when American leaders use this language it sends a confusing message to the Muslim world, showing ignorance on basic issues and possibly even raising doubts about American motives. Why, after all, would we call our enemy a “holy warrior”?
If we want to say what we mean, what terms better describe Qaeda members and other violent extremists? “Muharib” or the more colloquial “hirabi” or “hirabist” would be good places to start. “Hirabah,” the base word, is a term for barbarism or piracy. Unlike “jihad,” which grants honor, “hirabah” brings condemnation; it involves unlawful violence and disorder.
Of course, it’s probably best not to engage in these nuances at all. Which is why American leaders would do best to call terrorists by their rightful name: “terrorists.” The label may seem passé, but terrorism is an internationally recognized word for an internationally recognized crime. If we want to win a war of words, we would do well to choose the ones we use with greater care.
P. W. Singer is a fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington. Elina Noor is an analyst at the Institute of Strategic and International Studies in Malaysia.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/02/opinion/02singer.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Monday, May 26, 2008
Buying peace with Jihadis -- B. Raman
Buying peace with jihadis
B Raman (Pioneer, 27 May 2008)
Rather than fight terrorists, the Pakistan Government is back to striking deals with them
Disturbing signals from Pakistan relating to the various deals being made with different jihadi outfits by the coalition Government headed by Mr Yousuf Raza Gilani should be a matter of great concern not only to India and the US, but also the international community. Among these signals are the indefinite adjournment of the hearing in the case relating to the kidnapping and murder of Daniel Pearl, the American journalist of the Wall Street Journal at Karachi in January-February 2002.
In this case, the appeals filed by Omar Sheikh, the principal accused, against the death sentence awarded to him and by the state against the lenient sentences awarded to some other accused were being heard for the last more than five years. Even though the Anti-Terrorism Act of Pakistan lays down that all such appeals should be heard by the court on a day-to-day basis without any adjournment and disposed of in seven days, the case has been dragging on for over five years with frequent adjournments granted by the court under some pretext or the other. The state had not objected to these adjournments. Previously, the adjournments used to be for short periods at a time. Now, the hearing has been adjourned indefinitely without any objection being raised by the state prosecutor.
Reliable police sources in Sindh say that Omar Sheikh, at the request of the Gilani Government, is trying to persuade Jaish-e-Mohammad, headed by Maulana Masood Azhar, to agree to a ceasefire in the Swat Valley of the North-West Frontier Province. The JeM and the Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi (TNSM), headed by Maulana Fazlullah, popularly known as FM radio mullah because of the FM radio station run by him, were operating jointly in the Valley against the Pakistani Army.
While the TNSM, which is a constituent of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), headed by Baitullah Mehsud, its Amir, has agreed to a ceasefire and reached a so-called peace agreement with the authorities of the NWFP, the JeM has refused to adhere to this agreement so far. The JeM is a member of Osama bin Laden's International Islamic Front (IIF) and not of the TTP. The JeM and dissident elements from the TNSM, which are opposed to the peace agreement, blew up two girls schools and a gas pipeline, set fire to a house and attacked a police post at Nengolai near Mingora in the Swat Valley on May 21, 2008, killing a policeman. They also attacked Matta Police Station. These police sources say that Omar Sheikh has been taken to the Swat Valley to contact the JeM and the TNSM dissident elements and persuade them to accept the peace agreement.
One of the demands made by Baitullah and Fazlullah as a price for the peace agreement is that all those arrested during the commando raid in the Lal Masjid in Islamabad in July last year should be released and the criminal cases filed against them withdrawn. While the Gilani Government has not withdrawn the cases, it is no longer insisting on the quick disposal of the cases and has not been opposing bail applications moved on behalf of the accused. It is only a question of some weeks before all the accused, including Maulana Abdul Aziz, the principal accused, come out on bail and re-join the Masjid in their original positions. The Government has reportedly accepted the demand of Baitullah that the two madarsas -- one for boys and the other for girls -- attached to the Masjid should be allowed to function again without any hindrance.
As part of the peace agreement with the TNSM, the Government has not only agreed to enforce shari'ah in the entire Malakand Division of the NWFP, including the Swat Valley, but also to regularise the FM radio station operated by Fazlullah by granting formal permission. It has also agreed to grant similar permission to all other FM radio stations being run by mullahs and madarsas in the tribal belt, which are being used by the neo-Taliban for carrying on a vicious propaganda against the US and other NATO forces and against the Hamid Karzai Government in Kabul. Many of these radio stations have been repeatedly calling for the overthrow or assassination of Mr Karzai.
The Government has quietly withdrawn the orders issued by Gen Musharraf in the past for the registration of all madarsas as a condition for financial assistance to them by the Government. Similarly, all restrictions regarding the admission of foreign students have been withdrawn. The madarsas are once again being given financial assistance irrespective of whether they are registered or not. As part of the peace agreement with Fazlullah, the NWFP Government has agreed to give financial assistance for the establishment of an Islamic University in Imamdheri, the headquarters of the TNSM, to be run jointly by the Government and the TNSM.
The Government has agreed to return to the TNSM all its buildings and other real estate which had been occupied by the Army during the military operations against the TNSM.
Mr Tariq Azizuddin, Pakistan's Ambassador to Afghanistan, who was kidnapped by suspected neo-Taliban elements on February 11, was released on May 17. While the Gilani Government has been claiming that he was got released by the security forces during an operation and has denied any deal with the neo-Taliban, spokesmen of the TTP have asserted that in return for the release of the Ambassador, the Gilani Government has released Maulvi Obaidullah, former Defence Minister of the neo-Taliban and a close associate of Mulla Mohammed Omar, the Amir of the neo-Taliban, and 54 other members of the neo-Taliban, who were in different jails in the NWFP and Baluchistan. Local police sources say that in return for the release of the Ambassador, the Gilani Government has assured Mulla Omar that no further action would be taken against the neo-Taliban.
Mr Asif Ali Zardari, the co-chairperson of the Pakistan People's Party (PPP), who used to demand a UN-sponsored investigation into the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, has toned down his demand. The police have also reportedly been told to go slow in the investigation into the case in which the principal accused is Baitullah Mehsud. Baitullah has been demanding the release of all his men arrested during the commando action in the Lal Masjid and subsequently. The Government has already conceded his demand, though a formal peace agreement is yet to be signed.
The Pakistani media has claimed that as part of the peace deals with Fazlullah and Baitullah, the Government has agreed to withdraw the Army from the Swat Valley and the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and restore to the Frontier Corps the responsibility for the maintenance of law and order in the tribal belt. However, this has been strongly denied by the Government, which has been saying that there will be a re-location of the Army in the tribal belt, but not a withdrawal.
The restrictions on AQ Khan, the nuclear scientist, too, have been eased. While he continues to be under ostensible house arrest, he is allowed to visit friends and relatives, accompanied by security personnel.
http://dailypioneer.com/indexn12.asp?main_variable=oped&file_name=opd2%2Etxt&counter_img=2
B Raman (Pioneer, 27 May 2008)
Rather than fight terrorists, the Pakistan Government is back to striking deals with them
Disturbing signals from Pakistan relating to the various deals being made with different jihadi outfits by the coalition Government headed by Mr Yousuf Raza Gilani should be a matter of great concern not only to India and the US, but also the international community. Among these signals are the indefinite adjournment of the hearing in the case relating to the kidnapping and murder of Daniel Pearl, the American journalist of the Wall Street Journal at Karachi in January-February 2002.
In this case, the appeals filed by Omar Sheikh, the principal accused, against the death sentence awarded to him and by the state against the lenient sentences awarded to some other accused were being heard for the last more than five years. Even though the Anti-Terrorism Act of Pakistan lays down that all such appeals should be heard by the court on a day-to-day basis without any adjournment and disposed of in seven days, the case has been dragging on for over five years with frequent adjournments granted by the court under some pretext or the other. The state had not objected to these adjournments. Previously, the adjournments used to be for short periods at a time. Now, the hearing has been adjourned indefinitely without any objection being raised by the state prosecutor.
Reliable police sources in Sindh say that Omar Sheikh, at the request of the Gilani Government, is trying to persuade Jaish-e-Mohammad, headed by Maulana Masood Azhar, to agree to a ceasefire in the Swat Valley of the North-West Frontier Province. The JeM and the Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi (TNSM), headed by Maulana Fazlullah, popularly known as FM radio mullah because of the FM radio station run by him, were operating jointly in the Valley against the Pakistani Army.
While the TNSM, which is a constituent of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), headed by Baitullah Mehsud, its Amir, has agreed to a ceasefire and reached a so-called peace agreement with the authorities of the NWFP, the JeM has refused to adhere to this agreement so far. The JeM is a member of Osama bin Laden's International Islamic Front (IIF) and not of the TTP. The JeM and dissident elements from the TNSM, which are opposed to the peace agreement, blew up two girls schools and a gas pipeline, set fire to a house and attacked a police post at Nengolai near Mingora in the Swat Valley on May 21, 2008, killing a policeman. They also attacked Matta Police Station. These police sources say that Omar Sheikh has been taken to the Swat Valley to contact the JeM and the TNSM dissident elements and persuade them to accept the peace agreement.
One of the demands made by Baitullah and Fazlullah as a price for the peace agreement is that all those arrested during the commando raid in the Lal Masjid in Islamabad in July last year should be released and the criminal cases filed against them withdrawn. While the Gilani Government has not withdrawn the cases, it is no longer insisting on the quick disposal of the cases and has not been opposing bail applications moved on behalf of the accused. It is only a question of some weeks before all the accused, including Maulana Abdul Aziz, the principal accused, come out on bail and re-join the Masjid in their original positions. The Government has reportedly accepted the demand of Baitullah that the two madarsas -- one for boys and the other for girls -- attached to the Masjid should be allowed to function again without any hindrance.
As part of the peace agreement with the TNSM, the Government has not only agreed to enforce shari'ah in the entire Malakand Division of the NWFP, including the Swat Valley, but also to regularise the FM radio station operated by Fazlullah by granting formal permission. It has also agreed to grant similar permission to all other FM radio stations being run by mullahs and madarsas in the tribal belt, which are being used by the neo-Taliban for carrying on a vicious propaganda against the US and other NATO forces and against the Hamid Karzai Government in Kabul. Many of these radio stations have been repeatedly calling for the overthrow or assassination of Mr Karzai.
The Government has quietly withdrawn the orders issued by Gen Musharraf in the past for the registration of all madarsas as a condition for financial assistance to them by the Government. Similarly, all restrictions regarding the admission of foreign students have been withdrawn. The madarsas are once again being given financial assistance irrespective of whether they are registered or not. As part of the peace agreement with Fazlullah, the NWFP Government has agreed to give financial assistance for the establishment of an Islamic University in Imamdheri, the headquarters of the TNSM, to be run jointly by the Government and the TNSM.
The Government has agreed to return to the TNSM all its buildings and other real estate which had been occupied by the Army during the military operations against the TNSM.
Mr Tariq Azizuddin, Pakistan's Ambassador to Afghanistan, who was kidnapped by suspected neo-Taliban elements on February 11, was released on May 17. While the Gilani Government has been claiming that he was got released by the security forces during an operation and has denied any deal with the neo-Taliban, spokesmen of the TTP have asserted that in return for the release of the Ambassador, the Gilani Government has released Maulvi Obaidullah, former Defence Minister of the neo-Taliban and a close associate of Mulla Mohammed Omar, the Amir of the neo-Taliban, and 54 other members of the neo-Taliban, who were in different jails in the NWFP and Baluchistan. Local police sources say that in return for the release of the Ambassador, the Gilani Government has assured Mulla Omar that no further action would be taken against the neo-Taliban.
Mr Asif Ali Zardari, the co-chairperson of the Pakistan People's Party (PPP), who used to demand a UN-sponsored investigation into the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, has toned down his demand. The police have also reportedly been told to go slow in the investigation into the case in which the principal accused is Baitullah Mehsud. Baitullah has been demanding the release of all his men arrested during the commando action in the Lal Masjid and subsequently. The Government has already conceded his demand, though a formal peace agreement is yet to be signed.
The Pakistani media has claimed that as part of the peace deals with Fazlullah and Baitullah, the Government has agreed to withdraw the Army from the Swat Valley and the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and restore to the Frontier Corps the responsibility for the maintenance of law and order in the tribal belt. However, this has been strongly denied by the Government, which has been saying that there will be a re-location of the Army in the tribal belt, but not a withdrawal.
The restrictions on AQ Khan, the nuclear scientist, too, have been eased. While he continues to be under ostensible house arrest, he is allowed to visit friends and relatives, accompanied by security personnel.
http://dailypioneer.com/indexn12.asp?main_variable=oped&file_name=opd2%2Etxt&counter_img=2
Sunday, May 25, 2008
Hindutva raises the issue of terror: muslim cleric arrested for Jaipur terror blasts.
Hindutva raises the issue of terror: muslim cleric arrested for Jaipur terror blasts.
Hon'ble Min. of State, Prithviraj Chavan to note: Hindutva directly raises the issue of terror: how come a muslim cleric has been arrested by for Jaipur terror blasts? Modern Prithviraj, will you answer? Will you now call those who arrested the cleric as anti-terror Hindutva cops?
Being in PMO, have you ever read http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/index.html
It talks of islamist terror outside J&K and Northeast. What is Hindutva about this, Prithviraj? (See excerpt appended).
kalyan
Jaipur blasts: Cops arrest Muslim cleric
26 May 2008, 0848 hrs IST,TIMESOFINDIA.COM
NEW DELHI: A top Muslim cleric has been arrested from Bharatpur in connection with the Jaipur blasts, a private news channel reported on Monday.
Mohammad Ilias was arrested by police two days ago and has been brought to Jaipur for interrogation. Ilias is the Shahar Qazi of Bharatpur.
Cops raided the Shehar Qazi's premises and seized the madrassa computer. The mobile phone of Illias' wife was also seized.
Serial blasts had rocked Jaipur on May 13, claiming 66 lives. A little known terror outfit - Indian Mujahideen - has claimed responsibility of the attack through an email.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Jaipur_blasts_Cops_arrest_Muslim_cleric/articleshow/3072229.cms
Jaipur blasts suspect held in Delhi
22 May 2008, 0003 hrs IST,PTI
NEW DELHI: A man suspected to be involved in the Jaipur serial blasts, which killed over 60 people and injured more than 200, was arrested here late Wednesday, police said.
The militant, whose identity was not revealed, was nabbed from Chelmsford Road, the stretch leading to New Delhi Railway Station from Connaught Place, at around 8:30 pm.
The arrest by Delhi Police's Special Cell came following a tip off from intelligence agencies.
"There was an intelligence input that a militant is coming to Delhi," Deputy Commissioner of Police (Special Cell) Alok Kumar told reporters.
Kumar refused to provide the identity of the militant or where he came from.
"We have just started interrogating him. We cannot reveal everything now," he added.
The militant's arrest here comes in the backdrop of serial blasts in the Pink City last week.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/File_Jaipur_blasts_suspect_held_in_Delhi/articleshow/3060811.cms
Islamist Terrorism outside J&K and the Northeast
At least 270 people died in Islamist terrorist violence in locations outside J&K and the Northeast during 2006. The significant incidents included:
March 7: At least 21 civilians were killed and 62 others injured in three serial bomb explosions at a temple and railway station in Varanasi. Seven bombs were later defused, including four that had been planted on the Gowdolia-Dasashwamedh Ghat Road near the Kashi Vishwanath Temple. Hours after the blasts, a suspected LeT terrorist was shot dead during an encounter with the police in the Gosaiganj area on the outskirts of Lucknow city.
April 14: Two bombs exploded inside the Jama Masjid at Delhi injuring approximately 14 persons, including a woman and a girl.
June 1: Three suspected LeT terrorists were shot dead during an abortive attempt to storm the headquarters of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, a right-wing Hindu organization, at Nagpur in Maharashtra.
July 11: At least 200 persons were killed and over 700 others injured in seven bomb blasts targeting the railway network in the city of Mumbai. First class compartments of local trains at Mira-Bayandhar, Jogeshwari, Mahim, Santacruz, Khar, Matunga and Borivli stations on the Western Railway were targeted.
September 8: Forty people killed and 65 sustain injuries in three bomb explosions at Malegaon town in the Nashik District of Maharashtra.
According to the MHA's Status Paper, the current strategy of Pakistan-based terrorist groups is to:
* Maintain a continuous flow of finances to sustain the terrorist networks in India
* Target vital installations and economic infrastructure in India
* Recruit and train local modules
* Attack soft targets like market places, public transport system, places of worship and congregation, etc.
* Provoke communal tensions to create a wedge between communities
* Supply hardware through land and sea routes
The Status Paper discloses that the LeT and JeM also use territory and elements in Bangladesh and Nepal for movement of terrorists and finances. Army chief J. J. Singh, on December 27, 2006, stated that "As terrorists are finding it hard to penetrate the fence and new anti-infiltration systems placed all along the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir and in Punjab… The areas bordering Nepal and Bangladesh are still porous and intelligence reports suggest that terrorists are trying to use them to infiltrate into India."
According to data compiled by the Institute for Conflict Management, at least 81 Inter-Services Intelligence-Jihadi modules have been disrupted just over the years 2004-2006, leading to hundreds of arrests across India – outside Jammu and Kashmir and the Northeast – in locations that extend from Uttaranchal in the North, to Andhra Pradesh in the South, and from Gujarat in the West to West Bengal in the East. These modules had been tasked to target security and vital installations, communication links, and commercial and industrial centres, as well as to provoke instability and disorder by circulating large quantities of counterfeit currency and by drug trafficking. The National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan had stated, on July 28, 2006, that Indian security and nuclear installations are under "very serious threat" from the LeT, which may be planning a "major assault".
Worse, terrorist attacks by Pakistan-backed groups have occurred in places as far as Delhi, Mumbai, Malegaon, and Varanasi in 2006. Terrorist attacks in places like Mumbai and Varanasi in 2006 and earlier at Bangalore (December 28, 2005) and New Delhi (October 29, 2005) are only the more visible evidence of a long-term war of attrition by Pakistani state agencies and their jihadi surrogates, intended to undermine India's political stability, by increasingly attacking its economic, scientific and technological strengths. The frequency, spread and, in some cases, intensity of these operations in other parts of the country has seen some escalation in the past years, as international pressure on Pakistan to end terrorism in J&K has diminished levels of 'deniable' engagement in that theatre, and as violence in J&K demonstrates a continuous secular decline since the events of September 11, 2001 in the US.
It is important to note, however, that despite occasional and inevitable terrorist 'successes', this relentless strategy – which has targeted virtually every concentration of Muslim populations in India for decades – has overwhelmingly failed to secure a base within the community, beyond a minuscule radical fringe. Further, the record of intelligence and security agency successes against such subversion and terror, although lacking the visibility and drama of a terrorist strike, is immensely greater than the record of the successes of this strategy.
http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/index.html
Have you ever before seen this new definition of Hindutva? According to Prithvijar Chavan, Hindutva means raising the matter of terrorism.
Here is the evidence:
Question by Sheela Bhatt: In this election the BJP didn't raise Hindutva. Right?
Answer by Congress leader Prithviraj Chavan who was in charge of the Karnataka elections: They indirectly raised the Hindutva issue by raising the matter of terrorism! They tried to target a particular community alleging that they are responsible for terrorism. If you compare the record of the BJP and NDA government they have a pathetic record of tackling terrorism, still they kept on talking about the recent incidents. They had no other issue to talk about because their performance in the Karnataka government was pathetic so they kept talking about national issues in the assembly elections.
http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/may/25inter.htm
I think this comment by the 'Congress leader' Prithviraj Chavan takes the cake among all the intellectual gymnastics indulged in by columnists and political pundits. I was sick and tired of watching many TV channels and TV talk-show pundits, throughout the forenoon of 25 May 2008 as the election results started pouring in from 8 AM.
It is time for Sonia Gandhi to wind up her 10 Janpath residence and go into meditation in Orbassano to understand the nature of terror or even sending emissaries to meet LTTE operatives in Vellore jail and stop advising the politico-s about the communal politics which has become the UPA trademark.
It is a pity that the madam has such Congress pundits like Prithviraj Chavan, Hon'ble Minister of State (PMO) in PMO advising Hon'ble Manmohan. With such advisors, it ain't no wonder that UPA is leading a soft state, without any clue on methods of fighting terror. On the day the Foreign Minister visits Pakistan, a soldier gets killed in Jammu LOC and there was not even a whisper of a diplomatic note verbale to the Pakistan High Commissioner.
People like Prithviraj Chavan are to be complimented for recognizing the fact that it takes Hindutva to raise the issue of terrorism in the nation. Hurray, Hindutva.
kalyan
Hon'ble Min. of State, Prithviraj Chavan to note: Hindutva directly raises the issue of terror: how come a muslim cleric has been arrested by for Jaipur terror blasts? Modern Prithviraj, will you answer? Will you now call those who arrested the cleric as anti-terror Hindutva cops?
Being in PMO, have you ever read http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/index.html
It talks of islamist terror outside J&K and Northeast. What is Hindutva about this, Prithviraj? (See excerpt appended).
kalyan
Jaipur blasts: Cops arrest Muslim cleric
26 May 2008, 0848 hrs IST,TIMESOFINDIA.COM
NEW DELHI: A top Muslim cleric has been arrested from Bharatpur in connection with the Jaipur blasts, a private news channel reported on Monday.
Mohammad Ilias was arrested by police two days ago and has been brought to Jaipur for interrogation. Ilias is the Shahar Qazi of Bharatpur.
Cops raided the Shehar Qazi's premises and seized the madrassa computer. The mobile phone of Illias' wife was also seized.
Serial blasts had rocked Jaipur on May 13, claiming 66 lives. A little known terror outfit - Indian Mujahideen - has claimed responsibility of the attack through an email.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Jaipur_blasts_Cops_arrest_Muslim_cleric/articleshow/3072229.cms
Jaipur blasts suspect held in Delhi
22 May 2008, 0003 hrs IST,PTI
NEW DELHI: A man suspected to be involved in the Jaipur serial blasts, which killed over 60 people and injured more than 200, was arrested here late Wednesday, police said.
The militant, whose identity was not revealed, was nabbed from Chelmsford Road, the stretch leading to New Delhi Railway Station from Connaught Place, at around 8:30 pm.
The arrest by Delhi Police's Special Cell came following a tip off from intelligence agencies.
"There was an intelligence input that a militant is coming to Delhi," Deputy Commissioner of Police (Special Cell) Alok Kumar told reporters.
Kumar refused to provide the identity of the militant or where he came from.
"We have just started interrogating him. We cannot reveal everything now," he added.
The militant's arrest here comes in the backdrop of serial blasts in the Pink City last week.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/File_Jaipur_blasts_suspect_held_in_Delhi/articleshow/3060811.cms
Islamist Terrorism outside J&K and the Northeast
At least 270 people died in Islamist terrorist violence in locations outside J&K and the Northeast during 2006. The significant incidents included:
March 7: At least 21 civilians were killed and 62 others injured in three serial bomb explosions at a temple and railway station in Varanasi. Seven bombs were later defused, including four that had been planted on the Gowdolia-Dasashwamedh Ghat Road near the Kashi Vishwanath Temple. Hours after the blasts, a suspected LeT terrorist was shot dead during an encounter with the police in the Gosaiganj area on the outskirts of Lucknow city.
April 14: Two bombs exploded inside the Jama Masjid at Delhi injuring approximately 14 persons, including a woman and a girl.
June 1: Three suspected LeT terrorists were shot dead during an abortive attempt to storm the headquarters of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, a right-wing Hindu organization, at Nagpur in Maharashtra.
July 11: At least 200 persons were killed and over 700 others injured in seven bomb blasts targeting the railway network in the city of Mumbai. First class compartments of local trains at Mira-Bayandhar, Jogeshwari, Mahim, Santacruz, Khar, Matunga and Borivli stations on the Western Railway were targeted.
September 8: Forty people killed and 65 sustain injuries in three bomb explosions at Malegaon town in the Nashik District of Maharashtra.
According to the MHA's Status Paper, the current strategy of Pakistan-based terrorist groups is to:
* Maintain a continuous flow of finances to sustain the terrorist networks in India
* Target vital installations and economic infrastructure in India
* Recruit and train local modules
* Attack soft targets like market places, public transport system, places of worship and congregation, etc.
* Provoke communal tensions to create a wedge between communities
* Supply hardware through land and sea routes
The Status Paper discloses that the LeT and JeM also use territory and elements in Bangladesh and Nepal for movement of terrorists and finances. Army chief J. J. Singh, on December 27, 2006, stated that "As terrorists are finding it hard to penetrate the fence and new anti-infiltration systems placed all along the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir and in Punjab… The areas bordering Nepal and Bangladesh are still porous and intelligence reports suggest that terrorists are trying to use them to infiltrate into India."
According to data compiled by the Institute for Conflict Management, at least 81 Inter-Services Intelligence-Jihadi modules have been disrupted just over the years 2004-2006, leading to hundreds of arrests across India – outside Jammu and Kashmir and the Northeast – in locations that extend from Uttaranchal in the North, to Andhra Pradesh in the South, and from Gujarat in the West to West Bengal in the East. These modules had been tasked to target security and vital installations, communication links, and commercial and industrial centres, as well as to provoke instability and disorder by circulating large quantities of counterfeit currency and by drug trafficking. The National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan had stated, on July 28, 2006, that Indian security and nuclear installations are under "very serious threat" from the LeT, which may be planning a "major assault".
Worse, terrorist attacks by Pakistan-backed groups have occurred in places as far as Delhi, Mumbai, Malegaon, and Varanasi in 2006. Terrorist attacks in places like Mumbai and Varanasi in 2006 and earlier at Bangalore (December 28, 2005) and New Delhi (October 29, 2005) are only the more visible evidence of a long-term war of attrition by Pakistani state agencies and their jihadi surrogates, intended to undermine India's political stability, by increasingly attacking its economic, scientific and technological strengths. The frequency, spread and, in some cases, intensity of these operations in other parts of the country has seen some escalation in the past years, as international pressure on Pakistan to end terrorism in J&K has diminished levels of 'deniable' engagement in that theatre, and as violence in J&K demonstrates a continuous secular decline since the events of September 11, 2001 in the US.
It is important to note, however, that despite occasional and inevitable terrorist 'successes', this relentless strategy – which has targeted virtually every concentration of Muslim populations in India for decades – has overwhelmingly failed to secure a base within the community, beyond a minuscule radical fringe. Further, the record of intelligence and security agency successes against such subversion and terror, although lacking the visibility and drama of a terrorist strike, is immensely greater than the record of the successes of this strategy.
http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/index.html
Have you ever before seen this new definition of Hindutva? According to Prithvijar Chavan, Hindutva means raising the matter of terrorism.
Here is the evidence:
Question by Sheela Bhatt: In this election the BJP didn't raise Hindutva. Right?
Answer by Congress leader Prithviraj Chavan who was in charge of the Karnataka elections: They indirectly raised the Hindutva issue by raising the matter of terrorism! They tried to target a particular community alleging that they are responsible for terrorism. If you compare the record of the BJP and NDA government they have a pathetic record of tackling terrorism, still they kept on talking about the recent incidents. They had no other issue to talk about because their performance in the Karnataka government was pathetic so they kept talking about national issues in the assembly elections.
http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/may/25inter.htm
I think this comment by the 'Congress leader' Prithviraj Chavan takes the cake among all the intellectual gymnastics indulged in by columnists and political pundits. I was sick and tired of watching many TV channels and TV talk-show pundits, throughout the forenoon of 25 May 2008 as the election results started pouring in from 8 AM.
It is time for Sonia Gandhi to wind up her 10 Janpath residence and go into meditation in Orbassano to understand the nature of terror or even sending emissaries to meet LTTE operatives in Vellore jail and stop advising the politico-s about the communal politics which has become the UPA trademark.
It is a pity that the madam has such Congress pundits like Prithviraj Chavan, Hon'ble Minister of State (PMO) in PMO advising Hon'ble Manmohan. With such advisors, it ain't no wonder that UPA is leading a soft state, without any clue on methods of fighting terror. On the day the Foreign Minister visits Pakistan, a soldier gets killed in Jammu LOC and there was not even a whisper of a diplomatic note verbale to the Pakistan High Commissioner.
People like Prithviraj Chavan are to be complimented for recognizing the fact that it takes Hindutva to raise the issue of terrorism in the nation. Hurray, Hindutva.
kalyan
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Joint Command to fight terror. But Manmohan (aka Sonia substitute) can't be trusted.
Joint Command to fight terror. But Manmohan (aka Sonia substitute) can't be trusted.
The next terror attack could be from the sea
By Arun Kumar Singh (Deccan Chronicle, 19 May 2008)
Tuesday evening’s serial bomb blasts in Jaipur, in which over 60 people were killed, has demonstrated yet again how ill-equipped India is to handle the new complexities of terror warfare. A new command must be created to protect the nation.
Jaipur was the eleventh major terrorist strike on ‘soft’ targets in the past three years. The political leadership has stuttered out its usual statements about ‘resilience’ and ‘foreign hand’ ad nauseam, while the bureaucracy has predictably kept mum on what is a colossal failure of leadership and intelligence at both the Central and state levels. The Intelligence Bureau, in the meantime, has suggested that terrorists are planning seaborne attacks against the dozens of oil rigs, including production and support platforms, along both the coasts of India. This appears to have fallen on deaf ears.
An oil rig, like the proverbial iceberg, has a small portion visible above the surface — leaving the vulnerable parts beyond visibility. What cannot be seen are the supporting legs of the rigs, the labyrinth of pipelines with interconnecting control valves that ensure flow of crude oil from the rigs to the mainland or to single buoy moorings (SBMs), which, in turn, permit oil tankers to embark the same crude for transportation ashore. In some places, like the Gulf of Kutch, these SBMs are also used to enable incoming oil tankers to pump out their imported crude to refineries ashore. Supporting this gigantic effort is a large number of logistic ships (OSVs, or offshore support vessels), which provide food, handle personnel transfers (sometimes also done by helicopters), pollution control response, fire tender duties, etc.
The extreme vulnerability of the oil rigs was vividly displayed by the massive fire and total destruction of an oil production platform in Bombay High in July 2005 when an OSV accidentally collided with the rigs’ underwater pipeline. This resulted in a massive search and rescue operation by the Indian Navy, the Coast Guard and by civilian ships, followed by counter-pollution operations by the Coast Guard to prevent pollution along the Mumbai coastline. In addition to the financial loss, the nation had to face a massive drop in crude oil outflow from this offshore oilfield, located some 40 nautical miles off Mumbai port. This event will not have been missed by the new breed of maritime terrorists, who would also know that India has invested over Rs 1,60,000 crore in these rigs. There is an organisation to deal with offshore security threats to oil rigs, coastal refineries, coastal nuclear power plants and ports. The Coast Guard looks after peacetime security and is in regular touch with all stakeholders — the Navy, the port authorities, shipping, ONGC, Oil India and the intelligence agencies. Wartime threats are handled by the Navy.
In this era of ‘no-war, no-peace’, there is an ever-present threat to offshore and coastal installations. The threat from the sea can take various forms — trained ‘sea terrorists’ can attack by approaching the target in dhows or even submersibles, making the last mile in collapsible rubber boats, lay explosives in the most vulnerable parts and depart or carry out suicide attacks. Another alternative would be to bring an explosives-laden ship and collide it against the target, or sink it in the harbour approach to block the port. And, of course, terrorists can enter coastal targets by land and cover the last stretch, as in Israel, in microlite aircraft to get in.
In any such terror attack, the repercussions would be severe — economic, environmental and in sheer terms of shock. India’s economic prosperity lies in being completely secure at sea — 90 per cent of our trade, 70 per cent of our oil imports and 70 per cent of our indigenous oil and gas production comes from the sea.
The issue of modifying India’s national security-cum-intelligence apparatus to address new forms of warfare has been hammered to near-death. Little may have moved but the need for a completely new machinery to fight terrorism is becoming all the more relevant in everyday incidents as in Jaipur’s. We are simply not equipped to address terrorism.
There have been reports that the government is considering handing over the 2010 Commonwealth Games project to the Army keeping in view the failure of the bureaucracy and civil administration to deliver. The United States, in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks, has been far more ruthless and successful in protecting its citizens. With Jaipur’s incident in focus, does it not look like it is time to hand over all anti-terrorist activities to three separate ‘empowered’ joint commands, which will include all elements of the military, paramilitary, police, intelligence, railways, ports, airports and any other agency that needs to be a part of the apparatus? These three commands can be headed by the Army, for land threats, the Navy for seaborne-coastal threats, and the Air Force to address aerial threats. There is also an urgent need to augment the force levels of the Navy and the Coast Guard. Each of these seagoing services should reach a strength of 200 ships, and each should double their aviation assets.
Laws to permit the Navy and Coast Guard to board and search suspicious ships need to be introduced at the earliest. The existing force levels — 75 ships and 45 aircraft for the Coast Guard; and 130 ships and about 200 aircraft for the Navy — are inadequate. Getting our counter-terror mechanism in place should take priority over time-worn intellectual debates. Also, at some point in the future, these joint commands could also be pressed into action to combat the Naxalite threat, which today spans 11 states. The protection of its citizens is the Centre’s primary duty. The buck stops there.
How seriously other nations take this threat is best exemplified by what I saw in the United States in 2005. All armed forces units were flying an additional flag — of a serpent with the inscription ‘Don’t Tread On Me’. This flag has been used by presidential proclamation only four times in 234 years. It was brought out during the wars that threatened the American nation — the War of Independence (1776-1781), the Civil War (1860-1865), the attack on Pearl Harbour (1942) and post 9/11 (2001).
India too faces this new form of warfare and its government cannot take the rather philosophical view that was once articulated by a television commentator, to my considerable amazement: ‘As everyone knows, there is no reality, but only points of view.’
Global terrorism is a hard reality, and it is here to stay, irrespective of individual perceptions and views. Dealing with this new form of asymmetric war will require the combined might and wisdom of all of India. We need not emulate the Americans by hoisting a second flag to remind our citizens (and leaders) that the nation is in a state of war. But we do need to get our act together, and quickly. The present form of asymmetric war being waged by international terrorists who serve no nation is, after all, too serious an issue to be left only to the politicians, bureaucrats and the overstretched intelligence agencies and paramilitary forces. Remember the old saying: ‘Steel fist in a velvet glove’? That is what we need.
Vice-Admiral Arun Kumar Singh retired as Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief of the Eastern Naval Command, Visakhapatnam, in April 2007
http://deccan.com/Columnists/Columnists.asp?#The next terror attack could be from the sea
BJP questions Manmohan's bona fide in fighting terror
PTI | New Delhi (Pioneer, 19 May 2008)
A day after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh pitched for a federal crime agency, the BJP on Sunday questioned his commitment to fight terror and said a new agency would be of no use unless it is armed with a POTA-type stringent anti-terror law.
"Manmohan Singh's bonafides in the war against terror are suspect," senior BJP leader Arun Jaitley said, while asking whether a federal agency under him to deal with terror crimes can really be trusted given his "track record" in the last four years.
"It is ironical that after being in prime ministerial office for four years the Prime Minister has finally woken up to the harsh and cruel reality that prevention and investigation of terrorism in India is on the verge of collapse," Jaitley said.
He said the repeal of POTA, not giving assent to similar anti-terror laws in BJP-ruled States, non-execution of Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru and "helping the accused being prosecuted under POTA for burning Sabarmati Express" raises a legitimate question whether a federal agency under Singh can really be trusted.
Jaitely asked, "does the Prime Minister's track record inspire confidence that he will implement his proposal for a federal agency against terror."
He also sought to know whether Singh will have the political courage to strengthen the content of India's anti-terrorist laws to make them more "terrorist-unfriendly".
Claiming that the Prime Minister and Congress had been opposing strong anti-terror law, he sought to know "will not the federal agency be helpless in investigating terrorist crimes if confessions of terrorists are inadmissible evidence and an easy bail is available to the terrorists under normal law".
Jaitley also sought to know what purpose would be achieved in merely changing the investigating agency, particularly when investigation and prevention of terrorism is to take place "under a law which is not terrorist-unfriendly".
He also accused the UPA Government of having a "scandalous record of having misled the CBI, an investigative agency of the Central Government for political purposes in the last four years."
"Systematically, cases against UPA leaders have been closed and the political opponents have been harassed by the CBI."
Jaitley accused the UPA Government of "deliberately" not giving Presidential assent to three BJP-ruled States - Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat - to operationalise the laws against organised crimes, while such laws are operational in Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh (both ruled by Congress) and Karnataka.
"The effect of this is going to be that cases relating to the Mumbai train blasts and the Malegaon blasts will be investigated under the MCOCA but when accused are arrested in relation to the Jaipur serial blasts, they will be investigated under the ordinary law where easy bails will be available and confessions of the terrorists will not be admissible evidence," he said.
"The crippling of the investigation in the Jaipur blasts is directly attributable to the political motivated withholding of Presidential assent by the UPA Government," Jaitley said.
The senior BJP leader also accused Manmohan Singh of using his "softness on terror for vote bank politics rather than for security considerations."
The BJP was willing to discuss the issue provided it involves not merely a change of the investigative agency but also the content of the law, he said.
"Our anti-terror laws will have to be made more effective and POTA will have to be re-introduced," he said.
Jaitley said the jurisdiction to legislate against terrorism is already with the Central Government and the constitutional validity of TADA was challenged before the Supreme Court on the ground that the law and order and public order are state subjects and the Centre cannot legislate with regard to the same.
"The Supreme Court has categorically held that the war against terrorism includes the war against sovereignty and defence of India and therefore the legislation against terror falls in the domain of the Central Government," he said.
Jaitley also said what prevented the Prime Minister in the last four years from acting in the matter remains an "obvious mystery" and that his government is not "serious in fighting terrorism".
"The Central Govern-ment has the legislative and Executive powers to introduce and to enact laws in this matter," he said.
http://dailypioneer.com/indexn12.asp?main_variable=NATION&file_name=nt3%2Etxt&counter_img=3
The next terror attack could be from the sea
By Arun Kumar Singh (Deccan Chronicle, 19 May 2008)
Tuesday evening’s serial bomb blasts in Jaipur, in which over 60 people were killed, has demonstrated yet again how ill-equipped India is to handle the new complexities of terror warfare. A new command must be created to protect the nation.
Jaipur was the eleventh major terrorist strike on ‘soft’ targets in the past three years. The political leadership has stuttered out its usual statements about ‘resilience’ and ‘foreign hand’ ad nauseam, while the bureaucracy has predictably kept mum on what is a colossal failure of leadership and intelligence at both the Central and state levels. The Intelligence Bureau, in the meantime, has suggested that terrorists are planning seaborne attacks against the dozens of oil rigs, including production and support platforms, along both the coasts of India. This appears to have fallen on deaf ears.
An oil rig, like the proverbial iceberg, has a small portion visible above the surface — leaving the vulnerable parts beyond visibility. What cannot be seen are the supporting legs of the rigs, the labyrinth of pipelines with interconnecting control valves that ensure flow of crude oil from the rigs to the mainland or to single buoy moorings (SBMs), which, in turn, permit oil tankers to embark the same crude for transportation ashore. In some places, like the Gulf of Kutch, these SBMs are also used to enable incoming oil tankers to pump out their imported crude to refineries ashore. Supporting this gigantic effort is a large number of logistic ships (OSVs, or offshore support vessels), which provide food, handle personnel transfers (sometimes also done by helicopters), pollution control response, fire tender duties, etc.
The extreme vulnerability of the oil rigs was vividly displayed by the massive fire and total destruction of an oil production platform in Bombay High in July 2005 when an OSV accidentally collided with the rigs’ underwater pipeline. This resulted in a massive search and rescue operation by the Indian Navy, the Coast Guard and by civilian ships, followed by counter-pollution operations by the Coast Guard to prevent pollution along the Mumbai coastline. In addition to the financial loss, the nation had to face a massive drop in crude oil outflow from this offshore oilfield, located some 40 nautical miles off Mumbai port. This event will not have been missed by the new breed of maritime terrorists, who would also know that India has invested over Rs 1,60,000 crore in these rigs. There is an organisation to deal with offshore security threats to oil rigs, coastal refineries, coastal nuclear power plants and ports. The Coast Guard looks after peacetime security and is in regular touch with all stakeholders — the Navy, the port authorities, shipping, ONGC, Oil India and the intelligence agencies. Wartime threats are handled by the Navy.
In this era of ‘no-war, no-peace’, there is an ever-present threat to offshore and coastal installations. The threat from the sea can take various forms — trained ‘sea terrorists’ can attack by approaching the target in dhows or even submersibles, making the last mile in collapsible rubber boats, lay explosives in the most vulnerable parts and depart or carry out suicide attacks. Another alternative would be to bring an explosives-laden ship and collide it against the target, or sink it in the harbour approach to block the port. And, of course, terrorists can enter coastal targets by land and cover the last stretch, as in Israel, in microlite aircraft to get in.
In any such terror attack, the repercussions would be severe — economic, environmental and in sheer terms of shock. India’s economic prosperity lies in being completely secure at sea — 90 per cent of our trade, 70 per cent of our oil imports and 70 per cent of our indigenous oil and gas production comes from the sea.
The issue of modifying India’s national security-cum-intelligence apparatus to address new forms of warfare has been hammered to near-death. Little may have moved but the need for a completely new machinery to fight terrorism is becoming all the more relevant in everyday incidents as in Jaipur’s. We are simply not equipped to address terrorism.
There have been reports that the government is considering handing over the 2010 Commonwealth Games project to the Army keeping in view the failure of the bureaucracy and civil administration to deliver. The United States, in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks, has been far more ruthless and successful in protecting its citizens. With Jaipur’s incident in focus, does it not look like it is time to hand over all anti-terrorist activities to three separate ‘empowered’ joint commands, which will include all elements of the military, paramilitary, police, intelligence, railways, ports, airports and any other agency that needs to be a part of the apparatus? These three commands can be headed by the Army, for land threats, the Navy for seaborne-coastal threats, and the Air Force to address aerial threats. There is also an urgent need to augment the force levels of the Navy and the Coast Guard. Each of these seagoing services should reach a strength of 200 ships, and each should double their aviation assets.
Laws to permit the Navy and Coast Guard to board and search suspicious ships need to be introduced at the earliest. The existing force levels — 75 ships and 45 aircraft for the Coast Guard; and 130 ships and about 200 aircraft for the Navy — are inadequate. Getting our counter-terror mechanism in place should take priority over time-worn intellectual debates. Also, at some point in the future, these joint commands could also be pressed into action to combat the Naxalite threat, which today spans 11 states. The protection of its citizens is the Centre’s primary duty. The buck stops there.
How seriously other nations take this threat is best exemplified by what I saw in the United States in 2005. All armed forces units were flying an additional flag — of a serpent with the inscription ‘Don’t Tread On Me’. This flag has been used by presidential proclamation only four times in 234 years. It was brought out during the wars that threatened the American nation — the War of Independence (1776-1781), the Civil War (1860-1865), the attack on Pearl Harbour (1942) and post 9/11 (2001).
India too faces this new form of warfare and its government cannot take the rather philosophical view that was once articulated by a television commentator, to my considerable amazement: ‘As everyone knows, there is no reality, but only points of view.’
Global terrorism is a hard reality, and it is here to stay, irrespective of individual perceptions and views. Dealing with this new form of asymmetric war will require the combined might and wisdom of all of India. We need not emulate the Americans by hoisting a second flag to remind our citizens (and leaders) that the nation is in a state of war. But we do need to get our act together, and quickly. The present form of asymmetric war being waged by international terrorists who serve no nation is, after all, too serious an issue to be left only to the politicians, bureaucrats and the overstretched intelligence agencies and paramilitary forces. Remember the old saying: ‘Steel fist in a velvet glove’? That is what we need.
Vice-Admiral Arun Kumar Singh retired as Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief of the Eastern Naval Command, Visakhapatnam, in April 2007
http://deccan.com/Columnists/Columnists.asp?#The next terror attack could be from the sea
BJP questions Manmohan's bona fide in fighting terror
PTI | New Delhi (Pioneer, 19 May 2008)
A day after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh pitched for a federal crime agency, the BJP on Sunday questioned his commitment to fight terror and said a new agency would be of no use unless it is armed with a POTA-type stringent anti-terror law.
"Manmohan Singh's bonafides in the war against terror are suspect," senior BJP leader Arun Jaitley said, while asking whether a federal agency under him to deal with terror crimes can really be trusted given his "track record" in the last four years.
"It is ironical that after being in prime ministerial office for four years the Prime Minister has finally woken up to the harsh and cruel reality that prevention and investigation of terrorism in India is on the verge of collapse," Jaitley said.
He said the repeal of POTA, not giving assent to similar anti-terror laws in BJP-ruled States, non-execution of Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru and "helping the accused being prosecuted under POTA for burning Sabarmati Express" raises a legitimate question whether a federal agency under Singh can really be trusted.
Jaitely asked, "does the Prime Minister's track record inspire confidence that he will implement his proposal for a federal agency against terror."
He also sought to know whether Singh will have the political courage to strengthen the content of India's anti-terrorist laws to make them more "terrorist-unfriendly".
Claiming that the Prime Minister and Congress had been opposing strong anti-terror law, he sought to know "will not the federal agency be helpless in investigating terrorist crimes if confessions of terrorists are inadmissible evidence and an easy bail is available to the terrorists under normal law".
Jaitley also sought to know what purpose would be achieved in merely changing the investigating agency, particularly when investigation and prevention of terrorism is to take place "under a law which is not terrorist-unfriendly".
He also accused the UPA Government of having a "scandalous record of having misled the CBI, an investigative agency of the Central Government for political purposes in the last four years."
"Systematically, cases against UPA leaders have been closed and the political opponents have been harassed by the CBI."
Jaitley accused the UPA Government of "deliberately" not giving Presidential assent to three BJP-ruled States - Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat - to operationalise the laws against organised crimes, while such laws are operational in Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh (both ruled by Congress) and Karnataka.
"The effect of this is going to be that cases relating to the Mumbai train blasts and the Malegaon blasts will be investigated under the MCOCA but when accused are arrested in relation to the Jaipur serial blasts, they will be investigated under the ordinary law where easy bails will be available and confessions of the terrorists will not be admissible evidence," he said.
"The crippling of the investigation in the Jaipur blasts is directly attributable to the political motivated withholding of Presidential assent by the UPA Government," Jaitley said.
The senior BJP leader also accused Manmohan Singh of using his "softness on terror for vote bank politics rather than for security considerations."
The BJP was willing to discuss the issue provided it involves not merely a change of the investigative agency but also the content of the law, he said.
"Our anti-terror laws will have to be made more effective and POTA will have to be re-introduced," he said.
Jaitley said the jurisdiction to legislate against terrorism is already with the Central Government and the constitutional validity of TADA was challenged before the Supreme Court on the ground that the law and order and public order are state subjects and the Centre cannot legislate with regard to the same.
"The Supreme Court has categorically held that the war against terrorism includes the war against sovereignty and defence of India and therefore the legislation against terror falls in the domain of the Central Government," he said.
Jaitley also said what prevented the Prime Minister in the last four years from acting in the matter remains an "obvious mystery" and that his government is not "serious in fighting terrorism".
"The Central Govern-ment has the legislative and Executive powers to introduce and to enact laws in this matter," he said.
http://dailypioneer.com/indexn12.asp?main_variable=NATION&file_name=nt3%2Etxt&counter_img=3
Saturday, May 17, 2008
Jihadi terror victims: 3674 Indians (as of May 14, 2008 since Jan. 2004). Rulers are busy making money.
Jihadi terror victims: 3674 Indians (as of May 14, 2008 since Jan. 2004). Rulers are busy making money.
The UPA regime led by Sonia Gandhi and jaalra-ed by the Substitute Hon’ble PM Manmohan Singh consists of cuddlers of the merchants of death.
Media cries foul when there is a security breach for Sonia’s Karnataka election propaganda. Media keeps reckoning the count of victims of Jihadi terror, providing no comment on the role played by the cuddlers of the merchants of death.
Swapan is right. Of course, there is death of outrage. He adds: “India is confronted by home-grown, ideologically-driven terror. The Government doesn't want to admit it. Nor does it plan to act against it for fear of unsettling people who vote en bloc. It persists with its hypocrisy and double-speak on the cynical belief that the Kuffar-e-Hind is incapable of responding in a united way. ”
Swapan, the only unity of UPA is unity in staying in power and continuing to loot the nation’s treasury. Vote-bank? Aha, roll on to the Swiss bank. The list of account holders in Luxembourg LTG Group banks is yet to be called for by the Government; that list will be a revelation. The German Government has announced that it would share information on accounts held in the tax haven with any Government that wanted it. http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2008/03/28/stories/2008032850180800.htm
This unity in skullduggery is a blot on Bharatam – that the people of Bharatam have allowed such a rogues’ gallery of chamcha-s to be in sattaa who do not care about securing the life and limb of citizens of the nation who have given to themselves a Constitution which has been reduced to a scrap of paper by the Belgian-honored lady who has contributed to making Belgium the third largest trading party of the country – after USA and UK. No wonder the Order of Leopold is perceived to be a glorious honour for the Italian-born prima donna.
kalyan
Blast bags were made in China
16 May 2008, 0625 hrs IST , TNN
JAIPUR: Investigations have revealed that the bags used for the blasts carried brand name Boneno, and are of Chinese make. They are not available in local markets, and may have been brought from outside.
IG Pankaj Singh told TOI that the explosives were strapped to handle-bars. Meanwhile, the police released sketches of three more suspects late on Thursday based on descriptions given by owners and attendants of the cycle shops from where the bombers had bought the vehicles of death.
On Thursday, they managed to identify at least four other shops, and the sketches were prepared on the basis of descriptions from the shop employees who sold off the bikes.
That the bikes were bought from separate shops was confirmed by the fact that all of them carried locks of different make.
Singh said that the sketches were credible because the buyer in all the cases remained in the shop for almost an hour to get the lock installed giving the shop staff ample time to have a good look at his face.
In all five sketches released till now, the man shown is about 20-25 years old. The cops said that, going by the way they spoke, none of them seemed to be a native of Rajasthan. They all bought the bike without haggling.
Police sources also said that at least 5-6 bikes were sold on May 13, the day of the blast. While 3 of the cycles were of Avon make, 2 were Atlas. The remaining for bikes were all of separate make Hercules, Penny, Surya and Apollo. In the Boneno bags, the bomb parcel was hidden under newly bought underwears of a very popular brand. In one of the bicycles, it was wrapped in the April 4 edition of local newspaper Daily News.
The cops said that the ball bearings were of a "particularly damaging variety" and were placed in a "curve" in such a way that when the bomb exploded the shrapnel burst out ahead, and not up, causing maximum damage till close to 100 feet. That they were planted in congested bazars only added to their lethality.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/3045563.cms
Chronology of major bomb attacks in India
13 May 2008, 2353 hrs IST , AFP
NEW DELHI: The following is a list of recent major bomb blasts in India that police suspect were linked to sectarian groups:
May 13, 2008: At least 60 people killed and 150 wounded in what police said was a terror attack in the popular tourist city of Jaipur in Rajasthan.
November 23, 2007: At least 13 people were killed from serial blasts outside courts in three cities in Uttar Pradesh.
August 25, 2007: At least 43 people killed and more than 70 others injured as two bombs rock a crowded outdoor auditorium and a popular eatery in Hyderabad.
May 18, 2007: At least 10 killed and more than a dozen injured in blast at 17th century Mecca mosque in Hyderabad.
February 19, 2007: Sixty-eight people killed and dozens more injured after four explosions on board the Lahore-bound Samjhauta Express.
September 8, 2006: Thirty-eight people killed and more than 100 injured in three nearly simultaneous blasts, including one in a mosque, in the town of Malegaon in Maharashtra.
July 11, 2006: Seven bomb blasts in a period of 11 minutes on Mumbai's suburban trains. A total of 186 people were killed and more than 800 injured.
April 14, 2006: Fourteen people, including a woman and a girl, injured in two explosions at New Delhi's Jama Masjid, after Friday evening prayers.
March 7, 2006: Twenty-eight killed and 62 injured after three bombs rip through the holy city of Varanasi.
October 29, 2005: More than 60 people killed and nearly 200 injured when three bombs explode ahead of Diwali in New Delhi.
August 25, 2004: Six people die in two car bomb blasts in Mumbai.
March 13, 2003: Eleven people killed in a bomb attack aboard a commuter train in Mumbai.
September 24, 2002 : At least 31 people killed in a militant attack on a temple in Gujarat.
December 13, 2001: Fourteen people die, including five gunmen, in an attack on Parliament.
October 1, 2001: Forty people killed in a suicide attack on the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/3037370.cms
Only zero tolerance can end terror
Swapan Dasgupta (Pioneer May 18, 2008)
The serial blasts in Jaipur on May 14 were apparently the 21st successful operation (outside Jammu & Kashmir) by radical Islamists against the people of India. The 70 or so people who died horrible deaths last Tuesday joined the 3,674 Indians who are known to have been killed by a galaxy of terrorists in the 50-month period from January 2004. The statistics, diligently collated by The Times of India, suggest that India is second only to Iraq in the number of people killed by terrorists. The "merchants of death" have never had it so good.
The story of Incredible India is truly remarkable. It would be difficult discovering too many societies where a Government tries to cover up its pathetic helplessness by projecting the organised killings of the aam aadmi --commuters on suburban trains, scientists attending seminars, housewives shopping for Diwali and devotees worshipping at temples -- as karma and cruel fate. In normal democratic societies, the existence of well-organised terror networks would have prompted outrage. In India, it has prompted a curious response: A blend of capitulation and denial.
The capitulation has been shamefully brazen. In trying to dispel the assertion that terrorists don't deserve human rights, the UPA Government has gone out of its way to assert that terror suspects shouldn't suffer any discrimination. The architect of the Coimbatore bomb blasts, for example, turned his prison cell into a massage parlour before the authorities engineered his acquittal. The convicted perpetrator of the attack on Parliament idles away his time in prison with the full knowledge that the Government lacks the anatomical wherewithal to carry out the punishment awarded to him by courts.
For liberal India -- UPA represents its most disfigured face -- the important thing about terror is to deny its existence as far as possible. It has become almost a ritual for the Centre to greet every jihadi orgy with the assertion that we must not be provoked into enacting strong anti-terrorist legislation. For the English-language TV channels, the so-called "spirit of Mumbai" or the tale of Jaipur's "resilience", is invariably contrasted with the savage response of Gujarat to the carnage in Godhra.
It's one thing to invoke the gritty, stiff upper-lip approach as a byword for quiet determination. It's another thing to believe, like the infamous Mohammed Shah, that Delhi is still a fair distance away, and declare an unending happy hour for terrorist marauders. To mindlessly repeat after every outrage that terrorists are "cowards" is to miss the point. The issue is not about the lack of personal integrity of the bombers. It's about why the Centre has been emasculated by the terrorists.
It can hardly be the case that even someone as vacuously inept as Home Minister Shivraj Patil approves these attacks on what the Indian Mujahedeen email called the Kuffar-e-Hind (infidels of India). Like the inflation monster which threatens to eat up the Congress electorally in Karnataka, terrorists have alienated the UPA Government from large chunks of urban India. Yet, why is the Congress hellbent on courting unpopularity by persisting with its appeasement of terror?
After every terrorist atrocity, every religious head worth his name has invariably denounced the terrorists and prayed earnestly for peace. A massive conference was organised in Deoband some months ago to inform the terrorists that killing innocent civilians is theologically unsound. Therefore, if electoral support is what the UPA is after -- a legitimate preoccupation in a democracy -- why isn't the Manmohan Singh Government hitting the terrorists hard, and where it hurts? Logically speaking, by adopting a robust anti-terror policy the Government could have clawed its way back on popularity charts.
Unfortunately, there is a striking mismatch between reality as projected by breathless TV anchors and the truth in real life. There has been mounting evidence to show that the bombers are not foreign disruptionists who merely "sneak" into India, carry out an operation and then disappear into their cubby holes in Pakistan and Bangladesh. The post-mortem of every terrorist outrage points to local networks of radical extremism that act as facilitators. The leadership of the Student's Islamic Movement (they have dispensed with the "India" suffix) isn't foreigners; they are people who can quite legitimately claim Indian passports.
India is confronted by home-grown, ideologically-driven terror. The Government doesn't want to admit it. Nor does it plan to act against it for fear of unsettling people who vote en bloc. It persists with its hypocrisy and double-speak on the cynical belief that the Kuffar-e-Hind is incapable of responding in a united way.
No wonder there is growing liberal indignation at Rajasthan Government's decision to deport illegal immigrants from Bangladesh. If people have entered India without valid papers, they deserve to be expelled -- whether Bangladesh likes it or not. The compulsion is greater if it is established that Bangladeshi ghettos have served as sanctuaries for HUJI and other terror groups. Yet, just days after the outrage there is liberal clamour to keep many corners of Rajasthan forever Bangladeshi.
An effective anti-terror policy can be built on a combination of effective policing and social deterrence. That India needs a dedicated federal counter-terrorism body is undeniable. It is heartening that even the Congress has come around to this position. However, efficient policing and accurate Intelligence have to be complemented by all-round vigilance. A zero tolerance policy on terrorism implies creating an environment that discourages local support to bombers. All deterrence is based on fear of recrimination. Anti-terror strategies in India are hamstrung because support networks of terror enjoy political patronage. Our cities will become safer once the bombers and facilitators realise that every crime will be met by active intolerance.
http://dailypioneer.com/indexn12.asp?main_variable=front%5Fpage&file_name=story1%2Etxt&counter_img=1
The UPA regime led by Sonia Gandhi and jaalra-ed by the Substitute Hon’ble PM Manmohan Singh consists of cuddlers of the merchants of death.
Media cries foul when there is a security breach for Sonia’s Karnataka election propaganda. Media keeps reckoning the count of victims of Jihadi terror, providing no comment on the role played by the cuddlers of the merchants of death.
Swapan is right. Of course, there is death of outrage. He adds: “India is confronted by home-grown, ideologically-driven terror. The Government doesn't want to admit it. Nor does it plan to act against it for fear of unsettling people who vote en bloc. It persists with its hypocrisy and double-speak on the cynical belief that the Kuffar-e-Hind is incapable of responding in a united way. ”
Swapan, the only unity of UPA is unity in staying in power and continuing to loot the nation’s treasury. Vote-bank? Aha, roll on to the Swiss bank. The list of account holders in Luxembourg LTG Group banks is yet to be called for by the Government; that list will be a revelation. The German Government has announced that it would share information on accounts held in the tax haven with any Government that wanted it. http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2008/03/28/stories/2008032850180800.htm
This unity in skullduggery is a blot on Bharatam – that the people of Bharatam have allowed such a rogues’ gallery of chamcha-s to be in sattaa who do not care about securing the life and limb of citizens of the nation who have given to themselves a Constitution which has been reduced to a scrap of paper by the Belgian-honored lady who has contributed to making Belgium the third largest trading party of the country – after USA and UK. No wonder the Order of Leopold is perceived to be a glorious honour for the Italian-born prima donna.
kalyan
Blast bags were made in China
16 May 2008, 0625 hrs IST , TNN
JAIPUR: Investigations have revealed that the bags used for the blasts carried brand name Boneno, and are of Chinese make. They are not available in local markets, and may have been brought from outside.
IG Pankaj Singh told TOI that the explosives were strapped to handle-bars. Meanwhile, the police released sketches of three more suspects late on Thursday based on descriptions given by owners and attendants of the cycle shops from where the bombers had bought the vehicles of death.
On Thursday, they managed to identify at least four other shops, and the sketches were prepared on the basis of descriptions from the shop employees who sold off the bikes.
That the bikes were bought from separate shops was confirmed by the fact that all of them carried locks of different make.
Singh said that the sketches were credible because the buyer in all the cases remained in the shop for almost an hour to get the lock installed giving the shop staff ample time to have a good look at his face.
In all five sketches released till now, the man shown is about 20-25 years old. The cops said that, going by the way they spoke, none of them seemed to be a native of Rajasthan. They all bought the bike without haggling.
Police sources also said that at least 5-6 bikes were sold on May 13, the day of the blast. While 3 of the cycles were of Avon make, 2 were Atlas. The remaining for bikes were all of separate make Hercules, Penny, Surya and Apollo. In the Boneno bags, the bomb parcel was hidden under newly bought underwears of a very popular brand. In one of the bicycles, it was wrapped in the April 4 edition of local newspaper Daily News.
The cops said that the ball bearings were of a "particularly damaging variety" and were placed in a "curve" in such a way that when the bomb exploded the shrapnel burst out ahead, and not up, causing maximum damage till close to 100 feet. That they were planted in congested bazars only added to their lethality.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/3045563.cms
Chronology of major bomb attacks in India
13 May 2008, 2353 hrs IST , AFP
NEW DELHI: The following is a list of recent major bomb blasts in India that police suspect were linked to sectarian groups:
May 13, 2008: At least 60 people killed and 150 wounded in what police said was a terror attack in the popular tourist city of Jaipur in Rajasthan.
November 23, 2007: At least 13 people were killed from serial blasts outside courts in three cities in Uttar Pradesh.
August 25, 2007: At least 43 people killed and more than 70 others injured as two bombs rock a crowded outdoor auditorium and a popular eatery in Hyderabad.
May 18, 2007: At least 10 killed and more than a dozen injured in blast at 17th century Mecca mosque in Hyderabad.
February 19, 2007: Sixty-eight people killed and dozens more injured after four explosions on board the Lahore-bound Samjhauta Express.
September 8, 2006: Thirty-eight people killed and more than 100 injured in three nearly simultaneous blasts, including one in a mosque, in the town of Malegaon in Maharashtra.
July 11, 2006: Seven bomb blasts in a period of 11 minutes on Mumbai's suburban trains. A total of 186 people were killed and more than 800 injured.
April 14, 2006: Fourteen people, including a woman and a girl, injured in two explosions at New Delhi's Jama Masjid, after Friday evening prayers.
March 7, 2006: Twenty-eight killed and 62 injured after three bombs rip through the holy city of Varanasi.
October 29, 2005: More than 60 people killed and nearly 200 injured when three bombs explode ahead of Diwali in New Delhi.
August 25, 2004: Six people die in two car bomb blasts in Mumbai.
March 13, 2003: Eleven people killed in a bomb attack aboard a commuter train in Mumbai.
September 24, 2002 : At least 31 people killed in a militant attack on a temple in Gujarat.
December 13, 2001: Fourteen people die, including five gunmen, in an attack on Parliament.
October 1, 2001: Forty people killed in a suicide attack on the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/3037370.cms
Only zero tolerance can end terror
Swapan Dasgupta (Pioneer May 18, 2008)
The serial blasts in Jaipur on May 14 were apparently the 21st successful operation (outside Jammu & Kashmir) by radical Islamists against the people of India. The 70 or so people who died horrible deaths last Tuesday joined the 3,674 Indians who are known to have been killed by a galaxy of terrorists in the 50-month period from January 2004. The statistics, diligently collated by The Times of India, suggest that India is second only to Iraq in the number of people killed by terrorists. The "merchants of death" have never had it so good.
The story of Incredible India is truly remarkable. It would be difficult discovering too many societies where a Government tries to cover up its pathetic helplessness by projecting the organised killings of the aam aadmi --commuters on suburban trains, scientists attending seminars, housewives shopping for Diwali and devotees worshipping at temples -- as karma and cruel fate. In normal democratic societies, the existence of well-organised terror networks would have prompted outrage. In India, it has prompted a curious response: A blend of capitulation and denial.
The capitulation has been shamefully brazen. In trying to dispel the assertion that terrorists don't deserve human rights, the UPA Government has gone out of its way to assert that terror suspects shouldn't suffer any discrimination. The architect of the Coimbatore bomb blasts, for example, turned his prison cell into a massage parlour before the authorities engineered his acquittal. The convicted perpetrator of the attack on Parliament idles away his time in prison with the full knowledge that the Government lacks the anatomical wherewithal to carry out the punishment awarded to him by courts.
For liberal India -- UPA represents its most disfigured face -- the important thing about terror is to deny its existence as far as possible. It has become almost a ritual for the Centre to greet every jihadi orgy with the assertion that we must not be provoked into enacting strong anti-terrorist legislation. For the English-language TV channels, the so-called "spirit of Mumbai" or the tale of Jaipur's "resilience", is invariably contrasted with the savage response of Gujarat to the carnage in Godhra.
It's one thing to invoke the gritty, stiff upper-lip approach as a byword for quiet determination. It's another thing to believe, like the infamous Mohammed Shah, that Delhi is still a fair distance away, and declare an unending happy hour for terrorist marauders. To mindlessly repeat after every outrage that terrorists are "cowards" is to miss the point. The issue is not about the lack of personal integrity of the bombers. It's about why the Centre has been emasculated by the terrorists.
It can hardly be the case that even someone as vacuously inept as Home Minister Shivraj Patil approves these attacks on what the Indian Mujahedeen email called the Kuffar-e-Hind (infidels of India). Like the inflation monster which threatens to eat up the Congress electorally in Karnataka, terrorists have alienated the UPA Government from large chunks of urban India. Yet, why is the Congress hellbent on courting unpopularity by persisting with its appeasement of terror?
After every terrorist atrocity, every religious head worth his name has invariably denounced the terrorists and prayed earnestly for peace. A massive conference was organised in Deoband some months ago to inform the terrorists that killing innocent civilians is theologically unsound. Therefore, if electoral support is what the UPA is after -- a legitimate preoccupation in a democracy -- why isn't the Manmohan Singh Government hitting the terrorists hard, and where it hurts? Logically speaking, by adopting a robust anti-terror policy the Government could have clawed its way back on popularity charts.
Unfortunately, there is a striking mismatch between reality as projected by breathless TV anchors and the truth in real life. There has been mounting evidence to show that the bombers are not foreign disruptionists who merely "sneak" into India, carry out an operation and then disappear into their cubby holes in Pakistan and Bangladesh. The post-mortem of every terrorist outrage points to local networks of radical extremism that act as facilitators. The leadership of the Student's Islamic Movement (they have dispensed with the "India" suffix) isn't foreigners; they are people who can quite legitimately claim Indian passports.
India is confronted by home-grown, ideologically-driven terror. The Government doesn't want to admit it. Nor does it plan to act against it for fear of unsettling people who vote en bloc. It persists with its hypocrisy and double-speak on the cynical belief that the Kuffar-e-Hind is incapable of responding in a united way.
No wonder there is growing liberal indignation at Rajasthan Government's decision to deport illegal immigrants from Bangladesh. If people have entered India without valid papers, they deserve to be expelled -- whether Bangladesh likes it or not. The compulsion is greater if it is established that Bangladeshi ghettos have served as sanctuaries for HUJI and other terror groups. Yet, just days after the outrage there is liberal clamour to keep many corners of Rajasthan forever Bangladeshi.
An effective anti-terror policy can be built on a combination of effective policing and social deterrence. That India needs a dedicated federal counter-terrorism body is undeniable. It is heartening that even the Congress has come around to this position. However, efficient policing and accurate Intelligence have to be complemented by all-round vigilance. A zero tolerance policy on terrorism implies creating an environment that discourages local support to bombers. All deterrence is based on fear of recrimination. Anti-terror strategies in India are hamstrung because support networks of terror enjoy political patronage. Our cities will become safer once the bombers and facilitators realise that every crime will be met by active intolerance.
http://dailypioneer.com/indexn12.asp?main_variable=front%5Fpage&file_name=story1%2Etxt&counter_img=1
Friday, March 14, 2008
"We love death, they love life" -- islamism (Kanchan Gupta)
OIC's sinister message
by Kanchan Gupta (Pioneer, 15 March 2008)
The Organisation of Islamic Conference, whose membership is understandably restricted to 57 Islamic countries, at its meeting in Dakar, Senegal, over Thursday and Friday, has released a report that stands out for its remarkable casuistry. The 'Observatory Report on Islamophobia', a bulky document that lists a variety of imaginary grievances to make the point that Islam is being defamed and Muslims are being discriminated against, is of a piece with the OIC's untiring efforts to promote imagined victimhood as a convenient cover to justify Islamist terror.
In the past, the OIC has lashed out at India for 'suppressing' Muslim aspirations in Jammu & Kashmir; it has now lashed out at the entire world (barring, of course, those countries where Islam rules) for "defamation of Islam and racial intolerance of Muslims". The bulk of the OIC's anger is directed at "Western societies", but that is essentially because it wishes to play to the gallery and reflect the "concerns of the Islamic ummah". The report, however, should cause concern across the world, not least because it seeks a "binding legal instrument" that will delegitimise "negative political and media discourse" on issues with which Islam and Muslims are intimately associated, severely restrict freedom of expression, and force universal acceptance of, if not compliance with, all that is claimed in the name of Islam.
A fortnight before the official unveiling of this compendium of rant against the free world and denunciation of open and plural societies, the OIC Ambassadorial Group at the United Nations issued a statement on Islamophobia in New York on February 29. The statement is a summary of the obnoxious contents of the OIC report; its tone is belligerent and dismissive of dissenting opinion. "The Group is particularly and deeply alarmed by the intensification of the campaign against Islam, as it impairs Muslims' enjoyment of the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and impedes their ability to observe, practice and manifest their religion freely and without fear of coercion, violence or reprisal," the statement says.
The statement and the report, however, are deliberately silent on non-Muslims being denied the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion - for instance, as has been denied to the Pandits of Kashmir Valley and is now being denied to Hindus in Islamic countries like Malaysia - and thus impeding their ability to observe, practice and manifest their religion freely and without fear of coercion. This is not surprising as the OIC is known for speaking with a forked tongue. Nor is it surprising that it should seek to bring into popular usage a neologism like 'Islamophobia' that serves its sinister agenda, while insisting that others like 'Islamofascism', along with 'radical Islam' and 'Islamic terrorism', must be banned from public discourse. Those who persist with using these terms shall be seen as, and held guilty of, Islamophobia. Terror has a new identity.
Ironically, what Europe is now being accused of owes its origin to entirely misplaced European, more specifically British, faith in 'multiculturalism' which has become the magic password to escape censure for indulging in Islamofascism, the ideology of those who subscribe to radical Islamism. The world first heard of Islamophobia when the Runnymede Trust set up the Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia in 1996, much before New York's Twin Towers and the London Underground were bombed. It is no less ironical that the commission's report, 'Islamophobia: A challenge for us all', was released in 1997 in the House of Commons by then Home Secretary Jack Straw. In October 2006, Mr Straw was pitilessly denounced by those who claim to be victims of Islamophobia in Britain and abroad for daring to describe the Islamic veil as a "visible statement of separation and of difference".
By 2004, it was felt necessary to denounce Islamophobia to keep Islamofascists in good humour. In May that year the Council of Europe summit formally "condemned Islamophobia". Seven months later, Mr Kofi Annan, who brought shame and disgrace to his office as UN Secretary-General, gave it the stamp of international recognition by presiding over a conference on 'Confronting Islamophobia'. Between then and now, it has become fashionable to condemn any criticism of radical Islamism and fanaticism of the variety practiced and exported by Saudi Arabia, as Islamophobia, much the same way it is considered politically correct to describe the terrorism of Hamas and Hizbullah as "resistance against Zionism".
The truth is that Islamophobia is not about 'undue fear of Islam'. Well-known scholar Daniel Pipes, who is known to berate those who use Islam to justify their perversions, but not Islam (that has not prevented the OIC from naming him, along with Samuel P Huntington, author of The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, and eminent historian Bernard Lewis, as an Islamophobe) says, "While prejudice against Islam certainly exists, Islamophobia deceptively conflates two distinct phenomena: Fear of Islam and fear of radical Islam." So, those who feel repelled by the ideology of radical Islamism and fear the terrible consequences of not putting down its practitioners, are also accused of Islamophobia. Similarly, it has become a convenient tool to silence critics of Islam and reformists within the ummah. It equates freedom to question with racism.
Worse, it gives fanatics the right to abuse others and vilify their faith, secure in the knowledge that anybody who dares protest will be branded an Islamophobe. When Britain toyed with the idea of adopting a law against hate speech, this point was made eloquently by Mr Azzam Tamimi, a senior member of the Muslim Association of Britain, who insisted that while the law should gag critics of Islam, it should not prevent Muslims from berating other religions since it is their 'duty' to do so, or from glorifying Palestinian suicide bombers because, as he put it, "We love death, they love life." Mr Tamimi, curiously, is a leading light of the 'Stop the War Coalition'.
Similarly, criticism of textbooks used in a London school funded by Saudi Arabia, describing Jews as "repugnant" and Christians as "pigs", would be considered Islamophobia, as would any attempt to rein in Islamist terrorist outfits anywhere in the world. When the British Government tried to ban Hizb ut-Tahrir, it struck back by launching a 'Stop Islamophobia' campaign on British campuses. Apart from referring to the 9/11 terrorists as the "magnificent 19", as was done by its prominent leader Omar Bakri Mohammed, who later floated Al-Mohajiroun and now sends out e-mail 'advising' Muslim youth from his hideout in Lebanon, Hizb ut-Tahrir is guilty of practising anti-Semitism, abusing Hindus and Hinduism, and preaching that "suicide bombers go straight to heaven". To stand up to Hizb ut-Tahrir, therefore, amounts to Islamophobia.
Closer home, the Students Islamic Movement of India, which has been banned for being a terrorist organisation, insists that it is being targeted because its members are scrupulous adherents of Islam. Hence, if the OIC report is to be taken seriously and its definition of Islamophobia accepted, the order banning SIMI is a manifestation of Islamophobia. The Government of India is equally guilty of Islamophobia for providing dissident Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen with a resident permit. And, those in media who refuse to endorse the humiliation of Gudiyas and the persecution of Imranas by the ulema, and believe there is a connection between radical Islamism and Islamist terrorism, stand accused of "targeting Muslims and Islam".
We can afford to ignore the ringing message from Dakar only at the expense of the values that set us apart from those who decree that a woman who has been raped should be publicly flogged, if not stoned to death.
http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnist1.asp?main_variable=Columnist&file_name=kanchan%2Fkanchan163.txt&writer=kanchan
by Kanchan Gupta (Pioneer, 15 March 2008)
The Organisation of Islamic Conference, whose membership is understandably restricted to 57 Islamic countries, at its meeting in Dakar, Senegal, over Thursday and Friday, has released a report that stands out for its remarkable casuistry. The 'Observatory Report on Islamophobia', a bulky document that lists a variety of imaginary grievances to make the point that Islam is being defamed and Muslims are being discriminated against, is of a piece with the OIC's untiring efforts to promote imagined victimhood as a convenient cover to justify Islamist terror.
In the past, the OIC has lashed out at India for 'suppressing' Muslim aspirations in Jammu & Kashmir; it has now lashed out at the entire world (barring, of course, those countries where Islam rules) for "defamation of Islam and racial intolerance of Muslims". The bulk of the OIC's anger is directed at "Western societies", but that is essentially because it wishes to play to the gallery and reflect the "concerns of the Islamic ummah". The report, however, should cause concern across the world, not least because it seeks a "binding legal instrument" that will delegitimise "negative political and media discourse" on issues with which Islam and Muslims are intimately associated, severely restrict freedom of expression, and force universal acceptance of, if not compliance with, all that is claimed in the name of Islam.
A fortnight before the official unveiling of this compendium of rant against the free world and denunciation of open and plural societies, the OIC Ambassadorial Group at the United Nations issued a statement on Islamophobia in New York on February 29. The statement is a summary of the obnoxious contents of the OIC report; its tone is belligerent and dismissive of dissenting opinion. "The Group is particularly and deeply alarmed by the intensification of the campaign against Islam, as it impairs Muslims' enjoyment of the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and impedes their ability to observe, practice and manifest their religion freely and without fear of coercion, violence or reprisal," the statement says.
The statement and the report, however, are deliberately silent on non-Muslims being denied the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion - for instance, as has been denied to the Pandits of Kashmir Valley and is now being denied to Hindus in Islamic countries like Malaysia - and thus impeding their ability to observe, practice and manifest their religion freely and without fear of coercion. This is not surprising as the OIC is known for speaking with a forked tongue. Nor is it surprising that it should seek to bring into popular usage a neologism like 'Islamophobia' that serves its sinister agenda, while insisting that others like 'Islamofascism', along with 'radical Islam' and 'Islamic terrorism', must be banned from public discourse. Those who persist with using these terms shall be seen as, and held guilty of, Islamophobia. Terror has a new identity.
Ironically, what Europe is now being accused of owes its origin to entirely misplaced European, more specifically British, faith in 'multiculturalism' which has become the magic password to escape censure for indulging in Islamofascism, the ideology of those who subscribe to radical Islamism. The world first heard of Islamophobia when the Runnymede Trust set up the Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia in 1996, much before New York's Twin Towers and the London Underground were bombed. It is no less ironical that the commission's report, 'Islamophobia: A challenge for us all', was released in 1997 in the House of Commons by then Home Secretary Jack Straw. In October 2006, Mr Straw was pitilessly denounced by those who claim to be victims of Islamophobia in Britain and abroad for daring to describe the Islamic veil as a "visible statement of separation and of difference".
By 2004, it was felt necessary to denounce Islamophobia to keep Islamofascists in good humour. In May that year the Council of Europe summit formally "condemned Islamophobia". Seven months later, Mr Kofi Annan, who brought shame and disgrace to his office as UN Secretary-General, gave it the stamp of international recognition by presiding over a conference on 'Confronting Islamophobia'. Between then and now, it has become fashionable to condemn any criticism of radical Islamism and fanaticism of the variety practiced and exported by Saudi Arabia, as Islamophobia, much the same way it is considered politically correct to describe the terrorism of Hamas and Hizbullah as "resistance against Zionism".
The truth is that Islamophobia is not about 'undue fear of Islam'. Well-known scholar Daniel Pipes, who is known to berate those who use Islam to justify their perversions, but not Islam (that has not prevented the OIC from naming him, along with Samuel P Huntington, author of The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, and eminent historian Bernard Lewis, as an Islamophobe) says, "While prejudice against Islam certainly exists, Islamophobia deceptively conflates two distinct phenomena: Fear of Islam and fear of radical Islam." So, those who feel repelled by the ideology of radical Islamism and fear the terrible consequences of not putting down its practitioners, are also accused of Islamophobia. Similarly, it has become a convenient tool to silence critics of Islam and reformists within the ummah. It equates freedom to question with racism.
Worse, it gives fanatics the right to abuse others and vilify their faith, secure in the knowledge that anybody who dares protest will be branded an Islamophobe. When Britain toyed with the idea of adopting a law against hate speech, this point was made eloquently by Mr Azzam Tamimi, a senior member of the Muslim Association of Britain, who insisted that while the law should gag critics of Islam, it should not prevent Muslims from berating other religions since it is their 'duty' to do so, or from glorifying Palestinian suicide bombers because, as he put it, "We love death, they love life." Mr Tamimi, curiously, is a leading light of the 'Stop the War Coalition'.
Similarly, criticism of textbooks used in a London school funded by Saudi Arabia, describing Jews as "repugnant" and Christians as "pigs", would be considered Islamophobia, as would any attempt to rein in Islamist terrorist outfits anywhere in the world. When the British Government tried to ban Hizb ut-Tahrir, it struck back by launching a 'Stop Islamophobia' campaign on British campuses. Apart from referring to the 9/11 terrorists as the "magnificent 19", as was done by its prominent leader Omar Bakri Mohammed, who later floated Al-Mohajiroun and now sends out e-mail 'advising' Muslim youth from his hideout in Lebanon, Hizb ut-Tahrir is guilty of practising anti-Semitism, abusing Hindus and Hinduism, and preaching that "suicide bombers go straight to heaven". To stand up to Hizb ut-Tahrir, therefore, amounts to Islamophobia.
Closer home, the Students Islamic Movement of India, which has been banned for being a terrorist organisation, insists that it is being targeted because its members are scrupulous adherents of Islam. Hence, if the OIC report is to be taken seriously and its definition of Islamophobia accepted, the order banning SIMI is a manifestation of Islamophobia. The Government of India is equally guilty of Islamophobia for providing dissident Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen with a resident permit. And, those in media who refuse to endorse the humiliation of Gudiyas and the persecution of Imranas by the ulema, and believe there is a connection between radical Islamism and Islamist terrorism, stand accused of "targeting Muslims and Islam".
We can afford to ignore the ringing message from Dakar only at the expense of the values that set us apart from those who decree that a woman who has been raped should be publicly flogged, if not stoned to death.
http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnist1.asp?main_variable=Columnist&file_name=kanchan%2Fkanchan163.txt&writer=kanchan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
